Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLAN COMMISSION - 08/28/2017 - PC Minutes - Prelim.Technology Park - Higgins Road (Busse Farms) Elk Grove Village Plan Commission Minutes August 28,2017 Present: J. Glass S.Carlson F.Geinosky P. Rettberg G.Schumm J. Morrill P.Ayers K.Weiner T.Thompson Staff: M.Jablonski,Assistant Manager J. Polony, Deputy Director of Community Development R. Raphael, Engineering Supervisor E.Scheid,Administrative Intern Petitioner: M. Brennan, Brennan Investment Group K. Brennan, Brennan Investment Group B. O'Halloran, Brennan Investment Group N. Peppers,Storino, Ramello& Durkin C.Trefry,Ware Malcomb B. Duffy,Spaceco L.Aboona, Kenig, Lindgren,O'Hara,Aboona (KLOA) I Chairman Glass called the meeting to order at 6:58 p.m. Item 1: June 19,2017 Meeting Minutes j Commissioner Rettberg moved to approve the meeting minutes of June 19, 2017. Commissioner Weiner seconded the motion. Upon voting (Glass, Carlson, Geinosky, Rettberg, Schumm, Morrill, Ayers, Weiner and Thompson,AYES),the motion passed. Item 2: June 26,2017 Meeting Minutes Commissioner Rettberg moved to approve the meeting minutes of June 26, 2017. Commissioner Weiner seconded the motion. Upon voting (Glass, Carlson, Geinosky, Rettberg, Schumm, Morrill, Ayers, Weiner and Thompson,AYES),the motion passed. Item 3: PreliminaryMeeting—Annexation,Rezoning&Resubdivision for the Proposed Elk g g Grove Technology Park at 743-955 E Higgins&6-42 Stanley St.—Brennan Investment Group. 1 it I I Chairman Glass stated that this meeting is a preliminary hearing for the proposed Elk Grove Technology Park and asked the Petitioners to explain their purpose before the Plan Commission. M. Brennan stated that the proposed Elk Grove Technology Park will be transformational as this will bring in high tech users, such as robotic manufacturers, data centers, and other uses involving digital technology.- He stated that the-development will be a catalyst-for new investments-Indearea. The--- Technology Park will be beautiful, with wide boulevards and picturesque landscaping; and it will also be functional for the community, including ponds and walking paths for residents to enjoy. M. Brennan stated that the proposed Technology Park covers 85 acres which is being purchased from 10 property owners. The construction will first focus on the infrastructure, including the building of roads, retention ponds,landscaping and entryways.There will be 4 entrances to the site—from Bond Street,King Street, Lively and Oakton. There will be two pad sites off of Higgins for possible uses such as retail,office showroom or hotel. 60%of the Park will consist of high-end manufacturing,with 40%planned for use by data centers.The Petitioner stated that he plans to close on the property in the fourth quarter of 2017 and to begin construction of the infrastructure and the first four buildings in the spring of 2018. M. Brennan showed a slide show presentation of the proposed technology park, which included building elevations, entryway features,art along buildings on the boulevards, decorative pavers and other design features. He also showed a video of the proposed development, showing aerial and ground level views I of the two main entries,the boulevard and walking paths. 1 N. Peppers handed out packets which included a preliminary site plan and elevations of the first four buildings proposed to be built. He stated that the existing Fire Station on Oakton is planned as part of this development. He explained that to move forward it will be necessary to subdivide the property in two stages. First,the unincorporated property needs to be annexed into the Village in order to align with a concurrent TIF process. All of the unincorporated property will be resubdivided into one lot for the annexation, and there will be a preliminary 8-lot plat of subdivision, which lays out the proposed future subdivisions of the development that will need to come before the Plan Commission for final approval. N.Peppers stated that the zoning requested will be primarily 1-1,except for the two lots on the Northwest, which will be requested as B-2 zoning. The development is currently in the process of staff review, and that the Petitioner would like to request a Public Hearing date of September 25 to move forward with this project. Chairman Glass questioned which roads will be signalized. L.Aboona stated that King Street currently has a signal, and as part of the development additional phasing will be added from the south, and a wider approach to Higgins. Bond Street will not be signalized, as it will not meet the warrant needed for signal on Higgins, which IDOT has designated as a Strategic Arterial. Additionally there is a connection from the development to Lively,which also has a signal at Higgins. Chairman Glass asked how many feet there are from Lively to Higgins, and noted that it was a somewhat limited intersection, as Lively is a two-lane road which widens to include a left turn lane at Higgins. L. 2 Aboona stated that Lively Blvd. is located 500 feet from Higgins Rd, and stated that improvements were planned at Lively to add a left turn arrow to allow more vehicles from the south to make a left-hand turn. L.Aboona also noted that employees from the east side of the site are the most likely to use this as a way to exit the development. Chairman Glass asked how many employees are anticipated to work in the development.L.Aboona stated that they expect 700 trips during peak hours. Chairman Glass asked if there will be a lot truck traffic.L.Aboona stated that data centers do not generate a lot of truck traffic.M. Brennan stated that 40%of occupiers will be data centers as shown in pre-market research. M. Brennan stated that high end manufacturing does not generate significant truck traffic. M. Brennan noted that to come to the development,you have to be a high-end manufacturer,and that there will not be any logistics centers. M. Brennan stated that there will be reduced dock doors from the standard permitted in the 1-1 district and that no truck or trailer storage would be permitted. Chairman Glass asked if the foot print of the proposed first 4 buildings along Higgins were accurate. C. Trefry stated that the footprint is 90% accurate, that the buildings are planned as single story with potential for two stories of office. Chairman Glass asked if the buildings will have as many loading docks as shown in the site plan. C. Trefry stated there will be docks as shown but they may not be used depending on the users. Chairman Glass asked what users will occupy the buildings. M. Brennan stated that according to pre- j market research, users will be in the fields of high end medical diagnostics, pharmaceuticals and high end manufacturing. M. Brennan noted that due to the high-end features of the park, it will primarily attract users who need the prestige or a great work environment, not uses such as warehousing. He noted that they might be some traditional users in addition to data centers and other high-tech users. ! I I Chairman Glass asked why there is so much parking in the plans if they don't anticipate that many employees. M Brennan stated that it is hard to know how many employees will end up at a development with over 1.2 million square feet of building; uses such as laboratories have significantly more employees. M. Brennan noted that Village staff had pushed for making sure there was sufficient parking as well as some spaces land-banked for future parking. M. Brennan stated that having parking is a good idea and if there are data centers,then there will be a less need for parking. Chairman Glass stated concerns about ingress and egress traffic, considering the lack of signal at Bond and asked if flexible parking had been considered. C.Trefry stated that there will be land banked parking and noted that not all of the planned parking may need to be put in. C.Trefry mentioned that there will be permeable pavers opposed to asphalt to help with storm water management. Commissioner Rettberg asked if TIF will cover the entire project. N. Peppers that it will and this is a part of a larger TIF. Commissioner Rettberg asked if the development will draw tenants from existing businesses in the Elk Grove Business Park.M.Brennan stated that may be inevitable that certain businesses may move towards 3 the Technology Park. M. Brennan stated that Elk Grove Village has more traditional manufacturing jopposed to high tech. Commissioner Rettberg asked if there will be any traditional manufacturing and warehousing in the technology park. M. Brennan stated that the technology park will have it to an extent. Commissioner Carlson asked how quickly these buildings can be built. M. Brennan stated that the Village is pushing for full utilization. According to pre-market research, the Petitioner expects full utilization within a year from ground breaking.The Retitioner stated that tire-market is by 97%occupied-right now, and they have already seen interest in the site and have non-disclosure agreements signed from interested parties. I Commissioner Carlson asked if all of the buildings will be single-tenant. M. Brennan stated that it will remain to be seen based on users,but that it will likely be a combination of single-tenant and multi-tenant. j Commissioner Carlson asked if the buildings on the south end of the park could change.M.Brennon stated j that it will not be all built out at first and that the south end is the proposed location for data centers. Commissioner Weiner asked if the Technology Park will have a mixed use such as building a hotel in the planned B-2 lots. M. Brennon stated that hotels are not his personal choice. He stated that he wants uses that either showcase the mission of the park or act as an amenity. This could be a restaurant, or some sort of showroom type use. Commissioner Weiner asked about whether there would be additional traffic on Oakton going past residential properties and Ripley School. M. Brennan stated that truck traffic cannot turn west onto 1 Oakton.Commissioner Weiner asked what kind of trucks will be entering the technology park,and asked if box trucks are restricted from turning west onto Oakton. N. Peppers stated that the development will stay within existing restrictions on the road. I Commissioner Weiner asked if aesthetic improvements were planned along Oakton. C.Trefry stated that they cannot have ponds as they do along Higgins, but that there will be monument signs and landscaping, though not as grand as the main entrance. Commission Weiner asked if the design features on the boulevards would be brick pavers, because the community has seen issues with these not holding up to traffic. C. Trefry stated that pavers will only be used in the parking area for cars. The entry features and features along the boulevard would be stamped concrete. Commissioner Geinosky asked for an aerial view of the park to see the zoning of the surrounding uses.C. Trefry stated that he will provide a zoomed out aerial view that will show the zoning and that there will be a heavily landscaped berm on the west side of the site by the residential. Commissioner Geinosky noted that there were a lot of residents who showed up with regard to a recent screening issue. Commissioner Geinosky noted that there are 9 buildings to the east of the development on Lively Blvd and asked if they will be bought out. N. Peppers stated that there are only two buildings are under contract with the developer and the buildings are 70 and 80 Lively Blvd. 4 Commissioner Geinosky expressed concern with the noise associated with the manufacturing, including trucks supplying parts, etc., and noted that he was expecting more of demonstration and research facilities as uses. M. Brennan stated that laboratories are a target user, but that proposed tenants will do quiet manufacturing and will not invite noisy and smelly companies to the Technology Park. Commissioner Geinosky asked if companies will control the 5 buildings proposed on the south end of the site.M. Brennan stated that they will own the entire site. M.Brennan noted that some data centers might prefer to own their land, but they would still be required to comply with the conditions of the development. Commissioner Geinosky stated that data centers on Devon Ave and Busse Rd are very plain with no aesthetic attraction and asked if the Technology Park will have the same type of building. M. Brennan stated that all buildings in the park have to abide by the design guidelines for the development. N.Peppers added that there will be design and landscaping guidelines that all users must follow. Commissioner Geinosky added that he does not want to see plain concrete walls. N. Peppers stated that this would not be permitted under the aesthetic requirements of the design guidelines. Commissioner Geinosky asked if there will be a donation of land required as part of the development. M. Jablonski stated that is only applicable to residential annexations. Chairman Glass asked if the association will maintain landscaping including in winter. N. Peppers stated that the association is required to maintain all public components, including landscaping. Commissioner Geinosky asked if there would be a special use requirement, to allow the Village control over future use of the site. N. Peppers stated that this will be zoned as 1-1 and B-2, with no special use required, however the design guidelines will prohibit certain uses. Chairman Glass asked how the resubdivision will work, with it coming forward as a one-lot subdivision. N. Peppers stated that the petition includes a preliminary 8 lot subdivision,which will need to come back before the Plan Commission can finalize. Commissioner Morrill asked if there will be enough power and fiber network capacity for the data centers. B. O'Halloran stated that there have been preliminary meetings with Commonwealth Edison and there is enough powerfor one or two datacenters to move in immediately and ComEd is working to build capacity, additionally there is fiber on 3 sides of the property. ComEd wants datacenters in Elk Grove Village as we have the infrastructure to support it. Commissioner Morrill asked about storm water retention and how much can the park hold. L. Aboona stated that it is designed in excess of the MWRD requirements. B. Duffy stated that the site is designed for a 100 year flood and the development can hold 7.8 inches of water in a 24 hour period. Chairman Glass asked about storm water retention during construction of the park. B. Duffy stated that the retention will be the first thing to be constructed basins during construction. Chairman Glass asked for further information on water retention during construction at the next meeting. 5 i Commissioner Schumm asked about the number of parking spaces and land technology spaces in the technology park. C.Trefry stated that the number of parking stalls, a total of 1 per 1,000 square feet on the site overall,will exceed 1-1 requirements. Commissioner Schumm asked where the high tech employees will come from. M. Brennan stated that he was not sure where the employees will come from-but thereare high-tech workers available throughout the region. Commissioner Ayers noted that he didn't see that the reduced loading docks mentioned by the petitioner were reflected in the site plan, as it doesn't look like there would be possible to put any more docks in than are already shown. He asked what they meant by being limiting on loading docks.M.Brennan stated that the site plan shows a worst case scenario, in order to be flexible for potential users. M. Brennan stated that there will not be that many truck docks.C.Trefry stated that he will work with Village staff to reduce the number of docks down. Commissioner Ayers stated the site plan does not show a well thought out traffic flow. He asked why there is no connection between buildings 1 and 2, and noted that the exit onto lively is not lined up with the driving aisle of the adjacent parking lot. C.Trefry stated that building 1 has three access points, and is not connected to building 2 in order to provide for a user who may want more security. Commissioner Weiner stated that data centers use a lot of water and asked if the park will be able to accommodate the need for the water. B. Duffy stated that the property is surrounded by a 12" water main. Chairman Glass summarized the major concerns of the Pian Commission with the proposed development, stating that they wanted to see more information on:traffic ingress/egress plans, including discussion of Bond Street as a right-in/right-out only if it cannot get a signal; terming and screening for adjacent residential and buffering for Stanley Street properties; an aerial with details on surrounding zoning; information on storm water management during the construction phase,and a plan for traffic flow within the park. Item#4: ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Ayers motioned to adjourn the meeting and Commissioner Weiner seconded the motion. Upon voting(Glass, Carlson,Geinosky, Rettberg,Schumm, Morrill,Ayers,Weiner and Thompson,AYES) the motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:33 p.m. 6