2005-03-16 - Plan Commission - Minutes Board or Commission: ❑ Plan commission
Document Type: 0 A e
g nda 0 Minutes
Meeting ate: 03/16/2005
Type of Meeting: ❑ Regular Meeting
REGULAR MEETING
BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION
March 16, 2005
Lord's Love Community Church, Special Use in the R-5 District for
a place of worship and related uses, 1250 Radcliffe Road
Workshop # 1
Discussion of Village Comprehensive Plan —Workshop #4
Zoning Ordinance amendments concerning motor vehicle
sales and leasing in Business Districts —Workshop #2
Village Zoning Map -- Annual Review
Chairman Ottenheimer called the meeting to order at 7:30 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
Ms. Kenski-Sroka
Mr. Khan
Mr. Teplinsky
Mr. Stark
Mr. Cohn
Commissioners absent: None
Also present: Mr. Warren Skora, Attorney
Mr. Sang Kim, Lord's Love Church
Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner
Mr. Greg Summers, Associate Village Planner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Moved by Commissioner Teplinsky, seconded by Commissioner Khan to approve the public
hearing minutes of January 12, 2005 on the Gateway Center. All Commissioners were in favor
of the motion and the motion passed unanimously.
Moved by Commissioner Teplinsky, seconded by Commissioner Smith to approve the public
hearing minutes of January 12, 2005 regarding the Jacobs Homes. All Commissioners were in
favor of the motion and the motion passed unanimously.
Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Bocek to approve the regular
meeting minutes of February 2, 2005. Commissioner Cohn noted the word "touch" needed to be
added to the first sentence in paragraph 3 on page 7. Also he noted he would like to substitute
the word "rite" for the word "right" in the first paragraph on page 8. All Commissioners were in
favor of the amended motion and the motion passed unanimously.
COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS—None
LORD'S LOVE COMMUNITY CHURCH, SPECIAL USE IN THE R-5 DISTRICT FOR A
PLACE OF WORSHIP AND RELATED USES, 1250 RADCLIFFE ROAD—WORKSHOP#1
Mr. Warren Skora stated they have filed a petition for a Special Use for the former JCC building.
He stated they are aware there are concerns about a number of issues such as parking and
activities. He stated they would like to address any concerns the Commission may have.
Mr. Sang Kim stated they are presently located in Lincolnshire and they are a Korean-American
Presbyterian church with about 65 families totaling about 120 adults and 50 children.
Mr. Kim stated Sunday services are their main service at about 11:15 a.m. About half of their
members come to bible study in the afternoon. They also have about 20-30 members who come
in the early morning for a very short service. They also have Wednesday bible studies for about
20 people and it goes for about 10 months out of the year. Wednesday services has about 20
people coming in the afternoon and about 30-40 people show up for Friday bible studies.
Mr. Kim stated their five year growth goal is about 300 adults and children. The yearly special
event is for children Monday through Friday from about 9:00 to 3:00 in summer.
Commissioner Teplinsky asked if what other services are anticipated to be offered at this
location.
Mr. Kim stated they sometimes have funeral services for the family and if a member wanted to
have a wedding they would do so. He noted they have after school activities for children such as
music and art.
Commissioner Teplinsky noted this facility allows for a lot of expansion beyond holding a few
classes and worship services. That is why he would like to know what they are anticipating
farther down the road.
Mr. Kim stated they have nothing planned so far.
Commissioner Kenski-Sroka asked if there are any plans to sublease portions of the building to
other entities.
Mr. Kim stated they might want to lease out some space for music programs and that type of
thing.
Commissioner Kenski-Sroka asked if there are any plans for any type of day care facility.
Mr. Kim stated they are not planning for that now but it is possible for the future.
Commissioner Bocek asked if there has been any study on what the existing parking count is
versus what is required.
Mr. Kim stated there are about 135 existing parking spaces and the required amount for a church
is one parking space per 3 per seat, so it should not be a problem. The daily uses would be very
minimal and there would no problem providing adequate parking for the uses.
Commissioner Bocek asked if Mondays, Thursdays and Saturdays would have no one in the
building except for one half hour during the entire day.
Mr. Kim stated that is true if it is only for church purposes. If they lease out some room for
music or art there would be some people in and out.
Chairman Ottenheimer asked if the special use would encompass the decision to sub-lease part
of the building which could be used for a related but different type of use or would they have to
come back and ask for that.
Mr. Pfeil stated that is something that needs to be sorted through during this process. He noted it
is not unusual for churches to have day care centers, and typically day care has not been required
to have a separate special use. Concerning the issue of sub-leasing to other entities, it is better to
articulate in the original special use ordinance for this petition what the parameters are and the
range of uses that are allowed. As uses are proposed after the initial special use ordinance, the
Village would determine if each use is consistent with the special use or if an amendment is
necessary.
Commissioner Cohn stated he would like to see the petitioner identify every other use that is
anticipated for sub-leasing. He asked if continued growth is necessary to sustain the building.
Mr. Kim stated the additional membership would give some relief to the existing members.
They have raised enough money for a down payment for the building and they should be able to
sustain the building but they are confident they will have growth.
Commissioner Stark asked if there are any plans for altering the parking or exterior of the
building.
Mr. Kim stated there will be no changes and they even more than happy to share the playground
in the back with the rest of the community.
Commissioner Stark asked if the anticipated growth could result in going beyond the parking
capacity.
Mr. Kim stated he doubts that very much.
Commissioner Stark asked if there had been any complaints from residents in the past about
parking issues.
Mr. Pfeil stated the driveway access to the streets had been an issue in some situations for the
JCC, and he believes there were alterations made or some limitations on when the driveway was
open.
Commissioner Khan noted an article in the Daily Herald that states the JCC used to have
700-800 people at a time and he asked what the source for that figure was.
Mr. Skora stated that came from an individual at the Jewish Federation in Chicago. He further
stated it is important to recognize that the uses that the Lord's Love Community Church hopes to
make of the facility are similar to those that formerly have been in the facility and sponsored by
the JCC. It is also important to realize that the use will be much less intense than under the JCC.
In addition they are willing to have the same arrangement as the JCC to have the tot playground
available to the community.
Commissioner Teplinsky stated the issue was not how late the facility was going to be used but
rather how early in the morning it would be used under the JCC. He further noted he had seen a
suggestion in the packet about doing something to restrict the parking in the early morning hours
toward the west side of the parking lot toward the Arlington Heights Road side. If that is
something that could be accomplished, it would not be a bad idea.
Mr. Kim stated they could probably accommodate that suggestion.
Commissioner Khan stated he is not concerned with the hours of operation or parking light
spillover as there are provisions in the code to handle that.
Commissioner Cohn asked if the petitioner could have someone from the Jewish Federation
come and give some information on the amount of activity they conducted there.
Mr. Skora stated they will have someone come.
The Commissioners all agreed that a public hearing could be the next step.
Chairman Ottenheimer noted the following items would have to be presented at the public
hearing:
1. Comparison of the former use to the proposed use.
2. Identify all types of related uses that may be used at this facility along with the hours of
those related uses and the anticipated number of individuals that may be attending those.
If sub-leasing is anticipated, what types of uses would be anticipated.
DISCUSSION OF VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN—WORKSHOP#4
Mr. Pfeil stated the community opinion survey was distributed to the Village Board and the Plan
Commission for comments. There is a revised draft and the intent is to solicit community input
for concepts and ideas to support the comprehensive planning effort. One specific way to get the
survey distributed would be the Village newsletter and probably also on the website.
Chairman Ottenheimer asked for any additions or deletions to the draft survey.
Commissioner Cohn noted his only change would be under economic development which has
the traditional downtown concept which he feels is not economic development but more of a
community planning question and probably should be moved into the types of community
planning concepts. He further noted he would probably leave a space under community planning
for other just so people can write in anything else they are thinking of Also under economic
development, instead of not needed it may be advisable to phrase that as no more and not needed
because it depends if we have those types of businesses or not.
Mr. John Green, 351 Dundee Road, noted question number 15 under community planning
indicates the pie chart that follows this survey identifies the amount of land uses in Buffalo
Grove and asks for opinions of future planning efforts and then goes into a comparison of that
using the pie chart as the basis. However, the categories listed below question 15 do not match
the categories in the pie chart and that could be very confusing to some if they are referencing
the pie chart and then being asked to do opinions on whether or not they think there is more or
not enough of a particular type. He recommends this be corrected.
Mr. Green stated he is curious about the statistical accuracy and dependability of the survey,
particularly if the Village is proposing to do it in the Village newsletter and on the website
because potentially the same entity can respond a number of times thereby skewing the survey.
It is important to get good, clear, accurate information that can be statistically substantiated.
Commissioner Teplinsky noted there might also be a possibility of skewing some of these
categories by the examples that have been included. Some people might think we need more of
one and certainly not more of another. Perhaps something else could be used to define or
describe what we mean by something like convenience retailer other than a particular example
where someone might think we already have too many of that and therefore that might control
their response to the question.
Chairman Ottenheimer asked what can be done to ensure someone does not send in more than
one response to the survey.
Mr. Pfeil agreed that this is a valid concern. He said that he would discuss this with other staff to
monitor and control the process as carefully as possible.
Chairman Ottenheimer asked who else we plan to distribute this survey to besides the website
and newsletter.
Mr. Pfeil replied that the newsletter is the primary way because it is sent to all the mailing
addresses in the Village. He said the survey could also be made available at the counter at
Village Hall, but this might create multiple responses by the same person.
Chairman Ottenheimer asked how the survey would be returned. He noted his concern that
people would not take the time to put it in the mailbox if they have to mail it themselves.
Commissioner Stark asked what the meaning is for location of Buffalo Grove in the region.
Commissioner Cohn stated he thinks we are just trying to understand why people do or don't live
here.
Commissioner Cohn further stated that the confusion about the pie chart might confuse some but
he does not want to not find out information about the things that have been identified because
they are rigidly sticking to comparing to the pie chart. Perhaps some language should be put in
to direct them that the pie chart is just for reference but not necessarily a direct comparison
between what is being identified.
Mr. Mike Rylko asked what it means if people answer favorably on the amount of open space.
Does that mean they are happy with the open space or they would like to acquire more?
Mr. Rylko asked if some kind of coalition could be put together to look at acquiring the Didier
parcel whenever it might go up for sale.
Chairman Ottenheimer stated the point is well taken but he does not feel that will be happening
any time soon.
Mr. Pfeil stated the Village has applied for a regional transportation planning grant to be focused
on transit oriented development around the Metra train stations at Commerce Court and Prairie
View. He noted that the Village is in the process of trying to complete the applications and lock
in funding. Some of the grant money would be used for consultants that would help with the
details of planning proximate to the train stations. Some of the concepts that the Village would
consider in the planning process are the types of land uses that would be appropriate for the
future, including mixed use with residential, retail and services.
Commissioner Cohn asked how it might be changed so dramatically from what it is now with
one of those grants. How do we make mixed use developments happen when there are so many
industrial buildings around the area?
Mr. Pfeil stated to make dramatic changes, funding would have to be put into place to acquire
properties for redevelopment. He noted that he is not advocating public acquisition, but it is
something to probe and at least consider. Around the Commerce Court station there may be
some smaller land uses that could be more easily converted than others. There are some parcels
that might lend themselves to acquisition and redevelopment. There is the property just west of
Commerce Court that is still unincorporated that has a cell tower and an older industrial building.
The property owner might contemplate selling the parcel to and a developer interested in
redevelopment. There are properties that might be ready for redevelopment without needing
public financial incentives.
Commissioner Stark asked if there are any plans for the area on the east side of the tracks off of
Deerfield Parkway where it begins to curve.
Mr. Pfeil stated there is nothing imminent. Some of the situation was created when Deerfield
Parkway was realigned, because some of the parcels are small and irregularly shaped.
Commissioner Stark noted more parking might be necessary on that side once the double
tracking is completed.
Mr. Pfeil stated additional parking is being funded by Metra adjacent to the existing parking lot
on the Com Ed property and there may be adequate parking for the projected demand for the
double tracking. A point could be made that it might be more convenient to have it up closer
than to keep going down the Com Ed right of way.
Commissioner Teplinsky asked if there is any kind of sense about how strong the people around
the Prairie View station feel about selling or not for future development. It is no secret that is a
prime area where mixed use can come into play. There are lots of very old homes around there
and it seems like a natural area for that sort of development.
Mr. Pfeil stated we clearly need to reach out and have some kind of neighborhood meeting in
that area. He stated the Village strategy for the 1998 Comprehensive Plan was to look at Main
Street along the north side of Route 22 as commercial. Some open questions are the types of uses
and intensity to be encouraged along Main Street and adjacent areas north of Route 22.
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS CONCERNING MOTOR VEHICLE SALES AND
LEASING IN BUSINESS DISTRICTS—WORKSHOP 92
Mr. Pfeil stated this relates to the current Prestige Leasing petition where B-4 is being requested
on a relatively small parcel adjacent to other B-3 zoning. The reuse of that property in the event
it is rezoned B-4 and the Prestige use ends is one of the scenarios that we are trying to address.
The proposed amendment would create a special use that would be specific to smaller
automotive operations such as Prestige that would be terminated if the use was discontinued. The
draft amendment would make this a special use in the B-2 District which could also be applied in
the B-3 District which is the current zoning of the Prestige parcel.
Chairman Ottenheimer asked what the rationale is for one acre but not greater than three acres.
Mr. Pfeil said if the parcel is larger than three acres it ought to be in the B-4 District. Auto
dealerships selling new vehicles generally need at least five acres for efficient operations. If an
auto facility is a smaller operation in the B-2 or B-3 Districts, it will be a special use.
Chairman Ottenheimer asked if any limitations on hours of operation or is it all just part of the
process.
Mr. Pfeil stated the hours of operation might be better left to the specific special use for the
property rather than defining hours in the Zoning Ordinance.
Commissioner Bocek stated one of the permitted uses in the B-2 is automotive service station
and one of the things we specifically told Prestige that we did not want them doing is servicing
vehicles other than the ones they are leasing or selling. Is it possible to include some language in
the proposed text that says they are only permitted to service the vehicles they sell or lease?
Mr. Pfeil stated the proposal for the special use is that warranty work and repair conducted as an
accessory use would be permitted.
Commissioner Bocek noted that perhaps other repair service can be excluded because that could
be repair service for any vehicle not just the vehicles that are under warranty. She stated she just
wants to limit it so they cannot do repair service for just anyone driving in.
Mr. Pfeil stated the theory is that this would be a special use and the primary use is sale or lease,
and repair is not the primary use. If it is an operation that is generally open to the public for oil
changes and minor repairs, it would not be an auto leasing facility, but a permitted use within the
B-2 District.
VILLAGE ZONING MAP—ANNUAL REVIEW
Mr. Summers reviewed the draft of the Village's zoning map which includes the changes as
listed in the memo of March 11, 2005 and comprises the annexation of the Buffalo Grove Bank
& Trust, ASAP Software, Prairie Road Villas and Estates at Hidden Lake. Rezonings are also
included and consist of the Buffalo Grove Bank & Trust, Jacob Duman Center, and Columbian
Gardens Subdivision for rezoning to the R-5 District and the Edward R. James project. There is
also a special use designation for the Joy of the Game baseball facility.
Moved by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka, seconded by Commissioner Khan to approve the annual
update of the Village Zoning Map.
Chairman Ottenheimer called for a vote on the motion and the motion passed unanimously 8 to
0.
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT—None
FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE
Mr. Pfeil stated the next meeting will be on April 6, 2005.
PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS—None
STAFF REPORT—None
NEW BUSINESS—None
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka, seconded by Commissioner Smith and carried
unanimously to adjourn. Chairman Ottenheimer adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary
APPROVED BY:
LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair