Plan Commission

APPROVED PLAN COMMISSION VILLAGE OF DEERFIELD The Plan Commission of the Village of Deerfield held a Workshop Meeting at 7:30 P.M. on August 27, 2015 at the Village Hall, 850 Waukegan Road, Deerfield, Illinois. Chairperson Oppenheim called the meeting to order. Present were: Mary Oppenheim, Chairperson Bob Benton Larry Berg Alan Bromberg Elaine Jacoby Jim Moyer Stuart Shayman Also present: Dan Nakahara, Associate Planner Public Comment on a Non-Agenda Item There were no comments. (1) Prefiling Conference: Amendment to the Commercial Planned Unit Development for Deerbrook Shopping Center to Allow the Renovations for the Proposed Jewel-Osco Store and Outlot Buildings E & F, Amend the Jewel-Osco Special Use and a Text Amendment in the C-2 Outlying Commercial District for a Pharmacy Drive-Thru at the Proposed Jewel-Osco Store. Gil Magnelli, architect, OKW Architects, reviewed the site plan and their plans to construct a new Jewel-Osco supermarket and build two new outlot buildings in north section of Deerbrook Shopping Center. Mr. Magnelli noted that the overall gross leasable area (GLA) will increase with this proposal from 625,080 square feet to 648,797 square feet with a parking ratio of 4.47 per 1,000 square feet to 4.17 per 1,000 square feet and lot coverage going from 30.24% to 31.38% and usable open space going from 5.12% to 5.39%. Mr. Magnelli stated that in order to meet the parking lot lighting requirements for Jewel they will be proposing to replace the existing 25’ light poles with 30’ light poles with LED light fixtures. The light level will increase with an average footcandle of 6.8 from approximately 3.8 footcandles currently. The grading plan was reviewed. Mr. Magnelli commented that there will be a slight 2- 1/2’ retaining wall at outlot building E with the rest of the site being relatively flat. Bill Ferguson, landscape architect, Daniel Weinbach Partners, reviewed the landscape plan and the tree replacement plan. There will be 39 caliper inches being mitigated and replaced with 54 caliper inches of new trees. Chairperson Oppenheim noted that the caliper inches differed from what was originally submitted in their plans. The submitted Workshop Meeting August 27, 2015 Page 2 plan listed 63 caliper inches that would be replaced. Mr. Ferguson noted that the difference in the submitted plan was due the reconfiguration of the light poles and the landscape plan will be updated to reflect this for the public hearing. Mr. Ferguson commented that the landscaped islands will have shade trees and all of the islands will have a mixture of shrubs and ground cover. There will continue to be decorative gravel at the ends of the parking lot islands. The outlot buildings will be landscaped with foundation planting wrapping around the buildings. There is a parking lot island near the entry off of Lake Cook road that will have an abundance of color and the plan indicates new landscaping at that Lake Cook Road entrance. The proposed Jewel- Osco building will have planters with seasonal landscaping. Chairperson Oppenheim noted a nice mix of hearty landscaping but asked the petitioner to review the plant list sheet with the drawings because some of the labeling is incorrect. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if the plant list was specific to the plan or if this was a generic plant list. Mr. Ferguson clarified that this was a specific plant list for this plan by quantity and species. Peter Theodore, architect, Camburas Theodore Architects, went over the importance of the architecture and design of the proposed Jewel-Osco store. He noted the structural and customer challenges of keeping the operation open while constructing the new store. The firm has done this type of work and is familiar with the types of challenges associated with keeping a store open in conjunction constructing a new store. Mr. Theodore stressed his intent of creating a timeless design which would be green, energy efficient and code compliant through his mixture of material and design. Mr. Theodore commented that there was a departure from the existing architecture of the shopping center but done in a way that was compatible with the shopping center though the chosen palate of color and material while being mindful of the height and massing. He attempted to look at the massing, material and signage as a cohesive piece and a lot of thought went into creating an artful form. The building will have brick on all four sides, no drivit, and mechanical equipment will be fully screened by parapets. Mr. Theodore displayed the material samples for the Commission. He explained that the brick being used will be utility sized which is larger than the modular brick that is exists on the shopping center buildings. Modular brick is the type of brick used in residential construction and is approximately half the size of utility brick. Chairperson Oppenheim asked for clarification and purpose of the corridor that will exist between the Back to Bed store space and the proposed Jewel-Osco building. Mr. Magnelli noted that the corridor is approximately 5’ wide and serves as an emergency egress exit only for the Back to Bed. The egress needs to remain in place and be maintained. Mr. Theodore explained the construction staging area will be in the northwestern portion of the property and rear of the proposed Jewel-Osco store. He explained the order of the demolition of the existing building and the area of the existing store that will remain open while construction begins on the new store. He added that the majority of the parking will remain operational during the construction process. Mr. Theodore feels that they can accomplish this renovation with minimal impact to the customers. Workshop Meeting August 27, 2015 Page 3 David Henney, Jewel-Osco, commented that he and his team were tasked with constructing a new Jewel-Osco store without disrupting the entire existing operation. He noted that a portion of the existing store will remain open while they build around it and once three quarters of the store is complete, they will renovate the existing portion. Mr. Henney realizes that they will have to go the extra mile to make the customers comfortable during the construction process. Once the store is complete, the shopping center owner will demolish the existing store, do site work and then they complete the pharmacy drive thru. Mr. Henney anticipates the construction of the proposed Jewel- Osco store to be approximately 7 months. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if the building to be constructed will be accessible from the rear to alleviate any construction traffic in the front of the building especially since all of the material will already be in the rear of the building. Mr. Henney anticipates that this will be the case because they do not want to have construction activity in front of the store. The construction process will be demolition of vacant building where proposed Jewel- Osco store will be built, build the new store, site work and drive thru followed by construction of the outlot buildings and landscaping. Commissioner Bromberg asked if the entrances on Lake Cook Road will be closed at any time during the construction process. Michelle Panovich, Mid America Asset Management, noted that there will be a short period of time that one of the entrances will be closed during off peak times. Any entrance closure will be phased to minimize the time the entrance will be closed. Mr. Magnelli went into more detail regarding the egress corridor between the proposed Jewel-Osco store and the shopping center building. He commented that they proposing a steel louvered gate on both sides (front and rear of the building) of the 5’ corridor with approximately 80% visual screening. The gates will be for egress only and will be lit. Access into the corridor is only through the Back to Bed egress door. Mr. Magnelli went through the outlot buildings noting that they will follow proposed Jewel-Osco building design using wood cladding material and brick. The brick will be modular sized brick. The trash enclosures will be screened with similar building material and they are proposing a louvered gate with a 100% visual screen. Commissioner Bromberg asked how many tenants were anticipated for each building. Mr. Magnelli stated up to two tenants for each outlot building. There will be lighting sconces and fabric awning along the façade. Commissioner Shayman asked if there was any thought on matching the brick of new outlot buildings to the existing outlot buildings rather than the proposed Jewel-Osco building. Mr. Magnelli commented that they did discuss this, but they felt it was the right approach taking inspiration from the proposed Jewel-Osco building materials and this new look. Commissioner Jacoby said that it would be helpful to have photos of the existing center with the MOD/Subway and Starbucks outlot buildings and the proposed buildings so that the Commission can see the center as a whole. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that the petitioner’s exhibit that illustrates the proposed Jewel-Osco store next to the Back to Bed store is not to scale and does not show the correct building heights. Mr. Theodore noted that the building heights were not correct, but the objective of the exhibit was to show the Workshop Meeting August 27, 2015 Page 4 contrast between the two buildings. Chairperson Oppenheim would like to have this exhibit corrected for the public hearing in addition to Commissioner Jacoby’s suggestion so that it shows the contrast of the old and new buildings. Mr. Magnelli displayed specifications for the proposed bike racks and cart corrals noting that there will not be any awnings for the cart corrals. He also showed images of the fiberglass planters that are being proposed for the front of the Jewel-Osco store. Mr. Magnelli also noted a retaining wall at the rear of outlot building E will match the material on the outlot building. Commissioner Shayman asked if the parking spots near the retaining wall will have to be deeper. Mr. Magnelli noted that the parking stalls in that area are 18’ deep with a 24’ driving aisle. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that those parking stall are slightly below code. Mr. Magnelli commented that the existing stalls are 18’ deep with some areas having a wider drive aisle at 26’. He added that the proposed parking stalls along Lake Cook Road are 18’ deep. Commissioner Bromberg asked if there will be a curb in front of the proposed Jewel- Osco store that will protect customers from vehicles. Mr. Magnelli commented that there will be a zero curb in front of the store with planters. Chairperson Oppenheim commented on the cross-hatching on the overhead display of the site plan and asked if this indicated crosswalks. She would like to hear more about the internal circulation of vehicles and pedestrians with the proposed Jewel-Osco store and outlot buildings. Commissioner Jacoby asked for clarification that there would be no curbs in front of the Jewel-Osco store. Commissioner Berg noted that the submitted material shows a curb. Mr. Theodore commented that their preference is to have a zero curb with transition markings in the concrete to help the customer’s distinguish between a curb and the street. Mr. Theodore stated that the idea behind having a zero curb is to allow customers to get from the store to the parking lot without funneling them to a specific 6’ accessible ramp area. He followed up by saying that if the site were a high hazard, high risk area, they would not be proposing this. He noted that in another project in which they used a zero curb they installed stainless steel protective bollards in line of the drive aisles for additional safety of the customers. He is not opposed to having protective bollards as it will not hinder the functionality or the operation of the zero curb or its operation. Mr. Theodore commented on the successful implementation of zero curbs and if this were a life safety issue they would not propose it. Commissioner Berg mentioned that the Highland Park Jewel-Osco store has curb in front of the store and have zero curbs at the door areas. He asked how that functions for that store. Mr. Theodore commented that it functions okay, but the zero curbs are a function of improving the experience for the customers. He added that they are going to great lengths to make sure the customer will distinguish between the zero curb and the drive aisle. Mr. Theodore noted that zero curbs work great and it is a new concept for Jewel. Commissioner Jacoby asked if the outlot building will have curbs. Mr. Theodore commented that the outlot buildings serve a different purpose and function and will have curbs. Commissioner Bromberg asked if proposed Jewel-Osco will have an outdoor display. Mr. Henney noted that they will have outdoor displays as it lets the customer know that Workshop Meeting August 27, 2015 Page 5 something is going on at the store as well as creates excitement for the store. Mr. Henney added that zero curbs significantly eliminate slips and falls because so many people don’t see the curb. He added that Jewel views the zero curbs as beneficial as well as an aesthetic element and improve customer safety. Daniel Brinkman, traffic engineer, Gewalt Hamilton Associates addressed circulation as it relates to the proposed Jewel-Osco store and two new outlots. He commented that the proposed site plan is a significant improvement for circulation. Mr. Brinkman noted that outlot building E sits in the same area of the parking lot that is closed off and anticipated a low traffic, low turnover type tenant in that building. He noted that the new site circulation will help Starbucks customers going to the drive thru by situating the proposed Jewel-Osco entrance away from the Starbucks main traffic flow. The site plan indicates two-way drive aisles, eliminates one way drive aisles thereby providing more free-flow traffic movements. Chairperson Oppenheim wanted to know about traffic flow for the proposed pharmacy drive thru and the outlot buildings especially because it appears that pedestrians will have to cross the major drive aisle to get from outlot E to get to the proposed Jewel- Osco store and vice versa. She also wanted to know the traffic flow for vehicles to get to the Starbucks outlot building in the newly configured parking lot. Mr. Brinkman explained that the pharmacy drive thru traffic flow will go east to west along the north elevation of the proposed Jewel-Osco store. He noted that the outer lane is for dropping off prescriptions and the inner lane is for picking up and receiving prescriptions. Mr. Theodore noted stacking for four vehicles which is more than adequate for their needs and the drive thru exiting eliminates conflicts with truck traffic from the rear of the store and cars backing out of parking stalls. Commissioner Benton suggested that both lanes offer drop off and pick up of prescriptions which would allow vehicles to move thru the lanes quicker and provide for more stacking. Mr. Brinkman went through the traffic pattern for vehicles accessing the Starbucks outlot building and outlot buildings E and F. Mr. Brinkman noted the primary parking for the proposed Jewel-Osco store and the outlot buildings. Commissioner Shayman asked how the new parking configuration compares to the current parking provided and what would be required for the proposed Jewel-Osco supermarket. Mr. Magnelli commented that there are 294 proposed parking spaces for the Jewel-Osco store and currently there are 389 parking spaces. Mr. Theodore commented that typically it is 5 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet or in this case a need for approximately 310 parking spaces. Commissioner Bromberg asked if the drive aisle behind outlot building E would remain a deadend. Mr. Brinkman noted that it will remain closed and will have a trash enclosure and marked out spaces for vehicles to turn around. A discussion ensued about where customers would park for the new outlot buildings and proposed Jewel-Osco store. Commissioner Jacoby asked if there were any details on the uses for outlot building F. Michelle Panovich, Partner, Mid-America Asset Management, noted that they have been in discussion with a variety of prospective tenants and there is a lot of interest in small shop space. She added that these buildings will not be available until approximately 2017. Workshop Meeting August 27, 2015 Page 6 Mr. Theodore commented that they will have a signage and striping plan available in their next set of plans. He added that the parking reconfiguration for the proposed Jewel-Osco store is ideal because the maximum amount of parking spaces are located perpendicular to the store and there is more free flow of vehicular movement by having 2-way drive aisles. Commissioner Moyer asked if there are plans for upgrading the lighting throughout the center. Ms. Panovich commented that they will use a phased approach to updating the lighting throughout the property. Mr. Moyer asked for the reason for raising the lighting pole height. Mr. Theodore noted that by increasing the height of the pole it allows for a greater distribution of light using less light poles. Chairperson Oppenheim noted that the parking spaces are 18’ deep which is not code. Mr. Nakahara confirmed that the Deerfield Zoning Code requires 19’ deep parking stalls. Mr. Magnelli noted that they have 18’ deep parking spaces with 26’ wide drive aisles. Commissioner Jacoby asked Mr. Henney how many employees are there during peak times and where will they park. Mr. Henney noted that there are approximately 75 employees during peak times. He added that they do have a lot of employees that take public transportation, but for those that do drive they will typically park at the rear of the store. Commissioner Benton asked where and how will garbage and recycling be handled. Mr. Theodore noted that there will be a sealed and contained trash compactor by the loading docks. The compactor is filled internally and once it is filled it is taken away and a new container is brought in. Mr. Henney noted that a lot of the recyclable material goes back in the trucks and is sorted at their distribution center. Commissioner Benton commented that the Village negotiated a lower price trash and recycling contract for all Deerfield businesses. Mr. Nakahara asked the petitioner if there would be a TCF Bank in the proposed Jewel- Osco store and if so would there be any signage for the bank. Mr. Theodore commented that there will be a TCF Bank in the store but they are not proposing signage at this time. Chairperson Oppenheim noted that there has not been a lot of discussion on signage but realizes that the plan will go before the Appearance Review Commission for feedback on exterior modifications and signage. Mr. Nakahara clarified that the red color of the Jewel-Osco sign is the approved color for the Deerbrook Shopping Center and will not need a variation. Mr. Brinkman addressed the comprehensive traffic study which took into account the entire Deerbrook shopping center including a major changes at the south end and changes to middle portion of center. The traffic study encompasses the changes which constitutes a net reduction in gross leasable area for the center from what currently exists. The traffic study looked at peak times during weekdays and weekends and collected 18 plus hours of license plate data for vehicles going between Deerbrook Shopping Center and Deerfield Park Plaza. The study incorporates redevelopment of Workshop Meeting August 27, 2015 Page 7 the entire Deerbrook Shopping Center and not just the proposed Jewel-Osco building and outlots buildings E and F. He commented that redevelopment of the shopping center will increase current traffic due to significant vacant space in the center. He added that Deerbrook Shopping Centers current configuration as previously approved, noting two previous traffic studies, significantly generated more traffic impact than what is being considered in the current traffic study. The traffic study recommends improvements to the Deerfield Park Plaza Shopping Center to mitigate any traffic impact on Deerfield Park Plaza. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that the current traffic study is complicated because it is predicated on a conceptual development of the shopping center while what is being considered is the development of the northern portion of the property. However she added that the proposed development of the north portion of the property appears to rely on the north cross-access easement that takes vehicles out through the neighboring property which is addressed in the comprehensive traffic study. Mr. Brinkman commented that the traffic study being reviewed does not specifically look at just the proposed redevelopment. Commissioner Bromberg commented that there is an existing traffic issue with north cross-access easement for Deerfield Park Plaza. He noted that when the cross-access was opened up, it was not anticipated that there would be a barrier median on Lake Cook Road. He added that there is a bad traffic situation now and does not want to make it worse. He is hoping that the recommendations from the traffic study will make it better. Mr. Brinkman commented that if Deerbrook Shopping Center were to be fully occupied in its current configuration it would generate a lot more traffic than what is being considered in this current traffic study with less square footage. Commissioner Bromberg asked what would happen if the north cross-access easement were closed off. Mr. Brinkman speculated that if the north cross-access easement were closed the vast majority of the vehicles would utilize the south cross-access easement. He added that closing the north cross-access will generate more traffic in the rear of the properties and more queuing along the main north-south drive aisle in Deerfield Park Plaza. Commissioner Bromberg asked if Jewel ownership is concerned with a closure of the north cross-access easement. To alleviate the traffic issue, Mr. Brinkman noted that they recommend a modification to the outbound approach by providing separate left, through and right turns out or dual lefts and a shared thru/right turn lane. He added that these modifications increase the capacity of the short “throat” outbound lanes. Commissioner Benton commented that the stop light timing is short for outbound traffic exiting Deerfield Park Plaza. Chairperson Oppenheim asked the petitioner about Exhibit 8- Intersection Capacity Analysis from the traffic study. She noted that Exhibit 8, even with the recommended modifications, indicate that at certain times the level of service if far below acceptable levels. Mr. Brinkman commented that the reality is that many newly constructed intersections in the Chicagoland area at Level of Service D and E. Chairperson Oppenheim noted that Exhibit 8 illustrates that westbound traffic at the Lake Cook Road and Deerfield Park Plaza has a Level of Service that is unacceptable at any time. Mr. Brinkman confirmed this, but commented that one of the significant elements to this is how much (green light) time can be added from the county and how Workshop Meeting August 27, 2015 Page 8 to make use of that (green light) time. Chairperson Oppenheim asked Mr. Brinkman what was the likelihood, process and time frame of getting another lane put in and changing the timing of the light with the county. Mr. Brinkman commented that the process is straightforward but it can take some time. He added that if the request meets all of the technical requirements there is no reason to not getting a permit. He added that it will take active participation from Deerfield Park Plaza because it would be improvements on their property. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if there was any consideration toward moving the cars south and east from Deerfield Park Plaza to Deerbrook Shopping Center. Mr. Brinkman commented that they have gone to Cook County to ask for certain improvement including supporting the Village request for westbound U-turns at the Lake Cook Road and Deerfield Park Plaza intersection to go east. The county rejected this request. The petitioner has also requested to restore left turns into Deerbrook Shopping Center from Lake Cook Road. There has not been a response from the county. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if it was ever considered to have dual left turns into Deerfield Park Plaza. Mr. Brinkman commented that there is not enough right-of-way to allow those lanes. Commissioner Jacoby asked if Jewel had ever considered moving to the former Great Indoors location. Mr. Henney noted that they considered this 3 or 4 years ago but their analysis concluded that they were sacrificing business and they were accepting inferior real estate. He added that they have the best position in the shopping center with visibility from two arterials now. Sherwood Blitzstein, owner Deerfield Park Plaza, is pro-development and would like to see Deerbrook Shopping Center to be fully developed but just not at their expense. He commented that they have owned the Deerfield Park Plaza Shopping Center since 2008 and are at 95% occupancy. He commented that the north cross-access easement was not intended to be a “highway” between the two properties (Deerbrook and Deerfield Park Plaza Shopping Centers). He noted that the easement was intended for cross- shopping between the two properties. Mr. Blitzstein noted that the vast majority of those that use the Deerfield Park Plaza access are not shopping at their center but going to Deerbrook Shopping Center. He added that Deerfield Park Plaza is not built to handle this traffic and new development is only going to add to the existing problem. The proposed plan that Deerbrook has proposed provides direct access to their intersection. Mr. Blitzstein commented on the letters that his tenants have written regarding the current traffic problems. Mr. Blitzstein does not see any way that this proposal will be tolerable unless the north cross-access easement is closed off. He realizes that the cross-access was good planning but noted that the centers do not work for cross-shopping. He commented that if the north cross-access is closed off, more traffic would utilize the south cross-access and vehicles would have a longer drive aisle for vehicles to stack. Mr. Blitzstein reiterated that he is pro-development and wants to see development at Deerbrook Shopping Center if it is done correctly but to keep in mind that his access point is the only access point into his shopping center. He noted that Deerbrook Shopping Center is relying on his signal for 25% of their traffic. He added that he has met with the Village and Deerbrook representative, but there has not been a solution on the traffic issues. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if the Workshop Meeting August 27, 2015 Page 9 recommendations to his shopping were feasible such as utilizing a single shared access point for Dunkin Donuts and the Tile Shop. Mr. Blitzstein noted that his current lease with Dunkin Donuts will not allow for a change in their access. He added that he spoke with the Secretary of State and they told him that they have 750 customers a day and driving tests for 150 people a day and the Secretary of State is upset with the current traffic situation. He commented that this is a bad situation for his shopping center and keeping his current tenants. Hal Francke, attorney, Meltzer, Purtill and Stelle, LLC, representing Deerfield Park Plaza, reiterated that they are not objecting to the redevelopment of the Deerbrook Shopping Center and hopes for continued success to Jewel but want to make sure that all of the facts are addressed prior to the public hearing. Mr. Francke reiterated, as stated in the traffic study, there are existing traffic problems with the way the access is flowing. The intent was not to make the north cross-access a thoroughfare. Mr. Francke respects the benefits of cross-access but, as stated earlier, no one anticipated the installation of a non-mountable barrier median on Lake Cook Road. Mr. Francke referenced Exhibit 2B and Exhibit 7B of the petitioner’s traffic study, noting that it is evident Deerbrook Shopping Center customers are using the Deerfield Park Plaza intersection for exiting. He added that closing off the north cross-access easement will take consent from both shopping centers and the Village. He reiterated that Exhibit 8 illustrates that under existing conditions 40% of the traffic movements are below acceptable levels of service and with the recommendations listed in the traffic study, the unacceptable levels of service only goes down to 32%. Mr. Francke noted that new development presents an opportunity to address existing problems which will take a collaborative effort and his clients need to part of the discussion due to the language of the cross-access easement and because the Deerfield Park Plaza property is needed to fix the problem. Chairperson Oppenheim asked staff if there has been any response from the Police Department on any traffic safety issues on the Deerfield Park Plaza property. Mr. Nakahara commented that he has not received any data. David Dresdner, owner of Deerfield Park Plaza, commented that the Police are called when there are traffic accidents and there are frequent traffic accidents. He commented that there are elderly patrons that use their center and can’t say that the accidents are due to the cross-access, but it can be the result of the traffic congestion. Mr. Dresdner noted that a lot of the accidents occur at the pinch points on their property due to the traffic. Ms. Panovich stated that they have met with Mr. Blitzstein and Mr. Dresdner and they have a huge amount of respect for them and they have a good working relationship. They are willing to discuss with them how they can come up with solutions. They want to continue to have a good working relationship with Deerfield Park Plaza and want them to be as prosperous as they can be. Workshop Meeting August 27, 2015 Page 10 Chairperson Oppenheim commented that it is hard to approve something when there is not a comprehensive plan for the shopping center and it makes it hard to envision. She is concerned with the unacceptable levels of service as indicated in the comprehensive traffic study and as much as she would like to see a business be successful she does not want it to be at the expense of another business. She has concerns regarding traffic and the north cross-access easement. Chairperson Oppenheim noted that the comments from the Commission regarding this petition include:  more pictures comparing the contrast and context of the existing and proposed building and outlots,  more information on internal traffic flow, traffic movement around the buildings, cross walks,  feedback from the Appearance Review Commission,  alteration with the two-lane pharmacy drive thru and  traffic study specifically looking at the development of proposed Jewel-Osco and the two outlot buildings. A discussion ensued on having the Police get involved to help move traffic along at north cross-access to make it flow better. Another suggestion was to make the cross- access easement a one-way operation. Chairperson Oppenheim thought that Chief Sliozis may have thoughts on patrolling a private road. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that the opinion of the cross-access turning into a “thoroughfare” will be a legal question that Village legal counsel may have to address. Commissioner Berg asked if there would be a step before this petition goes to a public hearing because he feels there have been more questions than answers from this meeting. He feels that there is a major hurdle that needs to be addressed satisfactorily before this petition goes to a public hearing. Commissioner Berg feels that it would be in the petitioner’s best interest to resolve the issues before going to a public hearing. Chairperson Oppenheim has heard of the recommendations to help the traffic issues but there has been no mention on who would pay for the modifications. Mr. Blitzstein stated that Deerbrook Shopping Center has agreed to pay for the modifications. Commissioner Benton suggested that the Village Manager and Mayor could be involved in the discussions with Cook County to see if something could be done to alleviate the traffic concerns. He added that the success of both centers, being in Cook County, would also benefit Cook County. Chairperson Oppenheim stated that there is a petition before the Commission that must be considered and it will be the Commission’s opinion to whether this petition is recommended. There being no further business to discuss the meeting adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Daniel Nakahara