Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLAN COMMISSION - 08/17/1977 - GREYHOUND SUBURBAN STATION a MINUTES ELK GROVE VILLAGE PLAN COMMISSION August 17, 1977 The regular meeting of the Plan Commission was ca lied to order by Chairman William Shannon at 8:03 P.M. on Wednesday, August 17, 1977 in the Council Chamber of the Municipal Building, 901 Wellington Avenue, Elk Grove Village. MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: William Shannon, Chairman Thomas Rettenbacher, John Glass Building Commissioner Thomas Hamilton (9:45 p.m.) Robert Callahan, Edward Hauser Building Supervisor James Petri William Wesley MEMBERS ABSENT: Leah Cummins Docket 77-13: Greyhound Suburban Station Mr. John Kvistad, Attorney, and Albert Wallace, Regional Director for Greyhound, were present to represent the Greyhound Bus Company. The petitioner was requesting a Special Use to establish a Greyhound Suburban Bus Station at the Park and Shop Arcade located on Arlington Heights Road and Higgins Road. Mr. Wallace began his presentation by stating that Greyhound is currently developing a series of suburban bus terminals . Wallace noted that the Park and Shop Arcade was selected because of its ideal location. The present facility would be remodeled and Greyhound would have five buses stopping per day. The major business would be a package delivery business, although Wallace noted that the proposed facility would serve passengers . Wesley began the questioning by asking Wallace why Greyhound felt that the proposed site was so attractive. Wallace responded by stating that the square footage of the proposed facility and its proximity to Route 53 and Higgins Road were the two variables that made the site desirable. Wesley next asked if the petitioner had a site plan. Wallace stated that he had a site plan and he proceeded to submit it to the Plan Commission. Wesley next turned his attention to whether packages or passengers would be the main business. Wallace noted that because of the closeness to the Industrial Park, they felt that packages would be their major business . Wesley inquired if the packages would be large or small . Wallace stated that the packages would not exceed 150 pounds . Wesley asked if the petitioner intended on having a ramp. Wallace stated that they would. Wesley's next concern was whether Greyhound planned on expanding the services. Wallace stated that the optimal amount of buses per day would be seven, although he noted that for that to occur all the variables would have to be in Greyhound's favor. Wesley continued by asking what hours the proposed facility would operate. Wallace stated that the station would operate from 7:30 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. Plan Commission Minutes - 2 - August 17, 1977 Docket 77-13: Greyhound Suburban Station (continued) Wesley next inquired whether Greyhound made known their plans for establishing the facility to the other businesses in the Park and Shop Arcade. Wallace stated that to his knowledge, they did not. Wesley asked what was located in the rear of the proposed facility. Wallace stated that there was an eight foot fence which separated the facility from a residential area. Wesley next questioned Wallace as to whether Greyhound had any similar operations in the Chicago area. Wallace stated that Greyhound's Northlake operation was similar, although he noted that it was not located in a Shopping Center. Wesley continued by asking why Greyhound was requesting this Special Use when they were previously granted a Special Use for the proposed operation at 2202 Landmeier Road. Wallace responded by stating that during the first proceedings, because of certain variables, the proposed facility at 2202 Landmeier Road was rented to different tenants. Petri expressed concern over the design of the proposed facility. Wallace explained that the facility would have rest rooms , a waiting room and a package express room. Petri next asked what type of sign the petitioner intended on displaying. Wallace stated that Greyhound's sign would be the same size as the present tenant of the facility. Petri continued by asking if the petitioner planned on having vending machines . Wallace stated that they would have a soda pop vendor and possibly a coffee vendor. Hauser began his questioning by asking how far the bus would be extended north from the ramp when it was parked. Wallace stated that the bus would be extended approximately 36 feet north. Hauser asked if this would cause any conflict with nearby stores. Wallace noted that none of the existing stores had any ramps and Greyhound's proposed ramp would not cause any problem. Hauser next asked Wallace to briefly discribe the design of the proposed facility. Wallace stated that the waiting room would be located at the eastern side of the facility and the package room would be on the other side. Hauser continued his questioning by asking if there was a fire lane in the rear of the proposed site. Wallace stated that there was , but he noted that delivery trucks often used the rear entrances. Glass asked Wallace if Greyhound intended on processing packages from the rear entrance. Wallace stated that they would, although he noted that there would only be one bus at the ramp at a specific time. Glass next inquired how many employees Greyhound would utilize. Wallace stated that they would have one full time employee and one part time employee (for peak periods) . Glass expressed concern over the amount of money that would be kept at the proposed facility. Wallace noted that the most money that they would have at any one time would not be greater than $2,000. Glass concluded his questioning by asking if the buses would pass in front of the bowling alley. Wallace stated that the buses would indeed pass in front of the bowling alley. Shannon expressed interest in the proposed lease of the facility. Wallace stated that Greyhound would enter into a five year lease with one five-year option. Shannon next asked if Greyhound would compete j for passengers from Jefferson Park going to the Industrial Park. Wallace responded by stating that Greyhound was not in the commuter service and they could never compete with the RTA in that type of service. y • • Plan Commission Minutes - 3 - August 17, 1977 Docket 77-13: Greyhound Suburban Station (continued) Shannon concluded by asking how many College runs Greyhound intended on operating. Wallace stated there would be three buses operating for the College Specials. Hauser noted that at the rear of the Park and Shop Arcade there were several garbage facilities . Hauser asked if these dumpsters would cause any problems . Wallace stated that the dumpsters could be pushed up against the wall and would not be a problem. Rettenbacher asked if Greyhound planned on allowing people to park in the rear of the building. Wallace stated that he hoped that their sign would discourage parking in the rear of the building. At this point, Shannon stated that the Plan Commission would take under advisement all the information presented. A full accounting of the proceedings is available in the Official Transcript. Docket 77-14: 7-Eleven Food Store, SW corner of Nerge & Meacham Roads Howard Nagelberger, Attorney, and Robert Calkins were present to represent the petitioner. In addition, Terry Ladd and Jim Marone were present to represent the Southland Corporation. 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. Nagelberger began the presentation by submitting a plat of survey and a site plan of the proposed facility to the Plan Commission. Mr. Ladd continued the presentation by stating that the Southland Corporation intended on purchasing the property contingent on the rezoning being allowed by the Village. Ladd noted that they had provided for a 75 foot setback as required by Ordinance. Ladd con- tinued by saying that their marketing studies had determined that the proposed location would be very profitable. Ladd concluded his opening presentation by suggesting that they intended on having landscaping done, although the plans were not fully developed. Hauser began the questioning by asking where the petitioner planned on placing the refuge container. Ladd stated that it would be located on the side of the building facing Nerge Road. Ladd did note that the container would be fenced. Hauser stated that the site plan showed the parking space5to be nine feet wide instead of the ten feet that was actually required. Ladd agreed and stated that the site plan would be amended to show the ten foot width. Hauser next inquired whether Southiland foresaw a problem on Nerge Road. Ladd responded that they were not anticipating any traffic problems. Hauser next asked what type of outside lighting would be supplied. Ladd stated that normally they constructed one pole with lights that shined only on the parking area. Hauser concluded his questioning by asking the dimensions of the property. Ladd stated that the property was 207 feet by 196 feet or approximately 1 .5 acres. Glass asked what were the proposed operating hours. Ladd stated that it would be open from 7:00 A.M. to 11 :00 P.M. , although he noted that if the market allowed the facility might be open 24 hours a day. Glass next expressed concern that there were several similar facilities in the immediate area. Ladd stated that the 7-Eleven's marked radius 7 Plan Commission Minutes - 4 - August 17, 1977 Docket 77-14: 7-Eleven Food Store, SW corner of Nerge & Meacham Roads (continued) was three-fourths of a mile. He also noted that 7-Eleven stores ' market was quite different from supermarkets. Glass continued his questioning by asking what would happen to the property if the proposed store failed. Ladd stated that they would either sublease or sell the property. Glass next asked if the store would be a franchise. Ladd noted that no decision on that issue had been made. Glass noted that the driveway was only twenty feet from the intersection and the Ordinance required thirty feet. Ladd agreed and stated that Southland would make the correction. Glass next inquired what the grade of the site was compared to the residential area. Calkins stated that the porposed site had approximately four to six feet grade variation from the residential area. At this point Rettenbacher addressed the Plan Commission and stated that the petitioner's figures on parking were incorrect. He also noted that the proposed facility would require a loading space. Ladd noted Mr. Rettenbacher's comment and he suggested that Southland would make the necessary corrections in order to comply. Glass continued his questioning by asking if the petitioner would submit their landscaping plans. Ladd stated that the plans would be submitted when they were completed. Glass also asked if Southland would supply the required sidewalks . Ladd stated that if sidewalks were required they would construct them. Petri began his questioning by noting that the 7-Eleven stores already located in the Village left a great deal to be desired. Petri stated that the operation of the stores was so poor that he had serious doubts about establishing another similar operation. Ladd stated that they were aware of the problem and their operational department was currently cleaning up the stores. Petri next asked what would be in the rear of the store. Ladd stated that the entire rear area would be landscaping. At this point Hamilton suggested that the petitioner request that the Public Hearing be postponed to a different date. Hamilton noted that the petitioner was not properly prepared and apparantly was not aware of the Village Ordinances . Wesley agreed that the petitioner lacked important information especially on how the site was chosen. Wesley asked if the petitioner could supply written information on how they determined the proposed site. Ladd stated that they would make the site evaluation available to the Commission. Next Mr. Nagelberger addressed the Commission and requested that the hearing be rescheduled so that they could develop the necessary information. Shannon stated that he felt that rescheduling the hearing was a good idea. Hauser asked if Centex was attempting to tell of the proposed facility to new owners who had not moved into the area yet. _ Calkins noted that Centex had written to the people in an attempt to let them know about the proposed use. Wesley stated that his major concern was that if the rezoning was approved and the store was a failure, the property could be used for any of the uses allowed under the B-2 District. Wesley noted that many of the uses were not compatible with the nearby residential area. At this point Shannon stated that the Plan Commission would continue I w • Plan Commission Minutes - 5 - August 17, 1977 the Public Hearing on Wednesday, September 28th at 8:00 P.M. However, Shannon noted that there was approximately fifteen or twenty residents in attendance. Shannon stated that before he adjourned the hearing, he would like to allow these people to speak. Approximately six residents addressed the Commission and their concerns were as follows : Stevenson School is a few blocks from the proposed sites and this could be dangerous for the children; additional police protection would be required if the facility were constructed; litter would become a major problem; the proposed facility could be an ideal hangout for area kids; and during rush hours the facility would cause great traffic problems . Shannon noted the concerns expressed by the residents and he invited them to attend the Hearing set for September 28, 1977. A full disclosure of these transactions is available in the Official Transcript. Docket 77-15: 7-Eleven, Northwest corner of Nerge and Rohlwing Roads Howard Nagelberger, Attorney, and Robert Calkins were present to represent the petitioner. 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. Mr. Nagelberger asked if the Plan Commission would consider rescheduling the Hearing to allow the petitioner to obtain necessary information. Nagelberger made reference to the preceding Public Hearing and he stated that the Southland Corporation would need time to correct certain inac_cura_cies . Shannon, with the concurrence of the Commission, agreed and set September 28, 1977 as the date that the Plan Commission would hear the petitioners request. Shannon scheduled the hearing to begin at 8:30 P.M. Shannon noted that several residents were in attendance and he allowed them to enter their statements as part of the Official Record. The concern of the residents was that they felt that the suggested use was not justifiable. Also, the residents stated that traffic problems would be created by the use. Winston Grove Section 23 Joseph Lawcheary and Russel Schlatter were present to represent Centex. Mr. Lawcheary began the presentation by briefly describing the Section 23 plat. He noted that they were proposing 522 lots which would be more than in Section 22. Lawcheary also stated that the Park District and the School District #54 were presented with site plans and information concerning Section 23. Hauser agreed that Centex had brought the site plan to the Park District and he stated that the Park District was currently cooperating with District 54 in determining where the school sites should be located. Hauser also noted that they were investigating whether a junior high school was needed in the area. Hauser expressed concern over the proposed open space/detention area located on the western part of the plat. Hauser noted that it might be necessary to move certain lots . Shannon stated that it appeared that a natural creek flowed through the area Hauser was Plan Commission Minutes - 6 - August 17, 1977 referring to. Shannon asked if Centex intended on leaving the trees and bushes that were growing in that area. Lawcheary stated that all of the present foilage would remain. Hauser asked how much of a slope was proposed for Lots #57, #58, #59 and #60. Lawcheary stated that the slope would be from one to three feet overall with the lowest point not lying below five feet. Wesley inquired whether the detention pond was to be dry or wet. Lawcheary noted that the detention would be dry. He suggested that they would attempt to leave the water paths as naturally as possible as required by Village Ordinance. Shannon noticed that the site plan allowed for access paths to the proposed school . Hauser also noted the access paths, but suggested that they be widened to eighteen feet. Hamilton asked if Centex would submit the flood plain maps for the subject property. Mr. Schlatter stated that Centex would supply the maps . Wesley asked if Centex planned on fencing the proposed detention area. Shannon suggested that he felt the area should be kept as natural as possible. Shannon not@d that he would even like to see the grass grow naturally and not/cut. Hauser stated that Shannon's suggestion was nice in that it would defray maintenance cost although he noted that many people would complain about the height of the grass . Glass agreed with Hauser and he stated that people in the area would want the area to be kept up by the Park District. Glass cited the Village Weed Ordinance as a source of contention if the grass were allowed to grow in its natural state. Hamilton noted Glass' concern and he suggested that the Village classify the area as a "Nature Area". Shannon stated that the cul-de-sac area shown on the plat had green areas in the center. He noted that this was not acceptable and should be changed. Schlatter stated that they would amend the change. Shannon next asked if Centex had any commitments from School District #54. Shannon noted that the Plan Commission had experienced little cooperation with School District #54 in the past. Schlatter stated that Centex had no commitments from School District #54. Hauser asked what Centex planned on doing with the unincorporated corner lot. Lawcheary stated that they had no plans. At this point Shannon stated that the Plan Commission would take the preliminary report under advisement. Wesley left the meeting at 11 :45 P.M. Docket 77-9: Arlington Heights Nursery Shannon noted that prior to the start of the first Public Hearings, Mr. Matthies presented a revised site plan to the Plan Commission. The petitioner was requesting that the Village rezone the property located j at 1250 South Arlington Heights Road. The subject property is currently zoned R-1 Residential District and the petitioner is requesting that it be rezoned R-3, Residential District. Shannon suggested that the revised site plan was a vast improvement over the two previous site plans . The Commissioners agreed with Shannon and Hamilton moved to recommend approval of the requested rezoning. I i I Plan Commission Minutes - 7 - August 17, 1977 Petri seconded the motion. Shannon directed Finn to prepare a finding of fact for the Plan Commission, to be submitted to them at their August 31st meeting. Shannon noted that the Plan Commission would conduct a special meeting on Wednesday, August 31st at 8:00 P.M. for deliberation. The meeting adjourned at 11 :50 P.M. Submitted by, Richard M. Finn Administrative Assistant RMF:ms (8/29/77) 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. I