2020-08-05 - Planning and Zoning Commission - Minutes08/5/2020
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, AUGUST 5, 2020
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM by Chairman Frank Cesario
2. Open Meetings Act Compliance
Pursuant to orders issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, this Public Hearing is
closed to in-person, public attendance. The hearing is being held via Zoom web
conference meeting.
Please click the link to join the webinar:
<https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84367840318?pwd=T24xYnpBWjEwMFlJTGNLZnF5UmFpd
z09> or call in US: 13126266799,,84367840318. Password: 529814
Public Hearings/Items For Consideration
1. Consider a Variation to the Fence Code to Install an Ornamental Fence Which Requires
a Variation to the Required Permissible Gap Between Segments of an Ornamental Fence
at 1389 Radcliffe Road. (Trustee Johnson) (Staff Contact: Nicole Woods)
Petitioner Maria Wagener at 1389 Radcliffe Rd described the petition to install an
ornamental fence which requires a variation for a minimum permissible gap between the
ornamental fence sections.
Com Goldspiel requested clarification on the ornamental fence and the reasoning behind
the 20’ gap.
Village Planner, Rati Akash, gave an explanation of the ornamental fence Code which
relates to this case in particular.
Com Goldspiel then requested the definition of the ornamental fence.
Village Planner, Rati Akash, stated the definition of the Code being an open style fence
up to 4’ in height, with only 18 feet sections which must be 20 feet apart.
Com Au gave everyone some historical context of when the ornamental fence Code was
adopted where a continuous fence in the corner yard did not serve the purpose of
decorative fencing.
Com Weinstein asked the petitioner about how she would achieve privacy for this fence?
Also, if the Petitioner were to put a continuous fence around the yard it would be
inconsistent with the intent of the proposed fence?
Petitioner Maria Wagener clarified that the proposed fence was more for enhancing the
existing landscaping. The Petitioner agreed the continuous fence would not be
aesthetically pleasing, and hence only the corners have enhanced.
Com Moodhe requested the height of the landscaping and expressed concerns about line
of sight at the curb along both Radcliffe Road and Lehigh Lane.
Petitioner Maria Wagener described the landscaping which would be proposed.
08/5/2020
Deputy Director of Community Development, Nicole Woods said that the fence does not
cause any line of sight issues. If any issues with landscaping arises, we would work
directly with the Petitioner.
Com Au asked whether the image in the Staff report was representative of the proposed
fence, and asked if the Petitioner had reduced the sections 9 foot sections that it would
have met Code.
Village Planner Rati Akash mentioned the image is representative of the fence, and
confirmed that if the proposed sections were 9 foot it would not have required a
variance.
Chairperson Cesario asked if the Neighbors raised any concerns about the proposed
fence.
Village Planner Rati Akash mentioned a lot of calls were received however no concerns
were raised.
Com Khan asked whether the chain link on the Neighbor’s property will remain. Also,
that the fence is being proposed near south property line on the utility easements.
Petitioner Maria Wagener mentioned that the chain link will be removed.
Village Planner, Rati Akash mentioned that that the 5 foot fence near the south property
line will be looked into by Staff. The ornamental fence will not be an issue on the
proposed locations.
Com Goldspiel requested clarification on the ornamental fencing in front yard.
Chairperson Cesario and Village Planner, Rati Akash clarified the definition of the
ornamental fencing in context with the front yard.
Com. Weinstein made a motion to grant a variation to Section 15.20 of the Buffalo
Grove Fence Code to allow 6 ornamental fences each of 18’ in linear length paired
together, these 3 ornamental fence pairs will have no gap between them with at least
1.5’ from the property line along Lehigh Lane and Radcliffe Road Thompson provided the
fence shall be installed in accordance with the documents and plans submitted as part of
this petition provided:
1. The fence shall be installed in accordance with the documents and plans submitted as
part of this petition.
Com Richards seconded the motion
Petitioner Maria Wagener mentioned she is proud of the landscaping.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
AYES: Moodhe, Spunt, Cesario, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein, Au, Richards,
Worlikar
2. Consider a Variation to the Fence Code to Replace an Existing Fence with a 5 Foot Open
Fence, Which Encroaches into Corner Side Yard Setback at 160 Copperwood Drive.
(Trustee Weidenfeld) (Staff Contact: Nicole Woods)
Petitioner Max Tolsky at 160 Copperwood Drive described the petition to replace an
existing 4 foot open wooden fence with a 5 foot open aluminum fence for the safety for
his kids and his dog.
08/5/2020
Com Richards wanted clarification that the fence was only a replacement of the fence in
the same location.
Max Tolsky clarified that this was replacement of a fence in the exact same location.
Trustee Johnson mentioned that she would miss the temporary rainbow fence, and she
supports the Petitioners request.
Com Weinstein made a motion to grant a variation to Section 15.20 of the Buffalo Grove
Fence Code to allow a 5 foot open fence which would encroach 9 feet into the corner
yard setback along Thompson provided the fence shall be installed in accordance with
the documents and plans submitted as part of this petition.
Com Worlikar seconded the motion.
Com. Moodhe mentioned that this fence replacement will an improvement to the
neighborhood.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
AYES: Moodhe, Spunt, Cesario, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein, Au, Richards,
Worlikar
3. Consider a Variation to the Fence Code to Replace an Existing Fence with a 6 Foot Solid
Fence Installed in the Rear Yard at 634 Buckthorn Terrace. (Trustee Johnson) (Staff
Contact: Nicole Woods)
Petitioner Steve Johnson at 634 Buckthorn terrace described the petition to install a 6
foot tall privacy fence in the rear yard.
Com Weinstein asked whether any concerns were raised from the neighbors for the
proposed variation. Also, whether the 6 foot solid fence encloses the rear yard.
Petitioner Steve Johnson mentioned that both the neighbors on the north and south of
the subject property are supportive of the proposed.
Village Planner, Rati Akash stated that Staff received one call however no concerns were
raised, and confirmed that the 6 foot solid fence encloses the rear yard.
Com. Goldspiel wanted to know how wide the side yards were.
Petitioner Steve Johnson mentioned that the side yard setback were 10 feet from the
property line.
Com. Au asked whether there are any other variations apart from the variation for the
height of this 6 foot solid fence.
Village Planner, Rati Akash confirmed that there are no other variances apart from the
variation to the height for the 6 foot solid fence.
Com. Moodhe wanted to clarification about the location of the gate and the Neighbors
fence section on the south.
Petitioner Steve Johnson and Susan Johnson mentioned that there will no issues with
Neighbors fence on the south which 5 foot tall fence.
Com. Weinstein wanted clarification whether the Neighbors house on the south had a
fence. Also, he mentioned the Neighbors house is located on a higher grade, and hence
the proposed 6’ solid fence acts to their benefit.
08/5/2020
Com. Worlikar asked whether a partially open fence on the top is considered an open
style.
Village Planner, Rati Akash mentioned that open fences must be open in style from the
above the grade level.
Deputy Director Community Development, Nicole Woods mentioned that it is great to
hear all the commissioners’ comments as Staff begins to amend the Fence Code
Com Au asked whether the fence posts heights can exceed 6 foot height.
Village Planner, Rati Akash stated that the fence posts can exceed the 6 foot height as
per the Code.
Com. Spunt had a question on Page 36 whether there must be a gate on both sides of
the house.
Village Planner, Rati Akash mentioned that there is no requirement as part of the Code
that states that the gate needs to be located on both sides of the house.
Com Weinstein made a motion to grant a variation to Section 15.20 of the Buffalo Grove
Fence Code to allow a proposed 6 foot solid fence in the rear yard provided the fence
shall be installed in accordance with the documents and plans submitted as part of this
petition.
Com Moodhe seconded the motion
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
AYES: Moodhe, Spunt, Cesario, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein, Au, Richards,
Worlikar
Regular Meeting
Other Matters for Discussion
Approval of Minutes
1. Planning and Zoning Commission - Rescheduled Regular Meeting - Jun 24, 2020
7:30 PM
RESULT: ACCEPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
AYES: Moodhe, Spunt, Cesario, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein, Au,
Richards, Worlikar
Chairman's Report
Committee and Liaison Reports
The approved Village Board approved the TIF District.
Kensington Developers have also acquired town center for redevelopment.
Staff Report/Future Agenda Schedule
08/5/2020
Deputy Community Development Director talked about the items on the agenda for the next
meeting as well as an update on the Fence Code amendment.
Public Comments and Questions
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 AM
Chris Stilling
APPROVED BY ME THIS 5th DAY OF August , 2020