Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLAN COMMISSION - 12/12/1977 - MOBILE SERVICE STATION DOCKET 77-11 MINUTES ELK GROVE VILLAGE PLAN COMMISSION December 12, 1977 The special meeting of the Plan Commission was called to order by Chairman Shannon at 8:45 p.m. on Monday, December 12, 1977 in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 901 Wellington Avenue, Elk Grove Village. Members Present: Members Absent: Widliam Shannon, Chairman Leah Cummins, Secretary John Glass Thomas Hamilton Staff Present: Edward Hauser Thomas Rettenbacher, James Petri Building Commissioner William Wesley Richard M. Finn, Administrative Assistant Docket 77-11: Mobile Service Station Jerry Bartolai and Dennis Wong, members of the Mobile Corporation were present along wi th Brit Hitchcock, architect, to represent the petitioner. The petitioner was requesting that the property located at the northwest corner of Meacham and Nerge Roads be rezoned from R-3, Residential District to B-3, Automotive Orientated District, for the establishment of a self-ser-vice gas station. Mr. Bartolai began the discussion by stating that he had submitted a detailed landscaping plan to the staff as he was requested to do by the Plan Commission. He noted that the plans included the proposed final grading slopes of the site and he concluded by stating that the Village Engineer had reviewed and approved the proposed drainage of the property. Mr. Hitchcock continued the discussion by giving a brief explanation of the proposed landscaping. He noted that all the drainage water from the property site would remain on their lot. Hitchcock also stated that the slope on the west side would be 4 to 1 and the entire area would be maintained by Mobile. Wesley began the questioning by asking where the low point would be on the west side of the property. Hitchcock stated that the low area would fall exactly on the property line, thereby allowing drainage water from their site and the abutting home owners' sites to drain into the manhole located directly to the north. Hitchcock continued by stating that Mobile would construct an earth mound on the north side of the property site. He noted that the slope would be no more than 4 to 1 and would look natural in order to provide a desirable screen between the service station and the homes abutting the property from the north. Hitchcock also stated that they would provide tiles and a 5 foot hedge to reinforce the screening. Shannon asked what the height of the proposed structure would be in relation to the earth mound. Hitchcock stated that the structure would be approximately two feet above the mound. Petri expressed concern that the Mobile sign might be too high because of the close proximity of the residential area and he asked if Mobile would be willing to install 6 foot high signs instead of the 12 foot signs that would be normally permitted. Bartolai Plan Commission Minutes • - 2 - Pcember 12, 1977 stated that Mobile would comply with such a request if it were made part of the Village's requirements. Hauser noted that the northeast section of the property needed addi- tional screening. Hitchcock stated that he did feel that additional trees and bushes would be needed in the northeast section; however, he noted that addi- tional screening would be provided if requested by the Village. Shannon agreed with Hauser and he stated that it would be advantageous to add additional screening to the northeast corner of the property. Shannon continued by asking if Mobile anticipated installing any additional service islands. Bartolai stated that there were no plans for any additional service islands. Glass stated that he felt that Mobil had submitted a fine landscaping plan and he noted that the .subject property was ideally located for a commercial use. However, Glass expressed reservations over allowing a gas station next to a residential area. Glass concluded by stating that the proposed landscaping plans were acceptable if a few minor changes were made. Shannon noted Glass' comments and he stated that the major issue was whether the service station could be made to be compatible with the abutting homes. Hamilton agreed with Shannon and he stated that he originally thought the compatibility problem could be resolved by a good landscaping plan; however, he noted that apparently even a good landscaping plan could not adequately solve the problem. Hamilton stated that he felt that the Mobil Corporation would be an excellent addition to the Village although it did not appear that the proposed location would be a workable arrangement. At this point several residents addressed the Commission and they stated that their concern was that if the subject property were rezoned B-3, int would remain in that zoning classification forever. The residents also reiterated their extreme dislike for the proposed service station. Shannon noted the residents' -concerns and he stated that the Plan Commission would deliberate on the request and make a recommendation sometime after the first of January. Parkview Heights Subdivision (Szywala 80=acre tract) Mr. Szywala, the developer, Robert DiLeonardi, attorney, were present to represent the petitioner. The Parkview Heights Subdivision is located north of Ne rge and west of Rohlwi'ng Road. The Plan Commission was reviewing the final plat of subdivision to enable the Commission to make a recommenda- tion to the Village Board. Hamilton began the discussion by stating that he had .several reservations concerning the proposed development. Shannon noted Hamilton's concern and he stated that a finding of fact had been previously distributed to the Plan Commission. Shannon continued by noting that the finding of fact incorporated the various issues that the Commission had outlined during their previous meeting with the developer. Shannon asked if the petitioner or the Commission members had any problems with the finding of fact as it was originally sub- mitted. Mr. Szywala stated that the finding of fact as submitted was acceptable to him. Hamilton suggested that the last sentence in the second provision be withdrawn. Hamilton noted that this provision (as submitted) would allow the petitioner to recover any funds which were not used for the grading and seeding of the subject 1 1/2 acres. Mr. Szywala stated that he had no objections to the removal of the sentence, and he noted that the entire $5,000 should be retained to provide the necessary grading and seeding and any other required landscaping. The remaining Commissioners concurred with the change. Plan Commission Minutes - 3 - December 12, 1977 Next, Hamilton suggested that the fifth provision be changed to read as follows: "That the petitioner provide a minimum of 8 inches of topsoil on the surface of the entire Park areas, parkways and each building lot." Mr. DiLeonardi stated that the petitioner had no objection to the change. The other Commissioners also agreed with the change. At this point, Hamilton moved to recommend approval of the final plat for the Parkview Heights Subdivision with .the recommended approval being made contingent on the issues outlined in the Commission's finding . of fact. Glass seconded the motion. All present voted AYE. Windy City Garden Center Subdivision Shannon noted that the Engineering Department and the Building Department had reviewed and approved the plat of subdivision located at 1250 S. Arlington Heights Road. Finn stated that the subdivision complied wi'h all Village requirements except the requirement that all cul de sacs should not be longer than 400 feet. The plat showed that the cul de sac was actually 458 feet, although.- it was submitted according to the speci'ficati'ons that were accepted by the Plan Commission during the rezoning of the subject property. Hamilton moved to recommend approval of the windy City Garden Center Subdivision. Glass seconded the motion. All present voted AYE. Docket 77-20: Text Amendment to Zoning Ordinance - Ambulatory Surgical Treatment 'Center The petitioners (Elk Grove Village) were requesting a Text Amendment to Section 5.5 of the Zoning Ordinance, to amend the Village's B-2, General Business District, as outlined in the legal notice. Shannon began the discussion by stating that he had received informa- tion from Nancy Yiannias, Village Health Coordinator, concerning Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Centers. He noted that the memo stated that the State had no regulations governing the disposal of organs or fetuses that were less than five months old. The tissue could be disposed of by normal refuse service or even put into the sanitary sewer system. Glass noted Shannon's statement and he stated that he did not fully understand why the Village chose B-2, General Business District to permit the proposed Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Centers. Rettenbacher responded by stating that the General Business District was chosen because that particular zoning classification already allowed similar uses such as doctors' offices. Shannon continued the thought by stating that the proposed use might fit well in the O & T District and the Commission might want to consider both districts. Next Shannon stated that he believed that the Fire Chief and Deputy Fire Chief (who had appeared at the previous Commission meeting) provided extremely useful information concerning ambulance response time. Shannon noted that he felt it would be a step downward to compromise the Village standards by allowing Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Center to be regulated by less stringent response standards. Hauser stated that he did not see how the Commission's decision on the Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Center could effect the outcome of the litiga- tion which the Village was currently engaged in. Rettenbacher noted Hauser's comment and he stated that the litigation and the proposed Text Amendment were two separate issues. t• Plan Commission Minutes - 4 - kember 12, 1977 Wesley continued Shannon's earlier thought on which zoning district the proposed use should be provided and he asked why the Commission shouldn't allow Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Centers in O & T District and not in B-2 District. Rettenbacher stated that 0 & T Districts did not require location on major street arteries. Wesley responded to Rettenbacher's answer by stating that maybe it was not advantageous to have Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Centers on major street arteries because of slow traffic during certain parts of the day. Next, Glass asked if there was any reason why the Village could not require Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Centers to be free-standing structures. Rettenbacher stated that if the Commission wished they could add the requirement of a free-standing structure to the Text Amendment. Shannon stated that in his opinion the Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Center was a separate and distinct use and therefore, it should be in a separate and distinct building. At this point, Hamilton suggested that item (d) under number (3) of the Text Amendment be lengthened to include the following: "It must be shown that such ambulance service is able to meet the minimum 15-minute travel time requirement,said 15-minute period to be determined from the time the call is placed to the ambulance service to the time that a patient is delivered to the hospital with which the Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Center shall have the required transfer agreement." Hamilton noted that Knickerbocker had stated that item (d) was vague and the Plan Commission could define it In more detail. Kamilton argued that he wanted the Village's standards spelled out in detail. Shannon agreed that specific standards should be written into the Text Amendment. Wesley stated that he believed Hamilton's standard definition was reasonable and he noted that the State would allow the Village to Have more stringent requirements than those required by the State. Hamilton reiterated his contention that if the Village permits an Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Center, it should be made to meet the Village's safety standards. Hauser expressed concern that the Commission had not addressed the question of minors being treated at the Ambulatory Surgical Treatment Center for abortions. Shannon noted Hauser's comment and he stated that the proposed Text Amendment was a very involved issue and the Commission should take additional time to continue their research. The meeting adjourned at 11:50 p.m. Submitted by: Richard M. Finn, RMF;sf Administrative Assistant (12/30/77) C: Chairman & Members of Plan Commission, Village President and Board of Trustees, Village Clerk, Village Manager, Assistant Village Manager, Administrative Assistant, Building Commissioner, Village Engineer, Planning Consultant, Director of Parks and Recreation, Calkins, Centex.