Loading...
2003-09-17 - Plan Commission - Minutes Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: ❑A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 09/17/2003 Type of Meeting: PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION September 17, 2003 Proposed medical office building—313 Dundee Road Approval of Preliminary Plan in the B-1 District Vice Chairman Samuels 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. Vice Chairman Samuels 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: Mr. Samuels Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Khan Mr. Stark Mr. Cohn Commissioners absent: Mr. Ottenheimer Mr. Teplinsky Also present: Dr. Marvin Heimlich, Marvin Heimlich O.D. and Assoc. Mr. Peter Lewis, Acoa Ltd. Construction Company Mr. Paul Lipski, Marchris Engineering Mr. John Paulson, Architect Mr. Nicholas Niminski Mr. Marc Schwartz, Marc Schwartz & Associates Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Jeff Berman, Village Trustee Mr. Steve Trilling, Village Trustee Mr. Mark Biederwolf, Associate Village Engineer Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Mr. Greg Summers, Associate Village Planner The following exhibits were presented by the petitioner at the public hearing: Exhibit 1: Preliminary Site Plan/Concept Plan dated August 17, 2003 Exhibit 2: Exterior Elevations of building and Trash Enclosure dated August 17, 2003 Exhibit 3, Material samples, shingles and cedar siding 4, 5 Exhibit 6: Landscape Plan, undated Exhibit 7: Preliminary Engineering Plan dated August 18, 2003 Exhibit 8: Lighting Plan dated August 18, 2003 Dr. Heimlich stated his office has been in Buffalo Grove since 1977. In 1987 they moved to their present location at 165 W Dundee Road. He stated he has been looking to relocate to a larger space for several years and he believes the property at Dundee and Golfview Terrace is a perfect location for a doctor's office building to service the community and their patients in a more comfortable and professional manner. Dr. Heimlich stated they proposed to build a one-story brick building with dormers in the roofline to blend in with the surrounding residential area. He stated they hope to construct 4-6 office condominiums within the doctors' office building to service patients in a quiet, low-traffic location. For public safety, traffic will be routed off of Golfview Terrace to Dundee Road or directly unto Dundee Road from the northern lot access. Underground stormwater retention and drainage have been engineered and will be installed to eliminate any potential flooding problems from the property. There will not be any significant noise, high volume or late office hours. Since these will be condominiums, each owner will have a vested interest to make sure the building stays in top condition and that the neighbors are not aversely affected by office operations. Dr. Heimlich stated they have made multiple revisions to their plan due to input from neighbors and staff. They believe they have created the best possible combination of design and use of the space that enhances the neighborhood and is a benefit to their patients and the community. Mr. John Paulson reviewed the site plan stating they are building a 12,000 square foot, 1-story building that will house approximately 4-6 to condominium suites for the medical profession. The building is 218 feet long by 55 feet wide and 27 feet high to the ridge. They have provided parking on three sides of the building to house approximately 64 spaces with 3 handicapped spaces. The rear of the building has a driveway coming off of Dundee. This entrance is a right in, right out only. The driveway in the back of the building is to be used only by the doctors. There is a sidewalk in the back of the building and there will be exits out to the sidewalk. The screened trash collection will be at the south end of the building. The building will be brick and rough cedar siding. The setback from the east side of Golfview Terrace at the south end is approximately 96 feet and some distance further from the north end. There is a fence along the southern property line and a fence also along the eastern line. All mechanicals will be contained within the building. Mr. Paulson reviewed the building elevations noting the building is basically a 6 and 12 pitched roof of architectural asphalt shingles. The base of the building and the corners will be masonry and the area from the base of the windows up to the eaves is rough sown cedar siding. The windows will be clad casement windows. The front elevation is identical in materials but they have tried to architecturally delineate the four entrances to the building with small gables and these small entrances are projected out slightly to give it more architectural interest. They have included 6 dormers on the western face of the building in order to make the roof more interesting. The rear of the building is also rough sown cedar siding and they have also put a small gable over for more interest. The corners have been wrapped in masonry. The trash enclosure will be the same brick used on the elevations and rough sown cedar siding. The enclosure is approximately 8 feet by 9 feet. Mr. Pfeil noted Commissioner Bocek could ask some of the questions and give some of the points discussed by the Appearance Review Team (ART), as there are no minutes available as yet. Mr. Peter Lewis reviewed the landscaping plan noting they will be removing all undesirable bushes and dead trees. They will be leaving a line of trees where the townhomes are situated. They will be adding plantings and trees to maintain the integrity of the area and enhance it. Mr. Lipski reviewed the engineering plan noting there is an existing 12-inch sanitary sewer which runs along Dundee Road and an 8 inch sanitary sewer on the adjacent property which belongs to the Village of Buffalo Grove. He stated they have decided to connect the building to this 8-inch sewer based on his meeting with the Village Engineer. There is an 8-inch water main, which runs along the south edge of the right of way line. Part of this water main falls within this property and therefore they will dedicate a 10-foot easement along this property line to enable the Village to have access to this water main. The connection to the building will be at the northeast corner. All stormwater will be contained within the property and they are meeting the stormwater detention criteria of the Village of Buffalo Grove. They are proposing underground detention storage, which will collect all stormwater runoff. There will be a restricter provided which will restrict the flow from this facility. Mr. Lipski reviewed the lighting plan noting they are meeting the criteria of the Village of Buffalo Grove regarding the foot candle coverage throughout the property. He noted they are proposing a wall mount pack for the back of the building, which will be acceptable under Village code. Vice Chairman Samuels asked for specific reasons for the requested variations. Dr. Heimlich stated the initial plan had the building set back further and it was suggested that they bring the building forward. They have narrowed the building also to try to accommodate the setback but have come up slightly short on the front yard and side yard setbacks. The building is optimally sized and is downsized as much as possible to make proper use and medical spacing. Mr. Lipski discussed the two requested variations. The first variation is along the west boundary line, which requires a 12-foot setback, and they are asking for a 10-foot setback. In the back they are also asking for a variance. He noted originally the building did not provide access from all four sides of the building. Based on their experience it is beneficial for both the user and emergency vehicles to have such access and this setback variance will help have this kind of access. He further noted they are proposing a 6-foot high board on board fence is proposed in the back to provide screening for the adjacent residential properties. The remainder of the east property line meets the Village code. Along the west property line they are requesting a 2-foot variation and they feel that since there is already some landscape buffering along Golfview Terrace this reduction will not have a major impact. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka asked for details on the retaining wall on the east side of the building. Mr. Lipski stated they do not have much room for transition between their property line and adjacent properties and need to put a retaining wall in. It will be a keystone type of retaining wall, which will be about 2 '/z feet high at most. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka asked if there would be a fence on top of that. Mr. Lipski stated yes. The fence will be a board on board. Commissioner Bocek presented a summary of the architectural review team. She asked what colors and material would be used for the mullion windows. Mr. Paulson stated the muttons in the window are basically contained within the window. The color would probably be an off white in plastic. Commissioner Bocek asked if the muttons are available in either wood or plastic. Mr. Paulson stated yes. Commissioner Bocek noted the Commission preference is probably for the wood. Commissioner Bocek asked if the framing of the window would be metal. Mr. Paulson stated they are basically clad windows. Vice Chairman Samuels asked if they are vinyl or aluminum clad. Mr. Paulson stated they would be vinyl clad. Commissioner Bocek asked if there would be a monument sign. Mr. Paulson stated they have not detailed that yet. They will try to work that out with the landscape design and it will probably be placed out on Dundee as well as another sign where you enter. Mr. Pfeil noted the Plan Commission does not approve the actual sign. In this case a general representation of where the signs will be is adequate. Mr. Raysa agreed. Commissioner Bocek noted that the exterior building materials have now been changed from dryvit to cedar. Commissioner Bocek stated the architectural review team had no problem with the trash enclosure. It is, however, their opinion that the landscape that will be removed should be larger scale trees and landscaping. Mr. Paulson noted the shrubs are 30 inches and the trees are 8-10 feet high. Commissioner Bocek asked where and how many of those trees are to be provided. She noted the issue is that fifty percent of the trees are being removed and the committee does not want it to look that way. She noted they are looking for substantial trees so they look mature. Vice Chairman Samuels asked if the Village Forester had looked at the tree issue Mr. Lewis stated yes and they have a report with the trees marked for retention, which they will follow. He stated they will not leave the area barren, but will fill in so that the area is appealing not only to the neighborhood but also to the doctors who will be moving in. Commissioner Bocek stated the committee also feels that the developer should continue the brick wainscoting around to the back as it is a prominent elevation. Commissioner Bocek asked how the wainscoting is being capped off on the front elevation. Mr. Paulson stated it would be a limestone cap. Commissioner Bocek asked what color the shingles will be. Mr. Paulson stated they have not decided as yet, but thought it might be a warm brown. Commissioner Bocek asked if the color of the vents on the dormer would match the cream color. Mr. Paulson stated it is all wood siding. Commissioner Bocek noted there is no issue on the foot candles but the architectural review team would like the lighting to be described as far as finishes and if there are lights on the building. Mr. Lipski stated the lights would match the color of the materials on the building. Lights will be wall mounted on three areas and will not be noticeable to the neighbors. He noted they would be about 16 feet up. Commissioner Bocek asked where the condensing units would be located. Mr. Lipski stated they would be in the attic underneath the roof. Commissioner Bocek asked about the finish and type of fence proposed. Mr. Paulson stated the color and finish will match the cedar rough sown siding and it will be a 6-foot high board on board fence. If the fence needs to be higher, they will do so. Commissioner Bocek asked if there has been any analysis to the cycling of the light off of Golfview and Dundee. Mr. Pfeil stated he has spoken to the Village Engineer about that and he has reaffirmed that the best they can offer at this time is to request IDOT to review the cycles. Commissioner Smith asked if one trash enclosure would be enough for up to six users. Mr. Paulson stated the trash enclosure is sized for a user similar to a McDonald's. He noted they surveyed sizes of other trash enclosures in medical buildings to determine the need here. Commissioner Smith asked if the access aisles in the parking at 24 feet was sufficient in light of the memo suggesting 26 feet would be better. Mr. Paulson stated they have now changed that to 26 feet. Commissioner Khan asked to be walked through the details of the retaining wall. Mr. Lipski stated the wall is a concrete stone block wall, approximately 2 '/z feet in height and it will go down to about 6 inches. Commissioner Khan noted that since the site is about 147 feet wide by 375 feet long he wonders if grading would solve this problem without using a wall. Mr. Lipski stated that will not be possible because the Village requires that between the high water level and the finished floor elevation they must be a certain distance. He would not be able to put enough required storage on the site without doing it this way. Commissioner Khan noted that the retaining wall is dictated by the amount of underground storage needed. Mr. Lipski stated yes. Vice Chairman Samuels noted this is because the level of the parking lot on the west side is governing the level of the parking lot. Mr. Lipski stated that is correct as they are all interconnected and all the water must end up in the same underground detention facility. Commissioner Khan asked if the Village Engineer has looked at the driveway, which goes through the Village retention pond. Mr. Lipski stated yes and noted that the Village Engineer has agreed that they are not impacting the retention facility at all. Vice Chairman Samuels noted that while the requested variances appear to be small, the site does not appear to be all that constrained. He asked what is it about the size of the building that causes the need for these variances. Mr. Lewis noted they have reduced the building size from the original proposal. He stated they need a certain amount of capacity in each of these units to make them functional. Mr. Pfeil noted the building setbacks provided on the plan are considerably larger than the ordinance minimum standard. The variations that are requested pertain to the width of the landscaped yards, not the building setbacks. Ms. Cheryl Bernardi, 3340 Betty Drive, Arlington Heights, asked if the scale shown on the plan that says the scale is 1 inch equals 30 feet refers to the reduction or the original site plan. Dr. Heimlich stated the site plan he passed around to the neighbors was a reduction of the original. That scale no longer exists because of the decreased size of the plan. Ms. Bernardi asked if the green berm between the properties to the south is 12 feet wide. Dr. Heimlich stated it is 15 feet. Ms. Bernardi asked how many feet it is between her property line and the proposed entrance off of Golfview Terrace. Dr. Heimlich stated that is approximately 35 feet. Ms. Bernardi asked about routing of water underneath the entrance off of Golfview Terrace. Mr. Lipski noted that is an existing stormsewer. The restricter will be devised to restrict the flow and all stormwater runoff will be detained on the proposed property site and then released at a small rate into the existing system. Ms. Bernardi noted she has some very large trees on her southern border and she is concerned that the roots will be cut when digging begins for the parking lot. She asked what kind of insurance she has that her trees will remain healthy and if not who would pay for tearing them down. Mr. Lewis stated they will fence off and border all the bushes and trees to be maintained. Also, they will be keeping a 15-foot border so none of her trees will be hurt. The trees will be helped with a safety fence around them. Dr. Heimlich noted Ms. Bernardi's tree is a good 15 feet inside of her property line and there will be plenty of room for the root system to be maintained. Mr. Raysa noted there have been several representations regarding the height of fences. Any and all fences on the property will meet code unless there is a variation. Also, the Plan Commission does not approve location, size, and color of signs at this meeting. That will be subject to meeting Village code. Ms. Joellen Dobrow, 3329 Betty Drive, Arlington Heights, noted she likes the plan but is concerned with the location of the trash which she feels is too close to the residential. She noted it would be better on the northeast side or northwest side. She further noted the garbage trucks come at 6:00 a.m. and make considerable noise. Vice Chairman Samuels noted that Waste Management would accommodate the residents' wishes with regard to the times they come. Mr. Lewis stated they are planning on having the trucks back in and back out. Vice Chairman Samuels asked if later collection would be OK. Dr. Heimlich noted he has them at his office in Libertyville and they have accommodated a request for a time change in pick up. Mr. Nicholas Niminski, 936 Betty Drive, asked if there was any way to put the trash on the north side where the strip center is so that it will not be an eyesore. Dr. Heimlich stated it would be behind the fence so the trash enclosure will not be visible. Mr. Lipski stated they do not want to put trash in front of their building. Additionally, he noted heavy landscaping along the south property line and fencing would very well screen it. He noted they would like to keep the enclosure where it is proposed. Mr. Paulson stated they have sized this enclosure adequately and there will be no garbage lying around. It is basically a brick and concrete wall that is at least 6 feet high. Mr. Niminski stated he is concerned that on the east side of the property from the strip center almost to the end of his property his 70-year-old pine trees are right on the property line. Mr. Lipski stated they will verify the exact location of those trees prior to construction and will address this at that time. Mr. Niminski noted the proposed retaining wall and fence would be a problem. Mr. Lipski noted they are not sure as yet exactly what property those trees are on. Mr. Niminski asked if the fence on the east side of the property goes from the strip center to the end of the property. Mr. Lipski said yes. Vice Chairman Samuels stated he could not believe that the petitioner and Mr. Niminski, who has a proposal for the adjacent property have not discovered exactly where the trees are located. Mr. Niminski stated he measured them off from the back of the house from a survey that he has. Vice Chairman Samuels asked how plats are being prepared without surveys Mr. Lipski stated they have conducted a survey of the property but it was not required for them to present the location of the trees versus the property line. Therefore they will verify exactly where the trees are located. The survey itself does not cover the location of the trees. Vice Chairman Samuels asked how this interfaced with discussions with the Village Forester concerning trees that are to be removed. Mr. Lipski stated he was not part of that conversation. Mr. Lewis stated there was a tree survey of all trees in both areas. They reviewed all trees within their property line and they were marked off for retention. He noted he believes those trees were tagged but did not fall within their property line. Dr. Heimlich stated he believes these trees are probably not on their property. Mr. Niminski noted even if the trees are all on his property, the proposed retaining wall will destroy the trees. Mr. Lipski stated if Mr. Niminski will allow them to make some transitions in grading they can eliminate the retaining wall and slope somewhat onto Mr. Niminski's property. Mr. Russell Shavitz, 3407 Betty Drive, asked how the condensing units could be in the attic. Mr. Paulson stated the engineers have done this in several buildings. They have located a structure in the roof space and the condensing unit is directly vented to the outside. Commissioner Khan suggested working with the neighbor at 936 Betty Drive to remove the retaining wall. Mr. Lipski noted it would be entirely up to Mr. Niminski to allow them to grade the property and avoid a retaining wall. Mr. Pfeil stated his report is offered to the Commission as an exhibit to the public hearing. Dr. Heimlich stated they have been a long time Buffalo Grove business and they are interested in maintaining a very nice community oriented professional office building for the community. Mr. Shavitz stated he feels this is a very good project Ms. Juliette Shavits, 3407 Betty Drive, stated she would like the petitioner to look into saving the trees on the east property line. There being no further comments or questions from anyone else present, Vice Chairman Samuels closed the public hearing at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: MICHAEL SAMUELS, Acting Chair Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: ❑A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 09/17/2003 Type of Meeting: PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION September 17, 2003 Niminski property, 936 Betty Drive Rezoning of one parcel to R-4A and approval of a Preliminary Plan for two single-family lots Vice Chairman Samuels called the hearing to order at 9:00 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Vice Chairman Samuels 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: Mr. Samuels Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Khan Mr. Stark Mr. Cohn Commissioners absent: Mr. Ottenheimer Mr. Teplinsky Also present: Mr. Nicholas Niminski Mr. Marc Schwartz, Marc Schwartz & Associates Dr. Marvin Heimlich, Marvin Heimlich O.D. and Assoc. Mr. Paul Lipski, Marchris Engineering Mr. John Paulson, Architect Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Jeff Berman, Village Trustee Mr. Steve Trilling, Village Trustee Mr. Mark Biederwolf, Associate Village Engineer Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Mr. Greg Summers, Associate Village Planner The following exhibits were presented by the petitioner at the public hearing: Group Exhibit 1: Elevation drawings Floor plans Survey dated April 28, 1995 Section drawings Mr. Nicholas Niminski stated he is the owner of 936 Betty Drive, which consists of two lots, zoned B-1 and R-4A. He stated the north lot is 112 x 100 feet and the south lot is 88 x 100 feet. He is asking to have these lots re-divided so he can have two lots that 100 x 100 that are zoned R-4A. Mr. Niminski stated he has not done any kind of preliminary plans as yet because it did not seem as though the Village Board was in favor of this project. He noted he did not want to invest a lot of money into doing this if it was not going to have a chance. Acting Chairman Samuels stated it was Mr. Niminski's choice as to whether he would like to proceed on the basis of what has been stated in his testimony and what has been introduced in support of the petition. The Plan Commission can debate the issue and make a decision based on those items at this time. If he prefers a continuance to allow for additional evidence or witnesses, then the Commission would also give consideration for that request. Mr. Niminski stated he would like to continue. Vice Chairman Samuels asked how long the property asking for a rezoning from 13-1 to R-4A has been owned by Mr. Niminski. Mr. Niminski stated he has owned the property since 1994. Vice Chairman Samuels asked if the petitioner had made any attempts to market the property. Mr. Niminski stated he used as a business up until three years ago but the property taxes are much too high on the property as a commercial entity. Vice Chairman Samuels asked if the property has been marketed as a B-1 property. Mr. Niminski stated no as it is on well and septic and it would require a great deal of work and money to make it viable. Vice Chairman Samuels noted there are two variances being requested to defer widening of Betty Drive and to defer curb and gutter along Betty Drive and asked if the petitioner if he understood that he would be required to widen the street under the Village's development ordinance if he developed these properties. Mr. Niminski stated no. He stated he was aware that a sidewalk would need to be put in. Vice Chairman asked if the variations would be required if the cash in lieu payment is made by the petitioner. Mr. Pfeil stated that the variations are to defer the street and curb construction, not to waive the ordinance requirements. The Village would reserve the funds until the street would be widened as part of a larger project. He noted that in other small-scale developments similar variations to defer construction and make a cash in lieu payment have been granted. Vice Chairman Samuels asked if the variance is conditioned on the payment of a contributory sum to the Village or is it done in a special assessment at a later time. Mr. Pfeil stated it would literally be a cash payment to the Village. Mr. Niminski stated this is the first time he has heard of this. He noted that when he changed the south lot from B-1 to R-4A, there was no discussion of this sort. Mr. Raysa stated the Village of Buffalo Grove has what is known as a development ordinance. That development ordinance makes certain requirements of any development within the Village. The request here is for a rezoning and that rezoning will require meeting the requirements of the development ordinance. One of those requirements is set forth in the two sections that have been published in the newspaper and public hearing notice. One is to widen the pavement of Betty Drive to the Village standard of 24 feet. If Mr. Niminski proceeds on his rezoning request he needs to meet that requirement. If the requirement is not met then he needs to request a variation. The second requirement is that the petitioner needs to construct curb and gutter along Betty Drive to the east of 936 Betty Drive and the vacant R-4A parcel. He noted the petitioner has not proposed to construct that curb and gutter and therefore a variation would be necessary. If payment is deferred, a variation is still required. Vice Chairman Samuels asked if the granting of a variance absolves the petitioner from making payments. Mr. Raysa stated the variance that was published was to defer the widening of the pavement and to defer the construction of the curb and gutter. Mr. Raysa stated he does not want the petitioner to proceed if he does not understand and cannot recommend the Plan Commission continue on such a basis. Mr. Niminski stated he would take a continuance of the proceedings and talk to his attorney. The public hearing was continued to October 1, 2003 at 7:30 p.m. There being no further comments or questions from anyone else present, Vice Chairman Samuels closed the public hearing at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: MICHAEL SAMUELS, Acting Chair Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: 0 A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 09/17/2003 Type of Meeting: ❑ Regular Meeting REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION September 17, 2003 Dr. Marvin Heimlich, 313 Dundee Road,Approval of a Preliminary Plan in the B-1 District for a medical office building Niminski property, 936 Betty Drive, Rezoning one parcel to the R-4A District and approval of a Preliminary Plan for two single-family lots Turnberry Condominiums, 105/125 Buffalo Grove Road, modification Of Preliminary Plan concerning secondary access—Discussion Vice Chairman Samuels called the meeting to order at 9:25 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Commissioners present: Mr. Samuels Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Khan Mr. Stark Mr. Cohn Commissioners absent: Mr. Ottenheimer Mr. Teplinski Also present: Dr. Marvin Heimlich, Marvin Heimlich O.D. & Associates Mr. Paul Lipski, Marchris Engineering Mr. John Paulson, Architect Mr. Nicholas Niminski Mr. Marc Schwartz, Marc Schwartz & Associates Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Jeff Berman, Village Trustee Mr. Steve Trilling, Village Trustee Mr. Mark Biederwolf, Associate Village Engineer Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Mr. Greg Summers, Associate Village Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka, seconded by Commissioner Smith to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of August 6, 2003. All Commissioners were in favor of the motion and the motioned passed unanimously. COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS Commissioner Smith attended the September 8, 2003 Village Board meeting and stated there was a pre-application conference for a proposed townhome development by Insignia Homes on the east side of Prairie Road across from Chestnut Terrace. Due to numerous issues this item was not referred to the commission at this time. DR. MARVIN HEIMLICH, 313 DUNDEE ROAD, APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAN IN THE B-1 DISTRICT FOR A MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Moved by Commissioner Samuels, seconded by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka to recommend approval to the Village Board of the petition for approval of a Preliminary Plan in the B-1 Business District with the following variations: Zoning Ordinance — Section 17.44.020.G.1 (to allow a landscaped area of 10 feet in width instead of 12 feet along the right-of-way of Golfview Terrace) and Section 17.44.020.H.1. (to allow a landscaped buffer strip of less than 12 feet in width along a portion of the east property line abutting a residential district) so that the petitioner may construct a medical office building of 12,000 square feet, pursuant to the evidence presented in support of the petition at the public hearing and the testimony and exhibits introduced in evidence and the staff report, subject to: 1. Approval of the color of the exterior light fixtures 2. Approval of the Village Forester as to the removal of trees proposed by petitioner and the satisfaction of the Village Forester that trees to be replaced will be of sufficient size and caliper 3. Further art review of the final roof design incorporating the venting of the air conditioning condensers 4. Addition of brick wainscoting on the east elevation of the building Commissioner Smith stated the use is excellent for this site and the plan is very well done and he will support the project. Commissioner Stark stated he agrees with Commissioner Smith. He stated this is an adequate and preferred fit for this tract of land and the building blends into the neighborhood well. He stated he would support this plan. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka stated the proposed use is the only plan that seems to fit the land after many attempts by others to develop this site. Commissioner Bocek noted the arts committee had recommended that the brick wainscoting be continued to the backside and she requests opinions about adding this to the motion. Vice Chairman Samuels accepted this amendment to the motion as well as Commissioner Kenski-Sroka who seconded the motion. Vice Chairman Samuels called for a vote on the motion and the vote was as follows: AYES: Smith, Bocek, Kenski-Sroka, Khan, Stark, Cohn, Samuels NAPES: None ABSENT: Ottenheimer, Teplinsky ABSTAIN: None The motion passed 7 to 0. TURNBERRY CONDOMINIUMS, 105/125 BUFFALO GROVE ROAD, MODIFICATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAN CONCERNING SECONDARY ACCESSDISCUSSION Mr. Marc Schwartz of Marc Schwartz & Associates stated he represents Deerfield Bakery and noted nothing much has changed since the last meeting. He noted Mr. Pfeil's memo of September 12, 2003, which indicates that after review of the alternative that was discussed on the evening of August 20, 2003, it is the staff recommendation that the plan presented on that evening be pursued, providing access east to the Town Center shopping center. He stated he has nothing further to add. Moved by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka, seconded by Commissioner Smith to accept the revision to the Turnberry Condominiums regarding the secondary access as outlined on the Turnberry Condominium Easement alternative. Vice Chairman Samuels asked if there was more than one alternate plan. Mr. Pfeil noted the other alternative would require modifying the stormwater detention area on the east side of the Deerfield Bakery property. Mr. Schwartz requested that the motion be clarified so that when the Village Board receives the recommendation, it will be clear that the Commission recommends the east alternative. He asked that the motion be clarified to provide that the access will not be through the existing Deerfield Bakery site. He asked that the motion reflect that. Vice Chairman Samuels noted there had been considerable discussion regarding this issue when the condo development was considered and he recalls it was very important that the access be made as direct as possible to the access road where the signalized intersection is located opposite Old Checker Road. He does not know if he would have voted to approve the development had it not been designed in the way it was. Mr. Schwartz stated that testimony by Mr. Schmidt at the last meeting was that when he learned about the plan he objected to the Village staff and gave the reasoning for his objections. He was not present at any of the public hearings or any of the meetings. Vice Chairman Samuels noted he recalled that staff did pass on those objections during the considerations of this plan and the issue was discussed at the time and he would not be in support of the motion at this point. Commissioner Smith asked who determined that the alternative access through the Deerfield Bakery stormwater area is not better access than the east alternative through the rear of Town Center. Mr. Pfeil stated it is his personal opinion. Commissioner Smith stated he agrees with Vice Chairman Samuels. He stated this project probably would never have gone through with all of these issues. He noted he will probably vote in favor, but he does not particularly want to do so. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka called the question. Vice Chairman Samuels called for a vote on the motion, which is to change the approved site plan to the alternate site plan as depicted in the materials presented: AYES: Smith, Kenski-Sroka, Khan, Cohn NAPES: Bocek, Stark, Samuels ABSENT: Ottenheimer, Teplinsky ABSTAIN: None The motion passed 4-3. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT -None FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE Mr. Pfeil said the next meeting is scheduled for October 1, 2003. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS—None STAFF REPORT—None NEW BUSINESS—None ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Bocek and carried unanimously to adjourn. Vice Chairman Samuels adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: MICHAEL SAMUELS, Acting Chair