Monday August 13th, 2007 7pm - Plan Commission Meeting

Memo from Village of Grayslake

To: Brae Loch Road Area Residents
From: Village of Grayslake

Re: Plan Commission Meeting of August 13

The Village would like to take this opportunity to inform you that at its meeting of August 13th, the Plan Commission will discuss potential future land use(s) on the unincorporated parcels on the south side of Brae Loch Rd. (Monday, August 13th, 7:00 p.m. in the Board Room at the Village Hall).

As many of you know, the Village's Comprehensive Plan currently designates that property as public/semi public in the event any of the properties are annexed into the Village.

The purpose of the meeting will be to have the plan Commission make a recommendation to the Village Board as to whether the public/semi public designation remains appropriate and, if not, which designation is now appropriate.

The Commission will not be taking any specific plan for any of the parcels nor any rezoning proposals, It will be an open discussion on land use.

There will be an opportunity for public input.

-------------

As you can see from the plans submitted to the Soil and Water district the developer does intend to go forward with some kind of proposal. Please feel free to cut and paste the following letter and send it to each member of the Plan Commission and Village trustee (trustees have email addresses at the village web site).

To: Mayor Perry August 2007
Trustee Edwards
Trustee Werfel
Trustee Jarvis
Trustee Vogel
Trustee Taylor
Trustee Bassett

Planning Commission : Phillip Mullenix, Karl Molek, Fred Schaefer, Gayle Cinke, Daleen Jackson, Greg Hansen, Carl Miller, Hal Nachenberg, Tom Morris

Re: Planning Commission possible Special Use Permit, possible Annexation and Rezoning of 19581 and 19607 Brae Loch Road from R1 to R4-PUD

As you may already be aware, the Grayslake Village Zoning Board of Appeals rejected College Park North, Inc.’s (“College Park”) petition for rezoning of the above referenced parcels from Residential 1 zoning to General Business zoning. Now, Carris development intends to bring before the Planning Commission a new plan for a change in zoning from R1 to R4 PUD for the purposes of 34 multi family units.
It is our understanding that Carris Development intends to bring a possible plan to the Planning Commission for a thumbs up recommendation on a change in zoning from R1-R4 PUD. We believe that the rezoning and proposed special use permit should not be granted because:
• The proposed business does not meet the requirements of a Special Use Permit. This plan, as it currently sits, does not meet those standards. This plan will have substantial undue adverse effect upon all adjacent property completely changing the character of the area, destroying surrounding property values, clogging traffic, interfering with surrounding development as to dominate the surrounding area and other matters affecting safety, and general welfare, including but not limited to a possible increase in crime. As it sits, this development will only serve as a blight on the already existing neighborhood.
• The proposed development will negatively impact the property values of those in the surrounding homes and subdivisions;
• The proposed zoning is not in harmony with the existing residential zoning surrounding the parcel. The petitioner may argue that other municipalities have similar structures in residential neighborhoods. Just because other municipalities have allowed inappropriate zoning does not mean Grayslake should make the same mistake;
• 34 units w/multiple families, children, cars (x 2 cars each), etc. will not fit in the proposed site and only create a barracks type of installment that will bring property values down.
• The addition of 34 families would create new burdens and pressures on the Grayslake school system and its already strapped budget. Residential development impacts school districts in Lake County by adding students to schools that often do not have adequate space in classrooms of funding for educational and extra curricular programs.
• Infrastructure impacts such as fire truck access, garbage pick up, snow removal, mobility, sewer, and other such considerations have not been taken into consideration at all and would be a nightmare at this inappropriate location.
• Traffic considerations such as 34 units x 2 cars each are totally unmanageable for this location.
• The R4 zoning will set a precedent for future general rezoning along Brae Loch Road, which will create a hodge-podge of structures.
• The proposed use will adversely impact the surrounding residential parcels because of the size and type of proposed construction;
• The proposed type of construction is not consistent with the architecture of the College of Lake County and newly constructed fire station directly across the street.
• The proposed site (4.18 acres) is not large enough to accommodate the size of the structures, parking lot and buffer to make the facility economically feasible;
• There are alternative sites which have comparable building types to the proposed facility and have the infrastructure to handle increased traffic;
• The proposal does not provide for ample parking to accommodate the needed parking which will require people to park on Brae Loch Road creating a hazard;
• What are Grayslake’s requirements for ingress/egress (entrance/exit) for developments? What is the definition of public/semi public zoning?
• The proposed business will not provide a significant number of jobs or increase in village revenues;
• The fact that the Mayor of Grayslake was, at the time and is now again, the VP of the bank where the original petitioner received their loan in order to secure the deed constitutes a conflict of interest; moving development to a third party does not remove the village from ethical responsibilities since the original petitioner still owns the deed to this property.
• Traffic back-ups will block off access to Atkinson Road for the newly constructed Fire house on Brae Loch Road causing a delay in its response time;
• The traffic increase along Brae Loch Road will result in delays and possible traffic fatalities, as this plan has nothing in it providing for a turn lane;
• Current R1 zoning rules allow for one house per acre of land. This is more than
enough to accommodate three to four up-scale homes (depending on the infrastructure required) that would not only fit within the current neighborhood, but could easily prove profitable for any developer.

Because of the numerous items discussed above, and more, we believe that the rezoning petition should be declined.

Letter in Daily Herald -
http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/newssun/news/opinions/letters/504720,5_4_WA10_LETTERS_S1.article

Inappropriate location

I thought the residents of Grayslake and surrounding area might want to know about a plan that is currently in development by the village of Grayslake that will create new burdens and pressures on the Grayslake school system and its already strapped budget.

Currently, an application has been filed with the Soil and Water District that would cram 34 units with multiple families on a four-acre lot off of Brae Loch road. Residential development impacts school districts in Lake County by adding students to schools that often do not have adequate space in classrooms or funding for educational and extracurricular programs.

This will not fit in the proposed site and only create a barracks-type of installment that will bring property values down, set a precedent for future general rezoning along Brae Loch Road. It will create a hodge-podge of structures and impact traffic considerations.

Thirty-four units times two cars each is totally unmanageable for this location. Infrastructure impacts such as fire truck access, garbage pickup, snow removal, mobility, sewer and others have not been taken into consideration at all and would be a nightmare at this inappropriate location.

This plan is set to go before the Grayslake Plan Commission for recommendation on Monday, Aug. 13, at 7 p.m. at the Village Hall.

I encourage residents to make this meeting and lend their support to Grayslake area residents that are opposing this. We are not opposed to change. We just want change that makes sense.

Current R1 zoning rules allow for one house per acre of land. This is more than enough to accommodate three to four upscale homes (depending on the infrastructure required) that would not only fit within the current neighborhood, but could easily prove profitable for any developer.

Gene Kulin