Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLAN COMMISSION - 01/14/2019 - Home Depot,600 Meacham / ComEd, 1500-1510 MidwayElk Grove Village Plan Commission Minutes January 14, 2019 Present: J. Glass F. Geinosky K. Weiner J. Morrill R. DeFrenza T. Thompson P. Rettberg Absent: S. Carlson G. Schumm Staff: M. Jablonski, Assistant Manager J. Polony, Deputy Director of Community Development R. Raphael, Engineering Supervisor Petitioner: P. Glass, CLK Properties (Item 2) S. Wilson, Kimley-Horn (Item 2) B. Danley, Consultant to CLK Properties (Item 2) J. Turnage, ComEd (Item 3) C. Rosso, ComEd (Item 3) E. Sitter, ComEd (Item 3) S. Saef, Sidley Austin LLP (Item 3) D. Olson, Christopher Burke Engineering (Item 3) B. Kubilius, Christopher Burke Engineering (Item 3) Chairman Glass called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. Item 1: Dec 3, 2018 Meeting Minutes Commissioner Weiner moved to approve the meeting minutes of December 3, 2018. Commissioner Geinosky seconded the motion. Upon voting (Geinosky, Weiner, Glass, DeFrenza, Thompson, Rettberg AYES, Morrill ABSTAIN), the motion passed. Item 2: PC Docket 19-1- Petition for the Resubdivision of the property at 600 Meacham Road from one (1) lot to four (4) lots and variation from approved parking plan Chairman Glass read the legal notice into the record and asked the Petitioner to explain his purpose before the Plan Commission. B. Danley stated that he is a third party consultant to CLK Properties, which is the lead for a property ownership group ranging from the northeast and mid -west parts of the country which specializes in office, 1 retail, and multi -family properties. CLK Properties is the lead in the property ownership group which jointly owns the shopping center. B. Danley stated that CLK Properties has been working very closely with Home Depot staff out of Atlanta for the resubdivision. CLK Properties has been leasing the entire shopping center, except the Burger King, to Home Depot, who is currently responsible for their store and for the rest of the units in the shopping center. CLK Properties desires to keep Home Depot in the shopping center and in the Village. B Danley stated that CLK Properties began working with Village staff because Home Depot decided that they only want to manage themselves and believes that ownership should take control of the property and future of the rest of the shopping center. B. Danley stated that CLK Properties hired Kimley Horn to come up with a plan that had flexibility for the future of the center, which would create a subdivision just for Home Depot, as they desired, but also to plan for a future for the shopping center with new and different tenants that can include out lots. Chairman Glass asked the Petitioner what was planned for the out lots. U. Danley stated the le oU tlo is are pall of the strategic tegi% plan for the future fiI the center. There was an existing outlot on Biesterfield between Aldi and the road that was unbuilt, but the former Aldi's has such a nice large parking field, they decided the out lot on Biesterfield would be better located closer to the Burger King. This would open up more choices for users to use the vacant Aldi's space, so it was a strategic move. B. Danley stated the Meacham out lot is another strategic move. Throughout the country, shopping centers are mixing smaller tenants with larger tenants to create more options. He stated that he didn't know who the tenants will be, but that it is difficult to work with Home Depot outside of the lease negotiation, which is happening now, and won't happen again for another ten years. He stated that the subdivision was part of a plan for the future. Chairman Glass stated that the shopping center is divided into multiple units, and there are multiple existing vacancies in the existing space. He stated that Aldi just moved out, but there are other units that have not been leased in some time. B. Danley stated Home Depot was more interested in their work as a retailer than in subleasing the space. They just want to be a tenant now, CLK Properties would take over space -filling. The space that was originally super Kmart has been going through construction permitting to demo space to allow a future tenant to come in to build -to -suit space. He stated that they are aware they need to lead with leasing and then come back to the Plan Commission with a more detailed solution, so they are looking for flexibility in the subdivision. Chairman Glass inquired for how long the lease with Home Depot is for. B. Danley stated that the extension is for 10 years with possibly eight 5-year renewals. He noted that a significant effort was committed to keeping Home Depot staying here, including an incentive of lower rent for a long-term commitment. B. Danley stated that they had engage a new brokerage group that is more adept at this kind of leasing as opposed to focusing on bigger anchor tenants and that they think they will see some success there. Chairman Glass stated that every spring and summer, Home Depot takes up a bunch of space with plant sales, he asked how the parking variation would work in relation to this. B. Danley stated that the parking arrangement was worked out with Home Depot. He noted that many big anchor tenants are reducing parking because they don't use the space. He stated that Home Depot has flow throughout the day, with contractors in morning and home users during the day. He noted that Staples also has steady flow during the day. B. Danley stated that overall, there is still enough parking in the entire center to be within the code, but that they are requesting a variance for the number of spaces in the Home Depot lot. Chairman Glass asked what specific variance was being requested and where the parking was being removed from. S. Wilson stated that per village code, 600 spaces would be required per square footage of the Home Depot, and they are providing 162 less spaces than this amount. S. Wilson stated that some parking would be removed due to the additional outlot. Chairman Glass asked if there is a parking agreement setup and if it were approved by the Plan Commission. B. Danley stated that it was complicated because there is a sequence of REA's that have 3 amendments over the years. He stated there is also a business agreement between Home Depot and ownership in which Home Depot needs to keep the land clean, and they have been slacking in this area so there will be a partnership to keep the common area clean. Chairman Glass inquired who owns the Burger King Lot and if they support the petition. B. Danley stated Burger King is owned by a third party which owns a few other franchises in the area and that the Burger King ownership think it's a good thing that will bring more customers in the future. Chairman Glass asked if Burger King needed to approve the subdivision. B. Danley stated their signature would be needed, but they had already agreed to the proposal. Chairman Glass stated that the Petitioner was asking the Plan Commission to approve something with no details others than a resubdivision, to change parking without a reason for it, and to take 162 spaces from Home Depot, who are packed on weekends in spring and summer. He noted that if the Petitioner sold the property, some of these other tenants might object to future use without a shared parking agreement. B. Danley stated that none of the parking spaces in front of Home Depot or on the side would be affected, primarily the spaces in front of Staples would be affected. Chairman Glass stated that he understands that, but it seems Home Depot is using these spaces a lot during busy seasons and that he was concerned about the lack of detail, the lack of information to justify this parking variation. Commissioner Rettberg inquired if there is any active attempt to fill the space on the south corner of the lot. B. Danley stated yes that they have been showing the space to a number of tenants and Aldi moved out in the summer without letting them know. After that, they started the process of creating a long term plan, which is why they are trying to finalize the necessary approvals from home depot to create flexibility for the future. Commissioner Rettberg inquired if there are some restrictions to Burger King that prohibits other fast food restaurants to coming into this area. B. Danley stated that there is restriction to any burger type fast 3 food restaurants, but other facilities such as a salad or Mexican restaurant would be okay. He went on to say that the same goes for the bank there, there are restrictions in place for no other bank to come in. Commissioner Rettberg stated that this narrows the playing field for any possible tenants for the out lots. B. Danley stated that there are many other uses t around the Chicago area, such as ATT and other cell stores, another local restaurant, or a fast food restaurant like Potbelly's. There are a lot of restaurants that have not been seen on the road, but they typically require a lot of parking and CLK is looking into possibilities for multiple tenants. Commissioner Rettberg inquired whether the Petitioner would be able to move forward with the approval of the lots while not getting approval for the variation for parking spaces until they had solidified a tenant and could come back to the Plan Commission. M. Jablonski asked J. Polony to clarify for the Plan Commission the reason behind the parking variation. J. Polony stated that the parking variations are needed because they are proposing two out lots which will take space and parking. In the original design, there is a parking ratio of 5 automobiles per each 1,000 square footage of retail space. Essentially, they need 1,081 parking stalls. Right now they are proposing 986, so that is a little less than the approved parking plan. He noted that is with the condition of the existing covenants, but they do meet current Village standards. Chairman Glass stated that the point is that they do not know what they are putting in there, and they may have different parking needs depending upon the user. He noted there is a lot of parking there, maybe too much parking but it needs to be demonstrated that parking is provided in the right place. P. Glass stated that they have Home Depot's attention right now and they need to execute this amendment to keep them in place for the next ten years, which is why they are requesting the resubdivision now. Commissioner Rettberg asked if Home Depot controls who could come into these out lots and if there was anyone here representing Home Depot tonight. P. Glass stated that ownership will control the tenants, with some restrictions, but that there was no one here representing Home Depot. Commissioner Weiner inquired whether Home Depot was in agreement, even without any representative or written letter indicated agreement. She also asked to clarify if the parking that would be removed would be in front of Staples. P. Glass stated that Home Depot was very much in agreement, and that the she was correct about the parking being removed in front of the Staples. Commissioner Weiner stated the area for the widened sidewalk looks to be very close to the road in some areas, and that it is important to make sure to steer away from getting to close the road for safety reasons. S. Wilson stated that they had worked with staff to work on an easement with language to benefit a multiuse path. R. Raphael stated that the easement was being granted to the Village for the purposed of widening the sidewalk into a multiuse path Commissioner Weiner asked if installing the path would require removing trees. M. Jablonski stated that the planning was not that far along, but Public Works will be directing the installation of the path and they have affirmed the easement meets their needs. It may be necessary to remove some trees. 4 Commissioner Geinosky stated that the Petitioner is asking for approval of a plan with variation, without the Plan Commission knowing what is being approved. He noted that there is quite a bit of open space already in the building south of Staples that is empty and now the Petitioner is asking for ever more retail space. He noted that the outlot next to the Burger King looks like it is squeezing out the Burger King and taking up there parking. He stated the outlot might be better situated further west right across from Staples and Aldi. He stated that he understands wanting to be close to the intersection but it would make sense over there with plenty of space. Commissioner Geinosky noted he had concerns about empty space existing already, and being asked for more empty space with no details. B. Danley stated that they had wanted to preserve the parking area in front of the old Aldi space to allow for users who might need larger parking field. Commissioner Weiner asked if the Petitioner could be made to come back with more details as a condition of approval. M. Jablonski stated it is possible to make this a condition of the recommendation by the Plan Commission. Commissioner DeFrenza asked if there were any new tenants committed for the Aldi space. B. Danley stated that it is the hardest corner in the center, and that they have had different tours but no commitments. Commissioner DeFrenza inquired if the location is the reason why potential retailors can't commit. B. Danley stated that they are competing with Woodfield Mall in Schaumburg and the activity at the nearby Walmart shopping center. P. Glass stated that they had not had an opportunity to rent these spaces with their full efforts, and will not be able to until the land is resubdivided. He stated that Home Depot is good at selling rakes and lumber, but they are not a good landlord. Commissioner Morrill noted that the Plan Commission does not like approving a petition without knowing more details. He also asked how the Petitioner planned to deal with flood control issues. S. Wilson stated that they would be working on adding a detention storage for rain water and will be in compliance with the applicable stormwater requirements. Commissioner Morrill asked what standard (i.e. 50-year storm) the flood control would be built to. S. Wilson stated that the new requirements are not for volume control but for water quality. It will be built for the first inch of rainfall, and is for holding and cleaning rainfall, not for detention. Commissioner Morrill asked whether Home Depot owns the entire lot. P. Glass stated that CLK Properties owns the lot, but since 2006 Home Depot has managed every aspect of it. Chairman Glass asked if there were questions or comments from the audience. R. Didomenico of 578 Jersey Lane inquired where the storm water would go, and noted that there are always semi -trucks parked there on the weekends and overnight, which is a nuisance. He asked if there would be additional traffic generated, because it was already difficult heading west to turn onto Biesterfield. He also stated that there was no information about what would go in, and it could be a 24- hour operation. Chairman Glass stated that was correct, it could be 24-hours, they don't have information on what will be going in. He noted that McDonalds and Burger King are both 24-hour operations. R. Didomenico stated that it's impossible to get to the bank, and that so many vehicles turn by the Burger King and park in front of Staples. He asked if Biesterfield would be widened to four lanes. Chairman Glass stated that there wasn't enough right-of-way to widen the road. Chairman Glass stated when the Village first considered this shopping center, the Plan Commission placed restrictions on truck unloading and loading in the back and no overnight parking. This is an obligation for the owner to enforce. He stated that the resident should call the Village to report this if it occurs. P. Glass stated that he understood the need to follow these requirements and that CLK Properties will enforce them. Chairman Glass stated in terms of the drainage, and any issues in the resident's yard, it would have to do with the grading of the land. R. Didomenico stated there used to be a big hole where Home Depot was and inquired where the water was going. Chairman Glass stated that was long before the shopping center was built, but that one of the requirements of a development is that the water cannot leave their property at a faster rate than it is doing it while it was vacant. If they cannot provide detention above ground, it must be provided underground. M. Starostka of 487 Franklin Lane stated that the Petitioner owns the property, but Home Depot controls the property as far as maintenance goes. He stated that the landscaping is terrible, that on the residential side of the berm trees have died off and grass just burns out because there is no sprinkler system. He stated that with one person in charge right now it is not up to standards, and it will only get harder if it's possible there will be four people to deal with. He stated subdividing will provide less control rather than more. He thanked the Plan Commission for their questions and comments about the lack of detail from the Petitioner. Chairman Glass stated that the property changed substantially when K-mart left. The conditions for the site existed before the ownership change in 2006. He stated that Home Depot has been there almost 20 years and have been managing it poorly. He directed the Petitioner that the shopping center needs to be maintained, and that if they will be managing the site, they need to take care of addressing all these nuisances. P. Glass stated that they will take care of addressing these issues. He apologized for the nuisances and committed to taking care of all these issues and addressing them. He noted that as far as the Plan Commission's other concerns, he understands they will need to come back for further approval and does not have any objection to such a condition. He stated that it was important to everyone for Home Depot to stay, and that the resubdivision is the necessary step to make this happen. Commissioner Geinosky asked how long the lease for Staples was. P. Glass stated that the lease goes until 2020 and they will be looking to renew immediately after this is settled. Chairman Glass stated that he had mixed feelings about this. He noted that he would like to see the shopping center redeveloped and the out lots created, but had concerns about what's going to be there. He stated the condition of additional review by the Plan Commission for the out lots helped resolve that issue, but he was leery of giving a parking variation without justification. He recommended that if the Plan Commission were to approve this that the variation be considered on a lot -by -lot basis as opposed to a blanket basis. Chairman Glass stated that he would consider, subject to the feelings of the rest of the commission, a recommendation of the resubdivision that would require the Plan Commission to review plans for the building, a parking plan, easements, landscaping plan, etc., before any parking permits are issued. M. Jablonski stated that she wanted to clarify the parking variation, because it is not possible to approve the resubdivision without the variation. She explained that the approved parking plan is for the entire site, and by subdividing the properties, the parking plan is changing, even if no spaces are being eliminated. She stated that the Plan Commission could still maintain the right to review future plans before approving changes to parking layouts by recommending approval of the resubdvision and a variation from the approved parking plan subject to the condition that the building design, site plan, landscape plan, and parking plan for the new out lots must be approved by the plan commission prior to any permits being released. Chairman Glass stated that the one other requirement would be to contribute $36,000 to the future bicycle path prior to permits being issues. RECOMMENDATION Commissioner Geinosky moved to recommend approval of the Resubdivision of the property at 600 Meacham Road from one (1) lot to four (4) lots and variation from the approved parking plan, subject to the following conditions: 1. Building designs, site plans, parking plans, landscape plans and cross -access agreements for the new out -lots must be approved by the Plan Commission before any building permits are issued for either out -lot. 2. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for either outlot, the Petitioner shall pay the Village $36,000 to contribute to the expense of installing the future bicycle/pedestrian path.: Commissioner Weiner seconded the motion. Upon voting (DeFrenza, Geinosky, Glass, Morrill, Rettberg Thompson, Weiner AYES) the motion carried. The meeting recessed at 8:14 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:25 p.m. Item 3: PC Docket # 19-2 - Annexation into Elk Grove Village, a Rezoning classification to 1-1 (Restricted Industrial District), and a Special Use Permit to construct an Electric Transmission Substation (referred to as ComEd Elk Grove Substation) 7 Chairman Glass read the legal notice into the record and asked the Petitioner to explain his purpose before the Plan Commission. J. Turnage stated that as part of the construction of a new substation, ComEd desires to annex property into Elk Grove Village and create a long-term partnership with the Village. E. Sitter stated that Elk Grove Village has a significant amount of industrial businesses, and that there is also a lot of electrical infrastructure running through Elk Grove. Because of the recent growth, ComEd is currently operating above capacity and this needs to be addressed to continue reliable service and plan for future growth. He stated that ComEd had worked with Village staff over the last year and a half to identify a location for a new substation and that Midway Court is ideal because it is near the convergence of several transmission lines. C. Rosso stated that this property is next to the Vulcan concrete plant and existing ComEd transmission right-of-way. He stated that the main components of site are one building split into three compartments for different voltages. He stated that the security perimeter will have a precast concrete wall on the southern side, the rest of it will have a typical setup which is the 12 foot security fence with barb wire on the top. The eastern part will be a 25' wall that will double as security and a fire wall for safety in case of catastrophic failure of a transformer. D. Olson stated that Christopher Burke had created the landscape plan for the site and had worked to make it look as similar as possible to the landscaping for the existing Tonne substation in Elk Grove Village. He noted that both sites have constraints that the distance from the wall to any other landscaping needs to be 10 feet. He noted that there will be landscaping on the south side bordering midway court, and a variety of shrubs and perennials will be planted in the future !DOT right of way subject to future approval from IDOT. S. Saef, stated that the requested variations had been grouped together by topic. The first set of variations have to do with buildings and structures. There are 3 variations here one deals with the height in the 1-1 district. He noted that the main compartment is 60 feet tall, but with stairs and electrical it extends to 68 feet. The second variation is a waiver of the restriction to having not more than one accessory structure. He stated that more than one accessory structure was needed for the site, and the full layout was needed for safe operation of the site. The third variation is that while the main compartment will meet the exterior material requirements from the Village code, some of the other equipment needs to have metallic components not permitted as exterior materials. S. Saef stated the next set of variations were on site design. He noted that parkway trees would be incompatible with clearance requirements and distribution lines. Additionally, ComEd must have at least a 12 foot security wall/fence and the 25 foot fire wall, which exceed standard height requirements. In terms of the surface of the substation, it needs to be gravel instead of paving for safety and to allow for proper drainage. ComEd also needs a variation for the restriction on the area for loading and unloading for their maintenance trucks. Additionally, the Village has a foot-candle requirement that is applicable to parking areas, and a variation is requested because the site is unmanned and ComEd does not anticipate lighting the driving areas except when vehicles are on site. S. Saef stated the next variation was a variation on the limitation of storing flammable materials within 50 feet of each lot line to allow the storage of transformer oil exceeding 20,000 gallons. 0 S. Saef stated that there are also variations on the subdivision, which normally has public utility easement requirements that are incompatible with the use of this lot. He stated that non -electrical building services will be underground and that ComEd has agreed to record the plat of subdivision within two years of approval of the annexation agreement to allow for time to work with IDOT. C. Rosso stated the overall buildout of the plan is in two phases. The initial phase will involve 2 of the 3 compartments, the center and the east compartment, and will also include the eastern transformer bays and transmission overhead lines and two power transformers. This will also include demo of existing buildings and remediation. The ultimate buildout is planned for sometime around 2030, which will complete the building shell, and the addition of capacitor banks and two larger transformers on the western side of the property. Chairman Glass inquired on where ComEd will get the capacity to bring in all the electricity into this site and if this is part of the smart grid. C. Rosso stated that Smart grid is more at the distribution level, and this is more for bulk electric transmission issues to meet resiliency and load concerns. C. Rosso explained that each substation is like a support in the bridge. The more loading you have on the transmission corridors, the more substations you need to support the line. He stated that the substations Limit impact to the rest of transmission system. Chairman Glass stated that explosions were mentioned and asked if they occurred frequently. E. Sitter stated that these transformers will not actually blow up, but that connecting equipment may blow out. C. Rosso explained that the term "blow out" has more to do with fire —the walls are not for projectile explosions, but to contain a possible fire and prevent it spreading to other transformers. He stated that last major fire at a ComEd site in the region happened in 1999 in Chicago. S. Saef stated that ComEd has provided a full fire suppression system for the building, which was done in cooperation with the Fire Department. Commissioner Rettberg expressed concerns about the safety and security of the building since it is unmanned. C. Russo stated that the substation will have cameras and remote monitoring 24/7. Although it is unmanned, they have a large number of sensors, and would be notified immediately to check on any issue. He stated there were procedures for these types of properties and that there is scheduled preventative maintenance for all of the pieces of equipment. Commissioner Rettberg asked how often ComEd workers would be on -site and whether the Tonne substation was unmanned. C. Russo stated that maintenance would be performed weekly, and that all ComEd substations, including the Tonne substation are unmanned, but with 24/7 monitoring. Commissioner Rettberg asked whether the use gravel instead of paving was a cost savings issue. F. Gadowski stated that it was a safety issue, and that the gravel would absorb any fall current and drive it into the ground, so that if there was a fault or short circuit, and anyone was touching the fence, they will be fine. He noted they also looked into step and touch potential, to make sure the current won't go through the body. 4 Commissioner Rettberg inquired how often ComEd experiences criminal activity. S. Saef stated not very often, and noted the security and monitoring has kept sites very safe, since the substation are such critical infrastructure it is important to deter any criminal activity. Commissioner Weiner inquired about security lighting in the evenings. C. Rosso stated ComEd has the ability to have lighting but there is an effort to not have lights on all the time for cost savings reasons. He stated that if there is no one on site, there is no need for a fully lit facility, but he noted there are security lights there that are motion censored. Commissioner Geinosky asked if the petitioner had received the natural resources report yet. S. Saef stated they had received the report and no issues had been identified. Chairman Glass asked if there were any questions/comments from the audience. There were none. Chairman Glass inquired as to why ComEd chose this particular site. C. Rosso stated that ComEd sought out the Village for possible site locations, hoping to find 40 acres, and originally requesting a portion of the former Busse Farm. He stated that this location was identified and selected because it impacts the Village as little as possible in terms of space and neighbors, and it is also a natural juncture with the existing transmission right-of-way. He stated that any other parcels not adjacent to the transmission corridor, would have had to find way in and out, which is difficult, so this site worked out very well. Chairman Glass asked how they plan on to get rid of the tenants. C. Rosso stated that it is an under-utilized property, almost half empty and with many leases expiring within a year of acquisition. He noted that they are working with the final tenant. Chairman Glass asked if Village staff had any comments. M. Jablonski stated that staff requested that there be a condition requiring staff approval of the latest landscape plan. She explained that while not particular issues were anticipated, the latest planhadonly recently been supplied and staff wasunableto complete a review. RECOMMENDATION Commissioner Weiner moved to recommend approval of the following: • Petition to annex the properties at 1500 and 1510 Midway Court; • Petition to rezone the properties at 1500 and 1510 Midway Court to 1-1; • Petition to resubdivide the properties at 1500 and 1510 Midway Court • Petition for a Special Use Permit to operate an electrical substation; • Variation from the requirement to plant parkway trees (Village Code Section 8-3A 12-D-10); • Variations to allow maximum fence/wall height of 25 feet and to allow for the siting of fences, walls and other Substation structures within required setbacks (Zoning Code Sections 3-7-D.3, 3- 7-D.5, 7-1 and 7E-9.A); • Variations to exceed maximum height limits to allow a principal building height of up to 69 feet and to allow transmission structures to a maximum height of 126 feet (Zoning Code Section 7-1); 10 • Variation to allow gravel driveways, parking and loading areas, excepting the driveway apron (Village Code Section 8-8A-3-B.1 and Zoning Code Sections 3-7-E.4, 4-3-C.2); • Variation to allow loading and unloading within 60 feet of Midway Court (Zoning Code Section 3- 7-E.3); • Variation to allow more than 20,000 gallons of transformer oil within 50 feet of the lot lines (Zoning Code Section 7E-8-6(B)); • Variation from limitations concerning the number of principal and accessory structures and the bulk dimensions for accessory structures to allow the full development of the planned Substation (Zoning Code Section 3-6.B and 3-7.D); • Variation to waive required easements (Village Code Sections 8-1213-1-1(A)(3)(b), 8-12B-1-1(D) and 8-12B-1-1(D)); • Variation to allow above ground utility facilities, with the exception of non -electrical building services which shall be located underground (Village Code Section 8-12B-1-2(K)); • A variation from exterior material requirements for compartments, equipment and structures of the Substation with the exception of the primary Substation building, which will adhere to the exterior material requirements (Village Code Section 8.3B-2B.10); and • Variation to waive the 0.5 foot candle requirement for parking lot and drive aisle (Zoning Code Section 4-3(C)(6)). Subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of Landscape Plan by Village Staff. Commissioner Thompson seconded the motion. Upon voting (DeFrenza, Geinosky, Glass, Morrill, Rettberg, Thompson, Weiner AYES) the motion carried. Item 4: Adjournment Commissioner Geinosky motioned to adjourn the meeting and Commissioner Thompson seconded the motion. Upon voting (DeFrenza, Geinosky, Glass, Morrill, Thompson, Rettberg, Weiner AYES) the motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:13 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Maggie Jablonski Assistant Village Manager C: Chairman and Members of the Plan Commission, Mayor and Board of Trustees, Village Clerk 11