Village board approves preliminary plan for 24‑unit East Country Lane townhomes; cross‑access easement with Timber Court unresolved

The Village Board on April 7 approved preliminary PUD, rezoning and plat requests to allow a 24‑unit townhome development at 3310 North Arlington Heights Road (PC‑20‑415), and directed staff and the village attorney to prepare final documents for a future meeting.

Attorney Lawrence Friedman represented the petitioner and introduced David Schwartz of SFP Properties as the developer. Senior planner Emily Radman described the request: an amendment to the comprehensive plan to reflect a multifamily designation, rezoning from M‑1 (Research/Development/Light Manufacturing) to a multifamily district (R‑6), a planned unit development for four buildings comprising 24 townhomes, and a preliminary plat to consolidate the property into a single lot. Radman said the Plan Commission recommended approval subject to conditions; the developer has already addressed several of those items.

Radman said the units will include three bedrooms and attached two‑car garages and that the site meets the village's parking requirement (48 required stalls), with 10 visitor spaces on site. She said the development complies with the village inclusionary housing rules: the project will provide 1 on‑site affordable unit and will pay a fee in lieu for the remaining 0.2 required unit.

A recurring issue during the discussion was a cross‑access easement to link the new development with an existing Timber Court drive. Thomas Jacob, representing the Timber Court side, told the board that the access as currently proposed "was a non‑starter" for his client and that elements of the 2005 approval for Timber Court would make enforcement and alignment complicated. The petitioner said it had already designed the site to permit the connection, and the developer committed to construct the connection and pay the construction costs if given the legal rights and access to do so. Village staff and the village attorney said the cross‑access easement did not need to be fully resolved for preliminary approval but must be secured before final plat approval.

Trustee Lebeds moved, and Trustee Baldino seconded, the motion to direct staff and the village attorney to prepare the final approval documents consistent with the Plan Commission recommendation and conditions. The board approved the motion by voice vote.

Because this was preliminary approval, the developer must return for final plat and final PUD sign‑offs after satisfying remaining Plan Commission conditions, including resolving the cross‑access easement and submitting any remaining technical materials required for permitting.