OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Plainfield Plan Commission Reviews Concepts and Approves Plats - October 7, 2025

Village Board & CommissionsTuesday, October 7, 2025
BodyPlainfield, Illinois
SessionVillage Board & Commissions
DateTuesday, October 7, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:30:06

Transcript — Verbatim
5:39

Thanks for that.

5:40

Could we get a roll call, please?

5:42

Commissioner Campanella?

5:43

Here.

5:43

Commissioner Fahim.

5:45

Commissioner Heinen.

5:46

Present.

5:46

Commissioner Nicholson.

5:47

Here.

5:48

Commissioner Vilerga.

5:49

Here.

5:49

And Chairman Minnes.

5:51

Here.

5:52

Thank you for that.

5:53

First item on the agenda this evening is the approval of our minutes from our last meeting held September 16th.

5:59

There is a copy of those minutes in your packet.

6:02

If anyone has any recommended changes or comments, please let it be known.

6:08

Motion to approve the minutes.

6:10

All right.

6:10

We have a motion and a second.

6:12

We can do this with a voice vote.

6:13

All in favor with an aye.

6:15

Aye.

6:15

Any opposed with a nay?

6:17

Any abstentions?

6:18

All right.

6:19

The ayes have it.

6:20

Uh next on the agenda is an allotment of time for public comments.

6:24

Uh that's if anyone in the audience this evening has anything they would like to comment or speak on.

6:28

That is not a case that we are discussing this evening, uh, nor a existing public hearing.

6:34

So if there's anyone out there that would like to approach the microphone, now would be your time.

6:39

Certainly.

6:39

You said we can't be on something that you discussed.

6:41

Uh this one over here, sir, please.

6:43

Yeah, not on tonight's agenda and not on an existing public hearing, yes.

6:46

All right.

6:48

Um please state your name if you don't.

6:49

Doug Zimney, 902 Plainfield Road.

6:52

Okay.

6:52

Tonight's meeting is scheduled at a plan commission meeting that I assume your staff have properly noticed.

6:58

The petitioner in item three of your agenda has not complied with the zoning code that you have complied with in the notice requirements, they must meet.

7:06

Section 9-382C of your code requires the petitioner to give written notice to adjacent property owners, which they did not.

7:14

I am an adjacent property owner and received no notice in this meeting.

7:18

Section 9.382B requires that the applicant place signs on the property with the size coloring letters and the sign being clearly legible on the public and all adjacent public rights away, which have which have not been done.

7:32

I have driven around a property yesterday and today, there are no signs.

7:35

Your code requires these signs be placed at least 15 days prior to a meeting regarding any parcel of property.

7:42

You as the plan commission are conducting a public hearing tonight.

7:45

Therefore, petitioners in each agenda must comply with the notice requirements of your ordinance.

7:51

If the petitioner was just having a conversation at the village, throwing around ideas, that would be one thing.

7:57

But the scheduled plan commission hearing with all of the board members aware of this meeting, a quorum being present in which formal requirements must be met and upheld.

8:06

This is not a homeowner asking that a garage he wants to build encroachments into the side or setbacks in a residential lot.

8:14

These changes, the petitioners suggesting are huge.

8:17

Among the things they want is a 1.25 million square foot industrial building right in the backyard of a state lots.

8:23

He wants to bring high density living.

8:26

We are not adjacent people living in high density apartment condos.

8:30

We are homeowners living on three, four, five, and plus acre lots.

8:34

We are a state lots.

8:36

Most of the adjacent property in Nay say Township are a state lots.

8:40

They received opinions, objections, discussions from the last time we tried to make these changes to this property.

8:45

Now they have a small piece of a plan which increases the density to an unaccepted level.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning And Land Use████████████████████████████████████36%
Transportation Safety██████████████████18%
Affordable Housing██████████████14%
Public Safety███████7%
Procedural█████5%
Traffic Management█████5%
Community Engagement████4%
Public Engagement████4%
Engineering And Infrastructure███3%
Summary of Proceedings

Plainfield Plan Commission Meeting – October 7, 2025

The Plan Commission held a regular meeting on Tuesday, October 7, 2025, at 7:00 PM in the Village Boardroom. The agenda included approval of minutes, a development report, two final plat approvals for Playa Vista subdivisions, and concept plan reviews for a large industrial/commercial/residential project at the northwest corner of Ridge Road and 143rd Street and a luxury multifamily development on 119th Street. Extensive public comments were heard, particularly opposing the industrial concept. Two final plats were recommended for approval; no votes were taken on the concept plans, which remain in early stages.

Consent Calendar

  • Approval of Minutes: The minutes of the Plan Commission meeting held on September 16, 2025, were approved by voice vote without dissent.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • General Comments: Doug Zimney (902 Plainfield Road) argued that item #3 (NWC Johnson & Ridge concept plan) required proper public hearing notice under village code, stating no signs were posted and adjacent owners were not notified. Staff clarified that concept plans do not constitute public hearings; therefore, no such notice is required. Zimney expressed strong opposition to the proposed 1.25 million square foot industrial building adjacent to estate lots.
  • General Comments: Pete Pisteris (1998 Road at Swigle) noted that earlier this year, village leadership indicated no development was imminent west of Ridge Road, and expressed concern that plans have emerged within months.
  • Item #3 (NWC Johnson & Ridge): Multiple residents and officials spoke in opposition:
    • Doug Zimney reiterated concerns about traffic, environmental studies, and lack of community input.
    • A resident described existing gridlock on Laraway Road and questioned 143rd Street's capacity for additional truck traffic.
    • Cheryl Road (Naasi Township trustee) raised traffic congestion, commute times, and questioned the source of labor data for warehouse employment.
    • Biff George (Cherry Road) questioned how much development is enough and cited safety concerns for residential areas.
    • Eric Bernacki (Nay Say Township Supervisor & Vice Chair of Kendall County Regional Plan Commission) noted that the county and township comprehensive plans designated the northwest corner as commercial node and the rest as rural residential, and that the infrastructure (Johnson Road, 126) is inadequate for heavy trucks.
    • David Renard (Nay Say Township) urged rejection of industrial use, stating it would fundamentally change the rural residential character.
    • Patty Zimney (902 Plainfield Road) echoed neighbors' opposition, warning of further resistance if the project advances.
    • Jeremiah Finistad (Nay Say Township farm) raised concerns about emergency access and train crossings, and noted that the 143rd Street corridor improvements could affect traffic.
  • Item #4 (Fiduciary Multifamily): One resident (Todd Morris) commented that adding 400 units (est. 800 cars) would worsen already dangerous traffic conditions on 119th Street. Another asked about the possibility of Section 8 housing; staff and commissioners refrained from answering, noting the question is inappropriate for planning discussions. The applicant stated they finance conventionally and do not use tax credits.

Discussion Items

1. Playa Vista Townes (Case 2100-082025.FP.SSA) – Final Plat

  • Staff reported the 15.5-acre site at SE corner of Ridge Road and 135th Street, contiguous to existing Playa Vista. Plans include 118 townhome units in 21 buildings (six per building in some cases). The final plat is consistent with previously approved preliminary plat and special use permit.
  • Applicant Dan Fabish (Four Star) confirmed the plat is as previously reviewed.
  • Commissioners discussed right-of-way dedication for a future traffic signal or roundabout at Ridge Road and 135th Street. Chairman Minnes expressed preference for smaller building clusters (3–4 units) rather than six-unit stacks.
  • Motion: Commissioner Vilerga moved to recommend approval subject to staff stipulations; seconded by Commissioner Heinen. Vote: 4–1 (Commissioners Campanella, Nicholson, Heinen, Vilerga in favor; Chairman Minnes opposed).

2. Playa Vista Phase 2B (Case 2113-080925.FP) – Final Plat

  • Staff noted this unit was split from the original Unit 2 to provide additional right-of-way and landscape easement along Ridge Road, enhancing buffering. The plat is in compliance with the preliminary plat.
  • Applicant confirmed willingness to replat to meet village requests.
  • Public comment: A resident asked about Section 8 housing; staff clarified the village has no purview over such federal programs and noted the development is for-sale units.
  • Motion: Commissioner Heinen moved to recommend approval with the two stipulations; seconded by Commissioner Nicholson. Vote: Unanimous (5–0).

3. NWC of Johnson Rd. & Ridge Rd. Concept Plan (Case 2112-082225.CP)

  • Staff (with one recusal due to firm involvement) presented the concept: ~200+ acres at northwest corner of Ridge Road and 143rd Street (currently unincorporated), including ~1.25M sq ft industrial warehouse, 45 acres of R1 residential, and 9 acres of commercial. Access proposed off Plainfield Road, Ridge Road, and Johnson Road (143rd St). Staff noted excessive truck parking and too many access points on Johnson Road.
  • Applicant Liam Logan (Core Five Industrial Partners) presented company background (54M sq ft built, strong Chicago presence) and project details: 150 acres for industrial, 45 for residential, 9 for retail. They emphasized market demand, location near I-55, and a 60-foot buffer between uses. They raised power capacity concerns (ComEd transformer not available until early 2028, delaying occupancy if construction starts 2026).
  • Public testimony (see above) overwhelmingly opposed the industrial component, citing traffic, zoning, rural character, lack of studies, and inconsistency with previous comprehensive plans. Eric Bernacki highlighted that the county and township plans designated this area for commercial node and rural residential, and that the comprehensive plan update that zoned it industrial was disappointing.
  • Staff acknowledged traffic and environmental studies would be required later in the formal process. Jonathan stated that 143rd Street improvements (widening, future Route 126 alignment) are in the transportation plan.
  • Commissioner comments:
    • Commissioner Nicholson expressed opposition to the current plan, citing excessive building size, too many access points, and lack of clarity on the residential component.
    • Commissioner Vilerga questioned the residential parcel and potential commercial alignment along Ridge Road.
    • Commissioner Campanella suggested considering smaller industrial buildings instead of one large building; applicant stated market demand is for million-square-foot facilities.
    • Chairman Minnes echoed concerns about building size and access, and recommended reducing access points on Johnson Road and evaluating a layout with multiple buildings.
  • No vote taken; this was a concept plan seeking preliminary feedback. Applicant will continue working with staff.

4. Fiduciary Real Estate Development Multifamily Concept Plan (Case 2117-092925.CP)

  • Staff reported the 31-acre site on south side of 119th Street east of Route 59, adjacent to industrial park west and single-family homes east. Proposed 377 luxury apartment homes in two phases (232+ units), with density 13.1 units/acre (below the comprehensive plan's 15+). Applicant Fiduciary developed the successful Seasons of Plainfield (320 units, 98.3% occupancy, highest rents in market).
  • Tony DeRosa (Fiduciary) presented: buildings are two-story with private entrances, attached/detached garages, Class A finishes, EV charging, pollinator patches, and dark-sky lighting. Parking ratio 2.14 spaces/unit. Estimated annual property tax revenue $1.3M. 79% of Seasons residents moved from outside Plainfield.
  • Public comment: Todd Morris raised traffic safety concerns and questioned Section 8 (as noted).
  • Commissioner comments:
    • Commissioner Heinen praised the Seasons project but found the site plan very rigid; suggested more curvature, reduced density, and careful alignment of access points with future 119th Street improvements and adjacent Naperville development. He recommended exploring emergency access via Wolf Drive.
    • Commissioner Vilerga echoed rigidity and density concerns, but appreciated the transparent tax revenue and economic impact data. Asked about buffering from adjacent industrial uses; applicant noted they use garages and landscaping.
    • Commissioner Nicholson liked the quality and buffering, but supported limiting to one access point on 119th Street.
    • Commissioner Campanella questioned left-turn difficulty from 119th into the site and suggested a walking path to the Woodman's development.
    • Chairman Minnes recommended reducing density, possibly reorienting buildings to avoid cookie-cutter layout, and moving the clubhouse away from the industrial side.
  • No vote taken; next step is presentation to the Committee of the Whole (likely late October/early November).

Key Outcomes

  • Playa Vista Townes Final Plat: Recommended approval (4–1) subject to staff stipulations.
  • Playa Vista Phase 2B Final Plat: Recommended approval (unanimous) subject to two stipulations.
  • NWC Johnson & Ridge Concept Plan: No formal action; applicant will refine plan, including reducing access points, addressing building scale, and coordinating with staff. Further public input will occur in subsequent formal application stages.
  • Fiduciary Multifamily Concept Plan: No formal action; applicant will present to Committee of the Whole in ~3–4 weeks. Staff and commissioners provided specific design feedback to be incorporated.
  • Development Report: Village board favorably received the Plainfield Business Park West proposal; rejected the Redwood Communities ranch townhome plan on 127th Street due to density and location concerns.

Meeting Transcript

Thanks for that. Could we get a roll call, please? Commissioner Campanella? Here. Commissioner Fahim. Commissioner Heinen. Present. Commissioner Nicholson. Here. Commissioner Vilerga. Here. And Chairman Minnes. Here. Thank you for that. First item on the agenda this evening is the approval of our minutes from our last meeting held September 16th. There is a copy of those minutes in your packet. If anyone has any recommended changes or comments, please let it be known. Motion to approve the minutes. All right. We have a motion and a second. We can do this with a voice vote. All in favor with an aye. Aye. Any opposed with a nay? Any abstentions? All right. The ayes have it. Uh next on the agenda is an allotment of time for public comments. Uh that's if anyone in the audience this evening has anything they would like to comment or speak on. That is not a case that we are discussing this evening, uh, nor a existing public hearing. So if there's anyone out there that would like to approach the microphone, now would be your time. Certainly. You said we can't be on something that you discussed. Uh this one over here, sir, please. Yeah, not on tonight's agenda and not on an existing public hearing, yes. All right. Um please state your name if you don't. Doug Zimney, 902 Plainfield Road. Okay. Tonight's meeting is scheduled at a plan commission meeting that I assume your staff have properly noticed. The petitioner in item three of your agenda has not complied with the zoning code that you have complied with in the notice requirements, they must meet. Section 9-382C of your code requires the petitioner to give written notice to adjacent property owners, which they did not. I am an adjacent property owner and received no notice in this meeting. Section 9.382B requires that the applicant place signs on the property with the size coloring letters and the sign being clearly legible on the public and all adjacent public rights away, which have which have not been done. I have driven around a property yesterday and today, there are no signs. Your code requires these signs be placed at least 15 days prior to a meeting regarding any parcel of property. You as the plan commission are conducting a public hearing tonight. Therefore, petitioners in each agenda must comply with the notice requirements of your ordinance. If the petitioner was just having a conversation at the village, throwing around ideas, that would be one thing. But the scheduled plan commission hearing with all of the board members aware of this meeting, a quorum being present in which formal requirements must be met and upheld.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com