Loading...
2008-02-20 - Plan Commission - Minutes Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: ❑A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 02/20/2008 Type of Meeting: PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION February 20, 2008 Consideration of amendments to the Buffalo Grove Zoning Ordinance, Title 17 of The Buffalo Grove Municipal Code, including (I) Chapter 17.12—Definitions; And (ii) Section 17.48.020.C., concerning definitions and special use regulations For a landscape waste transfer station in the Industrial District Petitions to the Village of Buffalo Grove for annexation and zoning approvals for: East Parcel: zoning in the Industrial District with a special use to operate a Landscape waste transfer station, including related uses such as outdoor Storage and sale of landscape materials, and approval of a Preliminary Plan with The following variations: ZONING ORDINANCE— Section 17.48.020.F.5.a. (to allow a landscaped setback of less than 50 feet from Milwaukee Avenue); Section 17.48.020.F.6.b. (to waive the requirement for a 6-foot high screen Adjoining property in a residential district); and Section 17.48.020.F.6.a. (to Allow a building setback for the proposed office of 28 feet instead of 60 feet From the south lot line adjoining property in a residential district; and Any other relief necessary for the applicant's project as described; and West Parcel: zoning in the B-3 Planned Business Center District and any other Relief necessary for the applicant's project as described Chairman Ottenheimer called the hearing to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Chairman Ottenheimer read the Notice of Public Hearing as published in the Buffalo Grove Daily Herald, explained the procedure to be followed for the public hearing, and swore in all persons who wished to give testimony. Commissioners present: Chairman Ottenheimer Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Mr. Khan Mr. Teplinsky Mr. Stark Ms. Myer Mr. Weinstein Commissioners absent: Mr. Cohn Also present: Mr. Matthew Norton, Holland& Knight Mr. Bruce Knapp, Land & Lakes Mr. James Cowhey, Jr., Land& Lakes Ms. Mary Margaret Cowhey, Land& Lakes Mr. Martin Hanley, Land& Lakes Mr. James Putnam, Jacob & Hefner Associates Mr. Michael Loganbil, VOA Associates Mr. Tim Sjogren, Metro Transportation Group Mr. Steve Trilling, Village Trustee Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner The following exhibits were presented by the petitioner at the public hearing: Exhibit IA: Overall Aerial Photo Exhibit 1: West Parcel Aerial Photo Exhibit 2: East Parcel Aerial Photo Exhibit 3: West Parcel Concept Plan (2 sheets), dated January 30, 2008 Exhibit 4A: East Parcel - engineering plan depicting floodway and floodplanin areas Exhibit 4: East Parcel Preliminary Plan dated January 7, 2008 Exhibit 5: East Parcel Tree Survey and Preservation Plan Exhibit 6: East Parcel Preliminary Engineering Plan (3 sheets) Exhibit 7: East Parcel Preliminary Landscape Plan, dated January 30, 2008 Exhibit 8: East Parcel Building - Elevation Plans and Renderings, undated and page two Elevation drawing of scale facility Exhibit 9: East Parcel - Sample Board of proposed exterior building materials Exhibit 10: Trip Generation Analysis dated February 4, 2008 by Metro Transportation Exhibit 11: Memorandum dated February 15, 2008 from Robert Pfeil, Village Planner to Plan Commission Re: Consideration of Amendments to Buffalo Grove Zoning Ordinance Exhibit 12: Lake County Forest Preserve Department letter Exhibit 13: Memorandum dated February 15, 2008 from Robert Pfeil, Village Planner to Plan Commission Re: Land & Lakes Development Chairman Ottenheimer noted that both public hearings would be held at the same time as they are both closely allied. Mr. Matthew Norton of Holland & Knight stated they are here requesting a rezoning of the east and west parcels. On the west parcel they are requested B-3 zoning district and the east parcel to the Industrial District as well as a text amendment that will make it possible for the Village to approve a special use for a landscape waste transfer station in the Industrial District and then a request that a special use, in fact, be granted for this east parcel for a landscape waste transfer station. That transfer station, because of the configuration of that site, will also require certain variations that they will ask for tonight. Mr. Norton stated under the Village's zoning code, if no action is taken, these properties would be annexed and zoned into the Village's highest and least dense residential district of RE. The current uses and trend of development in this area and the Village's own comprehensive plan calls for commercial properties. Mr. Norton reviewed other developments bordering the vicinity of the west parcel. There is the City Park development in Lincolnshire, to the west is the Arbor Creek Business Center and to the south is the Corporate Grove development. Mr. Norton reviewed developments bordering the vicinity of the east parcel. To the north is the Cubby Bear Restaurant. The property directly to the east of the northern part of the property is zoned residential in the county but is used in part for commercial purposes and actually similar commercial purposes as they intend to put on their parcel. It includes storage of landscaping material, equipment and appears to have large piles of landscape material stored on the property. To the south is another property, although zoned residential, is being put to commercial uses, including a tree cutting business and has a composting and landscaping business going on. Mr. Mike Loganbil of VOA Associates, reiterated the trend along Milwaukee Avenue has definitely been commercial and they do not believe either the west or east parcel would be a suitable site for low density residential. They feel commercial is by far the highest and best use for both of these sites. He stated he is exceptionally excited by the development and plans for the west side. Mr. Loganbil stated they have been directed by Land & Lakes to really think about sense of place and create a special place that people from the community will remember. They are paying close attention to creating a unique space. Having a new and exciting destination will also bring increased tax revenue. Mr. Loganbil stated there have been three issues brought up at past meetings; namely, parking, phasing and grade change. With regard to phasing, the intent is to build buildings on the east parcel first in the front with parking to support those buildings on the front parcel and a portion of the rear parcel. As a phase 2 potential they are showing additional retail at the rear and enough parking to support that retail. Mr. Loganbil noted the parking they are currently showing is more than adequate for the amount of retail and potential hotel and restaurant or retail outlots as shown. Mr. Loganbil reviewed the grade change plans, noting there is a 15 foot grade change from Milwaukee to the rear of the site. If you park at the front you could enter right at the first level at grade. If you drive around and park in the back you would enter at a second level. The idea is that both would be primary entrances. He noted there are developments like this at Northbrook Court and many other malls where you enter on multiple levels. He further noted they have tried to bring a real pedestrian element to connect both the second and first level together. There is a grand staircase brings you from the upper level down to the rear. He noted there are a number of other ways you could negotiate the grade change as a pedestrian besides the staircase. The idea is there could also be internal circulation within the buildings that easily take you from one story to the next for a seamless transition. Mr. Norton stated the primary interest in commercial development along Milwaukee Avenue has been the primary interest that Land & Lakes has received from potential end users on the property. Mr. Martin Hanley of Land & Lakes stated they have not done a formal marketing program to date because it is too far out now to do that. We need to know our construction schedule and approval schedule after which they will do a full blown marketing analysis for the property. However, they have been in touch with many brokers and retailers and feel confident that the uses here will be a high quality, high traffic and high sales type of opportunity. He stated they have had people interested in almost all uses such as hotels and restaurants as well as retailers such as sporting goods stores, shoe stores, furniture stores, clothing stores and big box interests as well as small mom and pop type operations. Mr. Bruce Knapp of Land & Lakes reviewed how the landscape waste transfer station operation works. He noted on the south parcel they have multiple bins for mulch, stone and sand. that are picked up by landscapers for their landscaping projects. Mr. Norton stated that based on the Village's comprehensive plan, the demand received by Land & Lakes for commercial uses on their properties and the trend of development in the area they respectfully request that the Plan Commission give them a positive recommendation on their request to rezone the west side parcel to the B-3 zoning district and the east side parcel to the Industrial District. Mr. Norton stated at present the Village does not have a definition on its books of landscape waste transfer station and does not have landscape waste transfer station as an identified special use. Therefore they are proposing amendments that would allow the Village to do that. Mr. Pfeil's memo to the Plan Commission of February 15, 2008 states the petition needs to add "Landscape Waste Transfer Station" as a special use in the Industrial District. The rest of the text amendment would include adding a couple of definitions. First is the definition of Landscape Waste which is largely identical to the IEPA definition of landscape waste and secondly a Landscape Waste Transfer Station which is similar to the IEPA's definition and adds to that a third part which says that such a use must be permitted and operated in accordance with all applicable laws, including without limitation Illinois Environmental Protection Agency requirements. He stated these are the text amendments they are asking for. Mr. Norton addressed the special use criteria and stated the following: 1. He noted they have already discussed how the transfer station will serve a public need. The use of this facility as an interim process for the landscape waste to ultimately go to a compost facility is something that is needed. That use will not be detrimental to the public health and will be required to be operated in accordance with IEPA regulations. 1. The special use is in harmony with the comprehensive plan which supports commercial uses on Milwaukee. Relatively speaking, the size and nature of their operations are small and not particularly intense. Whatever intensity they have is pretty well insulated as they are between commercial uses to the north, similar commercial uses surrounding them and forest preserve on the east. The forest preserve has actually consented to this use as a landscape waste transfer station. They have seen the plans and they have consented to that. Mr. Tim Sjogren of Metro Transportation Group, stated there is already a facility across the street and they were able to use the information from that facility. They looked at the worst time of year with the most traffic which will end up creating on the other side about 450 trips in and out. About 200 vehicles per day is the activity associated with this facility. These are not new trips, they are already there and they just moving across the street. In perspective, there are about 40,000 vehicles per day on Milwaukee Avenue and we are therefore talking about 1 percent of the traffic there. Mr. Sjogren stated they have had discussions with IDOT for the east parcel transfer facility and they are requiring a traffic impact study and they have put together a memo for the Village. They did review the study and agreed that the location of the access is consistent with what is being planned in this area with a new signalized access between Aptakisic and Busch Parkway located roughly at the midpoint. Milwaukee is a strategic regional arterial and therefore signals have to be located at least '/4 mile apart which puts it right about in the middle. At this point they are not requiring any turn lanes or any type of signal as part of the east side. When the west side is done and there is a plan for that then a traffic impact study will be required at that point and probably a signal will be warranted as well as full turn lanes and widening etc. 1. The current uses of the property in the immediate area are generally commercial in nature and are consistent with the proposed use. 1. They do not really have buildings or structures to speak of as they have only bins which are the primary structures on the site and these will not be interfering with their neighbors or impeding development. The neighbors and properties are already developed and are, in fact, doing similar things. 1. Utilities were reviewed by Mr. Putnam. Mr. Putnam stated there is a floodway that exits with everything on this project located outside the floodway for the transfer facility and the sales portion. There is flood plain across the whole site. For drainage they have located storm sewers that are directing water to the detention basin for the site which will all fall into the Des Plaines River. 1. There are no parking areas on this property to the extent that the loading areas can be treated as parking areas. They really do not have any residential properties neighboring their site. Mr. Norton addressed the three variations they are seeking. He stated the first two relate to setbacks. They are asking for a variation from the Village's front setback requirement. The code ordinarily requires a 50 foot front yard landscaped setback from a major street which in this case is Milwaukee Avenue. The way the Village interprets that is nothing but landscaping can be in that 50 feet. The other setback variation being asked for is on the south property line. There is a 60 foot building setback requirement in sideyards. He noted they have their little office located 28 feet from the lot line. The standards as they relate to variations in the Village are that the property cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the strict conditions of the zoning code, the plight of the owners due to unique circumstances and the proposed variation will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The unique circumstances faced here for this property that make these setback variations necessary are that the property is oddly configured. It is a small piece of property and the flood plain covers most of the property which reduces the buildable area substantially. If the Village were to enforce the 50-foot setback and the 60-foot setback there is really not much left to build on. Mr. Norton stated that a very small building area is already severely constricted by the setbacks and would make it very difficult to build anything. He noted this is a small, low intensity use and these setbacks would probably drive any other commercial use away and make it impossible to do anything on this property commercially. Mr. Norton stated the third variation they are seeking is a screening setback. The Village has a requirement in the Industrial District which when adjacent to property zoned residential requires a 6 foot screen. They are asking for a variation of that 6-foot screening requirement and that it be waived. The intent is obviously when you are next to property that really is residential property to provide a buffer and a screen. However, the property that is zoned residential next to this site really is not used for purely residential uses. They include commercial uses to a substantial degree and they therefore ask that the requirement be waived through a variation. Commissioner Teplinsky asked what it is about requiring the 6-foot screening that causes a hardship or difficulty for Land & Lakes. He noted that although properties there are not at present residential uses, that may be the case at some time in the future. Mr. Norton stated the Village does not want, based on its Comprehensive Plan to promote residential development in this corridor and VOA thinks that commercial is the highest and best use and they feel it is unlikely that the other properties will be developed for residential use. In addition, they have the right of first refusal on the Ayala property and they would have no intention of developing it for residential. The Seckelmann property is a pretty large piece of property fronting right on Milwaukee and they are doing essentially the same things Land & Lakes would want to do. Therefore they would essentially be screening each other from looking at each other's piles of mulch which does not seem to make a whole lot of sense. He further noted the same flood plain restrictions they have will be faced by other properties. There are very few uses these properties can be put to. Commissioner Teplinsky asked what the nature of the sales on the property would be. Mr. Norton stated that landscapers who empty their trucks want to leave with a full load of something which is usually items for their next job. Commissioner Khan stated he did not see any kind of a gap study in the traffic report that shows how long of a wait on site there would be for a vehicle to make a left turn going southbound on Milwaukee Avenue. He asked if there was any idea of how long a wait there would be during the AM and PM peak hours. Mr. Sj ogren stated he does not have the answer to that as they did not do a traffic impact study which was not required at this time by IDOT. Obviously the left turn is the problem movement out of the site but there is sufficient room within the site for queuing there. The other thing that helps is that there are some gaps created by the signals which will slow traffic down to create some of the gaps. Commissioner Khan noted the stairs coming down because of some of the grade changes and asked if these stairs would be handicapped accessible. He also asked how someone in a wheelchair could be brought down from one elevation to the other. Mr. Loganbil stated they will definitely be accessible. He further noted at this stage they have not thought about exactly how that will work although he imagines there will be elevators within the buildings and there would probably be some type of series of ramps on the exterior. Commissioner Khan asked if all permits from the necessary jurisdictions have been secured relative to the flood plain and floodway. Mr. Putnam stated the floodway is under the jurisdiction of ID&R and the flood plain is under FEMA. With FEMA they have worked with the Village on providing compensatory storage for anything in the flood plain that they have filled in. In the floodway they have kept the grades either existing or have lowered them and they do not need a permit from ID&R to work in a floodway as long as you go down. Commissioner Khan asked Mr. Pfeil how he feels about the 6-foot fence and the setback. Mr. Pfeil commented that he thinks the property adjoining the site directly to the south is a different ownership than Seckelmann, and he is not sure if there is a residential use at this property. He indicated that the representations concerning use of the Seckelmann and Ayala properties are accurate. These properties are not residential in nature since there are commercial uses, and he does not think the screening is needed for these properties. Mr. Hal Francke of DLA Piper stated he is here on behalf of the owners of the most impacted parcels in the area and in particular City Park and the property immediately to the south of the west parcel commonly known as 1500 Busch Parkway in Buffalo Grove. He stated his principle purpose tonight is to ask that they be given the opportunity to review all the information that has just become available to them and that they be given the opportunity to confer with his clients and their own consultants. He noted this is the first formal opportunity to consider the exhibits and the evidence that has been presented. He asked that the public hearing be kept open and that the matter be continued to a later date. In addition, he noted he was confused with the discussion regarding the various exhibits and asked for a clarification of exhibits that are actually being considered part of the record. He also asked whether or not the Plan Commission has received a copy of a draft annexation agreement. Since the issue of annexation was on tonight's agenda and in the public notice and he is wondering if that has been disseminated to the Plan Commissioners for their consideration and deliberations. Chairman Ottenheimer stated the Plan Commission has not received a preliminary draft of the annexation agreement. He noted that typically that is not with the Plan Commission's purview. Secondly, there are thirteen exhibits, all of which have been admitted. Some of the exhibits have had no testimony. While there may be no foundation for them or explanation, they will stand on their own. He noted that testimony from the traffic consultant has indicated there will be increase in traffic as it is just being traded from one side of the street to the other. Chairman Ottenheimer further stated the plan is a conceptual plan only. When it comes time to actually get down to the real planning the petitioner must come before the Plan Commission again. Mr. Francke stated it is not their goal to provide testimony on the conceptual plan but always to be in a position to ask the petitioners' witnesses questions and to provide their own testimony on the matters which are on the agenda. He stated there is a request for a text amendment and for special use consideration and request for variations. They are not looking to offer testimony necessarily on a conceptual plan except to the extent that the petitioner's witnesses themselves offer testimony on the conceptual plan. Chairman Ottenheimer stated Mr. Francke's request is duly noted and he will have an opportunity at a later date to present and ask questions and make any comments. Mr. Bill Cotey, 182 Blueberry, Libertyville, stated he is the owner of the property at 0 Milwaukee Avenue which is the corner of Estonian Lane and Milwaukee Avenue. He stated his property is an undeveloped piece of property with the cell tower on it which does have a variance from the Village. He stated his property is zoned B-4 and he is in a quandary about the other side of the street being zoned B-3 as well as an Industrial zoning between the B-4 and B-3 properties. He stated it looks like spot zoning to him. Mr. Pfeil noted that the Village Comprehensive Plan designates the area on the east side of Milwaukee Avenue site for commercial use. Mr. Cotey asked if Industrial zoning would fall under that commercial use or is it more of an office type space use. Mr. Pfeil stated the Industrial District allows retail uses and other types of uses that are not literally manufacturing or other traditional industrial uses. The Zoning Ordinance does not currently list a landscape waste transfer station, so the Plan Commission is considering an amendment to this use. The petitioner's testimony concerning the difficulty of developing property on the east side of Milwaukee Avenue is valid. Mr. Pfeil noted that Mr. Cotey's property has been undeveloped with B-4 zoning for many years. The reasons for this include limited traffic access and floodplain/floodway issues. Mr. Pfeil stated he believes the petitioner has made a valid case for the landscape waste transfer facility being a reasonable use on the proposed site. The transfer facility would be a blend of uses that are commercial in nature and other uses that are more processing in nature. This is consistent with the uses on other properties in this area. Mr. Cotey asked if a property zoned B-4 could be rezoned to the Industrial District. Mr. Pfeil stated a property owner can always request rezoning, and if there is an accompanying plan that shows a valid reason to support that zoning, then the Village would give the petition full consideration. Mr. Cotey stated he opposes the text amendment for a landscape waste facility on the proposed site as it would not be the best use of the Milwaukee Avenue corridor. He stated he believes there are a lot better uses that could eventually be developed in this area. He further stated he does not feel that an Industrial zoning is justified just because the Seckelmann property is out of compliance with its current uses. He stated he does not oppose the annexation of the Land and Lakes property. He noted the industrial use of the Land and Lakes property puts a limitation on his property, and therefore opposes the proposed use. Mr. Raysa noted there were 13 exhibits placed into the record but he noted that some others were labeled as I and 3A which should have been 4A. Chairman Ottenheimer stated that was correct. Commissioner Teplinsky asked about page two in Mr. Pfeil's memo to the Plan Commission dated February 15, 2008 with reference to "best efforts" concerning a future connection to the Lake County Forest Preserve's Des Plaines River through the East Parcel. Mr. Pfeil stated the Forest Preserve District Des Plaines River Trail extends through Lake County from north to south and it adjoins this property. The petitioner sold a portion of the eastern edge of this site to the Forest Preserve District in order to complete the trail. It is a beautiful amenity, but there fairly limited places to access the Trail from Milwaukee Avenue. Village staff thinks there is an opportunity to provide access through the Land and Lakes property since a signalized intersection will be available. He acknowledged that the Village staff has not discussed the potential link with the Forest Preserve District, but he wants to at least create an opportunity for a connection. Commissioner Teplinsky asked if the petitioner has expressed any opinion on the idea. Mr. Pfeil stated they appear to be receptive to the concept of cooperating to create a link if it can be feasibly implemented. Mr. Norton stated they are receptive to the best efforts type of commitment. He noted he has had some discussion with the Forest Preserve who noted they have no plans or any formal requests. He noted they would respond to a formal request if one is made by the Village. They did, however, point out there are already two connections; one at Aptakisic and one at Estonian Lane. He stated they have had some questions themselves about whether a landscape transfer station is the right place to connect to the Des Plaines River trail but they are receptive to the best efforts language. There being no further comments or questions from anyone else present, Chairman Ottenheimer closed the public hearing at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: 0 A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 02/20/2008 Type of Meeting: ❑ Regular Meeting REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION February 20, 2008 Village Zoning Ordinance, Title 17 of the Municipal Code, Consideration of amendments concerning a landscape waste Transfer station in the Industrial District Land & Lakes property, consideration of annexation with zoning in the Industrial District for the East Parcel, consideration of a Preliminary Plan, appearance approval and a special use for a landscape waste Transfer station on the East Parcel, and consideration of Annexation with zoning in the B-3 Planned Development district for The West Parcels Chairman Ottenheimer called the meeting to order at 8:50 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Commissioners present: Chairman Ottenheimer Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Mr. Khan Mr. Teplinsky Mr. Stark Ms. Myer Mr. Weinstein Commissioners absent: Mr. Cohn Also present: Mr. Matthew Norton, Holland& Knight Mr. Bruce Knapp, Land & Lakes Mr. James Cowhey, Jr., Land& Lakes Ms. Mary Margaret Cowhey, Land& Lakes Mr. Martin Hanley, Land& Lakes Mr. James Putnam, Jacob & Hefner Associates Mr. Michael Loganbil, VOA Associates Mr. Tim Sjogren, Metro Transportation Group Mr. Steve Trilling, Village Trustee Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Weinstein, seconded by Commissioner Smith to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 16, 2008. All Commissioners were in favor of the motion and the motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Teplinsky abstaining. COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS Commissioner Bocek stated she attended the Village Board meeting on February 4, 2008 and stated there was nothing to report. VILLAGE ZONING ORDINANCE, TITLE 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS CONCERNING A LANDSCAPE WASTE TRANSFER STATION IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT Moved by Commissioner Teplinsky, seconded by Commissioner Smith to recommend approval to the Village Board of the proposed text amendment to the Buffalo Grove Zoning Ordinance, Title 17 of the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code, including without limitation (I) Chapter 17.12 — Definitions: and (ii) Section 17.48.020.C., concerning definitions and special use regulations for a landscape waste transfer station in the Industrial District. Chairman Ottenheimer called for a vote on the motion and the vote was as follows: AYES: Smith, Bocek, Khan, Teplinsky, Stark, Myer, Weinstein, Ottenheimer NAYS: None ABSENT: Cohn ABSTAIN: None The motion passed 8 to 0. LAND & LAKES PROPERTY, CONSIDERATION OF ANNEXATION WITH ZONING IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT FOR THE EAST PARCEL, CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAN, APPEARANCE APPROVAL AND A SPECIAL USE FOR A LANDSCAPE WASTE TRANSFER STATION ON THE EAST PARCEL, AND CONSIDERATION OF ANNEXATION WITH ZONING IN THE B-3 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THE WEST PARCELS Moved by Commissioner Teplinsky, seconded by Commissioner Smith to recommend approval to the Village Board of the petition for annexation and zoning approvals for: East Parcel: zoning in the Industrial District with a special use to operate a landscape waste transfer station, including related uses such as outdoor storage and sale of landscape materials, and approval of a Preliminary Plan with the following variations: ZONING ORDINANCE — Section 17.48.020.F.5.a. (to allow a landscaped setback of less than 50 feet from Milwaukee Avenue); Section 17.48.020.F.6.b. (to waive the requirement for a 6-foot high screen adjoining property in a residential district); and Section 17.48.020.F.6.a. (to allow a building setback for the proposed office of 28 feet instead of 60 feet from the south lot line adjoining property in a residential district; and any other relief necessary for the applicant's project and, West Parcel: zoning in the B-3 Planned Business Center District and any other relief necessary for the applicant's project to construct a landscape waste transfer station on the East Parcel in accordance with the proposed Preliminary Plan, and appearance plan and a commercial center on the West Parcel (after future approval of a Preliminary Plan and Final Plan subject to applicable Village regulations and requirements) and subject to: "Best efforts" language to be included concerning the future connection to the Lake County Forest Preserve's Des Plaines River trail through the East Parcel. Chairman Ottenheimer called for a vote on the motion and the vote was as follows: AYES: Smith, Bocek, Khan, Teplinsky, Stark, Myer, Weinstein, Ottenheimer NAYS: None ABSENT: Cohn ABSTAIN: None The motion passed 8 to 0. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT—None FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE Mr. Pfeil stated the next meeting will be March 5, 2008. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS -None STAFF REPORT—None NEW BUSINESS—None ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Weinstein and carried unanimously to adjourn. Chairman Ottenheimer adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair