Plan Commission

APPROVED PLAN COMMISSION VILLAGE OF DEERFIELD The Plan Commission of the Village of Deerfield held a Public Hearing Meeting at 7:30 P.M. on July 14, 2016 at the Village Hall, 850 Waukegan Road, Deerfield, Illinois. Present were: Mary Oppenheim, Chairperson Bob Benton Larry Berg Al Bromberg Jim Moyer Stuart Shayman Absent were: Elaine Jacoby Also present: Dan Nakahara, Associate Planner Public Comment on a Non-Agenda Item Andrew Marwick, 442 Kelburn Road, commented that there is a great need for transit- oriented development along the Milwaukee District North Metra Line. Mr. Marwick pointed out that there are currently no residential developments in the Deerfield Square area or around the Lake Cook Road Metra Station; commenting that with the lack of residential developments in downtown Deerfield, as well as the very low density of the residential developments in downtown Glenview and Northbrook, there is basically nothing along the Milwaukee District North Line that would supplement traffic. He commented that transit-oriented development along train lines throughout the United States proves that there is potential for residential development near train depots. Transit-oriented development creates more pedestrian traffic in downtown areas giving downtown businesses more revenue opportunities. Mr. Marwick compared Deerbrook Mall to White Flint Mall (located near the White Flint Train Station in Montgomery County, Maryland). Montgomery County has developed very dense transit-oriented development along their rail line, while considering the ratio of existing jobs in the area with the number of expected jobs and comparing those statistics to the increased population in the new residential units in order to maintain a balance between work availability and employment demand. Mr. Marwick commented that the many corporations along Lake Cook Road have a high demand for employees; however, due to the lack of high density residential developments in the area, many employees don’t live in Deerfield, but rather commute to work from other communities located along the Milwaukee District North Metra Line. Mr. Marwick commented that Lake County and Montgomery County are pretty similar in population and rail service potential but the planning and development is very different. Mr. Marwick feels that with all the rail lines going in and out of Chicago, Lake County has more potential for transit Workshop Meeting July 14, 2016 Page 2 oriented development although Montgomery County has done more to cultivate transit- oriented development. Mr. Marwick commented that a transit-oriented development plan is needed to spur an upgrade to the Milwaukee District North Line, as it is very difficult to move forward with spending the money to electrify and increase train service, extend Metra Services into Milwaukee and increase Amtrak frequency without more density along the route. Mr. Marwick commented that one advantage that the Lake Cook Metra Station has over the Glenview Metra Station is its location. The Lake Cook Metra Station is located near both the Edens Expressway and the Tollway, so it is easily accessible, whereas it is very difficult to commute to the Glenview Metra Station from the Edens and the Tollway. Mr. Marwick suggested that the Village Center Commission look to the Lake Cook Transit- Oriented Development Commission, in order to come up with a Lake Cook Road Sector Plan. The area that he believes this would encompass is Kates and Pfingsten Road to the west, Waukegan Road to the east and the tollway to the south. Mr. Marwick suggest a Lake Cook Road Sector plan would call for this area to be rezoned and allowed to have more residential development. He sees this area as having tremendous potential for redevelopment. (1) Request for a Special Use for a Self-Improvement Facility for Shredd415 Deerfield LLC at 636 Deerfield Road The petitioner has requested that the Special Use for Shredd415 is be continued to the September 8th, 2016 Public Hearing Meeting because the Petitioner is not ready to proceed at this time. (2) Request for a Resubdivision of the 826, 828, 830, 832, 834, 838, 840, 842, and 844 Chestnut Street Properties (Formerly 824 and 836 Chestnut Street) Into 9 Lots; 1 Lot for Each Townhome Unit and an Outlot for the Association’s Common Elements (Jacobs Venture II LLC) Cal Bernstein, Samuels & Bernstein, Attorneys at Law, representing Jacobs Venture II LLC, commented that a year ago the Taylor Junction Townhouse Planned Unit Development was approved and is currently under construction. The petitioners are requesting a favorable recommendation from the Plan Commission’s for the resubdivision of the properties (originally discussed during the PUD process), in order to create the actual lots for each townhome and the common area. Mr. Bernstein assured the Commissioners that the petitioner’s request is consistent with the Village’s previous approval of the Taylor Junction PUD. Chairperson Oppenheim asked for confirmation that none of the configurations for the Chestnut Street Properties have changed and that the buildings are exactly as were approved in regards to the layouts, sizes, square footage, common areas, etc., and that the petitioner is basically asking to subdivide the property into individual owned properties for each townhome unit. Mr. Bernstein confirmed, and commented that the petitioners were asking to first consolidate the lots, because right now the property is divided into two lots of record (in which one of the lots Workshop Meeting July 14, 2016 Page 3 was rezoned during the PUD process), and then to divide the consolidated lot into nine individual lots and an outlot for the common areas. The Commissioners did not have any issues with the requested resubdivision. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if there have been any issues with the neighbors during the construction process. Mr. Bernstein commented that there have not been any issues with the neighbors. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if there were prospective buyers interested in purchasing the properties. Mr. Bernstein confirmed that three of the townhomes are currently under contract, and there is a lot of interest in the property. As the project progresses and the construction site is cleaned up from the construction debris, the petitioners anticipate selling out pretty quickly. The first unit is supposed to close next month and construction is moving along. There being no further business to discuss the meeting adjourned. Respectfully Submitted, Mary Glowacz  APPROVED PLAN COMMISSION VILLAGE OF DEERFIELD The Plan Commission of the Village of Deerfield held a Workshop Meeting at 7:30 P.M. on July 14, 2016 at the Village Hall, 850 Waukegan Road, Deerfield, Illinois. Present were: Mary Oppenheim, Chairperson Bob Benton Larry Berg Al Bromberg Jim Moyer Stuart Shayman Absent were: Elaine Jacoby Also present: Dan Nakahara, Associate Planner (2a) Discussion of the Resubdivision of Chestnut Street properties The Plan Commission did not have any issues with the request for the resubdivision of the Taylor Junction Townhome Planned Unit Development. Commissioner Bromberg motioned to approve the request for a Resubdivision of the 826, 828, 830, 832, 834, 838, 840, 842, and 844 Chestnut Street Properties (formerly 824 and 836 Chestnut Street) Into 9 Lots; 1 Lot for Each Townhome Unit and an Outlot for the Association’s Common Elements. Commissioner Berg seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: Ayes: (6) Benton, Berg, Bromberg, Moyer, Shayman, Oppenheim Nays: (0) None The motions passed and will be on the August 1st Village Board of Trustees Meeting agenda. (3) Prefiling Conference: Request for an Amendment to the Deerfield Square Planned Unit Development to Permit the Redevelopment of the 711 Deerfield Road Building (CRM Properties Group, LTD) Chuck Malk, Founder and President of CRM Properties Group, Ltd., commented that they are proposing to demolish the outlot building at the corner of Deerfield and Waukegan Road (the 711 Deerfield Road Building), and redevelop the property into a multi-tenant building. With this development, they will be putting in parking that was landbanked during the initial development of Deerfield Square. Chris Siavelis, Senior Vice President, CRM Properties Group, Ltd., presented renderings of the proposed redevelopment of the 711 Deerfield Road Building, with images of the landbanked parking area transformed into additional parking spaces for the proposed multi-tenant Workshop Meeting July 14, 2016 Page 2 building. Mr. Malk noted that the proposed glass and brick design gives the building a modern, urban look, and commented that their goal is to open up the site and make it more inviting and attractive. Mr. Malk explained that the current 711 Deerfield Road Building (currently Biaggi’s Restaurant) was not designed by CRM Properties; adding that it is a large restaurant space that is very difficult to lease, and is therefore very difficult to make financially viable. CRM Properties is proposing to replace the existing building with a multi-tenant building with possible uses varying from smaller restaurants to retail and service uses. Mr. Malk stated that their goal is to create an interesting design that will refresh the corner and create a much more viable situation by livening up the out lot building with more character and natural light. Commissioner Berg asked how the size of the footprint of the proposed building compares to the size of the existing building. Mr. Siavelis replied that the interior of the proposed building is 8350 square feet, plus an additional 1600 square feet for the enclosed patio areas, so the footprint is a total of 9950 square feet while the interior of the existing building is 8000 square feet. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that the proposed building is significantly larger than the existing building. Mr. Malk commented that the internet has had a devastating impact on retail, especially in the suburban markets. This impact has resulted in CRM Properties having to change the types of tenants they lease their spaces to, as there is no longer a high demand for retail tenant spaces. Mr. Malk explained that it is very expensive to tear down an existing building that is in good condition; however, the reality is that CRM Properties needs to attract a different base of tenants in order to make the property viable. Mr. Malk stated that this outlot area is one of the best locations for visibility in Deerfield Square and they would like to maximize the profitability of that area. Mr. Malk noted that tenant rents have gone down 30%-35% in the shopping center since they center opened. Commissioner Bromberg commented that the Deerfield Review reported that the current tenant (Biaggi’s) has an option to extend their lease, and asked this was correct. Mr. Malk replied that the current tenant does not have an option to extend their lease, but rather an option to terminate their current lease. Mr. Malk assured the Commissioners that he has had many conversations with the tenant about this. Chairperson Oppenheim asked the date that the tenant’s lease was due to expire. Mr. Siavelis replied that the exercise option and closing date would be at the end of the year (possible January 2017 at the latest). Mr. Siavelis commented that CRM Properties is trying to be proactive, and reiterated that the current building is not feasible for the types of businesses that are interested in leasing tenant spaces. He added that replacing the building with a new, modern looking building is necessary for the center’s success. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that the 711 Deerfield Road Building is currently one large restaurant, and asked the petitioners if they were anticipating appealing to a different kind of restaurant by breaking up the space into three much smaller spaces. Mr. Malk confirmed, and commented that the proposed building could lease to up to five tenants (as the enclosed glass patio areas could be used as tenant spaces as well); the tenant spaces could be leased to a variety of uses, from a regular retail user to a coffee shop. Chairperson Oppenheim asked the petitioners if they wanted to appeal to a Workshop Meeting July 14, 2016 Page 3 smaller, more fast-casual type restaurant, rather than a larger, sit-down fine dining restaurant. Mr. Malk confirmed, and commented that sit-down fine dining is not as much of a suburban concept anymore. Mr. Siavelis added that the smaller spaces tend to attract more prospective tenants. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if the courtyard at the corner of the Square would remain or if it would be encroached upon. Mr. Malk confirmed that the area would remain the same. Commissioner Bromberg asked if the design of the new building would fit in well with the existing building structures in the Square. Mr. Malk explained that he has a passion for architecture and that when he originally designed the entire property his goal was to emulate different architects’ work to create an eclectic mix of architecture. Mr. Malk commented that the versatility of Deerfield Square’s overall look was designed to have more flexibility for change in the future; and therefore, he is confident that the fresher, more urban design of the new building is going to fit in nicely with the center as a whole. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if CRM Properties was going to attempt to unify the new design visually with the entire center, or if their goal was to have a completely new, standout look. Mr. Malk explained that the new building is not going to look like the existing architecture in the center, but he assured the Commissioners that it is not going to fall out of character with the entire property. Mr. Malk noted that there are multiple kinds of architecture used in each building on the property, and the new building would be yet another architectural design to add to the eclectic mix of architecture throughout the property, which tends to be the new trend in commercial architecture. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if their goal with the glassed-in indoor/outdoor patio spaces on each end of the building was to utilize the spaces all year long, since the outdoor dining season is a very limited time here. Mr. Malk confirmed that the spaces were going to be year round uses, and that the look that they are proposing is the new trend in architecture. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if the building would first be constructed and then leased to tenants that would fit the building or if they plan to reconstruct their design based on tenant demands. For instance, if more than three tenants were interested in leasing spaces in the building, would the two patio areas be reconstructed into two additional tenant spaces, so that there would be a total of five individual tenant spaces in the building? Mr. Malk commented that CRM Properties is not going to start construction until the building is at least partially leased. The glass spaces on the proposed building are intended to be standalone tenant spaces. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that the cross-functionality of the glass spaces would allow the petitioners to expand from three to five tenants given the demand of the tenants, and their intended use for the space. Commissioner Berg asked how many additional parking spaces would be gained by converting the existing land banked area into actual parking spaces. Mr. Siavelis replied that the south portion of the landed banked area would be converted into nine additional parking spaces to accommodate the parking demand for the new multi-tenant building. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if that would offset the additional space taken up by the construction in terms of the parking requirement for the mixed-uses. Mr. Siavelis explained that the last parking study for Workshop Meeting July 14, 2016 Page 4 Village Square indicated that there was plenty of parking available in the center, and that the outlot parking area is currently the least used parking area in the center. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that employees were required to park in this outlot area. Chairperson Oppenheim noted that it appeared that the footprint of the new building would be taking up additional space to the west. Mr. Siavelis confirmed that the footprint of the new building primarily overlays the footprint of the existing building, with the biggest addition being the west patio. Chairperson Oppenheim reiterated that the west patio could also be used as an individual tenant space, and commented that the west section of the building extends out into the existing parking lot. Mr. Malk commented that the outdoor service area may or may not be used depending on the tenant’s demands, so CRM Properties is trying to be flexible with that particular space. Commissioner Berg asked if the entrances are going to be entirely on the south side, or on the north and south side of the building. Mr. Malk commented that the front of the building faces pedestrian and vehicular traffic on Deerfield and Waukegan Road, so the window fronts would be made as inviting as possible to attract customers into the center. The entrances facing the parking lot allow customers to easily access the building from the parking lot inside the center. Commissioner Shayman commented that his biggest concern is that the exterior of the building facing out towards Waukegan and Deerfield Road would be inviting to customer, but not easily accessible to customers, as the entrances would be on the opposite side of the storefronts. Mr. Malk commented that their very reason for replacing the existing building with a new building with attractive window fronts is to draw in customers to the entire center. Chairperson Oppenheim inquired about the current location of the existing building’s loading and trash area. Mr. Siavelis noted that the existing trash area is enclosed in the building with the overhead door facing south, and the loading is done on the south end of the building with no actual designated loading zone or dock. Commissioner Benton commented that the current loading situation was ideal as the loading is done during non-rush hours between lunch and dinner hours or in the morning, and loading at the south end doesn’t really impinge on any of the parking. Commissioner Berg asked if the sidewalk along Deerfield Road was going to be expanded at all. The petitioners noted that the sidewalk was not going to be expanded. Chairperson Oppenheim asked if the petitioners would consider moving the building forward towards the east and taking up some of the space that is currently landscaped. Mr. Malk explained that the front of the center with the landscaped/fountain area is designed to create a sense of comfort as customers enter the property. Mr. Malk commented that the landscaped/fountain area also acts as a buffer between the busy intersection and the center, which is why the building is set back off of the fountain. He stated that the building is oriented to create the maximum amount of comfort and by placing the entrances to the building facing the parking lot, customers have the benefit of looking at the fountain rather than traffic while sitting in the patio area. Workshop Meeting July 14, 2016 Page 5 Commissioner Benton voiced his concern that many of Deerfield’s sit-down restaurants are gone, and he fears that by going primarily towards fast-casual restaurants that the Village may be losing a place for people to come and meet in Deerfield to have a sit down lunch or dinner. Mr. Malk commented that CRM Properties primarily develops in the city of Chicago, and he has found that the Deerfield community is one of the more difficult communities to serve customers. CRM Properties studied the Deerfield community and found that: chain restaurants are not preferred by Deerfield residents, the most price sensitive tenants tend to have the most difficult time surviving in Deerfield and, the Deerfield community responds well to deals. Mr. Malk commented that he has tried diligently to bring new urban concepts into Deerfield, while being sensitive to the overall progress of the Village’s development. Mr. Malk explained that the reality is that more expensive restaurants have proven to be more successful in the community; however, the issue is that the suburban community (especially in Deerfield) is not a high alcohol consuming public, and businesses primarily make their money on alcohol as the profit margin is much higher. Mr. Malk commented that CRM Properties is dedicated to coming up with the hippest concepts possible, and they plan to showcase the businesses in the proposed multi-tenant building, as it will be the face of their property. Mr. Malk commented that he has always tried to come up with up-and- coming concepts and trends with the most viability (using Whole Foods as an example), and his goal was not to look like a typical shopping center. Mr. Malk stated that he has failed the most trying to coming up with a price sensitive restaurants explaining that Biaggi’s is a fine restaurant and much more price sensitive than its competitors down Waukegan Road. Mr. Malk commented that smaller fast-casual restaurants tend to have a higher profitability than larger sit-down restaurants. Mr. Malk stated that CRM Properties is a very sophisticated developer, and they’ve educated themselves on the market and found that smaller, fast-casual restaurants are more viable; adding that he would have loved to keep the Biaggi’s building, but doesn’t see a viable alternative, as it’s very difficult to find a restaurant to take on that space. Mr. Siavelis commented that there are a lot of full-service sit down restaurants in the immediate area. Chairperson Oppenheim asked the petitioners if they thought Deerfield’s demographic was going to change at all with the addition of the two new apartment complexes (Woodview and AMLI Apartments). Mr. Malk reiterated that with the advent of the internet, people are looking for convenience however, if there was more residential density in the downtown area then retail becomes more viable. Retail is a very important for sales tax revenue. Commissioner Moyer commented that he agreed that the retail market was changing, and that there was no longer a high demand for retail store locations, but rather a fast growing demand for service oriented business locations. He added that customers are going to be drawn into shopping centers that offer more variety. Chairperson Oppenheim advised the petitioners that they would have to have a more details (particularly the parking) for their next meeting with the Plan Commission. She feels that the parking demands and needs are calculated differently based on the use (sit down restaurants, carry out, retail, etc.), which means that parking must be looked at closely. Workshop Meeting July 14, 2016 Page 6 Chairperson Oppenheim commented that Village Square has a staggered set of uses, which has worked well for the different peak time(s) parking demands, and added that the Village wanted to ensure that there continues to be ample parking for all businesses in the center. Mr. Malk commented that there was a recent parking study done in Evanston, IL that determined that the availability of parking does not determine the success of a shopping area. The study found that customers find other means to make their way to shopping areas (public transit, walking, biking, etc.) if parking is not available. Mr. Malk has found that the large parking area in Village Square has helped draw more customers into the center (finding that the lot filled with cars is inviting to others). Mr. Malk commented that he is going to continue to comply with the Village’s parking requirements, but also urged the Village to consider that modern planning trends are actually discouraging large parking lots in downtown areas that are easily accessible by public transportation, walking, biking, etc. (such as Deerfield). Commissioner Oppenheim commented that the Plan Commission has had recent discussions about possible changes to the C-1 Zoning District based on the changing trends in planning, as well as in the market place; informing the petitioners that the property owners in the C-1 District (including themselves) were going to be invited to a Public Hearing to discuss the possible changes that the Plan Commission is considering. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that the Village’s goal is to be future thinking when considering whether or not the zoning ordinances are realistic in regards to market demands and social/economic trends. She noted that the Village receives a lot of feedback from residents about parking, and there is a high demand from residents for more parking in the downtown area. Mr. Malk commented that the reality is that market demands and social/economic trends are changing, and it’s very difficult to determine exactly how it is changing. He noted that developers and municipalities alike are struggling to figure out where corporate retail is going. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that the Village itself is in transition, as a number of changes have been made over the last couple of years, and the outcome/effect that these changes are going to have on the Village are not yet known noting the population/demographic changes that the two new apartment complexes are going to have on the Village. Chairperson Oppenheim advised the petitioners that the Appearance Review Commission (ARC) would definitely have questions about the building materials being used on the proposed multi-tenant building, and how the modern look of the proposed building is going to be architecturally unified with the classic look of the existing buildings in the center. Mr. Malk assured the Plan Commission that the building materials were going to be of high quality, just like all the buildings materials used throughout their property. Chairperson Oppenheim commented that the petitioners should be prepared to discuss their actual plans for demolition and construction, and the sequencing of their construction plans to coexist with pedestrians around the construction site, as it is a major area that is not going to be shut down during construction. Mr. Siavelis commented that as the building is located at the corner of the property and it should be relatively easy to develop a construction schedule that coordinates well with the functionality of the entire center. He added that dust control is going to be heavily considered. Workshop Meeting July 14, 2016 Page 7 Chairperson Oppenheim advised the petitioners that a traffic study analyzing traffic patterns, especially in regards to the ingress and egress of vehicle and pedestrians traffic entering and exiting the property from the multiple accesses will need to be submitted to the Village for their public hearing. Chairperson Oppenheim explained that the traffic study would need to stress the safety of pedestrian traffic crossing the parking lot, as well as detail out where customers of the new multi-tenant building would primarily be parking to access the building from its many entrances. She commented that parking and access for the existing single tenant building is a relatively simple situation now with only one entrance from the parking area, but the parking and access is going to be slightly more complex with the changes to the building. Mr. Siavelis commented that even with the increased traffic and pedestrian volume they do not foresee the parking circulation in the center changing. The petitioner noted that they will detail out the traffic patterns and circulation with the addition of the new multi-tenant building. Commissioner Benton commented that the traffic light at Walgreen’s entrance and Deerfield Road still has a pedestrian signal, which will allow customers to cross from one side of the center to the other fairly easily and safely. Mr. Nakahara asked the petitioners if there is any consideration for public art or bicycle facilities for the new development. Chairperson Oppenheim informed the petitioners that the Village and the Fine Arts Commission has a real interest in trying to incorporate public art in new development. Mr. Malk commented that he is an advocate of public art, and is impressed that the Village is interested in incorporating art in its public areas; pointing out that there are sculptures displayed throughout the center and that seasonal flowers and plants are alternated throughout the year to create a seasonal, unified ambiance throughout the center. Public Comment Andrew Marwick, 442 Kelburn Road, commented that one of the issues that Mr. Malk brought up was that there isn’t enough residential development in the area, and suggested that the CRM Properties Group consider the possibility of replacing the 711 Deerfield Road Building (currently Biaggi’s) with a residential building similar to the one located in the southeast corner at Deerfield and Waukegan. Mr. Marwick calculated that a residential development in that location could easily fit between thirty and forty apartments units there; especially since the need for retail surface parking would be reduced if there is no longer a retail use there. Mr. Marwick pointed out that CRM Properties is considering removing the existing land banking in the Deerfield Square parking lot, which is one of the few pieces of larger landscaped area on the property. Mr. Marwick commented that another issue is the fast moving traffic coming in off of Deerfield Road by the Walgreens entrance into the Village Square parking lot; adding that vehicles enter the parking lot at a quick pace and often don’t stop for pedestrians trying to cross the parking lot. Mr. Marwick voiced concern that by removing the existing 711 Deerfield Road Building (currently a single tenant use with a dine-in restaurant) and Workshop Meeting July 14, 2016 Page 8 replacing it with a multi-tenant building with fast-casual restaurants, the increased lunch time traffic will create an increased problem for pedestrians trying to cross the parking lot. Mr. Marwick commented that the functionality of Village Square’s traffic flow is going to change if the Biaggi’s building is demolished, and replaced by a multi-tenant building. Currently the traffic flow in Village Square is balanced: Biaggi’s peak business hours are in the evening (primarily Friday and Saturday evenings), while other businesses in the Square have day time operation hours. However, if another multi-tenant building goes into Village Square, the parking situation could be a problem during peak periods. Mr. Marwick pointed out that the traffic issues that could spur from the proposed changes to the Biaggi’s building is a very similar situation to the one debated about Jewel, in which the Village extensively discussed the parking lot congestion and traffic that was created by the Deerfield Park Plaza exit onto Lake Cook Road. Mr. Marwick’s fear is that the same parking lot congestion/traffic problem could occur at the Walgreens entrance off of Deerfield Road. Mr. Marwick commented that he also had an issue with Mr. Malk not keeping his promise to the Village that he would bring in high class restaurants. During the development of Deerfield Square (about 17 years ago), Mr. Malk needed the Village to help him acquire some of the other properties and homes that resided in the area that is now part of Deerfield Square. Mr. Marwick stated that at that time, Mr. Malk made a deal with the Village that if they helped him acquire those additional properties for his development that he would bring in fancy restaurants to Village Square. Mr. Marwick reiterated to Commissioner Benton’s earlier statement that if the Biaggi’s building is removed that there won’t be any classy restaurants remaining in the Deerfield Square. Mr. Marwick voiced his issue with Mr. Malk not keeping his word to the Village, as he promised Deerfield Square would be a classy center, but now he is trying to replace the last remaining classy restaurant with a multi-tenant building with fast-casual restaurants. Mr. Marwick commented that Mr. Malk has assured the Village that the businesses he brings into the proposed multi-tenant building would be beneficial to the Village and would attract customers to the center; however, he is being being very vague on the concepts. Mr. Marwick commented that Mr. Malk said that he would not bring big chain, fast-food restaurants (like McDonald’s) into the Square, but he has not disclosed the types of tenants that may go into those spaces. Mr. Marwick commented that he’s concerned that tenants would come and go in the proposed multi-tenant building just like the Tom and Eddie’s restaurant that came in and went out of the Square (like so many other businesses). He added that the backside of the shopping center behind Robert York Road and Osterman Avenue is barely being utilized at all. Mr. Marwick pointed out that the proposed building is very similar to the Il Forno’s building, where there are currently two cleaners, a barber shop and the Il Forno’s restaurant; voicing his concern that similar types of tenants could easily occupy the tenant spaces in the proposed multi-tenant building in the front of the center. Mr. Marwick asked if that’s what Workshop Meeting July 14, 2016 Page 9 the Village wanted; adding that Mr. Malk has made absolutely no guarantees that the building won’t be leased to service uses like barber shops and dry cleaners. Mr. Marwick (who lives in Coromandel) commented that it’s very difficult to get into the shopping center from his neighborhood. He added that the senior citizens who live in the southeast corner of Robert York and Osterman are constantly complaining about the difficulty they have entering Deerfield Square, as there is a very small space between the curb and the building, so the only options are to either walk in the street or go around and then cross over to get into the shopping center. Mr. Marwick commented that he does not feel that there is architectural continuity with the proposed new multi- tenant building and the existing buildings in the Square. He stated that the existing buildings have very ornate designs with a lot of architectural detail, whereas the proposed building is very bland. Commissioner Oppenheim commented that at this point (because it is a preliminary discussion) the petitioner can’t really speak to exactly what the architecture is going to be. Mr. Marwick ended his comments by stating that he strongly objects to this proposal. There being no further business to discuss the meeting adjourned. Respectfully Submitted, Mary Glowacz