VILLAGE OF BARRINGTON HILLS

PLAN COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING

APRIL 4, 2007

 

 

The special meeting of the Village of Barrington Hills Plan Commission was called to order at 7:38 p.m. by Chairman Bosworth. A regular meeting on April 2, 2007 was canceled.

 

Commission Members Present: Kenneth Bosworth, Chairman

                                                            Peter Grande

                                                            Lou Anne Majewski

                                                            Joseph Messer

                                                            James O’Donnell

                                                            Michael Schmechtig

                                                            David M. Stieper

 

                                      Absent:           Patrick Hennelly

                                                            Thomas Roeser

 

The Attendance Sheet is attached and made part of these Minutes.

 

 

PREVIOUS MINUTES:  Commissioner Majewski made the motion, seconded by Commissioner Schmechtig, to approve the December 4, 2006 Minutes as presented.  Motion carried unanimously by voice vote. (Note:  January, February and March, 2007 Plan Commission meetings were cancelled.)

 

 

FLINT CREEK RESERVE COMMERCIAL LOT 5 (Wamberg) – PRELIMINARY PLAN:  Robert Best, attorney for the Wamberg family, appeared before the Commission regarding Lot 5, the commercial 11.25 acre parcel which is a part of the seventy acre parcel owned by the Wamberg family.  He attested to the fact that all required notifications had been made to adjacent property owners, giving Robert Kosin the signed receipts. 

 

The Wamberg property originally consisted of approximately seventy acres of land that made up the Uarco property, and was located in both Barrington and Barrington Hills.  Three years ago, Barrington and Barrington Hills completed an exchange of land for a realignment of municipal boundaries.  As a result of the exchange, all of the property along Old Hart Road which would more properly be used for residential purposes would remain in Barrington Hills, ultimately four 5-acre lots. 

 

The remaining property would consist of three sites, one approximately 18 acres in Barrington along Lake Cook Road and the second consisting of 11.25 acres to be located in Barrington Hills along New Heart Road.  The third site, being a major portion of Flint Creek, was placed in a 13 acre conservancy area.

 

The original development plans were for the southern commercial piece in Barrington to be developed first and then the commercial piece to the northeast located in Barrington Hills would follow, as the market dictates.  A joint venture agreement has been created with Great Lakes Principals for the development of both commercial sites.  An application has been submitted to the Plan Commission of Barrington Hills to first begin the development of the northeast 11.25 acre site in Barrington Hills (Lot 5).  Great Lakes Principals is currently proposing to build 14 one-story prairie style office buildings on that site.

 

Timothy Barrett from Great Lakes Principals previously appeared before the Commission in August 2006 with a presentation of the layout and types of proposed office buildings on Lot 5 in Barrington Hills.  He was before the Commission at this meeting pointing out some changes made since that original presentation; namely, access to the site,  parking ratios, impact on traffic, and a 50/50 ratio of improvements versus open space.

 

·        The applicant’s August 2006 proposal contained two points of access to this lot, located on the northeast and southeast side.  Their current proposal has eliminated the northeast access.   If a signalized access was constructed on the northeast lot line of Lot 5, it would require an elimination of the existing access further north serving the Hamilton Partners building (aka Pepper and G. E. Capital). The applicant stated that this proposal was unacceptable to them.  Also, the signalization for the former proposal would require coordination with the existing signals at Northwest Highway and Lake Cook Road, which would be at significant cost to the applicant.  The current proposal which only includes a southeast access would not require a signal at that location, confirmed by Lake County Department of Transportation (LDOT).  The Village of Barrington submitted a letter dated April 4th to the Director of Administration expressing safety concerns that may result from the proposed change of access which no longer would require signalization.  The new proposal will have right and left hand turning lanes.

 

·         The applicant’s revised plan would reduce the parking ratios.  The original parking ratio was 4.5 per 1,000 square feet of building space; the new proposal is in a range from 3.5 to 3.7 per 1,000.  This is less than the 4.0 per 1,000 which the Village’s current zoning allows; however, the Plan Commission has the authority to grant a variance to this parking ratio requirement.  The applicant’s traffic consultant, David Miller from Metro Transportation Group, believed that the proposed reduction was warranted based on his experience and a study by the Northwestern Institute of Traffic Engineers.

 

·        The proposed development would create 100 two-way morning trips and 175 two-way evening trips.  Of this, 45% would come from the north and 55% from the south.  In response to comments by the Village Engineer for Barrington Hills, the traffic consultant David Miller used LDOT’s traffic statistics in the area to account for regional growth.  Mr. Miller said assuming a 2% traffic growth factor a year he would predict a 4% increase in traffic from the north and 5% from the south.  A January 17th correspondence from LDOT indicates that trip increase is agreeable to them.  LDOT is not requiring any further analysis at this time.

 

·        There was a discussion on how to interpret components of the 50% open space requirement per the 2004 Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA).  The discussion focused on if any portions around the detention basins could be included in the open space calculations.   The Village of Barrington was measuring open space from the highest level of detention while the applicant was measuring the average detention level.  The applicant agreed to Barrington’s method of calculation and may have to make additional adjustments to meet the 50% requirement.

 

In his presentation Mr. Barrett displayed and explained the four types of buildings proposed on this site, labeled A through D.  All are variations of single story,  prairie style.  The footage ranges from 4,400 to 6,900 square feet. The uses envisioned by the applicant include legal, financial and medical services.  Their market research indicates the occupants will be small to medium size businesses who currently are within two miles of this site.   In response to a question by Commissioner Messer, the applicant said they couldn’t be more specific as to the uses of the buildings because that would be dictated by the market; however, Mr. Best pointed out that the IGA puts restrictions on the types of uses in these buildings.

 

The applicant described the different types of lighting fixtures and how they would be strategically placed to create the most effective yet minimal lighting, with no impact beyond the property line.

 

The applicant described their plan for utilities, which will be phased coordinated with construction.  The first phase would include five buildings along the east side, with sewer and water furnished from the Village of Barrington.

 

David McKelum discussed plans for the proposed landscaping, pointing out specific types and sizes of trees and shrubs, group plantings, and berms. 

 

Chairman Bosworth opened up the meeting for public comment, allowing the Village of Barrington’s Manager Denise Pieroni to speak first on behalf of Barrington’s Board of Trustees.   Ms. Pieroni expressed Barrington’s desire to revert to the original access plan which included a signal and access at the northeast portion of the site, that would in her opinion improve safety and traffic flow across from Barrington High School.  She asked the applicant to further appeal to Hamilton Partners for their cooperation in seeking such access.  Mr. Best indicated that his client is not willing to absorb the entire cost of such a signalized access, which is estimated at $1.2 million dollars; however, is willing to share such cost with surrounding property owners.

 

Ms. Pieroni reiterated her concerns about the 50/50 ratio calculations.  Finally, she expressed the practical difficulties of creating Special Service Areas (SSA) for the yet-to-be created southern parcels located in Barrington along Lake Cook Road.  Per the IGA, if Barrington is unable to create SSAs for these areas, they would not be obligated to extend utilities to any of the proposed sites including the lot under consideration.  In response to those concerns, Mr. Best expressed a desire to create the lots in an efficient manner and understood the obligations of the IGA.  He also pointed out that once certain southern lots were fully developed, that a bridge would be constructed to connect all the lots.

 

Village Counsel Jerry Callaghan informed the Commission that Barrington Hills has begun the process of creating an SSA for what is now referred to as Lot 5 and went into further detail as to the process that would be followed.

 

Village Engineer Todd Gordon reported on his early review of the proposed development, pointing out that much of the project falls under the jurisdiction of other agencies.  He had no objections to the proposal at this time, but wanted the applicant to consult with emergency service agencies to insure their vehicles could maneuver on the site. 

 

Village Planning Consultant Lee Brown, President of Teska & Associates, commented in three general areas:  parking, open space calculations, and architectural design.  In his opinion, the parking ratio should be lowered to match the community character of Barrington Hills expressed in the Comprehensive Plan which emphasizes open space and natural features.    He also said there needed to be an agreement on how to calculate open space among  the applicant and the two Villages.  Finally, Mr. Brown pointed out that the IGA contemplated two story buildings.  The applicant is now proposing single story buildings which are closer in proximity than those envisioned by participants of the agreement.

 

Residents Ted Singer of Hart Hills Road and Bob Milke of Oak Knoll Road expressed traffic concerns.

 

Chairman Bosworth acknowledged receipt of a letter from Mary Bradford White of Citizens for Conservation dated April 4th objecting to the applicant’s description of a conservation easement.

 

Commissioner Stieper wanted more information on surface water flow.  Commissioner Schmechtig asked the applicant to provide him with a tree survey.  The applicant agreed to respond to both their requests.  Chairman Bosworth noted that the next time the Commission considers this topic the discussion would revolve heavily around traffic.  The applicant and Village officials agreed to meet and exchange information as needed before subsequent presentations.

 

There was no further action taken on this proposal.

 

 

TRUSTEE’S REPORT:   Trustee Knoop asked Village Engineer Todd Gordon to give a status update on the Moroianu Estates proposed subdivision.  Mr. Gordon reviewed the history of this parcel, which is in unincorporated McHenry County but requires Plan Commission comments.  Chairman Bosworth had previously signed the preliminary plat for this subdivision.  It now requires approval of the final plat. Mr. Gordon said he had no objection to the plan as submitted and would recommend its approval.

 

Trustee Knoop brought to the Commission’s attention changes to Horizon Farms property and that it would be appropriate for the Commission to revise the Comprehensive Plan to reflect those changes which are consistent with the values embodied in the document.

 

Finally, Trustee Knoop reported on the activities of the Development Commission, and how the Plan Commission could interact with that Commission.

 

 

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. after being so moved and seconded.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

 

Lou Anne Majewski

Recording Secretary