2018-08-20 - Ordinance 2018-038 - GRANTING VARIATION FOR GROUND SIGN AT 10 DUNDEE RDORDINANCE NO. 2018 - 38
GRANTING A VARIATION TO THE BUFFALO GROVE SIGN CODE
FOR A GROUND SIGN
Buchanan Energy (Bucky's Express)
10 West Dundee Road Buffalo Grove IL
WHEREAS, the Village of Buffalo Grove is a Home Rule Unit pursuant to the Illinois
Constitution of 1970; and
WHEREAS, the real property ("Property") is zoned B3 and is commonly known as 10 West
Dundee Road, Buffalo Grove, Illinois; and,
WHEREAS, Carlos Corniffe, on behalf of Buchanan Energy ("Petitioner") is seeking a
variation for a ground sign on the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission voted against the variations (4-3), expressing
concern for the size of the sign. Prepared minutes of the public hearing are attached as Exhibit B;
and
WHEREAS, subsequent to the public hearing, the Petitioner revised the sign by reducing the
size of the sign to approximately 79 square feet, as depicted on Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the Corporate Authorities of the Village of Buffalo Grove hereby determine and
find that the requested sign variation are in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the
Sign Code (Title 14 of the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code) , and that the Petitioner has shown:
1. The literal interpretation and strict application of the provisions and requirements of
this Title would cause undue and unnecessary hardships to the sign user because of
unique or unusual conditions pertaining to the specific building, parcel or property in
question; and
2. The granting of the requested variance would not be materially detrimental to the
property owners in the vicinity; and
3. The unusual conditions applying to the specific property do not apply generally to other
properties in the Village; and
4. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the purpose of this Title pursuant to
Section 14.04.020
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE
OF BUFFALO GROVE, COOK AND LAKE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS, as follows:
1
Section 1. The preceding WHEREAS clauses are hereby adopted by the Corporate Authorities and
made a part hereof.
Section 2. Variation is hereby granted to the Village Sign Code (Title 14 of the Buffalo Grove
Municipal Code) for the purpose of installing a ground sign on the Property, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The proposed ground sign shall be constructed in accordance to the plans and documents
on Exhibit A and shall not be located in the existing watermain easement.
2. Additional landscaping around the base of the sign shall be provided in a manner acceptable
to the Village.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, and approval.
This Ordinance shall not be codified.
AYES: 6 — Berman Stein OttenheimerWeidenfeld Johnson Smith
NAYES: 0 — None
ABSENT: 0 - None
PASSED: August 20, 2018
APPROVED: August 20, 2018
ATTEST:
Janet MSirabian, Village Clerk
APPROVED:
AJJA IU"Q04n&fi'I
Beverly Suss n, Village President
0)
Exhibit A
Sign Plans
Buchanan Energy (Bucky's Express)
10 West Dundee Road Buffalo Grove IL
Buchanan Energy
2500 BRICKVALE ROAD, ELK GROVE VILLAGE, IL 60007
(847)693-6767
ccomiffe@buchananenergy.com
August 8, 2018
Planning & Zoning Commission
Village of Buffalo Grove
50 Raupp Boulevard
Buffalo Grove, Illinois 60089
Buchanan Energy is the owner of the property located at:
Bucky's 405
10 W. Dundee Rd.
Buffalo Grove, IL 68009
Buchanan Energy is requesting an application to remodel the canopy band and variances to install a new fuel
ground sign.
• Request a variation of proposed location of the electronic fuel ground sign which encroaches into the 15'
setback from the property line.
We have reduced the total sign square footage to 79.331 which is below the village requirement.
FOR THE COMPANY:
Carlos Corniffe
Carlos Corniffe
Territory Manager
af1
W J;!►! 1 t}3t' !Y !S!a#"tt� e J (t' �� �I�i -3�� ° 1
t t S •. �t• ft•s ! e ■ it
03 .�. ��� ir#F��eFf[�#3i ��} eFiE�E���� 9 �� �! �pp�} e� g E��a�•• `' �F 1��
c
°k-t...:.... • E �ff �R _ �N - 11 jl}
� r t°YF'et. F-�� I#.l�;�a•€ � # t -� s �' t } � a � '`ii ����
W� tI• . tF ap€ tt 1 t � � .�• j i } �F� 1 ea � ,
i�
Mom
p. x° tEF� ! =iP�E�i�Sie
m. N, a t1;11101 Emil
.v
+,: toto
i I i R
i � a t a
Qd02I i 3A02i 0 Itl3 3AS a to L c
�.nr,r < rr.00. an .• rnss
$ N p�p -8
OO oors
cq
-- ----- ----- -; ---- t e10 c �oTa
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — --�- a�• ,, a 6y 1 @ a
f �
co
t� � lo•io�1 � ? � � I Y.r � !
0
2
cc C I }
g
00'89cnr-----
Ili
,pq Y
g�s
i
Its
i E Ists�r �;�� � �.��€� its;•;#��',�; � 6.i��� ���;�:Is
#j���J°!�'0�����I� � ,� � a� ��� �s���
! eft I ji ; JI # ";
11 api
1 ! i I? i 1 E 1
f�.• LAO • i 5t� �� ."i JlY��a��lJ 5a i�� •�i�l F 11{#i RPM
}L
I " I I M ��I�►IE'iit;'iFI �ill�: 6�iIF1#!�#F!#i ��#],,,,!!!!!
o:
.a
3 3
a a
3
a
.%41b e✓ u
a� B ata�3
o
lama o�m�� p W
)m2 W Z Ko'J
cn ooF�mSr� ov
x
::E -��� M d �o ON vu
IIII U = � o N zawWZS „o, c� Q �W aj w
c oz�._.x
N OZ° laip C WZN~ W Z ZV ZZ Z6
N ~
—
� 26
O
2 z
h I, zo
q oiU �I
'o
O a .Z 6 L4 .9Z £ L
v
W°....................................................................._. p n
ac
co
z= o-
O N L L N
O O o m o�x
W 0.'� N ms a�oa I I at oayco
° W
N LO Z C� E j o2�?� o mSmg��a
r s 3 o ca 6Y' oy�o�Q mvRe.
a� m£ y
cn E oA 3 m6OR n m o
19
O w 3 f IL m ? co
o 'E� "y O c
Exhibit B
Minutes from the July 18, 2018 PZC Meeting
Buchanan Energy (Bucky's Express)
10 West Dundee Road Buffalo Grove IL
07/18/2018
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 50 RAUPP BOULEVARD,
BUFFALO GROVE, ILLINOIS ON WEDNESDAY, JULY 18, 2018
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM by Chairman Frank Cesario
Public Hearings/items For Consideration
Consider a Variation for an Electronic Ground Sign at 10 W Dundee Road (Trustee
Ottenheimer) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling)
Mr. Carlos Corniffe, Territory Manager, Buchanan Energy, 2500 Brickvale Drive, Elk
Grove Village, IL 60007, was present and sworn in.
Mr. Comiffe explained they are requesting to install a new identification and price sign.
The requested variations are to install a 91 square foot price sign that would encroach
into the 15 foot required setback. They meet the setback requirement along Dundee
Road. However, along Buffalo Grove Road the sign would be located 9 feet from the
property line.
Com. Moodhe asked how far back the old sign was located from Buffalo Grove Road. Mr.
Corniffe does not have the exact measurements, but there was the addition of the right
turn lane. The proposed sign's location is futher inside the property line than the old sign.
Com. Moodhe confirmed with Mr. Corniffe that the old sign was hit by a vehicle. He would
not want to see that same situation again. He asked if Mr. Corniffe feels that the
proposed sign will be set far enough back to avoid being hit in the future. Mr. Corniffe
believes so and added that the proposed sign meets the Village Engineer's
recommendation to be located outside the water main easement.
Ch. Cesario referenced page 16 of the packet and noted that the proposed sign would be
located approximately 3 feet west of the old sign location.
Com. Goldspiel is troubled by the proposed sign. This is a very significant corner in the
Village. While 3 out of 4 comers at the intersection are nicely developed, the fourth
comer is not that inviting and the extra sign area would further detract from the
appearance of the comer. There is a lot on the sign and he believes that it is too much.
There is a lot of signage on Dundee Road and it is difficult to distinguish one sign from
another. The proposed sign seems to have too much copy for a nice -looking comer. The
proposed sign looks like something that would be located on a highway, and Dundee
Road and Buffalo Grove Road are not highways. The proposed sign detracts from the
appearance of the area and work needs to be done to improve the look of the area.
There is land available to provide some landscaping around the base of the proposed
sign.
Com. Weinstein is concerned about the number of panels on the proposed sign. He
asked Mr. Corniffe is there is currently any signage for the car wash on the property. Mr.
Corniffe believes there was a sign on the car wash building, but that it was removed
07/18/20 l 8
because they changed the type of wash from a touchless wash to one with brushes. He
does not believe that there is currently a sign with the Wash n Run message. Com.
Weinstein confirmed with Mr. Corniffe that the proposed sign will be located 3 feet to the
west of the old sign location, farther away from Buffalo Grove Road. He believes that the
setback reduction is due, in part, to the expansion of the road, which the property owner
had nothing to do with. He also confirmed with Mr. Corniffe that the total sign area will be
91 square feet which does not include the base of the sign.
Ch. Cesario asked about the size of the old sign. Mr. Corniffe does not have that
information with him. The old sign had the Mobil panel and manual changeable gas
prices. It did not have the Wash n Run or the Bucky's panels. Ch. Cesario asked if the
proposed sign is the same dimensions as the Bucky's sign located on Route 83, which is
referenced in the packet on page 17 in the Staff memo.
Com. Moodhe asked Mr. Corniffe about the acreage for the Bucky's at 1251 McHenry
Road and the Bucky's at 10 W. Dundee Road. Mr. Corniffe knows that 1251 McHenry
Road is larger but he does not have the acreage. Com. Moodhe asked if 1251 McHenry
Road is almost twice the size as 10 W. Dundee Road. Mr. Corniffe responded that it most
likely is as the McHenry Road property had another building on it the old school house.
Com. Moodhe asked if any consideration was given to going with a smaller ground sign.
Mr. Corniffe explained that they have already reduced the size of the proposed ground
sign, specifically the price numbers.
Com. Cohn asked staff if staff is recommending approval of a 91 square foot sign in lieu
of an 80 square foot sign due to the approved sign at 1251 McHenry Road. Ms. Woods
responded that there are two rationales: one being that this is a reasonable request, and
two that historically the Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) has approved similar
requests. Com. Cohn asked if staff took into consideration that this proposed sign is for a
different roadway in a different area. Ms. Woods responded that staff always considers
the typology of the roads and that staff feels comfortable with this request. Com. Cohn
stated that the sign may be overwhelming for the area and may affect development of
other properties in the area. Ms. Woods stated that staff would not support a sign that
they feel could have adverse effects on future development of the area.
Ch. Cesario asked staff is there was any consideration of the proposed sign possibly
blocking the Taco Bell ground sign due to the height of the proposed sign. Ms. Akash
explained that the proposed sign was submitted to the Village Engineer, who did not have
any line -of -sight issues. Ch. Cesario believes that it would be helpful to have the
dimensions of the previous ground sign. In his opinion, the colors of the proposed sign
are pleasant. He believes that the price numbers are a little small. He would like to see
the price numbers a little larger. However, he believes the bottom half of the sign is
visually pleasing. He is struggling a little with the size, but it is not a huge change from 80
square feet to 91 square feet in terms of sign area.
Com. Khan asked if the sign on the property now was part of the sign that was knocked
down or was it brought in to replace the sign that was knocked down. Mr. Corniffe stated
that the sign there now is a portable, temporary sign that was brought in because the sign
that was hit was about to fall down and it was removed based upon a request from
Village staff. The base of the old sign is still there. Com. Khan seems to believe that the
old sign was much smaller than the sign at 1251 McHenry Road. He wished he had the
dimensions of the old sign as well. Mr. Corniffe responded that the price numbers are
07/ 18/2018
smaller on the proposed sign. He is not sure of the dimensions of the sign on McHenry
Road.
Com. Au asked if Buchanan Energy considered reducing the proposed sign to 80 square
feet in area. Mr. Corniffe responded that he is asking for approval of what he has
presented. They originally wanted larger price numbers and hence a bigger sign for
visibility and traffic flow but they reduced the square footage of the sign based upon the
suggestions made by staff. He would like to stick with the proposal made. Com. Au stated
that the price numbers are not that big and occupy less than 50% of the height. Over
50% of the proposed sign is other signage. Obviously the Petitioner would want the
"Mobil" panel to identify the brand, but the other panels occupy a big portion of the
proposed sign. Does the Petitioner need a "Bucky's" panel that is larger than the "Mobil'
panel? Mr. Corniffe responded that the "Bucky's" name has recognition and has grown in
this area since 2010. It goes a long way from a competitive standpoint.
Com. Cohn read Municipal Code Chapter 14.40.010 and stated that staff believes that
the request is reasonable. There is a conflict between what is reasonable and whether
there is undue and unnecessary hardship. Does staff find that there is an undue and
unnecessary hardship because of unique and unusual conditions? What facts is staff
relying on to reach that conclusion? He asked Mr. Corniffe to answer these questions as
well. Ms. Woods responded that these types of signs are changing across the nation. The
request to accommodate the changing needs of the gas station is reasonable. Mr.
Corniffe believes that the requested size is reasonable. it is typical of what he is seeing
throughout the market. in locations where they sell diesel fuel, customers did not know
they sold diesel until they added the diesel price sign. They would like larger price
numbers but went with the recommendation of staff. He understands that the roadway is
not a highway. However, it is a busy intersection.
Com. Khan stated that there is not much competition in this area. Advertising of the car
wash is not necessary. What's the difference of having the panel that identifies "Mobil'
and remove the "Bucky's" panel? Mr. Corniffe explained that their customers want to
know what services are offered at the different locations. What makes them competitive
is their product and their pricing. He wants to link the 3 Bucky's locations. Com. Khan
asked if the old sign had both a "Mobil" and "Bucky's" panel on the sign. Mr. Corniffe
stated that the old sign only had a "Mobil" panel.
Com. Weinstein stated that the main difference between this proposed sign and the sign
on McHenry Road is the "Synergy" panel and the "Wash n Run" panel. The difference in
area is only a one and a half foot difference in the overall height of the sign. He asked Mr.
Corniffe if he would be interested in removing the "Synergy" and "Wash n Run" panels,
which would reduce the overall height and may eliminate the need for the size variation.
Mr. Corniffe explained that "Synergy" is a big marketing push for ExxonMobil and they
are upgrading many locations to include the "Synergy" branding. The "Wash n Run" is to
let customers know that they have a car wash. They would like to keep both.
Ch. Cesario explained the options available to the Petitioner. Mr. Comiffe would like the
PZC to vote on what is presented.
Ch. Cesario entered the Staff Report dated July 18, 2018 as Exhibit 1.
07/18/2018
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were
no questions or comments from the audience.
The public hearing was closed at 8:29 PM.
Moved by Com. Weinstein, seconded by Com. Khan, to make a positive recommendation
to the Village Board to approve the variation request subject to the following condition:
1. The proposed electronic fuel ground sign shall be constructed in accordance to the plans
and documents submitted as part of this petition and shall not be located in the existing
watermain easement.
Com. Cohn stated that he generally does not have an issue with the size. He is trying to
figure out if the proposal is sufficient to meet the variation criteria standard. The criteria
provides that there has to be undue and unnecessary hardship and unique and unusual
conditions. All he has heard, from both staff and the Petitioner, that the request is not
unreasonable. He does not know if not being unreasonable meets the criteria.
Ch. Cesario explained that there are two variations, the first is the setback. He believes it
is clear that meeting the setback would be very difcult. With that, the circumstances are
clear. We think it is reasonable to announce who it is, what it is, gas prices, etc. The
question is how big of a sign is needed to communicate that. The Code also allows a
variation to be granted when the sign is of particularly good taste and well landscaped.
That is incredibly subjective. He is willing to take that stance and feels that the criteria
has been met. The variation for the setback is very clear to him. The total size he is
struggling with. He does not like the proposed height of 15 feet with the Taco Bell sign
behind it and not knowing what was there previously. The elimination of the "Wash n
Run" panel would bring the size down to almost 80 square feet. However, he likes the
sign telling him that there is a car wash. Based on that line of thought, he is supportive of
the proposal. It would have been helpful to know the height and size of the old sign.
Com. Au asked if the motion could be contingent upon the proposed sign not blocking the
Taco Bell sign. Mr. Raysa advised that a condition could be added that, in the Village's
discretion, the proposed sign does not unduly block the Taco Bell sign.
Com. Weinstein amended the motion to include a condition that the proposed sign will
not unduly interfere with the signage behind the Petitioner's sign, subject to staffs
determination. Com. Khan seconded the amendment.
Com. Goldspiel stated that this is a busy intersection. The proposed sign is very busy. He
does not believe that the PZC has to grant variations on everything that is requested. It
seems to him the proposed sign is out -sized for the location. It would fit much better
along McHenry Road. He believes that the sign would be a problem for redevelopment of
the area. The intersection is a gateway to the Village. No effort has been made to provide
for landscaping around the sign base. He believes the proposed sign would be
detrimental to the future development of the area.
07/18/2018
Com. Weinstein stated that this is one business, Mobil, and there are four things
advertised on the sign in addition to the prices; Mobil, Synergy, Bucky's and Wash n Run.
What is the purpose of the sign? He will know that this is a gas station before he sees the
sign. When he sees the Mobil sign, he will know it is a Mobil gas station and he will know
there is a car wash well before he sees the one and a half foot high panel. He does not
feel that the Wash n Run panel is adding anything to it because he will see the car wash.
He was trying to lead the Petitioner to downsize the sign so the Petitioner would not have
to deal with the variation for size. He is not in favor of the numerous panels on the sign.
Com. Moodhe believes that the sign could be reduced to the 80 square feet with some
work. One means is the Bucky's panel itself. The similarity between this proposed sign
and the one on McHenry Road differs in that the Bucky's on McHenry Road is huge. This
location is barely big enough to hold the cash register and a couple of coolers. He
believes the Bucky's panel can be reduced to be proportional to the size of the store.
That could bring the sign into compliance regarding size and still be able to keep all the
panels on the sign. He asked the Petitioner if he understood what Com. Goldspiel was
talking about as far as that particular corner is concerned. This intersection, Dundee
Road and Buffalo Grove Road, is a little more compact. The proposed sign would be a
much larger embodiment there. He would have felt better if the Petitioner was willing to
consolidate a bit.
Com. Cohn stated that he has not heard any hardship in the testimony presented. He is
still struggling to see where the hardship is. There was no testimony that if there was a
smaller sign that they would sell less gas and would not make a profit. The Village has a
Code for a reason and someone determined that an 80 square foot sign is standard. He
just does not see the hardship.
Com. Moodhe asked the Petitioner if he would like to reconsider and work with staff and
come back with a slightly different proposal.
Ch. Cesario discussed with the PZC Sign Code, Section 14.40.010, subsection B.
Com. Goldspiel stated that he would like to see the property particularly well landscaped.
Ch. Cesario asked Mr. Comiffe what he would like to do. Mr. Corniffe stated that the
hardship was the damage caused to the old sign by a consumer. He wished he had the
information and dimensions of the old sign and the sign on McHenry Road. He is not sure
if that would make a difference. He would like to move forward as presented.
Com. Au recommended amending the motion to include a condition that the site is to be
well landscaping in a manner acceptable to Village staff Mr. Raysa recommended
making the motion subject to Sign Code Section 14.40.010, subsection B.
Com. Weinstein made a second amendment to the motion to include Sign Code, Section
14.40.010, subsection B. Com. Khan seconded the amendment.
Com. Khan noted that there used to be a gas station at the northwest corner of Dundee
Road and Arlington Heights Road. The gas station has been gone for at least 10 years.
07/18/2018
However, the landscaping is still there. He asked staff if the old sign was granted a
variation. The PZC has been struggling to compare what the size of the old sign was
compared to the proposed sign. Ms. Akash replied that she is not sure if the previous
sign was granted a variation.
Roll Call to accept the second amendment concerning the requirement for landscaping:
AYE -Au, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Moodhe, Weinstein, Cesario
NAY - None
ABSTAIN - None
Motion passed.
Roll Call to accept the first amendment concerning the proposed sign not impeding any
other signage:
AYE -Au, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Moodhe, Weinstein, Cesario
NAY - None
ABSTAIN - None
Motion passed.
RESULT: RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE [3 TO 4]
Next: 8/20/2018 7:30 PM
MOVER: Mitchell Weinstein, Commissioner
SECONDER: Zill Khan, Commissioner
AYES: Frank Cesario, Mitchell Weinstein, Amy Au
NAYS: Adam Moodhe, Matthew Cohn, Stephen Goldspiel, Zill Khan
ABSENT: Scott Lesser
Regular Meeting
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:59 PM
Chris Stilling
APPROVED BY ME THIS 18th DAY OF July , 2018