HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLAN COMMISSION - 03/06/1985 - TRANSUNION PETITION FOR REZONING ti
Minutes
ELK GROVE VILLAGE PLAN COMMISSION
Date: Wednesday, March 6, 1985
Location: Trustees' Conference Room
Municipal Building
901 Wellington Avenue
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Glass at 8:23 p.m.
Members Present: Members Absent:
John Glass, Chairman None
Leah Cummins, Secretary
Orrin Stangeland
Fred Geinosky
George Mullen
Clark Fulton
Dave Paliganoff
Staff Present:
Robin Weaver, Administrative Assistant
Nineteen local residents attended the meeting.
Docket 85-2: Transunion Petition for Rezoning
(22 acres at Meacham & Biesterfield Roads)
Chuck Byrum reintroduced Bob Cowhey, Cliff DiLorenzo and Don O'Hara.
He summarized the rezoning request, indicating that the 22.7 acre parcel
would be developed in three phases, as follows:
Phase I B-2 zoning, 10.97 acres
Phase IA B-3 zoning, 2.20 acres
Phase II B-2 zoning, 9.53 acres
The first two phases would be developed this year if rezoning was i
granted. A letter of intent from Dominick's was submitted.
Cliff DiLorenzo explained that the site plan had changed to increase
employee parking, move the north line of Phase I farther north and
decrease the size of Phase II. An exhibit of the 50' wide berm was
explained. Screening with landscape materials will be done and will
be maintained by the developer. Fred Geinosky asked if the top of
the stores would still be visible to residents and the response was
affirmative.
Stanley Mitchell, an area resident, summarized objections to the
rezoning as many felt that there was no indication of future commercial
development; concern with types of stores in the shopping center;
traffic congestion; traffic and pedestrian safety; accessibility;
noise, light and signage nuisances; and drainage concerns.
Dave Paliganoff requested that the petitioner go over each of the
staff comments submitted by the Fire Department and the Engineering
i
Department. Bob Cowhey stated that the development will comply with
all Village requirements. There are three points which he would like
PC Minutes - 2 - :March 6, 1985
Docket 85-2 (continued)
to discuss further with the Engineering Department. They are: detention;
location of loading docks, and the number of access drives on Biesterfield
Road.
Dave Paliganoff asked Chuck Byrum to respond to the items of
concern that Stanley ,Mitchell had summarized. Chuck Byrum responded
that Centex had informed residents immediately adjacent to the property
on the North and ,West sides that the property would be developed
commercially and additionally Centex's advertising indicates the area
as commercial; this will be a quality shopping center with upscale
shops; traffic congestion will not be a problem after the scheduled
Meacham Road and Biesterfield Road improvements have been made; the
topography of Meacham Road has already been determined by Cook County;
the design of lighting and signs have already been worked on and that
drainage will meet all requirements. Dave Paliganoff asked if closing
statements signed by residents could be brought in by Chuck Byrum as
proof of knowledge of Centex's development plans. Chuck Byrum indicated
that he will try to locate the letters.
Cliff DiLorenzo reported that a lighting/energy firm has been
retained. He stated that no light pole will be taller than thirty feet.
He explained that glare is the usual problem with lights in older
shopping centers due to exposed bulbs. Signs will meet the Village
sign ordinance requirements. Signs will be on the buildings and made
up of individually lit letters rather than lit boxes. Robin Weaver
queried whether or not the petitioner intends to have a sign or signs
identifying the shopping center. Cliff DiLorenzo stated that none is
being requested and a future request would be unlikely.
i
When questioned by Dave Paliganoff about the effect of this
development on residential property values, Chuck Byrum responded that
having a viable commercial area does help values overall; any negative
impact on adjacent property would be diminished due to the landscaped
berm; and that properties across Meacham Road would probably not be
affected as a four-lane highway would already decrease their property
value. He also noted that the Village requires landscaping on the
East and South sides of the development.
George Mullen stated he felt that the residents' concerns were
general, not specific. He argued that because residents didn't know
about the proposed commercial use is no basis for objection.
A resident at 72 Arizona challenged the fiscal impact figures by
suggesting the business in this development would be business lost
from other Elk Grove Village businesses. Orrin Stangeland acknowledged j
that the figures could be debated but noted the village has no right to
restrict the number of any type of business.
John Glass confirmed that Centex has shown the area as commercial
in the advertising, in sales offices, and on official plats since at
least 1977.
Orrin Stangeland requested that a comparison of lighting to local
shopping centers be provided. He also asked if the petitioner would
consider any restrictions on B-3 uses. Cliff DiLorenzo replied
he preferred no restrictions but further explained that the economics
of a shopping center depends a great deal on the "out lots" and for
PC Minutes - 3 - March 6, 1985
Docket 85-2 (continued)
a developer to permit a poor use there would hurt the entire shopping
center economically. It is in the developer's best interest to have
a compatible use. Orrin Stangeland asked if a guarantee could be
provided that this use would not be objectionable. The response from
Cliff DiLorenzo was, no, only company history.
Clark Fulton asked if in the petitioner's opinion a shopping
center was the highest and best use of the property. Cliff DiLorenzo
stated, yes. He noted that a Jewel or Dominick food store is a good
anchor to draw other shops, especially as people will go out of their
way to shop at a Jewel or Dominick. The demographics of Elk Grove
Village (including education and income) will give the developer,
according to Cliff DiLorenzo, more leeway in choice of tenants. Clark
Fulton questioned that if this were the case, why not develop Phase II
at the same time - and wouldn't this take business away from existing
Elk Grove Village businesses. Cliff DiLorenzo explained that Phase II
must wait as only so much development can be professionally handled
at one time and because there is a greater amount of flexibility if
the center can be developed in phases. Cliff DiLorenzo stated that
he expects 60% of business to be generated from within Elk Grove Village
and 40% from without. He does not want to offer stores which already
exist in Elk Grove Village. Clark Fulton asked about the affect this
development would have on the shopping center to the south. The
response was, none, as there are different markets and strategies.
Fred Geinosky stated that three of the Plan Commissioners live
in the immediate area of the proposed development. Based on his
experience, a Dominick's would not hurt the business of convenience
stores and would keep some shopping in Elk Grove Village, as he
currently does grocery shopping at the Butera in Roselle or the Jewel
in Schaumburg. He asked about the number of jobs the development
would provide. The answer was 150 - 160 full time equivalent. He
also questioned the success of specialty stores. Cliff DiLorenzo
responded that no apparel stores would be sought due to proximity
and range offered by the Woodfield Mall in Schaumburg. Fred Geinosky
asked about traffic peaks and Don O'Hara responded that the greatest
amount of traffic would be on Thursday, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays.
Fred Geinosky stated that a possible 24 hour medical facility would
not be in conflict with Alexian Brothers Medical Station and that
hospitals frequently seek mutual arrangements with these centers.
Robin weaver stated that the Police Chief, after evaluating the
traffic situation with the Village Engineer, had dropped all concerns
relative to the proposed curb cut across from Texas Street.
Leah Cummins requested a change in the February 20, 1985 meeting
minutes. She also asked if a report on the property had been made by
the Plorth Cook County Soil and Water Conservation District. Chuck
Byrum responded that the study made in 1975 was found to be sufficient
and that a letter stating such from the District was on file with the
Village Clerk. Leah Cummins asked if Dominick's would request a liquor
license, and if Dominick's was made aware that Biesterfield Road will
not be extended to Plum Grove Road. Cliff DiLorenzo stated that a
liquor license would probably be sought and that Dominick's is aware
PC Minutes - 4 - March 6, 1985
Docket 85-2 (continued)
of the status of Biesterfield Road. Leah Cummins asked for specific
studies and information on how the shopping center development would
negatively impact residential property values. Cliff DiLorenzo replied
that he wasn't an expert in that field. Chuck Byrum stated other uses
might also negatively affect the property value, perhaps to a worse
extent. He also stated the property would most likely not be developed
as residential or remain vacant. George Mullen interjected that there
are too many variables to consider property values solely on the
existence of a shopping center and realtors have told him that for
every person who wouldn't buy next to a shopping center, there is one
who would consider it a convenience.
Leah Cummins questioned why the Police Chief would drop his
traffic concerns relative to Texas Street. Robin Weaver indicated
the Chief felt that the proposed plan was the safest way to handle
the traffic. Leah Cummins suggested the Chief state his reasons in
writing. Staff agreed to request a written memorandum from the Chief.
Residents raised concerns about the grading of the site. John
Glass explained that the Village must approve the final engineering
plan. He also stated that the Plan Commission could require the
lighting plan be submitted to and approved by the Plan Commission
prior to building permits being issued.
The request will be considered at the next Plan Commission meeting
on March 20, 1985.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:10 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
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.
I
Revised '3/20/85