Plan Commission

APPROVED PLAN COMMISSION VILLAGE OF DEERFIELD The Plan Commission of the Village of Deerfield held a Public Hearing at 7:30 P.M. on January 28, 2016 at the Village Hall, 850 Waukegan Road, Deerfield, Illinois. Chairperson Oppenheim called the meeting to order. Present were: Mary Oppenheim, Chairperson Bob Benton Alan Bromberg Elaine Jacoby Stuart Shayman Absent: Larry Berg Jim Moyer Also present: Jeff Ryckaert, Principal Planner Dan Nakahara, Associate Planner Public Comment on a Non-Agenda Item No public comment on a non-agenda item. (1) Request for an Amendment to the Deerfield Comprehensive Plan to Adopt a Master Plan for the Northwest Quadrant of the Village Center Proof of notification was presented to Chairperson Oppenheim. The legal notice was published in the Deerfield Review on January 7, 2016. Chairperson Oppenheim introduced the northwest quadrant (NWQ) commenting that Mr. Ryckaert provided a historical overview of all the past studies, proposals and improvements that have taken place over the last 15 years or so which was provided in the Plan Commissioner’s packet. She added that many of them had had some involvement in these efforts over the years including several of her colleagues who were on the Plan Commission when the Village Green proposal was approved and sent to the Board in 2009. When the Village Green proposal was brought to the Board, Trustee Jester raised the issue that we were planning in a vacuum by only considering what to do with the southeastern most corner of the quadrant and that they really needed to consider the quadrant as a whole. With that thought and because the library renovations would be coming, the plan was shelved. She added that in 2011, after the Library’s plans were finalized, the issue of safety for pedestrians walking from the parking and the other buildings at the south end of the Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 2 quadrant to the Library at the north end was raised. The Village, working in cooperation with the Park District, proposed a north/south path, a sidewalk, between the community center and the library. Once again, Trustee Jester objected as he felt, and the Board agreed, that the path would be a piecemeal approach to the problem, too narrow of a focus and they didn’t want to do something that they might need to undo in the future. Chairperson Oppenheim noted that at the same time, the Village owned parking lot along Deerfield Road was deteriorating, and needed repair. The question arose as to whether the layout and flow in that lot should be addressed as part of the repair, and if so, what should be the scope of those improvements. The idea for the Task Force derived from this conjunction of events. Tom Jester was the driving force behind the idea of looking at the quadrant as a whole, and doing some planning that took into account all the uses and properties in it. With the Library’s plans finalized, and since the Village had given up the idea of doing any commercial development on the former Lindemann’s property, the buildout of the area was complete. This gave the Village an opportunity to really look at how everything fit together, and do some long range planning to guide any future development. The Village set up the Task Force with representatives of all the property owners and stakeholders in the quadrant in the hope that they could put together a comprehensive plan that would coordinate all the activities and work for everyone that shared the space. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that because the NWQ held most of the public entities along with the Church and train station, it really is the ‘community’ part of the downtown. She noted that the vision of the task force was to create a campus setting for our public institutions, unify them visually, and move people around them safely. The goal was to make a really usable, great looking public space that draws people in, and makes them want to stay, to make the area into the cultural centerpiece of Deerfield and a benefit for the entire community. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that it was exciting to sit down together with colleagues from various agencies of the Village, the Park District, the Library, the Presbyterian Church, the commercial property owners and the American Legion to talk about how they shared the space and the issues they saw. The task force met as a group over a period of about a year, had smaller meetings with individual stakeholder groups, and a community wide meeting to ask for input from the public. The task force had the following basic assumptions: to look at the entire quadrant, ignore property lines, and assume that the buildings would stay where they were. She noted that this was an opportunity to address any issues they saw in the quadrant and improve on what we currently have. The charge of the task force was to develop a long range Master Plan, not necessarily to be implemented anytime soon, but as a Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 3 conceptual framework to guide future development when and if that came about. The task force looked to find the best use for the quadrant and have a plan in place to guide the thinking as it could be phased over 5, 10, or 20 years. The task force recommendation was finalized and sent on the Board in August of 2013. The Board asked for further discussion with the Church to consider issues they had with access and parking and for the Master Plan to be sent to the Plan Commission for consideration and a recommendation on its inclusion into the Comprehensive Plan. Over the last two years, Village staff and the representatives from the Church and one of the commercial properties have had a number of discussions on issues with the Master Plan and the Village retained a traffic consultant who worked with the Church to suggest an alternative design in their area. Chairperson Oppenheim stated that this evening the Plan Commission would be considering the request for an amendment to the Village’s Comprehensive Plan to adopt the Master Plan developed by the task force. This includes the language to describe the concepts and intent of the design plan, as well as the preferred Master Plan D, Interim Plan D1, and two alternative parking study plans, one developed to reflect issues raised by the Church and one suggested to address issues raised by the commercial property owner. She emphasized that the Master Plan is macro, big picture, and conceptual in nature and not construction drawings. In this Master Plan, property lines have not been addressed but would need to be before any actual changes are made. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that before any physical redevelopment of the quadrant, the land use approval process would need to take place, with all the procedural and legal requirements and protections that are built into that process. Any proposed changes to the quadrant would involve discussions between the individual landowners and would come to the Plan Commission for study and public input before any recommendations were made to the Village Board. Chairperson Oppenheim noted that by amending the Comprehensive Plan to adopt the NWQ Master Plan, the process of revision and detailing would be guided by the principles and concepts set out by the Task Force Report. Additional planning and reconciling of some issues would need to happen before any of the improvements suggested by the Master Plan could be implemented. The Comprehensive Plan would give a framework for those discussions to take place. She added that with the direction and eventual goals for the quadrant laid out in the Comprehensive Plan, the Village would be able to commit its resources strategically and make sure they are using them to get where we want to go. The framework would allow the process of fine tuning and revising the plan to continue as issues are worked through by the stakeholders. She concluded by commented that this is not a final step but a continuation of the process the NWQ Task Force began with the eventual goal of guiding improvements for the whole quadrant. Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 4 Jeff Ryckaert, Principal Planner explained that a Comprehensive Plan (CP) is a planning tool that establishes goals for the development of the Village. The CP is long range thinking to guide growth and development over the next 20 years and added that the Village has used a CP to guide its growth since the 1950s. A CP is basically a vision for the future and is an advisory document only; basically a guidance for the future. Mr. Ryckaert noted that tonight’s public hearing is for consideration of an amendment to the CP of the Village of Deerfield for the proposed Master Plan for the NWQ of the Village Center and consultant Jodi Mariano of Teska would explain both the text and maps in her presentation. Mr. Ryckaert explained that a Master Plan is not a construction drawing. This Master Plan was developed with aerial photography of the area and not actual surveyed data from each of the properties. The Master Plan is not cast in stone and is not a final finished product but a guide to the future of the quadrant. He added that when property owners propose to make improvements to their properties in future years, they will need to go through a zoning approval process at the time they are ready to make these improvements to their properties as they have done in the past. As the stakeholders in the quadrant make improvements to their properties, there will need to be discussion and negotiation between them. Details to implement the plan such as land exchanges or swaps, new easements for parking and access, new parking agreements, will occur in the future as the various entities in the NWQ make improvements to their properties. Consultant Jodi Mariano, Principal, Teska Associates, presented the process and Master Plan to the Plan Commission. Teska Associates was engaged by the Village in 2012 to help with visioning and master planning for the NWQ. The boundaries of the NWQ are Hazel Avenue to the north, Deerfield Road to the south, Waukegan Road to the east and the Metra tracks to the west. She commented that the area is full of vibrant community destinations with the library, village hall, Church, community center, park, Metra station and the question has always come up as to what to do with the spaces in between. The spaces in between lack in pedestrian safety and access and although Teska has been involved since 2012, the Village had been studying this, at least, since 1999. She noted that the NWQ had been studied with the idea of also improving its character and appearance. In the 2004 Comprehensive Plan update, one of the themes was to make the NWQ more pedestrian friendly, in 2008 the Village Green was set aside because of the Village’s desire to make the quadrant more cohesive by looking at the overall circulation, appearance and character of the quadrant. Ms. Mariano commented that Teska was involved in visioning of the NWQ in spring of 2012 with two workshops meetings with the NWQ Unified Task Force members. The workshops discussed the positives, negatives, the message to convey and what should take place in the quadrant in the future. As a result of these discussions a vision statement was derived. The Vision Statement of the NWQ Unified Task Force for the NWQ is: Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 5 “The Northwest Quadrant is a place of community pride representing the civic and cultural heart of the Deerfield. Throughout the year it is a safe, beautiful sustainable campus where residents and visitors of many differing interests gather to learn, play, shop, worship, relax and participate in civic life.” Ms. Mariano commented that it is wonderful that all of Deerfield’s civic life is all in one place versus being spread throughout the community as is in other communities. In the fall of 2012, Teska was involved in creating the master plan for the quadrant based on the goal, objectives and design criteria from the task force. These goals, objectives and design criteria guided the development of the master plan. The task force agreed to the idea that the NWQ has the opportunity to be transformed into the cultural center place of Deerfield. There was a series of meetings with the task force where many concepts were generated and as a result of the discussion there was one preferred plan and one interim plan. An open house followed in March of 2013. Ms. Mariano commented that one of the central themes of the Master Plan was that there are wonderful destinations linked by parking lots. The parking lots still need to function, but could be organized in a way that provided for safer pedestrian walks so that pedestrians are not always walking through parking lots but instead be in designated pedestrian ways. She noted that Jewett Park is a beautiful space and the plans focused on this space with views to the park and the pedestrian axis coming to this space. Ms. Mariano called Jewett Park Deerfield’s version of the lakefront, it was the big show that they wanted to highlight in the Master Plan. Ms. Mariano went through the traffic and pedestrian circulation of the plan D. She noted one of the features of the plan being the pedestrian entry plaza off of Deerfield Road that continues north throughout the quadrant. Ms. Mariano commented that the main difference between plan D and the interim plan D1 is that the main childcare drop off functions in plan D is on the west side of the park district building with a reconfigured parking lot while interim plan D1 keeps the main childcare drop off functions on the east side of park district building. She commented that other than the childcare drop-off functions for the community center building, the plans D and D1 are essentially the same. Ms. Mariano noted that one of the main points of discussion was the southeast corner of the quadrant north of Deerfield Road between the Church, park district building and the AT&T building. This area of the plan has the municipal lot being reconfigured as well as well as the Church parking lot. She commented that they implemented design features so that whenever a pedestrian were to walk between parking lots there would be curb bump outs, speed tables, defined cross walks and pavement treatments to further define where pedestrians would go. Ms. Mariano went through views and renderings as though a pedestrian were walking from Deerfield Road and heading north through the quadrant. She noted the many beautiful canopy trees in the quadrant and pointed out the canopy tree walk feature which is essentially a walkway that takes pedestrians into the tree canopy of the mature trees as if in a treehouse. She also pointed out some overlook features along the pedestrian walkway as well as a possible pavilion area. Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 6 Ms. Mariano displayed the pedestrian and vehicular circulation diagram and introduced Dan Brinkman, senior traffic engineer, with Gewalt Hamilton. Mr. Brinkman noted that when Gewalt Hamilton was brought in they did a significant amount of data collection of both pedestrians and vehicles throughout the quadrant. He commented that they also observed loading and deliveries in the quadrant for the commercial businesses, Church and Village Hall. Mr. Brinkman commented that when guiding principles are driving a plan, there needs to be enough engineering to be done to ensure that the premises of the plan work with the full understanding that there is still a lot of work to do. Mr. Brinkman commented on the alternative parking study done for commercial property owner Joy Fiorini. He noted that this parking study brings parking to the rear of the commercial property instead of a drive aisle in plan D and D1. He commented that this would be the only change to plan D and D1. The next alternative parking study that Mr. Brinkman reviewed was focused on the area between the Church and the community center building. He recalled that plan D and D1 have a single drive aisle with parking on both sides as well as pedestrian space in this area of the plan. The parking study divides the access way into two pieces so that pedestrians can make shorter crosses against moving traffic, add green space, creates two different locations where there is a raised crosswalk all of which are efforts to slow down traffic, make it more pedestrian friendly while still being able to move traffic through the area. The balance of this plan is similar to the master plan. He commented that this alternative plan would be the next step and one of many next steps that would come forward as the Master Plan is refined and designed. He noted that this alternative plan is based on the same premises of the Master Plan. The alternative plan is another variation on how to deal with defined pedestrian and vehicular space between buildings. This alternative plan could be the basis of a plan that gets presented in the future. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that the task force discussed safety, trucks moving through the area, in and out of Deerfield Road and these alternative plans are the first step because they have not been analyzed in terms of landscaping, pedestrian and vehicular access as were done with the plans that came out of the task force discussions. She noted that these alternative plans are more preliminary than what has come out of the task force. Mr. Brinkman commented that the alternative plans were more focused and didn’t include the entire quadrant and components of the quadrant. He noted that they are next steps and not construction documents but based on the same purposes that the task force was using. Commissioner Shayman asked how the number of parking spaces compares with the number of parking that is currently provided in the quadrant. Mr. Brinkman noted that plan D was a net increase of 18 parking spaces while plan D1 was a net increase of 9 parking spaces over the current supply. Ms. Mariano clarified that most of the net increase in parking occurred on the west side of the quadrant. Chairperson Oppenheim Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 7 commented that the task force wanted to keep the aggregate parking supply similar to what is currently provided. Chairperson Oppenheim called up Joy Fiorini and the Church to speak on their concerns. Joy Fiorini, commercial property owner in the quadrant, greeted the Commission and commented that there is great potential as long as we all share a better vision of what the quadrant can be. She noted that there will be give and take among the stakeholders and we should all be willing to do it. She commented that there has been so much work that has been done and she is looking forward to the process. She thanked Kent Street and Jean (Spagnoli) for their help. In an effort to make the quadrant work better, Ms. Fiorini realizes it will require a different kind of relationship – a public/private relationship to get the whole quadrant to work a lot better and is confident in what is to come. Pastor Suzan Hawkinson, First Presbyterian Church of Deerfield (FPCD), introduced Elder and Deerfield resident, Ben White, Elder and Deerfield resident Brit Olander(Moderator the Properties Council) and Robert Kenny, attorney and legal counsel retained by the FPCD. Mr. Kenny is an attorney that specializes in municipal and land title law. Pastor Hawkinson noted the Church’s enthusiasm for the improvements to be made in the NWQ and reiterated their willingness to be a good neighbor in the quadrant. In 2012, Pastor Hawkinson was privileged to serve on the NWQ Unified Task Force with the late Ray Craig and acknowledged his living and commitment to the Village. She noted that Mr. Craig’s notes were instrumental in her preparation and the Church’s thinking. She noted that at the end of the task force meeting in 2013 there was no vote taken as documented in the meeting minutes so whether or not there was consensus is a point of question for the Church. Pastor Hawkinson commented that because there was no vote at the meeting, FPCD had asked that their letter of discontent be included in those 2013 minutes. Sentences in that letter that was to be included in those minutes repeats in her presentation, mainly that FPCD will not support or cooperate with the plans as they are outlined in sketch D or D1 and the Church looks forward to continuing conversation. It is her hope that those two things are heard. Pastor Hawkinson commented that there are things in the plan that they like; beautification, more green, safer truck deliveries in the back of the retail, a more front look in the south parking lot and a safe way for the trucks to get through. She added that they realize there needs to be renovation and restoration of the existing roadway and the parking areas which are long overdue for Village and property owner maintenance. Pastor Hawkinson wanted it clarified on an article about this public hearing in the Pioneer Press that came out today. She noted that there was a paragraph in article that suggests that the conversations between the Church and the Village were sufficient to alleviate the concerns of the Church. She clarified that the Church was not interviewed for this article nor are their concerns alleviated. Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 8 Pastor Hawkinson commented that they reject plan D and D1 as it appears. Referencing plan D, she noted that Jewett Park Drive is gone and the Church’s west parking lot, referred in the task force discussions, is now the north-south connector. Pastor Hawkinson stated that they would like to retranslate this language to say that this is a two-way road through their parking lot and the Church has difficulty with both the language and the premise of such a thing. The Church also has questions with the sidewalk along the park district building commenting that the sidewalk is nearly 30 feet wide in an area which is a hub of activity and also a place where snow needs to be piled. The Church questions the pedestrian way and the traffic way. She noted that from their vantage point, the Church is not just counting parking spots but the plan causes the Church to lose two traffic through-ways and all of the parallel handicap parking up against their building. She added that diagram (plan D and D1) does not show any handicap parking spaces. Pastor Hawkinson commented that in the discussions with the task force one of the features that were presented so that the stakeholders would be able to talk openly was this “bubble place” where property lines do not exist. She noted that they embraced that conversation for the opportunity for good neighbors to talk openly about what is possible, however (referencing the Church’s property lines) this plan not only eliminates two pathways through their parking lot, but it eliminates the land that they own to the Jewett Park Road property line. Pastor Hawkinson referenced the goals and objectives of the task force noting the following will be talked about later in her presentation: Respectful and Neighborly; Barrier free Connectivity; Reliably Safe; Reasonably Maintained, and Fully Integrated Between Uses. Pastor Hawkinson stated that the FPCD has a long history of cooperation with the Village referencing the years:1962, 1965, 1970, 1990, 1993, and 2002 when the Church gave easements along Church property to enable the Village of Deerfield to construct public improvements upon and adjacent to the Church properties to allow beneficial use and access to the NWQ. These easements include use of the land to accommodate the traffic on Jewett Park Road. She noted easement maps that indicate easements on nearly every edge of their property and that when a plan works the Church has not just complied but generously given land to the purposes of the Village and to help their neighbors. She noted that the Church is excited to work together on a plan that works. Pastor Hawkinson noted that FPCD has been consistent in their communication with the Village about plan D and D1. At the conclusion of the task force meetings, the Church stated then that they could not do plan D or D1. In the April 2013 task force minutes the Church invited conversation by suggesting a temporary traffic design (or test) in the Church parking lot to see if the plan worked. Seventeen months after that invitation was the first time the Church received a call from the Village that they would like to meet and talk (she noted this date as September 4, 2014). Pastor Hawkinson and Ben White met with Village staff three or four times. The idea behind the drawing (referencing alternative parking study of the Church west parking lot which was originally drawn up by the Church) was that the Church was willing to talk. She commented that the assurances given to the Church was that the drawing and all of the other property Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 9 owners were going to be talked to and the Church would be hearing back from the Village. She noted that the last meeting with the Village was in July of 2015 and never heard from the other stakeholders nor were they invited into a conversation with the other property stakeholders. She commented that the next thing they heard from the Village was a postmarked letter from the Village dated December 22, 2015 and arriving on December 24, 2015, the day before one of the biggest holy days of the year. Pastor Hawkinson spoke of the Church’s involvement in the community with 763 members, 85% of which are Deerfield residents, families and friends who serve in the mission and ministry of the Church. The Church also houses the Christian Beginnings Preschool – Monday through Friday with 95-150 children enrolled annually in part-time and full-time preschool education and care. She commented that the children and families go from cars in the Church parking lot and cross the sidewalks and traffic lanes to get into their building. She added that another 100 children and their families who do the very same thing on the park district side across Jewett Park Road from the Church parking lot. Pastor Hawkinson commented that there are people in the Church 24 hours a day and pointed out that the consultants noted that the traffic study done for the quadrant was done when the library was closed for renovation. Pastor Hawkinson noted that FPCD serves as a PADS Homeless shelter 7 months out of the year with the help of 25 other congregation, both Jewish and Christian and area businesses and over 150 volunteers as well as home to 50+ year Boy Scout Troop 52. She commented that the drawing (plan D) with 200 children from preschools on both sides of their parking lot, plus youth groups is suggesting that they could get across a 2- way road through the parking lot safely. The Church questions this. The Church also serves as the home for the South Asian Congregation and will house another congregation beginning in July of this year. Other groups that meeting in the evenings in the Church building include the Highland Park Chorus, Focus Martial Arts, the Church’s youth program Tuesday Nights Together (150 children in the TNT program), Jr. and Sr. High youth groups and adult education. She added that the Church offers concerts that often require a lot of parking and people. The Church also lends its building to community agencies and noted that FPCD is a disaster response site (warming center) for the Village. The Church also serves as a parking partner and emergency staging for Village events such as the Art Exhibit, Deerfield Christmas, 4 th of July parade and Farmer’s Market. FPCD has objections to plan D and D1. The first fundamental and dearest objection is that neither of the designs are safe. Pastor Hawkinson stated that plan D and D1 erase the north-south road that is Jewett Park Road based on a flawed traffic study report. She noted that two lanes of traffic decimates the Church’s only west parking lot and it would be narrowed from easy entry diagonal parking into a 24’ wide drive aisle that separates the diagonal parking and the parallel parking against the building. She added that there is no room in the D and D1 drawings to back safely out of the parking spaces into two traffic and there is no accommodation for handicap parking without significant reduction in parking spaces and no safety considerations for parents with small children Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 10 disembarking from vehicles that are parked. Pastor Hawkinson commented that each day she watches a mom opening the back seat of a car with a child in her arm, while the other child breaks free. In these drawings, she noted that a child would be breaking free into a two way road. Pastor Hawkinson commented that they think that plan D and D1 provide a constricted and confused purpose in the west lot or what was called the north-south connector that the Church calls a north-south road. Pastor Hawkinson stated that the west entrance is the busiest entrance of the Church and it is private property Church parking that is being turned into a road. She commented that this two-way roadway has preschool drop off and pick up for the Church, park district drop off and pick up, it is a pedestrian access hub for the Church, park district, library and Village Hall. She commented that the plan calls for 30 feet of sidewalk and noted that when the temperature drops there are not a lot of people walking to the library or the park district, instead they bring their cars. Pastor Hawkinson noted that there has to be a way to figure out how to do both (vehicular and pedestrian access) safely and believes it’s possible. Pastor Hawkinson stated that the Church is concerned about loss of land and loss of access. She noted that the only way plan D and plan D1 can happen is if the Village succeeded in enforcing eminent domain and condemning the land of a vibrant, living, vital part of Deerfield that has been in Deerfield for 140 years. She noted that the Village website defines a comprehensive plan as an advisory document that guides land use decisions. She commented that what is not being said is that after this plan was adopted to the strategic plan, the Village would have the power to restrict use. Pastor Hawkinson noted that the Church, the owners of the land, would not be able to close their lot and control of improvements and modifications on their land. She noted that if they wanted to make changes they would be hassled for it. Pastor Hawkinson has heard over and over that this plan is just a concept and does not change property rights. She recalled the representative from AT&T who served on the task force with her who announced to the task force at the very first meeting saying, “ I am here to represent AT&T and the message from AT&T is we understand that you want to make changes in the northwest quadrant and the answer is no!” She noted that this person gave her sound advice when he said “Our council advises us that it is not true, that nothing changes if these diagrams are adopted into the comprehensive plan.” She is not sure what is more disappointing – that the Village might not know it or they might. She commented that they have been trying to get to the table for discussion. Pastor Hawkinson commented that when their issues were raised on the task force they were told that they were not timely because the Church was presuming no property lines. As the Church has been discussing these issues with Village staff over the past year, they have been told that their desires for use of property would be raised and they would be part of a conversation with the landholders and that they (the Village) would get back to them. Pastor Hawkinson commented that they are on a less than reassuring reality that they are being told not to worry, this is just a conceptual document; the detail will be worked out in actual negotiation over the years. She commented that this may be a response that the Village deems as responsible and helpful to the landholders of the NWQ but it is not one that the Church finds to be responsible or helpful – it is not a just Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 11 a concept. The Church rejects any design recommendations added to the Village’s strategic plan for the NWQ based on the premise that property lines don’t matter. The Church rejects the idea that property easement negotiation would take place after a conceptual plan is adopted by the Deerfield Village Board. Pastor Hawkinson commented that FPCD has been and will continue to be a good neighbor in the Village. The Church, in the center of, and integral to, plan D and D1 will not approve or participate in either of the plans as they are currently drawn or any variant which is known to the Church’s Session. Pastor Hawkinson noted that the Church believes that there is a way forward and they propose that the stakeholders gather together and explore alternatives with property lines intact with a view to develop a plan that adequately addresses the designs that are being offered and subscribed to by the Village to adequately address legitimate public necessities; to address the safety of all that use the west Church parking lot and who would use Jewett Park Road if it were there and satisfies the fiduciary, spiritual, social, educational and merciful obligations of the Church and its other neighbors. Pastor Hawkinson has heard that the Church has been dragging their feet and that the Church is afraid. She addressed both concerns by saying that the Church was ready after the task force to continue this conversation fairly and having been waiting for the opportunity. She commented that it is becoming increasingly clear that at this junction the Church is being asked to be the leader of this conversation and they are ready. Pastor Hawkinson invited any stakeholders in the NWQ and Village to come and discuss this at the Church. She commented that February 28 at 2PM would work for the church. She added that the Church will bring in a community organizer. Chairperson Oppenheim asked Mr. Ryckaert if an adoption of a plan, of this type, to the comprehensive plan would give the Village any legal rights to take the Church’s property. Pastor Hawkinson noted that she didn’t say that the Village could take the Church’s property. Mr. Ryckaert stated that there are no plans to condemn property and it has never been discussed. Chairperson Oppenheim noted that if the Church were to make any type of improvement on their property, whether or not, this is adopted to the comprehensive plan they would still have to go through the same land use process regardless. Mr. Ryckaert noted that they would have to go through the same special use process as they did ten years ago with their addition. A member of the audience interjected that they wanted to make a statement. Chairperson Oppenheim asked Pastor Hawkinson if she wanted to respond. Pastor Hawkinson clarified that they understand that the Village cannot take their land and that was not the Church’s objection. She deferred to Bob Kenny to speak on the Church’s behalf. Mr. Kenny, longtime Deerfield resident, clarified that comprehensive plans are large pictures of the entire Village and clearly conceptual because there are no lot lines. He added that it is also true that communities do subarea plans and this is a subarea plan with real definition. This site plan is not in the nature of a conceptual site plan for a comprehensive plan because it is too specific. Mr. Kenny recalled a piece of property at the northwest corner of Wilmot and Lake Cook Road where his client wanted Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 12 commercial development but couldn’t because of a subarea plan that called for residential. Mr. Kenny noted that the Village only approved what was in the subarea plan. Mr. Kenny realizes this is the concept plan for a comprehensive plan but when you get too detailed for a concept plan, it changes the concept because when development comes back for any property that will be the plan the Village is going to look to. He added that if there were to be a plan that only had wording and not specific drawings that would be a totally different scenario. Mr. Kenny stated that the Church is reacting to the specifics of this plan because that is the direction, if it is adopted, that the Village clearly wants to go. He commented that it takes a village to raise a child but only one car to kill the child. Larry Dondanville, longtime resident and NWQ Unified Task Force Member, wanted to talk about the transportation planning that went into this project. Mr. Dondanville noted that Tim Doron, traffic consultant that worked on this project and a longtime colleague, felt the same way that Mr. Dondanville felt about this project, but Mr. Doron was told to keep his mouth shut by the urban planners in the group. Mr. Dondanville commented that the Village killed access to Coromandel from the north and killed access to Carlisle Avenue to Lake Cook Road. He noted that the Village has some of the worst circulation and through street access than any village in the state of Illinois. He noted other traffic problems in the Village and stated that the proposals that this plan calls will not hurt this area, but it will paralyze the rest of the Village. Mr. Dondanville stated that this plan will hurt the library, the Village Hall, park district and the Church because there is no access except through Waukegan Road unless you want to use the pedestrian way. He commented that coming from the east, south and southwest the only way to get into the quadrant is by making a left turn on Waukegan Road. He added that the Police will have trouble going west because they will have to get out on to Waukegan Road. Mr. Dondanville also noted that Park Avenue is used for traffic getting to the southwest quadrant and this hurts them. Mr. Dondanville referenced the April 23, 2013 task force minutes and hopes they are a part of the Plan Commission’s discussions. He specifically referred to his comments on page 7 and those comments are no different today as they were then. He believes there are some good ideas but it is paralyzing the downtown area with this vehicle circulation plan. He commented that you can’t get anywhere without getting on to Waukegan Road and this plan destroys access to the southwest quadrant. Commissioner Bromberg commented that there is a right turn in and a right turn out on to Deerfield Road. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that east-west portion of the road is still open to vehicles under the plan. Ben White, 1051 Park Avenue, Church Elder and 16 year Deerfield resident, commented that he was involved with the talks with the Village and commented that Suzan (Hawkinson) has done a great job representing the Church. Mr. White has a 14 year old and 9 year old and they use the Jewett Park in the various sports that his children are involved in as well as the ice rink and skateboard park. Mr. White lives on Park Avenue and they walk all over town. He commented that you could not target a pedestrian friendly plan to a better constituent than himself. He loves the idea of Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 13 improving things but feels that this plan is a little over the top. As much as it is a beautiful and wonderful plan he is worried that as a conceptual plan it won’t ever actually come to be so maybe it is time to change the conceptual plan into something that is more realistic for everyone. Brit Olander, Church Elder and Deerfield resident, supported Pastor Hawkinson’s remarks. Courtney Lorentz, 463 Hermitage, commented that she just saw the plan yesterday and her immediate reaction has to do with what Suzan was talking about in regards to the safety of the children. Ms. Lorentz has two young children that go to Christian Beginnings. Her concerns deal with the drop off in the parking lot south of the Church adding that this is a “death trap”. Her other concern is that people will use the Church’s west parking lot as a cut-through to avoid Deerfield and Waukegan Roads. Kathy Heid, 428 Cumnor Ct., displayed alternative plans that proposes compromises with everyone involved and does solve some of the problems that she and Ms. Lorentz have discussed. Ms. Lorentz noted that current plan has semi-trucks driving in the south parking lot from Deerfield Road. One of the alternatives eliminates a loading area for the flower shop in a commercial building. Chairperson Oppenheim clarified that many ideas were pursued through the task force and were either eliminated for one reason or another. She wondered if it is productive in the sense that possibly these things were already examined and maybe have her contact the traffic consultant, Dan Brinkman to look at her ideas. Ms. Heid stated that the point of these alternatives is that they would like to continue the conversation and that there seems to be a lot of viable options and they would like to be part of the conversation. Paul Johnson, 8 Bannockburn Ct., represents the boy scouts from Deerfield and 98% of his scouts are Deerfield residents. Mr. Johnson’s primary concern is safety and learned about this meeting in the last 48 hours. He has not had any prior discussions with anyone about this so far and his immediate concern is the safety of the plans put forward for which Suzan (Hawkinson) has very eloquently illustrated. Accessibility and practicality are the two things that concern Mr. Johnson in that their major drop off collection and meeting area for their (Boy Scout) meetings and that their meetings can be at very odd hours day and night. One of his concerns, without consultation, are the parameters of the traffic study and it seems that it was conducted in a less than satisfactory manner. Mr. Johnson believes that by putting this down as a detailed plan you have made an error by wanting approval for something that is way too detailed for what you are trying to achieve. This should really be a proposal and not a detailed plan. He agrees that the whole area should be renovated and it will be enormously beneficial if it were. Mr. Johnson noted that due consideration should be given to the safety, practicality and usability of the whole area. He added that if you have to put in traffic calming measures you have already lost the argument of traffic safety. There will only be one chance to get this right, everything else will be expensive. Jan Caron, Deerfield Park District Board Member, along with Rick Julison, Park District Executive Director, was a member of the NWQ Unified Task Force representing the Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 14 Deerfield Park District. Ms. Caron reiterated that the task force was never asked to take a vote on these plans and was never asked in any other way for consensus. She commented that presenting this as the task force plan is questionable. The Park District has never taken any action on this plan and have not seen any of the revisions and didn’t know conversations were going since the task force stopped meeting. She stated that until they received their letter notifying them of the meeting they did not know anything was happening with the task force or this plan. The Park District is strongly in favor of a plan for the quadrant and agree with many parts of this plan and actually instigated parts of it. The Park District believes the task force was making good progress but had not completed its work. Ms. Caron stated that the Park District has some of the same concerns as the Church. The Park District has had a long standing agreement with the Church to use their parking lot so they do have the same concerns about traffic and safety that they do. The Park District is concerned with the safety of all of their users, their constituents (which are the same as the Village Board’s constituents) and believe that there are major safety issues that have not been resolved in these plans. At this point, the Park District cannot support either one of the plans and wanted this stated in the public record. Based on everything they have read in the newspapers the implication is that everyone on the task force was on board with this plan and the Park District would like to correct that. The Park District has agreements and good working relationships with many of the stakeholders in the quadrant and they would like to continue this, maintain those relationships and they would like to work on solutions to the remaining problems either through the task force or any type of meeting that is recommended. The Park District would like to see this action tabled until there is support for an improved plan from more of the stakeholders in the area. Quintin Brown, 1025 Hillside Dr., wonders why the Deerfield website shows NWQ renderings without, what some have labeled the “Deerfield missile”, the 220 foot monopole antenna. He commented that none of the drawings show the monopole and as a resident and tax payer we have to face facts that when someone walks across Deerfield Road to the north you will see the monopole. He commented that the Plan Commission is doing a wonderful job and would like to see something done in the NWQ but whatever is presented to the public should be more realistic than what is in these renderings. Michael Butera, 915 Birch Court, has lived in Deerfield for 10 years with his wife and two children both of which attend Christian Beginnings. Like so many residents, they chose Deerfield for the school system, strong community presence and safety. They could not be happier with the decision they have made. He commented that the Christian Beginnings and Church staff has always made the children feel safe and secure and have always made safety a priority. Safety begins at the south parking lot during drop-off. He noted that there is a lot of activity during drop-off and the main concern with this proposal is the safety of the children, parents and staff may be compromised. Mr. Butera is confident that the safety of the children, parent, staff members, pedestrians, and motorists will be the number one priority and he hopes this plan is carefully looked at with the safety of all parties in mind. Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 15 Jeff Holway, 1423 Ambleside, supports the comments that Suzan Hawkinson had made. Marcy Reed, 864 Central Ave. and a 30 year resident, commented that her family have been involved in many of the activities that happen in this quadrant such as boy scouts and AYSO soccer. Her family has spent a lot of time in this quadrant, they are patrons of the library, members of the Church and customer to the businesses on the corner. Right now she cannot imagine entering that area except at the Robert York and Deerfield intersection. With the way the traffic pattern is set up she wonders if there will be a need to add a stop light on Waukegan Road so vehicles can get in and out with the increased traffic. As a resident she would not happy with another light on Waukegan Road. She has real concerns and echoes the concerns regarding safety. She is thankful for the efforts to beautify the Village as it is an important part of what the Village does. The efforts makes the Village look nice and makes her proud to live in Deerfield. She added that when it becomes uncomfortable to navigate because of the beautification then it becomes counterproductive. Ms. Reed would like to see if it can become a comfortable place and a beautiful place. Judy Rundell, Director of Christian Beginnings, commented that while many safety concerns have been brought to light there is one that has been overlooked. Ms. Rundell noted that on the south side of the Church building, Christian Beginning students are dropped off in a one-way drive aisle in the south parking lot. Currently, the parking spaces against the building are angled so that should a child get away from a parent they are easily seen by the traffic coming towards and looking into the angled spots. The new drawings show that the angled spots are now perpendicular which make it more difficult for a car to see a child that might be between cars as well as the drive aisle allowing for two traffic. This also means that parents will be pulling out into two way traffic. Ms. Rundell views these changes as significant safety concern to their students. Betsy Legat, 1163 North Avenue, noted that people primarily walk in the street (drive aisle) to get between the park district and the library. She noted that on the plan the proposed pedestrian walk way along Jewett Park west of the Village parking lot is the most important part of the plan and hopes that this walk way stays so people don’t have to walk in the parking lots. Chairperson Oppenheim noted that a sidewalk was proposed a while ago in cooperation with the Village and the Park District. Ms. Legat commented this piece of the plan is the finest part of the plan. Jeff Zimmerman, 637 Elder Lane, is concerned that two major stakeholders feel that they didn’t have a final voice in the drawing this together. He hopes the offer will be taken by the Church to begin to work to through the issues before this is voted on and approved by the Village Board. Eileen White, 941 Waukegan Road, #1B, walks because she is not able to drive. When she first heard about the plan she was very excited but then began seeing what it was doing to the rest of the community. Ms. White does attend FPCD and is concerned with Public Hearing January 28, 2016 Page 16 the issues that the Church is concerned about. She is wondering why there is another road being built parallel to Waukegan Road. It was clarified that a road parallel to Waukegan Road is not being proposed. Chairperson Oppenheim asked the consultant Jodi Mariano if she wanted to respond or clarify some of the issues that were raised about the plan. Ms. Mariano acknowledged the public forum that is being offered. She did comment that before Teska was involved, at least since 1999, the Village has been honing in on this idea of being pedestrian friendly. Ms. Mariano noted that clearly there is more work to be done and we, as consultants, are listening. There are a lot of things that she heard that the stakeholders did agree with regarding the plan and there are some things that need further work. The beauty of drawing plans is that you are always inventing so there is a solution that has not been invented yet. A solution can be achieved. She commented that this was a framework for discussion and the forum is still open. She likes that everyone is willing to talk about the issues and there still seems to be an opportunity to continue discussions as the stakeholders are still interested. She encourages everyone to continue to talk until they can find a solution that works. There being no further comments Commissioner Bromberg motioned to close the public hearing and Commissioner Benton seconded the motion. Respectfully submitted, Daniel Nakahara