Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout1985-09-17 minutesPLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION AND ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes of the September 17, 1985 meeting. Village Hall - 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Arlo Simmons, Chairman ABSENT: Herb Bayer Don Pearson Rich Neely Jim Anderson Bob Russ, Ex-Officio Dale Gullicksen, Liason Karen Callanan, Trustee Mary Latta, Village President Steve Manning, Planner ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Case 137 - 82285V Baish Townhouses Request for Variation at 719 W. Main Street Walt Schempf John Myers, Ex-Officio Gene Cline, Ex-Officio Alan Arbo, Ex-Officio S. 11jenvich, Ex-Officio Petitioner Bob Baish, 217'N. Willow Drive, Plainfield was sworn in. Simmons - The Plan Commissioner have a report from Steve concerning this case. Mr. Baish, have you received a permit from the State yet? Baish - No, I have applied for a curb cut off of Route 126 and a floodplain construction permit. My site plans shows a 4-unit building turned so that one side is facing the street. The rear is facing northeast and the parking lot. The front is facing the office building to the south- west side and has a good view down the river. Manning - I have drawn 3 alternative site plans. First, I reduced the size of the building by 140 square feet to 4415 square feet which is the 1/3 of the buildable portion of the lot required by our ordinance. Then I drew the building and the required 8 parking stalls on the lot in 3 different layouts all of which have the required setbacks. Alternative (A) shows the parking in the rear as required by our ordinance. I think what will be most important in this case are the reasons why Mr. Baish has positioned his proposed building as he did and whether A, B, C or some other alternative would be more appropriate. Baish - I was advised I had to show a 201 front setback to match Niznik's office building setback. However I see no problem with having a 30' frontyard. Plainfield Plan Commission Zoning Board of Appeals September 17, 1985 Meeting Page Two Manning - The ordinance permits a front setback less than *301 if the neighboring building 60'. or less away is less than 30' setback. In this case Niznik's building is about 61' away.. The reduced setback is optional, not required, the way I read the ordinance. Simmons - Alternative (C) shows the parking on the southwest side which would (1) be next to the office parking and (2) give more privacy to the single family on the northeast side. Considering the resale value of the building, do you think it will be worth more with the parking on the side or in the rear? Baish - In the rear. a Simmons - The purpose of the requirement for the parking in the rear is so that off-street parking is not too noticeable as one walks or drives down a street. The purpose of the floor area ratio I requirement is to keep a certain minimum portion of the lot open for landscaping. How was this case noticed? Manning - It reads "to consider a variation in location of parking lot and-front setback". Simmons - If you want to stay with the size building you have shown, you will need another variation and another public hearing. Baish - I'd rather reduce the size of the building to meet the ordinance. I could probably go with Alternative A having parking in the rear. Anderson - Would you rather wait till our next meeting in 2 weeks so you can revise your site plan? Baish - I'd rather try to get a vote tonight. Mr. Kubinski - I own the property. The reason we want the parking on the northeast side and not the southwest side is so that the view out the front of the units will be down the river and to save the tree on the southwest side. Gullicksen - On Alternative A is there any reason why the drive could not be on the office side instead of the house side? Manning - Not that I know of. What landscaping do you plan to put in? Mrs. Kubinski - We were thinking of big tree at one of the front building corners and shrubs at the other front corner. Also a fence along the northeast edge of the parking lot by the house. I Plainfield Plan Commission Zoning Board of Appeals September 17, 1985 Meeting Page Three - Manning - Our zoning ordinance does not have any standards for buffering but for any sizeable parking lots there should be a hedge or other land- scape screen. Your site plan does not leave room for such a buffer. Simmons - At least 5' width minimum is needed to support such a hedge. Russ - As far as the view from the street I can accept the location of the parking lot as Baish has shown it if there was a row of high hedges about 25' long in front of it. I object to fences. Simmons - To summarize the request, are you asking for approval of your site plan with the changes of adding a landscape buffer in the front and side of the parking. lot and reducing the size of the building to meet our code? I Baish - That is correct. Simmons - For all variations our ordinance has 3 standards for hardship, be in harmony, not impair welfare and I think this petition meets these standards. Anderson moved to approve the Baish request for variation according to the site plan he presented with the changes summarized by Arlo Simmons. Pearson seconded. 'Anderson, Pearson, Bayer, Simmons voted aye. Neely voted nay. PLAN COMMISSION Anderson moved to approve the minutes of the August 20 and September 4, 1985 meetings as presented. Pearson seconded. All voted aye. Simmons - I have received a memo from our Village Administrator dated September 11, 1985 requesting that any of you who' get a call from a lawyer concerning anything that is happening in front of the Plan Commission or Zoning Board of Appeals be sure to refer it to our Village Attorney. It may be important to a lawsuit. We also received a letter from Naperville dated September 16, 1985 regarding FANCATS - Route 59 Guidelines. They have drafted some guidelines and have asked for our comments by October 21. Another meeting will be scheduled in early November to finalize these guidelines. Arlo Simmons left the meeting. Plainfield Plan Commission Zoning Board of Appeals September 17, 1985 Meeting Page Four CASE 138-91785 - SiRn Ordinance Karen Callanan introduced Lockwood Martling, an architect who has worked with ma . ny towns on renovation of their historic business districts. He is a member of the American Institute of Architects and other organizations. Martling - My presentation will have to do with more than just signs. I hope it will be helpful to the improvement of all aspects of downtown Plainfield. Signs are one of the biggest problems to deal with in any downtown area. The size, location, color, and other features of the sign should not hide or detract from the architecture of the building pilasters, cornices, arches and so forth. This slide of Troy, Michigan is a view of'their main street which shows about 15 signs that not only block one's view of the buildings but also completely obliterating each other. I suggested to their businessmen-, association that these signs be removed and that the cast iron columns, concrete urns, and wrought iron be cleaned and painted with colors that emphasize these wonderful features.. There were moans and groans at first but eventually the owners was convinced that thege improvements would help his business. I designed a wall sign having raised letters on a raised wood panel that fit in the transom area above the doors and below the second story windows. The original door, Victorian globe lighting, and gold colored trim were restored to get a finished facade that was very appealing. Often times older districts were built with the buildings joining so that each door was fairly close together. In these situations it is very important to have a coordinated sign design system to make sure all the signs and awnings are compatible. The whole town will take pride and the customers will come if the historic downtown is made to be a thing of beauty and a joy forever. Projecting signs can be designed to fit in, however, it is very difficult to control these signs by an ordinance. They should be reviewed on a case -by -case basis. A wood shake roof siding, or canopy;.1s,-o-i1t,-6f-w-1. 1ace. . P A brick building should get a standard metal seamed canopy which looks refined and dignified. Too often the businessman rely on a sign contractor to design their sign and it turns out to-have no relation to the architecture of the building. Frequently businessmen try to modernize the front of their store by re- moving or covering up the brick and iron posts. In my opinion this is a disasterous mistake. Here I show you many fine examples of stores that became "gems" when the original materials were preserved. Staining brick can bring some character to a plain facade. Plainfield Plan Commission Zoning Board of Appeals September 17, 1985 Meeting Page Five The backs of these fine, old commercial buildings were thought not.to.be for public view. However, many towns have now put parking.lots and walk- ways behind stores and merchants have been encouraged to provide rear entrances. So now it is necessary to dress up the backs of these build- ings. The key is to remove the clutter. I prefer the look of louvered shutters closed over windows. A color palette should be selected for downtown before any restoration is done. Earth tones or subdued colors are better than bright and flashy. Plainfield has some fine buildings along Lockport Street with cast iron columns, stamped metal cornices, the churches have fantastic character. The prize of the whole downtown area as far as I am concerned is the two story turret and metal onion dome on the Mason's Building. Unfor- tunately it was painted all one color where contrasting colors would bring out some of the detail. Manning - The new sign ordinance being considered by the Plan Commission has a section controlling signs in the historic downtown area. I would say that from Marling's presentation it is evident that there is no one type of sign that is best, rather, the sign design depends on the archi- tecture of the building. This makes it difficult to write specific sign standards. My idea to handle this is for the Village to,set up a design review process as described on page 8 of the draft. Russ - Number 4 in Section I limiting size.of signs in the historic district to 20 square feet is something that could also be determined by the design review committee. Pearson - I think that 20 square feet is not necessary too small for a projecting sign. Now we have several neon signs that seem to blare at you. Color is also important. Neely - Is there anything we can do about existing signs? Manning - There are different ways an ordinance can treat non-conforming signs. What 1 have proposed on page 9 does not require removal of all non-conforming signs within a specified period of time. It's been my experience that when removal is required the businesses have put political pressure to get the ordinance changed or they have filed a lawsuit against the Village. This is the primary reason for my recommendation to inform all the businesses in town about our proposed ordinance revisions. When they are made part of the process before adoption they will more likely support and voluntarily comply with the new standards. Bayer - Soneone should spearhead the publicity for this effort. Plainfield Plan Commission Zoning Board of Appeals September 17, 1985 Page Six Manning - I agree. Another idea is to get the Enterprise to write some features. You can make revisions to my draft tonight then we could mail. or deliver copies to all businesses and invite them to another public hearing before a Plan Commission vote. Anderson - I think we should take a vote tonight. If any business has complaints we can always revise the ordinance later.. Otherwise this could drag on. Pearson —Maybe we should contact the Plainfield Commerce Association and have Mr. Martling give them the same presentation. Neely That was done about 3 years ago and nothing happened. Russ Most of us saw this presentation for first time tonight and we could see the potentials. I just think if they saw it now they would get interested. At least it would be better than arguing about the size of signs under the current ordinance. Bayer It will take more than one meeting. Russ I think there is much more interest now in historic preservation in Plainfield than there was a few years. Neely - Don't you think that having an ordinance in place will get more people interested in replacing their existing signs? Anderson Controllingnew signs is different than rejuvenation of old buildings. Manning - I have written in some corrections on your typed draft of the sign ordinance. Now is your opportunity to make the additions and deletions you want. Neely - Number 5 Section I how far should projecting signs go over the sidewalk? Manning - My intention was to limit the projection to the width of the sidewalk only. Anderson - I move we recommend approval of the sign ordinance draft before us tonight with the corrections voted by Steve. Seconded by Neely. All voted aye. Plainfield Plan Commission Zoning Board of Appeals September 17, 1985 Page Seven OLD BUSINESS Manning - As requested by the Plan Commission at last meeting, I have drafted a letter to IDOT.regarding sidewalks as part of the Rt. 59 viaduct under the E. J. & E. railroad tracks being.studied for improve- ment. Does it meet with your approval? Bayer - I think it looks fine. Manning - As directed at the last meeting, the letter to the County requesting amendments to the Land Use Plan, Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances was sent. I have not heard a response yet. NEW BUSINESS Manning -A 66.6 acre subdivision is being proposed by Richard Searle on Caton Farm Road west of Rt. 59 by the railroad tracks. It is 2-1/2 miles from Plainfield so we have no review authority. However I thought you may be interested because it proposes 1/2 acre single family lots in a flood plain and would disrupt a 580 acre watershed of surrounding farm land. Bayer - We should Appose it. Meeting adjourned. Steve Manning, Planner