Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Gurnee Planning and Zoning Board - April 16, 2014

Village of Gurnee

Planning and Zoning Board Minutes

April 16, 2014


1.  Call to Order and Roll Call

The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m.

Planning & Zoning Board Members present: Chairman James Sula, David Nordentoft, David Ohanian, and Richard McFarlane

Planning & Zoning Board Members absent: Edwin Paff and Sharon Salmons

Other Officials present:  Bryan Winter, Village Attorney; Tracy Velkover, Planning Manager; Molly Booth, Associate Planner, and Scott Drabicki, Village Engineer.

2.  Pledge of Allegiance

3.  Public Comment

Mr. Sula asked if anyone from the public had any questions or comments regarding anything not on the evening’s agenda.  As there were no responses, Chairman Sula then closed the floor to the public.

4.  Approval of the Planning and Zoning Board’s March 19, 2014 meeting minutes

A motion to approve the March 19, 2014 meeting minutes was made by Mr. Ohanian, seconded by Mr. Nordentoft.

Voice Vote:

All "Ayes," no "Nays," none abstaining.

Motion Carried: 4-0-0

 5.  Approval of the Planning and Zoning Board's April 2, 2014 Minutes

A motion to approve the April 2, 2014 meeting minutes was made by Mr. Ohanian, seconded by Mr. Nordentoft.

Voice Vote:

All "Ayes," no "Nays," none abstaining.

Motion Carried: 4-0-0

Chairman Sula announced that, while the next three items on the evening's agenda were all related to the same project, three separate motions would need to be made (and voted on) in order to properly address them…

6.  Public Hearing:  Ashbury Woods, LLC

Conservation Development, LLC is requesting approval of the following:

1)  Special Use for a Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD); and
2)  Such other relief as may be necessary to accomplish the applicant’s development plan.

The requested PUD would allow for 18 single-family lots on approximately 8.6 acres located at 1001 N. Hunt Club Road (1,700 feet south of the intersection of Hunt Club Road and Dada Drive).  The property is zoned R-2, single-family residential.  A 14-lot residential PUD, which was approved in 2006 for this property, has expired.

7.  Final PUD Plat:  Ashbury Woods

Conservation Development, LLC is requesting Final PUD Plat Plan approval for an 18-lot single-family subdivision on approximately 8.6 acres located at 1001 N. Hunt Club Road (1,700 feet south of the intersection of Hunt Club Road and Dada Drive).

 8.  Final Subdivision Plat:  Ashbury Woods

Conservation Development, LLC is requesting Final Subdivision Plat approval for an 18-lot single-family subdivision on approximately 8.6 acres located at 1001 N. Hunt Club Road (1,700 feet south of the intersection of Hunt Club Road and Dada Drive).

After an introduction and overview of this matter was given by Ms. Booth. She made reference to a letter sent by Mark Paiser, 16748 Applewood Court, who owns property adjacent to the site of the proposed project, and also clarified that the acreage of the site is 8.6 acres, not 9.6 acres as incorrectly described on the posted agenda.

Village Attorney Bryan Winter then swore in all those wishing to speak on the matter. 

Petitioner Ron Gryzik, with Conversation Development LLC, began his presentation by reiterating the reasoning behind the request, and elaborated on the redirection of the project in adapting to the present market.    

Mr. Grizic stated that two homes (and garages) from the project have been donated to the Fire Department for Life, Safety, and Fire training and that three additional structures will be donated, as well.  He explained that the structures had been recycled through Petersen Excavating. 

He noted one particular premise of this project, which is to eliminate three dangerous driveways (one of which had been the scene of an accident involving a school bus). 

He then stated that the Merkal home, a 100-year-old home, has been recycled and turned into a sales office.  He elaborated on the "green" premise of the project, and how the intent is to keep as many trees on the property as possible so as not to degrade the site; tree patterns were considered when plans were made for the project, and that lot lines were distinguished in consideration of tree lines within the property.  He went on to explain that location of the project's office spaces were decided upon in an effort to cut down traffic on Orchard. 

He posited that real estate taxes as a result of this project will have a positive impact on the schools, and that income from other taxes and such will be generated from this project, and noted that subdivision's one-lane design, and that its amenities did not require much upkeep from the city. 

He also posited that lots (and pricing of these lots) within the project allow for upward-mobility of residents within the Village.   

Departures were addressed, such as variance in the density, lots sizes, etc.   The right-of-way is set to accommodate existing trees, and there will be only one sidewalk within the subdivision (also to accommodate trees and sanitation of streets).  He addressed departure of setback requirements, as well, and noted that there will be boaring under Hunt Club Road for water.   

Ms. Velkover added the consideration of departure from street width.

 Mr. Sula clarified with Ms. Velkover that the only major departures are that of lot size and a slightly higher loss of trees due to those changes in lot size; they both acknowledge that it was only in this regard were there any changes from the originally-approved PUD.   

Mr. Sula then asked if there were any questions/comments from members of the Board.

Mr. Ohanian questioned whether or not emergency vehicles would be able to navigate through the street of the subdivision, due to its width.  Mr. Drabicki responded that such vehicles should not have a problem, even with cars parked on both sides of the street.  When Mr. Ohanian then asked about school buses, noting the sidewalk being only on the one side of the street, Mr. Drabicki countered that such concerns are subject to the point that the property is in a cul-de-sac, were there would likely be less traffic.  Mr. Ohanian also expressed that he was not comfortable with the density.  

Mr. McFarlane asked for clarification that all utilities would be underground, and how the right-of-way would be embedded to accommodate this; the petitioner confirmed that all utilities would be underground, and embedding was planned in accordance with preserving as many trees as possible.    

Mr. Nordentoft clarified that the petitioner is the developer, but would not be building on the property.  He expressed concern over how, exactly, the trees would be protected throughout not only the development of the project but throughout the eventual construction, as well.  He stated that he was more concerned with green space, rather than bulk, and questioned the need for departure being requested. 

Mr. McFarlane questioned the need for departure for the setback; Ms. Velkover stated that such departure is being requested to accommodate the lots at the end of the cul-de-sac along Hunt Club Road.

Mr. Sula then asked if there were any questions/comments from the public.  He stated that all such questions/comments would be addressed after they all had been made.

Mark Mokate, of 16858 W. Jonathan Lane, expressed concern over run-off and retention, and how they would be addressed--particularly to those properties (such as his own) that are lower than those on the development. 

Ivan Harrow, speaking on behalf of his father (who owns 2 1/2 acres of property adjacent to the site), asked about the road width, and whether or not measurements offered included curbs, and how parking would be affected.  He also asked about storm water, the location of the terminus of the detention area, and how 2 1/2 acres of property to the north would be accessed. 

Don Anderson, 16820 West Jonathon Lane, also expressed concern over storm water and run-off.  He was also concerned about increased traffic resulting from the increase of lots in the development

Jim Bendners also expressed concern over drainage of surface waters, and whether or not there would be a swale or not.  He was also concerned over possible flooding on his property.

Mr. Anderson also asked what recourse he would have if there was, in fact, any flooding on his property, and how it would be resolved.  

Scott Fout, 35288 North Cemetery Road, expressed concern over lack of sidewalks and how this would be affected by increased traffic.

After closing the floor to the public, Chairman Sula deferred to Village Engineer Drabicki in regards to the many questions/comment concerning the management of storm water. 

Mr. Drabicki stated that the drainage pattern would not be masqueraded, and that focus would be on the right-of-way itself.  Each individual area would be graded out for the roadway itself, storm sewer will be installed, and suppository drainage would be maintained on the corridor of the roadway.  As individual lots are developed, the Village of Gurnee Engineering division will focus on the individual lots; water will be drained from spring lines of homes to the street, into the storm system, then conveyed to the proposed detention basin before being released to the swale located on the school property.  He acknowledged his concern over the backyards of the some of the properties, and stated that this would have to be addressed on a lot-by-lot basis. 

As this area is handled by Planning and Zoning of Lake County, the Village of Gurnee will work closely with them to ensure the appropriate handling of any concerns that may arise due to storm water management in the area.

Village Attorney Winter stated that if grading is to be changed, provisions would have to be made to avoid adverse affect on other's property.

In regards to street width, Mr. Drabicki noted that it would be measured from back-of-the-curb to back-of-the-curb.

Ms. Velkover stated that the adjacent property to the north would be accessed up Edgewood Drive by extended right-of-way.  She stated that there was no traffic study, as it was determined that increase in traffic would be minimal; travel service would still be at Level "A" (as defined by Institute of Traffic Engineers).

Mr. McFarlane asked about various options available in the management of storm water; Mr. Drabicki suggested that options may include piping, swaling, etc.

Chairman Sula suggested that a continuance may be in order, so as to allow time spent coming up with a more solidified plan for storm water management in this project.   He also asked if there were any other concerns that should be addressed more thoroughly.  Mr. Nordentoft  stated that he would like to see a more comprehensive plan for sidewalks within the development; when Ms. Velkover stated that that it has been determined that sidewalks would be on the south side of the street, he withdrew the suggestion.  Mr. Ohanian asked that more consideration be given to the impact of increased density, and that the number of lots being proposed be reconsidered.

Mr. McFarlane expressed concern over potential lack of accountability in regard to tree preservation. 

Mr. Sula open the floor to the public once again to allow for another question from Mr. Anderson, who asked how a possible swale would impact his property, particularly easement on his property.  

Mr. McFarlane asked if a covenant would be allowed in addressing these issues in the management of storm water.

The petitioner agreed to a continuance of this matter to the PZB meeting of May 7, 2014.  

A motion was made by Mr. Nordentoft, seconded by Mr. Ohanian, to continue this matter to the PZB meeting of May 7, 2014 at the petitioner's request. 

Roll Call Vote:

Ayes:  Ohanian, McFarlane, Nordentoft, and Sula

Nays:  none

Abstain:  none

Motion Carried:  4-0-0

9.  Next Meeting Date:  May 7, 2014 

10.   Adjournment

Mr. Ohanian made a motion to adjourn the meeting; seconded by Mr. Nordentoft.

Voice vote:

All "Ayes", no "Nays", none abstaining

Motion carried: 4-0-0

The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,

Joann Metzger
Planning and Zoning Board Secretary