Loading...
1971-07-07 - Plan Commission - Minutes • MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE HELD ON JULY 7 , 1971 The regular meeting of the Buffalo Grove Plan Commission was called to order by the Chairman, Mr. Merrill Hoyt, at 10 :00 PM, July 7 , 1971, following a Public Hearing. Members present : Chairman Hoyt, Messrs . Berth, Genrich, Guidotti , Haarr, Gamm, Fader, Yost and Mrs . Spence. Members absent: Messrs. Margolin and Mendenhall . Chairman Hoyt suggested 'the agenda be varied to •take up as first order of business a decision on annexation of Stenholm property. Mr. Yost questioned the 10 ft. public utilities ease- ment running through the Stenholm property. Mr. Sabin declared that there are no public utilities in the easement , having been vacated by the Edison and Telephone Companies and that a copy of a Petition to that effect had been received in his office . The Chairman requested a photostat of such Petition, and Mr. Sabin assured Plan Commission that the original had been filed. Mr . Genrich suggested that if the annexation were to be approved at this particular meeting, the Plan Commission and Village Board should do everything possible to promote development of this property in connection with that of adjoining property owners , thereby resulting in development on a larger scale. , A motion was then made that Plan Commission recommends the Village Board approve the adoption of a Statement of Policy, encouraging all adjacent property owners and developers to join together in creating the development of parcels of property on ' a larger scale . • Results of roll call vote . as follows : • • July 7 , 1971 Page 2 . Mr. Genrich ) Mr. Guidotti ) • Mr. Haarr ) Mr. Gamm ) Mrs . Spence ) YES Mr. Yost - NO, -Mr. Fader ) �./ Mr. Berth ) Mr. Hoyt ) 4r. Motion carried 8 to 1 , and Mr. Genrich was asked to prepare a Statement of Policyfor all future annexations . P Mr. Haarr made a motion that Plan Commission recommends the Village Board approve the request for annexation and B-1 Zoning, as amended by the Petitioner, to delete the request for a Variance on the eastern boundary and to covenant to maintain a green area of 20 ft. across the southern portion of the property. Motion seconded, carried 1. unanimously. • . Mr. Genrich asked if .a 20 ft. rear yard was adequate , suggesting it could possibly be more. Mr. Guidotti stated i that a 20 ft. rear yard is what Ordinance actually calls • for. Mr. Yost called attention to his suggestion made during previous public hearing meeting, asking for the restriction . • of a 30 ft. sideyard requirement rather than being tied down to 20 ft. because of houses in the area having a 100 ft. frontage. Mr. Haarr pointed out that presently the sideyard is merely being referred to as such because building plans as yet have not been provided. Mr. Genrich suggested that Plan Commissioners consider the more valuable portion of property facing Dundee Rd. , being mindful that in the back area there is a tendency to encroach upon residential area, while the valuable Dundee Rd. frontage should be used to its best advantage , and further questioned the possibility of doing away with the 10 ft. side set-back requirement on, Dundee Rd. Mr. Fader suggested leaving the figure open until further plans indicating how area will be developed have been provided. The Chairman voiced reluctance to suggest an amendment to this effect, . not realizing what legal effect it would have. With reference to motion made earlier by Mr. Haarr • July 7 , 1971 Page 3. regarding Plan Commission's request for annexation and B-i Zoning, Mr. Haarr agreed to change the motion to include , "a minimum of 20 ft. green area, to be maintained at the southern portion of the property. " Recall vote on motion as amended: Mr. Guidotti ) Mr. Haarr ) __YES Mr. Genrich ) // i3s"Tfii/j/ Mrs. Spence ) Mr. Fader ) ---NO Mr. Gamm ) ___�T Mr. Yost ) Mr . Hoyt. ) Mr . Berth ) Motion carried, 4 to 3. Mr. Berth questioned the voting results , referring to Section 3, Article IV of BY-LAWS regarding majority of votes . Chairman Hoyt pointed out that "Absent" does not constitute a vote cast and again stated that motion carried, 4 to 3 . Since this was a major issue, the three people who voted "No", were asked to get together and prepare a draft indicating their reasons for voting "No." Old Business : Mr. Guidotti noted an error in typing final copy of • • Planned Development Ordinance, in which a paragraph intended for deletion had been included. It was suggested that final. corrections be deferred, pending outcome of review by the Village Board of such Ordinance. Communications and Bills : Consideration was given to final plans of the movie theater , Mr. Haarr having presented Site Plans to Mr. Bill Dettmer along with a list requesting the following items : (1) Location of loading berth,, (2) Slide south parking spaces to get 12 ft. at west end of them, (3) Names of owners and certification by a licensed surveyor, (4) Four permanent concrete monuments on the south boundary corners , (5) Other corners - iron pipes and (6) Room for approval of Plan Commission and Village Board. Site Plans , along with changes requested above, to be returned to Mr. Haarr. A motion was made by Mr. Hoyt that Plan Commission recommends the Village Board approve a Plat of Dedication of a piece of road VØfl Buffalo Grove Rd. just east of the , July 7, 1971• Page 4. • Ranch Mart property (said Plat having been approved by the Village Attorney with assurance that it is in accordance with all Ordinances) . Motion seconded by Mr. Haarr, carried unanimously. Reports of Officers and Committees : - None. New Business : es47; Comm' sioners were asked to//consider a request for re-zoning fl an automobile se -L= ti^n , located at the • • corner of Arlington Heights Rd. and Dundee Rd. , currently zoned under B-3 to be re-zoned under B-4 . Area covers ' approximately 403 ft. by 820 ft. ' Mr. Berth referred Commissioners to Section 4 . 1-1d, pp. 89 and 90 of BUFFALO GROVE ZONING ORDINANCE and questioned the necessity of re-zoning under B-4 when property is already B-3 planned, adding that he was not opposed to re-zoning but felt that Commission would have more control over B-3 Zoning than B-4 . It was determined that B-3 Zoning was more restrictive overall ; however, Mr. Haarr pointed out that B-4 contains stiicter yard requirements . A motion was made to refer the problem to Mr. Raysa, with special emphasis on the possibility of retaining the auto- mobile Service Station under B-3 Zoning rather than re- zoning under B-4 . Motion seconded, carried unanimously. A motion was made by Mr. Hoyt that Plan Commission recommends the Village Board approve a request for $500 . 00 for the use and obtaining the services of a secretary, and an additional $500 .00 to be used for setting up a fund, covering payment of fees for various seminars , etc. , which would enable Plan Commissioners to better serve the Village of Buffalo Grove. Motion seconded by Mr. Haarr, carried unanimously. Motion was made by Mr. Berth that Plan Commission recommends the Village Board reappoint Mrs . Betty Spence to the Plan Commission for a term of one year. Motion seconded by Mr. Genrich, carried unanimously. 4 July 7 , 1971 Page S . Adjournment: • Mr. Yost made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Guidotti. The motion carried and the Plan Commission adjourned at 11 :00 PM. Respectfully submitted, • R o ding ec ary Approved: • Merrill Hoyt, airman • • ' -7.--'17----TP-xs .>i.,. . TI...------r.ri- -7..."=,:i-' ...' ''''..,.'' lw.„41:,„ 't.4,--' ":'' --r:4- '7:— '''': - .4,`-- A": : ..., '-° '''rst*-''Y-'• .;- — r-— e2,....'"'. •: . , ' "''' .. i......f. ,7,7-,;'.-,-,,,,,,-,-,,,,,.. .,... .,-..•,•. .„:•:-.'+710= .e.,1,a".4,•:---....;,,,;4.•, .`,..-,,"— - --` .• , . . '',7.-' tr. IP,`.. , s-i'''''+;:.+'47,,!r.'t'.:, . . - me , 4- .;.,C.._ : , ., :: ''',...- ,..".3i: , 1 •t.1,,,-ir 4 ' Y :, ` ..- -• -, '''-- ---..,. V,-It-.--4-k-t-- : --.- , ,-.- - - i--.14-7:---0-f-- .,- .".-- . - ,,--,- k*1*--- VIT.:MIA:- a." M OP-11--,:* ---- - t's v-' lEITIP-197.A.L0 GaR,CYNTM- ; 40-9,ty , - , 1 ...I ... - PUBLIC HEARING - Stenholm Pro?erty - Petition for Annexation and ' . Request for B-1 Business Zoning' - July 7 , 1971 , -. .. Chairman Hoyt called the meet to order at 8 : 30 PM in the Village Hall of Buffalo Grove , 50 Rail') Blvd . . 1. Commissioners Present : Mr . H3yt , Chairman Mr . Gamm - 4 Mr . Genrich Mrs . Spence Mr. Gplidotti Mr. Fader .... Mr . Haarr Mr . Yost f. . Commissioners Absent : Mr. Berth, Mr. Mendenhall , Mr. Margolin . The following documents were tiresented and entered as "Exhibit A" , copies attached hereto : (1) Public Hearing Notice , announcing this , hearing as published in the BJFFALO GROVE HERALD, (2) Certificate V,. of Mailing from Verna Clayton,, Village Clerk of the Village of Buffalo Grove and (3) Certifitate of Publication from Paddock Publi- cations , Inc . 1 Chairman Hoyt asked if petitii;ners were represented . '.. - t Robert J. Sabin, Attorney, 10 0 South Arlington Heights Rd. , Arlington Heights , representi g Mr. & Mrs . Stenholm, petitioners . ,;-- i. \ -..,.. Chairman Hoyt announced that h, Protest , directed to the President and Board of Trustees of the pillage of Buffalo Grove , has been filedjand thereafter suggesteti the following order of procedure : I. (1) Presentation of Petition 'and supporting evidence , (2) Allow Protesters to present their case and supporting evidence and (3) Questions from audience directed to Plan Commission. 1. Sworn in as witnesses were Mr t Robert J . Sabin, Attorney , and Mr . Robert A. Stern , Real Estte Agent . Mr . Sabin testified that a roiliest was made by the !Ward several weeks ago to amend the Petition with regard to sideyard 'requirement . i \wo It was stated that the particular piece of property involved is 122 .44 ft . at the top and 147 ft . at the bottom and is owned by — Mr . and Mrs . Stenholm. A Policy , dated March 23 , 1965 from the -,1 Chicago Title and Trust Company was then submitted to the Board 0 and entered as "Exhibit 1 . " Petitioner asks that this particular piece of property be annexed under B- 1 Zoning . With reference to the 10 ft . ideyard requirement and the allowance 4 ..1 of a 1/3 Variance , a petition was made for annexation of property 4 t; ii ., iL . - I I Public Hearing Meeting .. July 7 , 1971. Page 2 with a 6-2/3 ft . sideyard along 400 ft . of property, running 'from Dundee Rd. to the back of property . - Letters from Mark FI. Beaubi 'n Jr . , Attorney for Mr. Charles Hinze , indicating that Mr. Hinze is in favor of annexation, --and from + Mr . Robert J . Simonson, indicating that he is withdrawing any " opposition to annexation, were presented and entered as "Exhibit 2" and "Exhibit 3 ," respectively. , - Mr. Robert A. Stern, 3504 P um Grove Dr . , Rolling Meadows', a Real Estate Agent of Quinlin and Tysan, testified that he has been in the real estate business eight years and is familiar with the Stenhoim property. Mr . Stern ; advised that in order to obtain best usage of the property, commercial zoning is the only feasible plan at this time , giving consideration to prospective 4-lane highway on Dundee Rd , further stating that the nearest piece of A . commercial property is Dunjo , Shopping Center , located approximately ' 300 ft . away. Chairman Hoyt read aloud the Protest , dated June 10 , 1971 , signed j. by owners of the property described in preface of such Protest . Mr . Haarr questioned the number of property owners as Signators of Protest . He was informed there were 13 owners , involving 7 families . Protesters present were Henry. Hofmann, Ellen Hofmann and Ray Brosi . Mr . Brosio had not signed ttre Protest and stated that he was merely K concerned with the depth allowance of proposed building . If depth t, limitations were nonexistenthe would then request a postponement of decision on annexation to allow for consultation with and presence of his attorney . to Mr. Sabin, addressing Plan Commission and Protesters , suggested k. 4 that some definite conNideration be given to the copy of Dun-Lo- t Highlands Survey. Covxantts referred to in no way say that no commercial building should ,be constructed . In addition, the main face of any building should not be situated along the street line ; fit # petitioners are therefore sking that the 6-2/3 ft . sideyard be ` granted. ' t i. Chairman Hoyt inquired as to when Protest was amended . Mr. Sabin 3� answered , "June 14th . " : fr i Mr . Sabin further answered 'Protesters , pointing out the subdivision • of Lots 71 and 72 according to Zoning Ordinance , also that the property had been owned bySt:enholm ' s for some time . The Protest is inferring that a man may not zone 1 /2 of his property , in which case there should he a rc- zoning of the entire area , that is , all the property owned by Mr . and Mrs . Stenhoim at this time . 1 r 1 Z 4 • Public Hearing Meeting July 7 , 1971 Page 3 Mr. Sabin pointed out that it was one year ago when Mr . Brosio requested of the Board that his property , located 1/2 block from Stenholm property , be re-zoned under B-1 Zoning . Mr . Sabin also stated that petitioners do not agree that the present Zoning Ordinance is reasonable with particular reference to traffic requirements . Mr. Sabin then submitted that from previous hearings and testimony given at present meeting it would be more advantageous to all people involved to have property zoned as B- 1 . Rebuttal by Mr . Brosio followed to the effect that he actually did come in one year ago ; however , with a building depth of 130 ft . t. off Dundee Rd . rather than 400 ft . and, had no intentions of going deeper . He has no objection to commercial zoning on Dundee Rd. so long as there are building depth limitations , thereby providing protection to Protesters from a building development extending deeper into the subdivision . wx Chairman Hoyt asked Mr . Stern to describe property surrounding Stenholm property. k Mr. Stern gave description : North to 300 ft . from Stenholm property : Residential - Dundee Parkway is a separate side street away from Dundee Rd . itself . South : Residential - Mr . Hofmann owns the property and is centiguous to it . East : Residential - Property owned by Messrs . Hinze and Simonson, both parties in favor of annexation and B-i Zoning . Across Betty Drive is property owned by Mr . Mitchell and adjacent to it is Mr. Brosio ' s property. West : Three States Blvd. , bordering Stenholm property , 200 ft . from which is located a Methodist Church , the small area between Three States Blvd . and the Methodist Church being vacant . . Chairman Hoyt asked for location of G . Dahm property . Mr. Stern responded that it is next to property owned by Hofmann' s . Mr . Hoyt requested that one person come to the front and point out property owned by people surrounding the Stenholm property . ti Public Hearing Meeting July 7 , 1971 Page 4 Mr. Brosio volunteered and a discussion followed to determine .', owners on plat . Mr . Hoyt askedMr. Ilofmann to sketch his property. Mr . Genrich, addressing Protesters , asked what their major objection • was . His understanding from Mr ! Brosio 's presentation was that they were not so much against aIcommercial development on Dundee Rd . as to the fact that this development would encroach on their property. He then asked if Protesters would be aggreeable to the development if there was a restriction as to building distance from their property. Mrs . Hofmann stated objection to any commercial development of property involved and pointed of that if a depth of 400 ft . was granted, then Mr. Simonson would be entitled to the same right . Mr. Genrich then questioned Protesters if they would be agreeable if the developer would restrict the use of the property so that they would be required to maintain the landscaping . He then addressed Mrs . Hoffman , asking ;f her major objection was that the development would be too close to her property and suggested the requirement of a restriction such as screening out the develop- ment with a green strip . Mr. Guidotti asked Mr . Sabin if the property would front on `./ Dundee Rd. or on Three States Blvd. Mr. Sabin said there were no present plans . Mr. Guidotti , addressing the Commission, asked how they arrived at the figure of 10 ft . as a sideyard requirement and suggested the assignment of some zoning to the residential property , and whatever was assigned would determine sideyard. Mr. Haarr said that 20 ,000 sq . ft. lots were assigned with the 7 requirement of a 60 ft . frontage . Mrs . Hofmann addressed the Plan Commission, asking if any members had seen the area, adding that She has resided there for 3 years and would not have moved there knowing that residential zoning was not cleared. Mr . Hoyt pointed out that changes in zoning laws are a hazard of existence and that any time one moves close to a street such as Dundee Rd. , which will soon be a 4- lane highway, he takes that chance . Chairman Hoyt asked Mr . Haarr to give the audience some idea of what type of usage B- 1 Zoning allows . Y it s V • Public Hearing Meeting July 7 , 1971 Page 5 fld Mr. Haarr referred to BUFFALO GROVE ZONING ORDINANCE and read aloud Section 2 . 1- 1 , "Retail and Services Uses ," pp. 79 , 80 and 81 of Section 2 , Article XI . Mr. Genrich asked for location of the Simonson property. Mr . Simonson pointed out his property on the Plat , indicating that it was located entirely on Lot 71 . Mr . Haarr, addressing Petitioner , asked for the present address of Lot 1 on the Stenholm property. Mr. Stern testified that Lot 1 is a Dundee Rd. address . Mr. Haarr also asked if at this time Petitioner knows what will be used as frontage on the Stenholm property . Mr . Sabin ' s response was , "No,", with assurance to Plan Commission that he has testified to this under oath. Mr . Genrich , addressing Mr . Sabin , asked if property involved and septic system are on Lot 1 .i He was answered by Mr . Sabin that all are on Lot 1 . Mr . Yost asked Petitioner if the property would be brought into the sewer system. Mr . Sabin replied that it would be brought in, pointing out the need for additional facilities for commercial use , and that the • nearest pipe is located directly across from the Stenholm Property. Mr . Yost asked Mr. Sabin if there would be any objection to a restriction being placed on the' property, specifying that it would be brought into the sewer system. Mr . Sabin stated there would be no objection. Mr . Yost made reference to the rear yard requirement of not less than 30 ft . , that some of the lots were built in accordance with Zoning Ordinance R- 1 - "Residential District ," which contains a requirement of 30 ft . , and suggested the compliance with this requirement on the commercial development property, Mr . Haarr stated that Section 2 . 6-3 of Article XI , page 83 of BUFFALO GROVE ZONING ORDINANCE ,. requires a rear year of 20 ft . In addition, Mr . Haarr , addressing Petitioner and Board , indicated that if consideration is given to Dundee Rd . as frontage of `./ s Y IV Public Hearing Meeting July 7 , 1971 Page 6 property it does not give a clear cut picture of a rear yard con- necting to a side yard . -_: Mr . Sabin pointed out that the 30 ft . area appears to be small when considering 400 ft . , but if taken all the way across the lot line would amount to quite a sizable area . Mr. Yost suggested that the request for a 6-2/3 ft . Variance at this time would be premature . i Mr . Sabin agreed to amend the Petition , eliminating request for a 6-2/3 ft . Variance . • Mr . Haarr , addressing Protester's , asked if they would not be agreeable to a 20 ft . Variance . Mr . Hofmann voiced his objection , anticipating that commercial development would create an obstruction of view in relation to his property. Chairman Hoyt suggested that having received the Protesters ' reaction , the Public Hearing Meeting be called to a close . An announcement was made that following a short recess the regular �./ meeting of the Plan Commission would take place , and an invitation to remain for this meeting was extended to the audience to witness the Plan Commission ' s decision ;on the Stenholm property . Mr. Guidotti made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. I-Iaarr . Motion carried unanimously, and the Public Hearing Meeting of July 7 , 1971 adjourned at 9 : 30 PM. t:esPectfullY submitted, Rec' rding Secre' ary Approved : IC Merrill Hoyt , Chairman i 1 r i ' V ICI � /V