Village of Long Grove Plan Commission

Special Meeting Minutes

January 16, 2001

Present: Chairman Young, Commissioners Tarnaris, Dean, Jenkins, Borawski, Phillips, Walter and Coffin, Village Manager Doughty, Planner Kendig and Assistant to the Village Manager Johnson.

Late: Commissioner Di Iorio (arrived at the meeting at 8:15 p.m.)

L Special Meeting of the Commission.

Special Meeting of the Commission called to order by Chairman Young at 8:04 p.m.

Public Hearing

A. Good Shepherd Church Annexation, Zoning and Special Use Petition.

Village Manager Doughty read public notice and swore in all wishing to testify.

Public Hearing minutes taken by a Court Reporter are by reference made a part hereof.

With no further comments from the audience, Chairman Young closed the Public Hearing at 10:48 p.m.

Old Business.

A. Good Shepherd Petition - Discussion and Recommendation

Planner Kendig opened the discussion by noting that the petitioner's application to the County Board should be set aside since it was filed at our request and the petitioners have repeatedly stated they want to be in Long Grove. He noted that the Village has three options: approve the petition as submitted, change the petition, or deny the petition. He disagreed with several of the comments raised during the public hearing, such as: the problems cited with Kruger road already exist and would not be made worse by this petition and, in fact, will be partly be corrected with the proposed widening at the intersection with Gilmer, although he would prefer that the church entrance be on Gilmer and that left turn lanes be added; the flooding at Gilmer was caused by a broken tile, now fixed, and is not an issue; references to Willow Creek are nothing more than a scare tactic; it is preposterous to suggest that homes be built in order to fill the schools; he does not think this will negatively affect surrounding property values, an argument also used when the Fields of Long Grove was proposed; he believes the church should use the public sewer and does not see the capacity being overly burdensome on the system; and the storm water management issues will have to be dealt with by the petitioner whether this is built in Long Grove or the County. Planner Kendig was in favor of getting rid of the day care initially, but allowing the church to come back in five years if they so desired; he was not in favor of the overnight facilities; suggested that the square footage of residential development that would be allowed on the site be used as a building cap for the church; suggested only approving the first phase of the proposal and having the church come back for any future growth; he noted that criticism of the architecture was legitimate, but that the buildings could be designed to be part of the land, including the use of green roofs; he questioned whether the soccer field was necessary and suggested it be left open space; he noted that the Fields of Long Grove was set back 500 feet from the road and the proposed church buildings would be 800 feet.

Commissioner Tarnaris noted that the numbers cited regarding traffic were from a study performed last year and questioned whether a more updated study should be performed. Village Manager Doughty advised that a recent Village study had shown numbers consistent with those in the report.

Commissioner Dean commented that the Commissioners' usual process of raising their own concerns and working with the petitioner to suggest changes had been delayed until now and outlined several concerns and comments he had, including: because the typical congregation size was 200-300 people, the sanctuary should have no more than 500 seats; the church and facilities should be utilized by this congregation only, not regional use; he is not in favor of the retreat building and suggested one parsonage and one custodian building, each as single family homes, perhaps made a little larger to accommodate occasional overnight guests; the parking should be decreased; was not in favor of the day care; and suggested that if the economics of the reduced size was a problem, the petitioners consider a mixed use site with residential homes.

Commissioner Jenkins stated he was in favor of a church in this location, but expressed concern about the scale. He would like to see the size be more realistic and suggested that the education and special purpose buildings be combined; questioned why a separate administration building was necessary for such a small congregation; suggested that the missionary building be eliminated; and said he would prefer that the church be designed to look more like a country church and less like the school. He noted that with Gilmer Road slated to be widened to four lanes in the future, a traffic light proposed for Kruger and Route 22 and likely future development of the site to the south of this site, he did not see the proposed church activities or traffic to be a problem to neighbors.

Commissioner Borawski commented that he also was concerned about the size and scope of the project and noted that the smaller congregation numbers cited were not reflected in changes to the building size or number; he liked the idea of mixing residential on the site, and suggested pathways be included; stated there were a number of details still to be established, such as revival meeting and wedding hours, attendance, activities, liquor service, etc.; questioned the security gate mentioned in the latest documents; was opposed to the retreat building and overnight accommodations except for the parsonage and custodian homes; and suggested minimizing traffic problems by restricting right turns onto Kruger Road.

Commissioner Phillips commented that perhaps asking petitioners for their "dream" was a not productive to the process as this and another recent petition became too large and unrealistic. He was in favor of eliminating the missionary building and restricting traffic from going south onto Kruger Road. He suggested that the petitioner be asked to identify what it is they really want and go from there.

Commissioner Walter stated he also thought the proposal was too large. He was in favor of removing the day care and missionary buildings and using the parsonages for guest stays. He would prefer a Gilmer Road access across from the school, perhaps with a traffic control device to increase safety and suggested using this opportunity to involve the school, the Village, Lake County and any other relevant agencies to resolve this school safety issue. He commented that churches were compatible with residential; even with wild growth a sanctuary for 400 people maximum should be sufficient; parking should be reduced comparably; uses of the facilities should be limited to the congregation and not the regional church; the playing field was nice, but would prefer a prairie or other natural environment if it's not really needed; and he had no problem with the amphitheater or chapel in the woods that had been removed from the plan. He asked about special services such as on New Year's Eve and suggested that the petitioners include those special events on the list or they would not be allowed.

Commissioner Coffin commented that he also thought the project was much too large. He suggested making the buildings smaller to fit the realistic size of the congregation. He would prefer the entrance be off of Gilmer road and that a buffer and other consideration be given to make a graceful transition from this site to existing and future residential areas. He suggested that the petitioners really listen to the comments from the public, and County and Long Grove staff, which might require a major remodel of the plan, but it was important that the project fit into Long Grove. He also commented that: sewer was probably best and the petitioners need to address any capacity or lift station issues; parking should be decreased in proportion to the actual size of the congregation; and the soccer field is okay if needed, but restored prairie would be preferable.

Commissioner Di Iorio stated he also felt the proposal was too intense and agreed with many of the suggestions to downsize it. He expressed concern about traffic, especially south at Route 22 and Kruger Road and would prefer access off Gilmer Road. He also commented that it was important not to isolate the Cobblestone subdivision and that some effort should be made to transition the site to the Cobblestone homes.

Chairman Young commented that the petitioners must understand how Long Grove feels about open space and making buildings fit with the land. He would prefer just a small church building in keeping with its surroundings. He recommended that the petitioners really look at their need and noted that the Long Grove Community Church has been around for a long time and only has about 300 members. He stated he was not in favor of the day care or missionary buildings.

The Commissioners noted that the petitioners had received some very direct feedback on their proposal and the next step would be for them to decide if they wanted to consider the comments and suggestions expressed and revise their proposal accordingly or proceed with the petition as presented. After conferring with his clients, Mr. Zimmerman requested a continuance until the March 6, 2001 meeting, at which time they might present a revised, informal plan. The Commissioners noted that, especially with projects of this size and complexity, it was not unusual to have a number of these go-a rounds before finalizing a plan.

Ms. Pamela Newton, the Lake County Board member representing Long Grove, commented that the County had finished its review of the petitioner's application and nothing further would be done unless and until the petitioners requested the process continue.

IV. Adjournment of Meeting.

Motion to adjourn made by Commissioner Dean, seconded by Commissioner Jenkins. Ayes all. Meeting adjourned at 12:04 am January 17, 2001.

Respectfully submitted,

Camy Gould Secretary