Loading...
2003-01-08 - Plan Commission - Minutes Board or Commission: ❑ Plan commission Document Type: ❑A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 01/08/2003 Type of Meeting: PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION January 8, 2003 Prestige Leasing, 313 Dundee Road and 936 Betty Drive, Rezoning To the B-4 District and approval of a Preliminary Plan 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. Samuels Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Khan Mr. Teplinsky Mr. Billiter Mr. Stark Commissioners absent: None Also present: Mr. Bernard Citron, Schain, Burney, Ross & Citron, Ltd. Mr. Jamil Bou-Saab, Terra Engineering Ltd. Ms. Josephine Bellalta, Altamanu Mr. John C. Schiess, Architect Mr. Arthur Friedman, Prestige Leasing Mr. Igor Blumin, Elrod Realty Mr. Daniel J. Dowd, Dowd, Dowd& Mertes, Ltd. Mr. Jon Wildenberg, Rolf Campbell & Assoc. Mr. Mark Krause, MaRous & Company Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Ms. DeAnn Glover, Village Trustee Mr. Charles Johnson, Village Trustee Mr. Richard Kuenkler, 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: Written staff report by Robert Pfeil dated January 2, 2003 Exhibit 2 Aerial Photograph dated January 8, 2003. Exhibit 3: Zoning Map of surrounding area dated January 8, 2003 Exhibit 4: Site Concept Plan Exhibit 5: Zoning Data Sheet Exhibit 6: Detailed Architectural Site Plan Exhibit 7: Interior Plan Exhibit 8: North Elevation Exhibit 9: South Elevation Exhibit 10: East Elevation Exhibit 11: Landscape Plan Exhibit 12: Tree Survey Exhibit 13: Fence Detail Exhibit 14: Preliminary Utilities and Grading Plan dated January 8, 2003 Exhibit 15: Traffic Pattern Plan Exhibit 16: Traffic Pattern Plan Exhibit 17: Photometric Plan Exhibit 18: Tree View Rendering Exhibit 19: Tree View Rendering Exhibit 20: Traffic Study dated October 16, 2002 Exhibit 21: Traffic Study dated December 13, 2002 Exhibit 22: Comparison of traffic from proposed development versus permitted office use Exhibit 23: Home Price Study provided by Igor Blumin Exhibit 24: Home Price Study provided by Igor Blumin Exhibits 25 Thru 36: Slides of Uses along Dundee Road, dated January 8, 2003 Exhibit 37: Economic Impact Study Obj ectors' Exhibit 1: Submission in Opposition to Application by Millenium Holding Co. for Rezoning of Property at 313 Dundee Road and 936 Betty Drive, including tabs 1 through 5, dated January 8, 2003 Mr. Bernard Citron stated the site is located on the south side of Dundee between Betty Drive and Golfview Drive and is 1.81 acres and currently mainly zoned B-1 with a small portion of the site zoned R-4. He stated they are seeking to zone this site B-4 and the only reason for this is to allow this use. This is a business-zoned parcel so development of this site would be possible with various business zonings. It is important to note the various uses that would be permitted in the B-1 District. He noted that other various permitted uses would have worse traffic impacts than this use, which has a very low traffic impact. Mr. Arthur Friedman stated he has been located in Glenview since 1997 and they propose to move their current facility to improve their building size and location. He noted they are a service-oriented business and most of their customers live in Buffalo Grove and the northwest suburbs and they would be serving the public in this area. He further noted their current sales volume is about $22,000,000 and they believe they would be able to triple this volume at a larger facility here. He stated their business is leasing of current year automobiles as well as used car sales. He stated the business is about a 60/40 split between leasing and used car sales. He stated the majority of their sales are actually done over the phone and come in only for the paperwork and pickup of the car. Mr. Friedman stated they operate from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday and are closed on Sundays. He noted that by leasing mostly luxury cars it requires fewer transactions to reach the $22,000,000 level. He noted that at any one time they might have a maximum of 5-10 customers in the showroom on a given day with the busiest days being Monday and Thursday. Saturday is not a large volume day. During the day 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. are the busiest time periods and then after 6:00 p.m. Mr. Friedman stated they are not typical of new car dealerships and do not have big rigs coming in with car deliveries. What they usually have are flatbed or smaller trucks that delivery 2-4 vehicles at a time. These deliveries are probably once a week. All the trucks usually call before they come in asking the best way to come in and park. Mr. Friedman stated they do not allow test-drives by customers alone as it is a requirement of their insurance policy that customers be accompanied by an employee. Therefore they could direct test-drives out onto Dundee Road and away from the residential neighborhood. Furthermore, there would be no reason to go into the residential area, as there is nothing there. Mr. Friedman stated they have a maximum of 15 employees at one time with sufficient parking on site for them. They have an office use for the building as well as a leasing use. They will also be installing alarms, tinting windows, installing DVD's and small repairs. They are not equipped for any major repairs. Mr. John Schiess gave a brief overview of the project and noted their proposed FAR is .18. He noted there are two entrances to the site. One is along Dundee, which is a restricted right in and right out onto Dundee Road. There is a second entrance along Golfview Terrace that is an unrestricted in and out entrance. Customer parking has 43 parking spaces including two handicapped spaces. There is car storage, which is done via valet or employees of Millenium Holding Company. There is a temporary holding area for truck delivery parking. They do not propose to have any parking offsite by either employees or delivery vehicles. He noted the building would be equipped by a sprinkler system. The height of the building is 28' 8". Mr. John Schiess noted they are looking to bring in new water and sewer services to the building and those services do exit and no other improvements are needed on the part of the Village in order to accommodate this use. He noted the lighting that they have designed meets the standard of zero foot-candles at the perimeter of the site. Mr. Jamil Bou-Saab stated they need to provide detention storage area on site, which they will do with underground 100-year storage pipes. These will discharge onto Dundee Road through a restricter. These pipes are 48" in diameter and the restricter is about 6". They have also provided compensatory storage to compensate for the impervious driveway they are providing. He noted they are eliminating any water flow from the existing property to the neighboring area and they are storing all the water to be discharged onto Dundee, thereby not exacerbating or creating any additional problems in this area due to this development. Mr. Bou-Saab stated they have provided traffic counts for the intersection of Buffalo Grove and Dundee. They also did peak hour morning and evening counts. They also provided a full comprehensive traffic report as well as a simulation of traffic impact with any other developments on this site. He noted there would be no negative impacts to the flow of traffic in general at this location due to this development. He noted the level of service stays as it is. Most customers to this facility would be coming after peak hours. The main full service access is off of a signalized intersection, which is something that IDOT would recommend as opposed to having a full access onto Dundee Road. He stated they have had discussions with IDOT and they will allow a right in and out only on Dundee. He further noted their comparison of traffic impact by a permitted two-office development versus the proposed development is much higher, especially during peak morning and evening hours. A 27,000 square foot office building would not have as much control of where traffic could go and they could easily go into the residential area. Mr. Bou-Saab noted the suggested truck traffic plan was simulated with the use of emergency fire trucks in mind. He noted these trucks would not be negatively impacted. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the lighting plan shows there will be no spillover lighting onto the neighbors. There are zero foot-candles around the perimeter of the property. He stated they are also using some new technology of short pole lighting with the least amount of reflection in the parking lot. Ms. Josephine Bellalta stated they surveyed every tree on site that is about 4" in caliper. They also surveyed a few that are on the periphery but on the outside of the property. To the west of the site there I s a swath of existing trees, mostly box elder mulberry. On their property they have chosen to remove quite a few of these, as they are generally not recommended in landscape ordinances. Beyond that there are some evergreen trees on site, which happen to be in places where they would like to preserve them. She noted they have created a buffer system on the south and eastern edges composed of a 6' high wood fence, which they have landscaped on both sides. Along the eastern edge of Betty Drive there will be the same treatment. The trees along Betty Drive have taken on more of a street tree quality so they have not added any evergreen trees along that edge. On the west edge of the property they have managed to retain many trees. They have not included a fence on this edge as they still have a large swath of the existing trees outside of the property line. However, they have added a hedge that will help buffer any possibility of gaps in the tree line so you will not be able to see the cars. Along Dundee they have added deciduous trees. At the entrance to the drive along Dundee they have also added season flowers throughout the year. Also along the western property there will be "grass-crete," which is a way to retain green surface, but also allow the client to place cars there for exhibit. Around the existing property along Betty Drive they have also included a hedge like the one on the west side. Mr. Igor Blumin stated he was able to compare how average sales prices within the Village of Buffalo Grove tracked versus average sales prices of property located near another auto dealership in this area during the period of 1992 to 2000. He stated the specific area he looked at was surrounding the Arlington Nissan dealership at 935 West Dundee Road. He noted from 1992 through 2000 residential homes around this area have generally gone up with the average growth in sales prices being 31 percent and 36 percent in the rest of Buffalo Grove. He noted the older portion of Buffalo Grove which is south of Dundee Road tend to have lower prices compared with the new construction to the north and west in Buffalo Grove. Mr. Blumin noted that if a restaurant was placed on this site, some people would not want to move next to this site as the hours would be longer, a liquor license might be in use etc. Mr. John Schiess reviewed a series of slides and described the type of use of the construction as it is viewed from the street and the number of stories. He stated their purpose is to establish a character along the Dundee corridor. These slides establish a use that is primarily commercial with some auto dealerships falling within the commercial use. The uses on the south side of Dundee are commensurate with the zonings of B-1 and B-3 and are uses that take advantage of the traffic on Dundee Road. The north side of Dundee Road is mainly residential with some commercial uses mixed in. He noted that in his opinion there has been no negative impact on the trend of development in this area by virtue of the fact that there are commercial uses mixed in with residential uses. He further stated he believes the proposed building is more sensitive both to the site and the existing fabric along Dundee. He also noted they are proposing more than sufficient buffers to the parking area and he did not find this level of buffers on any of the parking which generally were in front of the building. In addition the proposed building is 1 story building that faces the street with a 2 story behind and that generally diminishes the bulk impact of the building. He noted they have also pushed the building as far from the residential uses as possible. He noted the height of the building is proposed to be 28 feet, which is commensurate with a typical 2-story house with a pitched roof. The trend of development along Dundee Road is multi-story condo buildings. Mr. Schiess stated he was asked to compile an economic study of this project, as it would relate to both the real estate taxes and sales taxes that would conservatively be generated from this project. He stated he estimated the improved property value would be $1,500,000 and that would generate approximately $60,000 in real estate taxes and $12,000 of that would go to the Village of Buffalo Grove. He further noted that based on a tripling of the business there would be sales tax revenue of about $238,000 to the Village. Therefore the projected total annual revenue to the Village of Buffalo Grove would be approximately $250,000. Commissioner Teplinsky noted previous testimony had stated delivery of trucks on large multi-car carriers. He asked if that had changed. Mr. Friedman stated that was correct. He stated they had looked into deliveries they have now and they really do not have anything as large as they thought they would. Commissioner Teplinsky asked what type of vehicle these cars would be delivered in. Mr. Friedman stated it is usually a flatbed or six car carriers. Commissioner Teplinsky asked how large the six car carriers are. Mr. Friedman stated they are about 40 feet. Commissioner Teplinsky asked if customers would be accompanied on all test-drives by employees. Mr. Friedman stated yes. He noted it is part of the insurance requirements. Commissioner Teplinsky asked if there would be any kind of rental car facility in the building. Mr. Friedman stated no, as they already have a rental car facility in Plaza Verde in Buffalo Grove. Commissioner Teplinsky asked why there is an area designated as rental on the plan drawings. Mr. Friedman stated they originally thought of putting rental in but that is no longer the case. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka asked if delivery trucks would not be using the driveway on Dundee. Mr. Bou-Saab stated that was correct. He noted delivery trucks would only turn right on Dundee once they have entered on Golfview Road. He noted their simulations were concerned mostly with fire trucks. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka noted she could not believe a 40-foot truck would be able to turn around on the lot. Mr. Citron noted the testimony was that there would be two types of trucks delivering. There will be a longer and shorter truck. The shorter one will be able to turn around and the longer one would exit onto Dundee and go eastbound. He noted they would go eastbound because there is no reason to go south onto Golfview as it goes nowhere. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka asked if the developer planned to approach IDOT about changing the signal length or timing on Golfview Terrace as alluded in Benes and Associates memo of January 7, 2003. Mr. Bou-Saab stated their study did not show this to be a necessity at this time. However, if the Village eventually sees this as necessary, they would be willing to help the Village approach IDOT. Commissioner Samuels asked what the length of the fire truck is that was used in the simulation. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the fire truck is usually more conservative for turning than the regular truck, as there is speed that must be considered and extended ladder clearance. Therefore, if the fire truck can go through, the 40-foot flatbeds can get through much easier. Commissioner Samuels asked if the fire department is aware of these studies. Mr. Pfeil stated the fire department has received all the plans submitted by the petitioner and no new comments have been received from them concerning the radii issue. Previously the fire department indicated they wanted to make sure the hydrants were in the right place and they recommended Golfview as the secondary access road. They appear to be satisfied with the movement into the site potentially for fire vehicles. Commissioner Samuels asked if there is any chance that IDOT will not allow the access on Dundee Road. Mr. Bou-Saab stated there is perhaps only a two- percent change that IDOT would not allow the access. Commissioner Samuels noted he couldn't see circulating a 40-foot truck in this parking lot as it is designed without a series of very complicated wide maneuvers. Mr. Citron stated it can be accommodated albeit with maneuvers that would not be commensurate with their business practice which is why they took the step of talking to IDOT and getting preliminary approval, pointing out the fact that there is an existing curb cut but noting that it is only a right in and out which would be allowed onto Dundee as the other uses are allowed. Commissioner Samuels noted a truck turn from Dundee right into the property appears to be a very tight turn from the far left turn lane and he wonders what part of good planning permits acceptance of such a design. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the exhibit shows a fire truck coming into the property, whereas a delivery truck would be coming from Golfview. Commissioner Samuels stated if he were a delivery truck driver and there is an access available on Dundee and he is coming westbound he would enter the property on a right turn from Dundee and then make a left turn from the signalized intersection on Golfview. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the delivery truck would be calling before they come. He further noted that no matter what direction truck drivers will be coming from they feel comfortable that these truck drivers will be able to make it in from Dundee if necessary. The islands are based on IDOT requirements and based on truck deliveries. Commissioner Samuels asked if the island must be there or if it can be striped for right in, right out only. Mr. Bou-Saab stated they could look into that and provide some signs or make the island smaller. Commissioner Samuels stated it is his opinion that the island is not of sufficient design to allow these turning maneuvers on a regular and safe basis. He asked who maintains the island. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the island is within the right of way and it would be maintained by IDOT. Commissioner Samuels noted he thought the grasscrete was to be allowed only on the portion of the curved building per workshop meetings. He asked if it is the petitioner's intention to keep the additional grasscrete area. Mr. Schiess stated they previously had the grasscrete coming around the front of the building or on the north side of the building. They have now cut it back as requested. Commissioner Samuels asked if the cars would be left there overnight or strictly during hours of operation. Mr. Schiess stated the cars would be there only during hours of operation. Commissioner Samuels asked how that area would be maintained. Mr. Bou-Saab stated it would be mowed just like any other grass area. Commissioner Samuels asked if there would be automatic sprinklers. Mr. Schiess stated they were not planning on automatic sprinklers. Mr. Citron stated they are asking for preliminary site plan approval so some of the items of detail that may be at issue would come back to be finalized if there is approval of this project. If there are recommendations made they can take them to the board and address them. At this point they have not gotten into those finite details. Commissioner Samuels stated that the aesthetics of a project such as this are an integral part of the approval process and the maintenance and the potential for proper maintenance of the property is a proper issue to be addressed at this point. There has been some concern expressed that this type of grass paved area can become an eyesore if not property maintained. Mr. Citron stated they are not saying they would not do it, merely that they have not been asked up until now to finitely address that. If the decision is made that the only way to keep the grasscrete right would be to add an irrigation system, then that could be made a part of the conditions of approval. Commissioner Samuels asked how the underground storage pipes for the stormwater are maintained. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the owner would maintain them. He stated they have provided manholes at every pipe end so they will be able to come in, open them and flush them if needed. Commissioner Billiter asked how many employees would be present during peak operation. Mr. Friedman stated 15 employees. Commissioner Billiter asked how many customers would be there at that time. Mr. Friedman stated there would be about 5-6 customers. Commissioner Billiter asked how many lease vehicles would be parked on the 43 parking spaces provided. Mr. Friedman stated none. Commissioner Billiter asked where test driven vehicles are parked when they return from test-drives. Mr. Friedman stated they are usually parked in one of the parking stalls, which are then removed by porters. Commissioner Billiter discussed the unloading of delivery vehicles and the possible backup of cars waiting to get in or out of the facility. Commissioner Stark asked if there are usually the same delivery truck drivers. Mr. Friedman stated yes. Commissioner Smith asked how many car deliveries would there be per week. Mr. Friedman stated there is usually one per week. Commissioner Smith asked what was the reason for a B-4 zoning request. Mr. Citron noted the Buffalo Grove zoning ordinance is a partial laundry list ordinance which means if it is not a use that is specifically set out in a district you cannot do it in that district. Automobile sales and leasing is a B-4 use. He noted they would not be asking for a B-4 district uncoupled with their project. There are B-4 uses that have developed without the care and detail they are trying to do and would be wholly inappropriate for this site in this location. However, they are asking for B-4 coupled solely with this use. This B-4 use is less intensive than many of the uses permitted in the B-1 district. Commissioner Smith stated that part of the reason these parcels have not sold to any of those other intense uses is because the property is not right for that kind of use. Commissioner Samuels asked about the volume of deliveries. Mr. Citron stated Mr. Friedman has indicated that deliveries by truck are about one per week. The remainder are cars driven in by people. Commissioner Samuels asked if the deliveries would increase if the business doubled or tripled in volume. Mr. Friedman stated not necessarily because they do have a fair amount of sales over the phone. Most leases are done over the phone. Commissioner Smith asked where some of the minor repairs and installations would be done. Mr. Friedman stated they are all done inside. Mr. Daniel Dowd stated he represents several of the neighbors along Betty Drive Mr. Citron stated he feels it would be appropriate for Mr. Dowd to specifically identify the property owners he is representing, especially in light of some of the cases that have recently come down regarding notice and representation in hearings of the plan commission. Mr. Dowd stated Russell and Juliette Shavitz have engaged him as well as David and Cheryl Bernardi. There are also others that have contributed to defray the cost. He stated he does not profess to speak for all and he would like everyone to know that after he is done performing cross examination on behalf of the group that has engaged him, they are free to come up and perform their own cross examination as well. He noted they are in no way foreclosed by what he is doing. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Friedman if anything besides used car sales, leasing business and installation of alarms and window tinting is done at his present location. He also asked if there are any mechanics on his staff at his current location. Mr. Friedman stated no. Mr. Dowd asked if 40 percent of the $22,000,00 gross sales is from new car leasing and 60 percent from car sales or the opposite. Mr. Friedman stated the majority will be generated by new car leasing which is 60 percent and 40 percent is used car sales. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Friedman had to go back and check the records to determine if a delivery vehicle larger than 40 feet was ever used. Mr. Friedman stated he did not have to check his records, merely sat down with his staff to review deliveries. Mr. Dowd asked what the average sale price was for these luxury vehicles. Mr. Friedman stated the average is around $35,000 and 60 percent of the $22,000,000 is generated from leased vehicles. Mr. Dowd asked what the average price is for used cars. Mr. Friedman stated about $20,000. Mr. Dowd asked if new cars are driven to the site and used cars are delivered by the 40-foot conveyances. Mr. Friedman stated that is correct. Mr. Dowd asked if the used cars are mostly delivered by the 40-foot cars. Mr. Friedman stated sometimes. He stated they usually have flatbeds deliver them. Mr. Dowd asked if one delivery per week is sufficient for sales of$22,000,000. Mr. Friedman stated he also said they do a lot of sales over the phone, which does not require delivery, as they go directly to the customer. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Friedman was in any other businesses. Mr. Friedman stated he is also in wholesale and rental operation. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Friedman owns that property or leases. Mr. Friedman stated he leases. Mr. Dowd asked if there is any consideration to moving that operation over to this location. Mr. Friedman stated they originally had that consideration but they have now abandoned that idea. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Friedman were aware of any restriction under the current zoning request they are asking for that would prevent them from doing so. Mr. Friedman stated he is not aware of anything. Mr. Dowd asked how many vehicles are available for rental in the Plaza Verde operation. Mr. Friedman stated they have about 10 cars. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Friedman has any other car rental operations other than Plaza Verde. Mr. Friedman stated he has 2 others located at Chicago-O'Hare and in Morton Grove. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Bou-Saab about the comparison between the number of peak time traffic movements, a.m. and p.m., for the uses proposed and for office buildings of 27,000 square feet and 39,000 square feet respectively. He asked if any analysis was made relative to the likely traffic that would be generated during a.m. and p.m. peak time uses for any other B-4 allowed uses. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the only thing they did was the B-4 and some residential. Mr. Dowd noted the analysis was done comparing the proposed use to what would be generated based on two separate and different office uses. Mr. Bou-Saab stated that was correct. Mr. Dowd asked if he was aware that if this property were rezoned for B-4 it would be capable of being used for a whole laundry list of additional uses. Mr. Bou-Saab stated they did not go beyond what this property would be rezoned for. Mr. Dowd asked if he had included the residential parcel when they did the property as presently zoned and the calculations for the office use. Mr. Bou-Saab stated yes. He stated they did the counts for a.m. and p.m. and then they did the escalation based on 10 years and 20 years. They also included the residential developments taking place on Golfview. Mr. Dowd asked if when the calculations were made based on the property being developed under its current zoning classification as a 27,000 and 39,000 square foot office building, was it considered that the parcel to the south on Betty Drive is R-4. Mr. Bou-Saab stated yes. Mr. Dowd stated along Betty Drive there is B-1 that fronts on Dundee and goes down Golfview and wraps around the existing B-1 use that is on the corner of Betty and Dundee. Then there are two parcels of which one is B-1 and the other is R-4. When the calculations were made for the development of the parcel as an office complex, he asked if the R-4 was included. He asked if the R-4 space had been considered as developable as office space. Mr. Bou-Saab stated he believes they excluded it, but would need to get back on this one. Mr. Dowd noted that the testimony then was that the property is that which is now B-1 excluding the R-4. Mr. Dowd stated his question was comparing the amounts of movements that would occur based upon the proposed zoning and that which the property would currently allow under the existing zoning classification if it were developed as an office. Mr. Bou-Saab stated that was correct. Mr. Dowd asked if he included the R-4 parcel as being developed as part of the office when that comparison was made. Mr. Bou-Saab stated yes, they included the whole property. Mr. Dowd asked if that comparison was therefore flawed because the existing zoning classification does not allow that R-4 to be developed as B-1. Mr. Bou-Saab stated they did it based on what is allowed on the B-1 property. Mr. Dowd asked if it would not have been better to exclude from the calculation the R-4 parcel that cannot be developed as office to provide a fairer representation of what the movements would be. Mr. Bou-Saab stated he would have to look at the report to answer that specifically. Mr. Dowd noted there had been representation that the lighting would be less intense for the type of use being proposed here than some of the other B-1 uses. He noted there would be storage of some expensive vehicles during the night and asked if the business plan calls for continuous illumination of the parking areas for these vehicles. Mr. Bou-Saab stated they will coordinate with the Village regarding security and will discuss how much lighting is required per the police department. Mr. Dowd noted the forestry department of the Village has asked for more separation in some of the planting material so there will greater illumination to the areas where the vehicles will be stored for security purposes because they have a great concern that the area be illuminated and kept open for viewing by police vehicles as they went by. Mr. Bou-Saab stated he does not know. He noted, however, that new lighting technology does not have to flood the area they are using here. The latest technology uses lower poles and less reflection. Mr. Dowd asked that Mr. Bou-Saab make a determination as to whether the R-4 parcel was included as being capable of being developed currently as office. Mr. Bou-Saab stated he would. Mr. Citron asked Mr. Friedman if it was correct to assume that if you currently have $22,000,000 of revenue that is generated from 60 percent on leasing, with an average price per car of$35,000, it comes out to about 377 cars. Mr. Friedman stated that was about right. Mr. Citron asked if people drive the cars onto this facility one by one as they come from a new car dealership. Mr. Friedman stated yes. Mr. Citron asked if there are a substantial number of cars that do not even come to this facility but are delivered from a dealership to the customer. Mr. Friedman stated there are quite a few of them. Mr. Citron noted that although Mr. Friedman has other businesses, they are not asking for approval to relocate any of those other businesses to this location. Mr. Friedman stated that was correct. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Schiess provided the numbers of 27,000 square feet and 39,000 square feet for the office development. Mr. Bou-Saab stated yes. Mr. Citron noted the 27,000 square foot office was based solely on what could be built in B-1 with a .5 FAR excluding the little piece of residential included on the site. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Blumin if he did a comparison of home sales generally in the Buffalo Grove area that were not around car dealerships and compared them to home sales that occurred. He asked how he compared the adjacency or nearness of the sales to use them as a comparison. Mr. Blumin they did compare all sales in 1992 and also sale prices of residential properties around 935 W. Dundee. Mr. Dowd asked what he meant by around 935 Dundee. Mr. Blumin stated the way to search on multiple listing service in the suburbs, Buffalo Grove, is not by pinpointing just the address of the property and get just 2 blocks away from the site. What were available to them were coordinates around the property. Mr. Dowd asked for one single comparable sale of a unit around the Nissan facility and compare that to one single comparable sale used that was not around the Nissan facility and the particulars of that sale. Mr. Blumin stated you cannot get a certain address of the property and get the same sale of the same property in a couple of years. You can only take all properties sold in the area and get the average. Mr. Dowd asked if it was not possible to have taken a home adjacent to the Nissan dealership and try to determine whether that had sold within a 10 year period and compare the characteristics of that home to another home that was not adjacent to a car dealership. Mr. Blumin stated you would be comparing apples to oranges. Mr. Dowd asked about taking the same kind of square foot area, the same kind of construction and everything being virtually the same except the location; one being next to a car dealership and one being in a residential zone. Mr. Blumin stated each property is unique. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Blumin had done any appraisals of properties and values to determine the economic impact of this proposed development on the surrounding property. Mr. Blumin stated that is what they did on an average basis. Mr. Dowd asked if he had considered the impact of this development as proposed on the single-family homes immediately across the street to the east on Betty Drive. Mr. Blumin stated no. Mr. Dowd asked what zoning classification motor vehicles are permitted in by Buffalo Grove. Mr. Blumin stated he is not the expert on zoning but has heard it is B-4. Mr. Dowd asked if he was familiar with the minimum area required for B-4 in Buffalo Grove. Mr. Blumin stated he understands from the presentation that it is .8 and the proposed is .18. Mr. Dowd asked if he would be surprised to learn the B-4 has a minimum area requirement of 4 acres. Mr. Blumin stated he is not aware of B-4 zoning requirements in Buffalo Grove. Mr. Dowd asked if he knows whether the Nissan dealership used to create the comparison is on an area of 4 acres or more. Mr. Blumin stated he knows it is a much larger area than the proposed. Mr. Dowd asked if had compared the transitional yards that exist at the Nissan development to those that are proposed here. He asked if he know what the sideyards, setbacks and rear yard setbacks are at the Nissan dealership used to compare the impact of this proposed development on the values of the surrounding properties. Mr. Blumin stated no. Mr. Dowd asked if that was important information that could have been used to get a better idea as to whether the comparison of the Nissan use, which is on a much larger parcel to those on the proposed use. Mr. Blumin stated in Buffalo Grove in recent years that site was the only one they were able get information on going back ten years. Mr. Dowd noted that he could not then tell the distance between the end of the parking lot and the beginning of residential areas for the sales that he had compared near the Nissan dealership to those that were not near the dealership. Mr. Blumin stated it was a large area search, which includes everything on the south side. Mr. Dowd asked if he had done any site-specific analysis in this case. Mr. Blumin stated he knew the Nissan is a bigger dealership and if it were to have a bad impact, bigger would be worse. Mr. Dowd asked if he what the distance is between the single-family homes he studied and the dealership. Mr. Blumin stated they included all available closing sales on the south side. Mr. Dowd asked if he could tell the location of one of the sales in relation to the Nissan dealership; whether it was immediately across the street or 100 feet away or something. Mr. Blumin stated about 150-200 homes were sold on the south side in one year. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Jon Wildenberg if he had had an opportunity to review the current zoning application and form an opinion as to its appropriateness as a land use. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. Mr. Dowd asked what was reviewed. Mr. Wildenberg stated they reviewed the site area itself as well as surrounding land uses both existing and what might be proposed in the Comprehensive Plan of the community. They also reviewed the zoning ordinance and other planning and zoning documents. Mr. Dowd asked if the characterization of the surrounding zoning as given on the direct testimony a fair representation or is there anything that should be added to it. Mr. Wildenberg stated those are facts that are usually determined by the zoning map and he would not change anything. Mr. Dowd asked what is known about the proposed use. Mr. Wildenberg stated it very much consists of what the testimony has presented. It is an auto leasing and sales facility with the attendant uses both within an enclosed structure and out on the grounds. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Wildenberg had formed an opinion as to the appropriateness of this particular request for rezoning of this property. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. He stated they feel that the proposed zoning district of B-4 is too intense to be applied onto this particular property for a number of reasons. The B-4 district represents an intensity that is not really appropriate in this location. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Wildenberg was aware of any restriction in the zoning ordinance as it now exists in the B-4 that would limit the development of this site to what is being requested tonight if it were given a B-4 zoning. Mr. Wildenberg stated no, not directly. He stated their belief is that if it is re-zoned to B-4 the permitted uses that are available in that district are available to that property whether or not this particular proposal moves ahead. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Wildenberg to amplify his statement that this particular use is too intense for this site. Mr. Wildenberg stated they have a number of concerns in regard to the B-4 District being placed on this property. First, would be some of the spot zoning characteristics involved with that. The change in zoning is really applicable only to a small area. In this case they are looking to rezone 1.8 acres to B-4. In Buffalo Grove's zoning ordinance it does require a minimum of 4 acres to be considered for rezoning in the B-4 district and they believe there is purpose for that. That purpose is to help alleviate and avoid spot zoning situations. Also, to be able to accommodate on an appropriate sized lot the types of intensity of use that would be expected to come to the B-4 district. Based on some of the other zoning factors involved, the zoning change is not particularly consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Right now the Comprehensive Plan designates the majority of this site for office use in the future. It does have the smaller pod in the southeast corner of the site as single family residential in the future and the subject property is being singled out for a use classification that is totally different from those of the surrounding area. Mr. Dowd asked what was the purpose expressed in the ordinance as it relates to the B-1 district, which is the current zoning in this classification. Mr. Wildenberg stated it is basically designed as a lighter intensity district and a general principal cited in the zoning ordinance to consider introduction of business districts in the residential areas and is to do so where their inclusion into a residential area has significant elements of service or convenience to the residential areas to offset any kind of disadvantage that might be posed by the rezoning. Mr. Dowd asked if there is anything in this particular use as a used car and leasing facility that lends itself to that purpose. Mr. Wildenberg stated no, not particularly. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Wildenberg if that is why this use is classified as B-4. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. He noted the B-4 district is to accommodate more intense retail type uses that appeal to a much broader market and may be better situated in more similar areas. Mr. Dowd asked what the Comprehensive Plan calls for at this particular site. Mr. Wildenberg stated it calls for office in the majority of the site and for the 10,000 square foot southeast corner it calls for single family detached. Mr. Dowd asked if this property is suitable for that zoning classification. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. He further stated the B-1 district offers a number of uses that could be implemented on this particular property. Mr. Dowd asked if there are any other aspects of the B-4 district and its intensity that are of concern as they relate to this location. Mr. Wildenberg stated one of the factors of intensity that they look at are the permitted uses. In addition to the use that has been proposed for this property, other uses may be available or could be permitted on the site such as automobile repair and service shops, building material sales operations, cartage and express facilities, house trailer sales, machinery sales and service and various processing and assembly type functions. Mr. Dowd asked if all of those purposes could be developed on this site without the necessity for a petition to come back before the plan commission if the B-4 district is allowed. Mr. Wildenberg stated they are listed as permitted uses in the B-4 district. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Wildenberg if he is aware of any other measures within the B-1 classification that set it aside in terms of protecting the surrounding areas from those kind of activities that are associated with B-4 activities. Mr. Wildenberg stated there is a clear distinction between B-1 and B-4 in that the B-1 district does require all activities to occur within an enclosed building and the B-4 district does allow the introduction of outdoor storage and other types of outdoor uses. Mr. Dowd asked what the maximum height in the B-4 district is. Mr. Wildenberg stated four stories or 45 feet. Mr. Dowd asked if the petitioner could develop a building of the maximum height of 45 feet without having to return to the Plan Commission or Board for zoning approval based upon the zoning ordinance as now written and if they were granted B-4 zoning. Mr. Wildenberg stated no further map amendment would be necessary and that height limitation would be available. Mr. Dowd noted that the transitional yards for the B-1 and B-4 are the same. He asked if that has something to do with the minimum area requirement for B-4 type uses. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. He stated that minimum area requirement helps to offset some of the expected intensity that could come into a B-4 zoned area versus a B-1 zoned area. The B-4 zoned area allows a FAR of up to .8 while the B-1 zoned area allows an FAR of up to .5. The potential is there if it can be designed and meet the rest of the district requirements. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Wildenberg if he was familiar with the zoning ordinance and the provision that allows for the use of property in a similar zoning classification to be included in the calculation of the minimum area. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. Mr. Dowd asked if there are any B-4 sites adjacent to this B-1 site. Mr. Wildenberg stated no. Mr. Dowd noted that if this were to be developed as B-4 it would have to draw more than 2 acres from a similar zoning classification. Mr. Wildenberg stated that is their understanding of the ordinance provision. Mr. Dowd asked if the B-4 zoning district is similar to the B-3 district as it is defined within the current ordinance. Mr. Wildenberg stated he did not belief it is similar. Mr. Dowd asked if the B-4 should be able to use the B-3 across the street at Golfview Plaza to reach the minimum area requirement of 4 acres. Mr. Wildenberg stated that is correct. The intensities that are proposed in the B-4 district are so much greater and much different than what the actual development is in B-3 for the west side of Golfview. The development to the west is very comparable to B-1 and the development to the east is zoned B-1 and developed in the B-1 district. Mr. Dowd asked if the author of the aggregation section wanted to allow the next least intensive zoning classification to be used to supplement the deficiency in the next higher zoning classification, he would have said that. Mr. Wildenberg stated it could be stated in a different manner to clarify that particular intent. Mr. Dowd asked if that would have been a better way to say things than "similar". Mr. Wildenberg stated similar could be interpreted a little more broadly than some of the other phraseology. Mr. Dowd asked if the interpretation of the zoning ordinance as now written is a correct interpretation, this project could not, as the land now surrounding it exits, meet the minimum area requirements. Mr. Wildenberg stated the B-3 district to the west is not added in to the overall area calculation of 1.8 acres and could not satisfy the minimum 4-acre requirement for a map amendment to B-4. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Wildenberg had been asked if he had been asked to comment on the draft of the current Buffalo Grove zoning ordinance. Mr. Wildenberg stated they were asked to review the Buffalo Grove zoning ordinance in relation to this petition for a zoning ordinance. Mr. Citron noted therefore that his opinion as to whether or not it was written correctly or incorrectly is really just his opinion. Mr. Wildenberg stated his opinion is that the intent of that section could be clarified with different wording. Mr. Citron noted that if the Village of Buffalo Grove had that interpretation in mind, their own staff could have told the developer from the moment they filed at that location that there was no jurisdiction to go forward with the application. Mr. Citron stated that along with asking for zoning they are also asking for preliminary site plan approval and that even if a property was zoned B-1, B-2 or B-4 you would still have to come before the Plan Commission for approval of a site plan before you could build something even if that use was permitted. Mr. Wildenberg stated that is his understanding. Mr. Citron noted municipalities do have the right to limit what can be done on property if it is inappropriate and has negative impacts on the surrounding area even though it may be a permitted use in the district. Mr. Wildenberg stated he would defer that to legal counsel. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Wildenberg had looked at some of the permitted uses in the B-1 district. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. Mr. Citron asked if he was aware that restaurants and taverns are permitted uses. Mr. Wildenberg stated they are listed as permitted uses. Mr. Citron asked if it would be a fair statement to say that even though there are a number of very intense uses, the likelihood of those uses of being developed or approved on this site would be farfetched. Mr. Wildenberg stated it is his opinion that that is why the minimum 4-acre requirement to rezone to B-4 is partly there. Mr. Citron noted that even though B-4 is not appropriate to this site in the opinion of Mr. Wildenberg, there are B-4 uses, which could be developed on this site and would be suitable on this site depending on how they were developed/ Mr. Citron further noted that even though they are asking for a B-4 use, they are asking for it in a way that is commensurate with what is appropriate and allowed in the B-1 district. Mr. Wildenberg stated that might be true in some respects, but in respect of being able to conduct an auto sales facility on this site it is not as it is not allowed in the B-1 district and it is not an office use pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Citron noted there is an office use here that is part of this process and asked if that portion of the proposed use is not only permitted under B-1 but would, in fact, be an appropriate use. Mr. Wildenberg stated they would not have a problem with office uses. Mr. Citron noted that from a planning standpoint there are other uses in the B-1 district that have elements of repair and sales. Mr. Wildenberg stated there are retail sales uses involved and there are also office uses involved. Mr. Citron noted that one of those uses is a food store and asked if Mr. Wildenberg believes that would have more traffic than that which is being provided for under testimony here today. Mr. Wildenberg stated he rather would not testify to that matter. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Wildenberg looks at the attributes of the use. Mr. Wildenberg stated they look at the districts as a whole. He stated they are not being presented with a B-1 use to evaluate at this point, but rather they are being presented with a map amendment request to change the zoning on the property from B-1 to B-4 and that is the perspective they are looking at. Mr. Citron noted that he is only looking at going to B-4 and forgetting about what is being put on the property. Mr. Wildenberg stated he would not go that far. Obviously what gets put on the property relates to what is allowable under the district that is requested. Mr. Citron asked if it also relates to what kind of impact that kind of use would have. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. Mr. Citron asked if there are specific uses under the B-1 district that would have a greater negative impact on the nearby residential than the proposed use. Mr. Wildenberg stated it is hard to testify to that without seeing some particulars on it. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Mark Krause if he had performed an impact analysis of the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding properties. Mr. Krause stated he reviewed both the Buffalo Grove Comprehensive Plan, the Cook County Zoning Map, LaSalle factors, the documents provided by the petitioners and the planning consultant's memorandum prepared by Rolf C. Campbell & Associates dated December 31, 2002. He stated he also inspected the single family residence of 3340 and 3407 Betty Drive, which included an interior and exterior inspection. Mr. Dowd noted the purpose of Mr. Krause's analysis was to determine what, if any, impact the proposed development on the site would have on the surrounding properties. Mr. Krause noted they looked at more of a commercial development as a change in use from the residential characteristics that are on Betty Drive. There is a single family residence on Betty Drive along with the site that is zoned for R-4 as well as a change in use of the characteristic from the 3440 property adjoining residential use to a wholly zoned business use site. Mr. Dowd asked if he had come to an opinion as to whether the development as proposed would have an impact on the surrounding residential properties on Betty Drive. Mr. Krause stated yes. He further stated they made a market investigation of single family sales located in Buffalo Grove, concentrating on the Cook County portion of Buffalo Grove as well as Arlington Heights using the online service provided by the multiple listing service. A market analysis was performed of both 3340 and 3307 Betty Drive and considering the factors in determining the value of the proposed development on both single-family houses. The houses will no longer join a residentially zoned property. It will front and/or adjoin a commercial property. The commercial characteristic will change from daytime hours from enclosed buildings to high-density commercial development with evening hours and operations on the weekends. Delivery of small vehicle trucks will change from flat bed trailers and, could include intercom noise, from porters. The density of the proposed development is 1.8 and could allow .8. Business operations would change to allow exterior business operations, which would include the storage and movement of motor vehicles for sales and/or lease which is not permitted in both the B-1 and/or the R-4A zoned lot on Betty Drive. Mr. Dowd asked if he had an opinion as to whether those changes in the characteristics of the property as they relate to the residential uses would have an impact on the value of those properties. Mr. Krause stated based upon a review of sales here as well as other experiences with other market analyses, he believes that impact on both 3340 and 3307 Betty Drive would range from 5-10 percent of the overall market value. Mr. Dowd asked if he had come to a market value in relationship to the two properties that were appraised and if he had established what the market value of those two properties is. Mr. Krause stated based upon an analysis of the data using the Northern Illinois multiple listing service for sales, they came up with market opinions of the 3440 property having an approximate market value of$245,000. Mr. Dowd noted that that particular property has as its sideyard a residential lot. Mr. Krause stated that was correct. Mr. Dowd stated what is being proposed is a six foot fence for 19 feet of transitional yard, lighting, vehicle storage, vehicle movement, and noise attendant to that. He asked if that would change or have an impact on the desirability of that home as a single-family residence. Mr. Krause stated that would effect the desirability. Presently the living lot area of the 3440 Betty Drive adjoins a residentially zoned property that will change to have a residentially zoned property adjoining a vehicle storage or a lighted parking lot for all practical purposes. Mr. Dowd asked if it is Mr. Krause's judgment and opinion that this development would have a negative effect on the value and living conditions of the two residential properties that were appraised. Mr. Krause stated he would conclude more on the impact on the overall value in the 5-10 percent of the market value. Mr. Dowd asked if there had been any attempt to market this residential piece of property. Mr. Krause stated that based upon a review of the multiple listing service, he did not find that the property at 936 Betty Drive, which is included in the site concept, is being listed at this time for sale. Mr. Dowd asked if that parcel is suitable for development under its current residential zoning classification. Mr. Krause stated the current zoning would allow for development under the R-4 zoning district. He further stated it is his opinion that the reason that that portion of the site can't be developed is that it lacks access to water and sewer. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Krause was asked to look at the effect of auto dealerships adjacent to residential homes. Mr. Krause stated yes, he was asked to look at homes next to commercial. Mr. Citron asked if he had looked at anything at Covington that is zoned R-9 Special Use across the street from the B-3. Mr. Krause stated those are multi-family and he only looked at single family. Mr. Citron asked if there are other home on Betty Drive that are directly across the street from B-1 commercial property. Mr. Krause stated he did not study that home. Mr. Citron noted that by being adjacent to a commercial district, regardless of whether it is open or closed space, fencing, landscaping, automatically it has a negative impact on the value of the two properties and asked Mr. Krause if that was correct. Mr. Krause stated he cannot automatically say there is influence on that but there is evidence of single family homes abutting commercial districts impacted when compared to homes of similar style that do not abut commercial districts. Mr. Citron asked if there would automatically be a negative impact on a single family home adjacent to a large office building with a grassy area. Mr. Krause stated it is a single-family residence based on uses and other uses that are incompatible with other residences of similar age and uses. That is the difference. Mr. Citron asked if a residential structure put on the R-4 parcel in question would impact the home also. Mr. Krause stated typically single family homes are not on isolated lots. They are in adjacent subdivisions adjoining other residential structures. If a residential structure were put on that R-4 zoning site on Betty Drive, it would be consistent with all the other uses located south on Betty Drive. Mr. Citron stated he is talking about the physicality. If a structure was put there, commercial or residential, it is now closer to that single family home than the proposed use and physically it cuts down on some of the light and air going into that building. Mr. Krause stated he would have to structure the impact if that lot were developed. Mr. Citron stated there would probably be five cars parked behind the fence on the piece that is R-4 that they are seeking to rezone to B-4. He asked what specifically about the fact that those cars are parked there, behind fencing and landscaping, negatively impacts the property value of the adjacent home other than the fact that it is commercially zoned property. Mr. Krause stated the impact of being located next to a commercially zoned property specifically is use of a parking lot. Mr. Citron asked if there would be a negative impact even if it were vacant land adjacent as long as it was zoned commercial. Mr. Krause stated it could definitely have a negative impact. He stated this is a vacant site that is currently zoned for single family. If residential land is zoned commercial it does have an impact on value. Mr. Citron asked Mr. Krause if he was asked to look at any of the properties on Golfview Terrace that are already next to the site that is vacant but zoned commercial. Mr. Krause stated no. Mr. Citron asked why just being next to commercial effect these homes' property values. Mr. Krause stated the uses proposed are for single family. The single-family use is more of a harmonious use. If it next to commercial use there is a risk in the future that the characteristics, whether the site is vacant or developed, would change. Mr. Citron noted in this case there is no risk as they are putting something forward that has a plan that specifically pushes the building all the way up to Dundee, substantially farther away than any other building would be next to these homes if it was developed as currently allowed. Mr. Krause stated that obviously any structure put there would be closer to any homes on Betty Drive. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Krause had been asked to look at any of the permitted uses in the B-1 district. Mr. Krause stated yes. Mr. Citron asked if there would be any impact from any B-1 development. Mr. Krause stated his study focused on the concept presented as is. Chairman Ottenheimer asked the Plan Commission if they had any questions for the expert witnesses. There were none. Chairman Ottenheimer continued the public hearing to January 15, 2003 at 7:30 p.m. at this location. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair Board or Commission: ❑ Plan commission Document Type: ❑A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 01/08/2003 Type of Meeting: PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION January 8, 2003 Prestige Leasing, 313 Dundee Road and 936 Betty Drive, Rezoning To the B-4 District and approval of a Preliminary Plan 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. Samuels Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Khan Mr. Teplinsky Mr. Billiter Mr. Stark Commissioners absent: None Also present: Mr. Bernard Citron, Schain, Burney, Ross & Citron, Ltd. Mr. Jamil Bou-Saab, Terra Engineering Ltd. Ms. Josephine Bellalta, Altamanu Mr. John C. Schiess, Architect Mr. Arthur Friedman, Prestige Leasing Mr. Igor Blumin, Elrod Realty Mr. Daniel J. Dowd, Dowd, Dowd& Mertes, Ltd. Mr. Jon Wildenberg, Rolf Campbell & Assoc. Mr. Mark Krause, MaRous & Company Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Ms. DeAnn Glover, Village Trustee Mr. Charles Johnson, Village Trustee Mr. Richard Kuenkler, 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: Written staff report by Robert Pfeil dated January 2, 2003 Exhibit 2 Aerial Photograph dated January 8, 2003. Exhibit 3: Zoning Map of surrounding area dated January 8, 2003 Exhibit 4: Site Concept Plan Exhibit 5: Zoning Data Sheet Exhibit 6: Detailed Architectural Site Plan Exhibit 7: Interior Plan Exhibit 8: North Elevation Exhibit 9: South Elevation Exhibit 10: East Elevation Exhibit 11: Landscape Plan Exhibit 12: Tree Survey Exhibit 13: Fence Detail Exhibit 14: Preliminary Utilities and Grading Plan dated January 8, 2003 Exhibit 15: Traffic Pattern Plan Exhibit 16: Traffic Pattern Plan Exhibit 17: Photometric Plan Exhibit 18: Tree View Rendering Exhibit 19: Tree View Rendering Exhibit 20: Traffic Study dated October 16, 2002 Exhibit 21: Traffic Study dated December 13, 2002 Exhibit 22: Comparison of traffic from proposed development versus permitted office use Exhibit 23: Home Price Study provided by Igor Blumin Exhibit 24: Home Price Study provided by Igor Blumin Exhibits 25 Thru 36: Slides of Uses along Dundee Road, dated January 8, 2003 Exhibit 37: Economic Impact Study Obj ectors' Exhibit 1: Submission in Opposition to Application by Millenium Holding Co. for Rezoning of Property at 313 Dundee Road and 936 Betty Drive, including tabs 1 through 5, dated January 8, 2003 Mr. Bernard Citron stated the site is located on the south side of Dundee between Betty Drive and Golfview Drive and is 1.81 acres and currently mainly zoned B-1 with a small portion of the site zoned R-4. He stated they are seeking to zone this site B-4 and the only reason for this is to allow this use. This is a business-zoned parcel so development of this site would be possible with various business zonings. It is important to note the various uses that would be permitted in the B-1 District. He noted that other various permitted uses would have worse traffic impacts than this use, which has a very low traffic impact. Mr. Arthur Friedman stated he has been located in Glenview since 1997 and they propose to move their current facility to improve their building size and location. He noted they are a service-oriented business and most of their customers live in Buffalo Grove and the northwest suburbs and they would be serving the public in this area. He further noted their current sales volume is about $22,000,000 and they believe they would be able to triple this volume at a larger facility here. He stated their business is leasing of current year automobiles as well as used car sales. He stated the business is about a 60/40 split between leasing and used car sales. He stated the majority of their sales are actually done over the phone and come in only for the paperwork and pickup of the car. Mr. Friedman stated they operate from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday and are closed on Sundays. He noted that by leasing mostly luxury cars it requires fewer transactions to reach the $22,000,000 level. He noted that at any one time they might have a maximum of 5-10 customers in the showroom on a given day with the busiest days being Monday and Thursday. Saturday is not a large volume day. During the day 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. are the busiest time periods and then after 6:00 p.m. Mr. Friedman stated they are not typical of new car dealerships and do not have big rigs coming in with car deliveries. What they usually have are flatbed or smaller trucks that delivery 2-4 vehicles at a time. These deliveries are probably once a week. All the trucks usually call before they come in asking the best way to come in and park. Mr. Friedman stated they do not allow test-drives by customers alone as it is a requirement of their insurance policy that customers be accompanied by an employee. Therefore they could direct test-drives out onto Dundee Road and away from the residential neighborhood. Furthermore, there would be no reason to go into the residential area, as there is nothing there. Mr. Friedman stated they have a maximum of 15 employees at one time with sufficient parking on site for them. They have an office use for the building as well as a leasing use. They will also be installing alarms, tinting windows, installing DVD's and small repairs. They are not equipped for any major repairs. Mr. John Schiess gave a brief overview of the project and noted their proposed FAR is .18. He noted there are two entrances to the site. One is along Dundee, which is a restricted right in and right out onto Dundee Road. There is a second entrance along Golfview Terrace that is an unrestricted in and out entrance. Customer parking has 43 parking spaces including two handicapped spaces. There is car storage, which is done via valet or employees of Millenium Holding Company. There is a temporary holding area for truck delivery parking. They do not propose to have any parking offsite by either employees or delivery vehicles. He noted the building would be equipped by a sprinkler system. The height of the building is 28' 8". Mr. John Schiess noted they are looking to bring in new water and sewer services to the building and those services do exit and no other improvements are needed on the part of the Village in order to accommodate this use. He noted the lighting that they have designed meets the standard of zero foot-candles at the perimeter of the site. Mr. Jamil Bou-Saab stated they need to provide detention storage area on site, which they will do with underground 100-year storage pipes. These will discharge onto Dundee Road through a restricter. These pipes are 48" in diameter and the restricter is about 6". They have also provided compensatory storage to compensate for the impervious driveway they are providing. He noted they are eliminating any water flow from the existing property to the neighboring area and they are storing all the water to be discharged onto Dundee, thereby not exacerbating or creating any additional problems in this area due to this development. Mr. Bou-Saab stated they have provided traffic counts for the intersection of Buffalo Grove and Dundee. They also did peak hour morning and evening counts. They also provided a full comprehensive traffic report as well as a simulation of traffic impact with any other developments on this site. He noted there would be no negative impacts to the flow of traffic in general at this location due to this development. He noted the level of service stays as it is. Most customers to this facility would be coming after peak hours. The main full service access is off of a signalized intersection, which is something that IDOT would recommend as opposed to having a full access onto Dundee Road. He stated they have had discussions with IDOT and they will allow a right in and out only on Dundee. He further noted their comparison of traffic impact by a permitted two-office development versus the proposed development is much higher, especially during peak morning and evening hours. A 27,000 square foot office building would not have as much control of where traffic could go and they could easily go into the residential area. Mr. Bou-Saab noted the suggested truck traffic plan was simulated with the use of emergency fire trucks in mind. He noted these trucks would not be negatively impacted. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the lighting plan shows there will be no spillover lighting onto the neighbors. There are zero foot-candles around the perimeter of the property. He stated they are also using some new technology of short pole lighting with the least amount of reflection in the parking lot. Ms. Josephine Bellalta stated they surveyed every tree on site that is about 4" in caliper. They also surveyed a few that are on the periphery but on the outside of the property. To the west of the site there I s a swath of existing trees, mostly box elder mulberry. On their property they have chosen to remove quite a few of these, as they are generally not recommended in landscape ordinances. Beyond that there are some evergreen trees on site, which happen to be in places where they would like to preserve them. She noted they have created a buffer system on the south and eastern edges composed of a 6' high wood fence, which they have landscaped on both sides. Along the eastern edge of Betty Drive there will be the same treatment. The trees along Betty Drive have taken on more of a street tree quality so they have not added any evergreen trees along that edge. On the west edge of the property they have managed to retain many trees. They have not included a fence on this edge as they still have a large swath of the existing trees outside of the property line. However, they have added a hedge that will help buffer any possibility of gaps in the tree line so you will not be able to see the cars. Along Dundee they have added deciduous trees. At the entrance to the drive along Dundee they have also added season flowers throughout the year. Also along the western property there will be "grass-crete," which is a way to retain green surface, but also allow the client to place cars there for exhibit. Around the existing property along Betty Drive they have also included a hedge like the one on the west side. Mr. Igor Blumin stated he was able to compare how average sales prices within the Village of Buffalo Grove tracked versus average sales prices of property located near another auto dealership in this area during the period of 1992 to 2000. He stated the specific area he looked at was surrounding the Arlington Nissan dealership at 935 West Dundee Road. He noted from 1992 through 2000 residential homes around this area have generally gone up with the average growth in sales prices being 31 percent and 36 percent in the rest of Buffalo Grove. He noted the older portion of Buffalo Grove which is south of Dundee Road tend to have lower prices compared with the new construction to the north and west in Buffalo Grove. Mr. Blumin noted that if a restaurant was placed on this site, some people would not want to move next to this site as the hours would be longer, a liquor license might be in use etc. Mr. John Schiess reviewed a series of slides and described the type of use of the construction as it is viewed from the street and the number of stories. He stated their purpose is to establish a character along the Dundee corridor. These slides establish a use that is primarily commercial with some auto dealerships falling within the commercial use. The uses on the south side of Dundee are commensurate with the zonings of B-1 and B-3 and are uses that take advantage of the traffic on Dundee Road. The north side of Dundee Road is mainly residential with some commercial uses mixed in. He noted that in his opinion there has been no negative impact on the trend of development in this area by virtue of the fact that there are commercial uses mixed in with residential uses. He further stated he believes the proposed building is more sensitive both to the site and the existing fabric along Dundee. He also noted they are proposing more than sufficient buffers to the parking area and he did not find this level of buffers on any of the parking which generally were in front of the building. In addition the proposed building is 1 story building that faces the street with a 2 story behind and that generally diminishes the bulk impact of the building. He noted they have also pushed the building as far from the residential uses as possible. He noted the height of the building is proposed to be 28 feet, which is commensurate with a typical 2-story house with a pitched roof. The trend of development along Dundee Road is multi-story condo buildings. Mr. Schiess stated he was asked to compile an economic study of this project, as it would relate to both the real estate taxes and sales taxes that would conservatively be generated from this project. He stated he estimated the improved property value would be $1,500,000 and that would generate approximately $60,000 in real estate taxes and $12,000 of that would go to the Village of Buffalo Grove. He further noted that based on a tripling of the business there would be sales tax revenue of about $238,000 to the Village. Therefore the projected total annual revenue to the Village of Buffalo Grove would be approximately $250,000. Commissioner Teplinsky noted previous testimony had stated delivery of trucks on large multi-car carriers. He asked if that had changed. Mr. Friedman stated that was correct. He stated they had looked into deliveries they have now and they really do not have anything as large as they thought they would. Commissioner Teplinsky asked what type of vehicle these cars would be delivered in. Mr. Friedman stated it is usually a flatbed or six car carriers. Commissioner Teplinsky asked how large the six car carriers are. Mr. Friedman stated they are about 40 feet. Commissioner Teplinsky asked if customers would be accompanied on all test-drives by employees. Mr. Friedman stated yes. He noted it is part of the insurance requirements. Commissioner Teplinsky asked if there would be any kind of rental car facility in the building. Mr. Friedman stated no, as they already have a rental car facility in Plaza Verde in Buffalo Grove. Commissioner Teplinsky asked why there is an area designated as rental on the plan drawings. Mr. Friedman stated they originally thought of putting rental in but that is no longer the case. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka asked if delivery trucks would not be using the driveway on Dundee. Mr. Bou-Saab stated that was correct. He noted delivery trucks would only turn right on Dundee once they have entered on Golfview Road. He noted their simulations were concerned mostly with fire trucks. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka noted she could not believe a 40-foot truck would be able to turn around on the lot. Mr. Citron noted the testimony was that there would be two types of trucks delivering. There will be a longer and shorter truck. The shorter one will be able to turn around and the longer one would exit onto Dundee and go eastbound. He noted they would go eastbound because there is no reason to go south onto Golfview as it goes nowhere. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka asked if the developer planned to approach IDOT about changing the signal length or timing on Golfview Terrace as alluded in Benes and Associates memo of January 7, 2003. Mr. Bou-Saab stated their study did not show this to be a necessity at this time. However, if the Village eventually sees this as necessary, they would be willing to help the Village approach IDOT. Commissioner Samuels asked what the length of the fire truck is that was used in the simulation. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the fire truck is usually more conservative for turning than the regular truck, as there is speed that must be considered and extended ladder clearance. Therefore, if the fire truck can go through, the 40-foot flatbeds can get through much easier. Commissioner Samuels asked if the fire department is aware of these studies. Mr. Pfeil stated the fire department has received all the plans submitted by the petitioner and no new comments have been received from them concerning the radii issue. Previously the fire department indicated they wanted to make sure the hydrants were in the right place and they recommended Golfview as the secondary access road. They appear to be satisfied with the movement into the site potentially for fire vehicles. Commissioner Samuels asked if there is any chance that IDOT will not allow the access on Dundee Road. Mr. Bou-Saab stated there is perhaps only a two- percent change that IDOT would not allow the access. Commissioner Samuels noted he couldn't see circulating a 40-foot truck in this parking lot as it is designed without a series of very complicated wide maneuvers. Mr. Citron stated it can be accommodated albeit with maneuvers that would not be commensurate with their business practice which is why they took the step of talking to IDOT and getting preliminary approval, pointing out the fact that there is an existing curb cut but noting that it is only a right in and out which would be allowed onto Dundee as the other uses are allowed. Commissioner Samuels noted a truck turn from Dundee right into the property appears to be a very tight turn from the far left turn lane and he wonders what part of good planning permits acceptance of such a design. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the exhibit shows a fire truck coming into the property, whereas a delivery truck would be coming from Golfview. Commissioner Samuels stated if he were a delivery truck driver and there is an access available on Dundee and he is coming westbound he would enter the property on a right turn from Dundee and then make a left turn from the signalized intersection on Golfview. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the delivery truck would be calling before they come. He further noted that no matter what direction truck drivers will be coming from they feel comfortable that these truck drivers will be able to make it in from Dundee if necessary. The islands are based on IDOT requirements and based on truck deliveries. Commissioner Samuels asked if the island must be there or if it can be striped for right in, right out only. Mr. Bou-Saab stated they could look into that and provide some signs or make the island smaller. Commissioner Samuels stated it is his opinion that the island is not of sufficient design to allow these turning maneuvers on a regular and safe basis. He asked who maintains the island. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the island is within the right of way and it would be maintained by IDOT. Commissioner Samuels noted he thought the grasscrete was to be allowed only on the portion of the curved building per workshop meetings. He asked if it is the petitioner's intention to keep the additional grasscrete area. Mr. Schiess stated they previously had the grasscrete coming around the front of the building or on the north side of the building. They have now cut it back as requested. Commissioner Samuels asked if the cars would be left there overnight or strictly during hours of operation. Mr. Schiess stated the cars would be there only during hours of operation. Commissioner Samuels asked how that area would be maintained. Mr. Bou-Saab stated it would be mowed just like any other grass area. Commissioner Samuels asked if there would be automatic sprinklers. Mr. Schiess stated they were not planning on automatic sprinklers. Mr. Citron stated they are asking for preliminary site plan approval so some of the items of detail that may be at issue would come back to be finalized if there is approval of this project. If there are recommendations made they can take them to the board and address them. At this point they have not gotten into those finite details. Commissioner Samuels stated that the aesthetics of a project such as this are an integral part of the approval process and the maintenance and the potential for proper maintenance of the property is a proper issue to be addressed at this point. There has been some concern expressed that this type of grass paved area can become an eyesore if not property maintained. Mr. Citron stated they are not saying they would not do it, merely that they have not been asked up until now to finitely address that. If the decision is made that the only way to keep the grasscrete right would be to add an irrigation system, then that could be made a part of the conditions of approval. Commissioner Samuels asked how the underground storage pipes for the stormwater are maintained. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the owner would maintain them. He stated they have provided manholes at every pipe end so they will be able to come in, open them and flush them if needed. Commissioner Billiter asked how many employees would be present during peak operation. Mr. Friedman stated 15 employees. Commissioner Billiter asked how many customers would be there at that time. Mr. Friedman stated there would be about 5-6 customers. Commissioner Billiter asked how many lease vehicles would be parked on the 43 parking spaces provided. Mr. Friedman stated none. Commissioner Billiter asked where test driven vehicles are parked when they return from test-drives. Mr. Friedman stated they are usually parked in one of the parking stalls, which are then removed by porters. Commissioner Billiter discussed the unloading of delivery vehicles and the possible backup of cars waiting to get in or out of the facility. Commissioner Stark asked if there are usually the same delivery truck drivers. Mr. Friedman stated yes. Commissioner Smith asked how many car deliveries would there be per week. Mr. Friedman stated there is usually one per week. Commissioner Smith asked what was the reason for a B-4 zoning request. Mr. Citron noted the Buffalo Grove zoning ordinance is a partial laundry list ordinance which means if it is not a use that is specifically set out in a district you cannot do it in that district. Automobile sales and leasing is a B-4 use. He noted they would not be asking for a B-4 district uncoupled with their project. There are B-4 uses that have developed without the care and detail they are trying to do and would be wholly inappropriate for this site in this location. However, they are asking for B-4 coupled solely with this use. This B-4 use is less intensive than many of the uses permitted in the B-1 district. Commissioner Smith stated that part of the reason these parcels have not sold to any of those other intense uses is because the property is not right for that kind of use. Commissioner Samuels asked about the volume of deliveries. Mr. Citron stated Mr. Friedman has indicated that deliveries by truck are about one per week. The remainder are cars driven in by people. Commissioner Samuels asked if the deliveries would increase if the business doubled or tripled in volume. Mr. Friedman stated not necessarily because they do have a fair amount of sales over the phone. Most leases are done over the phone. Commissioner Smith asked where some of the minor repairs and installations would be done. Mr. Friedman stated they are all done inside. Mr. Daniel Dowd stated he represents several of the neighbors along Betty Drive Mr. Citron stated he feels it would be appropriate for Mr. Dowd to specifically identify the property owners he is representing, especially in light of some of the cases that have recently come down regarding notice and representation in hearings of the plan commission. Mr. Dowd stated Russell and Juliette Shavitz have engaged him as well as David and Cheryl Bernardi. There are also others that have contributed to defray the cost. He stated he does not profess to speak for all and he would like everyone to know that after he is done performing cross examination on behalf of the group that has engaged him, they are free to come up and perform their own cross examination as well. He noted they are in no way foreclosed by what he is doing. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Friedman if anything besides used car sales, leasing business and installation of alarms and window tinting is done at his present location. He also asked if there are any mechanics on his staff at his current location. Mr. Friedman stated no. Mr. Dowd asked if 40 percent of the $22,000,00 gross sales is from new car leasing and 60 percent from car sales or the opposite. Mr. Friedman stated the majority will be generated by new car leasing which is 60 percent and 40 percent is used car sales. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Friedman had to go back and check the records to determine if a delivery vehicle larger than 40 feet was ever used. Mr. Friedman stated he did not have to check his records, merely sat down with his staff to review deliveries. Mr. Dowd asked what the average sale price was for these luxury vehicles. Mr. Friedman stated the average is around $35,000 and 60 percent of the $22,000,000 is generated from leased vehicles. Mr. Dowd asked what the average price is for used cars. Mr. Friedman stated about $20,000. Mr. Dowd asked if new cars are driven to the site and used cars are delivered by the 40-foot conveyances. Mr. Friedman stated that is correct. Mr. Dowd asked if the used cars are mostly delivered by the 40-foot cars. Mr. Friedman stated sometimes. He stated they usually have flatbeds deliver them. Mr. Dowd asked if one delivery per week is sufficient for sales of$22,000,000. Mr. Friedman stated he also said they do a lot of sales over the phone, which does not require delivery, as they go directly to the customer. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Friedman was in any other businesses. Mr. Friedman stated he is also in wholesale and rental operation. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Friedman owns that property or leases. Mr. Friedman stated he leases. Mr. Dowd asked if there is any consideration to moving that operation over to this location. Mr. Friedman stated they originally had that consideration but they have now abandoned that idea. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Friedman were aware of any restriction under the current zoning request they are asking for that would prevent them from doing so. Mr. Friedman stated he is not aware of anything. Mr. Dowd asked how many vehicles are available for rental in the Plaza Verde operation. Mr. Friedman stated they have about 10 cars. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Friedman has any other car rental operations other than Plaza Verde. Mr. Friedman stated he has 2 others located at Chicago-O'Hare and in Morton Grove. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Bou-Saab about the comparison between the number of peak time traffic movements, a.m. and p.m., for the uses proposed and for office buildings of 27,000 square feet and 39,000 square feet respectively. He asked if any analysis was made relative to the likely traffic that would be generated during a.m. and p.m. peak time uses for any other B-4 allowed uses. Mr. Bou-Saab stated the only thing they did was the B-4 and some residential. Mr. Dowd noted the analysis was done comparing the proposed use to what would be generated based on two separate and different office uses. Mr. Bou-Saab stated that was correct. Mr. Dowd asked if he was aware that if this property were rezoned for B-4 it would be capable of being used for a whole laundry list of additional uses. Mr. Bou-Saab stated they did not go beyond what this property would be rezoned for. Mr. Dowd asked if he had included the residential parcel when they did the property as presently zoned and the calculations for the office use. Mr. Bou-Saab stated yes. He stated they did the counts for a.m. and p.m. and then they did the escalation based on 10 years and 20 years. They also included the residential developments taking place on Golfview. Mr. Dowd asked if when the calculations were made based on the property being developed under its current zoning classification as a 27,000 and 39,000 square foot office building, was it considered that the parcel to the south on Betty Drive is R-4. Mr. Bou-Saab stated yes. Mr. Dowd stated along Betty Drive there is B-1 that fronts on Dundee and goes down Golfview and wraps around the existing B-1 use that is on the corner of Betty and Dundee. Then there are two parcels of which one is B-1 and the other is R-4. When the calculations were made for the development of the parcel as an office complex, he asked if the R-4 was included. He asked if the R-4 space had been considered as developable as office space. Mr. Bou-Saab stated he believes they excluded it, but would need to get back on this one. Mr. Dowd noted that the testimony then was that the property is that which is now B-1 excluding the R-4. Mr. Dowd stated his question was comparing the amounts of movements that would occur based upon the proposed zoning and that which the property would currently allow under the existing zoning classification if it were developed as an office. Mr. Bou-Saab stated that was correct. Mr. Dowd asked if he included the R-4 parcel as being developed as part of the office when that comparison was made. Mr. Bou-Saab stated yes, they included the whole property. Mr. Dowd asked if that comparison was therefore flawed because the existing zoning classification does not allow that R-4 to be developed as B-1. Mr. Bou-Saab stated they did it based on what is allowed on the B-1 property. Mr. Dowd asked if it would not have been better to exclude from the calculation the R-4 parcel that cannot be developed as office to provide a fairer representation of what the movements would be. Mr. Bou-Saab stated he would have to look at the report to answer that specifically. Mr. Dowd noted there had been representation that the lighting would be less intense for the type of use being proposed here than some of the other B-1 uses. He noted there would be storage of some expensive vehicles during the night and asked if the business plan calls for continuous illumination of the parking areas for these vehicles. Mr. Bou-Saab stated they will coordinate with the Village regarding security and will discuss how much lighting is required per the police department. Mr. Dowd noted the forestry department of the Village has asked for more separation in some of the planting material so there will greater illumination to the areas where the vehicles will be stored for security purposes because they have a great concern that the area be illuminated and kept open for viewing by police vehicles as they went by. Mr. Bou-Saab stated he does not know. He noted, however, that new lighting technology does not have to flood the area they are using here. The latest technology uses lower poles and less reflection. Mr. Dowd asked that Mr. Bou-Saab make a determination as to whether the R-4 parcel was included as being capable of being developed currently as office. Mr. Bou-Saab stated he would. Mr. Citron asked Mr. Friedman if it was correct to assume that if you currently have $22,000,000 of revenue that is generated from 60 percent on leasing, with an average price per car of$35,000, it comes out to about 377 cars. Mr. Friedman stated that was about right. Mr. Citron asked if people drive the cars onto this facility one by one as they come from a new car dealership. Mr. Friedman stated yes. Mr. Citron asked if there are a substantial number of cars that do not even come to this facility but are delivered from a dealership to the customer. Mr. Friedman stated there are quite a few of them. Mr. Citron noted that although Mr. Friedman has other businesses, they are not asking for approval to relocate any of those other businesses to this location. Mr. Friedman stated that was correct. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Schiess provided the numbers of 27,000 square feet and 39,000 square feet for the office development. Mr. Bou-Saab stated yes. Mr. Citron noted the 27,000 square foot office was based solely on what could be built in B-1 with a .5 FAR excluding the little piece of residential included on the site. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Blumin if he did a comparison of home sales generally in the Buffalo Grove area that were not around car dealerships and compared them to home sales that occurred. He asked how he compared the adjacency or nearness of the sales to use them as a comparison. Mr. Blumin they did compare all sales in 1992 and also sale prices of residential properties around 935 W. Dundee. Mr. Dowd asked what he meant by around 935 Dundee. Mr. Blumin stated the way to search on multiple listing service in the suburbs, Buffalo Grove, is not by pinpointing just the address of the property and get just 2 blocks away from the site. What were available to them were coordinates around the property. Mr. Dowd asked for one single comparable sale of a unit around the Nissan facility and compare that to one single comparable sale used that was not around the Nissan facility and the particulars of that sale. Mr. Blumin stated you cannot get a certain address of the property and get the same sale of the same property in a couple of years. You can only take all properties sold in the area and get the average. Mr. Dowd asked if it was not possible to have taken a home adjacent to the Nissan dealership and try to determine whether that had sold within a 10 year period and compare the characteristics of that home to another home that was not adjacent to a car dealership. Mr. Blumin stated you would be comparing apples to oranges. Mr. Dowd asked about taking the same kind of square foot area, the same kind of construction and everything being virtually the same except the location; one being next to a car dealership and one being in a residential zone. Mr. Blumin stated each property is unique. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Blumin had done any appraisals of properties and values to determine the economic impact of this proposed development on the surrounding property. Mr. Blumin stated that is what they did on an average basis. Mr. Dowd asked if he had considered the impact of this development as proposed on the single-family homes immediately across the street to the east on Betty Drive. Mr. Blumin stated no. Mr. Dowd asked what zoning classification motor vehicles are permitted in by Buffalo Grove. Mr. Blumin stated he is not the expert on zoning but has heard it is B-4. Mr. Dowd asked if he was familiar with the minimum area required for B-4 in Buffalo Grove. Mr. Blumin stated he understands from the presentation that it is .8 and the proposed is .18. Mr. Dowd asked if he would be surprised to learn the B-4 has a minimum area requirement of 4 acres. Mr. Blumin stated he is not aware of B-4 zoning requirements in Buffalo Grove. Mr. Dowd asked if he knows whether the Nissan dealership used to create the comparison is on an area of 4 acres or more. Mr. Blumin stated he knows it is a much larger area than the proposed. Mr. Dowd asked if had compared the transitional yards that exist at the Nissan development to those that are proposed here. He asked if he know what the sideyards, setbacks and rear yard setbacks are at the Nissan dealership used to compare the impact of this proposed development on the values of the surrounding properties. Mr. Blumin stated no. Mr. Dowd asked if that was important information that could have been used to get a better idea as to whether the comparison of the Nissan use, which is on a much larger parcel to those on the proposed use. Mr. Blumin stated in Buffalo Grove in recent years that site was the only one they were able get information on going back ten years. Mr. Dowd noted that he could not then tell the distance between the end of the parking lot and the beginning of residential areas for the sales that he had compared near the Nissan dealership to those that were not near the dealership. Mr. Blumin stated it was a large area search, which includes everything on the south side. Mr. Dowd asked if he had done any site-specific analysis in this case. Mr. Blumin stated he knew the Nissan is a bigger dealership and if it were to have a bad impact, bigger would be worse. Mr. Dowd asked if he what the distance is between the single-family homes he studied and the dealership. Mr. Blumin stated they included all available closing sales on the south side. Mr. Dowd asked if he could tell the location of one of the sales in relation to the Nissan dealership; whether it was immediately across the street or 100 feet away or something. Mr. Blumin stated about 150-200 homes were sold on the south side in one year. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Jon Wildenberg if he had had an opportunity to review the current zoning application and form an opinion as to its appropriateness as a land use. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. Mr. Dowd asked what was reviewed. Mr. Wildenberg stated they reviewed the site area itself as well as surrounding land uses both existing and what might be proposed in the Comprehensive Plan of the community. They also reviewed the zoning ordinance and other planning and zoning documents. Mr. Dowd asked if the characterization of the surrounding zoning as given on the direct testimony a fair representation or is there anything that should be added to it. Mr. Wildenberg stated those are facts that are usually determined by the zoning map and he would not change anything. Mr. Dowd asked what is known about the proposed use. Mr. Wildenberg stated it very much consists of what the testimony has presented. It is an auto leasing and sales facility with the attendant uses both within an enclosed structure and out on the grounds. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Wildenberg had formed an opinion as to the appropriateness of this particular request for rezoning of this property. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. He stated they feel that the proposed zoning district of B-4 is too intense to be applied onto this particular property for a number of reasons. The B-4 district represents an intensity that is not really appropriate in this location. Mr. Dowd asked if Mr. Wildenberg was aware of any restriction in the zoning ordinance as it now exists in the B-4 that would limit the development of this site to what is being requested tonight if it were given a B-4 zoning. Mr. Wildenberg stated no, not directly. He stated their belief is that if it is re-zoned to B-4 the permitted uses that are available in that district are available to that property whether or not this particular proposal moves ahead. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Wildenberg to amplify his statement that this particular use is too intense for this site. Mr. Wildenberg stated they have a number of concerns in regard to the B-4 District being placed on this property. First, would be some of the spot zoning characteristics involved with that. The change in zoning is really applicable only to a small area. In this case they are looking to rezone 1.8 acres to B-4. In Buffalo Grove's zoning ordinance it does require a minimum of 4 acres to be considered for rezoning in the B-4 district and they believe there is purpose for that. That purpose is to help alleviate and avoid spot zoning situations. Also, to be able to accommodate on an appropriate sized lot the types of intensity of use that would be expected to come to the B-4 district. Based on some of the other zoning factors involved, the zoning change is not particularly consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Right now the Comprehensive Plan designates the majority of this site for office use in the future. It does have the smaller pod in the southeast corner of the site as single family residential in the future and the subject property is being singled out for a use classification that is totally different from those of the surrounding area. Mr. Dowd asked what was the purpose expressed in the ordinance as it relates to the B-1 district, which is the current zoning in this classification. Mr. Wildenberg stated it is basically designed as a lighter intensity district and a general principal cited in the zoning ordinance to consider introduction of business districts in the residential areas and is to do so where their inclusion into a residential area has significant elements of service or convenience to the residential areas to offset any kind of disadvantage that might be posed by the rezoning. Mr. Dowd asked if there is anything in this particular use as a used car and leasing facility that lends itself to that purpose. Mr. Wildenberg stated no, not particularly. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Wildenberg if that is why this use is classified as B-4. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. He noted the B-4 district is to accommodate more intense retail type uses that appeal to a much broader market and may be better situated in more similar areas. Mr. Dowd asked what the Comprehensive Plan calls for at this particular site. Mr. Wildenberg stated it calls for office in the majority of the site and for the 10,000 square foot southeast corner it calls for single family detached. Mr. Dowd asked if this property is suitable for that zoning classification. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. He further stated the B-1 district offers a number of uses that could be implemented on this particular property. Mr. Dowd asked if there are any other aspects of the B-4 district and its intensity that are of concern as they relate to this location. Mr. Wildenberg stated one of the factors of intensity that they look at are the permitted uses. In addition to the use that has been proposed for this property, other uses may be available or could be permitted on the site such as automobile repair and service shops, building material sales operations, cartage and express facilities, house trailer sales, machinery sales and service and various processing and assembly type functions. Mr. Dowd asked if all of those purposes could be developed on this site without the necessity for a petition to come back before the plan commission if the B-4 district is allowed. Mr. Wildenberg stated they are listed as permitted uses in the B-4 district. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Wildenberg if he is aware of any other measures within the B-1 classification that set it aside in terms of protecting the surrounding areas from those kind of activities that are associated with B-4 activities. Mr. Wildenberg stated there is a clear distinction between B-1 and B-4 in that the B-1 district does require all activities to occur within an enclosed building and the B-4 district does allow the introduction of outdoor storage and other types of outdoor uses. Mr. Dowd asked what the maximum height in the B-4 district is. Mr. Wildenberg stated four stories or 45 feet. Mr. Dowd asked if the petitioner could develop a building of the maximum height of 45 feet without having to return to the Plan Commission or Board for zoning approval based upon the zoning ordinance as now written and if they were granted B-4 zoning. Mr. Wildenberg stated no further map amendment would be necessary and that height limitation would be available. Mr. Dowd noted that the transitional yards for the B-1 and B-4 are the same. He asked if that has something to do with the minimum area requirement for B-4 type uses. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. He stated that minimum area requirement helps to offset some of the expected intensity that could come into a B-4 zoned area versus a B-1 zoned area. The B-4 zoned area allows a FAR of up to .8 while the B-1 zoned area allows an FAR of up to .5. The potential is there if it can be designed and meet the rest of the district requirements. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Wildenberg if he was familiar with the zoning ordinance and the provision that allows for the use of property in a similar zoning classification to be included in the calculation of the minimum area. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. Mr. Dowd asked if there are any B-4 sites adjacent to this B-1 site. Mr. Wildenberg stated no. Mr. Dowd noted that if this were to be developed as B-4 it would have to draw more than 2 acres from a similar zoning classification. Mr. Wildenberg stated that is their understanding of the ordinance provision. Mr. Dowd asked if the B-4 zoning district is similar to the B-3 district as it is defined within the current ordinance. Mr. Wildenberg stated he did not belief it is similar. Mr. Dowd asked if the B-4 should be able to use the B-3 across the street at Golfview Plaza to reach the minimum area requirement of 4 acres. Mr. Wildenberg stated that is correct. The intensities that are proposed in the B-4 district are so much greater and much different than what the actual development is in B-3 for the west side of Golfview. The development to the west is very comparable to B-1 and the development to the east is zoned B-1 and developed in the B-1 district. Mr. Dowd asked if the author of the aggregation section wanted to allow the next least intensive zoning classification to be used to supplement the deficiency in the next higher zoning classification, he would have said that. Mr. Wildenberg stated it could be stated in a different manner to clarify that particular intent. Mr. Dowd asked if that would have been a better way to say things than "similar". Mr. Wildenberg stated similar could be interpreted a little more broadly than some of the other phraseology. Mr. Dowd asked if the interpretation of the zoning ordinance as now written is a correct interpretation, this project could not, as the land now surrounding it exits, meet the minimum area requirements. Mr. Wildenberg stated the B-3 district to the west is not added in to the overall area calculation of 1.8 acres and could not satisfy the minimum 4-acre requirement for a map amendment to B-4. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Wildenberg had been asked if he had been asked to comment on the draft of the current Buffalo Grove zoning ordinance. Mr. Wildenberg stated they were asked to review the Buffalo Grove zoning ordinance in relation to this petition for a zoning ordinance. Mr. Citron noted therefore that his opinion as to whether or not it was written correctly or incorrectly is really just his opinion. Mr. Wildenberg stated his opinion is that the intent of that section could be clarified with different wording. Mr. Citron noted that if the Village of Buffalo Grove had that interpretation in mind, their own staff could have told the developer from the moment they filed at that location that there was no jurisdiction to go forward with the application. Mr. Citron stated that along with asking for zoning they are also asking for preliminary site plan approval and that even if a property was zoned B-1, B-2 or B-4 you would still have to come before the Plan Commission for approval of a site plan before you could build something even if that use was permitted. Mr. Wildenberg stated that is his understanding. Mr. Citron noted municipalities do have the right to limit what can be done on property if it is inappropriate and has negative impacts on the surrounding area even though it may be a permitted use in the district. Mr. Wildenberg stated he would defer that to legal counsel. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Wildenberg had looked at some of the permitted uses in the B-1 district. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. Mr. Citron asked if he was aware that restaurants and taverns are permitted uses. Mr. Wildenberg stated they are listed as permitted uses. Mr. Citron asked if it would be a fair statement to say that even though there are a number of very intense uses, the likelihood of those uses of being developed or approved on this site would be farfetched. Mr. Wildenberg stated it is his opinion that that is why the minimum 4-acre requirement to rezone to B-4 is partly there. Mr. Citron noted that even though B-4 is not appropriate to this site in the opinion of Mr. Wildenberg, there are B-4 uses, which could be developed on this site and would be suitable on this site depending on how they were developed/ Mr. Citron further noted that even though they are asking for a B-4 use, they are asking for it in a way that is commensurate with what is appropriate and allowed in the B-1 district. Mr. Wildenberg stated that might be true in some respects, but in respect of being able to conduct an auto sales facility on this site it is not as it is not allowed in the B-1 district and it is not an office use pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Citron noted there is an office use here that is part of this process and asked if that portion of the proposed use is not only permitted under B-1 but would, in fact, be an appropriate use. Mr. Wildenberg stated they would not have a problem with office uses. Mr. Citron noted that from a planning standpoint there are other uses in the B-1 district that have elements of repair and sales. Mr. Wildenberg stated there are retail sales uses involved and there are also office uses involved. Mr. Citron noted that one of those uses is a food store and asked if Mr. Wildenberg believes that would have more traffic than that which is being provided for under testimony here today. Mr. Wildenberg stated he rather would not testify to that matter. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Wildenberg looks at the attributes of the use. Mr. Wildenberg stated they look at the districts as a whole. He stated they are not being presented with a B-1 use to evaluate at this point, but rather they are being presented with a map amendment request to change the zoning on the property from B-1 to B-4 and that is the perspective they are looking at. Mr. Citron noted that he is only looking at going to B-4 and forgetting about what is being put on the property. Mr. Wildenberg stated he would not go that far. Obviously what gets put on the property relates to what is allowable under the district that is requested. Mr. Citron asked if it also relates to what kind of impact that kind of use would have. Mr. Wildenberg stated yes. Mr. Citron asked if there are specific uses under the B-1 district that would have a greater negative impact on the nearby residential than the proposed use. Mr. Wildenberg stated it is hard to testify to that without seeing some particulars on it. Mr. Dowd asked Mr. Mark Krause if he had performed an impact analysis of the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding properties. Mr. Krause stated he reviewed both the Buffalo Grove Comprehensive Plan, the Cook County Zoning Map, LaSalle factors, the documents provided by the petitioners and the planning consultant's memorandum prepared by Rolf C. Campbell & Associates dated December 31, 2002. He stated he also inspected the single family residence of 3340 and 3407 Betty Drive, which included an interior and exterior inspection. Mr. Dowd noted the purpose of Mr. Krause's analysis was to determine what, if any, impact the proposed development on the site would have on the surrounding properties. Mr. Krause noted they looked at more of a commercial development as a change in use from the residential characteristics that are on Betty Drive. There is a single family residence on Betty Drive along with the site that is zoned for R-4 as well as a change in use of the characteristic from the 3440 property adjoining residential use to a wholly zoned business use site. Mr. Dowd asked if he had come to an opinion as to whether the development as proposed would have an impact on the surrounding residential properties on Betty Drive. Mr. Krause stated yes. He further stated they made a market investigation of single family sales located in Buffalo Grove, concentrating on the Cook County portion of Buffalo Grove as well as Arlington Heights using the online service provided by the multiple listing service. A market analysis was performed of both 3340 and 3307 Betty Drive and considering the factors in determining the value of the proposed development on both single-family houses. The houses will no longer join a residentially zoned property. It will front and/or adjoin a commercial property. The commercial characteristic will change from daytime hours from enclosed buildings to high-density commercial development with evening hours and operations on the weekends. Delivery of small vehicle trucks will change from flat bed trailers and, could include intercom noise, from porters. The density of the proposed development is 1.8 and could allow .8. Business operations would change to allow exterior business operations, which would include the storage and movement of motor vehicles for sales and/or lease which is not permitted in both the B-1 and/or the R-4A zoned lot on Betty Drive. Mr. Dowd asked if he had an opinion as to whether those changes in the characteristics of the property as they relate to the residential uses would have an impact on the value of those properties. Mr. Krause stated based upon a review of sales here as well as other experiences with other market analyses, he believes that impact on both 3340 and 3307 Betty Drive would range from 5-10 percent of the overall market value. Mr. Dowd asked if he had come to a market value in relationship to the two properties that were appraised and if he had established what the market value of those two properties is. Mr. Krause stated based upon an analysis of the data using the Northern Illinois multiple listing service for sales, they came up with market opinions of the 3440 property having an approximate market value of$245,000. Mr. Dowd noted that that particular property has as its sideyard a residential lot. Mr. Krause stated that was correct. Mr. Dowd stated what is being proposed is a six foot fence for 19 feet of transitional yard, lighting, vehicle storage, vehicle movement, and noise attendant to that. He asked if that would change or have an impact on the desirability of that home as a single-family residence. Mr. Krause stated that would effect the desirability. Presently the living lot area of the 3440 Betty Drive adjoins a residentially zoned property that will change to have a residentially zoned property adjoining a vehicle storage or a lighted parking lot for all practical purposes. Mr. Dowd asked if it is Mr. Krause's judgment and opinion that this development would have a negative effect on the value and living conditions of the two residential properties that were appraised. Mr. Krause stated he would conclude more on the impact on the overall value in the 5-10 percent of the market value. Mr. Dowd asked if there had been any attempt to market this residential piece of property. Mr. Krause stated that based upon a review of the multiple listing service, he did not find that the property at 936 Betty Drive, which is included in the site concept, is being listed at this time for sale. Mr. Dowd asked if that parcel is suitable for development under its current residential zoning classification. Mr. Krause stated the current zoning would allow for development under the R-4 zoning district. He further stated it is his opinion that the reason that that portion of the site can't be developed is that it lacks access to water and sewer. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Krause was asked to look at the effect of auto dealerships adjacent to residential homes. Mr. Krause stated yes, he was asked to look at homes next to commercial. Mr. Citron asked if he had looked at anything at Covington that is zoned R-9 Special Use across the street from the B-3. Mr. Krause stated those are multi-family and he only looked at single family. Mr. Citron asked if there are other home on Betty Drive that are directly across the street from B-1 commercial property. Mr. Krause stated he did not study that home. Mr. Citron noted that by being adjacent to a commercial district, regardless of whether it is open or closed space, fencing, landscaping, automatically it has a negative impact on the value of the two properties and asked Mr. Krause if that was correct. Mr. Krause stated he cannot automatically say there is influence on that but there is evidence of single family homes abutting commercial districts impacted when compared to homes of similar style that do not abut commercial districts. Mr. Citron asked if there would automatically be a negative impact on a single family home adjacent to a large office building with a grassy area. Mr. Krause stated it is a single-family residence based on uses and other uses that are incompatible with other residences of similar age and uses. That is the difference. Mr. Citron asked if a residential structure put on the R-4 parcel in question would impact the home also. Mr. Krause stated typically single family homes are not on isolated lots. They are in adjacent subdivisions adjoining other residential structures. If a residential structure were put on that R-4 zoning site on Betty Drive, it would be consistent with all the other uses located south on Betty Drive. Mr. Citron stated he is talking about the physicality. If a structure was put there, commercial or residential, it is now closer to that single family home than the proposed use and physically it cuts down on some of the light and air going into that building. Mr. Krause stated he would have to structure the impact if that lot were developed. Mr. Citron stated there would probably be five cars parked behind the fence on the piece that is R-4 that they are seeking to rezone to B-4. He asked what specifically about the fact that those cars are parked there, behind fencing and landscaping, negatively impacts the property value of the adjacent home other than the fact that it is commercially zoned property. Mr. Krause stated the impact of being located next to a commercially zoned property specifically is use of a parking lot. Mr. Citron asked if there would be a negative impact even if it were vacant land adjacent as long as it was zoned commercial. Mr. Krause stated it could definitely have a negative impact. He stated this is a vacant site that is currently zoned for single family. If residential land is zoned commercial it does have an impact on value. Mr. Citron asked Mr. Krause if he was asked to look at any of the properties on Golfview Terrace that are already next to the site that is vacant but zoned commercial. Mr. Krause stated no. Mr. Citron asked why just being next to commercial effect these homes' property values. Mr. Krause stated the uses proposed are for single family. The single-family use is more of a harmonious use. If it next to commercial use there is a risk in the future that the characteristics, whether the site is vacant or developed, would change. Mr. Citron noted in this case there is no risk as they are putting something forward that has a plan that specifically pushes the building all the way up to Dundee, substantially farther away than any other building would be next to these homes if it was developed as currently allowed. Mr. Krause stated that obviously any structure put there would be closer to any homes on Betty Drive. Mr. Citron asked if Mr. Krause had been asked to look at any of the permitted uses in the B-1 district. Mr. Krause stated yes. Mr. Citron asked if there would be any impact from any B-1 development. Mr. Krause stated his study focused on the concept presented as is. Chairman Ottenheimer asked the Plan Commission if they had any questions for the expert witnesses. There were none. Chairman Ottenheimer continued the public hearing to January 15, 2003 at 7:30 p.m. at this location. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair