Long Grove Plan Commission

Commissioner Gould advised she had reviewed her notes on the April 3rd meeting and that the motion made by Commissioner Di Iorio, seconded by Commissioner Coffin was to recommend approval of an amendment to the Village Code as to the B-1 Business District regulations to allow outdoor dining as set forth in the proposal dated March 20, 200l with the additional requirement that cups, plates, napkins and similar items used the outdoor dining bear the name of the respective merchant. The motion was carried by aye votes of all Commissioners present. Ms. Gould offered her apologies to the Commission for the confusion and to Village Manager Doughty who had graciously accepted responsibility for the error that was not his.

Motion to accept the minutes of May 1, 2001, as corrected, made by Commissioner Walter, seconded by Commissioner Borawski. Ayes all. Motion carried.

IV. OLD BUSINESS.

A. Good Shepherd Church Annexation and Special Use.

Village Manager Doughty advised that the Village had received a letter from Kenneth Shepro, attorney representing Good Shepherd United Methodist Church, stating they were not ready to proceed with their petition at the June meeting and requesting a further continuance to the Commission’s July 2001 meeting.

Motion to table consideration of the Good Shepherd petition made by Commissioner Borawski, seconded by Commissioner Walter. Ayes all. Motion carried.

B. Jay’s Camp Annexation, Zoning and Amended Language to the Village Code.

Village Manager Doughty advised that he, Planner Kendig and Commissioner Walter had met with Jay Goldstein and his attorney regarding the concerns expressed at the last Commission meeting and that the petitioner was not amenable to accepting only residential zoning with specific conditions in an annexation agreement. The petitioner had requested tabling the matter until further notice to allow him the opportunity to put together uses that might be acceptable to him and the Village.

C. B-1 Historic Business District Regulations and Amendments.

The Commissioners reviewed and discussed the suggested Code amendments in Attorney Mullen’s memo of May 8, 2001 regarding taverns/restaurants with bar area. Hours of operation and liquor service on patio areas and the ability to require buffers and other restrictions under a petition for special use were discussed.

Motion to recommend an amendment to the Village Code relative to taverns/pubs as set forth in Attorney Mullen’s memo of May 8, 2001 made by Commissioner Di Iorio, seconded by Commissioner Fred Phillips. Ayes all. Motion carried.

D. Gridley Smokehouse Restaurant Final Approval Recommendation.

Village Manager Doughty advised that while the Gridley Smokehouse restaurant was approved as part of the Preserve at Long Grove PUD, it was subject to final approval as to architecture, site and landscape plans, which were now before the Commission. The Architectural Board had recommended approval with conditions set forth in memorandums from three Architectural Board members.

Planner Kendig reviewed with the Commission his concerns about the building size, parking, site plan and landscaping and lighting as set forth in his memo of May 31, 2001, with special emphasis on problems caused by the use of “open to the public” in defining the maximum square footage allowed, which is not a normal zoning definition and does not conform to zoning codes or the definition of floor area used to determine parking. Additional discussion by the Commission included possible use of valet parking to decrease parking spaces (determined to be unrealistic), the noted outdoor dining area, whether fencing or berms or a combination was the best solution for improving the buffering on the southern border and lighting, which was covered in the recommended conditions by the Architectural Board. It was the consensus of the Commission that the flaw in determining square footage notwithstanding, the site was included in the overall approval of the PUD and therefore not subject to the usual limits on impervious surface.

Motion to recommend final approval as to the architecture, site and landscape plans for the Gridley Smokehouse restaurant subject to the conditions set forth by the Architectural Board approval dated May 30, 2001 and paragraphs #2 and #3 under “Site Plan” in Planner Kendig’s memo of May 31, 2001 made by Commissioner Walter, seconded by Commissioner Fred Phillips. Ayes all. Motion carried

V. NEW BUSINESS.

A. Valenti’s Long Grove Woods Phase II Annexation and Planned Unit Development.

Messrs. Joseph E. Valenti, Jr. of Valenti Builders, Inc., Frank Salathe of JenLand Design, Inc., landscape architecture and Pete Manhard of Manhard Consulting were present to outline the petition for annexation of approximately 120 acres west of N. Krueger Road and south of Gilmer Road, with a special use as a PUD. Mr. Valenti advised they had invited 150 neighbors of the property to an informal meeting to present their development plans and that comments had been generally favorable; expressing agreement with the proposal for one curb cut onto N. Krueger, and requests that the developers be sensitive to the height of any berms (high, unnatural berms being undesirable) and to illumination from street or other lighting. He advised that at the initial presentation to the Village Board, two items had been raised: a possible tot lot in a buildable part of the open space and a pathway through the development to connect the property to the north and a pathway along the southern border of the property. The homes would be approximately 4500 to 5500 square feet, with 4-5 bedrooms and 3-car side-load garages, selling in the range of $600,000 to $800,000.

Mr. Salathe described the property and reviewed the site analysis, wetlands, conservancy soils, drainage patterns, conceptual landscape plan and proposed site plan. The plan calls for 62 single family lots with an average lot size of 41,200 square feet (minimum 40,000 square feet, including private road easement); one private road access from N. Krueger Rd. branching into six cul-de-sacs; 40% common open space, yard setbacks of 70-foot front, 60-foot side (combined with 25- foot minimum), and 30-foot rear; and 30- foot setbacks from adjoining properties to the north, south and west; with a 100-foot scenic corridor along North Krueger Road.

Mr. Manhard advised they were requesting sanitary sewer for the development and that preliminary analysis showed the capacity to be available and considered possible download problems south on the system solvable. He also advised the development would be served by a central well system dug to mid-depth in the St. Peter aquifer with a treatment facility.

Commissioner’s comments on the proposal included: the preference for swale drainage as opposed to curb and gutter; location of the water treatment facility would need to be established and approved; the possibility of connecting cul-de-sacs to the north and south to adjacent properties for emergency access; whether the developer would build all the homes or sell lots (the petitioner advised that decision had not yet been made); comparison of proposed lot sizes to those in the Preserve at Long Grove development (some of which are 25,000 square feet); whether or not sufficient benefit to Long Grove was present to warrant bonus lots; concern that water treatment facility regulations were becoming more stringent and burdensome on homeowner associations; the sense that seemingly every inch of the property except wetlands had a lot on it; the undesirability of lots backing to one another as lots #6, #7 and #8 do; the proposed setbacks were different from those set by Village Code; lots #1,#2 and #61 backed right up to the scenic corridor along N. Krueger Road; question as to whether the proposed pathway was in keeping with the pathway plan by being placed along the road instead of through the subdivision, with another view that along the road may be safer for children using the path to walk to the nearby school; the percentage of open usable vs. unusable land (which the petitioner advised had not been determined, but estimated to be approximately 18 acres of open usable space in pockets throughout the development); comment that the tot lot should be made more available to all residents rather than just those within the subdivision to avoid creating a closed community; and that the proposed roads would be extremely difficult for school buses.

Some Commissioners expressed a strong preference for the use of septic fields instead of sewer, citing the policy standard in the Comprehensive Plan which states that “... no request for sanitary sewer connection shall be granted where the connection does not show a clear need from a health and welfare standard and is only for convenience, to increase the value of property, or increase the density of the zoning on the property in opposition to the zoning and planning philosophy of the Village of Long Grove.”, as well as concern that granting sewer to this development could affect the Village’s ability to require septic fields on the property directly north as a way to limit future growth and development and that homes in subdivisions with sewer may have an unfair advantage in terms of property value and marketability over homes in subdivisions without sewer.

Commissioner Gould also advised that pursuant to a conversation with a District 96 School Board member, it was very likely that elementary school children from this proposed subdivision would be bused to Prairie School because Country Meadows was near capacity. Not only was the Preserves building out more quickly than anticipated, the number of children per household had increased.

Mr. Valenti responded that they had worked hard to create a development in keeping with Long Grove; that he was open to access to the north and south if so requested by the Fire Department; that the wetland preservation, enhanced prairie and extensive landscaping benefited Long Grove and warranted the two extra bonus lots requested; that they could have made the lots 25,000 square feet with more open common space, but homeowners have indicated they generally prefer more private space; Mr. Valenti stated that while individual wells and septic would be less expensive to install, it was not what he wanted to do, was not what his marketing showed people wanted, and would not be sensitive to N. Krueger Road.

Planner Kendig stated that while he had not had time to thoroughly review the plans, he had the following initial comments: he would like to see this development reflect what the Fields of Long Grove started on the other side of the road, keeping 300-400 feet off N. Krueger Road; the increase of water on the property may mean that a drain tile has broken, which should be located; he was in favor of the walking path looping through the development; the existing tree rows should be preserved and integrated into the development; he believed that sanitary sewer and community well would result in a better development; and he proposed mixing the lot sizes, with some lots down to 25,000 square feet in order to get more open space. Planner Kendig also commented that with the larger homes now being built, the landscaping regulations may no longer be adequate and that the regulations regarding street trees and road edges seemed to considered optional by some developers.

There was discussion on what direction the petitioner was to follow with the divergent opinions expressed by the Commission as to the sewer/septic issue. Noting that sanitary sewer would allow a larger open area along N. Krueger Road, Chairman Young asked each Commissioner to give their opinion on whether they favored a larger scenic corridor or the use of septic fields. Four Commissioners favored the scenic corridor, three Commissioners favored the use of septic fields and one Commissioner was uncommitted.

From the audience, Village President Dean commented that the Comprehensive Plan provided clear direction and suggested that the petitioner be asked to provide a best quality plan under both alternatives for the Commission’s consideration, or that Planner Kendig create a plan using septic and the petitioner adjust his plan using sanitary sewer reflecting the Commissioners’ and Planner Kendig’s comments at this meeting.

Resident and Village Trustee Stephanie Hannon commented that some lots in her subdivision backed up to one another, but that conservancy areas were between the properties and suggested that idea might be used in this development also.

Mr. Valenti stated he wanted to meet with staff before determining whether he or Planner Kendig would create the alternate septic plan.

*******MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS*********

Commissioner Walter commented that while he had read Planner Kendig’s memo of April 30, 2001 outlining how the Good Shepherd United Methodist Church proposal would fare under the County’s regulations, he requested an expanded memo comparing the differences between the development under County regulations and Village of Long Grove regulations.

Commissioner Gould asked if it made sense to request a legal opinion as to the Village’s ability to set limits and restrictions on activities and land use under the First Amendment and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Person Act of 2000 (the Religious Land Use Act or “RLUIPA”) and how decisions in pending cases filed under RLUIPA could further affect that ability. There was discussion about whether it was more appropriate for the Village board to seek such an opinion in their consideration following a Plan Commission recommendation. Commissioner Walter commented that the information could have bearing on how the Commission voted on the matter. Village President Dean commented that he was in favor of the opinion being obtained sooner rather than later.

From the audience, Kenneth Shepro, attorney representing Good Shepherd Church, suggested that the Village’s attorney review the Chicago Heights case before the Supreme Court.

Motion to recommend that the Village Board request an opinion from Attorney Mullen on the potential annexation agreement for the Good Shepherd United Methodist Church petition and whether the proposed conditions would be in compliance with Federal Law, with particular review of the Chicago Heights case before the Supreme Court made by Commissioner Walter, seconded by Commissioner Lisa Phillips. Ayes all. Motion carried.

VI. COMMITTEE REPORTS - none.

VII. PLANNER’S REPORT.

Planner Kendig suggested that in light of the tendency toward larger homes and the breakdown in compliance with road standards, ditches, tree sizes and landscaping, it may be time to review these standards and he would like to do so at this time. Discussion followed, including the desire to prevent the use of production housing techniques like brick wide fronts with aluminum cut outs on rear elevations, such as at the Preserves at Long Grove, and that the intent of the landscaping standards to create tree-lined streets and screen houses from the road, seems to be unknown and/or disregarded by developers and homeowners.

Some Commissioners expressed disfavor of the size of homes being constructed and suggested that the bulk standards also be revisited. Village Manager Doughty commented that while that was possible, the idea in the past was not to prevent people from building their “dream homes”.

VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT.

Village Manager Doughty advised that he had prepared an alternating schedule for Plan Commissioners to attend the Village Board meeting following Plan Commission meetings and that Commissioner Walter was scheduled to attend the June 12, 2001 Village Board meeting.

Village Manager Doughty advised that the next Plan Commission meeting was scheduled for July 3rd and asked if the Commissioners wished to keep or reschedule that date. Discussion followed on who would be available on alternate days as well as what venues would be available.

Motion to move the next Plan Commission meeting from Tuesday, July 3, 2001 to Monday, July 9, 200l at 8:00 p.m. at the Country Meadows school, Gilmer and N. Krueger Roads made by Commissioner Borawski, seconded by Commissioner Fred Phillips. Ayes all. Motion carried.

IX. ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING.

Motion to adjourn made by Commissioner Borawski, seconded by Commissioner Lisa Phillips. Ayes all. Meeting adjourned at 11:01 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Camy Gould

Acting Secretary