2021-09-15 - Planning and Zoning Commission - Agenda Packet m m' Meetingof the Village of Buffalo Grove Fifty Raupp Blvd
g Buffalo Grove,IL 60089-2100
Planning and Zoning Commission Phone:847-459-2500
Regular Meeting
September 15, 2021 at 7:30 PM
I. Call to Order
II. Public Hearings/Items For Consideration
1. Consider a Variation to the Fence Code to Install a Fence in the Front Yard at 8
Columbus Parkway. (Trustee Pike) (Staff Contact: Nicole Woods)
2. Consider a Variation for an Existing Driveway to Exceed Max Front Yard Coverage at
811 Summer Court (Request to Continue to October 6, 2021) (Trustee Johnson) (Staff
Contact: Nicole Woods)
III. Regular Meeting
A. Other Matters for Discussion
B. Approval of Minutes
1. Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting-Aug 18, 2021 7:30 PM
C. Chairman's Report
D. Committee and Liaison Reports
E. Staff Report/Future Agenda Schedule
F. Public Comments and Questions
IV. Adjournment
The Planning and Zoning Commission will make every effort to accommodate all items on the
agenda by 10:30 p.m. The Board, does, however, reserve the right to defer consideration of
matters to another meeting should the discussion run past 10:30 p.m.
The Village of Buffalo Grove, in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, requests that
persons with disabilities, who require certain accommodations to allow them to observe and/or
participate in this meeting or have questions about the accessibility of the meeting or facilities,
contact the ADA Coordinator at 459-2525 to allow the Village to make reasonable
accommodations for those persons.
2.1
.........................................T
...............................
Action Item : Consider a Variation to the Fence Code to Install a
Fence in the Front Yard at 8 Columbus Parkway.
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Recommendation of Action
Staff recommends approval, subject to the conditions in the attached staff report.
The Petitioner, who resides at 8 Columbus Parkway, has received a permit and installed a 6 foot solid
fence in rear yard of the subject on the east and north property lines. The property abuts a Mi Mexico
restaurant, which is in the B3 Planned Business District. This fence meets code as the property abuts a
non-residentially zoned lot. The Petitioner would like to extend the fence into the front yard on the east
property line. Pursuant to the Fence Code, a fence that goes beyond the building line requires a variance.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Staff Report (DOCX)
• Plan Set (PDF)
Trustee Liaison Staff Contact
Pike Nicole Woods, Community Development
Wednesday, September 15,
2021
Updated: 9/10/2021 3:00 PM Page 1
Packet Pg. 2
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE
PLANNING &ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: September 15, 2021
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 8 Columbus Pkwy
PETITIONER: Krzysztof Mancewicz
PREPARED BY: Rati Akash,Village Planner
E
REQUEST: A variation to install a fence in the front yard at 8 Columbus o
t)
Parkway. 00
EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is improved with a single-family home currently
L
zoned R5. }
c
0
L
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The approved Village Comprehensive Plan calls for this property u_
and the immediate neighborhood to be single family detached.
c
c
m
U_
PROJECT BACKGROUND cc
The Petitioner, who resides at 8 Columbus Parkway, has received a permit and installed a 6 foot solid �o
fence in rear yard of the subject on the east and north =
o
property lines. The property abuts a Mi Mexico restaurant,
which is in the B3 Planned Business District. This fence
� f i�Y uuuwiw..n
meets code as the property abuts a non-residentially zoned
lot
� W
The Petitioner would like to extend the fence into the front C
yard on the east property line. Pursuant to the Fence Code, v
a fence that goes beyond the building line requires a
t o
variance. C
a
PLANNING &ZONING ANALYSIS
W• The Petitioner is proposing to install a 6 foot solid CIO
privacy fence installed in the front yard on the east property line.
E
s
• The Petitioner has been granted and installed a 6' solid fence in the rear yard through a permit. The U
Fence Code was recently updated to allow for a 6 foot solid fences that abut major arterial roads, a
railroad right of ways, multi-family, parks or non-residentially zoned lots. In this case, the fence is
permitted in the rear yard as the property abuts B3 Planned Business District, but is not permitted in
the front yard as per the Fence Code.
• The Petitioner is requesting this 6 foot solid fence to provide privacy from the parking lot of the
adjacent business on the East.
Packet Pg. 3
2.1.a
• Other than the variation for the height, the proposed fence meets all outlined Fence Code
requirements.
VARIATIONS REQUESTED
A fence height variation from Section 15.20 from the Buffalo Grove fence code states that no fence can
be located nearer to the street than the front line of the building.
DEPARTMENTAL REVIEWS _
Village Department Comments £
Engineering The Village Engineer has reviewed the proposed fence location and v
does not have any engineering or line of sight concerns or objections 00
with the proposed location of this fence.
L
SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS }
Pursuant to Village Code, the contiguous property owners were notified and a public hearing sign was o
L
posted on the subject property. The posting of the public hearing sign and the mailed notifications were U-
completed within the prescribed timeframe as required.As of the date of this Staff Report,the Village hass",
received three calls inquiring about the proposed fence, however no objections were expressed.
STANDARDS
a_
The Planning & Zoning Commission is authorized to grant variations of the Fence Code based on the
following criteria: �o
c
0
1. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances;
2. The proposed variation will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood;
3. There are practical difficulties or particular hardships in carrying out the strict letter of this
Chapter which difficulties or hardships have not been created by the person presently having an
interest in the property; and, y
4. The proposed variation will not be detrimental to the public health safety and welfare. c
U
The petitioner has provided a written response to the standards for a variation which are included in c
this packet. d
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Cn
Village staff recommends approval of a variation for the installation of a 6 foot solid fence for the property
at 8 Columbus Dr, subject to the following condition:
E
s
1) The fence shall be installed in accordance with the documents and plans submitted as part of this U
petition. a
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) shall open the public hearing and take public testimony
concerning the variation.The PZC shall make a final decision on whether or not to approve the variation.
Packet Pg. 4
2.1.a
Suggested PZC Motion
PZC moves to grant a variation to Section 15.20 of the Buffalo Grove Fence Code to allow a proposed 6
foot solid fence in the front yard provided the fence shall be installed in accordance with the documents
and plans submitted as part of this petition.
E
0
t)
CO
L
a.+
O
L
U-
s
C
C
m
U-
L
O
W
O
O
L
C
O
V
O
O.
d
ca
C
G1
E
s
U
�a
Q
Packet Pg. 5
Village nf Buffalo Grove
Planning&Zoning Commission
Dear Planning&Zoning Commission members:
The purpose of this letter is to request an addition fence on my property line that will end at tile
,;idewalk.The reason fol the fence going to the end of the sidewalk is because the customers of the
commercial property,next tnmy house,are always parking near my property line and |fear for my
children's safety. It often ends up being very noisy and loud as the day goes on and have a fence up 0
would serve asa barrier between my home and the commercial property, in turn lowering some ofthe CO
volume that comes from that property.The costumers that park near the property line always tend to 1�
look into my property and invade on the privacy of my own backyard. Putting up a fence would help 2
�
Ijetter ensure my privacy and the privacy of my family.The owner of the commercial property Is not a
very friendly person and it is difficult to have a good decent relationship with them.They have caused —
U-
/nonyisyueuhornnyfam0||yondvvewou|d ||ket¢ beab|etoQoaboutour|ixesvvithoutanytrouWe. �
Attached are pictures to show how inconvenient it is to not have a fence up on the property line.Thank
you for taking this information into consideration when you review my case.
Sincerely, m
�
krzyxztofK8ancexxicz
^ / m
�
m
�
on
2.1.b
PLAT OF SURVEY
Residential Topographical
Commercial Studnicka and Associates, Ltd. Condominium
NORTH ALTA Site Plans
Tel. 815 485-0445 17901 Haas Road
Fax 815 485-0528 Mokena, Illinois 60448
LOT 8 IN BLOCK 2 IN UNIT NO. 1, COLUMBIAN GARDENS, BEING A SUBDIVISION OF PART OF
THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 43 NORTH, RANGE 11, EAST OF THE THIRD
PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED MAY 5, 1926, AS
DOCUMENT NUMBER 278278 IN BOOK "P" OF PLATS, PAGE 33, IN LAKE COUNTY, ILLINOIS.
RGo
FENCE POST p0UNO Op.
5.99 W'LY& P�pR
t66 N'LY i
f j
X
0
n1
FENCE POST "
4.99 W'LY& p:U ` oa
FENCE POST 0.19 N'L^f
6.a9 W'LY& m L 0 T 8 �,'A' •a
0.43 S'LY 'A °m„ - n,'�w, b
% C
p0U RO? o
;lid U.
7.97 X o BLOCK 2 w
X k.
8ni
r
U.
GR u %
1 err n2
\
X
p .75 18 O �x }
FENCE POST 'M f�' : L"
I W'LY X r' ro eR1"L WAU- <o �' �,,.....- `5i
% Z
6010 NG UNE r
WOOD FENCE 22.5 can U
G ^•� C._
10.67 H RO N PIPE
NO IP.CORNER r°/3
'PRO
Al
$8C 7 b
CONCH:..-^'
9
CORS
�1 fY
Scale: 1" = 20 feet
Distances are marked in feet and decimals: STATE OF HMOLS
as
Ordered by: Loza Law Offices P.C. COUNTY OF WILL
Order No.: 11-3-94 Studuicka and Associates, Ltd., an Illinois Land Surveying
Compare all points before building b Corporation does hereby certify that this professional
same and at once report any differeny ce. service conforms to the current Illinois standards for
For building lines, restrictions, or easements.not boundary survey.
shown hereon, refer to abstract, deed or ordinance.
Field work completed: 3125111 Mokena, IL. March 27, A.D. 2011
Drawn by: S. K.
Proofed by: T.S. by
Design Firm Registration 1 184-002791 License No. 3304 Expires 11130112
Packet Pg.7
During your testimony at the public Hearing you need to testify and present your case for the
variance being requested During your testimony you need to affirmatively address the four(4)
standards listed below. I have completed the first one for you since it is not applicable.I have left
you room to write down your statements in advance of the meeting.
The Planning& Zoning Commission is authorized to grant variations to the regulations of the
Fence Code based upon findings of fact which are made based upon evidence presented at the
I i,mring that:
1.The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances-,
Your Evidentiary Statement:
.to
profex-f 0
00
a6o�
72
to `Y,Aj, Cc 6 p-t44 ,
U-
2.The proposed variation will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood;
Your Evidentiary Statement:
u-
co
co
co
co
cu
3.There are practical difficulties or particular hardships in carrying out the strict letter of this 0
Chapter which difficulties or hardships have not been created by the person presently
having an interest in the property;and, 0)
rh
Your Evidentiary Statement: ro
CL
j
E
ISO,
4.The proposed variation will not be detrimental to the public health safety and welfare.
Your Evidentiary Statement:
Packet Pg. 8
jil'"
no
E
00
!////
al/All //
'O
r J
f r / WN Ilk, 10
,20
ff 1'M /
� � � �/°
!All
/
j
/ ar
% i
" /ZCL
'
ME
no
lo�e
r
u %�/� rii . /� I �ii
ti /' 1 je, Packet Pg. 9
or �i
g }e paeA }uoa=l ay; ui aOu8=1 a JOI U014eiaen a aapisuOO) Iag veld :luauay3ejjv
r
III /
i I� 11
a.
a /0a/li,rr/�
apt/rr'li�r
11
1
1
'�
(
! f
�� i.f j;
1lJ
i/
/ r
1 r r I / r ryi
;r,
, r Q
r
f
I r
I%q
2.2
......................................... � ...............................
� m
Action Item : Consider a Variation for an Existing Driveway to
Exceed Max Front Yard Coverage at 811 Summer Court (Request to
Continue to October 6, 2021)
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Recommendation of Action
The PZC shall reopen the public hearing and continue it to the October 6, 2021 PZC Meeting.
A public hearing to consider a variation to allow for an existing driveway to exceed maximum front yard
coverage (40%) at 811 Summer Court was scheduled for Wednesday, September 15, 2021. New and
additional information on this request has been recently conveyed, thereby requiring further analysis. As a
result, this will be continued to the October 6, 2021 Planning &Zoning Commission meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Continue Memo (DOCX)
Trustee Liaison Staff Contact
Johnson Nicole Woods, Community Development
Wednesday, September 15,
2021
Updated: 9/10/2021 3:09 PM Pagel
Packet Pg. 11
2.2.a
VILIAGE OF
BUFFALO 3 N
0
DATE: September 10, 2021 v
L
cd
G
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission E
FROM: Nicole Woods, Director of Community Development co
ea
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to Consider a Variation to allow for an existing driveway to exceed
the 40% of front yard coverage maximum at 811 Summer Court.
0
t�
L
A public hearing to consider a variation to allow for an existing driveway to exceed maximum }
front yard coverage (40%) at 811 Summer Court was scheduled for Wednesday, September c
15, 2021. New and additional information on this request has been recently conveyed,thereby U-
requiring further analysis. As a result, this item will be continued to the October 6, 2021
Planning &Zoning Commission meeting.
aD
a�
x
w
O
�a
3
m
0
a�
N
X
W
_
ca
L
0
_
0
L
R
L
0
a
.N
_
0
U
O
E
d
d
_
_
0
C�
_
G1
E
t
co
a
Page 1 of 1
Packet Pg. 12
3.B.1
08/18/2021
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 50 RAUPP BOULEVARD,
BUFFALO GROVE, ILLINOIS ON WEDNESDAY,AUGUST 18, 2021
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM by Chairman Frank Cesario
Public Hearings/Items For Consideration
1. Consider a Variation to Install a 6 Foot Solid Fence in the Rear Yard at 98 Downing Road y
(Trustee Johnson) (Staff Contact: Nicole Woods)
3
Village Planner Akash provided a brief background on the petitioner's request for a 6-
foot wood solid privacy fence on two sides enclosing the rear yard. Village Code allows c
for a 6-foot open design.
Mr. Kosak provided detail of the mismatch fencing in the rear yard of the subject a
property. The petitioner noted that they are seeking privacy and safety. Q-
Q
Chairperson Cesario asked staff to provide a summary of Village Code requirements for
fences as they pertain to pools since the subject property also has a pool. a
0
M
Village Planner Akash provided the summary of the Village Code for fence requirements ti
for pools. Minimum requirement is 5 feet open style. c
N
Com.Au asked the petitioner why a 6-foot solid fence would be better than a 5-foot C
fence solid style.
a�
Mr. Kosak replied it is for privacy and safety concerns. Q
0
Com.Au asked if they have talked to the neighbors
Mr. Kosak said neighbors have no problem. c
Com. Moodhe noted a lot offences in the neighborhood are 5 foot fences and so is the
neighbors on the west side.
Mr. Kosak said their neighbors'fence to the west is in good condition, but if it was in C
poor condition, they would replace it with a 6-foot solid fence. a
Com. Moodhe asked the petitioner if a 5-foot would fit in better.
Mr. Kosak said he believes there are some 6 foot fence in his neighborhood.
Com. Moodhe asked if he told the neighbors what kind offence he was installing.
Mr. Kosak said he talked with the neighbors and no one had any issues.
Com. Moodhe asked the petitioner if he had given any consideration to a 6-foot board-
on-board, which is permitted.
Mr. Kosak said for privacy a solid would be better.
Com. Khan noted he walked the neighborhood and observed the area and found the land
behind the house was flat. He noted that the 6-foot solid fence would not give much
more privacy than a 5 foot fence.
Mr. Kosak noted his lot is slanted down and his neighbors are higher up.
Packet Pg. 13
3.B.1
08/18/2021
Com.Au asked staff if they offered the board-on-board option to Mr. Kosak.
Village Planner Akash said yes.
Deputy Community Development Director spoke briefly about the permit process.
Chairperson Cesorio explained the Village Code and the power of the Planning and
Zoning Commission when reviewing variances. He noted that keeping consistency is
strongly encouraged with fence style.
Chairperson Cesorio asked the petitioner to explain what is atypical about their property.
Mr. Kosak noted the slope in his hard and the high ground his neighbors are on as well as
safety of children in the neighborhood as it relates to the pool. y
d
Chairperson Cesorio entered the Village Staff report as exhibit one. 3
c
Mr. Kosak said in closing that he appreciates the commission reviewing their request.
0
Com. Khan asked staff about the 6-foot solid fences in the area, nothing seem to be
before they amended the Village Code. o
a
CL
The public hearing closed at 7:49 PM. Q
Com Khan made a motion to grant a variation to Section 15.20 of the Buffalo Grove a
Fence Code to allow a proposed 6-foot solid fence in the rear yard provided the fence o
shall be installed in accordance with the documents
ti
and plans submitted as part of this petition. c
N
Com Richards seconded the motion. ao
Com. Moodhe spoke about the overwhelming number of 5 foot fences in the a
neighborhood.
0
Chairperson Cesorio commented that the pool is really the only reason he can see a 6-
foot solid fence.
Village Planner Akash noted that the Village is reviewing all Village Code and intends to
make changes to the pool ordinances allowing for 6-foot solid fences in the future.
Com. Khan noted he does not support the request. Q.
a�
Com. Moodhe asked far clarification on the pool ordinances. 0
a
Village Planner Akash said that staff is considering that 6-foot solid fences be permitted
as it pertains to the pool ordinance. c
Deputy Community Development Director Woods reminded the Commission that staff
tabled the fence ordinance as it pertains to pools and has not drafted any kind of
change. The pool code stands as is and cautions speculating.
Com.Au asked about the variances in the area and if there were any complaints about 5-
foot fences not being adequate.
Village Planner Akash said they have not heard any kind of complaints that 5 foot fences
are not adequate.
Com. Moodhe asked if there were any calls regarding the subject property.
Packet Pg. 14
3.B.1
08/18/2021
Village Planner Akash said they received two calls asking what the variance was for and
had no issues.
RESULT: APPROVED [6 TO 3]
AYES: Moodhe, Spunt, Cesario, Weinstein, Richards, Worlikar
NAYS: Stephen Goldspiel, Zill Khan, Amy Au
2. Consider a Variation to Install a 6 Foot Open Fence in the Rear Yard Abutting a Golf
Course at 316 Checker Drive. (Trustee Pike) (Staff Contact: Nicole Woods)
Village Planner Akash provided a brief background at the subject property for a 6-foot
solid fence backing a golf course. The petitioner also has a pool.
Mr. Karabetsos described his proposal for a 6 foot aluminum open style fence.
Chairperson Cesario clarified for the record that the subject property is asking for a c
variance because they back to a golf course.
0
Com. Moodhe asked if the variance was still needed even though the fence is not on the
rear lot line. c
i
Q
Village Planner Akash said yes because no fence is allowed on properties backing a golf Q-
Q
course.
Deputy Community Development Director Woods provided additional comments a
0
regarding the ordinance.
ti
Com. Moodhe reference packet page 20. c
N
Com. Moodhe asked the petitioner about the lot line. ao
Mr. Karabetsos said he believes it goes all the way back to the golf course. a'
Q
Com. Khan noted he was out at the subject property and spoke about the chain-link 0
fence in the rear yard.
Mr. Karabetsos went over where the fence would be installed. c
Com. Richards asked if a 6-foot open fence would be permitted if the property was not
abutting a golf course.
Village Planner Akash said that it would be permitted if it was not abutting a golf course. Q-
a)
U
The Village staff report was entered as exhibit one a
N
Public hearing was closed at 8:11 PM. a'
c
Com. Moodhe made a motion to
Com. Spunt seconded
Com.Au discussed the difference between this petition verse the pervious one.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
AYES: Moodhe, Spunt, Cesario, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein, Au, Richards,
Worlikar
3. Consider Approval of a Plat of Subdivision; Rezoning to B3 Planned Business Center;
Special Use for a Planned Unit Development; Special Use for a Drive-Through; and a
Development Plan with Zoning and Sign Variances for a New Development at 700 Lake
Cook Rd. (Trustee Johnson) (Staff Contact: Nicole Woods)
Packet Pg. 15
3.B.1
08/18/2021
Village Planner Akash provided a background on the subject property and reviewed the
changes they have made based on previous workshop recommendations from the
Planning and Zoning Commission.
Mr. Paionk provided a description of the property and summary of their requests and
changes they have made to the site plan based on previous workshops with the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Com Au asked the petitioner to go over how they came to combine the building spaces.
Mr. Paionk went over the process.
Com Au asked about the vision of the retail spaces. Would there be a drive-through
request in the future.
3
Mr. Paionk said no.
Com.Au asked what the proposed drive-through is for. o
Mr. Paionk said the proposed drive-through is for the store space. c
i
Com Au asked about the signage for the drive-though. C
Mr. Paionk said there will be additional way signage to assist drivers.
a
Com. Richards asked about the cross access and asked if it connects all the way to 0
Hastings. ti
Mr. Paionk said they are providing easement. c
N
Com Richards reviewed the requests before the Planning and Zoning Commission. ao
Mr. Paionk clarified that the sign requests are a part of the development plan approval. Q
Com. Goldspiel asked about the height of the tower on the car wash o
N
Village Planner Akash said it is 36 feet in total. a'
c
Com. Goldspiel asked what the purpose of the tower is. g
Mr. Paionk said it holds a lot equipment for the facility to maintain the open glazing.
Com. Goldspiel asked if it can be shorter. Q,
a)
Mr. Paionk talked about the elevation and the different levels of the building, noting how a
the current design give a nice architectural look. y
a�
Com. Goldspiel asked about the flags on the traffic study.
Mr.Aboona, Traffic study consultant, provided additional details of the flags in the
traffic study.
Com. Goldspiel asked if there would be any effect on Lake Cook Road for those not using
the site.
Mr.Aboona said no.
Com. Goldspiel asked about the impact of the deceleration lane. He noted it was long.
Mr.Aboona said it would be a positive impact.
Com. Goldspiel asked if it would pose as a confusion.
Mr.Aboona said no.
Packet Pg. 16
3.B.1
08/18/2021
Chairperson Cesario asked about the allocation of the parking stalls.
Mr. Paionk reviewed the number of parking stalls and fueling stations.
Chairperson Cesario asked to see who the traffic flow will operate.
Mr. Paionk briefly spoke about the flow and the improvement to the site plan.
Com. Moodhe commented on the number of variations.
Deputy Community Development Director went over the variations, specifically signs.
Com. Moodhe asked the petitioners to go over the signs.
Mr. Paionk reviewed the signs and said the lighting of the signs would meet Village y
Code.
3
C
Village Planner Akash noted the number of calls they have received for the development.
She also noted the document that was signed they will comply with all electronic sign c
code. ca
0
Com. Moodhe asked if they were 4 separate pins. CL
P
a
Mr. Paionk said yes. a
Com. Moodhe said each lot could be sold up separately. as
0
Mr. Paionk said yes, theoretically.
Com. Moodhe asked about the QSR. N
(D
N
Mr. Paionk replied yes there is a restaurant is inside the convenience store. ao
Com. Moodhe reference packet page 23. 3
Q
Civil Engineer 11 Mr. Sianis noted that the petitioners did submit a photometric plan as c
part of their proposal. He noted that light does not escape the site.
Mr. Paionk went over the traffic flow on page 23.
Com. Moodhe asked how many cars can be stacked for the convenience store
considering the vacuums. CL
c
Mr. Paionk said there are 10 stacking spaces and additional flow to avoid backup. aa)
U
Com. Moodhe reference packet page 23, again. Q
N
Mr. Paionk showed the commission where the orders would be taken for the °1
convenience store.
Com. Spunt asked about the sign on the front.
Mr. Paionk said you can see it from either access point.
Com. Spunt asked about the hours of operation of the drive-through.
Mr. Paionk said the convenience store is 24 hours, but the drive-through will not be. No
hours have been determined.
Com. Spunt asked about the underground storage tank placement.
Mr. Paionk talked about the placement and access.
Com. Spunt asked about solar panels
Packet Pg. 17
3.B.1
08/18/2021
Mr. Paionk said no
Com Au asked the lights of the cars will shine into the residents while cars are in the
drive-through
Mr. Paionk said there will be landscaping to mitigate the light.
Chairperson Cesario reference packet page 26 and reviewed the four signs that do
require a variation.
Mr. Paionk went through the variations with the Commission.
Com.Au asked about sign number 3 and the size.
Mr. Paionk said because it is the only sign at a full-access entrance and advertises for the
whole development. 3
c
Com.Au asked about how much traffic will go through that access point.
0
Mr. Paionk said they appreciate the feedback. They believe they can go back to the
drawing board to get it to an acceptable size. o
a
CL
Com. Moodhe referenced packet page 146. a
Mr. Paionk said those are the poll lights and be angled in and will be LED lights. a
Village Planner Akash said that engineering will look at the photometric plan for
correctness.
N
CD
Chairperson Cesario entered the staff report as exhibit 1, the PowerPoint as exhibit 2, N
and the visual as exhibit 3. ao
Jim Miller, 1150 North Berry Ln., expressed his concerns regarding the development. Q
Buffalo Grove Resident, 1166 North Berry Ln., expressed her concerns regarding the 0
development.
Mr. Paionk said the traffic study was done in 2020 with a sidewalk proposed.
Additionally, he thanked the Village for their time and help in developing the concept,
which has become a standard for all of their future buildings.
Com. Moodhe reference packet page 31. Q.
a�
Public Hearing was closed at 9:39 PM.
Q
Com. Khan made a motion to recommend approval to the Village Board to approve Plat
of Subdivision;Rezoning to B3 Planned Business Center;Special Usefor a Planned Unit c
Development,Special Use for a Drive-Through;and Development Plan approval with
Zoning and Sign Variances of the property proposed to contain a retail establishment,
convenience store,fuel center and car wash on two of four lots within this site. Subject to
the following conditions:
1. The proposed development shall be developed in substantial conformance to the
plans attached
as part of the petition.
2.A final plat of subdivision shall be revised in a manner acceptable to the Village as
required. The
Packet Pg. 18
3.B.1
08/18/2021
plat shall include a cross access easements in a manner and form acceptable to the
Village.
3. Final Engineering plans shall be revised in a manner acceptable to the Village as
required.
4.Any directional or incidental sign added to the sign package provided shall be
reviewed
administratively by Staff.
S. The future development of lots 3&4 shall be subject to the review and approval of the
Village
N
and in accordance with Village Code. d
3
c
6. Future permitted and special uses on the Property shall comply with the B3 Planned
Business o
Center District. c
i
7. Staff will work with petitioners on sign number three to conform with Village Code. C
8. Petitioners will work with staff on the height on the car wash equipment tower.
a
9. Village Staff will work on the reviewing the photometric plan. o
M
Com Moodhe seconded the motion.
N
Chairperson Cesario reviewed the elements of use and noted the thoughtful plan design. N
Com. Moodhe spoke in favor of the motion. C6
a�
RESULT: RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] Q
0
Next: 9/20/2021 7:30 PM
AYES: Moodhe, Spunt, Cesario, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein, Au, Richards, 3
Worlikar S
ci
Regular Meeting
Q.
Other Matters for Discussion U
a
Approval of Minutes
c
1. Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting -Aug 4, 2021 12:00 AM
RESULT: ACCEPTED [UNANIMOUS]
AYES: Moodhe, Spunt, Cesario, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein, Au,
Richards, Worlikar
Chairman's Report
Chairperson Cesario talked about the new mask mandate for meetings and thanked the
commission for flexibly and ability to adapt to change.
Committee and Liaison Reports
Packet Pg. 19
3.B.1
08/18/2021
Chairperson Cesario talked about the items approved at the last Village Board meeting pertaining
to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Staff Report/Future Agenda Schedule
Village Planner Akash talked about future agenda items.
Deputy Community Development Director Woods talked about fee and fine calculation
simplifications they have taken as another step in simplifying the permit process.
N
Public Comments and Questions
3
C
None.
0
Adjournment 'o
The meeting was adjourned at 9:53 PM a
Q
a
Chris Stilling c
M
ti
N
O
APPROVED BY ME THIS 18th DAY OF August , 2021 N
C
a�
Q
0
N
G1
7
C
d
V
C
R
CL
V
V
Q
N
G1
7
C
Packet Pg. 20