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.