Views
5 years ago

9.07.2010 - Village of Deerfield

9.07.2010 - Village of Deerfield

Village

Village Center Development Commission June 2, 2010 Page 3 issue has been brought up previously. He explained that even taking away 80 spaces for snow, there are enough spaces available. Mr. Siavelis added that it is no different than any other retail center and they look at it on an ongoing basis when needed. Mr. Siavelis noted it is costly to haul snow off site. Ms. Shaw asked if this business would take business away from Pearle Vision. Mr. Siavelis explained they do not own the other center and it is a free enterprise system. Mr. Siavelis stated Visionworks has a contract with Blue Cross Blue Shield and they have requested a location in this area. Mr. Cooper made a motion to approve the proposed Special Use for the optometrist office as presented. Mr. Cooper seconded the motion. The motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: (5) Adler, Cooper, Kaufmann, Shaw, Garfield Nays: (0) None 2. Village-owned parking lots along Deerfield Road Ch. Garfield reminded the Commissioners that the Village asked the VCDC for a plan to clean up the Village-owned parking lot along Deerfield Road. Ch. Garfield asked the Board for parameters and staff came up with a temporary plan. Ch. Garfield asked the Commissioners to remember this proposed plan is a temporary plan. Mr. Ryckaert explained the proposed plan would be a clean up plan until a long-term use is decided. The plan shows 151 parking spaces and provides new striping, seal coating and directional signage in the lot. It removes the existing barricades in the middle of the lot and accommodates truck delivery for small and medium-sized trucks. Mr. Street would approach Kevin from Kevin’s Place to request his deliveries be made in small or medium-sized trucks. The proposed plan would not accommodate large or semi-trucks. Ch. Garfield noted that the Village could put a sign on Waukegan Road stating no deliveries. Ch. Garfield noted this plan was labeled a ‘clean up’ plan. He thought the plan was originally supposed to be a beautification plan. Ch. Garfield likes the traffic flow, but does not believe it should be just a parking lot for the church, commercial property and Park District. Ch. Garfield thought the plan was supposed to enhance the aesthetics of the property. Mr. Adler asked about the cost of the project. Mr. Ryckaert explained the cost would be approximately $20,000 plus the cost for Public Works, who would handle much of the workload, and Public Works personnel are already being paid. He noted that if the Village puts a lot of money into the property, it would not be a temporary clean up plan. Ch. Garfield does not believe any money should be spent on the property unless it benefits the Village. He does not believe it should be a private parking lot for the Park 3

Village Center Development Commission June 2, 2010 Page 4 District, church and retailers, unless they contribute to the cost. He believes it will be an ugly, asphalt lot without trees or screening. Ch. Garfield does not believe the plan creates a safer environment for children. Ch. Garfield suggested removing some of the parking spaces to create a safer environment. He does not believe removing some spaces would require an amendment to the plan. Mr. Ryckaert explained the Village is proposing a clean up. Mr. Kaufmann suggested not having angled parking, which would make it safer because kids would not be crossing through as many spaces. Ch. Garfield wants to make a safer and aesthetically appealing project. Mr. Ryckaert noted there were some planting areas along Deerfield Road. Ch. Garfield suggested a berm to screen the parking lot. Mr. Adler asked when the Board would discuss this proposal. Mr. Ryckaert explained the Board would discuss the proposal on Monday night. Mr. Ryckaert hopes the permanent use for the property can get determined in the next six months or one year. Ch. Garfield believes whatever gets put on this property will stay as it is for the next several years. Mr. Kaufmann added that if the Village resurfaces the lot, adds striping and landscaping, the Village would have everything except the park. He believes it should be beautified. Mr. Ryckaert explained that if the Village puts a significant amount of money into the property at this time, people might expect it to be a permanent plan. Mr. Cooper suggested asking the property owners to contribute to the cost of beautifying the property. Ms. Shaw noted that the space will not be developed for a number of years, no matter how much the Village spends on the property. Ch. Garfield questioned what ‘temporary’ means. Mr. Adler explained that the church, Park District and commercial properties currently have unlimited use of Village property for parking. Once the parking lot is resurfaced, those uses will not want to give back the parking. Ch. Garfield noted that the Village seems to want adequate parking to be allocated, but he does not believe the rest of the parking lot should be an eyesore. Ms. Shaw believes the property could stay a parking lot for a long time and believes the Village should spend a little more money to make it aesthetically appealing from Deerfield Road. Ch. Garfield noted the entrance into downtown Deerfield is a sea of parking and an ugly building (AT&T). He would rather the VCDC recommend the Village spend the money to screen the parking lot and keep the actual parking lot as is. Mr. Cooper likes that alternative, because it would open up more options in the future. Mr. Adler explained that if the money were used to screen the property, the screening could be utilized in a future use as well. Ch. Garfield looks at screening the property as a visual enhancement to the lot. The property is currently an eyesore. Mr. Cooper would not want to see a park in this location; rather, he would prefer beautification of the existing parking lot. Given the financial situation, the Commission would prefer to spend the limited funds to beautify the property to screen the parking lot from Deerfield Road. The Commission 4

Residents And Businesses - Deerfield Township, Ohio
April/May Edition - Deerfield Township, Ohio
A park and recreation plan for the village of Steger, Illinois
Deerfield Glencoe Glenview Highland Park Highwood ... - NSSRA
DLL_Jordan Springs Village Centre Concept Plan.indd - Penrith City ...
Deerfield Point -- Digital Tour Collateral - Stream Realty Partners
Downtown Revitalization Plan - Village of Saukville
handbook draft - Village of Olympia Fields
LAKELINE VILLAGE
Open cafes and eateries beside the Eastlakes ... - Eastlakes Village
Village of Spencerport Eastern Village Corridor Concept Study
Abetenim Arts Village (The UBUNTU Village) - NKA Foundation
12 Codicote Road, Welwyn Village, Welwyn, AL6 9NQ ... - Vebra
Village of Shorewood Comprehensive Bicycle Study
Village Capacity in Maintaining Infrastructure - psflibrary.org
June 2012 - Village of Palos Park, Illinois
Winter 2012 - Village of Flossmoor, Illinois
Freight Villages in the NYMTC Region
Issue 131 - the Pembury Village Website
Winter/Spring - Village of Brown Deer
Download Village Design Statements: The Way Forward?
north-rainier-urban-village-asssessment-final
BIKE METRA - the Village of Oak Park
4 Schlitterbahn Waterpark & Sports Village at Fort Lauderdale
TETON VILLAGE MIX - Summer 2012- Guide to Teton Village ...