2020-03-04 - Planning and Zoning Commission - Agenda Packet
Meeting of the Village of Buffalo Grove
Planning and Zoning Commission
Regular Meeting
March 4, 2020 at 12:00 AM
Fifty Raupp Blvd
Buffalo Grove, IL 60089-2100
Phone: 847-459-2500
I. Call to Order
II. Public Hearings/Items For Consideration
1. Consider a Variation to Allow a Fence Encroach into the Corner Yard Setback at 785
Vernon Court South (Trustee Weidenfeld) (Staff Contact: Nicole Woods)
2. Consider Variations to Allow a Fence Encroach into the Corner Yard Setback & Exceed a
Maximum Height at 301 Ronnie Drive (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 - Feb 19, 2020 12:00 AM
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.
V. Action Items
The Village of Buffalo Grove, in compliance with the Americans with D isabilities 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.
Updated: 2/28/2020 2:16 PM Page 1
Action Item : Consider a Variation to Allow a Fence Encroach into
the Corner Yard Setback at 785 Vernon Court South
Recommendation of Action
Staff recommends approval, subject to the conditions in the attached staff report.
The Petitioner resides at 785 Vernon Court South and is proposing to install a 5 foot board-on-board
fence that will be setback 10 feet from the property line. As this location encroaches 20 feet into the
corner yard setback, a variation is required.
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report (DOCX)
Plan Set (PDF)
Trustee Liaison Staff Contact
Weidenfeld Nicole Woods, Community Development
Wednesday, March 4, 2020
2.1
Packet Pg. 2
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: March 4, 2020
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 785 Vernon Ct S
PETITIONER: Rob and Laura Bailey
PREPARED BY: Rati Akash, Village Planner
REQUEST: Variation to the Fence Code, Section 15.20, pertaining to
Residential Districts for a proposed 5 foot board-on-board fence
which would encroach into the corner yard setback along Vernon
Lane.
EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is improved with a single-family home currently
zoned R4.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The approved Village Comprehensive Plan calls for this property
and the immediate neighborhood to be single family detached.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The Petitioner is proposing to install a 5 foot
board-on-board (Shadow box) fence, which
encroaches into the corner yard setback along
Vernon Lane which requires a variation.
The proposed 5 foot board-on-board fence
turns and runs along the North property line,
and turns again and runs along the East property
line. This 5 foot board-on-board fence in these
locations meet Code.
The Neighbor on the East (795 Vernon Ct S) has
an existing 5 foot separating their property and
the subject property. This open fence is marked
in yellow in Image A.
Image A
2.1.a
Packet Pg. 3
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
.
)
PLANNING & ZONING ANALYSIS
The Petitioner is proposing to install a 5 foot board-on-board fence, which encroaches 20 feet into
the corner yard setback and will be setback 10 feet from the property line. The fence in the corner
yard turns to meet the building parallel to Vernon Ct.
Variations requested
A corner side yard variation from Section 15.20.040.B from the Buffalo Grove fence code states that
Fences may be erected placed and maintained on corner lots to a height not to exceed six feet above
ground level. No such fence shall be located nearer to any street than the building setback line.
The following is a list of recently approved setback variations for corner side yard fences:
Address Fence Height/Type Setback from property line
302 Ronnie Dr 5’ board on board 4’ from the property line
2044 Jordon Ter 3’ dog-ear fence 0” from the property line
1271 Radcliffe 4’ chain-link (open) 1.5’ from the property line
2123 Sheridan 5’ wrought-iron (open) 2’ from the property line
741 Silver Rock 5’ chain link (open) 4’ from the property line
1239 Devonshire 5’ board on board 4’ from the property line
1295 Euclid Ave 5’ board on board 4’ from the property line
DEPARTMENTAL REVIEWS
Village Department Comments
Engineering The Village Engineer has reviewed the proposed fence location and
does not have any engineering or line of sight concerns or objections
with the proposed location of this fence.
SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS
Pursuant to Village Code, the contiguous property owners were notified and a public hearing sign was
posted on the subject property. The posting of the public hearing sign and the mailed notifications were
completed within the prescribed timeframe as required. As of the date of this Staff Report, the Village has
received no calls inquiring about the proposed fence variation.
STANDARDS
The Planning & Zoning Commission is authorized to grant variations of the Fence Code based on the
following criteria:
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,
4. The proposed variation will not be detrimental to the public health safety and welfare.
2.1.a
Packet Pg. 4
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
.
)
The petitioner has provided a written response to the standards for a variation which are included in
this packet.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Village staff recommends approval for this variation to install a 5 foot board-on-board fence setback 10
feet from the property line along Vernon Lane:
1) The fence shall be installed in accordance with the documents and plans submitted as part of this
petition.
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.
Suggested PZC Motion
PZC moves to grant a variation to Section 15.20 of the Buffalo Grove Fence Code to allow a proposed 5
foot board-on-board fence which would encroach 20 feet into the corner yard setback along Vernon Lane
provided the fence shall be installed in accordance with the documents and plans submitted as part of this
petition.
2.1.a
Packet Pg. 5
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
.
)
Robert and Laura Bailey
785 Vernon Court S.
Buffalo Grove, IL 60089
Tuesday, January 28, 2020
To whom it may concern at Planning and Zoning Commission for the Village of Buffalo Grove,
Our family is writing to you to request a fencing variance, for our current property of 785
Vernon Court South.
Our family consists of three young children: one 4-year old daughter, as well as two 20-month
old twins. In addition, we have two dogs. We recently purchased this home in December, and
are excited to make this our family’s “Forever Home”.
Our current house sits on a corner lot, near the entrance to Windsor Ridge subdivision (our
house just off the Dundee Road entrance). Unfortunately, the street can get quite busy, with
fast moving traffic, which poses a safety concern for our children.
We are requesting a Fencing Variance, as we would like to put up a 5-foot wood shadow box
fence (see attached plot survey for additional details regarding exact location of fence). With
this fence, we will be able to provide extra safety for our children in the summer months, so
that they can enjoy playing outside in the backyard, without having to worry that they may try
to run out into the street. In addition, it will provide extra privacy for our family.
We hope that you will please consider our request for a fencing variance, as we are both trying
to make our neighborhood look aesthetically pleasing, provide privacy for our family, as well as
provide an extra measure of safety for our children.
Thank you for your consideration.
Robert and Laura Bailey
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 6
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
.
)
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 7
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
.
)
Additional questions for public hearing testimony for 785 Vernon Ct. S Fence Variance Request
1. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances:
We are requesting a Fence Variance, as we would like to be able to extend the fence a bit past
the house, to give our children and dogs a bit more room in the back yard. We are on a corner
lot, to which our house is laid further back. By extending the fence past our house, we will be
able to better utilize our yard space and create more room for our family to play.
In addition, it will up the property value of both our house, as well as our neighbor’s houses.
We previously had over grown / dead trees, which we cut down to make the yard look more
esthetically pleasing. However now, we have a large, empty lot, which actually does not look
nice when neighbors drive buy, especially since we are at the beginning of the subdivision. By
extending the fence past our house and allowing us to maximize our yard space, it will increase
the property value of the house, as people will see a larger yard, as opposed to a small yard.
Finally, as we are next to a very busy street, the fence will also serve as additional safety for our
family.
2. The proposed variation will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
There are already several houses throughout Windsor Ridge, who have fences extended past
there house up to the side walk. When you look at these homes, the extended fences actually
look very nice in the neighborhood, helping to raise the neighborhood value.
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.
There are no hardships / difficulties. We are looking to improve the appearance of our house
and neighborhood.
4. The proposed variation will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare:
No. The fence will actual serve as increased safety for our family, as well as others. We do have
two dogs, and by putting a fence up, people who are playing across the street at the park will
not need to see our dogs outside, as well as the dogs will not get irritated by people playing
across the street at the park.
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 8
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
.
)
5 Foot Wood Shadow Box Fence
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 9
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
.
)
Proposed 5’ shadow box fence
Existing Neighbor’s 5’ open fence
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 10
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
.
)
Updated: 2/28/2020 2:13 PM Page 1
Action Item : Consider Variations to Allow a Fence Encroach into
the Corner Yard Setback & Exceed a Maximum Height at 301 Ronnie
Drive
Recommendation of Action
Staff recommends approval, subject to the conditions in the attached staff report.
The Petitioner resides at 301 Ronnie Drive and has recently installed a 6 foot solid fence in the corner
yard setback along Thompson Boulevard. The fence requires two variations: (1) for encroaching 8 feet
into the 25 foot required corner yard setback and (2) for height, as any fence greater than five (5) feet
must be of an open design.
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report (DOCX)
Plan Set (PDF)
Trustee Liaison Staff Contact
Johnson Nicole Woods, Community Development
Wednesday, March 4, 2020
2.2
Packet Pg. 11
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: March 4, 2020
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 301 Ronnie Drive
PETITIONER: Achila Jayasurya
PREPARED BY: Rati Akash, Village Planner
REQUEST: Variations to the Fence Code, Section 15.20, pertaining to
Residential Districts for an existing 6 foot solid fence which:
1. Encroaches into the corner yard setback along Thompson
Boulevard;
2. Exceeds the maximum height for a solid fence in the corner
yard setback along Thompson Boulevard.
EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is improved with a single-family home currently
zoned R5A.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The approved Village Comprehensive Plan calls for this property
and the immediate neighborhood to be single family detached.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The Petitioner has recently installed a 6 foot
solid fence in the corner yard setback along
Thompson Boulevard which requires a
variation for both the encroachment into
the corner yard setback as well as the
maximum allowable height for a solid
fence.
Pursuant to Fence Code any fence greater
than five feet must be of an open design. As
the Petitioner has installed a solid fence
greater than five feet, a variation is
required.
The 6 foot solid fence that has been
installed on the East property line along
Buffalo Grove Road is permitted, as this
fence abuts a major arterial road. Pursuant
to the Fence Code solid fences can be Image A
2.2.a
Packet Pg. 12
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
installed along major streets and highways not to exceed 6 feet.
There is an existing 6 foot scalloped open fence separating the subject property with the neighbor at 305
Ronnie Drive on the South property line which is owned and maintained by the Petitioner as marked in
blue in Image A.
PLANNING & ZONING ANALYSIS
The Petitioner has installed a 6 foot solid fence which encroaches 8 feet into the required 25 foot
corner yard setback along Thompson Boulevard, and on the East property line along Buffalo Grove
Road.
The proposed 6 foot solid fence along Thompson Boulevard requires two variations, (1) for
encroaching into corner yard setback which is setback approximately 17’ from the property line on
the North; and (2) for height, as per Fence Code any fence greater than five (5) feet must be of an
open design.
Staff supports the unique request for both a 6 foot solid fence as well as the corner yard encroachment
due to the special and unique circumstance at the subject property. The subject property has 3 streets
abutting this site, Ronnie Drive on the West, Thompson Boulevard on the North, and Buffalo Grove
Road on the East which leaves this site with little privacy. Given the high visibility from the various
streets including Buffalo Grove Road at the Northeast corner of the site, Staff finds the request for
both variations reasonable.
Variations requested
1. A corner side yard variation from Section 15.20.040.B from the Buffalo Grove fence code states
that Fences may be erected placed and maintained on corner lots to a height not to exceed six feet
above ground level. No such fence shall be located nearer to any street than the building setback
line.
2. A fence height variation from Section 15.20.090.C from the Buffalo Grove fence code states that
fencing material that is over five feet in height shall be of a design that is open so as to allow
visibility.
The following is a list of recently approved setback variations for corner side yard fences:
Address Fence Height/Type Setback from property line
302 Ronnie Dr 5’ board on board 4’ from the property line
2044 Jordon Ter 3’ dog-ear fence 0” from the property line
1271 Radcliffe 4’ chain-link (open) 1.5’ from the property line
2123 Sheridan 5’ wrought-iron (open) 2’ from the property line
741 Silver Rock 5’ chain link (open) 4’ from the property line
1239 Devonshire 5’ board on board 4’ from the property line
1295 Euclid Ave 5’ board on board 4’ from the property line
2.2.a
Packet Pg. 13
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
DEPARTMENTAL REVIEWS
Village Department Comments
Engineering The Village Engineer has reviewed the proposed fence location and
does not have any engineering or line of sight concerns or objections
with the proposed location of this fence.
SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS
Pursuant to Village Code, the contiguous property owners were notified and a public hearing sign was
posted on the subject property. The posting of the public hearing sign and the mailed notifications were
completed within the prescribed timeframe as required. As of the date of this Staff Report, the Village has
received two calls inquiring about the proposed fence variation, however no objections were expressed.
STANDARDS
The Planning & Zoning Commission is authorized to grant variations of the Fence Code based on the
following criteria:
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,
4. The proposed variation will not be detrimental to the public health safety and welfare.
The petitioner has provided a written response to the standards for a variation which are included in
this packet.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Village staff recommends approval for the variation for an existing 6 foot solid fence which is setback 17
feet from the property line along Thompson Boulevard as shown in the drawings submitted to the Village.
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.
Suggested PZC Motion
1) PZC moves to grant a variation to Section 15.20 of the Buffalo Grove Fence Code to allow a
proposed 6 foot solid fence which would encroach 8 feet into the corner yard setback along
Thompson Boulevard as shown in the drawings submitted to the Village.
2.2.a
Packet Pg. 14
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 15
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 16
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 17
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 18
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 19
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 20
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 21
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 22
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 23
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
5’ open fence
6’ solid fence
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 24
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
a
F
e
n
c
e
E
n
c
r
o
a
c
h
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
r
n
e
r
Y
a
r
d
S
e
t
b
a
c
k
&
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
H
e
i
g
h
t
)
02/19/2020
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, FEBRUARY 19, 2020
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM by Chairman Frank Cesario
Public Hearings/Items For Consideration
1. Petition to the Village of Buffalo for a Variation to Section 17.32.030 of the Zoning
Ordinance to Increase the Maximum Allowed Height of an Accessory Structure (New
Gazebo) Located Within the Green Lake Park Development at Northeast Corner of
Green Knolls Drive and Deerfield Parkway. (Trustee Stein) (Staff Contact: Nicole
Woods)
Petitioners Reisinger and Howe were swron in.
Executive Director Reisinger described the proposal for a proposed gazebo located within
the Green Lake Park at the Northwest corner of Green Knolls Drive and Deerfield
Parkway. The accessory structure occupies approximately 1,143 square feet in area with
an approximately 24’-5” in overall height, which exceeds the maximum height by 9’-7”.
The gazebo is setback over 250’ from the nearest resident on both sides.
Chairperson Cesario asked if it was similar to other structures in another park.
Staff responded yes and there have been no complaints.
Com. Goldspiel asked if there will be a light system intended for the proposed gazebo.
The petitioners responded yes. There will be one security light inside the gazebo at the
top which will shine down beginning at 10:00 PM.
Com. Goldspiel asked if the light would spillover on to the neighboring residential area.
The petitioners responded no. The closest residence is over 250 feet on each side.
Com. Goldspiel asked if there were any plans for more structures.
The petitioners responded no.
Com. Goldspiel asked why they wanted the gazebo to be so large.
The petitioners responded that the public has been looking for a gazebo of that size in
that particular popular park. They believe the proposed size will accommodate rentals,
something else the public has been requesting.
The petitioners added that they held several public hearings of their own regarding the
gazebo. The public was happy to hear of the structure. Additionally, the structure will not
stick out like it doesn’t belong, given the mature trees situated around it.
Com. Goldspiel asked if there would be any additional play areas added near the gazebo.
The petitioners responded no. There will also be no changes to the current play areas in
Green Lake Park.
Com. Goldspiel asked if there would be adequate parking to accommodate the proposed
gazebo.
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 25
Mi
n
u
t
e
s
A
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
:
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
o
f
F
e
b
1
9
,
2
0
2
0
1
2
:
0
0
A
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
02/19/2020
The petitioner responded yes, they believe there is adequate parking.
Com. Goldspiel asked if there will be additional seating.
The petitioners responded yes.
Com. Richards asked if the zoning needed to be addressed for the gazebo.
Staff responded no
Staff responded no. Recreation acts as the primary use and the gazebo acts as the
secondary use, or accessory structure.
Com. Khan asked for a clarification on the variation. He believes the height of the gazebo
is not that big of an issue and will add value to the park.
Com. Worlikar asked if there were any concerns during the public hearing the Park
District held regarding the gazebo and the new view the residents will have.
The petitioners responded no, the opposite, they were all in support of the structure.
They had about a dozen show for the hearing and none shared concern, but suggestions
which they have tried to incorporate into the final plans.
Com. Au asked if the playground was included in the rental of the gazebo.
The petitioners responded no.
Com. Moodhe asked what the distance is from the gazebo to the lot line.
The petitioners responded 50 feet as an estimate. Additionally, the gazebo sits at the
highest point and they are not concerned about flooding.
Com. Moodhe asked if they would be losing any trees.
The petitioners responded no. They will actually be adding a few new trees.
Com. Moodhe asked if there were any plans to restock Green Lake.
The petitioners responded that they always do. Every year.
Com. Goldspiel asked if those renting the gazebo would have access to the restroom
facilities inside the fitness center.
The petitioners responded no. Occasionally they make exceptions for emergencies and
could potential allow if it was discussed in advance of renting out the gazebo.
Com. Goldspiel asked if there baseball fields at Green Lake Park.
The petitioners responded no.
Com. Goldspiel asked what kind of lightning protection the gazebo would have.
The petitioners responded that the structure will be grounded.
Chairperson Cesario entered the staff report as exhibit one.
Public Comment
Jim Kupler - 1211 Green Knolls - Asked if the base of the structure would be asphalt and
if the park benches would be portable.
The petitioners responded that the base of the structure will be concrete and the seating
inside the gazebo will be picnic type (moveable).
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 26
Mi
n
u
t
e
s
A
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
:
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
o
f
F
e
b
1
9
,
2
0
2
0
1
2
:
0
0
A
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
02/19/2020
Chairperson Cesario asked the petitioners if they had anything they wanted to add.
The petitioners thank the Commissioners for their support.
The Public Hearing closed at 8:02 PM
Com Khan made a motion to grant a variation to Section 17.32.030 of the Zoning
Ordinance to allow a proposed accessory structure (new gazebo) in the Green Lake Park
at Northeast corner of Green Knolls Drive and Deerfield Parkway to exceed the maximum
height restriction subject to the following conditions:
1) The proposed gazebo shall be installed in accordance with the documents and plans
submitted as part of this petition
Com. Moodhe said that the Park District has always done an excellent job with their
projects and believes that this project will be no different. It will be a welcome addition.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
AYES: Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Au, Richards, Worlikar
ABSENT: Mitchell Weinstein
Regular Meeting
Other Matters for Discussion
Deputy Community Development Director provided an overview of the update planning and
zoning map.
Com. Moodhe asked about the zoning of Chase Bank.
Ms. W oods discussed why they were not making any changes at this time.
1. Information Item : Review the 2020 Zoning Map (Trustee Johnson) (Staff
Contact: Nicole Woods)
Approval of Minutes
1. Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting - Dec 18, 2019 7:30 PM
RESULT: ACCEPTED [UNANIMOUS]
AYES: Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Au, Richards, Worlikar
ABSENT: Mitchell Weinstein
2. Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting - Feb 5, 2020 7:30 PM
RESULT: ACCEPTED [7 TO 0]
AYES: Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Au, Richards
ABSTAIN: Neil Worlikar
ABSENT: Mitchell Weinstein
Chairman's Report
None.
Committee and Liaison Reports
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 27
Mi
n
u
t
e
s
A
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
:
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
o
f
F
e
b
1
9
,
2
0
2
0
1
2
:
0
0
A
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
02/19/2020
Com. Richards reported the approvals at the last Village Board meeting that had been at the PZC
previously.
Staff Report/Future Agenda Schedule
Woods discussed the next meeting.
Public Comments and Questions
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:14 PM
Chris Stilling
APPROVED BY ME THIS 19th DAY OF February , 2020
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 28
Mi
n
u
t
e
s
A
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
:
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
o
f
F
e
b
1
9
,
2
0
2
0
1
2
:
0
0
A
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)