Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLAN COMMISSION - 11/13/2017 - 1551Busse and 751 MeachamElk Grove Village Plan Commission Minutes November 13, 2017 Present: J. Glass S. Carlson F. Geinosky P. Rettberg G. Schumm K. Weiner T. Thompson Absent: J. Morrill P. Ayers Staff: M. Jablonski, Assistant Manager J. Polony, Deputy Director of Community Development R. Raphael, Engineering Supervisor Petitioner: M. Golz, owner or GW Properties (Item 3) T. Abrams, President of WT Civil Engineering (Item 4) S. Gawlik, President of SGS Architect (Item 4) T. McHugh, Attorney for Petitioner ((Item 4) J. Glascott, WT Civil Engineering (Item 4) Chairman Glass called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. Item 1: October 16, 2017 Meeting Minutes Commissioner Geinosky moved to approve the meeting minutes of October 16, 2017. Commissioner Rettberg seconded the motion. Upon voting (Glass, Carlson, Geinosky, Rettberg, Schumm, Weiner and Thompson, AYES), the motion passed. Item 2: October 30, 2017 Meeting Minutes Commissioner Geinosky moved to approve the meeting minutes of October 30, 2017. Commissioner Schumm seconded the motion. Upon voting (Glass, Carlson, Geinosky, Rettberg, Schumm, Weiner and Thompson, AYES), the motion passed. Item 3: PC Docket 17-4 - Petition for Resubdivision from one lot to two lots and Rezoning from the 1-1 Industrial District to the B-3 General Business District to operate two drive - through facilities at 1551 South Busse Road - GW Properties Group LLC Chairman Glass read the legal notice into the record and asked the Petitioner to explain his purpose before the Plan Commission. M. Golz stated he was the co-owner of GW Properties, a retail based investment company. The property at 1551 Busse was formerly a Hardees, and that GW Properties is the contract purchaser for the vacant property. The current owner is an absentee owner out of Las Vegas. M. Golz stated that the property was put under contract and taken out to market to a variety of tenants, such as Potbellys and Starbucks. The proposed property plan is a combination of retrofitting the existing building into 2 units and also creating a separate parcel to the south to construct a freestanding Starbucks building. Both properties would have cross -parking and cross -access agreements. M. Golz stated that the Starbucks building will be new construction, a brick facade, with some upgrade to the parking area and drives. M. Golz noted that the rezoning is required because drive-thrus are not permitted in current zoning, and a resubdivision is required to split the property into two parcels. The roadway access and setbacks will remain as they currently exist, and there would be upgraded landscaping, and parking islands throughout the two sites. M. Golz noted that he would like to break ground as soon as possible. Commissioner Schumm asked if GW Property Group LLC was incorporated in Illinois. M. Golz stated that it was incorporated in Delaware. Commissioner Rettberg asked why the Petitioner was seeking a variation from the 12 required stacking spaces down to ten. M. Golz stated that there was no functional way to get 12 stacking spaces to work with the existing building, without employing double -stacking, which doesn't generally work for tenants. Commissioner Rettberg asked what type of tenant would go into the existing building. M. Golz stated that the plan was for something like a Potbelly's restaurant, where the drive-thru is not the primary portion of their business. Commissioner Rettberg asked if there was commitment from Starbucks. M. Golz stated that there was commitment from Starbucks and that they had almost signed Potbelly's. Commissioner Geinosky asked about the site plan, which showed ten stacking spaces on both properties. M. Golz stated that it could accommodate more, but the spaces weren't shown with cars. Commissioner Geinosky asked if there was only one access point if driving north on Busse. M. Golz stated that vehicles could enter from Busse or turn right and enter on Greenleaf. Commissioner Geinosky noted that he saw a possible congestion point turning from northbound Busse hitting into the stacking spaces for the Starbucks drive-thru. M. Golz stated that those stacking spaces are actually by the exit from the Starbucks, the entrance is on the south side of the site and that he had worked closely with staff on the site layout. Commissioner Geinosky what signage was proposed for the site. M. Golz stated they were proposing corner monument signage in a similar configuration to what is currently existing, however tenants may propose something different. Commissioner Geinosky asked why the Petitioner was requesting a variation of minimum lot width at the front yard line. M Golz stated that they had wanted to put the line of subdivision in the logical spot. The dimensions of the Starbucks site are smaller, but there are cross -parking and cross -easements throughout. Commissioner Geinosky asked if the Petitioner had any background in developing parcels like this. M. Golz stated that GW Properties has developed 50 properties in Chicagoland area and most recently completed a 17,000 square foot project in Skokie, at the site of the former Jack's Diner. Commissioner Geinosky asked what hours of operation would be. M. Golz stated that the hours would ultimately set by the tenant, but that there will likely be limited hours on weekend, and open very early on weekdays, closing at seven or eight in the evening. Commissioner Geinosky asked if there would be a seated area at the Starbucks as well and if there was sufficient parking for that. M. Golz stated that the Starbucks building would be 2,200 square feet, which will include a seating area in about half of the space along with outdoor seating. He noted that parking would be sufficient. Commissioner Geinosky asked when construction would begin if they were approved. M. Golz stated that they have already partially submitted for permits already for work on the existing building. M. Golz noted that the plan would be to start work on the site and existing building this year and then begin work on the Starbucks building once the weather breaks next year. He noted that the goal for occupancy would be late spring/early summer of 2018. Commissioner Geinosky asked if the Petitioner was in agreement with staff comments. M. Golz stated that yes, they have either satisfied or are working to satisfy all staff comments. Chairman Glass asked why the Petitioner decided to subdivide this into two lots instead of asking for variation of two buildings on single lot. M. Golz stated that eventual ownership may be different for the two buildings and this provided better versatility down the road. RECOMMENDATION Commissioner Geinosky moved to recommend approval of the following: • Petition to rezone the property at 1551 Busse Road from 1-2 to B-3 for the purpose of constructing two drive-thrus; • Petition to resubdivide the property from one -lot to two -lots; • Variation for 2 stacking spaces, to permit 10 stacking spaces instead of the 12 required on the multi -tenant parcel • Variation of minimum front lot width from 150 feet to 108 feet on the single tenant parcel Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion. Upon voting (Carlson, Geinosky, Glass, Rettberg, Schumm, Thompson, Weiner AYES) the motion carried unanimously. Chairman Glass recessed the meeting at 7:19 p.m. Chairman Glass reconvened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. Item 4: Petition for Annexation Resubdivision, and Rezoning to A-2 for the property located at 751 Meacham — Village Square Roselle Chairman Glass read the legal notice into the record and asked the Petitioner to explain his purpose before the Plan Commission. T. Abrams stated that the property at 751 Meacham Road is known as the Maison Du Val Development. The development will include 6 multi -family residential buildings or townhomes. T. Abrams noted that the property is bordered by Walmart to the south, a church to the southwest, a bank and commercial strip mall to the northwest, and single family residential to the northeast and to the east, single family residential. T. Abrams added that the development will include a lot south of the southeast portion of the Meacham parcel, which is bordered to the south and east by single family residential and to the west by Walmart. T. Abrams stated that currently the property is comprised of 7 lots--6 lots along the main strip and the single lot in the southeast corner totaling approximately 5.17 acres. T. Abrams noted that one of the variances the Petitioner is seeking is a variation from the 60' required right-of-way width to 50' for Dakota Drive; a variation on the 50% maximum requirement for lot coverage; as well as a variation on the maximum cul de sac length. T. Abrams showed the existing topographic survey and noted that south of the bank property there is an existing ridgeline. Everything west of the ridge drains to Meachaml everything east of the ridge drains to the adjacent development along Easton Lane. T. Abrams noted that approximately 4 acres of the 5 acre development currently drains overland to the backyards of primarily two properties on Easton lane. T. Abrams explained that on the west side of the development, there is a new proposed left turn lane on Meacham road to allow left turns into the new Dakota drive. T. Abrams explained the layout of the site from west to east. He stated that the first two buildings on the west side of the site are 6-unit rowhouses, with front entry on the north and garages facing to the south. He explained that originally it was proposed differently, but this alignment was to ensure safe ingress and egress, putting an entry drive further from Meacham Road. T. Abrams stated that to the east of those buildings are 7 off-street parking spaces, and east of that are two more traditional townhome buildings with 6 units. T. Abrams stated that further east are 7 additional off-street parking spaces. East of that is proposed an at -grade detention bond, and further east is a 5-unit traditional townhome building. T. Abrams noted that to the southeast is an additional 4 unit rowhome building. T. Abrams explained that the proposed landscape plan includes shade trees and ornamental trees and that the Petitoner had worked with staff to ensure residential to the north would be properly screened, with evergreen trees spaced tightly across the north property line. T. Abrams noted that the goal of the grading design was to drain everything to the proposed detention pond, retain the water and route it to a restrictor, significantly reducing release rates north of the detention pond. The current maximum release rate is 10 cubic feet per second and the final release rate following the development will be reduced to 0.48 cubic feet per second, the majority of which will be drained to existing storm sewer north of the northeast corner of the development. T. Abrams explained that the design of this detention pond is more restrictive than is standard. The MWRD allows 0.3 cfs per acre, and this pond will allow only 0.1 cfs per acre, as that is a requirement for annexing into the Village. S. Gawlik stated that there are two designs proposed, one for rowhouses and one for they more typical townhouse design. S. Gawlik explained that the rwhouse design orients parking away from the street and keeps it more toward the commercial side of the lot, he noted that they may switch gables and designs from building to building, with siding and brick combinations. S. Gawlik stated that the traditional townhome buildings have garages facing Dakota Drive, with their backyards facing the backyards of the single family properties to the north. Commissioner Schumm noted the several deeds included as part of the petition, included Trustee and Quitclaim Deeds. He asked what state Emerald Inc. is incorporated in and who the owner of the trust agreement was. T. McHugh stated that Emerald Inc is an Illinois corporation and that the beneficiary of the trustee was P.J. Tuttle. Commissioner Schumm asked where Meacham Grove Ltd was incorporated. T. McHugh stated that it was incorporated in Illinois. Commissioner Schumm asked about the unpaid taxes according to property tax information provided as part of the petition and asked if there was concern about a tax sale. T. McHugh stated that the Petitioner is in the process of paying those taxes but is trying to resolve some mistakes from the county first. T. McHugh stated that they expect to have it resolved by the end of the year Commissioner Rettberg asked why the Petitioner was seeking a variance for the right-of-way width. T. Abrams stated that there are certain requirements related to sidewalks widths and slopes and that the site has quite a few draining challenges to it. T. Abrams noted that part of the issue is that the Village does not allow retaining walls in the right of way, which creates grading challenges, and that additionally lot width availability is limited. T. Abrams noted that on the south side of Dakota Drive, the existing Walmart property line is very close and that the grade transitions from property make it very difficult to make the grade transitions work without a retaining wall. Commissioner Rettberg asked where the retaining wall would be located. T Abrams stated that they will be at the southwest corner of the property, the northwest corner of the pond and along the northeast corner of the property. Commissioner Rettberg asked why they were requesting a variation from the maximum cul de sac length. T Abrams stated that it is not a traditional cul de sac, there is access to the bank property through a cross -access agreement on the west and emergency access to the Walmart property, but there is no way to make a connection east due to existing single family residential. Commissioner Rettberg asked if there was any access from the east of the property. T Abrams stated that there is no access through to the single family residential, however there is a proposed eight -foot wide bike path along the east side of the Walmart detention pond, with access to Home Avenue and West Glenn Trail, as well as emergency access if needed. Commissioner Rettberg asked what would prevent cars from driving down the path. T. Abrams noted that there would be collapsible bollards on both ends of the path going from Home Avenue to West Glenn Trail, and that a collapsible bollard could also be added at the entrance to the bike path from the Dakota cul de sac. Commissioner Rettberg asked if the primary access was off Meacham road and if there was any other access designed for vehicles. T. Abrams stated that the only other entry for vehicles would be through the bank property. Commissioner Rettberg asked why the Petitioner was asking for a variation on maximum lot coverage. J. Polony noted that the variation related to the coverage of concrete or pavement in the front yard. Commissioner Rettberg asked if the purpose of the lot coverage requirement related to potential flooding. R. Raphael stated that that could be a potential purpose, however stormwater detention really covers that need, and he indicated it is more likely an aesthetic requirement. Commissioner Rettburg asked if the Petitioner was exceeding the ground coverage requirement due to the size of the buildings. T. Abrams stated that the variation was necessary for a few reasons, relating to grades, available lot size in the narrow property, and requirements for length of the front yard driveway. Commissioner Rettberg asked if the structures were smaller, would that meet the existing lot coverage requirements. T. Abrams stated that the building size could be reduced, or other areas could be reduced if staff permitted. T. Abrams noted that it require an estimated 8% reduction in building footprint to meet the code, which is a pretty significant reduction in building size, due to the multiple stories. He noted that the building is not the only factor in lot coverage, which also relates to the driveway and sidewalks. Commissioner Rettberg asked what the target market for this development would be. T. Abrams stated early 30s professionals. Commissioner Rettberg asked how much parking would be provided per unit. T. Abrams stated that each unit would have a 2-car garage, along with 14 off-street parking spaces for visitors and the ability to park up to two cars in the driveway as well. He also noted that some parking might be permitted in the street. Commissioner Carlson asked what the access would be for Lot 6. T. Abrams noted that the access would be from Home Avenue to the south, which currently provides access to multiple single family residential and currently dead -ends at this property. Commissioner Carlson asked what would happen with the snow stockpile. T. Abrams noted that they had worked pretty hard with staff to make this site plan work, and the snow easement provides sufficient space east of the rowhouses to allow plows to plow straight north and continue to pile snow there. Commissioner Carlson asked what the future lot 7 would be. J. Glascott stated that the future lot 7 is about what is being annexed, and that nothing is planned to be built there. He noted that plan was to have everything annexed in then resubdivide. Commissioner Carlson asked if Home Avenue was an unincorporated street. J. Polony stated that it was. M. Jablonski clarified that the residences on Home Avenue were unincorporated, but that the Village owns and maintains the street. Commissioner Weiner expressed concerns about the grading and potential flooding. R. Raphael stated that on top of MWRD requirements which govern stormwater, the developer is also adhering to a more stringent release rate of 0.1 cfs per acre as part of the annexation agreement. Also, as part of MWRD requirements, the pond will be wetland bottom to help absorb and infiltrate water. R. Raphael stated that the basin will hold a 100 year storm event and that in the event of catastrophe, there is overflow within the storm sewer. Commissioner Weiner asked if the weir was on township property. R. Raphael noted that the weir is located within the development. Commissioner Weiner noted that there are only 14 guest parking spaces and that if there's no parking on the street that may not be sufficient. Chairman Glass asked if there was any reason not to have on - street parking since the pavement width is the same as elsewhere in the Village. R. Raphael stated that staff had not contemplated on -street parking, but that it would likely be permitted as long as it makes sense with site layout. Commissioner Geinosky asked if there would be basements. T. Abrams stated that there would be basements in the townhomes, but not in the rowhouses. Commissioner Geinosky asked when construction would begin and when the properties would be available for occupancy. T. Abrams stated that construction would begin as soon as possible once permits are obtained, likely in the spring, and that occupancy would be likely in 12-18 months after that, likely in 2019. Commissioner Geinosky asked what price ranges were being contemplated. S. Gawlik stated that the units would range in price from $250,000-$450,000 depending on unit amenities. Commissioner Geinosky asked if there was a market for this kind of property in the Village. T. Abrams stated that there was a relatively similar development at nw corner Roselle Rd and Schaumburg Road, which has a higher percentage of impervious areas and is busier than this proposed development. T. Abrams noted that development is almost sold out of units. Commissioner Geinosky asked if sidewalks would be provided along the cul de sac. T. Abrams stated that yes, there would be sidewalks on both sides of Dakota, as well as the bike path leading south and connecting to Home avenue. He noted they would also be adding sidewalk within the Meacham Road right-of-way. Commissioner Geinosky asked what Rucks Street was. T. Abrams stated that Rucks Street will essentially provide access to development, and it is going to be vacated. M. Jablonski stated that the Village owns the Rucks Street right-of-way and would be vacating it to the Petitioner as part of this development. Commissioner Geinosky asked about the comments from the Department of Community Development memo dated November 8 related to site grading and detention flow from the Walmart. T. Abrams stated that in the existing condition, there is Walmart detention pond for Walmart, which drains to a detention pond on east portion of property. In an extreme event, the pond would drain overland into people's backyards. T. Abrams noted they proposed to pick up emergency overflow and drain to our pond and through a weir and into a storm sewer. Commissioner Geinosky asked if the Petitioner had any concerns on the comments from staff related to landscaping. T. Abrams stated the Petitioner would work with staff to comply with those comments. Commissioner Geinosky noted there were not comments from the Fire Department and asked how they would access lot 6. T. Abrams stated that the access would be from Home Avenue. J. Glascott noted that as part of the bike path from Home Avenue to West Glenn Trail, there will be permeable grass pavers on both sides of the path to allow exit onto West Glenn Trail if needed. Chairman Glass opened the floor to the public for comments. R. Hultgren, resident at 1048 West Glenn Trail, asked what was proposed on lot 7 and asked who owned the property. Chairman Glass stated that no buildings were planned for that lot, but a bicycle/pedestrian path was proposed. Chairman Glass explained that it was unclaimed property, which is being claimed and will be used and maintained by that developer. R. Hultgren asked about the ridge line on that property, whether half drained to the north and half towards the Walmart retention poind. Chairman Glass noted that the Petitioner had testified the drainage flows west for a bit, and the rest flows east/northeast to the proposed detention pond R. Hultgren stated his concern that the site will not be able to absorb additional water created by the development. Chairman Glass noted that was the reason for the detention pond, and also why the development is limited to .1cfs per acre release rate. Chairman Glass noted that additional overflow would divert into another storm sewer. He noted that it may not cure the existing problem, but it will not make it worse. R. Hultgren noted that the Walmart detention pond isn't sufficient now. Chairman Glass stated that the Walmart drainage will not be affected. D. Henderson, resident at 794 Indiana Lane asked if there would be a stoplight on Dakota. Chairman Glass stated he didn't think the development would warrant a stoplight. C. Hendriz, resident at 1106 Home Avenue, asked what will happen to home avenue with additional traffic. Chairman Glass noted that yes, cars for the four proposed townhome units would come down Home Avenue. M. Gerhardt, resident at 1114 West Glenn Trail, stated that the water comes right down behind our house in the ravine and that from April to June he can't walk in backyard due to standing water. M. Gerhardt stated his concern that this development taking away places for the water to go, regardless of what the engineer says. M. Gerhardt also noted a concern about the access road that's going fromto West Glenn Trail, since people already drive up the berm into Home Avenue. Chairman Glass stated that when the property was originally developed, that lot was left vacant with the intent it would become a street that would feed west, however this never happened. Chairman Glass noted that this would be an eight foot wide bike path with bollards up that would prevent vehicle traffic. Chairman Glass further explained that the bollards would only come down for the emergency access by fire trucks. Chairman Glass stated that this development will not change existing conditions on the residents property. M. Gerhardt asked why the water traveled south. Chairman Glass stated it was based on the slope of the land. R. Raphael stated that the water is coming from Home Avenue, as well as water release from Walmart. He stated there is a drainage swale on east side of Home Avenue. Tiffany Gerhardt, resident at 1114 West Glenn Trail, stated that there is a mound with utility easement and that all the water on their side of the hill is coming from that area. She also expressed concerns that Home Street would generate more traffic adding vehicles essentially in her back yard. Chairman Glass noted that the street exists now and only four units are being added. J. Johnson, resident at 1080 West Glenn Trail, stated that she lives next door to the proposed connection from Home Avenue to West Glenn Trail and that people will drive down the 12' path. Chairman Glass stated that it is an 8' bike path with grass pavers on either side to help support emergency vehicoles. He noted that there will be bollards to block any other traffic. J. Johnson stated that she was told there were utilities going throughthe lot and that no one could build it and that it was owned by Schaumburg. Chairman Glass stated that Schaumburg never owned that lot and that it was always intended as potential future street. J. Johnson asked if the units would be owner occupied or rentals. Chairman Glass stated that they are buildings for sale, and they could be either owned or rented. J. Pickett, resident at 721 Bismarc court, stated that she lived near the intersection of Dakota and Meacham and asked if there would be a left turn lane in the southbound Meacham, because that would add an additional lane of traffic for her to cross in order to turn onto northbound Meacham. Chairman Glass stated that there would be a left turn lane going into that property. R. Gerami, resident at 752 Easton lane, asked how tall the townhomes would be and how much shade would be cast to the north. S. Gawlik stated that the towhomes would not exceed 30' in height and that they had performed an extensive shade study that showed the shade cast never exceeded the backyard line. R. Gerami noted that water drains between her neighbors houses and asked if the retention pond would make this worse. R. Raphael stated that if anything, the condition would improve, because currently they are taking runoff from undeveloped site, and once it's developed, they will take that extra runoff and detain it on site, and then slowly released to storm sewer. Chairman Glass noted that it wouldn't help with runoff on their side of the property. S. Evenson, resident at 1114 Home Avenue, stated that Home Avenue has been there forever and he is, concerned about roadside parking for the additional buildings going in, considering street parking is not permitted due to the narrow road. Additionally, he noted that it's difficult to turn left out of Home Avenue onto Nerge and extra cars in and out will also have this issue. Chairman Glass asked if there were plans to maintain Home Avenue. M. Jablonski stated that the Village owns and maintains Home Aenue as a result of another nearby annexation and that there are plans to do maintenance on the road. E. Huntgren, resident at 1048 West Glenn Trail, asked why the sidewalk was needed, as it just adds extra concrete. Chairman Glass noted that Walmart is a large area, and that detention pond serves the store, the parking lots, loading docks, etc. He noted that the Petitioner has testified, and been verified by staff, that the water release will be less than it is now. It won't cure the existing problem, but shouldn't aggravate it. E. Huntgren stated that the strip of land for the bike path is in her backyard and if concrete is going there, there is nowhere for it to go. T. Abrams stated that the runoff created by the path will be picked up by the storm structures on the west side of bike path. He noted they are also adding 3 storm structures on east end to direct all water to the pond. C. Schorsch, resident at 763 Easton Lane, asked if the bike path is intended as a path to Link School for any children moving in. Chairman Glass stated that it is intended to be a bike and walking path. C. Schorsch noted that there is an issue of the White Cliff subdivision being in back of commercial property —he stated that connecting the bank to the new development will increase traffic in that alley as cars will be able to bypass all of Meacham if they wanted. Chairman Glass stated that when that shopping center and bank was built, the Plan Commission had the same discussions about traffic and this was never an issue C. Schorsch noted that he was president of Whitecliff Homeowners Association and stated that their concern was landscaping —on the commercial side is 8' fence. He asked if In addition to evergreen trees, there was any plan for a fence or a berm or a grade change. He also mentioned the wall at north end of new retention pond and asked what kind of drop off there would be. T. Abrams stated that there will be a fence between the retaining wall and adjacent properties. The intent of the fence it to shield the retaining wall. T. Abrams stated they are currently only providing fence at that location, but there is existing fence along the back of the properties. C. Schorsch asked who would maintain the fence and evergreens. Chairman Glass stated the association for the new developemtn and the property owners would be responsible for maintenance. T. Abrams noted a fence would be provided north of building 5 as well. M. Hendrix, resident at 1106 Home Avenue, asked if adding water to storm sewers would cause additional wear and tear on the system. Chiarman Glass stated that the engineering of these systems typically allows for the future development of vacant sites. M. Biernat noted that his property is north of the new development and asked how deep the retention pond would be and if it would be an issue for kids safety. T. Abrams stated that the pond was designed to be a dry bottom pond with plantings in the bottom. When it is not raining, the pond will be dry. In the worst case scenario, during a 100 year storm event, there is a potential for 6 feet of water within the pond, which would take approximately 24 hours to fully drain. M. Roiacon, resident on West Glenn Trail, asked about construction traffic. T. Abrams started that construction vehicles would access off of Meacham, and there is sufficient space to provide access through lot 7 on the east side. M. Khatri, resident at 760 Easton Lane, stated that he lives north of the new detention pond and asked if the new detention pond filled up, would that water come into his backyard. T. Abrams stated that all stormwater was designed to drain to detention pond. Water drains out of pond through a restrictor to ensure the flow coming out of pond doesn't exceed the allowable release rate. The water will then drain through proposed stormsewer in the northeast corner of property, which will connect to existing storm sewer. Storm water currently flows directly into backyards to the north. This will be stopped, it will all be routed to the pond. R. Raphael noted that since the Walmart was developed, MWRD requirements are a lot more stringent, and the annexation agreement is above and beyond those MWRD requirement K. Meier, resident at 764 Easton Lane, stated that there is currently a retention wall and asked if the new development would be at that height, or the height of the homes in the surrounding area. T. Abrams stated that the buildings to the southwest corner will be lower than development. The building to north will be higher than residential buildings to the north. He noted that they had tried to get them as low as possible, but were constrained by fire access to Walmart parking lot, which has a substantial grade differential. K. Meier asked if the new structures wouldl be ten feet higher. T. Abrams stated that the proposed buildings, at the worst case, would have a 7' elevation difference. He noted that the buildings are approximately 70' apart from houses to the north and that existing finished floor elevations on Easton can be as high as 4' with only a 20' distance. K. Meier stated that it would be like looking up to a 3 story building, and that there is a ten foot drop from the Walmart parking lot to the grade of her property. T. Abrams stated that yes, they are making up that grade. There are maximum slopes that can provided for safety and they are using the maximum slope down to get the grade down as low as possible for those buildings. K. Meier asked why the buildings have to be higher. T. Abrams stated that the connection to Walmart for fire access limits the grade changes they can make. K. Meier asked if the water would flow into their yards, since it is downhill. T. Abrams stated that all stormwater will flow into the pond. K. Meier asked if there was a traffic safety study on Dakota avenue accessing Meacham. Chairman Glass stated that past studies showed it didn't meet the warrant for a light. K. Meier stated the structures would be an eyesore. Chairman Glass noted that the current state of the property is not very slightly and that every property owner has a right to use his or her property. K. Meier asked if a bus would be able to get down the street for handicapped children. Chairman Glass stated that the cul de sac turn will be the same as other cul de sacs. K. Meier asked wehre the snow will go and where guests will park. Chairman Glass stated that the snow will pile up when it snows a lot and noted that there are guest parking spots. R. Hultgren asked what the distance from the property lines to the building was at the southeast portion of the lot. T. Abrams stated that it will be 33 feet from building to property line. R. Hultgren asked if it will be fenced. T. Abrams stated that they would put in a fence if needed. Chairman Glass noted that fences aren't generally put back to back as it is impossible to maintain the space between the fences. N. Duragio, resident at 751 Bismark, asked if the new Dakota street would run parallel straight across from the existing street. Chairman Glass stated it would. N. Duragio stated that the new left turn lane will make it more difficult to make a left turn onto Meacham, because it takes the median away which cars use as a stopback. He stated cars from the bank also use it as a stopgap to turn left onto Meacham southbound. Chairman Glass noted that this condition exists everywhere and that it's a limited number of units with residents, not vehicles driving in and out all day. Commissioner Rettberg stated that he didn't think there was been a case made as to why they can't stick to the 50% ground coverage. He noted that there are reasons for that requirement in the ordinance and he would be inclined to vote for it if they weren't asking for that. RECOMMENDATION Commissioner Geinosky moved to recommend approval of the following: • Petition to annex the properties at 751 Meacham; • Petition to rezone the properties at 751 Meacham to A-2 Multiple Family Residence District; • Petition to resubdivide the properties at 751 Meacham; • Variation from the required right-of-way width from sixty (60) feet to permit a fifty (50) foot right-of-way with a ten (10) foot easement; • Variation to exceed the maximum cul de sac length of 400 feet to allow a 1,130 foot cul de sac with emergency access per approved plans; • Variation to exceed the maximum 50% ground coverage as follows: Lot 1, 55%, Lot 2, 56%; Lot 3, 51%; Lot 5, 51%; Lot 6, 58%. Subject to the condition that the covenants for the Homeowners Association must be approved by Village Staff. Commissioner Weiner seconded the motion. Upon voting (Carlson, Geinosky, Glass, Schumm, Thompson, Weiner AYES; Rettberg NAY) the motion carried. Item 3: Adjournment Commissioner Weiner motioned to adjourn the meeting and Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion. Upon voting (Carlson, Geinosky, Glass, Schumm, Thompson, Weiner, Rettberg AYES) the motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Maggie Jablonski Assistant Village Manager C: Chairman and Members of the Plan Commission, Mayor and Board of Trustees, Village Clerk