Long Grove Plan Commission
Commissioners present: Camy
Gould, Robert Jenkins, Fred Phillips, Joseph Di Iorio, Michael Dvorak, Lisa Phillips, Nicholas Fasano, and Ed Acuna
Commissioners Absent: None
Also Present: Village Manager
1. CALL TO ORDER
Commissioner Fasano motioned to appoint Fred Phillips as Chairman
Pro-tem, seconded by Commissioner Phillips. Ayes, all. Nays, none, motion carried.
Chair Pro-tem Phillips
called the meeting to order at
2. MINUTES OF
The
3. Public Hearing for the Consideration of the Following
Requests for the Mill Pond Shoppe’s in Long Grove (Currently the Pond View Inn
Restaurant): (1) Text Amendment to Allow Businesses in the B-1 Historic
Business District to Exceed 5,000 Square Feet as Permitted Special Uses; (2)
Special Use to Expand the Existing Restaurant by 690 Square Feet to the North,
with the Resulting Total Square Footage of the Building Exceeding 5,000 Square
Feet; (3) Special Use for the Addition of a 644 Square Foot Deck on the West
Side of Building (Adjacent to the Existing Covered Walkway); (4) Special Use to
Allow an 135 Square Foot Cooler to the East of the Existing Building; and (5)
Special Use for Outdoor Dining on the Existing Covered Walkway and Proposed
Deck, Located at 235 Robert Parker Coffin Road, Submitted by Miriam and Sherman
Gerber. Referred to the Commission From the
Petitioners Sherman and Miriam Gerber were
present.
Mr.
Gerber provided a visual presentation of the plans for Long Grove Café in the
Mill Pond complex and recapped their requests.
A Special Use Permit was required to allow for a 675 square foot
building addition and a 644 square foot patio for the purpose of outdoor
dining. The changes to the plans were
highlighted.
The
dumpster on the east side of the building would remain the same and one
dumpster on the west side of the building would be eliminated. The parking lot lighting was illustrated on a
plan submitted by Idaho Wood and would include 7 fixtures consisting of
incandescent 165 watt bulbs that would be shielded from the neighboring
properties. These lights would be on a
timer and would be timed to turn off after the restaurant was closed. The petitioner stated that the neighboring
property owners would only be able to see the warm glow of these lights
positioned in the parking lot. The
petitioner discussed the automobile lights within the parking lot. As the parking lot is on a slope, that drops
down towards the retention pond the automobile headlights would be directed
downwards towards the pond and not the neighboring properties. The petitioner stated that the neighboring
residences were approximately 10 to 15 feet higher than the pond elevation, therefore headlight glare would not be a problem
for the neighbors.
A
new fountain/aerator had been added to the pond to act as a noise buffer
between the outdoor dining patio and the neighboring properties. There was also some discussion on the
proposed landscaping the petitioner was planning to install at this
location. To the north of the addition,
15 x 24” Pfitzer Junipers, 13 x 30” Arrowwood Viburnum and 1 x 2”
Eastern Redbud were proposed. To the west of the addition, 18 x 24” Pfitzer Junipers, 14 x 30” Arrowwood
Viburnum and 1 x 3” Freeman Maple were
proposed. The roofline of the proposed
addition had been modified in response to some previous concerns and the
intention was to match the existing roofline.
The outdoor dining patio was to be buffered by the fountain/aerator,
which was installed to create a “waterfall” sound to block conversational
sounds. The petitioner stated that they
would not seat anyone on the outdoor dining patio after
Staff
raised the issue of installing some landscaping between the circular drive and
the retention pond. Commissioner Fasano recommended that some additional landscaping be
positioned between parking space numbers 7 through 20 as a buffer. The petitioner stated that they will add
landscaping to this area. Commissioner
Gould had some concerns about the dumpster enclosures including the frequency
of pick-ups and adequate screening. The
petitioner stated that they were not convinced that these proposed changes to
the dumpster enclosures would increase the number of garbage pick-ups. The hours of operation for the outdoor dining
patio was discussed, and different closing hours were proposed for the patio on
weekend nights as opposed to week nights.
Commissioner Phillips stated her concern about placing too many
limitations on the restaurant would jeopardize the financial viability of the
business.
Commissioner
Acuna was in agreement with the additional proposed
landscaping and limiting the proposed hours for the outdoor dining patio. He recommended that the Special Use Permit
include provisions that the Village Board may revoke or not renew the outdoor
dining license if the licensee fails to comply with the recommended conditions
of approval. Chairman Phillips
recommended that the fountain/aerator be operated on a timer and be timed to
shut down at a specific time. He also
stated that the petitioner should be willing to add landscaping to the north
side of the retention pond if it becomes an issue with the neighboring property
owners. The petitioner agreed and would
work with the neighbors to achieve this.
Chairman Phillips stated that no music or amplified sound be allowed
outside the restaurant and the petitioner agreed to this condition.
Chair
Pro-tem Phillips then opened the public hearing to the audience. The following residents spoke:
George
St. John, 3137 RFD had concerns about the re-sale value of his
residence. Photos of the property were
passed out to the Plan Commission to indicate the concerns. The major concern was the blocking of noise
and illumination from the proposed outdoor dining patio.
Tom Panton,
4101 RFD expressed concerns about the size of the dumpsters. The proposed addition and outdoor dining
patio would double the amount of garbage and the dumpster areas were too small
to accommodate this additional garbage.
He stated that there was continually garbage on the property and the
dumpsters should be covered.
The
restaurant operator stated that the increase in restaurant hours and size would
not necessarily double the amount of garbage at this location. A better solution would be to increase the
size of the dumpster and increase the amount of garbage pick-ups.
The
restrictions that the Plan Commission felt appropriate to limit the outdoor
dining patio to were:
1.
Limit the closing hours for the outdoor
dining patio to
2.
No music or amplified sound would be
permitted outside of the restaurant.
3.
The fountain/aerator would be timed to shut
down with the parking lot lights.
4.
Garbage pick up would be scheduled regularly
and the dumpster enclosure to the east would be covered in an appropriate
manner.
5.
The parking lot lighting was approved with
shields and would be timed to shut off one hour after the closing of the
restaurant or
6.
The Special Use Permit would be revocable if
the Village found the facility to be in violation of any of the approved
conditions and/or any Village Codes.
7.
The Landscape Plan would be revised to
include additional landscaping materials between the parking lot cul-de-sac and
the retention pond as directed by the Architectural Review Board. If not
specified differently by this group then at the time of planting there would be
a combination of 5-foot on center non-deciduous and
3-foot on center deciduous plantings to block automobile headlights from the
facilities parking lot to the neighboring properties.
8.
The use of the patio would be restricted to
full service sit-down dining only. The
use of the outdoor dining patio as a waiting area or for receptions or cocktail
parties would be prohibited.
Commissioner Phillips motioned that the Plan Commission recommend approval of the Special Use permit to allow for the construction and operation of a 644 square foot outdoor dining patio located to the west side of the existing building located at 235 Robert Parker Coffin Road subject to the nine conditions listed above, Commissioner Di Iorio seconded. Ayes, all. Nays, none, motion carried.
4. Continued Public Hearing for the Consideration of a Request for a
Special Use Permit, Text Amendment and And/Or Additional Relief Necessary
And/Or Appropriate Under The Zoning Code To Install a Second Cellular Monopole
and Related Equipment on the Christ’s Church Property, Located at 5105 Arlington
Heights Road, Submitted by Voice Stream Wireless. Public
Hearing Date of
Acknowledging
the Petitioner had requested a continuation to allow more time to prepare the
information required by the Plan Commission. The Petitioner had changed for
this request and the new Petitioner was not present at the meeting.
Commissioner Gould motioned to
postpone the public hearing and send out the appropriate revised notices,
Commissioner Fasano seconded. Ayes, all. Nays, none, motion carried.
5. Public Hearing for Amendment(s) to The Existing Planned Unit
Development and/or Special Use Ordinance for a 720 Sq. Ft. Addition to the
North Side of the Existing Church Located at 1660 Checker, Submitted by
The petitioner discussed
explained the request for the storage addition.
The petitioner indicated that the larger tree illustrated in the
distributed picture would not be removed, a smaller
tree would possibly have to be relocated with the construction of the storage
addition. There was a point of
clarification that the original PUD was limited to a maximum
lot coverage of 36%. The petitioner
acknowledged that the maximum allowable lot coverage is 40,938 square feet and
the proposed used lot coverage is 39,131 square feet. Michael Robinson from Lane Kendig’s office discussed the shared parking agreement and
discussed the parking count at this location
Commissioner Gould motioned that the Plan Commission recommend approval of the
PUD Amendment and Special Use permit to allow a 720 square foot storage
addition to the north side of the existing Church building located at 1660
Checker subject to the condition that the materials used for the construction
of the addition match the existing Church building, Commissioner Acuna seconded. Ayes, all. Nays,
none, motion carried.
6. Consideration of an Amendment(s) to The
Existing Planned Unit Development Ordinance For Permission to Utilize a Portion
of the Basement for a Banquet Room for the Gridley’s
of Long Grove Restaurant Located at 4868 Route 83, Submitted by George
Callas.
Petitioner George Calas of Gridley's of Long Grove Restaurant were
present. Mr. Calas
stressed that the banquet facility was an important factor in his success and
that the proposed facility would be used approximately 3-4 times per
month. Discussion of proposed banquet
facility centered on the need for increased square footage and parking. Commissioner Gould raised concerns with the
potential increase in maximum floor area, parking and the precedent this would
set. George Callas indicated the request
was due in nature to the additional unforeseen costs associated with the new
building. Planner Kendig
stated that the Plan Commission had previously rejected the banquet facility
and the previous approval of the project clearly prohibits the use of the
basement for anything other than storage.
The petitioner’s architect calculated the size of the proposed basement
area to be 1,752 square feet for use as a banquet facility. Therefore making the
overall square footage of the building approximately 6,361 total square feet in
size. The Plan Commission
sympathized with the petitioner in this case, however,
the Plan Commission had an overriding concern with the dangers of setting a
precedent with such an approval.
Commissioner Gould recommended a
motion to deny a portion the utilization of the basement for a banquet
facility, seconded by Commissioner Fasano. Ayes, Gould, Acuna, Phillips, Fasano, Jenkins,
Dvorak, Chairman Phillips. Nays, Di Iorio, motion carried.
7. Request to Set a Public Hearing for a Text Amendment and
Special Use Permit to Operate a Day Care Center for Approximately 22 Children
within the existing Residence Located at 25836 W.Route
83 (Lot #29 Towner Subdivision), Submitted by Dmitriy
Makhovik.
Elliott Hartstein
was present and discussed the potential project. The property with the existing residence is
located across from the
The petitioner stated that
they would be willing to install additional fencing in between the proposed
playground and the rear property line.
Michael Robinson from Lane Kendig’s office
presented his
Commissioner Dvorak
suggested expanding the parking area for easier access to this property and
keeping the sight lines clear of landscaped material along Route 83 for ingress
and egress to this property.
Commissioner Acuna also questioned how many
days of the week the proposed facility would be in operation and whether this
would include the weekend or not.
Commissioner Phillips commented in regards to The Department of Children
and Family Services (DCFS) what are the appropriate fire and safety codes for
such a potential use and does the DCFS have regulations specifically on the
drop-off and pick-up of children from day car facilities.
Commissioner Gould had a
number of queries and concerns on this potential petition in regards to
signage, parking – whether it should be angled parking for easier access, Radon
issues/concerns that Commissioner Phillips also had concerns with, would any
trees be removed, would the well be a community well or individual well, how
often would the facility be inspected and by whom, would the use be specific to
this user, toilet facilities, financial information & background
information on the facility operators, proposed fees, clientele and does it
comply with subdivision regulations.
It was recommended that a
scaled site plan be submitted for this property with the associated
improvements indicated and that the neighboring properties and buildings be
illustrated on such a site plan.
Superintendent Block indicated
that the property had an address of 7155 RFD.
Commissioner Phillips motioned to
publish a public hearing notice for the
8. Planner's Report - no report
9. New Business – Next Special Meeting - Tuesday,
Next Regular Meeting -
10. Adjournment
Motion to
adjourn by Commissioner Acuna, seconded by
Commissioner Dvorak.
Meeting adjourned at
Respectfully submitted by,
Village Planner
Village of Long Grove