Loading...
1983-06-27 - Village Board Special Meeting - Minutes 6225 6/27/83 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE VILLAGE BOARD OF THE VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE, ILLINOIS, HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, VILLAGE HALL, JUNE 27, 1983 President Clayton called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Those present stood and pledged allegiance to the flag. Roll call indicated the following present: President Clayton; ROLL CALL Trustees Marienthal , Stone, O'Reilly, and Hartstein. Trustee Glover was absent. Also present were: William Balling, Village Manager; William Raysa, Village Attorney; James Doyle, Assistant Village Manager; William Brimm, Finance Director; Gregory Boysen, Director of Public Works; Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer; Keith McIntyre, Engineering Technician; James Truesdell , Village Planner; Police Chief McCann; and Paul Kochendorfer, Village Treasurer. Moved by Marienthal , seconded by Stone, to approve the minutes APPROVAL OF of the June 20, 1983 Regular Meeting. Upon roll call , Trustees MINUTES voted as follows: AYES: 4 - Marienthal , Stone, O' Reilly, Hartstein NAYES : 0 - None ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. Mr. Kochendorfer read Warrant #505. Moved by Stone, seconded WARRANT #505 by O'Reilly, to approve Warrant #505 in the amount of $180,538.09, authorizing payment of bills listed. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows : AYES: 4 - Marienthal , Stone, O' Reilly, Hartstein NAYES : 0 - None ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. President Clayton appointed Mr. Lauron Musfeldt to fill a vacancy PLAN COMMISSION on the Plan Commission, with a term to expire April 30, 1984. APPOINTMENT Moved by Stone, seconded by Marienthal , to concur with President Clayton' s appointment. Upon voice vote, the motion was unanimously declared carried. President Clayton then introduced Mr. Musfeldt to the Board and the audience, and thanked him for his willingness to serve the Village. President Clayton read Resolution #83-19 recognizing the years of RESOLUTION service to the Village by Marc Schwartz. Moved by Hartstein, 083-19 seconded by Marienthal to pass Resolution #83-19. Upon voice vote, the motion was unanimously declared carried. President Clayton then presented the Resolution and a plaque of appreciation to Mr. Schwartz. Mr. Schwartz stated that it had been a pleasure to serve on the Board, and also wished to publicly thank the staff for their hard work and dedication. President Clayton then sworn in Mr. Bill Reid as Village Trustee APPOINTMENT OF to fill the vacancy created by Marc Schwartz. TRUSTEE 6226 6/27/83 President Clayton noted that the Lincoln Park Zoo is offering BUFFALO the adoption of a buffalo for $25.00. Mrs. Clayton suggested ADOPTION that the Village adopt a buffalo in honor of the 25th anniversary of the Village. Moved by Hartstein, seconded by O' Reilly, that the Village of Buffalo Grove officially adopt a buffalo from the Lincoln Park Zoo. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES : 5 - Marienthal , Stone, O' Reilly, Hartstein, Reid NAYES : 0 - None ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. Mr. Balling explained the request for an adjustment in capital GOLF COURSE expenditure allocation within the Golf Course budget, specifics BUDGET of which are in Mr. Balling' s memo to the Board of June 22, 1983. Moved by Marienthal , seconded by Stone, to recommend adjustments in the two areas which are budgeted in account 12-14, in accordance with Mr. Balling' s memo of June 22, 1983. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES : 5 - Marienthal , Stone, O' Reilly, Hartstein, Reid NAYES : 0 - None ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. Mr. Balling reported on the request of Mr. Hyman of the Plaza TRAFFIC Verde Shopping Center to install a traffic signal at the entrance SIGNAL to the shopping center. Mr. Hyman had contributed $1 ,000.00 toward a traffic study to determine the feasibility of such a signal . Mr. Balling reported that he had received notice from the owners of the Strathmore Square Shopping Center that they are no longer interested in participating in such a study. Trustee Stone stated that he recalled that the Strathmore Square Shopping Center had previously li indicated that they did want to participate in a study to install a traffic signal , and suggested that the Board keep this point in mind when there are future dealings with the Strathmore Square Shopping Center. Mr. Balling will pursue the matter with the owners of the Strathmore Square Shopping Center. President Clayton asked if there were any questions from the QUESTIONS FROM audience. Mr. Al Vermiglio asked if the audience would be THE AUDIENCE permitted to speak during the discussion on the traffic study. President Clayton stated that the audience would be allowed to participate. President Clayton explained the Consent Agenda, and stated that CONSENT any member of the Board or the audience could request that an AGENDA item be removed for full discussion. It was requested that Item XI , B, be removed from the Consent Agenda. Moved by O' Reilly, seconded by Hartstein, to approve Resolution RESOLUTION #83-20, a resolution determining the prevailing wage rates for #83-20 public works construction. Chapter 48, Section 39s-9, of the (Prevailing Wage Illinois Revised Statutes requires that the Village make a Rates) determination or prevailing wage rates paid to skilled and 6227 6/27/83 unskilled workers engaged in public works construction as defined in the act. Village contractscontain a requirement that prevailing wages be paid, and the determination of prevailing wages based on the Illinois Department of Labor printouts. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 5 - Marienthal , Stone, O' Reilly, Hartstein, Reid NAYES: 0 - None ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. Moved by O'Reilly, seconded by Hartstein, to approve the Village- VILLAGEWIDE wide watermain reinforcement project easement for Hidden Lakes WATERMAIN Easement No. 21A. The Village Engineer recommends approval of EASEMENT this easement agreement required for the subject project. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 5 - Marienthal , Stone, O' Reilly, Hartstein, Reid NAYES: 0 - None ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. received Tr Trustee Stone stated that the Board had rec ed Mr. u esd l e l ' s ORDINANCE and Mr. Balling 's memos on amending the Northwood Grove PUD. NO. 83-33 Mr. Truesdell stated that he had nothing to add other than noting that this is just extending the same terms for 5 years, with the exception of the Title XIX. Moved by Stone, seconded by Marienthal , to pass Ordinance #83-33, amending a planned development dated June 30, 1978. Trustee Hartstein stated that he wants a better understanding of what the developer's intent is with regard to the property, and also an indication from staff as to what is gained by the Village by granting this extension, as opposed to requiring comprehensive review at the time the proposal comes back to the Board. Mr. DeGrazia stated that he was before the Board recently relative to a different use of the property or what they are currently requesting. They are working out a new plan; they are not completely satisfied with the plan that they have at this time; they are going back to the drawing board to come up with a product which would be more satisfactory to the Village Board and the homeowners, and are inventorying the market to see what is the best use of the plan in terms of the market, and it will be some type of a multi-family product. Mr. Balling stated that the primary benefit to the Village at this point is the Title XIX requirements, which would be clearly specified within the PUD ordinance. The advantage to the builder is that the present PUD ordinance has a term in it as of June 30, 1983 as a reverter clause to the R-3 zoning district. The R-9 as approved does conform to the Buffalo Grove Comprehensive Plan. Mr. DeGrazia is attempting to come up with a new planning program; it was his 6228 6/27/83 intent to meet the deadline with the single-family, but that plan met with opposition. Trustee Hartstein stated that, with the present intent of the developer being not to continue with this plan, he personally thinks the Village is in a better and stronger position in terms of how that development will be shaped by not granting this extension, and reviewing a new concept from scratch. In terms of Title XIX, there would be no advantage in that regard because any new proposal would have to abide by whatever the current Title XIX or other requirements are on the books at the time the new plan is submitted. Trustee Stone said that a large part of the concern is down-sizing homes, and he thinks that can be made a part of the PUD agreement. Trustee Hartstein stated that that would be a modification nonetheless, because that would be a total change from what is there, but if the present intent is to come in with something different, he thinks the Village is in a better position in terms of land use and in terms of how the property is going to be dealt with in looking at a new plan from scratch as opposed to playing around with an existing plan which , for all practical purposes, is not the present intent of the developer. Mr. David Shaw, attorney for Anden, stated that he does not think it is the intent of the developer, and hopes it is not the intent of the Board, to go back to playing games that were being played 10 years ago in the development scene. There are very practical reasons why an extension of the PUD ordinance as such is going to benefit both the developer and the Village: 1 . It is clear that a multi-family product is called for in terms of the Master Plan and in terms of the overall development. 2. If the property does revert to R-3, the Village is placing the developer in a position of having to go through a full zoning procedure again, because the property will obviously not sustain economically an R-3 single-family product, and it would not sustain it judicially. As a practical matter, the Village has much more control by letting them work within the confines of the existing PUD whereby they still have to seek the same approvals, but can do it by modification of the overall plan rather than starting from scratch. The developer has agreed to incorporate those new provisions of the ordinance that staff deemed to be critical . Trustee O'Reilly stated that the attorney seems to say that multi- family is indicated, and yet the developer was previously before the Board with a single-family plan. Mrs. O' Reilly has the same concern as Trustee Hartstein that this whole plan seems to be in a state of flux; she thinks that the plan expiring now becomes the worst case plan that they can always fall back on, rather than coming up with the modifications. Mr. Balling emphasized that one of the points raised by the attorney is the continuity. The parcel sitting to the west is a parcel that 6229 6/27/83 was zoned B-2, and has now reverted to R-8 to make it compatible with the parcel to the east. This was originally annexed in 1973 as a large-scale, 1600 unit PUD, and has gone through several changes . This is entitled Northwood Unit 2. At the time this was brought in in 1978, the Plan Commission felt that only Phase 1 of the single-family could proceed, and then it must be followed by the multi-family and the 3rd phase of the single-family. That was evaluated in 1979 by the Plan Commission and the Board, and the Board ultimately did permit that Phase 3 could go ahead, and all of the single-family was built. There is some importance to continuity. It is the desire of the owner to build multi-family. After a legal battle for the ownership rights and the engineering of the multi-family area, which has now been resolved to the benefit of Anden, the plans that the Board did approve are in ownership and custody of Anden , so that the plan can be implemented if we proceed with it. One of the primary objections at the Plan Commission was the lack of garages on all units. Mr. DeGrazia stated that they have enjoyed a very good relationship with the Village, and they have come through on their promises, and the Village has come through on their promises. The property is identified in the Village ordinance as multi-family. Mr. DeGrazia is not that happy with the proposal that they have; he stated that they would have just had to begin construction before the June 30th deadline, and they would have been able to continue with the product which has already been approved. Mr. DeGrazia stated that they were very honest and came before the Board asking that they be able to continue the status quo of the property while they are developing a better plan. The reason that the plan got laid into this thing is that, in discussion between staff and Anden , they were trying to hit the June 30th date, and did not want to get involved with playing around with this plan, because they did not want to burden the Board or the staff with something that they would possibly not go ahead with. The last 5 years have been a very down market, and there was no market to proceed. They have been upfront with the Village on every issue regarding this development. They are asking that the Village bear with them while they develop a new plan. If the property reverts to R-3, it puts Anden in a very precarious position with their financing. They maintain that the zoning on it now is good zoning. Anden wants to build something that makes good sense in the market. They want to have the time to work out a new plan; their intention is not to build the plan being presented. Trustee Hartstein reiterated his position that, if Anden intended to move forward with the plan, and if it was a good plan for this property , he would have no problem with granting a reasonable extension of time with which to further the development. Trustee Hartstein is not entralled with the plan as it is currently laid out. With regard to the zoning, the property would revert, but the fact remains that the property is shown on the Master Plan as multi-family. Trustee Hartstein thinks that, as long as this is something that is going to be changed , the Village should not have a position down the road where the developer may state that if the Village does not go along with a change, the developer could always revert to the proposed plan, which is a worst-case situation. 6230 6/27/83 Trustee Marienthal asked if the developer planned to submit a new plan to the Village within the next six months. Mr. DeGrazia stated that his plan is definitely to submit a new plan within the next six months , but because of the fluidity of the market, he cannot guarantee that. Because he has always been upfront with the Village, Mr. DeGrazia does not think he should be put in a position of R-3 zoning, which makes no sense for the property. Trustee Marienthal suggested that an additional clause be written in whereby a new plan must be presented to the Board within a 6 month period of time. Mr. Raysa stated that he would have no objection to having another clause added that a new plan of development for Phase 2 be submitted and have conceptual approval within the next 6 months; if that did not happen , then the property would revert to R-3. Trustee Hartstein asked if there is a way to grant an extension of the underlying PUD zoning, and vacate this particular plan subject to submission of a future plan. Mr. Raysa stated that that is in the Village's sole discretion. Mr. Shaw stated that the only thing they want to avoid is the complete process and the to R-3zoningclassification . Mr. DeGrazia reversion the D Gra is stated that he must come back before the Board before he can do anything, which should alleviate the Board's concern that he could build the proposed plan without any further approval . Mr. DeGrazia suggested vacating the proposed plan so that the next action which must be taken is that he come back with a new concept which is up to the Plan Commission and the Board to determine if it is feasible. Trustee Stone asked why Mr. DeGrazia is asking for a 5 year extension. Mr. DeGrazia stated that he would prefer no limit at all , just that the property is zoned R-9. Trustee Stone suggested a 1 year extension. Mr. DeGrazia stated that would put them in a bad position with regard to the banks and financing. Trustee Stone suggested that if the 1 year extension is a problem, Mr. DeGrazia could come back and ask the Board for another extension. Mr. DeGrazia stated that he prefers not to have to ask the Board every time he does anything; they will vacate the plan, but they want to know they have the zoning on it. Trustee O' Reilly stated that that addresses her concern with the plan itself. Regarding the timing, she does not think the Village can make him do anything if the timing is not right. Mr. Raysa stated that, if the Village lets the property revert to R-3, and Mr. DeGrazia comes in with a petition to rezone to R-9, and the Village denies it, in looking at the surrounding property with is industrial and commercial , Mr. Raysa sees difficulty in keeping an R-3 zoning on the property. The reason for the R-3 zoning is an agreement tool that the developer will develop the property. If the developer sold to someone else who wanted commercial and industrial on the property, Mr. Raysa thinks the court would grant that zoning. Trustee O'Reilly stated that she is not disagreeing with the zoning. She is disagreeing with the plan, and does not wish to see the plan travel with it any longer. 6231 6/27/83 Regarding the point of vacating the present plan, Mr. Raysa stated that he could agree with that as long as the developer signs an agreement that it is in the Village's sole discretion to approve any plan he would submit. Another sentence could be added stating that, if there is no approved plan, then it will , upon the Village's action, revert to R-3. Trustee Hartstein asked if the Village would be in a stronger position in terms of dealing with a multi-family plan than dealing with a modification to the existing plan, or simply leaving it vacant with the underlying zoning being R-9 subject to the Village's sole discretion. If the underlying zoning is there, is the Village not vulnerable with regard to any use in that regard? Could language be inserted stating that the property would have to be compatible with the surrounding area in the sole discretion of the Village, since it is PUD zoning and not straight zoning? Mr. Raysa stated that, if the developer signs an extended PUD which states that the plan will be vacated and agrees that it is strictly up to the Village as to the zoning; the Village would be giving the developer certain zoning, but would, in effect, restrict that zoning to whatever the Village approves. Mr. Balling stated that, if the Village extends the agreement as is for 5 years as proposed , the Village does not have to act any further with respect to changes or modifications. If it is vacated, and it is just left as R-9, the Village is compelled to act by the terms of the extension if a reasonable proposal is brought before the Village. Mr. Shaw agreed with Mr. Raysa and Mr. Balling that the Village would have more control over the property by maintaining the plan as is. The way things stand now, permission has been granted to build this plan, and unless there are extraordinary circumstances, the developer has no other rights except to build this plan unless they can come back to the Village and show that they have something better. Mr. DeGrazia has already indicated that the possibility of building this plan is very remote. Their primary objective is to make the easiest possible path procedurally. Either one of the two alternatives offerred would be acceptable to the developer. Trustee Hartstein asked if Trustee Stone would be willing to accept a modification to a 2 year extension. Trustee Stone amended the motion to change the time extension on the agreement to 2 years rather than 5 years. Trustee Marienthal seconded the amendment. Upon roll call , Trustees voted on the motion: AYES: 4 - Marienthal , Stone, Hartstein, Reid NAYES : 1 - O ' Reilly ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. 6232 6/27/83 Mr. Truesdell displayed a map of the Buffalo Creek Forest RESOLUTION Preserve, and reviewed the contents of the proposed Resolution. #83-21 Moved by O' Reilly, seconded by Stone, to pass Resolution #83-21 , (Buffalo Creek which expresses the Village's desire for active use areas and Forest Preserve) expresses concern over the closing of Schaeffer Road at Lake-Cook Road. The Resolution will be presented to the Forest Preserve District at a Public Hearing on June 29, 1983. Upon voice vote, the motion was unanimously declared carried. Trustee O' Reilly will be representing the Village at the Public Hearing. �•/ Mr. Balling reviewed his memo of June 21 , 1983 to the Board LOCAL TRAFFIC regarding Local Traffic Safety Information. Trustee Hartstein SAFETY REPORT stated that neither alternative outlined in the memo is acceptable to him. Mr. Hartstein stated that he does not believe that a $60,000 study is necessary for the Village to accomplish what the Village Board thinks is appropriate and reasonable for the residential streets in our community, based upon unique conditions within the community. Trustee Hartstein urged the Board to consider a third alternative of assembling an investigation and either imposing a 20 or 25 MPH limit on the residential streets throughout the Village. Mr. Raysa stated that he questions what criteria staff would use in undertaking such a study. Mr. Balling stated that staff has not come up with the kinds of criteria that they feel the State Law speaks to. Trustee Stone also stated that he is not happy with either alternative. He suggested that the previously done study be modified in order to change the speed limits. Lengthy discussion took place regarding a method to come up with a reasonable and enforceable speed limit without undertaking a Villagewide study. Trustee Marienthal stated that he is also unhappy with both alternatives suggested. He suggested doing a study of a select number of representative streets in the Village. Mr. Balling stated that the staff definitely has the technical capabilities to conduct the traffic study; however, because of time and man- power limitations, this could not be accomplished within a reasonable amount of time. Trustee Hartstein stated that the State Statutes are set so that a governing body may not arbitrarily set speed limits; however, in this case the speed limits would not arbitrarily be set since Buffalo Grove is attempting to set a speed limit which is reasonable and safe for our community. Trustee Reid questioned Mr. Raysa as to the credibility of a staff study versus a professional engineering study. Mr. Raysa stated that we do have qualified personnel on staff to conduct such a study, so there would be no credibility gap between staff and a professional engineering study. Trustee O ' Reilly stated that she is also uncomfortable with either solution. She asked Mr. Balling which projects would suffer if the study were done in-house. Mr. Balling stated that the study could not be conducted without additional personnel , or a year time period to complete the study. Mr. Balling stated that he does not foresee adding manpower to that department in the near future. 6233 6/27/83 Mr. Raysa stated that even if the 25MPH limit would not hold up in court, it would not affect tickets issued in excess of 30 MPH. Trustee Stone proposed setting the speed limit on residential streets at 25 MPH. Mr. Al . Vermiglio of Chatham Circle stated that he would like to see the speed limits set at 20 MPH. Mr. Marc Schwartz stated that the speed limits should be set using proper standards so that they will hold up in court. Trustee Stone stated that, even if an offender were to get the case dismissed from court, it would still cost that person time and �•/ money, which would hopefully be a deterrent to speeding. Trustee Hartstein suggested that staff be directed to do a sampling of six different areas in the Village, and bring that sampling to the Board to enable them to determine a uniform speed for the entire Village. Mr. Balling stated that staff could complete a study of six streets; he did not think that they would all come back with the same speed limit, which would put the Board in the same situation that they are currently in. He stated that Staff needs standards from the Board as to the type of streets which would be studied, i .e. curved streets, collector streets, etc. Moved by O ' Reilly to direct staff to investigate two different subjects : one would be getting a consultant; and secondly, and preferably, consideration of expanding our staff to do this entire study internally, using a one-year time frame. There was no second to the motion. Moved by Hartstein that the staff, with the objective of this Village Board being to establish a uniform standard of speed on the majority of residential streets, conduct the following study and investigation of speeds throughout the Village and report back to the Board. A. Conduct a resonable sampling of residential streets throughout the community and submit same to the Village Board. B. Recommend to the Village Board whether the staff would recommend a different or uniform standard for collector streets versus all other residential streets in the community. There was no second to the motion. Moved by Hartstein, seconded by Stone, that, with the objective of establishing a uniform speed limit on the majority of residential streets, staff be instructed to do the following: A. Take a reasonable sampling which shall include six collector and non-collector streets, B. To recommend to the Board whether collector and non-collector streets should have a different uniform standard of speed, said report to be submitted back to the Village Board within 60 days. Mr. Balling stated that staff would make every reasonable effort to complete said study within 60 days . Trustee Hartstein stated that, if staff could not complete the study within 60 days, they should request an extension from the Board . Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows on the motion: i, I i �I II ,I I I it it I, V 6234 6/27/83 AYES: 4 - Stone, O' Reilly, Hartstein , Reid NAYES : 1 - Marienthal ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. President Clayton declared a recess from 10:00 P.M. until RECESS 10: 14 P.M. Mr. Raysa reviewed the reasons that it is impractical for BUFFALO GROVE �•J the Village to entertain the request of the developer to maintain COMMERCE CENTER a perpetual letter of credit for sidewalks and parkway trees. UNIT 1 Moved by Stone, seconded by Marienthal , to delay final acceptance of the Buffalo Grove Commerce Center, Unit 1 , until all the public improvements are completed. Mr. Rick Piggott of the Lexington Development Corporation stated that the sidewalks are not appropriate in an industrial park. Mr. Piggott stated that there will be a site improvement bond for every lot which is developed, and the sidewalk improvements could be included in those general bonds. Mr. Piggott stated that, if sidewalks and parkway trees are put in on undeveloped lots , there would not be an owner to maintain same, and they would, therefore, probably have to be replaced at a later date. Lexington feels that they were given direction by the Board, and that direction has now been changed. Trustee Hartstein stated that he thinks that the nature of the two things which are being discussed could adequately be covered by bond, and urged that the Board allow the final acceptance of this project, subject to the posting of a bond, which could be reduced as the improvements are made on individual lots. Mr. Balling reviewed the commitments which were made to and by Lexington Development Corporation. After further discussion, Trustees voted as follows on the motion: AYES : 2 - Marienthal , Stone NAYES : 3 - O' Reilly, Hartstein, President Clayton PASS : 1 - Reid ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion denied. Moved by Hartstein, seconded by O' Reilly, that final acceptance procedure be adopted which would allow final acceptance subject to a posting of a bond to insure completion of the parkway trees and sidewalk improvements, said bond to be reduced as individual bonds are posted by the individual lot owner, or in the event there are any changes in Village ordinances. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES : 3 - O' Reilly, Hartstein , President Clayton NAYES: 2 - Marienthal , Stone PASS: 1 - Reid ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. 6235 6/27/83 Moved by Hartstein, seconded by O' Reilly, that the bond would be called in the event the sidewalks and parkway trees are not completed with 5 years from date of acceptance. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES : 3 - O' Reilly, Hartstein, President Clayton NAYES: 2 - Marienthal , Stone PASS : 1 - Reid ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. �•/ Moved by Stone, seconded by O'Reilly, to approve Resolution RESOLUTION #83-22 and Final Plat of Subdivision for the Buffalo Grove #83-22 Commerce Center, Unit 2B, subject to the 7 items outlined in BUFFALO GROVE Mr. Kuenkler' s memo to Mr. Balling of June 2, 1983. Upon roll COMMERCE CENTER call , Trustees voted as follows: UNIT 2B AYES : 4 - Marienthal , Stone, O' Reilly, Hartstein NAYES : 0 - None PASS: 1 - Reid ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. Moved by Stone, seconded by O' Reilly, to accept the Warner-Amex WARNER-AMEX liability insurance policies , with the condition that we receive LIABILITY the $9,000,000.00 umbrella policy. Upon roll call , Trustees INSURANCE voted as follows : AYES: 5 - Marienthal , Stone, O ' Reilly, Hartstein, Reid NAYES: 0 - None ABSENT: I - Glover Motion declared carried. Mr. Balling reviewed the Appearance Commission Appeal of the PLAZA VERDE - Buffalo Grove Podiatry Center sign in Plaza Verde. Mr. Marvin (Buffalo Grove Hymen made a brief presentation to the Board regarding the Podiatry Center) proposed sign. Moved by Hartstein, seconded by Stone, to over- turn the Appearance Commission decision, and that the sign be allowed as submitted. Mr. Larsen of the Appearance Commission explained the decision of the Commission. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 5 - Marienthal , Stone, O' Reilly, Hartstein, Reid NAYES : 0 - None ABSENT: 1 - Glover Motion declared carried. Moved by Hartstein, seconded by O' Reilly, to adjourn the ADJOURNMENT meeting. Upon voice vote, the motion was unanimously declared �./ carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 P.M. Janet Sirabian, Village Clerk APPROVED BY ME 'i'H I S DAY OF , 1983. Village President