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.