Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout1986-06-03 minutesVILLAGE OF PLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION REgular Meeting DATE: June 3, 1986 AT: Village Hall PRESENT: J. Sobkoviak, W. Schempf, J. Anderson, H. Bayer, Chairman Simmons; D. Gullicksen, R. Russ, M. Gehrke, J. Bostjancic. ABSENT: D. Anderson, R. Neely, W. Sharp, D. Almon, J. Eichelberger, J. Anderson, A. Arbo, J. Wilson, S. Manning. Chairman Simmons called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. There being no additions or corrections to the minutes'of the May 6, 1986 meeting Chairman Simmons declared the minutes approved as presented. Chairman Simmons added to the Agenda under Unfinished Business the Graver Farm County Case, and a Notice of Meeting. Chairman Simmons announced there will be a Village Board Workshop meeting on June 23, 1986, 6:30 p.m., at the Village Hall. Subject of the workshop is Boundary Agreements with Naperville which is in the preliminary stages. The Naperville Planner will be present. Unfinished Business - Graver Farm County Case Chairman Simmons reported Allen Mauer had a meeting with Clayton Eaton, the adjoining landowner to the south of the Graver Farm. From that meeting it sounds tentative regarding annexation. Right now we still have a problem getting . the property contiguous to the Village and would like to see this matter reported to the Village Board, because any action r equired to make the property contiguous and also to get water and sewer there will have to be done by the Village Board. Attorney Craig Wright, partner with Mr. James Babcock, and Mr. Paul Graver were present. Plan Commis�ion June 3, 1986 Page Two Mr. Wright briefly re-stated proposed plans for rezoning the property from a farming classification to an R-2A County zoning, and that when the Village can show them that they can make them contiguous to the Village they would be willing to sit down and work out a pre-annexation agreement. Chairman Simmons stated the Plan Commission would like to see the property be annexed to the Village, because if it is developed County and we do go north, that property will be in the Village but still not part of the Village. D. Gullicksen reported the Village is under restriction by the State of Illinois and the EPA on the Radium situation in our water. The Village can apply for a variance, but that will take some time. This is a problem in addition to becoming contiguous to the property. Chairman Simmons stated that at the present time the Village cannot extend water mains anywhere. Also, our Fire Department wanted a second entrance in the subdivision. In a meeting with government entities up and down Route 59 from Warrenville through Plainfield there was a consensus to limit the number of ingresses and egresses between major intersections. Mr. Graver stated he will do whatever is required. Chairman Simmons stated he feels we should not hold a developer up for a couple of years, but would like to see the Village actively pursue annexation and also a waiver for the Radium in the water. J. Sobkoviak motioned to recommend to the Village Board.that they actively pursue annexation and a waiver for the Radium in the water. Seconded by W. Schempf. Vote by roll call. Sobkoviak, yes; Schempf, yes; J. Anderson, yes; Bayer, yes; Simmons, yes. 5 yes, 0 no. Motion carried. Plan Commission June 3, 1986 Page Three County Case - 13301 S. Route 59 - Crompton, Parcel 1 Route 59 - Parcel 2 Present were Attorney Robert Cichocki on behalf of the owners of the two parcels, and Dr. Neubeck, a clinical psychologist and one of the purchasers of the property. They presented two applications seeking County R-1 zoning from existing A-1 zoning. There are no plans at this time for development of the property. They will use the existing home as it is. They are also seeking a Special Use for a group care facility which is a permitted special use under the R-1 zoning. The reason for the purchase of the two parcels is to give enough space for the R-1 zoning requirement. Chairman Simmons stated this property is south of the Graver Farm and north of Clayton Eaton. Dr. Neubeck stated the type of operation they are proposing to run is a group home facility which is analogous to foster care, but it provides more services. It actually is the same size as foster care in terms of number of children you can have. Up to 8 for foster care and 8 for group care. In a group care home they are expected to provide more in the way of services both to the children and their families and work harder to get them back into their family situation. Also, he feels there is a substantial need in the Naperville/ Plainfield area for this type of facility. In the past year children had to be taken to McHenry County. He feels this property is ideal; it has a beautifully built home on a nice piece of land and would provide a good home kind of environment for children that need to be out of their home during crisis periods. The Board asked Dr. Neubeck if this is his main business. He stated he is in a practice called "The Institute for Behavioral Services" which does work with these type of children, and is also involved in special education programs in Lockport, Aurora and Hillside. They work with children ages 6 through 21, majority junior high and high school age. Children in the group home would not be as old because 18 is the cutoff for group home. They would be mostly in the 12 to 18 age bracket. Plan Commission June 3, 1986 Page Four Attorney Cichocki emphasized that the ' group home is a temporary shelter and not a permanent placement. The primary emphasis is re-integrating back into the family home or seeking long-term foster care. Chairman Simmons asked if the children would be going to the local schools. Dr. Neubeck stated it depends on the length of :.time the children are with them, but they do have to provide levels of educational opportunity. They are in the process of contacting the Plainfield schools and the Special Education Co-op that services this area. If the child is in the home for a short period, under a week, the home would provide home hospital tutoring. If the child requires more involved special education, they would send them to either Aurora or Lockport, depending on where their home base was. if they had.no particular problem and would be with us for a couple of months, we would enroll them in the Plainfield School District and Plainfield would be reimbursed 1000 for the child's education under the Orphanage Act Funding. Attorney Cichocki stated that from time to time if placement may be a little longer there is the possibility that the school district would work out a transportation program. Dr. Neubeck further stated that the plan they are looking at on staffing is to have two people (preferably a couple with no children) that would be live-in. At least one of them be a professional, either educational or mental help type. Plus one more on staff to provide additional assistance in running the home. This is regulated by the Department of Children and Family Services.;:.::-:.Funding is provided ' through the state, but it can be from other sources as well. Dr. Neubeck was asked what would happen to this property in the event they would lose funding .or be unable to run the operation as a group home. He stated that a group is personally financing and leasing to the group home. If unable to operate they would keep it as an investment or sell. The Special Use would not go with the property. Plan Commission June 3, 1986 Page Five M. Gehrke asked what the difference is between what the group home does and what Guardian Angels family counseling does. Dr. Neubeck said Guardian Angels runs on an institutional license rather than a group home license and tend to take more severely involved children for longer periods of time. W. Schempf asked if any of the children would be connected with any type of a crime. Dr. Neubeck stated they do not intend to take children with criminal or drug problems, or who are seriously dangerous. They will not take referrals from the Department of Corrections. This is to be a home-type environment. J. Sobkoviak motioned to recommend that the Village Board not object to the rezoning and special use. Seconded by J. Anderson. Vote by roll call. Sobkoviak, yes; Schempf, yes; J. Anderson, yes; Bayer, yes; Simmons, yes. 5 yes, 0 no. Motion carried. STATE OF ILLINOIS COUNTY OF WILL SS: VILLAGE OF PLAINFIELD GRAVER FARM COUNTY SUBDIVISION LOCATION: N.E. Corner 135th Street, Route 59 June 3, 1986 Attorney James E. Babcock on behalf of owner Paul Graver. REQUEST: Rezoning of County property from A-1 to R-2A DISCUSSION: Attorney James Babcock appeared before the Plan Commission on April 15, 1986 representing the owner of the property, Mr. Paul Graver. They are asking approval from the Plan Commission to rezone the property from its present County zoning of A-1 to R-2A to enable this property to be developed to single-family residential lots, approxi- mately 100. The proposed lot size is 30,000 square feet, approximately three-quarters of an acre which is the County requirement for well and septic. Petitioner talked with Village Administrator and the Water and Sewer Department to see where water and sewer services were and where they ended because there is an indication the Village would like to annex the property and Petitioner does not object to annexation. In checking on the water and sewer lines Petitioner stated it would cost roughly a half a million dollars to hook up to our water and sewer and that kind of figure would prohibit them from doing so. The owner of the property, Mr. Graver, does not want to be in the position of trying to convince people contiguous to the Village to annex. If the Village would take the responsibility of getting certain property owners to annex in order for the Village to get to the Graver property, get them to voluntarily annex, Petitioner would have no opposition as long as an agreement is worked out. If we do not have voluntary annexation we run into litigation; Petitioner wants friendly annexation. Petitioner stated according to the Village Plan the area is considered residential. Referencing rough drawing of the subdivision, Petitioner stated some of the concerns expressed were: one entrance to the subdivision, Fire Chief expressed concern about water supply in case of fire, and water retention facilities. Petitioner will do whatever is necessary to make entrance to the subdivision acceptable and will do the proper engineering on water retention facilities when zoning is granted. Report of Plan Commission June 3, 1986 Page 2 Chairman Simmons stated he would like to see some active pursuit from the Village on annexation because the proposed subidivision will be using Plainfield, such as Police services since they are on the edge of the County. Allen Mauer, building inspector for Plainfield, stated this is a logical way for Plainfield to grow. We have a 27-inch sewer main which is readily adaptable sitting on the north side of Plainfield primarily geared to future expansion north. Mr. Mauer feels the growth pattern has to be there and feels this parcel of land should not go to County development, and it is important at this time for the Village to talk to surrounding property owners; that these areas can be developed into something that would attach to the Village of Plainfield. In discussion the Plan Commission agreed a committee should be established to talk to CBI and Mr. Eaton. This case was continued to the next Plan Commission meeting. At the May 6, 1986 Plan Commission meeting Mr. Babcock was present to ask if anything had been done regarding the Graver Farm matter. Mr. Babcock stated he understands these things take time, but he and his client would not like to be bogged down with waiting one to three months while negotiations are taking place. He also stated that if it should turn out you can get to us to annex, no matter what state they're in they will sit down and talk to the Village, because they feel it is to their advantage to annex to the Village. If the answer is no the Village cannot annex contiguous to them, at least they haven't lost two or three months time. Mr. Babcock said they would make a commitment in writing to negotiate annexation. The Board apologized for not having any information at this time, but would have something by the next meeting. Attorney Craig Wright, partner with Mr. James Babcock, and Mr. Paul Graver were present at the June 3, 1986 Plan Commission meeting. Mr. Wright briefly re-stated proposed plans for the Graver property, and that anytime the Village can show them that they can make them contiguous to the Village, they would be willing to sit down and work out a pre-annexation agreement. Chairman Simmons reported Allen Mauer had a meeting with Clayton Eaton, the adjoining landowner to the south of the Graver Farm. From that meeting it sounds tentative regarding annexation. Right now we still have a problem getting the property contiguous to the Village and would like to see this matter reported to the Village Board, because any action required to make the property contiguous and also to get water and sewer there will have to be done by the Village Board. Report of Plan Commission June 3, 1986 Page Three Chairman Simmons also stated that the Plan Commission would like to see the property be annexed to the Village, because if it is developed County and we do go north, that property will be in the Village but still not part of the Village. D. Gullicksen reported the Village is under restriction by the State of Illinois and the EPA on the Radium situation in our water. We can apply for a variance, but that will take some time. This is a problem in addition to becoming contiguous to the property. Chairman Simmons stated he feels we should not hold a developer up for a couple of years, but would like to see the Village actively pursue an annexation and also a waiver for the Radium in the water. By a vote of 5 to 0, the Plan Commission recommends that the Village Board of Trustees actively pursue annexation and a waiver for the Radium in the water. Would everyone attending this Plan Commission meeting 6�3 please sign this sheet for our official records. NAME AtLy) 'A IN/ IV U ADDRESS 6DC(. KIA(we(ELD I I (' q,, A J e-1- z zr A� REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS FIRST AND THIRD MONDAY EVENINGS OF EACH MONTH STATE OF ILLINOIS COUNTY OF WILL SS: June 3, 1986 VILLAGE OF PLAINFIELD REPORT OF PLAN COMMISSION COUNTY CASE - REZONING AND SPECIAL USE LOCATION: 13301 S. Rt. 59, Parcel 1 Route 59, Parcel 2 Attorney Robert T. Cichocki on behalf of owners Crompton and Kalantzis. REQUEST: Rezoning from County A-1 to R-1 and Special Use . for Group Care Home. DISCUSSION: Present were Attorney Robert Cichocki on behalf of the owners of the two parcels, and Dr. Neubeck, a clinical psychologist, one of the purchasers of the property. They presented two applications seeking County R-1 zoning and Special Use for Group Care Home. There are no plans at this time for development of the property. They will use the existing home as it is. The reason for the purchase of the two parcels is to give enough space for the R-1 zoning requirement. The property is south of Graver Farm and north of Clayton Eaton. The type of operation they are proposing to run is a group home facility which is analagous to foster care, but it provides more services. In a group care home they are expected to provide more in the way of services both to the children and their families and work harder to get them back into their family situation. Dr. Neubeck feels there is a substantial need in the area for this type of facility. He feels this property is ideal; it has a beautifully built home on a nice piece of land and would provide a good home kind of environment for children that need to be out of their home during crisis periods. Dr. Neubeck stated he is in a practice called "The Institute for Behavioral Services" which does work with these type of children - ages 6 through 21, majority junior high and high school age. Children in the group home would not be as old because 18 is the cutoff for group home. Would be mostly in REPORT OF PLAN COMMISSION June 3, 1986 Page Two the 12 to 18 age bracket. The group home is a temporary shelter and not a permanent placement. The primary emphasis is re-integrating back into the family home or seeking long-term foster care. Depending on the length of time the children are in the group home,levels of educational opportunity must be provided. If the child is in the home for a short period, under a week, the home would provide home hospital tutoring. If the child requires more involved special education, they would be sent to either Aurora or Lockport, depending on where their home base was. If they had no particular problem and would be with the home for a couple of months they would be enrolled in the Plainfield School District. Plainfield would be reimbursed 100% for the child's education under the orphanage Act Funding. Dr. Neubeck stated they do not intend to take children with criminal or drug problems, or who are seriously dangerous. The home will not take referrals from the Department of Corrections. This is to be a home-type environment. The plan they are looking at on staffing is to have two people (preferably a couple with no children) that would be live-in. At least one of them be a professional, either educational or mental help type. Plus one more on staff to provide additional assistance in running the home. This is regulated by the Department of Children and Family Services. Funding is provided through the state, but it can be from other sources as wel-1. Dr. Neubeck is a member of a group who is personally financing and leasing this property to the group home. In the event they would lose funding or be unable to run the operation as a group home they would keep it as an investment or sell. The Special Use would not go with the property. Inamelal By a vote of 5 to 0, the Plan Commission recommends that the Village Board of Trustees not object to the rezoning and special use.