Loading...
1994-02-02 - Plan Commission - Minutes REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION February 2, 1994 Village Zoning Map - Annual Review Zoning Ordinance - Discussion concerning Amendment to Section 17 .28 .030.D - Time Periods for Special Uses Chairman Silbernik called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. in Room 24, Buffalo Grove Park District Alcott Center, 530 Bernard Drive, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Commissioners present: Chairman Silbernik Mr. Krug Mr. Rhodes Ms. Howard Mr. Rosenston Mr. Samuels Ms. Genell Commissioners absent: Mr. Goldspiel Mr. Berman Also present: William Raysa, Village Attorney Robert Pfeil, Village Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner Howard to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 19, 1994. Commissioner Krug noted that on page 15 the discussion of the Manchester Greens plat of resubdivision needs to be revised to describe what is meant by the "dark" boxes - these areas are lots or units, and this should be clarified. All Commissioners were in favor of the motion as amended, and the motion passed unanimously, with Chairman Silbernik abstaining. COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS - None VILLAGE ZONING MAP - ANNUAL REVIEW Mr. Pfeil reviewed the changes that have been made since the previous map was approved in March of 1993. He noted that annexations included the Indian Creek subdivision, the Rolling Hills subdivision, Concord Glen, the District 102 Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-February 2, 1994-Page 1 middle school site and the Speedway service station on Milwaukee Avenue. Chairman Silbernik asked for a motion to approve the map. Moved by Commissioner Samuels, seconded by Commissioner Krug, to recommend approval of the revised Zoning Map dated January 28, 1994. Chairman Silbernik called for a vote on the motion, and the vote was as follows: AYES: Krug, Rhodes, Howard, Rosenston, Samuels, Genell and Silbernik NAYES: None ABSENT: Goldspiel, Berman ABSTAIN: None The motion passed 7 to 0. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - Section 17 .28 .030 .D, SPECIAL USE TIME LIMITS Mr. Raysa noted that the Plan Commission had held a public hearing on this matter on July 15, 1992 and recommended language that a special use will be revoked automatically if the use has not been established within two years of the original approval or has been discontinued for one year if the petitioner does not request an extension. He said that staff is concerned with the automatic revocation provision, and has drafted an ordinance dated December 6, 1994 that stipulates a special use "may" be revoked unless other provisions are made by the Corporate Authorities. He indicated that the Plan Commission does not need to hold another public hearing concerning this matter because the proposed ordinance is very similar to the language reviewed by the Commission at the original hearing. Commissioner Krug inquired if child day care homes would be covered by the amended language. Mr. Raysa said day care homes would be included, and if a day care home were discontinued for a year, it would need a new hearing for the provider to re-establish the use. Commissioner Samuels stated that he strongly supports the Commission' s original language that uses "shall" revoke as the basic approach to regulating abandoned special uses. Commissioner Rosenston commented that regardless of the "may" or "shall" revoke approach, the staff will need to maintain a Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-February 2, 1994-Page 2 tickler file to track the status of every special use. Chairman Silbernik said it appears to be more fair to petitioners and developers to use the "may" revoke approach. Commissioner Samuels said he thinks it is better to use automatic revocation. He noted that a petitioner or the Village can take action to extend a special use. Commissioner Rosenston commented that he has tried to determine the best approach to this question, and he has decided that "shall" revoke is the preferable language. He noted that this causes a property's zoning to revert to the status quo, and this is the safest approach. Chairman Silbernik asked Mr. Pfeil to comment on the memo dated July 24, 1992 written by staff that expresses concern with administration of special uses if "shall" revoke language is used in the ordinance. Mr. Pfeil said that he thinks the staff will have to be very careful to allow enough lead time to process special uses that have to be extended to prevent revocation. He expressed concern that developers will not act quickly enough to request extensions, and the Village will have to take action to extend the period of special uses that are considered to be important to the Village. He said that the "may" language would alleviate much of the time pressure that will probably occur if uses are automatically revoked unless the developer of Village takes action to extend the period. He noted that essentially, the Village Board will be asked to approve some special uses more than once - the original approval, and then subsequent re-approvals if extensions are needed. This seems somewhat cumbersome, especially for projects that the Village wants to encourage. He noted that delays in establishing a use are usually related to economic and marketing factors. Commissioner Samuels noted that the extensions could be put on the Village Board's consent agenda, so the Board won't have to spend much time in extending special uses that the Village wants to encourage. Chairman Silbernik expressed concern that the "shall" language may make the Village less attractive to developers, and the Village could lose out on some good development opportunities. Commissioner Samuels commented that it is important to consider the changing character of areas in the Village over time. If a use is approved, and then a long period passes before the actual development is started, the use may no longer be the highest and best use for that particular site. Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-February 2, 1994-Page 3 Chairman Silbernik asked for a polling of the Commissioners to determine if there is a clear consensus of the "may" or "shall" revoke approaches to regulating the periods of special uses. The polling indicated that Commissioners Krug, Rhodes, Howard, Rosenston, Samuels and Genell favored the "shall" revoke language. Commissioner Samuels made a motion to recommend to the Village Board an amendment of Section 17.28.030 .D. of the Zoning Ordinance as delineated in the draft ordinance dated December 6, 1993 with the revision that the text " . . .the Corporate Authorities may revoke the special use unless other provisions are made by the Corporate Authorities. " be changed to " . . .the special use shall be deemed to be revoked unless an extension is granted. . . " Chairman Silbernik called for a vote on the motion and the vote was as follows: AYES: Krug, Rhodes, Howard, Rosenston, Samuels, Genell NAYES: Silbernik ABSENT: Goldspiel, Berman ABSTAIN: None The motion passed 6 to 1. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT - None FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE Mr. Pfeil said that the next meeting would be the regular meeting on February 16, 1994. Items on this agenda include a public hearing on the Prairie Grove subdivision, a workshop for proposed townhomes on Park View Terrace, and a workshop for a proposed office/industrial building on the east side of Weiland Road at Thompson Boulevard. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND OUESTIONS - None STAFF REPORT - None NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Krug asked staff to check on the signage that was supposed to be installed on the Speedway service station site to regulate turning movements onto Milwaukee Avenue. The Commission asked Mr. Raysa for information concerning the annexation of the Billick's Acres and Quill property south of Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-February 2, 1994-Page 4 Route 22 near the Wisconsin Central Railroad tracks. Mr. Raysa indicated that a petition has been filed with the circuit court of Lake County by a majority of property owners and electors as required by statute for this type of annexation. He said that the court will have a hearing on February 14th to review the petition and give any objectors with standing an opportunity to comment on the petition. He noted that Buffalo Grove has filed a motion to intervene on behalf of the petitioners. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner Genell, and carried unanimously to adjourn. Chairman Silbernik adjourned the meeting a 8:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, kd--(--bot Robert E. Pfeil, Village Planner APPROV D MARTIN SILBERNIK, Chairman Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-February 2, 1994-Page 5