Lake County Gazette

Village of Libertyville Plan Commission met March 20.

Here is the minutes provided by the Commission:

Members present: Vice Chairman William Cotey, Amy Flores, Matthew Krummick, Walter Oakley, and Kurt Schultz.

Members absent: Chairman Mark Moore, and David Semmelman.

A quorum was established.

Village Staff present: John Spoden, Director of Community Development; David Smith, Senior Planner; and Fred Chung, Senior Project Engineer.

Commissioner Krummick moved, seconded by Commissioner Schultz, to approve the February 20, 2017, Plan Commission meeting minutes.

Motion carried 5 - 0.

Old Business:

PC 16-06 DRH Cambridge Homes Inc., Applicant 127, 131, and 201 S. Stewart Avenue

Request is for a Preliminary Plat of Resubdivision in order to resubdivide three (3) residential lots into two (2) residential lots for property located in an R-7, Single Family Attached Residential District.

Mr. David Smith, Senior Planner, stated that the petitioner was before the Plan Commission at their April 25, 2016, June 13, 2016, and again on September 12, 2016 meetings, requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat of Resubdivision in order to resubdivide three (3) residential lots into two (2) residential lots in order construct six (6) single family attached dwelling units, three (3) per lot, for property located in an R-7, Single Family Attached Residential District at 127, 131, and 201 S. Stewart Avenue.

Mr. Smith stated that at their June 13, 2016 meeting, the Plan Commission recommended approval to the Village Board. He stated that at the August 9, 2016 meeting, the Village Board referred this item back to the Plan Commission due to a significant change in the site plan.

Mr. Smith stated that the applicant next appeared before the Plan Commission at their September 12, 2016 meeting per the request of the Village Board. He stated that during the course of the September 12, 2016 Plan Commission meeting, the Chairman of the Plan Commission deferred this item until the applicant was able to secure a preliminary agreement with the property owner directly to the west at 220 Florence Court as it relates to the rights of access to the proposed driveway to Florence Court. He stated that as the two parties had not yet reached an agreement but were corresponding in an effort to reach a resolution, Staff recommended that this item be placed back on the Plan Commission October 24, 2017 agenda so that the two parties could provide an update on the progress of the negotiations to the Plan Commission.

Mr. Smith stated that during the course of the October 24, 2017 Plan Commission meeting, various issues were discussed including requirements for a Homeowners Association utilizing a property management company, the advantages and disadvantages of owner occupied versus rental units, the proposed density, how well the proposed townhomes fit into the character of the neighborhood, storm water management and on-site detention, ingress/egress and right of access for the neighboring property, self-help provisions to be incorporated in the HOA covenants, change in driveway location, the disposition of the alley being vacated and who should own that portion of the land, location for the garbage containers, the screening between the subject site and the neighbors to the west, and Appearance Review Commission feedback. He stated that at the October 24, 2016 meeting, the Plan Commission recommended approval to the Village Board of Trustees for the proposed Preliminary Plat of Subdivision with certain conditions.

Mr. Smith stated that at their November 8, 2016 meeting, the Village Board referred the request for the Preliminary Plat of Subdivision back to the Plan Commission. He stated that the Village Board was concerned that the plan had changed after the Plan Commission last reviewed it and indicated that they did not support the vacation of the alley. He stated that the Village Board expressed concerns that the neighboring property to the west did not have direct access to Florence Court, but instead would have been provided an easement through the petitioner’s property.

Mr. Smith stated that the petitioner has submitted a revised Preliminary Plat of Subdivision for the subject site. He stated that they are still seeking approval for a Preliminary Plat of Resubdivision in order to resubdivide three (3) residential lots into two (2) residential lots in order construct six (6) single family attached dwelling units, three (3) per lot, for property located in an R-7, Single Family Attached Residential District at 127, 131, and 201 S. Stewart Avenue. Mr. Smith stated that the revised plan does not incorporate the alley located between the subject site and neighbors to the west.

Mr. David Munaretto, agent for petitioner, stated that they are no longer proposing to vacate the adjacent alley to the west, but will provide a separate driveway accessing their site from Florence Court. He stated that they are not seeking any variations. He stated that they will be able to provide four (4) parking spaces per unit. He stated that garbage cans can be placed along the western edge of the drive on refuse pick-up days and be screened from the property owners to the west. He stated that they will comply with all of the Planning Division comments found in the DRC Staff Report.

Ms. Beth Miller, agent representing the property owners to the west, stated that they are pleased that the alley vacation has been excluded. She stated that emphasis should be placed on screening the garbage pick-up area. She stated that they are still concerned about the increase in density and the likelihood of an increase in parking in the street. She stated that additional clarification should be provided regarding the proposed rain gardens.

Mr. Fred Chung, Senior Project Engineer, stated that they will look for complete storm water detention calculations upon application for the Final Plat of Subdivision. He stated that the applicant will be responsible for being compliant with Lake County Storm Water Development Ordinance Appendix P relative to their storm water management plans.

Mr. Munaretto stated that the management of the on-street parking should belong to the Police Department. He stated that on garbage pick-up day, the garbage cans are proposed to have screening on three sides.

Ms. Miller stated that consideration should be given to providing landscaping around any screening proposed for the garbage cans.

Ms. Deb Galvin, 155 Sunnyside Place, stated that she is concerned about the storm water management. She stated that the existing storm water sewers date back to the 1920’s. She stated that storm water runs down to the bike path during a rain. She asked what are the remedies if the new development has a negative impact upon the surrounding properties.

Mr. David Pardys, Village Attorney, stated that Illinois State Statute authority requires that any development shall not increase the off-site storm water flow above the existing conditions.

Ms. Galvin stated that the current sanitary sewer capacity is old and that the calculations should take into consideration the existing sanitary sewer capacity.

Mr. Chung stated that they will ask the petitioner’s engineer to provide the proper calculations for the sanitary sewers. He stated that the existing sanitary sewers are currently in good condition.

Ms. Galvin stated that there will be fewer trees and less soil to hold the storm water.

Mr. Chung stated that they will require information that will incorporate both the existing conditions and the new development conditions as it relates to water flow. He stated that the on- site detention should be able to hold water and slowly release it into the storm sewer system.

Ms. Barbara Wilcox, 1129 Pine Tree Lane, stated that she is concerned about the rate in which the neighborhood is losing its historical homes. She stated that she is concerned that the area is losing its heritage.

Ms. Patricia Axelrod, 340 McKinley Avenue, stated that she works for the People’s Advocate. She stated that she is concerned that more details of the project couldn’t yet be discussed. She stated that certain people have a cavalier attitude.

Commissioner Krummick stated that he could not identify what is different about the current proposal from when it was before the Plan Commission last time. He stated that there does not appear to be anything functionally different. He asked the petitioner how they are meeting the lot coverage requirement now that the alley will no longer be vacated. Mr. Munaretto stated that they have reduced the driveway width.

Commissioner Krummick asked for clarification as to the application process and where the petitioner is now in that process. Mr. John Spoden, Director of Community Development, stated that the request before the Plan Commission tonight is the Preliminary Plat of Subdivision. He stated that once the Preliminary Plat is approved the petitioner will have to come back before the Plan Commission for the Final Plat of Subdivision review and recommendation to the Village Board.

Commissioner Flores stated that in lieu of a fence-like garbage enclosure along the western edge of the driveway, consideration should be given to using evergreen landscaping instead.

Vice Chairman Cotey asked the petitioner if they have an agreement with Groot as to how they will access the garbage cans. Mr. Munaretto stated that they have an agreement.

Vice Chairman Cotey stated that he is not supportive of this proposal as it is too dense for his liking, but is glad to know that the easement issue with the next door neighbor has been resolved. He asked the petitioner how they would like for the Plan Commission to proceed. Mr. Munaretto stated that he would like for the Plan Commission to render their recommendation to the Village Board tonight.

In the matter of PC 16-06, Commissioner Semmelman moved, seconded by Commissioner Oakley, to recommend the Village Board of Trustees approve a Preliminary Plat of Resubdivision in order to resubdivide three (3) residential lots into two (2) residential lots for property located in an R-7, Single Family Attached Residential District, subject to the following conditions:

1. That prior to a Plan Commission making a recommendation to the Village Board regarding the Final Plat of Subdivision, the petitioner shall provide complete Final Engineering drawings and documents for Village Staff review and approval.

2. The following list identifies additional items that will need to be addressed and provided for Engineering Division review and approval, prior to a Plan Commission recommendation to the Village Board regarding the Final Plat of Subdivision: 

A. A completed Watershed Development Permit Application shall be submitted. 

B. A Final Plat of Subdivision shall be provided for review and approval. All proposed boundaries and provisions for drainage, utility, and other easements shall be reviewed and approved in conjunction with the Final Engineering drawings. 

C. Final Engineering Plans shall be submitted for review and approval. Final layout of the utilities will require further review; all utility crossing elevations shall be shown. Utilities which are required/proposed to be public shall be clearly identified as such. (The proposed 8” sanitary sewer would need to be public.) 

D. A Final Stormwater Management Report shall be provided for review and approval. 

E. Final Landscaping Drawings shall be provided for review and approval. 

F. All storm sewer and stormwater management systems shall be privately owned and maintained and contained within stormwater management/drainage easements. (Use the Drainage Easement provisions recommended by Lake County Stormwater Management Commission.) 

G. Monument should be located on the Final Plat and set on the field. 

H. Storm sewer conveyance system design calculations should be submitted; 

I. Storm water detention calculations shall be submitted in accordance with Appendix P; 

J. Check the Finished Floor Elevations on the Grading Plans. 

K. Show the proposed driveway apron and design, driveway culvert may be required, therefore, cross-sectional detail should be shown; 

L. Show spot elevation for the drainage swale in front of the project. 

M. Submit rain garden cross section with volume capacity calculation. 

N. Detention storage is required for any net impervious increase exceeding 200 sq- ft; submit all supporting calculations. 

O. Submit a project narrative. 

P. Provide the Engineering Cost Estimate. 

Q. A sanitary sewer extension permit is required from the IEPA; therefore provide a completed permit application with the Final Engineering submittal. 

R. A Development Agreement is required for the proposed subdivision. 

S. The proposed Declarations shall be provided. 

T. Provide Engineering Cost Estimate. 

U. Provide a Maintenance Plan for the ongoing maintenance of all stormwater management system components, including wetlands. 

V. Any comments from the Village’s traffic consultant shall be addressed. 

W. Further review will be needed upon receipt of the above-requested information.

Motion carried 4 - 1.

Ayes: Flores, Krummick, Oakley, Schultz 

Nays: Cotey 

Absent: Moore, Semmelman

PC 16-41 Paul Swanson, Applicant 213, 317, 403, and 417 S. Butterfield Road

Request is for a Preliminary Plat of Subdivision in order to subdivide property and develop a single family residential subdivision for property in an R-5, Single Family Residential District.

Mr. David Smith, Senior Planner, introduced the petitioner’s request. He stated that the petitioner, Paul Swanson, was before the Plan Commission at their December 12, 2016, meeting and again at their January 23, 2017, meeting requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat of Subdivision in order to subdivide 7.6 acres of land for property located in an R-5, Single Family Residential District at 213, 317, 403, and 417 S. Butterfield Road. Mr. Smith stated that the subject site is triangular in shape and bounded by the North Shore Bike Path on the north, Butterfield Road on the east, and the single family residences fronting Victory Drive along the south. He stated that access to the proposal will be created with a new 580 foot long cul de sac street. Mr. Smith stated that the Subdivision Code limits the cul de sac to not exceed 500 feet in length. He stated that a variation from the Subdivision Code shall be required in order to permit the cul de sac street to be longer than 500 feet. Mr. Smith stated that this is not a Zoning Code variation, but shall require the approval of the Village Board. Mr. Smith stated that the proposal contemplates two-story single family homes containing 3 and 4 bedroom units. Mr. Smith stated that the applicant has submitted revised materials and has reduced the number of proposed Lots from 19 to 15.

Mr. Paul Swanson, petitioner, presented the proposed Preliminary Plat of Subdivision and Site Plan to the Plan Commission and the attending public in the audience. He stated that the revised plan shows the removal of two lots along Butterfield Road. He stated that after looking at alternative plan designs they decided that the 580 foot long cul de sac is the best option. He stated that the tradeoff for reducing the dwelling unit count from 19 to 15 is the 580 foot long cul de sac. He stated that it is his understanding that the Fire Department does not object to the longer cul de sac. He stated that in addition to the 15 proposed lots for homes there is also a 55,000 square foot park that will be kept in its natural state. He stated that he development process will include the removal of most of the trees in order to regrade the subject property. He stated that they have decided that it does not make sense to remove the Butterfield Road curbed median in front of the access point as there is not enough space to provide a center turn lane on Butterfield Road. He stated that he is looking for a vote from the Plan Commission tonight.

Mr. Carl Kupfer, civil engineer representing the residents from Victory Drive, stated that he is concerned with how the developer will handle the storm water.

Mr. Swanson stated that the existing 1/2 acre wetland is very low quality. He stated that they have met with the Village Engineering Division Staff on this and other issues.

Ms. Mara Slesers, 1320 Victory Drive, stated that there is over 336 years of combined property ownership along Victory Drive. She stated that she loves her street. She stated that each lot is 3/4 of an acre in size. She stated that they have enjoyed the natural greens space behind their property from the beginning. She stated that the current storm water runoff does not drain properly today and so she is concerned how much more the drainage problem will be exasperated once the trees are removed.

Ms. Lisa Roti, 1212 Victory Drive, is concerned that there may be an infringement of property rights with this proposal. She stated that she lives in the second house from Butterfield Road. She is concerned about the proposed storm water management and that it will still disperse into her yard. She stated that she recognizes that the developer has certain rights, but is concerned about the impact upon her property by the proposed development. She stated that she is concerned that Victory Drive will be used for cut through traffic. She stated that Butterfield Road is heavily traveled. She is concerned that her street will be used for a parking lot.

Ms. Slesers stated that she objects to the loss of trees.

Mr. Craig Hammett, 1220 Victory Drive, stated that he is concerned about the impact that the development will have on the wildlife.

Ms. Slesers, stated that the quality of life will change. She presented photos of the wetland area. She stated that she is concerned about the safety of the neighborhood children.

Ms. Patricia Axelrod, 340 McKinley, representative for the People’s Advocate, stated that an EcoCat report should be supplied. She stated that the certain people should be cautious if violating any conflict of interest laws. She stated that any mitigation of the wetland will be subject to litigation. She stated that this proposal is not in compliance with the law. She stated that she believes that this property is a habitat for several wildlife species. She stated that the development will have an impact on those nearby with asthma conditions.

Ms. Ana Draa, 1020 Ashley Lane, stated that consideration should be given by the Plan Commission to limit the amount of time that testimony can be given at the podium.

Mr. Andris Slesers, stated that this proposal should be continued to a future meeting. He stated that Village Staff should review a third party Civil Engineer’s report not just the developer’s engineer’s report and plans. He stated that he is concerned about potential for cut through traffic.

Mr. Ted White, 305 S. Butterfield Road, stated that he has lived in his home for 61 years. He stated that most of the existing trees on the property are bad. He stated that he is concerned about the proposed detention areas and their impact upon the adjacent properties.

Ms. Debbie Wilson, 1312 Victory Drive, stated that their back yards have flooded enough in the past that they have seen her neighbor canoe in the flooded area. She stated that there should be a clause in the documentation that will hold the developer accountable if the new storm water management system does not work.

Mr. David Pardys, Village Attorney stated that Final Civil Engineering plans shall be required to be reviewed and approved.

Ms. Wilson stated that she is concerned about the overland storm water drainage and the potential impact upon the property values.

Mr. Swanson stated that he has applied to EcoCat and that there will be some displacement of some wildlife. He stated that this is partly why they will provide a natural park area. He stated that the development will not contribute to the existing flooding problems.

Mr. Angelo Zografos, civil engineer representing the petitioner, presented the existing topographical and drainage conditions of the subject property. He stated that the proposed development will make drainage and storm water management better. He stated that part of the storm water management system will include an outlet control structure. He stated that all Village of Libertyville and Lake County ordinances will be followed.

Mr. Swanson stated that he is very concerned about being a good neighbor. He stated that many of the existing trees on the western end of the property will be left in their natural state. He stated that he is seeking a Plan Commission vote tonight.

Mr. Kupfer stated that the actual water shed tributary is larger than what the petitioner’s report includes. He stated that he is concerned that the petitioner’s plan is dependent upon a pipe system which could clog and back up.

Mr. Zografos stated that the overland flow routes have been accounted for in their study and that they will be compliant with the WDO regulations.

Commissioner Oakley stated that it appears that the entrance will only be a right-in/right-out.

Mr. Swanson stated that the traffic will have to acclimate to the Butterfield Road curbed median.

Commissioner Oakley asked about the 20 additional feet of dedication to the Butterfield Road right of way.

Mr. Ron Adams, civil engineer for the petitioner, stated as development happens along Butterfield Road, which is a Lake County right-of-way, half of the right-of-way which is typically 40 feet is often required to widen to 60 feet. He stated that this is Lake County’s policy.

Mr. Fred Chung, Senior Project Engineer, stated that these types of dedications are often required in order to accommodate utility installation such as larger water mains, etc.

Commissioner Oakley asked if the development will include the installation of a sidewalk along Butterfield Road. Mr. Swanson stated that he prefers to not have to install a sidewalk.

Commissioner Flores stated that the proposed open space is located all the way on the west end of the proposed development. She stated that she is concerned that it is hidden from the public.

Mr. Swanson stated that there is a connection to the bike path.

Commissioner Krummick asked the petitioner if he has taken the plan as far as he can. Mr. Swanson stated that the proposed density of 15 units is as low as he can bring it.

Commissioner Krummick asked if the petitioner ever considered relocating the entrance further to the north. Mr. Swanson stated that relocating the entrance will not work. He stated that the H.O.A. will maintain the stormwater.

Mr. Zografos stated that there will be more than adequate storm water detention capacity.

Commissioner Krummick stated that he is concerned about the lack of access to the proposed park.

Commissioner Schultz stated that he is not concerned about the proposed density or the proposed storm water management system. He stated that he is concerned about the removal of the trees. He stated that he would prefer it if the number of units could be dropped by another four (4).

Vice Chairman Cotey reviewed the Staff review comments with the petitioner.

Mr. Swanson stated that he cannot agree to all of the Planning Division comments including the tree buffer along the southern property line, but that there will be some landscaping. He stated that he could not agree to the request to push the garage doors behind the front facade of the homes, but did offer that some of the homes will have side loaded garages.

Ms. Debbie Haddad, attorney representing the petitioner, stated that they have a concern about the cash in lieu of park land requirement indicated by Staff.

Mr. Swanson stated that as long as the H.O.A. maintains the proposed naturally wooded area as a public space then they feel like they should not have to donate cash in lieu of a dedicated park.

Vice Chairman Cotey stated that the Staff review comments will require some additional editing that should not be done during the public meeting. He stated that it seems that it is appropriate to continue this meeting to April and provide Staff the opportunity to draft a motion with conditions for approval for next time.

In the matter of PC 16-41, Commissioner Oakley moved, seconded by Commissioner Flores, to continue this item to the April 10, 2017, Plan Commission meeting.

Motion carried 5 - 0.

Ayes: Cotey, Flores, Krummick, Oakley, Schultz 

Nays: None 

Absent: Moore, Semmelman

New Business:

PC 17-07 IRC Retail Centers Management Inc., Applicant 1300-1440 S. Milwaukee Avenue

Request is for a an Amendment to the Planned Development Final Plan in order to install new front facade changes on a commercial building and install new wall business wall signs for the Red Top Plaza Shopping Center in a C-4, Shopping Center Commercial District.

In the matter of PC 17-07, Commissioner Oakley moved, seconded by Commissioner Flores, to continue this item to the April 24, 2017, Plan Commission meeting to be held at the Libertyville Civic Center, 135 West Church Street, Libertyville, IL 60048.

Motion carried 5 - 0.

Ayes: Cotey, Flores, Krummick, Oakley, Schultz 

Nays: None 

Absent: Moore, Semmelman

Communications and Discussion:

Commissioner Oakley moved, seconded by Commissioner Flores, to adjourn the Plan Commission meeting.

Motion carried 5 - 0.

Meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.

http://www.libertyville.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_03202017-775