AGENDA BOLINGBROOK PLAN COMMISSION February 7, 2007 1.

CALL TO ORDER:

Chair: Robert Cawthon, Jr.

2.

ROLL CALL:

Vice Chair: Mary Rennels Commissioners: Rick Campos, Ronald Elliott Steve Quigley, Talat Rashid, J.D. Rhoades Libby Runge and Calvin Wright

3.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

January 17, 2007

4.

PUBLIC HEARINGS:

Special Use Permit for a Communication Monopole 100 feet west of Weber Road and 735 feet south of Hassert Boulevard Applicant: Steven Hedges on behalf of T-Mobile Project No.: 420.96 Staff Presenter: Dennis Kowalczyk CONTINUED TO FEBRUARY 21, 2006 Special Use Permit for a Planned Residential Development with Variances and Final Development Plan Riverstone Apartments – Woodcreek Drive and Lily Cache Lane Applicant: Jackson Square Construction Project No.: 438.06A Staff Presenter: Marisa Munizzo Rezoning from E-R Estate Residential to B-2 Community Retail, Special Use Permit for a Planned Commercial Development with Variances, Preliminary Development Plan and Preliminary Plat of Subdivision Promenade Bolingbrook Phase 4 – east side of Janes Avenue south of Falconridge Way Applicant: Forest City Bolingbrook LLC Project No.: 413.04E Staff Presenter: Nicole Knapp

5.

NEW BUSINESS:

Final Plat of Subdivision Carlow Corporate Center North Unit 7 – 905 Carlow Drive Applicant: Northern Builders, Inc. Project No.: 402.07 Staff Presenter: Matthew Eastman

6.

OLD BUSINESS:

7.

APPROVAL OF PLAN COMMISSION REPORTS:

8.

CITIZENS TO BE HEARD:

9.

CHAIR’S REPORT:

10.

COMMISSIONER’S REPORT:

11.

PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT:

12.

ADJOURNMENT:

PC07.02 Approval of a Special Use Permit for a Planned Development with Variances and Final Development Plan Boughton Ridge Golf Course - Applicant: PHN Architects Project No.: 454.06

A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLAN COMMISSION OF THE VILLAGE OF BOLINGBROOK February 7, 2007 CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Mary Rennels called the meeting to order at 8:03 p.m., Wednesday, February 7, 2007. ROLL CALL Present:

Commissioners Talat Rashid, Steve Quigley, J. D. Rhoades, Ronald Elliott, Calvin Wright, Rick Campos, Vice Chair Mary Rennels

Absent:

Commissioner Libby Runge, Chairman Robert Cawthon, Jr.

Staff:

Director of Community Development, Dennis Kowalczyk; Planning & Zoning Administrator, Nicole Knapp; Planner, Matt Eastman; Assistant Village Engineer, Tom Pawlowicz

Press:

None

APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion Quigley, second Rhoades to approve Minutes of the January 17, 2007, meeting of the Plan Commission. Voice Vote: Unanimous Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A COMMUNICATION MONOPOLE, 100 FEET WEST OF WEBER ROAD & 735 FEET SOUTH OF HASSERT BOULEVARD, APPLICANT: STEVEN HEDGES ON BEHALF OF T-MOBILE, PROJECT NO. 420.96 Motion Rhoades, second Wright to open the public hearing. AYES: Commissioners Rashid, Quigley, Rhoades, Elliott, Wright, Vice Chair Rennels NAYS: None ABSENT: Commissioners Runge, Campos, Chairman Robert Cawthon, Jr. Motion carried, public hearing opened at 8:04 p.m. Director of Community Development, Dennis Kowalczyk, presented the request for a Special Use Permit to allow for construction of an eighty (80) foot high communication monopole at the Lily Cache Sports Complex park. The monopole will be the same height as the existing lights at the soccer fields. The equipment boxes at the bottom of the pole would be screened by a six (6) foot high wood fence as well as landscaping.

There is also existing landscaping on the site. The pole would be located near the northeast corner of the park. Commissioner Campos arrived at 8:11 p.m. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of a Special Use Permit to allow a maximum eighty (80) foot high communication monopole to be located at the Lily Cache Sports Complex Park, commonly known as 1357 Hassert Boulevard. DISCUSSION Commissioner Quigley noted the monopole will look like a light pole minus the lights. Commissioner Rashid asked if it has to be eighty (80) feet high. Director Kowalczyk answered that eighty (80) feet would be the maximum allowed, and according to TMobile engineers, that would be tall enough for the other towers in their system to be able to "see" each other. Roberta Paul, 717 Rockhurst Road, sworn. Ms. Paul asked what the tower will emit, and does the applicant have anything with him to backup his answer. Ms. Paul said questions other than the height restrictions should be asked, and the Commission should have been more prepared than her, as a citizen. Steven Hedges, agent for T-Mobile, sworn. Hedges said antennas do emit a radio frequency signal, and that T-Mobile operates well below the Federal Communication Commission regulations for radio signals. The facility will pose no health risk to the community whatsoever. The consensus of the scientific community, both in the US and internationally, is that the power emissions from cell sites is far too low to pose any health risks. Emissions from T-Mobile's facility are hundreds of times lower than those established by the FCC. Vice Chair Rennels asked if the FCC actually tests the poles. Hedges answered that he imagines they must do some random testing to make sure companies are within their licenses and regulations. In answer to a question by Vice Chair Rennels, Hedges said cell communication companies are required to purchase FCC licenses. Once they have purchased their license, they are the only company that can operate within that radio frequency. He mentioned websites that provide information. He also stated the World Health Organization released in May, 2006, a fact sheet that states no adverse short term or long term health effects have been shown to occur from the signals. Ms. Paul asked if these tests were done on poles that were isolated in one area. She asked if the emissions will bounce off buildings and stay in a confined area. Are there other poles that are not allowed to be constructed within a certain distance of the one at this site. Are all of these poles collectively going to poison people after ten (10) years? Hedges reiterated there has been no evidence whatsoever shown in short term or long term studies that health concerns have arisen from the emissions. The antennas are eighty (80) feet in the air and are directional so they point outward and not straight down. There is not a large amount of radio signal on the ground. 2

2.7.07

Commissioner Rhoades noted some time ago a tower project came before the Commission, and she asked questions at that time about emissions and magnetic fields. The answer then was it would be no more than you would get in your home with a microwave, and less than what you would get by using a cell phone. She said that her concerns at that time were of the cumulative effect of more towers and electric wires, etc. Hedges said a person standing at ground level using a cell phone would receive more emissions from the phone than from the tower or pole. Commissioner Rhoades asked if the level of power could be increased at this location. Hedges said, yes it could. Commissioner Rhoades asked how that would affect the safety issues. Satish Bhat, 1899 Apple Valley Road, sworn. Bhat is a radio frequency engineer, and displayed a chart depicting tower locations and the distances from which calls can be made. Commissioner Quigley asked if the capacity of the tower is increased, do the emissions create a health problem. Bhat answered absolutely not. Commissioner Campos asked if increasing the capacity of the tower does not increase the calling distance, but increases the number of phones that can use that tower at a given time. Bhat said that is correct. Hedges said the federal government requires that cell companies improve their network and the E-911 services to insure clear communications to emergency services are available. He also said the network is closely monitored, and the network has shown a significant number of dropped calls in this area. Customer complaints have also been received. T-Mobile encourages subleasing of space so other companies can place their antennas on the same tower. If that would happen at this location, the Bolingbrook Park District would be able to negotiate a lease with the other companies. Commissioner Rhoades pointed out that we all want to use cell phones, but as the network grows, does it then become a danger? Vice Chair Rennels asked if all the sites combined pose a danger. Hedges said they still have to be within the FCC guidelines, and there would not be an adverse effect. Commissioner Campos asked about microwave use and cell towers cumulative effect. Hedges again answered the federal government has set the regulations and the companies are within the guidelines. Motion Elliott, second Rashid to close the public hearing. AYES: Commissioners Quigley, Rhoades, Elliott, Wright, Campos, Rashid, Vice Chair Rennels NAYS: None ABSENT: Commissioner Runge, Chairman Cawthon Motion carried, public hearing closed at 8:32 p.m. Motion Elliott, second Quigley to accept the recommendation of Planning Staff. AYES: Commissioners Rashid, Quigley, Rhoades, Elliott, Wright, Campos, Vice Chair Rennels NAYS: None ABSENT: Commissioner Runge, Chairman Cawthon Motion carried. 3

2.7.07

SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH VARIANCES AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN--RIVERSTONE APARTMENTS, WOODCREEK DRIVE & LILY CACHE LANE, APPLICANT: JACKSON SQUARE CONSTRUCTION, PROJECT NO. 438.06A Motion Rhoades, second Wright, to open the public hearing. AYES: Commissioners Rashid, Quigley, Rhoades, Elliott, Wright, Campos, Vice Chair Rennels NAYS: None ABSENT: Commissioner Runge, Chairman Cawthon Motion carried, public hearing opened at 8:33 p.m. Motion Wright, second Quigley to continue the public hearing to February 21, 2007. AYES: Commissioners Rashid, Quigley, Rhoades, Elliott, Wright, Campos, Vice Chair Rennels NAYS: None ABSENT: Commissioner Runge, Chairman Cawthon Motion carried, public hearing continued to February 21, 2007. REZONING FROM E-R ESTATE RESIDENTIAL TO B-2 COMMUNITY RETAIL, SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH VARIANCES, PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN & PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SUBDIVISION--PROMENADE BOLINGBROOK PHASE 4, EAST SIDE OF JANES AVENUE SOUTH OF FALCONRIDGE WAY, APPLICANT: FOREST CITY BOLINGBROOK LLC, PROJECT NO. 413.04E Motion Rhoades, second Wright to open the public hearing. AYES: Commissioners Rashid, Quigley, Rhoades, Elliott, Wright, Campos, Vice Chair Rennels NAYS: None ABSENT: Commissioner Runge, Chairman Cawthon Motion carried, public hearing opened at 8:34 p.m. Planning & Zoning Administrator, Nicole Knapp, presented the request which includes Rezoning, a Special Use Permit for a Planned Commercial Development with Variances, approval of a hotel with extended hours of operation, Preliminary Development Plan and Preliminary Plat of Subdivision. Approval would allow for continuation of the Promenade at Bolingbrook Shopping Center. The applicant is requesting to rezone the subject property from E-R Estate Residential to B-2 Community Retail consistent with Phases 2 and 3 of the Promenade. Phase 4 would consist of four (4) buildable lots. Lot 1 would be 18.849 acres in size and would be created for development of one multi-tenant retail building and six retail or restaurant buildings. Lot 2 would be 13.102 acres created for development of a 174,000 square foot retail building. Lot 3 would be 6.829 acres created for development of a 97,800 square foot retail building. Lot 4 would be 5.934 acres created for development of a hotel, which would include conference space and a restaurant. 4

2.7.07

Newly dedicated easements for utilities and access would be included. Access to each lot would be from three points along Janes Avenue. Detention would be provided along the east side of the property adjacent to I-355 along with a smaller detention area near the west side of the property. An existing wetland area along the south property line would remain undisturbed. A minimum three (3) foot high landscaped berm would be provided along the east side of Janes Avenue. The berm would include landscape material and an irrigation system. The public sidewalks will be connected from the north and south in addition to the interior pedestrian sidewalks. At this time none of the proposed businesses wish to open before 5:00 a.m. or remain open beyond 10:00 p.m. except the hotel. The applicant has requested the following variances: 1.

To allow multiple buildings on one zoning lot. The Zoning Ordinance allows no more than one principal building on one zoning lot unless it is incorporated as part of a planned development. The applicant is proposing to locate three restaurants and four retail buildings on Lot 1 and three (3) buildings associated with the hotel on Lot 4. Staff supports this request as the proposed users would be part of the same ownership for the overall maintenance and management of the land. This type of variance has been approved in the past when the intention of the developer was to create a unified development.

2.

To reduce the required number of parking spaces by twenty-five (25) spaces for Lot 2 and one hundred twenty-five (125) spaces for Lot 3, as a result of the oddshaped property lines of Lots 2, 3, and 4. Staff supports this variance since a large percentage of customers would shop at more than one store per visit, and the developer is providing approximately two hundred thirty-four (234) extra parking spaces for the overall development.

3.

A variance to increase the size and number of signs. The Zoning Ordinance allows one (1) development sign not to exceed (10) feet in height and fifty (50) square feet in area on properties within three hundred (300) feet of residentially zoned properties. A sign that directs attention to a business must be located on the actual premise/lot and pole signs are prohibited on properties located in Sign Zone "B". The applicant is requesting two (2) monument signs, each twenty-five (25) feet in height with an overall size of two hundred (200) square feet and sign text area of one hundred (100) square feet. The Village Board of Trustees previously approved a similar request for Phases 2 and 3. This would allow for continuation of a unified development. The request also includes a seventy-five (75) foot high, three hundred (300) square foot pole sign in the northeast corner of Lot 1. This sign was previously approved as part of Phase 3; however, the applicant wishes to relocate the previously approved sign to Phase 4. 5

2.7.07

The applicant would like to have the ability to advertise the business name of any of the businesses located on Lots 2, 3, and 4; however, that would result in offpremise advertisement, since each of the signs is located on Lot 1. Therefore the applicant is requesting off-premise signs on the monument signs and the pole sign specifically limited to businesses located in Phase 4 only. Staff supports the request for two monument signs and one pole sign as requested to ensure that traffic on Janes Avenue and/or I-355 is directed efficiently to their shopping destination. Further, if the signs are approved as requested staff wishes to apply the following conditions: a) The materials used and the design of the monument signs is to compliment the monument signs located within Phases 2 and 3. b) The design of the pole sign is subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development. c) Upon construction of the proposed pole sign located in the far northeast corner of Phase 4, the original variance approved for a pole sign in Phase 3 shall be rescinded. 4. A maximum structure height of forty (40) feet is allowed in the B-2 Zoning District. The applicant is requesting a variance for a structure height of one hundred (100) feet at its highest point for the hotel on Lot 4 in order to allow for flexibility of a potential user and to allow for architectural prototypical elements. Staff supports this variance as the proposed building would be eight hundred (800) feet to the closest residential property to the south. 5. The Development Code requires every lot to have direct frontage onto a public rightof-way. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow Lots 2, 3, and 4 not to have direct frontage onto Janes Avenue. Staff supports the variance due to the geometrics of the overall parcel. 6. The Zoning Ordinance would require Lots 2, 3, and 4 to have a thirty (30) foot front yard setback, a ten (10) foot rear yard setback, and ten (10) foot side yard setback. The applicant is asking for a variance to reduce the front, side, and rear yard setbacks on each of the lots to zero (0) feet. The property lines would be located either adjacent to a detention area or in the middle of a common drive aisle located between two properties. Staff supports the variances as requested since the newly created property lines between Lots 2, 3, and 4 are being created solely for the purpose of individual land ownership, and the unified commercial development would appear the same as originally proposed. 7. Per the Zoning Ordinance, a two and one-half (2.5) to three (3) foot high berm, irrigation system and landscape material are required within the front yard setback of Lots 2, 3, and 4, in addition to landscape material being required within the side and rear yard setbacks. The applicant is requesting to eliminate the berm, irrigation system, and landscape material located within the side and rear yard setbacks as a 6

2.7.07

result of Variance 6. Staff supports each of these variances as the proposed Preliminary Landscape Plan for the overall development gives the appearance of a unified commercial development and all the required plant material has been relocated elsewhere within the development. Further, staff supports the variance subject to fifteen (15) additional overstory trees being placed within the parking lot area of Lot 2. To develop the property in accordance with the proposed site plan, the applicant is seeking a Special Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development as hotels are not listed as a permitted or special use within the B-2 Zoning District unless they are approved as part of a Planned Unit Development. Per the Zoning Ordinance, businesses are not permitted to be open past 10:00 p.m. unless a Special Use Permit is approved. The hotel proposed for Lot 4 would be a 24hour operation and therefore, a Special Use Permit would be required. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of a Rezoning from E-R Estate Residential to B-2 Community Retail. Staff recommends approval of a Special Use Permit for a Planned Commercial Development with the following: 1. A variance to allow seven (7) buildings on Lot 1 and three (3) buildings on Lot 4. 2. A variance to reduce the required number of parking spaces by twenty-five (25) on Lot 2 and one hundred twenty-five (125) on Lot 3. 3. A variance to allow two (2) monument signs on Lot 1 that are each twenty-five (25) feet in height, have an overall monument size of two hundred (200) square feet, and a sign text area of one hundred (100) square feet, subject to the materials used and the design of the monument signs to compliment the monument signs located within Phases 2 and 3. 4. A variance to allow a pole sign that is seventy-five (75) feet high and three hundred (300) square feet in area to be located in the far northeast corner of Lot 1, subject to: a) The design of the pole sign is subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development. b) Upon construction of the proposed pole sign located in the far northeast corner of Phase 4, the original variance approved for a pole sign in Phase 3 shall be rescinded. 5. A variance to allow a building height not to exceed one hundred (100) feet for the hotel located on Lot 4. 6. A variance to allow Lots 2, 3, and 4 to not have direct frontage onto Janes Avenue. 7. A variance to reduce the front, rear, and side yard setbacks on Lots 2, 3, and 4 to zero (0) feet. 8. A variance to eliminate the berm, irrigation system, and landscape material on Lots 2, 3 and 4, subject to fifteen (15) overstory trees being placed within the parking lot of Lot 2. 9. A Special Use Permit for a 7-story hotel on Lot 4, subject to a building height not to exceed one hundred (100) feet and the hotel being a 4 or 5 star national chain. 7

2.7.07

10. A Special Use Permit for a hotel located on Lot 4 with 24-hour operation. Staff recommends approval of a Preliminary Development Plan, subject to: 1. All of the comments from staffs' review dated Friday, February 2, 2007 being addressed. 2. The review and approval of the Directors of Public Works and Engineering and Community Development. DISCUSSION Commissioner Rhoades asked who will maintain the wetlands, and since the applicant is asking for several buildings on one lot, if they decide to sell, do they have to sell "as is". Ms. Knapp answered the association that maintains the overall development, and the management company is responsible. They would not sell to an individual user because they want it to stay with the common management. Commissioner Rhoades complimented staff on the traffic flow and signage. She asked about the I-355/Boughton Road ramps and access from Janes Avenue. Specifically will the I-355 ramps be expanded. Engineer Pawlowicz said the improvements made in that area have been guided by a traffic study done by KLOA. The study has been updated periodically as the development has changed. Janes Avenue is currently being widened to accommodate the additional traffic. A signal will be installed at the corner of Falconridge Way and Janes Avenue. There will be a traffic circle at the main entrance to the mall, and that will allow traffic to move in and out without waiting for a signal. There are no proposed right turn lanes. He said there is not available land to expand the on-off ramps of I-355. Jennifer Folino, 344 Janes Avenue, sworn. Ms. Folino asked how close will the development be to her property. She also expressed traffic and security concerns. Valerie Westley, Forest City Bolingbrook LLC, sworn. The location of Ms. Folino's house was pointed out on the aerial. She said Forest City will have full time security patrolling the property. Commissioner Quigley asked if there is a landscape berm. Ms. Knapp said they are providing a transitional yard up to the wetland. It is forty (40) feet from the property line to the water tower. It would be further to Ms. Folino's house. There was discussion that the traffic circle will calm traffic. Ms. Westley said there will be large deciduous and conifer trees in the transitional yard so there will be foliage year round. Thomas Herrera, 364 Stonegate Road, sworn. Herrera asked how high the fences or the separation on Lot 3 would be from his house, will lights be shining onto his property, and will there be security at all times? The Commission pointed out there will be security in all areas of the Promenade. Ms. Knapp said there is detention and landscaping, but no fencing and no berm. Herrera expressed concern that people visiting the Promenade could walk into his yard. Ms. Knapp explained there is a detention pond between his house and the Promenade. Engineer Pawlowicz said the pond might be a dry pond. Victoria Cathey, 713 Rockhurst Road, sworn. Ms. Cathey asked if property taxes will go down. Vice Chair Rennels answered that property tax issues are not in the Commission's realm. Ms. Cathey then asked how long it will take to widen Janes Avenue. Engineer Pawlowicz said the current schedule shows it being finished in May; however, he thinks that schedule may be a little aggressive. She asked if the speed limit 8

2.7.07

on Janes Avenue will change, and if there will be additional speed bumps. Pawlowicz said he does not believe the speed limit will go down. There are no plans to change Janes Avenue south of the development. There is one speed bump within the limits of the development that might be removed as part of construction. Sheri Kosmos, Woolpert, sworn. Ms. Kosmos said the lighting at the property lines will meet the Village Ordinance, which means there will not be light that carries over to the residential lots. There will be cutoff shields so the light stops at the property lines. The detention area will be a dry basin preliminarily; but it is still subject to the Village Landscaping Ordinance. Andrea Quintanar, 344 Homewood Drive, sworn. Ms. Quintanar presented a visual aid and also printed information to be introduced into the record which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. Ms. Quintanar said her husband is a licensed architect and Leadership and Energy and Environmental Design accredited professional, and he helped prepare the material. Ms. Quintanar said the visual aid identifies the disproportionate amount of chain retail existing within a four (4) mile radius of the proposed development. She asserted that Bolingbrook is not in need of additional retail of this sort, and the rezoning should not be granted unless the developer is willing to alter plans to benefit the surrounding community. The master plan will have detrimental effects to the community due to the location of the utility entrance which will produce pollution, exhaust, and noise; the high percentage of impervious surfaces, lack of pedestrian and bicycle access, and high capacity of vehicles. Bolingbrook will gain little economically unless a high percentage of businesses are locally owned. She outlined a list of changes that she wants made, said changes being listed in the attachment. Vice Chair Rennels pointed out the Commission is made up of citizens, and many people in the community do not agree that additional retail is not needed. Ms. Quintanar responded there is a need for responsible retail, for local businesses here in Bolingbrook, but not any cookie-cutter, chain-type retail. Commissioner Rhoades asked what exactly would she like addressed. It seems more like an opinion. Ms. Quintanar asked if they are willing to use alternative resources. What are they willing to do for the community? Are they willing to reserve for local businesses? Are they willing to replace the impervious surfaces with a pervious alternative? Are they going to give back to the community? Commissioner Quigley said they are not excluding local businesses from renting space. He said there is at least one local business in the northern portion, and if the space is chopped up into individual ownership, it becomes very pricey and impractical for the local owner and produces a lot of vacancies. Ms. Quintanar said she wants to know if the developer is willing to replace the impervious surfaces, provide bicycle/pedestrian access, etc. Discussion continued regarding pervious/impervious surfaces. Engineer Pawlowicz said there are some advantages to using pervious surfaces; it is questionable in this part of Bolingbrook, since there is such impermeable clay soils, how much water will soak in vs. runoff. As a matter of economics, the cost for installing a pervious parking lot is ten times that of an impervious surface. Commissioner Quigley asked if there is a difference in snow 9

2.7.07

removal for the surfaces. Engineer Pawlowicz said it is probably harder to plow the pervious surface, it is harder to walk on with high heels, especially. A pervious surface would probably be a little cooler than asphalt, it reduces runoff a little bit, it is aesthetically pleasing, but there are also drawbacks in addition to costs. Ms. Quintanar repeated her question of what the developer is willing to do for the community and the environment the community lives in. Commissioner Rhoades commented that tiles are being sold at the opening of the Promenade, the proceeds of which will go to the pediatric wing of the Bolingbrook Adventist Hospital. Ms. Westley testified with all of Forest City's developments they view the community as a partner. Along with the tiles being sold, they are planning a black tie benefit the evening of the opening which also will benefit the pediatric ward of the hospital. There is also a children's event that they are promoting the Saturday of opening weekend that is marketing the children's play area and getting the children involved. There will be more things coming. They are planning a light show and large Christmas tree at Christmas. Roberta Paul, 717 Rockhurst Road, asked if the retention pond will be stagnant if it is filled with water. Engineer Pawlowicz said typically a retention pond is only charged by whatever rainwater is piped into the pond. Between rainstorms it would be stagnant, but with the dry pond there would be no water between rainstorms, because it dissipates. Ms. Paul said she thinks the traffic on Janes Avenue has not been addressed properly. There will have to be a point of egress on I-355. It will have to happen. This development will be an enormous sacrifice to citizens. The noise level will be atrocious. The thing she has the biggest problem with is the 24-hour facility. She does not want that at all. They will have weddings and be drunk, etc. You can hear everything from the houses. She stated "I do not want a 24-hour facility there." Engineer Pawlowicz stated he thinks the chances of having any more access to I-355 are essentially zero. Commissioner Rhoades commented it is the people who live in the neighborhood that are speeding. The people getting traffic tickets are the residents. We are the ones who are guilty. Commissioner Quigley said there are other alternatives to using Janes Avenue, and when the speed bumps are installed people complain about them. He continued that the developer is paying the cost of improving Janes Avenue, and the developer has also made past contributions to local charities. Ms. Paul reiterated the contention that I-355 has to be an alternative to traffic on Janes. Jeanette Charon, 342 Homewood Drive, sworn. Ms. Charon stated she is for the growth of Bolingbrook, but has problems with some of the variances being requested. She said the southern entrance to the mall appears to be approximately thirty (30) feet from her fence. She objects to the noise and asked that they eliminate the most southerly buildings and extend the wetland to protect the homes on Homewood from the retail development. Additionally, she opposes the variance to eliminate the landscaping around the separate lots. If they extended the wetland, it would make up for the landscaping they're not doing around each individual lot. She asked if they don't eliminate the three buildings and do not erect a fence, how big will the berm be, because three (3) feet is not going to cut it. The variance for one hundred (100) feet for 10

2.7.07

the 7-story hotel is way too high. You didn't accept the variance for the hotel that has already been approved, and is being built, and I believe it is 4 or 5 stories. Nothing should be taller than that. You can't give enough trees to block out a 7-story hotel. People on the top story of that hotel will see into the neighboring yards which is a concern. She asked the hours of the retail operation over the Christmas holiday season and said if the stores are open till midnight that is a little late. Dawn Howard, 340 Homestead Drive, sworn. Ms. Howard said she appreciates the growth of Bolingbrook; however, Janes Avenue is a disaster. She applauds the speed bumps even though she has to go over them every day. She was a proponent of the "25 Stay Alive" campaign and had a sign in her yard. She said before Janes Avenue was open to Boughton Road, people did not go sixty miles per hour in her neighborhood. Stop signs may have been an option, but they did not go sixty miles per hour. She could walk safely to the detention pond on Forest Way. She now cannot cross Janes Avenue safely. She wants Forest City to be a good neighbor physically, as well as for the community. She asked Engineer Pawlowicz to point out exactly where the traffic circle will be. She is concerned about the crime, etc. that development will bring. In answer to a question by Vice Chair Rennels, Ms. Knapp said the retail stores will close at 10:00 p.m. The stores would have to obtain a special use permit in order to stay open later than 10:00 p.m. Ms. Knapp said the berm cannot be higher than four (4) feet and be maintainable in the area questioned. She said there is an option to place a fence in that area and reduce the landscaping. Ms. Knapp said the fifteen trees being placed in the parking lot of Lot 2 will not cover what the applicant is requesting. On the overall parcel of land, the amount of landscaping is way over the code. If each lot is broken out individually, the code requires setbacks; you cannot do that and provide a property line through the middle of a drive aisle. To help break up the openness of the parking lot the fifteen (15) additional trees are requested by staff. Commissioner Rhoades asked if staff could work with the residents to settle the issue of a fence vs. the trees. Ms. Knapp said the truck docks are built so the trucks are not visible when they are backed into the wall. What you see is the brick wall, if you can see it at all. Commissioner Elliott asked how far the 7-story hotel is from the homes. Ms. Knapp answered it is eight hundred (800) feet or more, and added the 5-story hotel did receive a height variance. Engineer Pawlowicz said almost the whole property slopes to the south toward Lily Cache Creek. The homeowners' property drains toward the detention at Stonegate Village. He said about six (6) acres of the area drains into the homeowners property. Ms. Charon returned and said even though the land slopes down, it slopes to the north so the buildings already under construction at Falconridge also slope down. Even though that hotel is only going to be five (5) stories, it slopes down a little bit less than the proposed seven (7) story hotel. It will still be taller by two (2) stories, even though it slopes down. Even though that is only thirty (30) feet, that is a lot when you look out your back window. She said she is not quite sure about the option between the berm and a fence, but is open to working with the builder. Another option is to eliminate the three buildings or move the buildings north, because there is more parking than 11

2.7.07

required, or make one of the buildings smaller and put more parking in that space. She understands building size/users as she is in construction. Commissioner Elliott asked if the hotel can be seen from the homes. Ms. Westley displayed a perspective and said it does not show from the homes, but it gives an idea and feel for the height of the hotel, and a sight line study has not been done to confirm visibility from the homes. Ms. Charon said she can see Meijer and the parking lot lights from her back yard. Commissioner Elliott said the site will change because there will be trees and buildings in between. Ms. Westley said Forest City would be happy to work with the residents to the south and come up with a solution for the berm, whether it be landscaping or a fence. At this time, they do not know the users so she can't speak to moving buildings around at this point. Commissioner Campos asked about public transportation and pedestrian/bicycle access. Ms. Westley said within the Promenade there are sidewalks, bicycle paths, and bike racks. There is a bus stop on Boughton Road. One of the core values of Forest City is to promote sustainable development. The Phase 2 piece of the Promenade will be LEED certified. They will implement as many sustainable practices as they can for the Phase 4 piece. Ms. Quintanar returned and asked in what way the neighbors are working with the developers on the berm and can they also work with issues such as pedestrian access, bicycle paths, and what format will this take place. Director Kowalczyk said the testimony has been that there is an internal bike path system. Ms. Quintanar said that was only in Phase 2. Director Kowalczyk pointed out it was in the staff report for Phase 4. Ms. Quintanar said she wanted to know if residents can be included in discussions not just limited to the berm, and in what format will it take place. Director Kowalczyk asked what other issues? Ms. Quintanar answered the other things she talked about. Director Kowalczyk said what her husband's letter is dealing with is basically green buildings, and they are recognized by the International Building Code, but our building codes are performance based which means that whatever a developer is willing to do and bring in, we have to review that off of those codes. We cannot dictate in any way, shape or form what kind of performance code they are going to elect to have for their building designs. We can encourage them to do sustainable type buildings and building materials which is embodied in the International Code but we cannot require them to do that. Ms. Quintanar said the other issues that other residents have brought up such as the distance of the buildings from the houses, and the fence and the berm, how will that take place. Director Kowalczyk answered there are certain things the Village can compel the developer to do and certain things we cannot. They will start with the berm and landscaping. It is not design by committee. They have a right to develop their property according to our codes, and it is all driven by market. Ms. Quintanar asked again in what format? Director Kowalczyk said typically the Village likes to have a representative sample of the residents. Residents need to come into the room with a consensus of what they are looking for, and then it will be discussed. It could be a situation where they walk the site.

12

2.7.07

Vice Chair Rennels asked if everyone who signed in will be notified of a meeting. Director Kowalczyk answered that typically the residents are contacted and asked who wants to participate. They like to keep it to a manageable group. If the residents come to a consensus, or close to a consensus, to give direction, the Village and Developer meets with them. Pat Garnier-Davis, 346 Homewood Drive, sworn. She said there is not only a slope of the land to the north but a significant slope to the south towards the fence line separating the property on Homewood Drive from the rest of the development. What will be done about runoff along that fence area? The residents don't want all that water coming toward their yards, and the service drive is very close to their property fences as well as the trash compacters and areas. She is concerned about effect on property values with property to the north being filled with huge concrete buildings. She said it would be good if they could have additional setbacks of the buildings from their fenced areas. Director Kowalczyk said it was stated earlier that most of the property drains to the north, that approximately six (6) acres drains to the southeast. They will install retention ponds on that area to contain the runoff before it reaches any homes, so there will not be runoff in that area. Ms. Garnier-Davis said perhaps she misunderstood but they have the detention ponds to the east. Director Kowalczyk pointed out the site plan is a good illustration--everything in blue is detention, plus the green area at the bottom is wetlands. Any drainage goes into the wetlands and stays there. Director Kowalczyk said our codes require anything built is not allowed to send water to the adjoining property owners other than any historical water that might be coming to it. Whatever the rains and water that comes onto your property today cannot ever increase. That is code. Engineer Pawlowicz said they already mentioned to the developer they will need a storm sewer on the side of the berm to pick up any water that comes off of the berm or any water from the back yards that is currently flowing off onto their property. As you go east there is a pond, and the ground will slope down and take away any water in that area. Further east there is a wetland which cannot be disturbed. Ms. Garnier-Davis asked what will be done to secure the trash area from rodents, etc. and how the residents are going to be involved in proceeding with the later phases of the engineering design for this facility. She would also like to hear more about the degree of commitment Forest City can provide to setback these large buildings further away from the Homewood Drive property line. Commissioner Rhoades said she did not see a variance request for a rear yard setback reduction for Lot 1, which means the developer is following code and trying to be a good neighbor to work with the residents that live in that area. Commissioner Rhoades said if the project is approved as is, the residents wouldn't have a meeting about engineering or the buildings, where they are located, etc.; the issues residents would be involved in would be the landscaping around the areas where the affected homes are.

13

2.7.07

Motion Quigley, second Wright to close the public hearing. AYES: Commissioners Rashid, Quigley, Rhoades, Elliott, Wright, Campos, Vice Chair Rennels NAYS: None ABSENT: Commissioner Runge, Chairman Cawthon Motion carried, public hearing closed at 10:14 p.m. Motion Quigley, second Rashid to accept the recommendation of Planning staff. AYES: Commissioners Rhoades, Elliott, Wright, Campos, Rashid, Quigley, Vice Chair Rennels NAYS: None ABSENT: Commissioner Runge, Chairman Cawthon Motion carried. NEW BUSINESS FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION--CARLOW CORPORATE CENTER NORTH UNIT 7, 905 CARLOW DRIVE, APPLICANT: NORTHERN BUILDERS, INC., PROJECT 402.07 Planner Matthew Eastman presented the request which, if approved, would subdivide one (1) lot into two (2) lots. The subject parcel is currently zoned I-1 Limited Industrial and comprises approximately twelve and one-half (12.5) acres. The property is currently developed with a 150,200 square foot office/warehouse building. The proposed Plat of Resubdivision would create two (2) lots. Lot 1 would be approximately seven and one-half (7.5) acres. The existing office/warehouse building is located on Lot 1. Lot 2 would be approximately five (5) acres, and is currently vacant. Lot 2 would be created for future office/warehouse use. Access to Lot 1 is provided via two (2) direct entryways from Carlow Drive. Lot 2 will have access from one direct entry from Carlow Drive. Utilities currently on site will remain in place. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of a Final Plat of Subdivision for Carlow Corporate Center North Unit 7 at 905 Carlow Drive subject to the approval of the Directors of Community Development and Public Works and Engineering. DISCUSSION None Motion Rhoades, second Wright to accept the recommendation of Planning staff. AYES: Commissioners Rashid, Quigley, Rhoades, Elliott, Wright, Campos, Vice Chair Rennels NAYS: None ABSENT: Commissioner Runge, Chairman Cawthon Motion carried. OLD BUSINESS None 14

2.7.07

APPROVAL OF PLAN COMMISSION REPORTS Motion Rhoades, second Campos to accept Plan Commission reports: PC 07.02

Approval of a Special Use Permit for a Planned Development with Variances and Final Development Plan--Boughton Ridge Golf Course, Applicant: PHN Architects, Project No. 454.06

Voice Vote: Unanimous. Motion carried. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None CHAIR’S REPORT None COMMISSIONER’S REPORT None PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT None ADJOURNMENT Motion Wright, second Rhoades to adjourn. Voice Vote: Unanimous Motion carried. Vice Chair Mary Rennels adjourned the meeting at 10:18 p.m.

CHAIRMAN

APPROVED

SECRETARY

15

2.7.07