Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLAN COMMISSION - 06/17/1981 - CENTEX PH DOCKET 81-6 • Minutes Elk Grove Village Plan Commission Wednesday, June 17, 1981 The regular meeting of the Plan Commission was called to order at 8 p.m. on Wednesday, June 17, 1981 in the Council Chamber of the Municipal Building, 901 Wellington Avenue. MEMBERS PRESENT: Glass, John R. , Chairman Cummins, Leah, Secretary Fulton, Clark Geinosky, Frederick C. Mullen, George E. Paliganoff, David J. Stangeland, Orrin J. STAFF PRESENT: George B. Knickerbocker, Village Attorney Robert Callahan, Building Inspector Supervisor Charles B. Henrici, Fire Chief Gary E. Parrin, Assistant village Manager Thomas F. Rettenbacher, Building Commissioner Steven J. Wylie, Administrative Intern Chairman Glass first noted that Item 1-B on the Agenda (Review of Subdivision Control Ordinance Requirements for Sidewalks) will be transferred to Unfinished Business and would be for consideration at a later date. Public Hearing - Docket 81-6: The Plan Commission, acting as a Zoning Commission, reconvened the Public Hearing on the petition of Centex Homes. The petitioner is requesting (1) a Text Amendment establishing a combined multi-family recreational district, (2) the rezoning of portions of Section 24 to a combined multi- family recreational district, and (3) the amendment of the Special Use Permit for the Hampton Farms portion of Section 24. These proposals apply to property located east of Plum Grove Road, north of the Chicago District Pipeline, and west of Meacham Road. Chairman Glass stated, for the record, that the Public Hearing had reconvened on Saturday, June 13, 1981 for the purpose of inspecting the subject area. Fred Feinstein, Attorney for the petitioner, recalled Russell Taylor, Vice President, Michael L. Ives and Associates, Inc. Taylor discussed the standards for recreational facilities. He then described the particular subject area including the proposed dispersal of acreage, and the potential dwelling units and population. Feinstein recalled William Gillilan, President, Centex Homes Midwest. Gillilan attested to the accuracy of testimony given on June 3, 1981 by Lewis L. Smith, President, Elk Grove Park District Board of Commissioners. Gillilan gave a brief history and description of the subject property and Plan Commission Minutes - 2 - June 17, 1981 Docket 81-6 (continued) stated that under Centex ownership the property had always been considered as potential multi-family housing. With the assistance of Joe Luciani, slides of the property were presented to "reorient" those in attendance. Gillilan then reiterated the changes in the latest A-3 proposal made by Centex Homes regarding building separation requirements, number of dwelling units, number of bedrooms, elevators, parking and alterations in building, landscape, street, and cul-de-sac design. (Official Transcript contains exact references.) After a brief recess, Feinstein recalled William Newcomb, Golf Course Architect, for testimony. Newcomb testified that approximately 2,000 trees would be planted on the subject property. He noted some of the probable locations. Newcomb again stated that the golf course was designed to be as safe as possible. Feinstein inquired as to the effects of the golf course on wildlife. Newcomb responded that it was his experience that wildlife would remove itself during construction (in this case to the north) and then return after the installation of turf grass. At this point, Feinstein introduced Paul Ulatowski, Regional Design Engineer, Henderson and Bodwell Construction. Ulatowski gave a general description of the subject property and, with the aid of Exhibit 14, a graphic account of the proposed water and sewer systems. He testified to its adequacy and noted that Elk Grove Village, the Metropolitan Sanitary District, and the Illinois Department of Transportation, Division of Water Resources would be involved in any installations and that the approval of one or more of the above entities was required for the issuance of permits. Ulatowski further described the Flood Plain and Flood Way of the subject property and stated that the golf course was designed to meet water retention and detention needs. He also projected that course play could resume in 24 hours or less following the occurrence of a two year storm. Ulatowski also testified to the following items: (1) the adequacy of subject property soil for building development, (2) the return of wildlife following the installation of turf grass, and (3) the preserva- tion of as many subject property trees as possible. Feinstein then declared that all testimony given in Public Hearing #2 also applied to Public Hearing #3. Plan Commission members were requested to direct questions to Hearing witnesses and Village Staff. Stangeland inquired as to how much of the 66 acres available for recreational use would actually be developed. Smith commented that the area adjacent to Margaret Mead School would be developed similarly to Disney or Lions Park. Stangeland then asked what the projected cost of the golf course was, whereupon it was estimated to be 1.2 to 1.5 million by the Park District. It is expected to be a self-sustaining entity with an estimated annual profit of $60,000. Newcomb commented that his projection was 1.3 million and that the average cost per hole for his construction was usually $50 - 60,000. Plan Commission Minutes - 3 - June 17, 1981 Docket 81-6 (continued) Stangeland inquired as to the placement of fences. Newcomb replied that fences were only appropriate in certain places and were a matter of personal preference, except where subject to zoning restrictions. Newcomb further informed that the fairways would be mowed every third day and that this would not be an inordinate disturbance to wildlife. Fulton inquired as to whether Village Staff had received any feedback from surrounding communities. Parrin replied that an inquiry was received from the Village of Schaumburg and that information concerning the proposal was being sent. At this point, a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Brad Schwartz, 732 Morlin Drive, Schaumburg, Illinois (Exhibit 15) was read into the record by Chairman Glass. The letter expressed concern over the type of multi- family structures to be constructed adjacent to existing single family homes along Plum Grove Road. The Schwartz's requested that any structure constructed within approximately 500 feet of existing structures be of comparable height and appearance. They suggested that beyond that limit, building height may gradually be increased, but wish to prevent any nearby buildings from "towering over" their property. Fulton questioned the convenience of not installing elevators in three-story buildings. Gillilan referred to the absence of informa- tion concerning future market demand and reiterated the cost of installing an elevator in a small building. Fulton asked Henrici if there were no safety factors involved in the consideration of elevator installation. Henrici replied that there was and that he would be testifying at a later date. Fulton expressed concern over the number of parking spaces required per dwelling unit. Gillilan and Rettenbacher both responded that two spaces per unit would be adequate. After a brief recess, Glass announced that there would be a special meeting of the Plan Commission on Wednesday, June 24. Geinosky inquired whether any golf course fairways would be bordering roadways. Newcomb indicated that there would be no problem with golf balls striking automobiles. Newcomb also assured that all boundaries of the golf course would be marked as such. Paliganoff then asked Newcomb if it was best to design a golf course around housing. Newcomb responded that it was often necessary and practical to do this in communities and that, indeed, it was often being done. Paliganoff also asked if the course would be illuminated anywhere except around the Clubhouse and Newcomb replied that it would not. Cummins asked Newcomb how this golf course could be made a "10". Newcomb said it would be necessary to remove the housing from the plan to make a perfect golf course. She also sought whether the proposed course would enhance the surrounding areas. Newcomb replied that it would. The Public Hearing was then opened for comments from the audience. A prepared statement was read to the Plan Commission by Randy Melind. Melind indicated displeasure with the absence of a specific plan that would allow the review of product size and location. He also questioned the strain on the Village water supply. Melind noted the 3-2 Park Board decision to not offer the golf course proposal for public referendum, Plan Commission Minutes - 4 - June 17, 1981 Docket 81-6 (continued) commenting that he felt the voters should have a voice. Melind also alleged that Centex' motive was purely based on economics and the Village should not expect to receive anything for nothing. Other comments were made by Joe Kabbes who questioned how a golf course could be considered "general purpose". He suggested more specificity in the use of recreational portions of the subject property. He also spoke of the excess bedrooms increasing the population, and, specifically, the number of children living in the area, and expressed concern over the quantity of playground facilities to be offered and the increased traffic generated. Chairman Glass again indicated that the hearing would continue on June 24 and proceeded to adjourn the meeting at 12:10 a.m. Submitted by: Steven J. ylie Administrative 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, Director of Parks and Recreation, Centex, NWMC, McGraw-Hill.