Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLAN COMMISSION - 12/04/1985 - HUNTINGTON SQUARE Minutes ELK GROVE VILLAGE PLAN COMMISSION Date: Wednesday, December 4, 1985 Location: Council Chamber Municipal Building 901 Wellington Avenue The meeting was called to order by Chairman Glass at 8:15 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: John Glass, Chairman Leah Cummins George Mullen Orrin Stangeland Clark Fulton, Acting Secretary Fred Geinosky David Paliganoff Staff Present: Tom Rettenbacher, Building Commissioner Robin Weaver, Administrative Assistant John Coakley, Administrative Intern Others representing Huntington Square: Michael Lerner, The Property Group Bob Lux, Project Director, Dominium Group Jayne Matt, Shepherd, Legan, Aldrian, Ltd. Jack Schliesmann, Dominium Group Others: Several members of the Housing Commission and several unidentified persons. Huntington Square The Public Hearing was called to order at 8:16 p.m. by Chairman Glass. Jayne Matt stated that the special concept of Huntington Square would enhance the lives of residents. She said that the important aspects of a retirement center was the open space, package of amenities, and the one building design of the development. The proposed concept is the development of a retirement center which provides independent living for retirees. Michael Lerner reiterated the need for a text amendment to provide zoning for retirement communities. Presently, the Village Codes do not allow for this type of development. He further stated that all of the amenities and programs would be included in Huntington's $1,000 - $1,500 rental fee. Mr. Lerner responded to a question by George Mullen, stating that he is currently involved with four similar retirement developments. Three of these proposed developments are in Arizona and one is in Plan Commission Minutes - 2 - December 4, 1985 Huntington Square (continued) Schaumburg. Mr. Lerner has been involved with the construction of more than 5,000 units of housing through the Dominium Group. George Mullen inquired as to the differences between the village Grove Apartments and the proposed development. Mr. Lerner responded that there will be no subsidized units in Huntington Square. He further stated that the larger units, numerous amenities, 24 hour call system, the programs, and activities which will create the lifestyle of Huntington were also different than existing senior citizen housing. Mr. Lerner explained that in order to accommodate future developers, he was proposing a generic text amendment. He then explained the reason for requesting 55 bedrooms per acre, by stating that retirement centers have a lower density of approximately 1.2 persons per unit. Extra bedrooms are typically only used for storage. David Paliganoff requested that the petitioner explain the changes requested for text amendment, point by point. Jayne Matt said the main difference between the retirement center and regular A-2 zoning is that the population is limited to older people. Other differences include the lifestyle provided and the amenities. Lerner added that market surveys have demonstrated a need for senior housing of this type in the area. This data would be provided later for the Plan Commission. Jayne Matt continued to explain the proposed text amendment, stating that a minimum of 100 units would be needed in order to financially support the amenities. The development should also be designed as one unit. David Paliganoff asked about construction time and phasing of the project. Lerner said he would have no objection toa time limit of two years placed on construction. Ms. Matt addressed the need for meal service in the retirement community. The text amendment could allow for either in-house meal service or a catered service. She asserted the importance of the support facilities which are necessary for the lifestyle provided. The amenities should be a requirement in the text amendment in the amount of at least 55 square feet of common space per unit. The requirement for elevators and ramps are also important because the elderly have trouble with stairs. Lerner pointed out that the height restriction will allow for "mid- rise" rather than highrise buildings. The intent of this section is to maintain the residential environment of Elk Grove. In addition, a minimum distance between buildings should be included. David Paliganoff asked how critical the 15 foot setback requirement was to Huntington as opposed to their 10 foot setback proposal. Mr. Lerner replied that he did not think that it was critically important but he would have to check with the architech. Lerner also explained that retirement centers do not need as much open space as a typical residential development, as senior citizens are engaged mostly in indoor activities. The density requirements for retirement centers was proposed to be 35 dwelling units per acre and 55 bedrooms per acre. The population pro- jections for retirement communities show approximately 20% of the units • i Plan Commission Minutes - 3 - December 4, 1985 Huntington Square (continued) would be double occupancy. The remaining 80% of the units would be occupied by single residents. Ms. Matt replied to David Paliganoff's question regarding parking by responding that the parking space dimensions could be made 9 feet by 19 feet rather than the requested 9 feet by 18 feet, but it would mean less green space. She further noted that only . 75 spaces per unit would be necessary although the Huntington proposal is for one space per unit. Statistics from other retirement communities show only .6 spaces per unit are needed. Tom Rettenbacher asked about the loading space provisions. Ms. Matt stated that a 20 foot by 100 foot loading area was provided for the village center portion of the development. This met with current A-2 standards. Clark Fulton suggested a restriction be put on the distance between a unit and the community areas. Michael Lerner agreed that this suggestion could be included. Chairman Glass asked the petitioner to explain who owns the property. Discussion followed regarding whether or not the owners were a part of a corporation. If they were a corporation, they were required by law to be represented by an attorney. This question would be answered at the next meeting. Mr. Mary Prace, a resident of Elk Grove, addressed the Plan Commission. He expressed concerns regarding the purpose of a text amendment, zoning in general, and this developer's experience with housing for the elderly. Another resident, Mr. Sid Miller, said he felt that the process for the text amendment and annexation was backward. He suggested that a text amendment be carefully designed by the village prior to the consideration of any development proposal. Cathy Duoba, a member of the Housing Commission, addressed the Plan Commission. She requested that the Plan Commission not make a decision on the text amendment until the Housing Commission had an opportunity to review the proposal. She further stated that the Housing Commission had a lot of background information that could assist the Plan Commission. Chairman Glass said the Plan Commission would welcome any assistance. The public hearing regarding the text amendment was adjourned at 10:24 p.m. (Ten minute recess. ) The Chairman called to order the second public hearing, regarding rezoning, at 10:34 p.m. Michael Lerner reiterated Huntington Square's request for rezoning. He stated that the proposed development would consist of 216 dwelling units with 144 two-bedroom and 72 one-bedroom units. The development would be a retirement center. The proposal includes a center core area called the village center, four residential wings, six elevators, and underground parking. Clark Fulton asked a question regarding health facilities. Mr. Lerner responded that no facilities were provided. The wellness center would keep residents' health records, check their blood pressure, and develop fitness activities for each person. Plan Commission Minutes - 4 - December 4, 1985 Huntington Square (continued) Mr. Lerner stated that although several means of financing were available, no financing had been arranged, as yet. He then responded to a question by Clark Fulton by stating that the development would take about two years to construct. George Mullen inquired about who would own the property once it was developed. Mr. Lerner responded that the policy of the owners is to sell portions but retain control as the General Partner. Discussion followed regarding the elevation of the parcel in relation to the elevation of the church property to the east. Chairman Glass requested this information be brought in at the next meeting. The public hearing was adjourned at 11 :41 p.m. Both public hearings will be continued at 8:30 p.m. on December 18, 1985. Respectfully submitted, V '""_ J n M. Coakley A ministrative Intern 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, Deputy Fire Chief, Village Attorney, Housing Commission, Park District, NWMC, Centex.