Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLAN COMMISSION - 08/05/1981 - SDK LANDSCAPE PLAN I Minutes Elk Grove Village Plan Commission Wednesday, August 5, 1981 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Plan Commission was called to order at 8:05 p.m. on Wednesday, August 5, 1981 in the Multi- Purpose Room of the Municipal Building, 901 Wellington Avenue: MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Glass, John R. , Chairman None Cummins, Leah, Secretary Fulton, Clark Paliganoff, David J. Geinosky, Frederick C. Stangeland, Orrin J. Mullen, George E. STAFF PRESENT: Gary E. Parrin, Assistant Village Manager George B. Knickerbocker, Village Attorney Charles B. Henrici, Fire Chief Thomas F. Rettenbacher, Building Commissioner Jon P. Wildenberg, Administrative Assistant SDK Landscape Plan The Plan Commission 'continued deliberation of the petition of Draper and Kramer, Inc. to berm and landscape on Lot 10 of SDK Subdivision No. 2. Sherwin Portnoy of Draper and Kramer, Inc. related that he had read the Foreman of Land and Forestry's comments regarding the plan which was submitted for Staff review, and that he was agreeable to changes recommended. Portnoy also mentioned that the Village Engineer had expressed concerns regarding heavy vegetation located in 20 feet of the 25-foot utility easement; therefore, Draper and Kramer would be willing to relocate and limit all vegetation to the first 10 or 15 feet of the easement thereby maintaining a 10 or 15 foot strip which would be easily accessible for future use. Glass noted that any plan should reflect the main objective of the Plan Commission which is to provide 12 month heavy screening around the truck dock areas. Portnoy pointed out that by moving vegetation downward on the berm some height of the screening vegetation will be lost. Geinosky maintained that Engineering concerns should be addressed. Mullen suggested that a revised plan be submitted. Glass then directed Draper and Kramer to submit a revised plan which addresses the changes recommended by the Foreman of Land and Forestry, and the Village Engineer. Docket 81-6 Petition of Centex Homes for: (1) a Text Amendment to the zoning Ordinance, (2) rezoning of portions of Section 24, (3) amendment of the Hampton Farms Special Use Permit. The Plan Commission then continued consideration of the Centex Homes petition. Review of a draft Text Amendment dated August 3, 1981 began. Plan Commission Minutes - 2 - August 5, 1981 Docket 81-6 (continued) 5.37-1 Purpose Glass questioned why the word "District" was inserted for the word "project". Parrin replied that this substitution was made to maintain consistency throughout the whole Text Amendment. 5.37-3 General Requirements (C) Stangeland suggested deletion of last sentence and replacement of last sentence with: "The minimum distance from any building to any other street, road, private or public right-of-way, parking lot, or delivery and service lanes for motor vehicles shall be fifteen (15) feet." (J) Mullen observed that the word "streets" should be dropped from the first sentence. Knickerbocker was in agreement and stated he would do so. 5.37-5 D. (9) Paliganoff expressed concern over the fact that no real basis for comparison exists at this time. Stangeland suggested striking last three lines of the section and replacing them with: "consistent with the comprehen- sively planned Multi-family Residential Districts." 5.37-6 Line 2 The word "ordinance" is in need of a spelling revision. Upon completion of the Text Amendment review, Chairman Glass indicated he would entertain a motion to approve the Text Amendment. Paliganoff moved to recommend adoption of the proposed Text Amendment (dated 8-3-81) contingent upon recommended changes being implemented. Stangeland seconded the motion, whereupon Secretary Cummins called the role. The motion was unanimously carried. Fred Feinstein, Attorney for Centex Homes, submitted, for purposes of substitution, a revised Conceptual Land Use and Zoning Map. Feinstein pointed out that this revised plan was essentially similar to that previously submitted at the time of petition, and that the proposed Golf course boundary has been changed by approximately two-tenths (2/10) of an acre. Glass noted acceptance of this map for the record. Stangeland expressed concerns regarding methods of stronger guarantee that the golf course be built. Stangeland noted that the Park District Board could possibly change membership prior to the actualization of a golf course, and that such new membership could change policy and not build the golf course. Stangeland suggested perhaps some form of performance bond or letter of intent could be required to create a stronger guarantee. Mr. Lew Smith of the Elk Grove Park District related that the intent of the Park District at this time is to build the golf course, and, as the representative of the Park District Board, he speaks on behalf of the whole Board. Smith also reported that pursuant to the advice of the Park District Attorney, the Park District cannot enter into any contractual obligations at this time. Mullen observed that development and enforcement of assurances is out of the purvue of the Plan Commission. • • Plan Commission Minutes - 3 - August 5, 1981 Docket 81-6 (continued) Glass concurred and directed that conversation center on Conditions to Approval to Conceptual Land Use and Zoning Map. Condition No. 1 Feinstein suggested the addition of the word "requirement" after the third word in line six. The Village Attorney and Plan Commission were in agreement with Feinstein's suggested change. Condition No. 4 "University Lane" is in need of capitalization. Lines 4 & 5 Addition of the sentence: "The length of the three lanes shall be determined by the Village Engineer." Condition No. 8 Concensus was reached for the use of the word "may" instead of "shall" in the first sentence. Condition No. 9 It was noted by Feinstein that this language was formulated through discussions with the Village Engineer. At this point Mullen made a motion to approve the Conditions to Approval to the Conceptual Land Use and Zoning Map. Geinosky seconded and the vote was taken. The motion passed by a unanimous (7-0) margin. Amendment of the Hampton Farms Special Use Permit Discussion of amendments to the Hampton Farms Special Use Permit ensued. Concensus was reached on all proposed amendments to the Hampton Farms Special Use Permit. (Specifics can be found in the Plan Commission Chairman's memo to the Village President and Board of Trustees dated August 4, 1981.) Mullen made a motion to approve the amendments to the Hampton Farms Special Use Permit. Fulton seconded, and the motion was carried by a unanimous margin (7-0) . Docket 81-7 The Plan Commission then continued the Public Hearing concerning the petition of Robert Calkins to rezone the northwest corner of Nerge and Rohlwing Roads from (R-3) to (B-2) . Glass restated that one item of main concern was that of ingress and egress of large Fire Department apparatus. Glass noted a report from Fire Chief'Henrici and Building Commissioner Rettenbacher on the problem. Glass then asked for further clarification from Henrici or Rettenbacher. Henrici stated that the recommendation is to reverse the angle on the south end of the driveway apron facing Rohlwing Road. Mullen inquired if the exact degree of the apron angle is known at this time. Henrici responded that the exact angle would be subject to study and recommendation by the Village Engineer. Calkins indicated he would be happy to cooperate with the Village fully. Paliganoff remarked that he was concerned with traffic impacts which might be created by this development. Specifically, Paliganoff questioned the movement of automobile traffic into, out of, and around the development. Glass observed that it might be possible to recommend "no left turn" signs, or other traffic control measures at certain • • Plan Commission Minutes - 4 - August 5, 1981 Docket 81-7 (continued) points of the proposed development. Paliganoff maintained that further comment from the Police Department should be sought regarding traffic control at the site. Calkins stated he would be willing to cooperate with the village regarding traffic control measures. Fulton questioned whether the proposed loading zone should be put next to the building to facilitate ease of loading, and waste disposal. Glass added that the loading zone would make more sense next to the building for purposes of semi-truck use. Mullen inquired as to what sort of uses would require that a semi- truck make deliveries. Calkins responded that he did not know at this time whether any semis would be required for any of the proposed operations. Glass maintained that the loading zone be moved adjacent to the building site and that this movement should be made a part of the finding of fact. Fulton suggested that the drive parallel to Nerge Road be designated as a fire lane. Mullen responded that this is not an item that the Plan Commission should be making a recommendation on but rather this is a Fire Department topic. Glass then asked citizens in attendance for their comments regard- ing the rezoning. A citizen questioned why the land could not be zoned for a public use instead of business use. Glass responded by noting that when this tract of land was first developed a certain amount of open space was required to be donated by the developer and was, therefore the open space requirements had already been met. Secondly, in order for this property to be used for public purposes, it must first be purchased by a public entity from the owner for a fair market price. Another question from a citizen was raised concerning the amount of vandalism in the area. The citizen maintained that another business property would add to the rate of vandalism. Glass responded that the citizen had some foreknowledge that they would be moving near a busy intersection. Paliganoff added that it could be beneficial to have a property owner, instead of a vacant lot, for purposes of developing a strategy to combat vandalism. Wally Wood, Real Estate Broker, explained that the lighting on the property may also serve as a deterrent. A citizen questioned whether the village or the developer could plant deciduous trees on the Nerge Road parkway. Rettenbacher responded that since this was a County right-of-way, any action taken would need the prior blessing of the County. Richard Jones, Attorney for Calkins, presented a letter from the prospective contract purchasers of the property which stated that they would not allow any store to be used for coin-operated amusement devices, nor would any store be used for a 24-hour type of operation. (A copy of said letter is attached to and made a part of these minutes.) It was moved by Mullen and seconded by Geinosky that the Plan Commission recommend the rezoning of the northwest corner of Nerge and Rohlwing Roads from (R-3) to (B-2) , whereupon secretary Cummins called the role: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; Abstain: 1 (Cummins); Absent: 1 (Stangeland) . July 20, 1981 Plan Commission Village of Elk Grove Village 901 Wellington Avenue Elk Grove Village, Illinois 60007 Attention: Mr. John Glass Chairman Re: . Northwest corner Nerge and Rohlwing Roads, Elk Grove Village Gentlemen: In connection with the Petition for Rezoning of the above-described property to B-2, please be advised that the under- signed are the contract purchasers for the same and hereby agree that they will not allow any store to be used for coin-operated amusement devices nor will there be any twenty-four-hour type of operation allowed on any of the premises. Yours very.truly, Orlando Magnelli Mary Magnelli Plan Commission Minutes - 5 - August 5,' 1981 Southeast Corner of Meacham & Biesterfield Roads Glass then noted a Staff Review concerning property located at the southeast corner of Meacham and Biesterfield Roads. For the record, Glass stated that no Public Hearing will be conducted regarding this property until title and ownership of the Home Avenue right-of-way is determined. 770 Arthur Avenue - Fence Plan Building Commissioner Rettenbacher then presented a fencing plan for property located at 770 Arthur Avenue for Plan Commission review and approval. Chairman Glass asked for and received a consensus to approve the fencing plan. It was moved by Geinosky and seconded by Paliganoff that the Plan Commission approve the proposed fencing plan. The motion passed by a unanimous margin (6-0) . Cook County Zoning Docket No. 3692 Cummins stated for the record that the Plan Commission stands in opposition to the proposed special use for a Consulting Engineering Company at Devon Avenue approximately 130 feet east of Ridge Avenue. The meeting was adjourned at 11:35 p.m. Submitted by: Jon P. Wildenberg Administrative Assistant ms c: Chairman & Members of Plan Commission, Village President & Board of Trustees, Village Clerk, Village Manager, Assistant Village Manager, Administrative Assistant, Administrative Intern, Building Commissioner, Village Engineer, Director of Public Works, Fire Chief, Director of Parks and Recreation, Centex, NWMC, McGraw-Hill.