Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br /> ELK GROVE VILLAGE PLAN COMMISSION <br /> December 8, 1975 <br /> The regular meeting of the Plan Commission was called to order <br /> at 8:15 P.M. on Monday, December 8, 1975 in the Staff Conference Room of <br /> the Municipal Building, 901 Wellington Avenue. <br /> MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: <br /> William Shannon Joseph J. Misurelli , <br /> Thomas Hamilton Administrative Intern <br /> William Wesley Thomas Rettenbacher, <br /> Stanley Klyber Building Commissioner <br /> Edward Hauser <br /> MEMBERS ABSENT: <br /> Alvin Krasnow <br /> Leah Cummins <br /> Warren Jacobsen <br /> Epstein Resubdivision <br /> Dan Foster, representative for the McLennan Corporation, <br /> requested a resubdivision of the Epstein property from one large lot <br /> into seven lots . The property, located on the north side of Landmeier <br /> Road between Route 83 and Lively Boulevard is not in the flood plain: <br /> Klyber moved approval of the resubdivision. Hamilton seconded the <br /> motion. All present voted "Aye". <br /> Preliminary Plan: Arvidson <br /> Joe Arvidson, Attorney Robert DiLeonardi and two representatives <br /> from Rolf Campbell and Associates were present for an informal discussion <br /> of the 30 acre Arvidson tract located on Devon Avenue. Arvidson presented <br /> a revised plan incorporating some of the changes suggested by the Plan <br /> Commission at the November 5th regular meeting. A copy of the plan is <br /> in the Trustees' Conference Room. Two buildings (12 dwelling units) were <br /> eliminated, resulting in a decline of total dwelling units from the <br /> previous 450 to 438. A recreation building with a meeting room and <br /> storage facility was added. Hamilton began the discussion by pointing <br /> out that the revised plan did not incorporate many of the changes <br /> recommended by the Commission at the November 5th meeting. The plan <br /> had what was felt to be excessive density in the face of single family <br /> development (or eventual development) to the East , West, and North. <br /> Parking areas would abut these properties. Rettenbacher questioned <br /> whether the density of the plan had been determined according to the <br /> density definition of the zoning ordinance. He also suggested that <br /> the aisles in the parking lot may be considered streets. It was noted <br /> that density had grown from 100 single family homes on a plan at an <br /> earlier date to 450 dwelling units . Arvidson attributed this to costs <br /> in improving the property and costs of holding the property. He also <br /> did not feel 15 dwelling units per acre-was excessive. One of the <br /> representatives of Rolf Campbell and Associates noted that it did not <br />