HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLAN COMMISSION - 12/19/1984 - PLAT OF SUBDIVISION GENERAL INNS Minutes
ELK GROVE VILLAGE PLAN COMMISSION
Date: Wednesday, December 19, 1984
Location: Council Chamber
Municipal Building
901 Wellington Avenue
The meeting was called to order at 7:50 p.m. by Chairman Glass.
Members Present: Members Absent:
John Glass, Chairman Clark Fulton
Fred Geinosky Leah Cummins
Orrin Stangeland Dave Paliganoff
George Mullen
Staff Present:
Thomas Rettenbacher, Building Commissioner
Robin Weaver, Administrative Assistant
Plat of Subdivision: General Numeric
Members considered a two-lot plat of subdivision for General
Numeric. George Mullen moved that the plat be approved. The motion
was seconded by Orrin Stangeland and passed unanimously.
Public Hearing: Docket 84-14 - Petition for Special Use
Hampton Inns
As no court reporter arrived for the meeting, Chairman Glass
directed Robin Weaver, Administrative Assistant, to take minutes during
the public hearing.
The public hearing was called to order at 8:00 p.m. . This was a
continuation of the hearing begun on December 5, 1984.
Ted Novak, attorney for the petitioner, summarized the meeting
with staff on December 12 (letter by Robin Weaver regarding that meeting
is attached) and indicated to the Plan Commission that all engineering
requirements of the Village would be met.
Status on the present billboard on the property was given by Ted
Novak. He assured the Plan Commission that the petitioner is anxious
to relocate the sign and that several alternatives were being pursued
with respect to the sign lease.
Ted Novak reiterated that the Hampton Inn was a prestigious concept,
that market analysis showed this site to be a great location for the
product, and that the Holiday Inn company requires strict standards in
marble vanities, wall fabrics, quality of construction, etc.
The items for consideration, as listed by Ted Novak, are:
(1) Parking stall size variation from 10'x20' to 9'x20' .
Sufficient space is available for the required size
but the request, if granted, would permit more green
space and less impervious surface.
Plan Commission Minutes - 2 - December 19, 1984
Docket 84-14 (continued)
(2) Variation to use front yard parking. It was noted
that the Plan Commission had approved this for a
motel use in the recent past.
(3) Variation on loading berths. Hampton Inns would like
to have only one loading space as laundry is done on
site and no restaurants will be on the site.
(4) Sign variation if the billboard must remain. Proposed
Hampton Inn signage meets Village requirements but if
the billboard is figured into the total signage, a
variation will be required.
John Glass asked about zoning map location and existing use of
the site and surrounding property. The zoning map was displayed:
property to the northwest .is unincorporated with heavy equipment
storage outside, two structures exist on the site - an office structure
and a windmill. Pictures on file were reviewed.
Fred Geinosky asked if Hampton Inn can compete at that site,
given the other motels at that intersection. Ed Forester responded
that the market analysis shows it as an excellent location and that
he is familiar with the area as he operates the Holiday Inn in Rolling
Meadows. An occupancy rate of 65% is projected for the first year of
operation. Fred Geinosky inquired if this would be the prototype.
According to Ed Forester, the first Hampton Inn opened August 1, 1984
in Memphis, Tennessee; the second will open in January, 1985 in Columbus,
South Carolina, and more will open in Arkansas and Texas in the next
four to five months. Proposed room rates were requested by Fred
Geinosky and he asked if the new product wouldn't cut into the Holiday
Inn market. Ed Forester replied that rates would be 35 - 40% less
than the Holiday Inn and that there was a market to be pursued at
that price range, especially as a truly national hotel chain. Fred
Geinosky related his concern about a glut of rooms in the Elk Grove -
Schaumburg area. It was related by Ed Forester that there are approxi-
mately 5,000 rooms in this area, that this area is third in number of
rooms behind only Oakbrook and O'Hare but that this area has more
manufacturing and business to generate the room market. He stated
that he is very confident that this project will be successful . The
use will be by training groups in this area: salesmen, executives in
town, etc. Of all sites studied across the nation, this is the strongest
site. In response to Fred Geinosky's question, Ed Forester stated that
the traffic analysis did take into account traffic which will be
generated by La Quinta and Sixpence.
Sidewalk installation was discussed. Robin Weaver stated that
Village policy now permits petitioners to request postponement of
sidewalk installation under certain conditions. Jeff Crane stated
that they would like to begin construction in March.
Fred Geinosky and Orrin Stangeland stated their concerns with
parking stalls less than ten feet wide and their desire to stick with
the 10'x20' requirement. Orrin Stangeland inquired about the height
of the Hampton Inn sign requested versus the existing billboard. The
Plan Commission Minutes - 3 - December 19, 1984
Docket 84-14 (continued)
architect, Joe Levy, responded that the billboard is 75' high and the
Hampton Inn sign will be 95' high, so the sign will be taller but
architecturally will be more attractive and the square foot area of
the sign will be dramatically smaller. Orrin Stangeland asked if
Hampton Inn would be on the higher end of the economy motels. Ed
Forester responded that it will be a limited service hotel with rooms
equal to any fine hotel in the area but without meeting rooms, large
lobby, pools and restaurants. The rate range would be low 40's. A
description of continental breakfast was requested by Orrin Stangeland.
Ed Forester explained that it would be rolls, croissants, juice and
coffee and the appliances would consist of a microwave and a dishwasher
only. Orrin Stangeland stated that he feels a Hampton Inn is the
highest and best use of the land.
John Glass queried the petitioner to determine if a combination
of 9'x20' and 10'x20' parking stalls would be possible. George Mullen
asked if 10'x19' stalls would help. Ted Novak explained that at -this
particular site, 10'x19' stalls would not increase green space and
that a combination of sizes is confusing and troublesome. Detail on
occupancy rates was requested by John Glass. Ed Forester provided the
breakdown:
Sunday 55%
Monday 90%
Tuesday, Wednesday 100%
Thursday 99%
Friday 35-40%
Saturday 50%
There being no questions from the audience or staff, Chairman Glass
adjourned the public hearing at 8:55 p.m.
The topic was scheduled for continued discussion on January 9, 1984.
Docket 84-8: Petition for Rezoning
800 Arlington Heights Road
Chuck Byrum, attorney for the petitioner, indicated that the
petitioner and the owner of the Longfellow Plaza were establishing
meeting times to discuss a shared parking arrangement but that the
option to purchase the property is running out. The petitioner can
no longer make a commitment to begin construction this spring but does
feel strong enough about the ultimate commitment, according to Chuck
Byrum, that they are willing to purchase the property now with a revised
site plan which will eliminate the need for parking relief. If B-3
zoning is tied to a site plan, they will eliminate reference to square
footage and either build a one-story (with underground level) bank or
acquire a shared parking arrangement and request approval later. Also,
access to Boardwalk will not be sought as a condition to closing. Robin
Weaver suggested that B-3 zoning approval could exclude nonbanking B-3
uses.
George Mullen moved that the Plan Commission recommend rezoning
to B-3 tied to the site plan and limited to the banking facility with
Plan Commission Minutes - 4 - December 19, 1984
Docket 84-8 (continued)
drive-ups as the only permitted B-3 use. Language on the site plan
must state that any increase in the square footage of the building
requires compliance with Village parking regulations. The motion was
seconded by Orrin Stangeland and passed unanimously.
Docket 84-10: Petition for Text Amendment
Docket 84-11: Petition for Rezoning
(17 acre parcel on Busse Road - Boulevard Ltd.)
A redesigned internal parking and traffic plan was submitted and
explained by Chuck Byrum, the attorney for Boulevard, Ltd. The new
plan was submitted in response to concerns raised previously by Plan
Commission members. The number of parking spaces required is 710, the
plan has 808 spaces. Discussion followed regarding signage and traffic
flow.
Robin Weaver indicated that the Village Engineer thinks that there
should be a public street. John Glass suggested that at any attempt
by the developer to subdivide or sell the property, the Village could
require that the roadway be brought up to Village standards and dedicated
to the Village. Chuck Byrum agreed and noted that requirement could
be put in the annexation agreement. Thomas Rettenbacher suggested that
language to that effect could be put on the plat of subdivision.
John Glass requested that staff review revised text amendment
language submitted by the petitioner.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:18 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
<�� WA.4e
Robin A. Weaver
Administrative Assistant
ms
c: Chairman & Members of Plan Commission., Village President, Board of
Trustees, Village Clerk, Village Manager, Assistant Village Manager,
Administrative Assistant, Building Commissioner, Village Engineer,
Director of Public Works, Fire Chief, Deputy Fire Chief, Village
Attorney, Park District, NWMC, Centex.
Attachment
Elk
�� Village LESS. Z Village H T. Ba
� � CHARLES J. ZETTEK JOSEPH T. BOSSLE7
Grove Village Clerk
RONALD L. CHERNICK
PATRICIA S.SMITH EDWARD R. HAUSER
��. JAMES P. PETRI
Village Manager MICHAEL A. TOSTO
VillageCHARLES A. WILLIS STEPHEN M. UHLARIK
December 14 , 1984
Mr. Theodore J. Novak
RUDNICK & WO FE
30 N. LaSall Street � ' �����
Chicago , Ill nois 60602 °�``�T -�7
Dear Ted:
Thank you for meeting with Village staff on
December 12 , 1984 . I feel that the meeting was
very productive.
The intent of this letter is to recap the
items discussed to ensure agreement on major points
and to itemize the unresolved matters .
The topography map will be completed shortly
and submitted for review to the Village Engineer with
more detailed Engineering plans . The Engineering plans
already submitted are sufficient for purposes of the
- -Plan--eommi-s-sion--and" Village Board. As petitioner and
OWNER, you have agreed to meet all Engineering
specification of the Village.
A driveway entrance/exit on Old Higgins Road
(Midway Court) will be added to the plans .
All sidewalk requirements will be met .
Hydrant locations were selected and agreed upon
by your engineer , William White, the Village Engineer and
the Deputy Fire Chief . The distance between them will
exceed the 300 ft. spacing requirement by 25 ' -30 ' .
An 8 " sanitary sewer main shall be installed by
the Owner along the north side of Old Higgins Road. A
sanitary sewer connection across Busse Road to the Elk
Grove Township sewer is required. Recapture agreement
information and language will be discussed in terms of
the pre-annexation agreement.
Alleys will not be required.
All applicable building codes will be met.
No overnight vans are planned for the development.
However, sufficient parking spaces will be available given
the current 9 ' x 20 ' plan.
901 WELLINGTON AVENUE • TELEPHONE 439-3900 • ELK GROVE VILLAGE, ILLINOIS 60007
s •
_2-
Joe Levy, architect for the development , will
provide parking counts for the December 19 , 1984 Plan
Commission meeting.
Sign variations are being requested. One sign
on the exhibit was incorrectly labeled as P1. It should
be P182 w/out reader. lifter later review of exhibits, it
was found that insufficient information was available.
A letter of request should be directed to the Building
Commissioner with dimensions , height from ground, square
footage and information as to whether the signs will have
two faces or one face.
Staff agrees in concept to a reduction of required
loading spaces to one but a variance must be requested.
The Woodfield Ford sign on the property is still
a problem. The petitioner and the Village want it removed.
The petitioner will continue to negotiate possible solutions .
This item will be addressed in the pre-annexation agreement.
An employee count will be provided at the
December 19 , 1984 Plan Commission meeting.
Sincerely yours ,
RW:mw ROBIN A. WEAVER
Administrative
Assistant
Village Manager ' s
office
C: Assistant Vi age Manager
Village En sneer
Building ommissioner
Fire Ch of
Villa Clerk
Vill e Attorney
Pla Commission
r
i
bc : J. S nagel
R. enas