Loading...
1980-02-04 - Village Board Regular Meeting - Minutes 5607 2/4/80 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE VILLAGE BOARD OF THE VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE, ILLINOIS, HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, VILLAGE HALL, FEBRUARY 4, 1980 President Clayton called the meeting to order at 7:40 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, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske. Also present were William Balling, Village Manager; William Raysa, Village Attorney; William Sommer, Assistant Village Manager; Frank Hruby, Director of Building and Zoning; James Truesdell , Village Planner; Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer; Gregory Boysen, Director of Public Works; William Brimm, Finance Director. Moved by Marienthal , seconded by Hartstein, to approve the APPROVAL OF minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 21 , 1980. Trustee MINUTES O'Reilly suggested that, if a Trustee requests minutes to be verbatim, a vote be taken by the Board. Discussion on this suggestion followed. President Clayton polled the Board: "Yes" indicates favor of Trustee O' Reilly's suggestion that if complete minutes of a conversation are to be put in the minutes, it be done so after a vote of the Board; "No" indicates opposition: YES - Stone, O'Reilly NO - Marienthal , Hartstein , Kavitt, Gerschefske Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows on the motion to approve the minutes: AYES: 6 - Marienthal , Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAYES: 0 - None Motion declared carried. Mr. Brimm read Warrant #420. Moved by Marienthal , seconded WARRANT #420 by Kavitt, to approve Warrant #420 in the amount of $231 ,714.54 authorizing payment of bills listed. Mr. Brimm and Mr. Balling answered a question from Trustee Hartstein. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6 - Marienthal , Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAYES: 0 - None Motion declared carried. President Clayton appointed Mr. Earl Sabes to the Transportation TRANSPORTATION Commission for a term to expire April 30, 1981 . Moved by COMMISSION Stone, seconded by O'Reilly to concur with President Clayton 's APPOINTMENT appointment. Upon voice vote, the motion was unanimously declared carried. President Clayton introduced Mr. Sabes, and thanked him for his willingness to serve the Village. 5608 2/4/80 Trustee Hartstein asked that the public be made aware of the VOTER fact that the last day to register both for the March 18 REGISTRATION Primary, and the March 1 Municipal election will be Tuesday, February 19, 1980. Mr. Hartstein also reminded everyone that the informational meetings for the Fire Referendum and the Home Rule Referendum will be held on February 13, 14, 19, and 21 , 1980. Mr. Balling announced that the Regular Meeting scheduled for MEETING Monday, February 18, 1980, has been rescheduled to Monday, CHANGE February 25, 1980, because of the President' s Day Holiday, and also so as not to conflict with the referenda information meetings to be held that week. President Clayton asked if there were any questions from the QUESTIONS FROM audience. There were none. THE AUDIENCE President Clayton explained the Consent Agenda, and stated that CONSENT AGENDA any member of the audience or the Board could request that an item be removed for full discussion. There were no such requests. Moved by O'Reilly, seconded by Stone, to pass Ordinance #80-4, ORDINANCE #80-4 amending Title 10 of the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code (speed (Speed Restri- restriction along St. Mary's Parkway) . tion-St. Mary's Parkway) The Village Engineer has conducted a speed survey based on citizen requests on St. Mary' s Parkway and recommends a reduction in speed to 25 M.P.H. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6 - Marienthal , Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAYES: 0 - None Motion declared carried. Moved by O' Reilly, seconded by Stone, to pass Ordinance ORDINANCE #80-5, providing for election judges for the March 1 , #80-5 1980 Municipal Election. Election_ Judvs1 The March 1 , 1980 municipal election requires legislation to provide for the appointment and selection and compensation of judges. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6 - Marienthal , Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAYES : 0 - None Motion declared carried. Moved by O'Reilly, seconded by Stone, to pass Ordinance ORDINANCE #80-6, amending Chapter 10.04 of the Buffalo Grove Municipal #80-6 (Senior Code (vehicle licenses for senior citizens) . Citizen Vehicle License Dis- count 5609 2/4/80 Senior Citizens vehicle license discounts are authorized by this ordinance. A $1 .00 fee is available for 1 vehicle owned by each senior citizen in Buffalo Grove. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6 - Marienthal , Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAYES: 0 - None Motion declared carried. Moved by O'Reilly, seconded by Stone, to approve the Plat of BUFFALO GROVE Easement for the Buffalo Grove National Bank. NATIONAL BANK The easement document satisfies Village requirements relating to new parking lot addition to the subject property. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6 - Marienthal , Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAYES: 0 - None Motion declared carried. Moved by O'Reilly, seconded by Stone, to award a bid for MUNICIPAL Municipal Exterior Street Lighting Program to Fulton EXTERIOR STREET Contracting Company, with a low bid of $14,493. LIGHTING PROGRAM The FY 79-80 program budget provides for lighting of the municipal complex. The low qualified bidder falls under the maximum approved budget limits . Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6 - Marienthal , Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAYES: 0 - None Motion declared carried. Moved by O'Reilly, seconded by Stone to authorize to bid MUNICIPAL FY 79-80 municipal property landscape and concrete program. PROPERTY LANDSCAPE AND The FY 79-80 budget provides for certain concrete and CONCRETE landscape improvements. Authorization to solicit bids PROGRAM BID is requested. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6 - Marienthal , Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAPES: 0 - None Motion declared carried. President Clayton read a proclamation recognizing Junior JUNIOR ACHIEVE- Achievement and the week of February 10, 1980 JUNIOR MENT WEEK ACHIEVEMENT WEEK. 5610 2/4/80 Trustee Gerschefske explained that this is the next step in ORDINANCE 80-7 preparing ourselves for commercial and industrial revenue ( Industrial & bonds. Commercial Revenue Bonds) Moved by Gerschefske, seconded by Kavitt, to pass Ordinance #80-7, establishing procedures and fees regarding application for Industrial and Commercial Revenue Bonds. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6 - Marienthal, Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAYES: 0 - None Motion declared carried. Trustee Hartstein, on behalf of the Board, thanked the Plan B-5 BUSINESS Commission, the BDDC, the Appearance Commission, and Brim/ DISTRICT ZONING Braun Associates, for a very comprehensive and thorough job ORDINANCE - in moving forward with a project that is very important to PROPOSED the Village of Buffalo Grove. REVISION Mr. Truesdell explained that Exhibit A contains goals and policies which were approved by the BDDC. Exhibit B is the plan which Mr. Truesdell displayed, also reviewed by the BDDC and the Plan Commission, the intent being to get a consolidated plan for the Town Center. Various uses were established, in the ordinance, and the various uses referred to areas that are defined on the plan. Other bulk requirements were set, such as minimum lot size, maximum lot coverages, maximum densities. A separate set of parking requirements were established for the Town Center. This ordinance is basically designed for the Town Center to be a planned development with its own set of standards. Also included in the ordinance is a fairly detailed set of appearance criteria, requiring various buffer areas and land treatments. It also requires a detailed review of each develop- ment by the Village architectural consultant, so that when buildings do come in, they will be utilizing the appearance criteria in this ordinance to determine if, in fact, the develop- ment is consistent with the goals and policies of the Town Center, and also to monitor development throughout the Center to make sure that, as different developments come in, they fit together as a unified development. The final section of the ordinance describes the development process. The process here is slightly different than other typical projects in the Village. A developer would first meet with the staff, then the BDDC, and then the Village Board, before beginning the normal process of development in the Village. The main difference is that the development would be reviewed by the Village architectural consultant to determine compatibility. Mr. Truesdell stated that Mr. Raysa had suggested the following changes to the ordinance: 5611 2/4/80 Page 9: Section 7.4.2, C - The feeling is that a more detailed definition should be given to the type of screening; this would be true for all sections of the ordinance which refer to screening. Page 15: top of page - Lineal foot should be spelled out;, rather than just having the initials L. F. Page 19: 7.5. 1 , A - The reference to the Chief Administrator should be changed to Village Manager. Page 27: last line - Should read "public hearing may be held" rather than "shall be held". Last Page: 7.9 - The third line should read as follows: "ment schedule of the Final Development Plan, the Planned". Mr. Balling pointed out that the Village would not be zoning the property by passing this ordinance; they would be providing for the district. Separate zonings would occur upon individual application. Trustee O'Reilly questioned the wording on Page 19, Section 7.5. 1 , B. Mr. Balling stated that this would involve a direction, not to be construed as approval or disapproval . An application going through Step A, would automatically go through Steps B and C. On Page 23, regarding paragraph "f", Trustee O'Reilly asked how the Plan Commission would know whether the Village Board would be willing to alter regulations . Mr. Balling answered that, unless there was specific direction from the Board on referral , the Plan Commission would not know, which would, in effect, discourage any variation requests. The Plan Commission would have to highlight any requirement variation in their recommendation to the Village Board. On the last page, under Section 7. 10, Trustee O'Reilly felt it would be helpful to point out what commission is being referred to in this section. It was stated that this refers to the Plan Commission becuase Section 7.5.4 beginning on Page 21 deals with Plan Commission Review. In answer to a question by Trustee Hartstein, regarding Section 7.4.5, A, Mr. Truesdell stated that the first applicant in the Center would basically set the design trend for the Center, although the architectural consultant has pointed out that harmony can be extremely diverse. Mr. Raysa felt that the question of vagueness in this paragraph could be overcome by the fact that there would be one commission studying all applicants . Trustee Hartstein referred to page 15, paragraph C,1 . , and stated that he was concerned that some businesses might not have any frontage on which to place a sign, and conversely that signs could conceivably be placed every 200 ' , which is a lesser standard than our present sign code states. 5612 2/4/80 Mr. Truesdell stated that this was a compromise between Brim/ Braun and the Appearance Commission, reached because of the fact that each development coming in would have to have a sign package which would require approval . Regarding a possible development which would be on the interior, and not have any frontage, Mr. Truesdell stated that he would have to check into that possibility further. Mr. Raysa suggested that the paragraph in question be revised and reworded for clarity. Trustee Hartstein stated that it might be possible to state that free standing signs shall be prohibited unless approved as part of the sign package. Mr. Raysa stated that he and the staff would need direction from the Board as to specifics before the paragraph could be reworded. President Clayton polled the Board: "Yes" indicates favor of the suggested change that there would be no ground or free standing signs unless approved as part of the sign package; "No" indicates opposition. YES - Marienthal , Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein , Kavitt, Gerschefske NO - None Regarding Section 7. 10, Trustee Hartstein stated that there should be stronger language regarding work stoppage if conditions and regulations are not met. Mr. Raysa said that he has already made a notation regarding same. Mr. Raysa questioned the need to send a certified notice to all owners within the Town Center, as well as those within 250' , as stated on page 21 . The consensus of the Board was that this requirement should remain as stated. Mr. Salvatore Santoro, representing Midwest Bank & Trust Company, owner of approximately 3 acres at the Northwest corner of Lake- Cook Road and Route 83, stated that the Village is, in effect, zoning property. He stated that the ordinance as drawn bears no indication of allowable use or special use for the two existing service stations on the property. Mr. Santoro stated that the Shell Oil station is zoned B-2, with special use for a service station. As part of the issuance of the permits, they agreed that they would petition the Village to rezone to B-5, with a special use permit allowing service station use, as well as the full scope of uses under the B-5 zoning ordinance. He said the proposed ordinance provides for no use of service stations whatsoever. Regarding the minimum 5 acre lot size, Mr. Santoro asked the status of the remaining 2+ acres , excluding the service station. 5613 2/4/80 Discussion followed on whether or not all administrative requirements were met regarding Mr. Santoro's property, thereby not permitting a public hearing as yet. There was then discussion on whether or not this ordinance can be construed as a zoning ordinance, and whether or not Mr. Santoro will actually have use of his service station. Trustee Stone said there is no intention of removing an existing service station, but merely to prevent future �./ service stations. President Clayton stated that the intent is to create a zoning district, not to zone property. Mr. Raysa stated that he would have to review the file to be sure of specifics in the annexation agreement. Mr. Shields stated that the Plan Commission discussed this matter, and did not reach a legal understanding either. The purpose of the recommendation the way it was written was that the Commission did not want to have the Santoro property rezoned B-5; they did not know exactly how to make sure that that would not be the effect. It was not the intention of the Plan Commission anywhere along the line to restrict the development of either of those parcels. Mr. Santoro stated that by petitioning for B-5, based on permitted uses or special uses, there is no zoning for service stations. From the standpoint of Mr. Raysa's statement about a legal non-conforming use, it puts Mr. Santoro in jeopardy with the use of that property. President Clayton stated that she is sure that there is some legal way to be able to provide for a special use for the two existing service stations. Mr. Santoro stated that is exactly what he wants. Trustee Hartstein stated he did not believe it was the intent of the Board to do anything other than that. Mr. Santoro said that is not what the ordinance reads. Discussion ensued on the legal interpretation of the ordinance. Mr. Shields stated that another possibility which was discussed was to leave those two parcels out of the Business District Development area, and leave them zoned as they are presently zoned. Moved by Hartstein, seconded by Kavitt , to direct the Village Attorney to prepare the ordinance on the B-5 Town Center Planned District in accordance with the suggested additions, deletions, or modifications made this evening, and that particular attention be given to the service station in question in that recommendation. 5614 2/4/80 Mr. Santoro asked that clarification be given regarding the minimum lot area as it relates to Lot 1 and the 2. 1 acres contiguous to Lot 1 . Mr. Knuth stated that he owns 7 and 1/2 acres of land at the north end of the Town Center area. He went over some of the developments which have occurred during the last few years. He has been told that there will be flexibility regarding land use, but under the new ordinance, he is concerned that he is going to be limited to one use under B-5 zoning. He does not feel that residential use is the best use for this property. It was stated that Mr. Knuth made the same presentation before the Plan Commission, and that no definite response was given in that regard. President Clayton stated that it is her understanding that this ordinance will be used as a goal and a guide, and that the Village will be flexible when a developer comes in. Mr. Genrich stated that if Mr. Knuth 's parcel comes in by itself, the plan exhibited indicates the preferred use; however, if Mr. Knuth comes in with a developer and has a good use in mind, it would certainly be considered. Mr. Knuth stated that the wording in the ordinance does not indicate flexibility. Mr. Knuth asked that the record show that he feels the ideal and best use of his property is commercial . Mr. Knuth stated that there have been three different zoning studies made of this area , and in each case, his land has been shown as commercial . Mr. Balling stated that residential has always been a use in the B-3 district, as well as commercial uses. The goals that the BDDC and the Plan Commission have been working on are based on a marketing study and relate to a maximum square footage potential on this site. That has five different land use classifications, residential being one of them. It is felt very strongly that if residential is going to occur, it 's going to occur on the northern portion of the site adjacent to other existing residential areas. Mr. Knuth stated that he feels residential could be placed on other areas of this 80 acres. Mr. Balling stated that the Village would consider any alternative land use, but the plan contained here reflects the best thinking of every advisory commission in the Village. Mr. Genrich stated that the BDDC has been receptive to the people having interest in this property. He said that, as the Center moves along, there will be changes . The BDDC will be glad to work with Mr. Knuth, and they would be reasonable with him. Trustee Hartstein restated his motion for clarification. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES : 6 - Marienthal , Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAYES: 0 - None Motion declared carried. 5615 2/4/80 Trustee O'Reilly explained the two appeals before the Board COMMONS this evening. Mr. Shassian explained the process of events leading to the present dilemma. Mr. Shassian stated that, at an early stage in the development, he did state that the colors would be earth tones. The Building Department subsequently ordered him to remove the green roof from the model . Mr. Shassian then asked for another review by the Appearance Commission. He requested �.J that Appearance Commission members visit the site so they could see the actual product. He said that not one of the members had visited the site, and had no idea what the product looked like. Moved by Hartstein, seconded by Gerschefske, that the Appearance Commission be overruled in this regard, and that anyone who wants a green roof in accordance with the rest of the approved package color combinations in the Commons shall be allowed to have a green roof. Trustee O'Reilly stated that she did not like to overrule the Appearance Commission, but that she would in this instance. Mr. Balling stated that perhaps some direction should be given to the Appearance Commission with regard to flexibility. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES: 6 - Marienthal , Stone, O 'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAPES : 0 - None Motion declared carried. Trustee O'Reilly moved to make the general policy of the Village Board to advise the Appearance Commission that the Village Board wishes greater flexibility with regard to color packages. There was no second to the motion. President Clayton stated that many times the Appearance Commissioners are not clear on the desire of the Board. Mr. Shassian stated that there are only a small number of colors available. Moved by O'Reilly, seconded by Hartstein, to overrule the Appearance Commission decision to deny the arrow on the sign on Route 83. Upon roll call , Trustees voted as follows: AYES : 4 - O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske NAPES: 2 - Marienthal , Stone Motion declared carried. i I `� i I I V I _ __ 5616 2/4/80 Moved by Hartstein, seconded by Stone, to adjourn the ADJOURNMENT meeting. Upon voice vote, the motion was unanimously declared carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 P.M. Janet K.4Sirabian, Village Clerk APPROVED BY ME THIS JL DAY OF 1980. � l , Village President