Loading...
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