Loading...
09/09/2010DES PLAINES PLAN COMMISSION AUGUST 9, 2010 MINUTES The Des Plaines Plan Commission held its regularly scheduled meeting on Monday, August 9, 2010, at 7:00 P. M., in Room 102, City Council Chambers, of the Des Plaines Civic Center. PLAN COMMISSION PRESENT: Kellerman, Kowalski, Perez ABSENT: Bar, Niemotka Also present was Senior Planner Scott Mangum. Chairman Kowalski called the meeting to order at 7:00 P. M. Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 2 Case #08 -045 -PUD -2550 E. Dempster Request: A two-phase Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) is requested under Section 3.5 of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow for construction of a landscape sales building and warehouse with a second -floor office in Phase I and construction of a "shade building" and expansion of the existing retail store in Phase II. Mr. Mark Lurvey, 35608 Wayfair Trail, Oconomowac, Wisconsin, was sworn in to give testimony in this case. Mr. Lurvey stated he was present to seek final approval for the proposed project. Mr. Lurvey noted Preliminary Approval was received November 16, 2009 and that City Council also, subsequently, granted Preliminary Approval. Referencing the renderings contained in the Commissioners' binders, Mr. Lurvey noted modifications to the building had been made to the building design. Mr. Lurvey stated the proposed building construction is precast concrete siding on a two-story, steel building. Mr. Lurvey added the first floor would be approximately 8,500 square -feet and the second floor office space, approximately 3,500 square -feet. Mr. Lurvey stated that the fence on the north side of the property had been completed, as had the landscaping along the fence line. Mr. Lurvey stated that the pavement in the truck loading area would be completed upon receipt of Final Approval. Mr. Lurvey added that initial completion of the paving would exclude the area in which the building would be constructed and that the additional pavement would be completed after the building was completed. Mr. Lurvey stated he was happy to review the project and answer any questions. Mr. Kellerman inquired as to the meaning of a shade building. Mr. Lurvey stated a shade building is a greenhouse like structure with a roof that has the capability of shading the sides either partially or entirely in order to protect plants from freezing. Mr. Lurvey stated the building would be used primarily for annual and perennials. Mr. Kellerman inquired as to whether the business was solely a wholesale business. Mr. Lurvey stated it is not - that Phase II includes improvements to the existing retail store. Stating he did not feel the design was in keeping with the neighborhood, Mr. Kellerman inquired as to the reasoning behind the barn -like design. Mr. Lurvey stated he was sorry Mr. Kellerman felt that way. Mr. Lurvey stated he felt the barn exterior fits well with the character of the neighborhood as well as suits the nature of his business. Mr. Lurvey stated the existing structure was not characteristic of the area. Mr. Kellerman noted that a high school and strip mall surround Lurvey's. Mr. Lurvey asked if Mr. Kellerman preferred the first building design. Mr. Kellerman stated he did not recall the prior design. Mr. Lurvey added that, although he worked with an architect to improve the building design, he was open to input from the Commission. Mr. Kellerman inquired as to whether the design would be required to be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission. Noting the design had been revised, Mr. Mangum confirmed the Architectural Review Commission would review the new design. Mr. Lurvey stated he felt the prior design was more industrial and warehouse -like. Mr. Lurvey added he preferred the new design. Mr. Perez inquired as to the type of precast finish that would be used on the building front. Mr. Lurvey stated natural stone veneer was proposed at the bottom, with the balance being precast concrete with a pattern to look like natural wood. Mr. Lurvey added that, if the building can be constructed this fall, he is able to incorporate Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 3 the color directly into the precast rather than having to paint it in winter months. Mr. Lurvey stated the rooflines were developed to conceal the mechanical units and sloped for drainage. Mr. Lurvey added that a green roof is proposed on the entrance. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether live plants would be used on the green roof. Mr. Lurvey confirmed live plants would be used and that he is pursing LEED Certification. Mr. Lurvey stated the proposed precast design utilizes a 5" urethane insulation with steel coating on the inside. Mr. Lurvey noted the design is highly energy efficient. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether the intent was for the building to look like an 1850's -1860's barn. Mr. Lurvey stated it was and added that the intent is to incorporate the same scheme into the planned retail improvements. Chairman Kowalski confirmed the facade on the existing retail building would also be changed. Mr. Lurvey confirmed it would and added that the converted house that is currently being utilized would be removed and that it would be replaced with some structure replicating the theme of the new building. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether the setting would be that of an old farm with a central building and a barn. Citing a farm on Lake Street in Glenview, Mr. Lurvey stated that was correct. Mr. Perez inquired as to whether the Glenview farm was a museum. Mr. Lurvey confirmed it is. Mr. Lurvey added that, given the nature of his business, he feels the new design is more inviting than the previously proposed warehouse style building. Chairman Kowalski called for questions of Mr. Lurvey by members of the Commission. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether any change in operation is proposed. Mr. Lurvey stated no change in operation is proposed. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether the hours of operation would change. Mr. Lurvey stated there would be no change in the hours of operation. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether Mr. Lurvey had reviewed the Staff Report. Mr. Lurvey stated he had. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether the Conditions contained in the Staff Report posed any problem. Mr. Lurvey stated none did - that he was willing to comply with all [the Conditions]. Chairman Kowalski called for additional questions of Mr. Lurvey by members of the Commission. None were raised. Chairman Kowalski called for the Staff Report to be read by Mr. Mangum. Issue: A two-phase Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) is requested under Section 3.5 of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow for construction of a landscape sales building and warehouse with a second -floor office in phase 1, and construction of a "shade building" and expansion of the existing retail store in phase 2. Analysis: Final Planned Unit Development Report Owners: Mark D. Lurvey & Eileen M Lurvey Joint Revocable Trust Gregory J Lurvey and Debra L Lurvey Joint Revocable Trust W 3411 State Road 59 Whitewater, WI 53190 Petitioner: American Green, Inc. DBA Landscape Supply and Garden Center Mark Lurvey Case Number: 08 -045 -PUD Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 4 Real Estate Index 09-15-306-013, 09-15-306-014, 09-15-306-015, 09-15-306-016, 09-15- 306-017, Numbers 09-15-306-018, 09-15-306-019, 09-15-306-037, 09-15-306-039, 09-15- 306-040, 09-15-306-043, 09-15-306-044, 09-15-306-045, 09-15-306-049, 09-15- 306-052, 09-15-306-053, 09-15-306-054, 09-15-306-056, 09-15-306-057 Project Description Construction Schedule Modifications from Preliminary PUD/Plat This site currently holds a combination retail and wholesale goods establishment that sells landscaping material. Both are permitted in the C-3, General Commercial zoning district, the former by -right and the latter by securing a conditional use permit. The petitioner/owner is proposing a two-phase expansion of the landscape supply/garden center on this 9.4 -acre site. The first phase consists of the construction of a wholesale sales center to replace the smaller existing wholesale sales center. The two-story structure would have a total floor area of approximately 11,360 square feet. It would hold products for sale to landscape contractors, a sales office, a warehouse on the first floor, and an office for company staff on the second floor. Phase Two of the PUD, to begin in late 2012, would involve expanding the existing retail shop located just west of the Wendy's Restaurant, and the construction of a "shade building" to the west of the existing retail center. Also part of the PUD is the existing office building (with the address of 2474) located on Dempster Street, west of the current retail store which would not change. The petitioner/developer has already erected a 10 -foot high screening fence on the north property line along Prairie Ave. This fall he plans to demolish the existing warehouse and construct its replacement as part of the Phase I. Phase II would start in Fall 2012 and be finished by the Spring 2013. 10' -high privacy fence installed along North property line. Landscaping installed along North property line (see Phase I post PUD Approval Landscape Plan, Tab 7 of Final PUD Binder). Depressed Outdoor Truck Dock removed from Floor Plans of Warehouse/Wholesale Sales Building. Total Building Warehouse/Wholesale Sales Building square footage increase from 8,300 to 11,360. Warehouse/Wholesale Sales Building footprint reduced from 83' by 100' to 84' by 96'. Exterior Elevation Changes to Warehouse/Wholesale Sales Building. Phase I development schedule completion moved from March 2010 to March 2011. Phase I development schedule completion moved from March 2012 to March 2013. Existing Zoning C-3, General Commercial Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 5 Existing Land Use Retail and Wholesale Nursery This site currently holds a combination retail and wholesale goods establishment that sells landscaping material. Both are permitted in the C-3, General Commercial zoning district, the former by -right, and the latter by securing a conditional use permit. Surrounding Zoning North: R-1, Single -Family Residential South: City of Park Ridge (Residential) East: City of Park Ridge (Residential/Commercial) West: C-3, General Commercial Surrounding Land Use North: Single-family Residences South: City of Park Ridge (Residential) East: City of Park Ridge (Residential/Commercial) West: Commercial (Office and Retail) Street Classification Dempster Street forms the south property line, it is an east -west, four -lane major arterial (100 -foot wide right-of-way) under the jurisdiction of IDOT; Potter Road forms the east property line, it is a north -south, two-lane arterial (77 -foot wide right-of-way) under the jurisdiction of the Cook County Highway Department. Prairie Avenue forms the north property line; it is a two-lane local street with a 66 -foot wide right-of-way under the jurisdiction of the City of Des Plaines. Comprehensive Plan Community Commercial is the recommended use for this property. PUD Findings As required, the proposed development is reviewed below in terms of the findings contained in Section 3.5- 5 of the Zoning Ordinance: A. The extent to which the Proposed Plan is or is not consistent with the stated purpose of the PUD regulations in Section 3.5-1: Comment: The proposed plan is consistent with the stated purpose of Section 3.5-1 of the Zoning Ordinance in that it would comply with Section 3.5-1-A which states: A maximum choice in the types of environment available to the public by allowing a development that would not be possible under the strict application of the other sections of the (Zoning) Ordinance. B. The extent to which the proposed plan meets the prerequisites and standards of the planned unit development regulations: Comment: The proposed Planned Unit Development meets all PUD requirements contained in Section 3.5-2 of the Zoning Ordinance as it is located in a zoning district that permits PUDs, it meets the minimum size standard of two acres and is under single ownership or unified control. C. The extent to which the proposed plan departs from the applicable zoning and subdivision regulations otherwise applicable to the subject property, including, but not limited to the density, dimension, area, bulk, and use and the reasons why such departures are or are not deemed to be in the public interest: Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 6 Comment: The proposed plan has no departures from zoning or subdivision regulations that would be considered negative; in fact, the proposed buildings in Phase I and II meet or exceed the following applicable zoning regulations: • Minimum distance between buildings (15 -feet is required, approximately 200- feet is provided); • Parking requirements (143 off-street parking spaces are required (one space per 300 square feet) and 170 off-street spaces are provided); • Building height of the proposed Landscape Supply Building and others (Up to 45 -feet is allowed and 32 -feet is proposed); and • Front, side and rear yard setbacks (assuming the proposed concrete storage bins located along Prairie Avenue are temporary, if not, a variance/exception is required). D. The extent to which the physical design of the proposed development does or does not make adequate provision for public services, provide adequate control of vehicular traffic, provide for, protect open space, and further the amenities of light and air, recreation and visual enjoyment: Comment: The petitioner has submitted a professional traffic study, which is required for all PVDs. Metro Transportation Group, Inc performed the study. In the firm's summary of conclusions, (page 12 of the synopsis) it states that the proposed construction will not affect the property in a negative manner, even though there will be a slight increase in commercial traffic. The City of Des Plaines Engineering Department has reviewed the traffic study and it concurs with the Metro Transportation's conclusions. However, the Department of Community Development has also reviewed the traffic study and has concerns about the truck traffic generated by landscape contractors. Based on complaints from the neighbors to the north of the site, trucks traveling to Lurvey's queue on Potter Road causing congestion on that street. For the preliminary site and engineering and utility plans, it appears that the necessary infrastructure including storm and sanitary sewers and water main will be provided by the petitioner/owner. The petitioner has submitted a revised site plan showing a paved asphalt road to replace most of the existing dirt road that the trucks picking up landscape supplies at the proposed landscape supply building use. E. The extent to which the relationship and compatibility of the proposed development is beneficial or adverse to adjacent properties and neighborhood: Comment: The proposed development is located at a heavily traveled intersection, Dempster Street & Potter Road, which has a great deal of adjacent commercial business such as office buildings, restaurants, strip shopping centers and medical facilities. The landscape business, while not an ideal fit, does in fact blend with the surroundings because of its long tenure at this location. Before this property became a landscape supply and garden center in 1987, it was a farm stand, so this property has a history of agricultural uses. The landscape supply part of the business caters to landscape contractors that arrive in heavy trucks to pick up supplies. The peak period for such traffic is the warm weather months. The large trucks generate a great deal of dust, which drifts northward into the existing single-family neighborhood. The petitioner has built a 10 -foot fence to remedy this problem. Another step the petitioner has taken is to submit a plan to pave the drive aisles with asphalt for the heavy trucks. If the proposed two-phase PUD was built, the amount of truck traffic on Potter Road and other arterials in the area may increase slightly; however, the petitioner's professional traffic study found that it would not overburden the surrounding roadway system. Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 7 The initial design of the proposed landscape supply building has been reviewed by the City of Des Plaines Architectural Review Commission to ensure compatibility with adjacent properties and it has received preliminary approval of the exterior design. While the bulk and mass of the proposed building has not changed, the revised design will need to be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission. The applicant believes the revised design is an aesthetic improvement. F. The extent to which the proposed plan is not desirable to physical development, tax base and economic well-being of the entire community: Comment: The proposed plan includes replacing a smaller obsolete outmoded warehouse. The proposed construction of the new warehouse/sales building may increase the assessed valuation of the property, which will result in an increase in tax revenues for the City of Des Plaines and enhancement of the economic well being of the municipality. Once the proposed landscape sales center and retail building expansions are complete, there may be greater demands on city streets and services, plus other public facilities. Due to the small scale of the proposed construction, one -and -two-story buildings with moderately sized footprints, it is assumed that the City will handle the expansion without building new public facilities or services. G. The extent to which the proposed plan is in conformity with the recommendations of the 2007 Comprehensive Plan: Comment: The proposed commercial Planned Unit Development conforms to the land use recommended in the 2007 Comprehensive Plan in that community commercial is the recommended land use. According to the Plan, community commercial includes neighborhood and community-based retail goods and services located at major intersections in commercial districts. These commercial areas serve surrounding neighborhood residents as well as consumers from outside the city. PUD Issues/Considerations: 1. While the petitioner's traffic study addresses peak vehicular traffic times, a concern has been raised by neighbors regarding truck queuing in the early morning hours on Potter Road. During the construction of Potter Road, Dempster Street has accommodated additional truck access. With proper management of existing access points truck queuing can be limited and excessive on -street queuing address by police traffic enforcement. Staff Recomm endations: • The Department of Community and Economic Development recommends approval of the Final Planned Unit Development, and approval of the Final Plat, subject to compliance with the conditions of approval listed below. • The Public Works and Engineering Department recommends approval of the Final PUD. The Engineering Division has reviewed the Final Plat of Subdivision, Final Engineering plans and the Traffic Study and is recommending approval subject to conditions #4 and #5, as listed below. • The City of Des Plaines Fire Department recommends approval of the Final PUD, subject to conditions #6, as listed below. Conditions: 1. Vehicular access to the site is limited to the existing three access drives on Dempster Street and the two access drives on Potter Road. Authorized vehicular access locations are shown on the Final Plat and indicated in Note "A". 2. No vehicular access whatsoever is allowed from Prairie Avenue or the loading or unloading of landscaping permitted along the Prairie Avenue frontage. Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 8 3. All utility transmission wires to the proposed landscape supply center and all other new buildings must be located underground. 4. The petitioner must install asphalt paving as shown on the Development Concept Plan, revision date, 01-07-09 (as required by the City of Des Plaines Engineering Department). 5. The petitioner must submit an "as built" to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and Engineering prior to occupancy. 6. The petitioner must install a connection within 75 -feet of hydrant, a minimum 1500 GPM fire flow required (8 -inch main), and a sufficient turn radius for emergency vehicles including a minimum 26 -feet unobstructed access (as required by City of Des Plaines Fire Department). 7. Petitioner shall discontinue stocking mushroom compost in order to eliminate offensive odors. 8. Petitioner shall plant, at its own expense, additional screening on private property north of Prairie Avenue, if approved by the respective property owners. 9. Petitioner shall convert the ten foot sound fence to a solid configuration to improve the sound deflection from the neighboring residences. 10. Petitioner shall install plantings along the sound fence according to a plan approved by the City in order to enhance sound absorption. 11. Petitioner shall restrict the times of receiving boulders that are dumped in the supply yard to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Plan Commission Procedure: The Plan Commission may vote to recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval. Next Sten in PUD Review Process: Once the Plan Commission reviews the Final PUD and makes a recommendation, the City Council would consider the PUD at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting. Chairman Kowalski called for questions or comments by members of the audience, either in favor of or in conjunction to the proposal. Mrs. Weslie Bellini, 2495 Seminary, Des Plaines, Illinois, was sworn into give testimony in this case. Noting it has been two years since their original proposal, Mrs. Bellini stated Lurvey's continues to be a problem in the neighborhood and that she has been arguing its expansion for years. Mrs. Bellini asked what its going to take for Des Plaines to raise the bar for its citizens. Mrs. Bellini stated developers offer Des Plaines residents the minimum necessary - that other communities, such as Mount Prospect, Arlington Heights and Park Ridge, have greater restrictions and that their communities look more attractive. Stating she believes Des Plaines, which is close to the airport and highways, is the foremost northwest suburb in the area. Mrs. Bellini stated the opposition to the Lurvey's proposal is known. Mrs. Bellini inquired as to why neighbors are informed of meetings such as tonight's at the ultimate last minute and why the Staff Report and presentation binder was not provided in advance so that she had an opportunity to rebut their contents. Mrs. Bellini provided members of the Commission a 16 -page document entitled, "Development of Lurvey's Wholesale Expansion" and 22 full-size, color photographs. Referencing the 10 -foot privacy fence and landscaping that Mr. Lurvey stated was completed, Mrs. Bellini inquired as to whether any of the work to date had been inspected. Mrs. Bellini stated that 50 boards are missing from the fence and that it is, in her opinion, a crooked eyesore. Mrs. Bellini stated he maintains her backyard in excellent condition. Mrs. Bellini added the maple trees planted were insufficient to meet the 5 -foot landscape buffer. Mrs. Bellini stated she believes Mr. Lurvey has put forth minimal effort. Mrs. Bellini stated her opinion of the new design is that of Old McDonald's Farm. Mrs. Bellini stated she does not feel the area is rural. Mrs. Bellini stated Des Plaines is a metropolitan area and that more should Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 9 be done to improve the City so that it becomes the metropolitan area she believes it should be. Citing the recent gaming license the City received and the restaurant row plan for Oakton, Mrs. Bellini stated more should be done to bring people to the area year-round instead of seasonally. Stating she has called the EPA and IDOT, Mrs. Bellini noted the traffic report was conducted in 2008, before the CVS had been constructed. Mrs. Bellini noted Ballard and Potter Roads are also under construction. Mrs. Bellini requested a moratorium be issued until the road construction has been completed. Mrs. Bellini stated she has invited each of the Aldermen to her house. Mrs. Bellini noted the dust in the area does not allow the house to be kept clean for any length of time. Mrs. Bellini stated she is unable to open the windows in the summer and that the noise is unbearable. Mrs. Bellini stated she believes Lurvey's current use supercedes that of its zoning. Mrs. Bellini noted that the 7:00 P. M. Noise Ordinance is not enforced. Mrs. Bellini cited tax revenue as the City's motivation for allowing its continuation. Mrs. Bellini suggested the City seek retail establishments with decent buildings and with general appeal. Mrs. Bellini noted Lurvey's facade on Dempster is great but that area around Potter is more like a scene from Iraq. Stating she owns a business in Des Plaines, Mrs. Bellini stated the last thing she would want to do is aggravate her neighbors. Mrs. Bellini stated Mr. Lurvey should be highly motivated to please the neighbors. Mrs. Bellini suggested that the storage bins on the property line be moved. Mrs. Bellini asked why no inspections have been conducted and why no citations have been issued. Mrs. Bellini stated if it were her business, she would be shut down. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to why the City had not responded. Mr. Mangum stated the Building Code Department responds to complaints of the nature described by Mrs. Bellini. Mrs. Bellini concluded Mr. Mangum had never been out to Lurvey's and stated, because Mr. Mangum was not familiar with the history of the matter, it was ludicrous for him to speak. Chairman Kowalski stated Mr. Mangum had replaced former Senior Planner, Patrick Hogensen. Mrs. Bellini stated calls to 311 were not recorded and added she felt it was ridiculous to call 911 because she was suffering from allergies as a result of the activities on the Lurvey's site. Noting Mrs. Bellini had previously spoken before the Plan Commission and also City Council, Chairman Kowalski inquired whether any action had been taken by the City in response to her comments. Mrs. Bellini stated, because Mr. Lurvey states the work has been completed, the City has not had felt their was cause to take further action. Mrs. Bellini added that 5 maple trees and a fence with 50 missing boards cannot be considered complete. Mr. Mangum stated the requirement was that Lurvey's plant trees in planters along the north property line. Lurvey's garden manager, Mr. Dwayne Ulrichss, 1281 S. Wildmeadow, Round Lake, Illinois, was sworn in to give testimony in this case. Mr. Ulrichss stated 19 trees have been planted and that one more is planned. Mr. Ulrichss stated that the 19 trees currently planted are planted approximately 30 -feet apart and are currently 8-10 feet over the fence height and will grow 18-20 feet tall. Mr. Ulrichss stated it is Lurvey's intent to honor the 20 quantity. Mr. Ulrichss stated additional landscaping is planned, including 150 Boston Ivy plants to cover the fence, like at Wrigley Field. Mr. Ulrichss stated the reason board are missing from the 720 -foot fence is because warped boards are being replaced prior to planting the ivy. Stating graffiti had been repaired, Mr. Ulrichss stated most of the fence is in stellar condition. Mrs. Bellini stated the landscaping described by Mr. Ulrichss does not meet the 5 -foot buffer requirement and does not address the storage on the fence line. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to when the photos provided by Mrs. Bellini were taken. Mrs. Bellini stated the photographs were taken in Spring, 2009. Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 10 Mr. Ulrichss noted that it is not possible to make any green improvements on the Potter Road side of the site until the road construction is complete but stated the intent is to make the Potter Road side like Dempster. Mr. Ulrichss acknowledged Potter Road has been a construction zone for two years. Mrs. Bellini inquired as to why the block storage bins have not been moved to the middle of the yard. Mrs. Bellini stated the aesthetics are the biggest issue. Stating she had read her presentation to City Council, Mrs. Bellini stated Lurvey's continues to violate City Ordinances. Mrs. Bellini cited the requirement that accessory structures, which she believes the proposed barn to be, are required to be subordinate in height, area and bulk to that of the principle residence. Mrs. Bellini asked why the larger structure was being allowed. Mrs. Bellini stated she believes it does not belong in the C-3 Zoning District. Mrs. Bellini stated the warehouse use is being used in the wrong manner. Noting the Chalet in Wilmette looks like a park, Mrs. Bellini suggested City Council visit the other active, prolific and beautiful nurseries. Mrs. Bellini expressed concern that Lurvey's business operation devalues her home and that of others in the area. Mrs. Bellini expressed concern over not being able to sell her home. Mrs. Bellini stated her and other homes are on 3/4 acre lots and added she believed that their properties should be designated estate or manor lots. Mrs. Bellini asked the Commission to consider the future of the neighborhood and cautioned the City to avoid becoming a community of homes for sale or in foreclosure. Mrs. Bellini stated she was personally insulted that the City did not the opinion of those directly impacted by the proposal. Mrs. Bellini asked why the voters and taxpayers did not count. Mrs. Lurvey cited the tax revenue generated by Lurvey's. Mrs. Bellini stated she was born and raised in Des Plaines and has lived in her home for 22 years. Mrs. Bellini added she has no plan to leave unless she is forced out. Mrs. Bellini reiterated her request for a moratorium on the proposed Planned Unit Development until road construction is completed. Mrs. Bellini requested new EPA and IDOT reports. Mrs. Bellini stated Lurvey's has not been a good neighbor. Mr. Ulrichss acknowledged the dust generated by the gravel. Mr. Ulrichs noted the existing building is 20 - feet by 30 -feet. Mr. Ulrichs stated five different landscape architects expressed excitement over the barn - like design. Mr. Ulrichs noted Lurvey's roots are in farming and that the building design represents a state - of -the art design that includes a green roof and R27 insulation value in addition to possible LEED Certification. Mr. Ulrichs compared the proposed building and its amenities to those being built in Chicago and other communities. Mr. Ulrichs cited Lurvey's as a destination. Mr. Ulrichss stated he understood the issues brought forth by Mrs. Bellini and stated the premise of the proposal is to improve those conditions. Mr. Ulrichss noted it is difficult to distinguish the dust and noise generated by the Potter Road construction from dust and noise generated by Lurvey's operation. Mr. Ulrichss noted that area of Des Plaines is a rural area with larger residential lots and that the new building would serve to increase property value in the area. Mr. Ulrichss stated he did not believe area properties would be similarly served if the warehouse design were constructed. Mr. Ulrichss stated he had not received one call or complaint from the City this year. Mr. Ulrichss cited that they have eliminated trucks on site in the evenings and that water is used to mitigate the dust. Mr. Perez inquired as to what type of material is kept close to the fence. Mr. Ulrichss stated temporary bins containing the least loaded gravel, like baseball field mix, is stored in the bins. Mr. Ulrichss stated that commonly sold materials, like soil and mulch, have been moved south. Mr. Ulrichss added that they have ceased the sale of mushroom compost because of its odor. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether the photograph shows Unilock pavers against the fence. Mr. Ulrichss stated it does and that the pavers were Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 11 placed intentionally to provide 20-25 feet more buffer. Mr. Perez stated he believes the storage is too close to the property lines. Mr. Perez expressed concern that the dump trucks delivering the material generate noise and dust. Mr. Perez asked that the neighbors be given more consideration and suggested the material be moved to the middle of the property. Stating he has friends who live in Round Lake, Mr. Perez noted it is a community with a larger number of new homes. Mr. Ulrichss restated he understood Mrs. Bellini's point and reiterated the reasons for the proposed paving, planting of trees and ivy planned for the fence is to address those issues. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether the dust resulting from Lurvey's operation is a result of having an unpaved lot. Mr. Ulrichss confirmed it is because trucks drive over the gravel. Mr. Perez confirmed the dust was created by the gravel lot. Mr. Ulrichss confirmed that was correct. Mr. Ulrichss added the concrete and pavement would allow the dust to be contained and that is what they wish to do. Mr. Ulrichss stated the concept of the green roof and the landscaping around the building would not be as viable if the gravel and stone were not replaced with pavement. Mr. Ulrichss stated it was not Lurvey's wish to look like a construction zone but that further approval is needed in order to move forward. Mr. Perez inquired as to when the Dempster pictures had been taken. Mrs. Bellini stated the photographs had been taken in March, 2009. Chairman Kowalski asked if Lurvey's sweeps the streets. Mr. Ulrichss stated Lurvey's wants a sweeper of their own, but does not have one. Mr. Ulrichss added that Lurvey's has hired companies to sweep on Dempster in the past, but that it was not possible to sweep Potter because of the construction. Mr. Ulrichss stated it is their preference to have a safe and organized environment. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether the dirt on the street was a result of the gravel. Mr. Ulrichss confirmed it is and that the dirt could be eliminated by completing the paving. Mr. Kellerman noted paving would not quell the noise. Mr. Ulrichss restated he has moved the least handled items to that wall but would move them again if needed. Mr. Ulrichss stated he wanted to address the neighbors concerns. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to what type of materials are dumped against the fence. Mr. Joseph Bellini, 2495 Seminary, Des Plaines, Illinois, was sworn in to give testimony in this case. Mr. Bellini stated boulders are dumped against the fence. Chairman Kowalski noted Lurvey's was required to, and has, restricted the times of delivery. Mr. Bellini expressed concern that dropping boulders on asphalt would cause destruction. Mr. Bellini stated he has called the City more than 50 times to no avail. Mr. Bellini stated an inspector named Tina is sent out but does not stay on site and that no further action is taken if she does not hear or see anything at the time she is there. Mr. Ulrichss stated concrete will not break if boulders are dropped on it. Mr. Ulrichss noted that it is not just the loading area, but also the roadways, where paving is proposed. Referencing Tab #7 in the binder provided to Commissioners, Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether the site plan illustration showed trees planted on Lurvey's side of the property line. Mr. Ulrichss noted the fence was required first. Mr. Ulrichss added that the 2 -foot setback did not allow enough space to plant on Prairie but reiterated the Maple trees planted grow tall and fast and would likely double in size in 5 years. Chairman Kowalski confirmed the trees were planted on the inside of the fence. Mr. Ulrichss confirmed that was correct. Mr. Ulrichss reiterated the Boston Ivy is also fast growing and that the fence would be completely concealed in two years. Chairman Kowalski confirmed the ivy was being planted over the entire length of the fence. Mr. Ulrichss confirmed that was correct. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to the area on the far west. Noting the area was in a floodway, Mr. Ulrichss stated planting was not permitted in that area because of the [water] detention basin. Mr. Ulrichss stated that was the reason more landscaping was planted to the east. Mr. Ulrichss added that 10-15 trees were removed when the City dredged the creek. Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 12 Mr. Ulrichss stated he would like to plant in the neighbors' yards, but that the neighbors won't allow them to do so. Mr. Ulrichss noted one of the neighbors cuts anything that is planted. Chairman Kowalski called for additional questions or comments by members of the audience, either in favor of or in objection to the proposal. Mr. Bellini inquired as to the height of the proposed building. Mr. Mangum stated the proposed building is 32 -feet high. Mr. Bellini inquired as to whether that was equivalent of a three-story building. Chairman Kowalski stated a three-story building would be approximately 45 -feet tall. Mr. Mangum noted that 45 - foot height is permitted in the C-3 Zoning District. Mrs. Bellini inquired as to the height of the warehouse. Mr. Mangum stated the height of the warehouse is also 32 -feet. Chairman Kowalski stated he worked for IDOT for 28 years, 25 of which were spent in charge of the Bureau of Traffic and that, subsequently, four more years were spent as Superintendent of the Cook County Highway Department. Referencing his 25 years experience with Dempster and Potter, Chairman Kowalski stated he reviewed the work of Metro Transportation Group and found their work to meet all acceptable standards. Chairman Kowalski concluded traffic was not a justified argument - that the proposal would not result in any change in traffic conditions. Chairman Kowalski stated his expert opinion that the roads could handle the traffic. Chairman Kowalski added that if he were the hired professional, his opinion would be the same as that of Metro Transportation Group. Chairman Kowalski called for additional questions or comments by members of the Board. None were raised. Chairman Kowalski confirmed Mr. Lurvey was aware of all the Conditions contained in the Staff Report. Mr. Lurvey stated he is. Referencing Condition #8, requiring the petitioner to plant on private property at its own expense, Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether Lurvey's had contacted the neighbors involved. Mr. Ulrichss stated he had and that they do not want him to plant on their property. Mrs. Bellini stated she believes it is the City's property or an easement. Chairman Kowalski noted the Condition specifically references private, not City, property. Mr. Bellini stated it must be a mistake - that there is 50 - feet before their property begins. Mr. Bellini stated his property is well -planted and did not wish to have Lurvey's plant on his property. Mr. Ulrichss stated another neighbor, Mr. Tom Fenton, also does not wish to allow them to plant. Chairman Kowalski confirmed the 10 -foot fence had been converted to a solid configuration. Noting the previous fence was board -on -board style, Mr. Mangum confirmed the applicant had fulfilled that requirement. A motion was made by Kowalski to recommend Final Approval of a two-phase Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow for construction of a landscape sales building and warehouse with a second -floor office in Phase I and construction of a "shade building" and expansion of the existing retail store in Phase II, subject to the Conditions contained in the Staff Report. MOTION FAILED for lack of a second. Citing the neighbors' opposition, Mr. Kellerman stated he could not go along with the proposal. Mr. Kellerman added he did not feel the barn design was appropriate for Des Plaines. Mr. Kellerman stated he has been a Lurvey's customer or many years but that, in this instance, he cannot make revenue a consideration. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether the Commission wished to make a recommendation to City Council. Mr. Perez stated he did not believe the wall system or dump truck activity should be taking place near the fence. Mr. Perez stated he was inclined to agree to wait until the Potter Road construction was completed. Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 13 Chairman Kowalski asked what will change when Potter Road is complete. Mr. Perez stated it might be easier to identify the dust and noise that is generated by Lurvey's operation. Chairman Kowalski noted, that without the ability to pave the yard, no change will result in the dust and noise generated by Lurvey's. Ms. Greta Ranum, 2404 Seminary, Des Plaines, Illinois, was sworn in to give testimony in this case. Ms. Ranum stated she agreed with the idea to wait so that the dust that envelops the neighborhood could be proven. Chairman Kowalski reiterated the dust would not be eliminated unless the yard is paved. Ms. Ranum stated she did not feel paving would make any difference. Chairman Kowalski explained the dust results from the unpaved yard. Ms. Ranum stated the gravel has always been there. Chairman Kowalski tried to explain it is the gravel that creates the dust. Ms. Ranum invited members of the Commission to come out and look for themselves. Mr. Ulrichss stated he welcomes anyone to come out and see the changes that have been made. Mr. Ulrichss reiterated further improvement cannot be made without the ability to move forward with the proj ect. Mr. Bellini cited the acquisition of 6 acres and the expansion of the business as the problem. Mr. Bellini stated the prior operations included the sale of flowers and bushes, some dirt and mulch. Mr. Bellini stated the current operation includes pavers, rock and heavy machinery. Mr. Bellini stated the City has allowed Lurvey's to exceed the scope of its operation. Chairman Kowalski noted that this issue had been discussed at great length at a prior City Council Hearing and it is the opinion of the City's legal staff is that Lurvey's is operating within the zoning on its property. Mr. Lurvey stated, as a result of that discussion, the City conducted its own noise and dust study and provided copies of the study to Commissioners. Mr. Lurvey stated the stated the study was conducted after the first Plan Commission and City Council Hearings. Mr. Lurvey added the study speaks for itself - finding that no excessive noise existed at the property line. Mr. Bellini stated he cannot take a picture of noise. Mr. Lurvey stated he is aware of the neighbors' concerns and that he is not insensitive to them. Mr. Lurvey stated the proposal will improve Lurvey's operations as well as their impact on the neighborhood. Mr. Lurvey stated he is not sure there is anything he can do to completely satisfy the neighbors. Mr. Lurvey stated he believes that some would only be satisfied if Lurvey's were to go away. Mr. Lurvey stated it is his intention to stay and operate his business and will continue to do so. Mr. Lurvey added he would like to make further improvements to the property but cannot move forward without approval. Noting it is the only reasonable course available, Mr. Lurvey asked the Commission to reconsider. Chairman Kowalski stated his appreciation of Mr. Lurvey's comments. Chairman Kowalski indicated the Plan Commission is citizens' advisory group that makes recommendations to City Council. Chairman Kowalski stated, as such, Plan Commission approval is not necessary - that it is City Council approval that is needed. Chairman Kowalski stated his understanding that Mr. Lurvey would like the approval of the Plan Commission, but cited a case that the Plan Commission had not recommended on two occasions but that had been approved by City Council. Chairman Kowalski stated lack of Plan Commission approval did not preclude Mr. Lurvey from seeking approval directly from City Council. Mr. Mangum confirmed the applicant is permitted to go before City Council without a recommendation from the Plan Commission. Chairman Kowalski stated the minutes of the Plan Commission Hearing are made available to the City Council but that without a unanimous decision either way, the Commission was unable to make a recommendation to City Council. Chairman Kowalski confirmed that was acceptable to the members of the Commission. Messrs. Kellerman and Perez stated it was. Chairman Kowalski called for additional questions or comments by members of the audience. Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 14 Mrs. Bellini stated she understood Mr. Lurvey's problems and the fact he was trying to run a business but stated she would like him to be more sensitive to their concerns. Mrs. Bellini noted the neighbors never received a letter from Mr. Lurvey inviting them to sit down and discuss the unresolved issues, which is something to which the neighbors would be amenable. Mrs. Bellini reiterated that neighbor input had not been sought, there has been no follow-up by the City and that no checks and balances exist. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to what follow-up was expected. Mrs. Bellini stated follow-up on the fence that had been installed. Mrs. Bellini added she does not feel she has any assurances or recourse once the dye is cast. Chairman Kowalski inquired as to whether Mrs. Bellini has been in contact with the City. Mrs. Bellini stated she has. Chairman Kowalski asked to whom she had spoken. Mrs. Bellini stated persons in the Building and Police Departments. Mrs. Bellini added, through FOIA, she requested a summary of complaint calls that had been made but was told that complaint calls are not recorded. Mr. Ulrichss stated he was not aware of any calls or complaints and that he had not been contacted by the City. Mrs. Bellini stated there was no reason to call to complain when nothing is done. Chairman Kowalski asked to whom in the Building Departments Mrs. Bellini had spoken. Mrs. Bellini stated she has spoken with Tina, who has also been sent out as a result of her calls. Chairman Kowalski asked what Tina's findings have been. Mrs. Bellini stated she has not identified any noise or dust at the time of her visits. Mrs. Bellini stated it is difficult to witness unless one is there at the time it occurs. Chairman Kowalski asked why those discussions and visits were not found to be satisfactory follow-up. Mrs. Bellini stated she has called police when noise occurs between 2:00 and 4:00 A. M. Chairman Kowalski asked what happens when the police are called. Mrs. Bellini stated the police talk to the driver and the driver leaves. Chairman Kowalski noted the police do not typically follow-up on 911 calls. Mr. Bellini stated 911 must be called to have the call recorded. Mr. Perez asked whether or not the Bellinis were able to obtain a statement of their outgoing phone calls. Mrs. Bellini stated calls are also made by others. Mrs. Bellini reiterated her concerns. Chairman Kowalski stated his understanding. Mr. Perez asked how many homes were affected. Mrs. Bellini estimated 20 houses and an apartment building. Mr. Perez asked how many properties are adjacent to the fence. Mrs. Bellini estimated 10 on Prairie and stated the homes across the street were equally affected. Mrs. Ranum stated it is a small, beautiful neighborhood. Mr. Ulrichss thanked the Commissioners for their time and stated he did not wish to take more. Noting he previously received many calls and estimating the last call received was approximately a year ago, Mr. Ulrichss reiterated he has not received any calls from the neighbors recently. Mr. Ulrichss stated he has not received any complaints from the City and restated that there have been no overnight trucks this year. Mrs. Bellini asked what prevents them from starting again. Mr. Ulrichss stated there is an expectation that he is to comply with the agreed resolutions to complaints. Mr. Ulrichss stated there will not be any trucks over night nor would the fence be torn down in the future. Mr. Ulrichss reiterated change cannot occur without approval. Chairman Kowalski thanked Mr. Ulrichss for his comments. Chairman Kowalski stated it is difficult to make future assurances, but that it appears that Lurvey's has prohibited unloading this year and that the neighbors have acknowledged that. A motion was made by Kellerman, seconded by Perez, to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 8:14 P. M. The next meeting of the Des Plaines Plan Commission is Monday, August 30, 2010. Sincerely, Case #08 -045 -PUD - 2550 E. Dempster August 9, 2010 Page 15 Carl Kowalski, Chairman Des Plaines Plan Commission Cc: City Officials Alderm en Plan Commission Petitioner(s)