Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLAN COMMISSION - 09/28/1977 - LANCER CORP MINUTES ELK GROVE VILLAGE PLAN COMMISSION September 28, 1977 The special meeting of the Plan Commission was called to order by Chairman Shannon at 7:45 P.M. on Wednesday, September 28, 1977 in the Council Chamber of the Municipal Building, 901 Wellington Avenue, Elk Grove Village. MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: William Shannon, Chairman Gary Parrin, Leah Cummins, Secretary Assistant Village Manager John Glass Richard Finn, Thomas Hamilton Administrative Assistant Edward Hauser James Petri William Wesley Lancer Corporation: Preliminary Plat. Mr. Hunter was present to represent the Lancer Corporation in their request to annex 40 acres into the Village. Hunter began the discussion by submitting a revised preliminary plat to the Plan Commission. He stated that the revised plat include only 27.8 acres of the original 40 acres. Hunter noted that the remaining 12.2 acres would be excluded from the residential development to provide the necessary Right-of-Way for the Devon extension. Shannon asked Hunter if it was the Lancer Corporation's opinion that the Devon extension was a legal fact. Hunter stated that his attorney was working on the question, and at present Lancer did not feel that the County had the legal right to stop the vacation of Devon extended. Hauser continued the questioning -by asking if the 1 .6 acres shown on the plat would be the total area required for detention. Hunter stated that it was and he added that at the present time the Lancer Corporation did not know where they would provide detention for the remaining 12.2 acres . Hunter noted that the original plans showed that the 1 .6 acres of detention would have served the entire 40 acres ; however, the plan was based on developing the entire parcel with residential homes. Parrin stated that Lancer could provide off-site detention for the 12.2 acres if the Village Engineer approved the plans . Parrin next asked if the plat of annexation would include the 12.2 acres. Hunter stated that the Lancer Corporation had not made a decision on that issue. Hunter did note that if the Devon extension was not developed, the Lancer Corporation might request to develop the property commercially. Shannon stated that if the 12.2 acres was annexed to the Village at a later time, Lancer would have to provide additional open space. While referring to the revised plat, Glass stated that he would like to see the removal of the three proposed residential lots fronting on the park area. Glass noted that this would give the Park District a more usable parcel . Glass continued by asking if Hunter knew what type of commercial zoning he would request for the remainingl2.2 acres . Hunter stated that he did not know. Plan Commission Minutes - 2 - September 28, 1977 Lancer Corporation (continued) Shannon concluded the discussion by stating that he admired Lancer's continued efforts to resolve the many problems that had developed concerning the annexation of the 40 acres. Shannon did note that Hunter should try to increase the proposed park area. Mr. Parrin left the meeting at 8: 10 P.M. Docket 77-14: 7-Eleven Food Store, Southwest corner of Nerge & Meacham Roads Mr. Woolner, Attorney and Robert Calkins were present to represent the petitioner. In addition, Edward Voyda, Architect and Terry Ladd were present to represent the Southland Corporation. The Public Hearing was a continuation of the hearing held on Wednesday, August 17, 1977. The petitioner was requesting that the property located at the southwest corner of Nerge and Meacham be rezoned from R-3, Residential District to B-2, Business District. The proposed use of the property was to establish a 7-Eleven store. Mr. Voyda began the presentation by stating that he had submitted revised site plans and landscaping plans to the Village staff. Voyda asked if the Commission had any questions. Shannon noted that the Commission had received staff reports concerning the proposed rezoning. Hauser began the questioning by asking what the dimensions of the parking spaces would be. Voyda responded by stating that he had met with the Village Engineer and the Building Commissioner and the revised site plan met all Village requirements . Voyda noted that the revised site plan showed the required 75 foot setback on the west and south side of the proposed structure. He also stated that the petitioner would enclose the refuge container. Voyda also suggested that the petitioner would place evergreens around the parking lot and they would construct a six foot fence where the property abutted residential areas . Hauser continued by asking what type of fence would be constructed. Voyda stated that it would be a six foot cedar fence. Hauser asked if the petitioner was willing to place a different type of fence that would not require maintenance, such as a brick fence. Voyda stated that a brick fence would require a foundation which would greatly inflate the cost. Glass continued the questioning by asking why the architect designed the driveways in the manner shown on the site plan. Voyda stated that the design was based on the traffic flow. Glass next asked how much higher the proposed 7-Eleven would be compared to the abutting homes. Voyda stated that it would be approximately six feet higher. Glass noted that if that were true, there would be no screening for people who owned two-story houses . This was a concern to Glass since the proposed landscaping would not address this problem. Voyda suggested that the landscaping plan could be changed to correct the oversite. Glass next asked if the front of the proposed store was on Nerge Road. Voyda stated that it was. Cummins next asked if the lighting for the 7-Eleven sign would shine into the homes abutting the proposed structure. Voyda stated that it would not. Plan Commission Minutes - 3 - September 28, 1977 Docket 77-14: 7-Eleven Food Store, SW corner of Nerge & Meacham Roads (continued) Petri expressed interest in whether the facility would be leased out. Ladd stated that he did not know whether the facility would be franchised. Petri asked who would have the responsibility to maintain the proposed facility. Ladd stated that the Southland Corporation required the franchise owners to maintain the facilities . Wesley asked if the Southland Corporation had any business rela- tionship with Centex. Ladd stated that Southland had no relationship with Centex except in purchasing the subject property. Wesley expressed •concern over whether the proposed structure could perform other operations outside of retail sales. Ladd stated that in his opinion the proposed structure could only operate as a, retail outlet. Wesley next asked if the structure could be used for business offices . Ladd stated that with remodeling it could serve certain types of business offices . Wesley continued by asking if Southland ever converted a 7-Eleven to another use like a gas station. Ladd stated that Southland did convert several 7-Eleven stores to different uses; however, they never converted any of their stores to gas stations . Hamilton stated that he wanted to know which homeowners (near the proposed facility) were notified by Centex of the proposed commercial use. Calkins stated that he would supply the information. Shannon began his questioning by asking if it were possible for Southland to construct a liquor store on the lot at a later date. Ladd stated that the possibility was remote and he noted that it was not the intention of the Southland Corporation to construct a liquor store on the subject property. Shannon also expressed concern over the maintenance of the proposed facility and he asked how Southland made the lessee comply with the fulfillment of the maintenance requirements. Ladd stated that the lessee was responsible through the contractual agreement and if the lessee did not fulfill the maintenance requirements , the Southland Corporation would perform the maintenance and bill the lessee. Hauser asked if the operating hours of the proposed facility were determined. Ladd stated that the store hours had not been determined. Glass next asked if the 7-Eleven stores allowed coin-operated amusements. Ladd stated that Southland did operate the machines where they were allowed; however, Ladd noted that if the Village did not want pinball machines to be used within the proposed facility, Southland would comply. Hamilton inquired whether the petitioner was willing to substitute landscaping for the unnecessary parking spaces . Hamilton noted that the petitioner was proposing approximately ten more parking spaces than the Village ordinance required. Ladd stated that he would have to consult with other representatives from Southland before he could answer the question. Hamilton also asked if Southland would be willing to do away with the hot food serve. Ladd stated that they would not. Before concluding the Public Hearing, Shannon noted that there were several residents present. Shannon allowed the residents to address the Commission and their concerns were as follows: The residents did not feel it was possible to screen the lights from the proposed structure; The noise burden would be very great; And the proposed site would create a potential traffic problem. Shannon noted the concerns expressed by the residents and he concluded the Public Hearing. A full disclosure of these transactions is available in the Official Transcript. Plan Commission Minutes - 4 - September 28, 1977 Docket 77-15: 7-Eleven, Northwest corner of Nerge & Rohlwing Roads Mr. Woolner, Attorney and Robert Calkins were present to represent the petitioner. In addition, Edward Voyda, Architect and Terry Ladd were present to represent the Southland Corporation. The petitioner was requesting that the property located at the northwest corner of Nerge Road and Rohlwing Road be rezoned from R-3, Residential District to B-2, Business District. The proposed use of the property was to establish a 7-Eleven Food Store. The Public Hearing was a continuation of the hearing held on Wednesday, August 17, 1977. Mr. Ladd began the presentation by stating that the Southland' Corporation had previously supplied revised site plans and landscaping plans to the Village Staff. At this point, Ladd turned the presentation over to the architect. Mr. Voyda briefly described the site plan and he also commented on the proposed landscaping. Voyda did note that the revised site plan was in compliance with all Village requirements . Cummins began the questioning by asking if the petitioner had contacted the County for permission to cut the median. Voyda stated that they had not contacted the County. Cummins next asked if the petitioner was aware that a ten foot rear easement was required. Voyda stated that although it was not shown on the site plan, it would be added. Cummins continued by asking where the petitioner would provide storm detention. Voyda stated that storm detention would be kept in the parking lot if it were required. Petri asked if the petitioner intended on putting a six foot fence next to the residential properties which already had privately owned fences . Voyda stated that the fence would be constructed for a screening effect. Glass expressed concern with the proposed driveway located 30 feet from the intersection. Glass felt that the traffic flow into the facility might cause serious traffic problems . Glass continued by asking which proposed 7-Eleven would generate more business . Ladd stated that he did not know for certain, however he felt that the Meacham and Nerge would probably do more business. Glass stated that he felt that the subject property had a good possibility and he wondered why the petitioner did not supply additional parking on the site as the petitioner had done on the Meacham-Nerge site. Wesley continued the questioning by asking if the petitioner had the information requested from the first Public Hearing concerning the market analysis . Ladd proceeded to identify 8 pairs of 7-Eleven stores each located approximately 3/4 of a mile from the other. Ladd noted that all 16 store locations were selected by the Southland marketing technique and they were all successful . Wesley next asked how the Southland Corporation determines the location. Ladd stated that South- land look at several variables, including traffic flow, house count within 3/4 of a mile, surrounding property uses, and competition. Wesley stated that his concern was that if the Village allowed the rezoning and the proposed 7-Eleven store failed, the property could be used for many various uses, some of which would not be compatible with the abutting residential property. Hauser next asked who was in charge of determining if the proposed store would operate 24 hours a day. Ladd stated that the decision would be made by the regional director. Hamilton noted that there was some question as to the final grading Plan Commission Minutes - 5 - September 28, 1977 Docket 77-15: 7-Eleven, NW corner of Nerge & Rohlwing Roads (continued) and slope of the property, especially the rear section. Hamilton asked Finn to direct this concern to the Village Engineer. Hamilton next asked if the petitioner knew how much tax revenue would be brought into the Village from sales tax. Ladd stated that he did not have the information; however, he would supply the information for both proposed sites at a later date. Hamilton also noted that the proposed landscaping was designed for the summer months ; however, during the winter, there would be little if any screening. Voyda stated that this was an oversight and he would correct the problem. Shannon asked if the other area 7-Eleven stores were located in shopping centers or residential areas. Ladd sited several area 7-Eleven stores and he noted that they were each located in residential areas. Before concluding the hearing, Shannon allowed several residents to address the Commission. The concerns expressed by the residents were: The proposed facility would cause continuous traffic problems; And the facility would be dangerous for children to cross the street. Upon noting the concerns expressed by the residents, Shannon concluded the Public Hearing. A full accounting of the proceeding is available in the Official Transcript. Docket 77-11 : Mobile Service Station Jerry Bartolai and Dennis Wong were present to represent the petitioner. The petitioner was requesting that the property located at the north*4 st corner of Meacham and Nerge Roads be rezoned from R-3, Residential District to B-3, Automotive Orientated District. Shannon began the discussion by suggesting three issues which concerned him. First, if the rezoning were permitted it would be the first time that a commercial use of this type would be allowed in a largely residential area. Secondly, there was a great concern over the height of the subject property and the abutting residential homes. Finally, were the homeowners advised of the intended use when they bought their homes. Shannon did note that if the homeowners were not notified, it was not the Mobile Corporation who was at fault. Shannon concluded that he would not object to the proposed use if the service station was designed to be fully compatible with the residential area. Mr. Wong noted the concerns of the homeowners and he stated that Mobile had developed the landscaping plans based on the specific locations of the houses concerned. Wong stated that they would prefer to put in mature landscaping to facilitate the screening process. Hamilton asked if retention was required for the site or if it was included in Section 22. Shannon directed Finn to obtain the information from the Village Engineer. Petri stated that he would like to see the petitioner use evergreens in the landscaping plans. Glass asked Wong how much higher the proposed station would be in relation to the homes. Wong stated that there was approximately a five foot difference in height. Glass asked what the difference in height was at the property line. Wong stated that there seemed to be a seven or eight foot difference in height at the property line. Glass noted that during the Public Hearing Mr. Wong stated that they would slope the grading; however, it appeared • • Plan Commission Minutes - 6 - September 28, 1977 Docket 77-11 : Mobile Service Station (continued) that a cliff presently exists. Calkins stated that Centex would meet with Mobile and work out an -accePtable plan for the sloping of the property in question. Wesley asked if the proposed canopy was necessary since it visually expanded the service station. Mr. Bartolai stated that the canopy was a definate asset to the facility, and it would be impractical to eliminate. Several residents were present and they submitted a list of all the service stations currently operating in the Village. The residents noted that nowhere in the Village is there a similar use encompassed by residential homes. Telar 4th Vacation of an Easement Shannon noted that the vacation of the easement for the Telar 4th Subdivision had been reviewed and approved by the Village Engineer. Hamilton made a motion to recommend approval of the vacation. Petri seconded the motion. All present voted 'Aye' . The meeting adjourned at 12:35 A.M. Submitted by, Richard M. Finn Administrative Assistant RMF:ms (10/3/77) c: Chairman & Members of Plan Commission, Village President & 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.