2016-09-21 - Planning and Zoning Commission - Agenda Packet
Meeting of the Village of Buffalo Grove
Planning and Zoning Commission
Regular Meeting
September 21, 2016 at 7:30 PM
Fifty Raupp Blvd
Buffalo Grove, IL 60089-2100
Phone: 847-459-2500
I. Call to Order
II. Public Hearings/Items For Consideration
1. (ID # 1687) Consider Approval of a Variation for a Six Foot (6') Solid Fence at 5
Cambridge Court (Trustee Berman)
2. (ID # 1684) Consider Approval of an Amendment to Ordinance 2015-56 for Sky Fitness
at 1501 Busch Parkway (Trustee Weidenfeld)
3. (ID # 1689) Consider Approval of Amendment to the Existing Annexation Agreement
Ordinance No. 90-55, as Amended by Ordinance No. 2007-55 Requesting Approval for a
Rezoning to B3 Planned Business Center District with a Special Use for a Planned Unit
Development and Approval of a Plat of Subdivision and Preliminary Plan with Multiple
Special Uses and Variations for the 25 Acre Property at the Northwest and Southwest
Corners of Milwaukee Avenue and Deerfield Parkway (Trustee Berman)
III. Regular Meeting
A. Other Matters for Discussion
B. Approval of Minutes
1. Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting - Aug 17, 2016 7:30 PM
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.
The Village of Buffalo Grove, in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities 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: 9/16/2016 1:50 PM Page 1
Ordinance No. : Consider Approval of a Variation for a Six Foot (6')
Solid Fence at 5 Cambridge Court
Recommendation of Action
Staff Recommends Approval
The Petitioner is proposing to install a new six (6) foot vinyl privacy fence. Pursuant to Sectio n
15.20.090.C. of the Village Fence Code, fences greater than five feet (5') shall be of an open design. As a
result, the petitioner is requesting a variation. Additional information can be found in the attached staff
report.
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report (DOCX)
Application for Variation (PDF)
Petitioners Letter (PDF)
Petitioners Responses to Standards (PDF)
Plat of Survey (PDF)
Proposed Fence - Picture (PDF)
Trustee Liaison Staff Contact
Berman Chris Stilling, Community Development
Wednesday, September 21,
2016
2.1
Packet Pg. 2
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: September 21, 2016
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 5 Cambridge Court
PETITIONER: Julie Jacobson and Peter VanderHye
PREPARED BY: Brian Sheehan, Building Commissioner
REQUEST: A variation to install a 6 foot solid fence.
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 is proposing to install a new six (6) foot vinyl privacy fence. Pursuant to Section
15.20.090.C. of the Village Fence Code, fences greater than five feet (5’) shall be of an open design. As a
result, the petitioner is requesting a variation.
PLANNING & ZONING ANALYSIS
As noted, the petitioners are proposing a six (6) foot vinyl privacy fence along their north side
property line and west (rear) property line.
The proposed fence would connect to an
existing six foot (6’) to the southeast
located at 6 Cambridge Court.
The fence at 6 Cambridge Court is also a
vinyl fence, however, that fence does have
openings meeting Village Code.
It should be noted that the property to the
north and east have an existing chain link
fence which will remain. The petitioner’s
new fence would be a couple inches on the
petitioner’s property leaving a small gap
between the petitioner’s new fence and
the existing chain link fence.
Staff has advised the petitioner that they
will be responsible for maintenance of this
area.
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
(
1
6
8
7
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
a
S
i
x
F
o
o
t
(
6
'
)
S
o
l
i
d
F
e
n
c
e
a
t
5
C
a
m
b
r
i
d
g
e
C
o
u
r
t
)
DEPARTMENTAL REVIEWS
Village Department Comments
Engineering The Village Engineer has no comments or objections with the proposed
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, no comments
have been received from the public concerning this project.
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 responses to the standards for a variation which are included as an
attachment with this report.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the variation, provided that the petitioner properly maintains the area
between the existing chain-link fence and their proposed new fence.
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.
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
(
1
6
8
7
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
a
S
i
x
F
o
o
t
(
6
'
)
S
o
l
i
d
F
e
n
c
e
a
t
5
C
a
m
b
r
i
d
g
e
C
o
u
r
t
)
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 5
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
(
1
6
8
7
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
a
S
i
x
F
o
o
t
(
6
'
)
S
o
l
i
d
F
e
n
c
e
a
t
5
C
a
m
b
r
i
d
g
e
C
o
u
r
t
)
2.1.c
Packet Pg. 6
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
e
t
i
t
i
o
n
e
r
s
L
e
t
t
e
r
(
1
6
8
7
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
a
S
i
x
F
o
o
t
(
6
'
)
S
o
l
i
d
F
e
n
c
e
a
t
5
C
a
m
b
r
i
d
g
e
C
o
u
r
t
)
2.1.d
Packet Pg. 7
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
e
t
i
t
i
o
n
e
r
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
s
t
o
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
(
1
6
8
7
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
a
S
i
x
F
o
o
t
(
6
'
)
S
o
l
i
d
F
e
n
c
e
a
t
5
C
a
m
b
r
i
d
g
e
C
o
u
r
t
)
2.1.e
Packet Pg. 8
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
t
o
f
S
u
r
v
e
y
(
1
6
8
7
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
a
S
i
x
F
o
o
t
(
6
'
)
S
o
l
i
d
F
e
n
c
e
a
t
5
C
a
m
b
r
i
d
g
e
C
o
u
r
t
)
2.1.f
Packet Pg. 9
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
F
e
n
c
e
-
P
i
c
t
u
r
e
(
1
6
8
7
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
a
S
i
x
F
o
o
t
(
6
'
)
S
o
l
i
d
F
e
n
c
e
a
t
5
C
a
m
b
r
i
d
g
e
C
o
u
r
t
)
Updated: 9/16/2016 1:51 PM Page 1
Ordinance No. : Consider Approval of an Amendment to Ordinance
2015-56 for Sky Fitness at 1501 Busch Parkway
Recommendation of Action
Staff Recommends Approval
On October 6, 2015, the Village Board approved Ordinance 2015-56 granting an amendment to the
Special Use Ordinance 97-4 for an expansion of Sky Fitness's facility at 1501 Busch Parkway.
Subsequent to the approvals, the petitioner is proposing changes to the approved Preliminary Plan
reducing the size and height of the building addition. The footprint of the addition will remain, and
therefore, the original variation to the Zoning Ordinance for a side yard setback reduction, as approved by
Village Ordinance 2015-56 is still required. As a result, an amendment to Ordinance 2015-56 is required.
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report (DOCX)
Aerial (PDF)
Sky Fitness Plan Set (PDF)
Ordinance 2015-56 (PDF)
Certificate of Publication (PDF)
Trustee Liaison Staff Contact
Weidenfeld Chris Stilling, Community Development
Wednesday, September 21,
2016
2.2
Packet Pg. 10
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: September 21, 2016
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 1501 Busch Parkway
PETITIONER: Sky Fitness Corporation/Yan Belfor
PREPARED BY: Christopher Stilling, Director of Community Development
REQUEST: Petition to the Village of Buffalo Grove for an amendment to
Village Ordinance 2015-56 which granted Preliminary Plan
approval to the Subject Property with multiple variations.
EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is improved with the existing Sky Fitness Center
and is currently zoned Industrial.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The approved Village Comprehensive Plan calls for this property
to be Commercial.
PROJECT OVERVIEW
On October 6, 2015, the Village Board approved Ordinance 2015-56 granting an amendment to the
Special Use Ordinance 97-4 for an expansion of Sky Fitness’s facility at 1501 Busch Parkway. Subsequent
to the approvals, the petitioner is proposing changes to the approved Preliminary Plan reducing the size
and height of the building addition. The footprint of the addition will remain, and therefore, the original
variation to the Zoning Ordinance for a side yard setback reduction, as approved by Village Ordinance
2015-56 is still required. As a result, an amendment to Ordinance 2015-56 is required.
PLANNING, ZONING, AND ENGINEERING ANALYSIS
Zoning History
The facility is currently operating with a special use in the Industrial district. Ordinance 97-4, which was
passed in 1997, approved a special use in the industrial district for the Highland Park Hospital Health and
Fitness Center. In 2012, Highland Park Hospital Health and Fitness and was sold to 1501 Busch Parkway,
LLC for Sky fitness. The special use was not restrictive to the developer and consequently, Sky Fitness
has operated the facility under the same special use.
In 2015, the Village approved an Ordinance granting an amendment to the Special Use to allow for a
19,050 square foot addition with a first floor swimming pool, second floor basketball court and a third
floor mezzanine. At that time, the addition required the following variations:
1. A variation from Section 17.48.020 of the Buffalo Grove Zoning Code for a side yard setback
reduction in the Industrial (I) Zoning District,
2. A variation from Section 16.50.040 of the Buffalo Grove Development Code concerning
stormwater detention facilities, and
3. A variation from Section 18.20.020 of the Buffalo Grove Floodplain Regulations Code concerning
floodplain regulation.
2.2.a
Packet Pg. 11
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
Proposed Changes to the Approved Plans
Ordinance 2015-56, which granted the preliminary plan approval and variations, were subject to an
approved set of plans. Sky Fitness is proposing changes to the approved preliminary plan reducing the
size and height of the building addition. The footprint of the addition will remain, and therefore, the
original variation to the Zoning Ordinance for a side yard setback reduction, as approved by Village
Ordinance 2015-56 is still required. The other 2 variations concerning stormwater facilities and
floodplain are no longer required.
The proposed addition will be maintaining the same footprint as the 2015 proposed plans. The most
significant change is that the building addition is lower in height (29 ft. versus 50 ft.). The proposed
expanded development fulfills the dimensional requirements in the Industrial District, with the
exception of the side setback.
Industrial District Dimensional Requirements
Setbacks I District Requirements 2015 Approved Plan
Current
Request
Front 37 ft. 371 ft. 371 ft.
West Side 27 ft. 22 ft. 22 ft.
East Side 27 ft. 308 ft. 308 ft.
Rear 27 ft. 28 ft. 28 ft.
Building Height 4 Stories or 50 ft 3 stories and 50 ft
1 story with a
roof deck/pool
and 29 ft.
Building Addition Area 19,050 s.f. 16,980 s.f.
Design
The proposed addition continues the architectural
features and aesthetics of the existing facility. The main
design difference between the proposed addition and the
existing building is height. Staff finds that the addition fits
within the design context of the building and site itself.
Parking
The municipal code requires a recreation building to offer
1.0 off-street parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor
area. With the addition, the Sky Fitness facility will have a
total of 81,980 square feet of floor area, thus requiring a
minimum parking requirement of 82 spaces. Sky Fitness
currently has 235 parking spaces, however, they have
been recently issued a permit to expand the parking lot to
add 31 spaces for a total amount of 266 spaces. The
proposed parking lot expansion would meet Village Code.
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
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
Stormwater Management
While the proposed development will meet all current stormwater and floodplain requirements, the
2015 approval included the following 2 variations to the Development Ordinance:
1. A variation from Section 16.50.040 of the Buffalo Grove Development Code concerning
stormwater detention facilities, and
2. A variation from Section 18.20.020 of the Buffalo Grove Floodplain Regulations Code concerning
floodplain regulation.
Subsequent to the approvals, the Village Board approved amendments to the Development Ordinance
which aligned Village Code with the Lake County’s Watershed Development Ordinance (WDO) and the
County’s floodplain regulations. As a result, the variations noted above are no longer required. While
the variations are no longer required, staff still recommends that the petitioners structurally floodproof
the building addition to 3 feet above the base flood elevation. In addition, they shall provide a bioswale
along the western edge of their property. These were requirements of the previous addition in 2015.
STANDARDS FOR VARIATION
The petitioner’s response to standards from their 2015 request are still applicable.
1. The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only
under the conditions allowed by the regulations of the zoning district in which it is located
except in the case of residential zoning districts;
“We took over the facility from Highland Park Hospital Health & Fitness Center as they
faced bankruptcy. We have since invested millions and we have grown some, but not by
enough to be sustainable. The best way for us to create new revenue is to differentiate
ourselves from our competitors by expanding and offering amenities such as aquatics and
basketball courts. Our proposed addition, which features such amenities, will enable us to
stand out as a unique upscale fitness facility and something special in Buffalo Grove.
Consequently, we would be one of only four upscale fitness facilities in the immediate
area and the only one Buffalo Grove. In addition to differentiating ourselves, these
amenities will be an attraction in their own right. Research tells us that swimming pools
that are used for a multitude of activities such as triathlon training, swim lessons, swim
clubs, scuba lessons, and aquatic therapy, can attract new clients and bring in revenue we
need to survive. Without building these amenities, we cannot compete in the in the
extremely competitive market. Moreover the proposed addition is the only logical and
functional space for Sky Fitness to expand and create amenities that will enable us to
bring in a significant revenue stream.”
2. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances;
“Our circumstances are a unique. We need to expand our facilities to compete in the
market, however our property offers limited opportunities to expand. We have explored
various configurations and facility layouts to build this addition, but have found that the
proposed location and size is the only workable option.”
3. The proposed variation will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
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
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
“The proposed addition will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Our
building has been a fitness facility in this neighborhood since 1997. Our addition features
design and architectural features that blend with the existing structure and is compatible
with the rest of the area. “
PUBLIC COMMENTS
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 mailing of the
notifications were both completed within the required timeframe. As of the date of this Staff Report the
Village has not received any inquires.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of an amendment to Village Ordinance 2015-56 which granted Preliminary
Plan approval, with a side yard setback reduction to Sky Fitness located at 1501 Busch Parkway.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) shall open the public hearing and take public testimony and
the PZC shall then make a recommendation to the Village Board.
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
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
Lake County, Illinois
LakeCounty
Geographic Information System
Lake County Department
of Information Technology
18 N County St
Waukegan IL 60085
(847) 377-2373
Map Printed on 04/30/2013
Parcel 1521400034 is outlined.
N
Disclaimer The selected soil feature layer may not occur anywhere in the current map extent. A Registered Land Surveyor should be consulted to determine the precise location of property boundaries
on the ground. This map does not constitute a regulatory determination and is not a base for engineering design. This map is intended to be viewed and printed in color.
100 ft
2011 Buildings
Forest Preserves
Lake County Border
Streams
Trails
2010 Aerial Photography
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 15
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
e
r
i
a
l
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.
2
.
c
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
6
Attachment: Sky Fitness Plan Set (1684 : Consider Approval of an Amendment to Ordinance 2015-56 for Sky Fitness at 1501 Busch Parkway)
2.
2
.
c
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
7
Attachment: Sky Fitness Plan Set (1684 : Consider Approval of an Amendment to Ordinance 2015-56 for Sky Fitness at 1501 Busch Parkway)
2.
2
.
c
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
8
Attachment: Sky Fitness Plan Set (1684 : Consider Approval of an Amendment to Ordinance 2015-56 for Sky Fitness at 1501 Busch Parkway)
2.
2
.
c
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
9
Attachment: Sky Fitness Plan Set (1684 : Consider Approval of an Amendment to Ordinance 2015-56 for Sky Fitness at 1501 Busch Parkway)
2.
2
.
c
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
2
0
Attachment: Sky Fitness Plan Set (1684 : Consider Approval of an Amendment to Ordinance 2015-56 for Sky Fitness at 1501 Busch Parkway)
2.2.c
Packet Pg. 21
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.2.c
Packet Pg. 22
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.2.c
Packet Pg. 23
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.2.c
Packet Pg. 24
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.2.c
Packet Pg. 25
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.2.d
Packet Pg. 26
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.2.d
Packet Pg. 27
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.2.d
Packet Pg. 28
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.2.d
Packet Pg. 29
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.2.d
Packet Pg. 30
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.2.d
Packet Pg. 31
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
P
a
r
k
w
a
y
)
2.2.e
Packet Pg. 32
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
e
o
f
P
u
b
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
(
1
6
8
4
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
n
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
5
-
5
6
f
o
r
S
k
y
F
i
t
n
e
s
s
a
t
1
5
0
1
B
u
s
c
h
Updated: 9/16/2016 2:01 PM Page 1
Ordinance No. : Consider Approval of Amendment to the Existing
Annexation Agreement Ordinance No. 90-55, as Amended by
Ordinance No. 2007-55 Requesting Approval for a Rezoning to B3
Planned Business Center District with a Special Use for a Planned
Unit Development and Approval of a Plat of Subdivision and
Preliminary Plan with Multiple Special Uses and Variations for the
25 Acre Property at the Northwest and Southwest Corners of
Milwaukee Avenue and Deerfield Parkway
Recommendation of Action
Staff recommends approval subject to the conditions in the attached staff report
Shorewood Development Group (SDG) is the contract purchasers of the 25 acre property located at the
northwest corner and the southwest corner of Milwaukee Avenue and Deerfield Parkway commonly
referred to as the Berenesa Plaza Property. SDG currently has an agreement with Woodman's Food
Markets (Woodman's) allowing them to acquire approximately 20 acres of the parcel to develop a
242,000 square foot Grocery Store located on the northwes t corner of the intersection. Woodman's also
plans to develop a fuel center, convenience store, quick lube and carwash on the south side of Deerfield
Parkway. SDG would develop the remaining 5.5 acres at the southwest corner of the intersection, with
multiple commercial buildings. The project requires an amendment to the existing annexation agreement
Ordinance No. 90-55, as amended by Ordinance No. 2007-55 requesting approval for a rezoning to B3
Planned Business Center District with a special use for a Pla nned Unit Development and approval of a
Plat of Subdivision and Preliminary Plan with multiple special uses and variations as outlined further in
this report.
ATTACHMENTS:
staff report (DOCX)
Aerial (PDF)
Woodman's Letter to PZC Workshop Questions (PDF)
certificate of publication (PDF)
Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (PDF)
Trustee Liaison Staff Contact
Berman Chris Stilling, Community Development
Wednesday, September 21,
2016
2.3
Packet Pg. 33
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: September 21, 2016
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: The approximately 18 acre vacant tract of land at the
northwest corner of Milwaukee Avenue and Deerfield Parkway,
and the approximately 7 acre vacant tract of land at the
southwest corner of Milwaukee Avenue and Deerfield Parkway,
Buffalo Grove, IL 60089
PETITIONER: Shorewood Development Group
PREPARED BY: Christopher Stilling, Director of Community Development
REQUEST: Petition to the Village of Buffalo Grove for an amendment to
the existing annexation agreement Ordinance No. 90-55, as
amended by Ordinance No. 2007-55 requesting approval for a
rezoning to B3 Planned Business Center District with a special
use for a Planned Unit Development and approval of a Plat of
Subdivision and Preliminary Plan with multiple special uses and
variations
EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is zoned B3 and OR (Office Research) and is
currently vacant
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The approved Village Comprehensive Plan calls for this
property to be Commercial.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Shorewood Development Group (SDG) is the contract purchasers of the 25 acre property located at the
northwest corner and the southwest corner of Milwaukee Avenue and Deerfield Parkway commonly
referred to as the Berenesa Plaza Property. SDG currently has an agreement with Woodman’s Food
Markets (Woodman’s) allowing
them to acquire approximately 20
acres of the parcel (hereinafter
referred to as either “Woodman’s
Development Parcel 1” or “Parcel
1”). Woodman’s plans to develop
a 242,000 square foot Grocery
Store located on the northwest
corner of the intersection.
Woodman’s also plans to develop
a fuel center, convenience store,
quick lube and carwash on the
south side of Deerfield Parkway.
SDG would develop the remaining
5.5 acres at the southwest corner
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 34
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
s
t
a
f
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
of the intersection, with multiple commercial buildings (hereinafter referred to as either “Shorewood’s
Development Parcel 2” or “Parcel 2”). The project requires an amendment to the existing annexation
agreement Ordinance No. 90-55, as amended by Ordinance No. 2007-55 requesting approval for a
rezoning to B3 Planned Business Center District with a special use for a Planned Unit Development and
approval of a Plat of Subdivision and Preliminary Plan with multiple special uses and variations as
outlined further in this report.
PLANNING & ZONING ANALYSIS
Zoning History
The property is currently zoned B3, with a small portion of the southern parcel zoned Office Research.
The property is subject to an existing annexation agreement originally dated September 10, 1990 and
amended by Ordinance 2007-55, which was approved by the Village Board on September 25, 2007. As
part of the development request, the previous annexation agreements will be amended and the key
terms and conditions will be replaced by the current request. Overall, the property had always been
contemplated for a large commercial development. Staff finds that the proposed development is
consistent with the original intent of the 1990 Annexation Agreement and the 2007 Amendment.
Workshop History
This item had originally been heard before the Village Board on June 20, 2016 and was referred to the
Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC). Subsequent to the Board meeting, the PZC held two (2) workshops
(July 17th and August 15th) to review the proposed plans. Attached to this staff report is a memo from
Woodman’s representatives providing a summary to the items raised at both workshops.
Site Plan/Zoning Summary for Woodman’s Store & Unattended Fuel Pumps on Development Parcel 1:
The proposed plan includes an approximately 242,000 square foot Woodman’s Food Market,
unattended fuel pumps with a canopy, and associated parking on the 18 acre parcel on the
north side of Deerfield Parkway, west of Milwaukee Avenue.
The Woodman’s Food Market will be one-story and face Deerfield Parkway. Approximately
139,000 square feet of Woodman’s will be dedicated to the grocery store while the balance will
be utilized for storage of their products being sold.
B3 District Dimensional Requirements
B3 District Requirements Proposed
Se
t
b
a
c
k
s
Front
(south) 25 feet
Store- 307 feet
Gas Station canopy- 60 feet
Side (east
& west)
Pursuant to the B3 standards, a side and rear yard setback
for the principal building is not required when the subject
property’s side yard abuts existing commercially zoned
property. The property to the north, south and west is
zoned B3 in Buffalo Grove and the property to the east is
commercially zoned in the Village of Riverwoods
East- 74.9 feet
West- 82.3 feet
Rear
(north) Same as above 67.5 feet
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 35
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
s
t
a
f
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
The plan proposes 623 parking spaces for Woodman’s grocery store. Pursuant to Village Code,
the development requires 560 parking spaces. According to Woodman’s, the proposed parking
count is consistent with their other locations. Staff finds that sufficient parking is provided.
Despite the future change to reduce the required size of the parking stalls to 9’x18’ with a 24’
drive aisle, Woodman’s plans to meet current Village Code to accommodate their large shopping
carts.
The proposed grocery store and the ten (10) unattended fuel pumps will be open 24/7.
Woodman’s will be providing a solid 6’ fence along the north property line.
The proposed Woodman’s architectural design will be consistent with their most recent stores
in Altoona, WI and Sun Prairie, WI. However, based on PZC feedback, additional architectural
features have been added to the building, especially along the elevations most visible from the
street. This includes additional brick and other design features to help breakup the mass of the
building. Furthermore, Woodman’s has provided multiple perspectives showing how the
proposed development would look as someone travels along Deerfield Parkway.
The building will be constructed of predominately concrete panels with various brick accents
along the south, east and west elevations. The proposed building will be beige with red canopies
and light fixtures.
At its highest point, Woodman’s would be 51 feet in height.
Site Plan/Zoning Summary for Woodman’s Gas Station/Lube and Carwash on Development Parcel 1:
On the south side of Deerfield Parkway, Woodman’s is proposing a fuel center with ten (10)
pumps and canopy, convenience store, quick lube and carwash on the western 1.6 acres.
B3 District Dimensional Requirements
B3 District Requirements Proposed
Se
t
b
a
c
k
s
Front
(north) 25 feet
Store- 80 feet
Car wash- 92 feet
Gas Station canopy- 50 feet
Side (east
& west)
50 feet to west lot line because it abuts a residentially
zoned property in Buffalo Grove. No setback is required to
the east since it is zoned B3
East- 119 feet
West- 15 feet (car wash)
Rear
(south)
Pursuant to the B3 requirements, a rear yard setback is
not required because the property to the south is
unincorporated Lake County. The B3 setback
requirements only apply to residentially zoned property in
Buffalo Grove.
Store- 85 feet
Car wash- 120 feet
Gas Station canopy- +/- 70
feet
As shown above, the western side yard setback is required to be 50 feet. This is because the
existing 6.5 acre detention pond to the west is zoned R9. Based on Woodman’s plans, the
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 36
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
s
t
a
f
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
carwash is setback 15 from the west side lot line. However, the nearest residential building
(apartment) is approximately 750 feet from the proposed carwash building.
Other than the car wash which will be open 24/7, the attended gas station and convenience
store will be open from 7AM-7PM. The lube station will have more restrictive hours as follows:
o M-F 8AM-6PM
o Saturday 9AM-5PM
o Sunday 10AM-3PM
The lube station will only perform minor service to vehicles such as oil changes.
The carwash will have 2 bays, with each bay accommodating 1 car at a time. Both doors
(entrance & exit) will be closed during the wash operation (including drying).
The gas station will be constructed with brick and stone with additional architectural elements.
Woodman’s is providing a 6’ high solid wood fence along the rear of the property adjacent to
the existing unincorporated residential to the south. This fence will align with SDG’s fence.
Site Plan/Zoning Summary for Shorewood’s Project on Development Parcel 2:
On the remaining 5.5 acres of the southern parcel, SDG is proposing approximately 30,000
square feet of first floor commercial/retail space in three (3) buildings.
The building furthest east (Building A) on the site will include a 2nd story with approximately
11,000 square feet of office space.
B3 District Dimensional Requirements
B3 District Requirements Proposed
Se
t
b
a
c
k
s
Front
(North) 25 feet
Building A: +/- 80 feet from
Deerfield and +/- 120 feet from
Milwaukee
Building B: +/- 80 feet from
Deerfield
Bank: +/-60 feet from Deerfield
Side
Pursuant to the B3 standards, a side yard setback for
a principal building is not required when the subject
property’s side yard abuts existing commercially
zoned property. The property to the north and west is
zoned B3 in Buffalo Grove and the property to the
east is in the Village of Riverwoods
Building A: +/- 120 feet from
Milwaukee
Rear
(south)
Pursuant to the B3 requirements, a rear yard setback
is not required because the property to the south is
unincorporated Lake County. The B3 setback
requirements only apply to residentially zoned
property in Buffalo Grove.
Building A: 22.7 feet, however
the pick-up window will be
setback 18’ (abuts B3 District)
Building B: 94.6 feet
Bank: +/-140 feet
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 37
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
s
t
a
f
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
As noted, the B3 requirements only require a setback from residentially zoned property in the
Village of Buffalo Grove. The property to the south is located in unincorporated Lake County. At
its closest point, Building A is setback 18 feet (drive-through window) from the recently
approved commercial development to the south (former PJs & McDonalds) and is setback 22.7
feet from the unincorporated residential lot to the south.
While the final tenant mix has not been identified, SDG is requesting 2 drive-throughs. Both
drive-throughs will provide the minimum required stacking of 10 vehicles.
SDG’s development also includes a bank at the new signalized intersection along Deerfield
Parkway. The bank will have 2 remote ATMs located to the rear. The current plan shows a
stacking of 4 vehicles for each ATM. Village Code requires a minimum stacking for banks at 6
vehicles. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the bank, the plans will need to be revised
to meet code or a separate variation will be required.
Parking/Cross Access for Shorewood’s Project on Development Parcel 2:
SDG is proposing a total of 296 parking spaces for the development on Parcel 2. Pursuant to
Village Code, 188 spaces are required (1 space per 220 square feet).
While it is not required, the Developer is providing additional parking for the proposed quick
service restaurants at a ratio greater than 1 space per 100 square feet floor area. This more
restrictive ratio is consistent with the Village’s parking requirements for a standalone restaurant.
Based on this ratio, a total of 271 spaces are required. As shown, SDG is providing 296 spaces.
The petitioner is seeking a variation to the Village’s parking lot dimensions to allow for 18’ deep
parking stalls. Currently Village Code requires 18.5 feet.
Staff believes the 18’ is sufficient and it is recommended by traffic consultants and the Urban
Land Institute (ULI).
SDG is providing a 6’ high solid fence along the rear of the property adjacent to the existing
unincorporated residential to the west. This fence will align with Woodman’s fence to the west.
SDG’s plan also show the cross access to the recently approved development to the south. Cross
access will also be requested as part of the annexation agreement.
Architecture for Shorewood’s Project on Development Parcel 2:
Both Buildings A and B will be constructed with mostly brick and some cast stone accents. The
elevations will also include metal paneling as accent details and within the tenant signage area.
A portion of Building A will have a 2nd story office and roof patio. The office area is
approximately 11,000 square feet.
At its highest point, Building A will be approximately 32.6 feet high.
UTILITIES AND SITE ENGINEERING
The proposed development would be connecting to existing utilities that were previously
installed along the frontage of the property.
Stormwater is being accommodated by the existing detention ponds to the west as the property
was included within the Barclay Station development in the early 1990s.
Staff finds that the preliminary plans meet both the Village’s and Lake County’s Watershed
Development Ordinance (WDO).
As with much of the area along Milwaukee Avenue, the site does contain floodplain. To
accommodate the proposed buildings, the developer is seeking to fill small portions of the
floodplain. All necessary compensatory storage is provided onsite. Based on the preliminary
engineering plans, all parking areas will be outside the limits of the floodplain.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 38
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
s
t
a
f
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Overall, the proposed floodplain improvements and stormwater will meet the Village’s Code and
the County’s WDO.
SIGNAGE
Requested Sign Variations for both Woodman’s and SDG
1. A Variation to Chapter 14.16 of the Sign Code to exceed the maximum allowable number of wall
signs and canopy signs as shown on the Uniform Sign Package; and,
2. A Variation to Chapter 14.16 of the Sign Code to allow multiple wall signs and canopy sign to
exceed the maximum size as shown on the Uniform Sign Package; and,
3. A Variation to Chapter 14.16 of the Sign Code to allow ground signs to encroach into the
required front yard and corner setback as depicted on the Preliminary Plan; and,
4. Variations to Chapters 14.16 and 14.20 of the Sign Code to allow multiple Electronic Vehicle Fuel
Signs to exceed the maximum height and size as shown on Uniform Sign Package; and,
5. A Variation to Chapter 14.16 of the Sign Code to allow ground signs to exceed the maximum size
and height allowed as shown on the Uniform Sign Package; and,
6. Variations to Chapters 14.16 and 14.20 of the Sign Code to allow multiple menu boards to
exceed the maximum height; and,
7. Variation to Chapter 14.16 of the Sign Code Sign Code to permit multiple ground signs and allow
them to be closer than 250 feet as depicted on the Preliminary Plan.
Summary of Woodman’s Signage on Development Parcel 1
As part of the development approval, Woodman’s is seeking approval of a uniform sign package,
as outlined in Section 14.16.050 of the Sign Code.
While Woodman’s requested relief for increasing the total number of signs may seem large,
staff believes the request is reasonable given the overall size and scale of the Woodman’s
building. Furthermore, had the larger parcel been developed with a large multi-tenant shopping
center, it is likely that the total number of walls signs permitted would be higher than what is
being proposed by Woodman’s. Staff finds that the overall sign package is acceptable.
The following is a quick summary of the signage (excluding incidental/directional signage) for
Woodman’s:
Woodman’s Grocery Store Signs
Building Elevation Number of Wall Signs Conformance to Code
East 1 Meets Code
South 5 Code allows a maximum of 1 sign per elevation
North 0 N/A
West 1 Code does not allow a wall sign. Therefore a
variation for the number and size of the wall sign is
required.
Ground Sign 1 Meets Code (they may not build it)
Woodman’s Unattended Gas Station
Building Elevation Number of Wall Signs Conformance to Code
East Canopy 2 1 sign meets Code, however the fuel sign exceeds
the maximum size requirements
Ground Sign 1 Meets Code
Woodman’s Gas Station/Lube/Carwash
Building Elevation Number of Wall Signs Conformance to Code
North Elevation Carwash 1 Meets Code
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 39
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
s
t
a
f
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
North Elevation Store 1 Meets Code
East Elevation Store 1 Code does not allow a wall sign. Therefore a
variation for the number and size of the wall sign is
required.
West Elevation Store 1 Code does not allow a wall sign. Therefore a
variation for the number and size of the wall sign is
required.
East Elevation Canopy 2 1 sign meets Code, however the fuel sign exceeds
the maximum size requirements
Ground Sign 1 Exceeds maximum size allowed
Summary of SDG’s Signage on Development Parcel 2
As part of the development approval, Woodman’s is seeking approval of a uniform sign package,
as outlined in Section 14.16.050 of the Sign Code.
As with other similar multi-tenant developments, SDG is requesting wall signage for tenants
located at the corner units. Furthermore, SDG is requesting up to three (3) wall signs on the 2nd
story office building.
Finally, SDG is requesting approval of 2 ground signs for their multi-tenant buildings. The main
ground sign located at the corner of Deerfield Parkway and Milwaukee Avenue will be 25 feet
high and 250 square feet in area. Code allows a maximum height of 15 feet and maximum size
of 120 square feet.
The second ground sign would be located at the new signalized intersection at Deerfield
Parkway. This sign will be 18 feet high and 169 square feet in area. The height and size of this
sign still requires a variation, but staff notes that it is similar in height to the recently approved
ground sign for the new commercial development to the south.
Lastly, the proposed bank use will also be requesting a ground sign. While no specifics have
been provided, that sign will have to meet Village Code. Because this sign will be separated less
than 250 feet from SDG’s freestanding, a variation is required.
VARIATIONS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE
The following is a summary of the requested Zoning Ordinance variations reflected in the plan:
A Variation to Section 17.44.040 of the Zoning Ordinance reducing the required building and parking lot
setbacks, as depicted on the Preliminary Plan
The carwash building on Parcel 1 will not meet the required 50 setback. Staff finds that the property
to the west will not be impacted since it is used as detention. The nearest residential building is
approximately 750 feet away.
Furthermore, the plans currently meet the Village’s parking lot setback requirements. However, the
roadway improvements along both Deerfield Parkway and Milwaukee Avenue as still under review by
IDOT and LCDOT. Therefore, the final limits of the ROW have not been determined, which may reduce
the setbacks. This will remain as a variation.
A Variation to Section 17.44.040 of the Zoning Ordinance reducing the required perimeter and
landscaping setbacks as depicted on the Preliminary Plan
As noted above, the plans currently meet the Village’s parking lot landscape requirements. However,
the roadway improvements along both Deerfield Parkway and Milwaukee Avenue as still under
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 40
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
s
t
a
f
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
review by IDOT and LCDOT. Therefore, the final limits of the ROW have not been determined, which
may reduce the required landscape setback. This will remain as a variation.
A Variation to Section 17.32.020 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow multiple accessory structures in the
front yard as depicted on the Preliminary Plan
Woodman’s attended and unattended gas stations provide a canopy to offer protection to their
customers. Per the Zoning Ordinance, any accessory structure (canopy) cannot be located closer to the
front lot line than the principal building. Since the canopies are in front of the principal buildings, the
variation is required. Staff notes that this is a common variation for all gas station requests and finds
that the variation is warranted.
A Variation to Section 17.36.030 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow driveways to exceed the maximum
width of thirty-five feet (35’) as depicted on the Preliminary Plan
This variation is only required for the new signalized intersection along Deerfield Parkway, which is
technically considered a driveway per Village Code. This intersection is required by both the Village
and LCDOT, therefore staff finds that the variation is warranted.
A Variation to Section 17.36.030 of the Zoning Ordinance regarding the dimensional requirements for
parking lot design as depicted on the Preliminary Plan.
Currently Village Code requires that parking stalls be 18.5 feet deep. Staff believes the 18’ is sufficient
and will be seeking a future text amendment to Village Code to codify the change. Based on staff’s
research, several nearby communities as well as Lake County allow for 18’ deep parking spaces. This
size is also recommended by traffic consultants and the Urban Land Institute (ULI). Th e 18’ deep stalls
results in less pavement, thus reducing the amount of stormwater runoff. As previously noted,
Woodman’s site plan meets Village Code. They have elected to keep the wider drive aisles and deeper
stalls to better accommodate shopping carts.
DEPARTMENTAL REVIEWS
Village Department Comments
Engineering The Village Engineer has reviewed the preliminary plans and has no
specific comments or concerns regarding the preliminary engineering
plans.
Fire Department The Fire Department has reviewed the proposed plans and does not
have any objections.
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 report, the Village
received a few inquiries from nearby residents asking to view the plans. One specific concern was raised
about the proximity of the underground fuel tanks for the gas station on the south side of Deerfield. The
underground fuel tanks are 35 feet from the southern lot line. According to Woodman’s, the location of
the fuel tanks meet and exceed the minimum distance and design requirements as established by the
State Fire Marshal.
STANDARDS
Variations
The following are the applicable standards for a variation:
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 41
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
s
t
a
f
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
1. The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under
the conditions allowed by the regulations of the zoning district in which it is located except in
the case of residential zoning districts;
2. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances;
3. The proposed variation will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
During the meeting, the petitioner shall address the required standards for a variation.
Special Use
The following is a response to the standards for a special use:
1. The special use will serve the public convenience at the location of the subject property; or the
establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will not be detrimental to or
endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare;
2. The location and size of the special use, the nature and intensity of the operation involved in or
conducted in connection with said special use, the size of the subject property in relation to
such special use, and the location of the site with respect to streets giving access to it shall be
such that it will be in harmony with the appropriate, orderly development of the district in
which it is located;
3. The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the
immediate vicinity of the subject property for the purposes already permitted in such zoning
district, nor substantially diminish and impair other property valuations with the neighborhood;
4. The nature, location and size of the buildings or structures involved with the establishment of
the special use will not impede, substantially hinder or discourage the development and use of
adjacent land and buildings in accord with the zoning district within which they lie;
5. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and/or other necessary facilities have been or will be
provided;
6. Parking areas shall be of adequate size for the particular special use, which areas shall be
properly located and suitably screened from adjoining residential uses, and the entrance and
exit driveways to and from these parking areas shall be designed so as to prevent traffic hazards,
eliminate nuisance and minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.
During the meeting, the petitioner shall address the required standards for a special use.
Signage Variation Standards
The Planning & Zoning Commission is authorized to make a recommendation to the Village Board for a
variation to the Sign Code based on the following criteria:
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 42
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
s
t
a
f
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
A. Except for Prohibited signs (Chapter 14.32), the Village Planning & Zoning Commission may
recommend approval or disapproval of a variance from the provisions or requirements of this
Title subject to the following:
1. The literal interpretation and strict application of the provisions and requirements of this
Title would cause undue and unnecessary hardships to the sign user because of unique or
unusual conditions pertaining to the specific building, parcel or property in question; and
2. The granting of the requested variance would not be materially detrimental to the property
owners in the vicinity; and
3. The unusual conditions applying to the specific property do not apply generally to other
properties in the Village; and
4. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the purpose of this Title pursuant to
Section 14.04.020
B. Where there is insufficient evidence, in the opinion of the Planning & Zoning Commission, to
support a finding under subsection (A), but some hardship does exist, the Planning & Zoning
Commission may consider the requirement fulfilled if:
1. The proposed signage is of particularly good design and in particularly good taste; and
2. The entire site has been or will be particularly well landscaped.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning, Planned Unit Development, preliminary plan, plat of
subdivision, special uses and variations, subject to the following conditions:
1. The proposed development shall be developed in substantial conformance to the plans attached
as part of the petition. The plans for the bank building shall be revised to meet the required
vehicle stacking, otherwise a separate variation is required.
2. Prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy, the property owner shall grant an
easement to the Village allowing for a Village entrance sign with related landscaping in a
manner acceptable to Village and in accordance to the area identified on Woodman’s
Preliminary Landscape Plan.
3. A final plat of subdivision shall be submitted. The plat shall dedicate the necessary right-of-way
to accommodate the offsite roadway and intersection improvements, as shown on plans
attached as part of this petition.
4. Any future modifications to the building elevations for Shorewood’s Development Parcel 2,
including those modifications required as part of a tenant request, shall conform to the Village’s
Appearance Plan.
5. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for Shorewood’s Development Parcel 2, the
Owner of Parcel 2 shall grant the necessary easements to allow for future shared cross access to
the property immediately to the south of Parcel 2 in a form acceptable to the Village and to the
Owner.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) shall open the public hearing and take public testimony
concerning the request. The PZC shall make a recommendation to the Village Board.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 43
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
s
t
a
f
f
r
e
p
o
r
t
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
+/- 18 acres
+/- 7 acres
2.3.b
Packet Pg. 44
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
A
e
r
i
a
l
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
Building Systems General Corp. PZC MEETING RESPONSES
5972 Executive Drive
Suite 100 Phone: 608-276-4400
Madison, WI 53719 Fax: 608-276-4468
1
July 13, 2016 & August 17, 2016
PZC Workshop
Village of Buffalo Grove
50 Raupp Blvd.
Buffalo Grove, IL 60089
Meeting Time: 7:30 PM
Questions posed by Buffalo Grove PZC Commissioners with responses:
1. Building Materials. PZC asked for a summary of the materials used on the grocery store building. The
materials are as follows:
a. Precast Concrete with Form Liners to simulate: Split Faced Masonry, Brick, and Horizontal and
Vertical Reveals. Precast Concrete is Painted On-site.
b. Aluminum Storefront with Glass.
c. Metal-Faced Composite Wall Panels.
d. Ornamental Lighting.
e. Exterior Insulation and Finish System (EIFS) on Cornice.
f. A Picture of the Sun Prairie, WI Store was Provided for Reference.
g. Berming along Milwaukee Avenue and Deerfield Parkway is being considered pending review
by the Civil Engineer of Compensatory Storage Requirements.
2. Building heights. PZC asked for the heights of the grocery store building. The heights are as follows:
a. Primary Building Height: 31’-4”
b. Parcel Pick-Up: 39’-4”
c. Flat-Topped Focals: 38’-0”
d. Radius Focal: 50’-7”
2.3.c
Packet Pg. 45
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
W
o
o
d
m
a
n
'
s
L
e
t
t
e
r
t
o
P
Z
C
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
Building Systems General Corp. PZC MEETING RESPONSES
5972 Executive Drive
Suite 100 Phone: 608-276-4400
Madison, WI 53719 Fax: 608-276-4468
2
3. Building signage. PZC asked how the proposed signage compares to Village Ordinances. The sizes are
as follows:
a. Store Monument Sign –
i. Unattended Gas Station: Sign Dimensions 5’-0” wide x 6’-0” tall = 30 square feet on a
3’-8” tall masonry base.
ii. Store: Future Sign with 120 square feet per face.
iii. Sign Code Allowed: 2 Signs @ 120 square feet/face per 14.16.060.B)
1. Comparison:
a. Proposed Number of Signs = Code
b. Proposed Sign Area is 90 square feet below Code
b. Store East Elevation –
i. “Woodman’s”: Sign Dimensions 40’ wide x 10’-11” tall = 538 square feet including
“Employee Owned” and “Open 24 Hours”.
ii. Sign Code Allowed: 1 Sign @ 1,005 square feet (335’x3” sf/lf per 14.16.003.C)
1. Comparison:
a. Proposed Number of Signs = Code
b. Proposed Sign Area is 467 square feet below Code
c. Store South Elevation –
i. “Woodman’s” over Main Entrance: Sign Dimensions 40’ wide x 10’-11” tall = 484
square feet including “Open 24 Hours”.
ii. “Woodman’s” at West Focal: Sign Dimensions 26’ wide x 15’-5.5” tall = 395 square feet
including “Open 24 Hours”.
iii. “Shop Woodman’s .com”: Sign Dimensions 10’ wide 5’-8” tall = 57 square feet.
iv. Sign Code Allowed: 1 Sign @ 2,187 square feet (729’x3” sf/lf per 14.16.003.C)
1. Comparison:
a. Proposed Number of Signs = +2 Above Code
b. Proposed Sign Area is 1,251 square feet below Code
2.3.c
Packet Pg. 46
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
W
o
o
d
m
a
n
'
s
L
e
t
t
e
r
t
o
P
Z
C
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
Building Systems General Corp. PZC MEETING RESPONSES
5972 Executive Drive
Suite 100 Phone: 608-276-4400
Madison, WI 53719 Fax: 608-276-4468
3
v. Directional/Informational Signs
1. “Liquor”: Sign Dimensions 10’ wide x 2’ tall = 20 square feet
2. “Parcel Pick Up”: Sign Dimensions 26’-8” wide x 2’ tall = 53 square feet
d. Store West Elevation –
i. “Woodman’s”: Sign Dimensions 36’ wide x 9’-8” tall = 395 square feet including “Open
24 Hours”.
ii. Sign Code Allowed: 0 Signs
1. Comparison:
a. Proposed Number of Signs = +1 Above Code
b. Proposed Sign Area is 395 square feet above Code
e. Store Unattended Gas Station Canopy –
i. Sign Code Allowed: 1 Sign @ 294 square feet (147’x2” sf/lf per 14.16.080.C)
1. Comparison:
a. Proposed Number of Signs = Code
b. Proposed Sign Area is 237 square feet below Code
f. Gas Station North Elevation –
i. Sign Code Allowed: 1 Sign @ 62 square feet (4.5’x13.67’ per 14.16.070.A)
1. Comparison:
a. Proposed Number of Signs = Code
b. Proposed Sign Area is 28 square feet below Code
g. Gas Station East Elevation –
i. Sign Code Allowed: 0 Signs
1. Comparison:
a. Proposed Number of Signs = +1 Above Code
b. Proposed Sign Area is 22 square feet above Code
2.3.c
Packet Pg. 47
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
W
o
o
d
m
a
n
'
s
L
e
t
t
e
r
t
o
P
Z
C
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
Building Systems General Corp. PZC MEETING RESPONSES
5972 Executive Drive
Suite 100 Phone: 608-276-4400
Madison, WI 53719 Fax: 608-276-4468
4
h. Gas Station West Elevation –
i. Sign Code Allowed: 0 Signs
1. Comparison:
a. Proposed Number of Signs = +1 Above Code
b. Proposed Sign Area is 22 square feet above Code
i. Gas Station Canopy East Elevation –
i. Sign Code Allowed: 1 Sign @ 294 square feet (147’x2” sf/lf per 14.16.080.C)
1. Comparison:
a. Proposed Number of Signs = Code
b. Proposed Sign Area is 261 square feet below Code
j. Gas Station Canopy North Elevation (Pricer) –
i. Sign Code Allowed: 1 Sign @ 56 square feet (28’x2” sf/lf per 14.16.080.C)
1. Comparison:
a. Proposed Number of Signs = Code
b. Proposed Sign Area is 32 square feet below Code
k. Gas Station Monument Sign –
i. Sign Code Allowed: 1 Sign @ 60 square feet per 14.20.070.B)
1. Comparison:
a. Proposed Number of Signs = Code
b. Proposed Sign Area is 36 square feet above Code
4. Access. PZC asked about the type of access to the grocery store site from Milwaukee Avenue and
Deerfield Parkway. Access is as follows;
a. Milwaukee Avenue:
i. Right-In/Right-Out at Northeast Corner of Lot.
ii. Right-In at Center of Lot running along front of Grocery Store.
2.3.c
Packet Pg. 48
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
W
o
o
d
m
a
n
'
s
L
e
t
t
e
r
t
o
P
Z
C
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
Building Systems General Corp. PZC MEETING RESPONSES
5972 Executive Drive
Suite 100 Phone: 608-276-4400
Madison, WI 53719 Fax: 608-276-4468
5
b. Deerfield Parkway:
i. Right-In/Right/Out aligned with Radius Entry to Store.
ii. Traffic Signal with Full Access at approximate Center of Lot.
iii. Right-In/Right-Out at Southwest Corner of Lot.
c. Pedestrian:
i. A Pedestrian Crosswalk at the Traffic Signal on Deerfield Parkway is being considered.
5. Truck Access. PZC asked how trucks would enter and exit the property.
a. Loading docks and refuse facilities are located on North Elevation of store. The primary
entrance for truck traffic is the Right-In located on the Northeast corner of the property along
Milwaukee Avenue. A Truck turnaround is located in the Northwest corner of the property to
allow trucks to make a U-Turn and return to the Right-Out at the Northeast corner of the
property along Milwaukee Avenue.
i. Due to the size of the building, the International Building Code requires roads around the
building to allow fire department access. Although Woodman’s instructs truck drivers
where they are to enter and exit the site, some truck drivers do not follow instructions and
find themselves in the parking lot. In the event that a truck driver does attempt to exit the
truck dock area by traveling on the road located along the west side of the building,
provisions have been made to allow the truck to safely maneuver to the Traffic Signal.
6. Deliveries. PZC asked how many truck deliveries occur each day.
a. M-F: 20-30 trucks per day split 50/50 between tractor/trailer and straight trucks.
i. Most deliveries are between 5:00 AM and 6:00 PM.
ii. 1-2 trucks will deliver between 8:00 PM and 10:00 PM.
b. Sat & Sun: 2-3 trucks per day.
7. Parking Lot Orientation. PZC questioned the parking lot orientation. BSGC explained the history of
this parking lot orientation and how Woodman’s feels that this orientation best serves their customers
with convenience and improved safety.
2.3.c
Packet Pg. 49
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
W
o
o
d
m
a
n
'
s
L
e
t
t
e
r
t
o
P
Z
C
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
Building Systems General Corp. PZC MEETING RESPONSES
5972 Executive Drive
Suite 100 Phone: 608-276-4400
Madison, WI 53719 Fax: 608-276-4468
6
8. Snow Storage. PZC questioned how Woodman’s addresses snow storage.
a. Snow is pushed to the perimeter of the parking lot and mounded into piles as shown on the
landscaping plans. If snowfall accumulations become too great and impede shoppers from being
able to access enough parking stalls, snow is removed from site.
9. Parcel Pick-Up. PZC asked about the parcel pick-up operation.
a. Parcel Pick-Up is available to all customers at no charge. Simply tell the cashier that you wish to
drive up for your groceries and they will give you a number which you present to the attendant
when you drive into the parcel pick-up area and they will load your groceries into your car.
b. The Parcel Pick-Up area can hold four cars under its canopy and has staging for another four cars
without impeding traffic in the drive lane running parallel with the front of the store.
10. Membership. PZC asked if you need to purchase a membership to shop at Woodman’s.
a. No membership is required.
11. Building Appearance. PZC requested that the east and west elevations incorporate additional building
elements. The following additional building elements have been added,
a. East Elevation (Milwaukee Avenue):
i. Added an Element similar to that located on the South Elevation (just east of the Liquor
Entrance).
b. West Elevation:
i. Added an Element similar to that located on the South Elevation (just east of the Liquor
Entrance).
ii. Added Ornamental Light Fixtures.
iii. Added Windows.
2.3.c
Packet Pg. 50
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
W
o
o
d
m
a
n
'
s
L
e
t
t
e
r
t
o
P
Z
C
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
Building Systems General Corp. PZC MEETING RESPONSES
5972 Executive Drive
Suite 100 Phone: 608-276-4400
Madison, WI 53719 Fax: 608-276-4468
7
12. Building Landscaping. PZC requested additional landscaping along the East and West elevations to
soften the large building. The following landscaping has been added:
a. East Elevation (Milwaukee Avenue):
i. Added (1) Deciduous Tree.
ii. Enlarged Planting Bed.
iii. Added (12) Evergreen Shrubs.
iv. Added Ornamental Grass.
b. West Elevation:
i. Added (6) Deciduous Trees.
ii. Added (8) Ornamental Trees.
iii. Added (8) Narrow Evergreen Trees.
13. Unattended Gas Station. PZC questioned the safety of an unattended gas station.
a. Unattended Gas Stations are permitted under Title 41: Fire Protection, Section 175.220.
i. Shutoff switch at each dispensing island;
ii. Shutoff switch located at least 20 feet but not more than 100 feet from each dispenser;
iii. Fire Alarm System: activation of any emergency shutoff switch at the facility shall
automatically transmit an alarm to local emergency fire services providers;
iv. Dispensing devices must limit the delivery of product (50 gallons for gasoline and 250
gallons for diesel);
v. Portable fire extinguishers and a fire detection system located under a weather enclosure
canopy.
b. Woodman’s currently operates (2) Unattended Gas Stations in Illinois (Carpentersville and North
Aurora).
2.3.c
Packet Pg. 51
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
W
o
o
d
m
a
n
'
s
L
e
t
t
e
r
t
o
P
Z
C
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
Building Systems General Corp. PZC MEETING RESPONSES
5972 Executive Drive
Suite 100 Phone: 608-276-4400
Madison, WI 53719 Fax: 608-276-4468
8
14. Underground Storage Tanks (UST) and Piping. PZC questioned the installation of the USTs at the
Unattended Gas Station near the pond in case of a leak.
a. Underground tanks are double-wall construction and equipped with interstitial monitoring.
b. Underground piping is double-wall construction and equipped with interstitial monitoring.
c. Contractors that install UST’s and piping are required to be Office of the State Fire Marshal
(OSFM) licensed and have at least one employee doing the work who is certified under Title 41:
Fire Protection, Part 172.
d. A shear valve is installed in the base of each individual dispenser. The shear valve incorporates
a fusible link or other thermally activated device designed to close automatically in the event of
severe impact or fire exposure.
e. Relocation of the unattended gas station tanks is being considered.
15. View from Deerfield Parkway heading East. PZC asked for a view of the west side of the project from
Deerfield Parkway.
a. Colored Elevation D, dated 8/2/2016, shows the view of the unattended gas station and the
grocery store from the west on Deerfield Parkway.
16. Gas Station Hours of Operation. PZC asked for the hours of operation of the convenience store, lube
station, and car wash.
a. Gas Station: 24/7 (7:00 AM – 7:00 PM Attended)
b. Convenience Store: 7:00 AM – 7:00 PM
c. Lube Station: M-Fri 8:00 AM – 6:00 PM, Sat 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM, Sun 10:00 AM – 3:00 PM
d. Car Wash: 24/7
17. Car Wash Noise. PZC asked about noise from the car wash and its impact on adjoining residential
neighbors.
a. The car wash has been situated such that the entrance is on the south side of the building and the
exit is on the north side of the building facing Deerfield Parkway. The dryers (which create the
noise) are attached to the car wash system that glides over the vehicles on beams attached to the
ceiling. Both the entrance and exit doors to the car wash are closed when the drying process is
occurring. Once the drying is complete, the exit door opens.
2.3.c
Packet Pg. 52
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
W
o
o
d
m
a
n
'
s
L
e
t
t
e
r
t
o
P
Z
C
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
07/13/2016
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, JULY 13, 2016
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM by Commissioner Eric Smith
Public Hearings/Items For Consideration
1. (ID # 1625) Consider Approval of a Preliminary Plan, Plat of Subdivision and Variations
for a New 40,437 Square Foot Industrial Building at 875 Busch Parkway (Trustee
Weidenfeld)
Jeff Jacob (Civil Engineer), Jeff Sode (Representative from Thermflo), Cameron Treffry,
and Craig Denegar were sworn in.
(Commissioner Moodhe arrived at this time.)
Craig Denegar from ThermFlo said that they were excited to be here and introduced the
team.
Jeff Sode said that ThermFlo would be the primary owner of the property. Zonatherm
would be a secondary owner. He gave backgrounds on both companies.
Mr. Denegar said that the minor variations were needed due to parking stall dimensions.
They were requesting 18-foot stall length (instead of 18.5 feet). They were also
requesting a 36-foot driveway width instead of the 35-foot as standard. The reason for
the parking stall variation was to ensure that there would be sufficient amount of parking
spaces needed while abiding by the setbacks. The driveway width variation would allow
for a safer turning radius for the trucks coming into the facility. The parking plight was
because ThermFlo parking capacity was larger due to training services offered at the
facility. The driveway width allowed for safer turning lanes for the truck without impacting
oncoming traffic.
Mr. Denegar did not feel that the parking space and driveway width would alter the
character of the neighborhood as this was a fairly common dimension.
Cameron Treffry went through the site circulation; the trucking would be coming in on the
west side of the site. There was an employee patio, and the tallest point of the building
would be a fin panel of 32-feet. The entryway was 27-feet and parts of the building went
down to 25 feet. There was also a dumpster enclosure (in pre-cast concrete). He
reviewed the image of the main entrance of the building. He also reviewed the insulation
that met energy code and reviewed the materials of the panels. He reviewed the different
facades and elevations of the building.
Jeff Jacobs said that this site was 4.3 acres, and about 53 percent of the property drained
to the north, and the rest drained to the southeast corner. There was a reinforced
2.3.d
Packet Pg. 53
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
Z
C
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
f
r
o
m
7
.
1
3
.
1
6
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
07/13/2016
concrete pipe to the north, and a swale to the southeast. He reviewed where the water
main and sanitary services came to the site.
Commissioner Cesario asked Staff about ongoing activity about the recommendations.
Mr. Stilling said that the apron and parking length/driveway width were being looked at for
amendments to the code; these variations were requested at Staff’s recommendation.
Commissioner Cesario asked about vehicle access; Mr. Denegar said that the truck
entrance and the other access point were both available. There was brief discussion
regarding the parking with variation being sufficient.
Commissioner Goldspiel asked about the “X” on the plan. Mr. Jacobs said that this would
be trees removed from the site. Commissioner Goldspiel asked what types of trees were
being removed. Mr. Stilling said that the ash trees were being removed, and the Village
landscaper was supportive of the plan. Commissioner Goldspiel asked about what a
trailer truck needed to turn and how this compared to what was on the plan. Mr. Stilling
said that the additional median added an obstacle but he had not seen a template for
this. Commissioner Goldspiel asked about painted lines being required as this would
prevent traffic from meandering. Mr. Stilling said that this could be addressed with the
code amendment. There was some discussion regarding space to turn.
Commissioner Khan asked about stormwater management on the site and asked if this
size building was anticipated when the stormwater management was installed. Mr.
Jacobs said that the plan proposed was under the impervious coverage ratio that was
originally predicted.
Commissioner Moodhe asked about the wider driveways and was glad to see this.
Commissioner Weinstein asked about the updated plans needed. Mr. Denegar said that
the plans would be updated by early next week. He explained that the change was due to
the Association needs and requirements. There was some discussion regarding the plan
including the construction entrance. Commissioner Weinstein asked about ThermFlo
taking control of the water main easement. The petitioner was aware that the water main
ran through the property; the agreement with the Village was that if this needed to be
accessed, ThermFlo would be responsible for the above-ground restorations.
Chairman Smith entered the staff report from Ms. Woods as Exhibit One.
There being no further comments or questions from anyone else present, Chairman
Smith closed the public hearing at 8:01pm.
RESULT: RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
Next: 7/18/2016 7:30 PM
AYES: Smith, Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein, Au
ABSENT: Scott Lesser
Regular Meeting
Other Matters for Discussion
2.3.d
Packet Pg. 54
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
Z
C
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
f
r
o
m
7
.
1
3
.
1
6
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
07/13/2016
1. Workshop- Proposed Woodman’s Development on the Berenesa Plaza Property
(Trustee Berman)
Mr. Stilling introduced the developer for Woodman’s. He reviewed the site and
said that multiple inquiries and proposals had come to the Village. Staff was
confident in the project moving forward as the development was anchored by the
grocery store and gas station. The Village Board had provided preliminary
feedback, and Staff wanted to get preliminary comments from the Commission
as the plans were being changed.
Gary Fox said that he was the architecture designer for the Woodman’s project.
This would be Store 17 and would be over 240,000 square feet. He reviewed the
dimensions of the plan - including the gas station across the street. There would
be brick and pre-caste features on the facades as well as canopies. The gas
station would be a duplicate of the larger building but would be real block and
brick; the tones would be the same. There would be a membrane highly-
insulated roof. Designs were in process, and plans were sent to IDOT. They
wanted to start construction next Spring if possible; however, this would depend
on the timing of IDOT approval. Lake County was not anticipated to take long to
approve as the county had been supportive.
Mr. Stilling said that based on preliminary plans, just about all parking would be
outside of the flood plain; however, engineering was still in process.
Commissioner Cesario asked if this was intended to be open 24 hours. Mr. Fox
said it would but was not sure about the gas station; the lube center and car
wash would not be 24 hours. Commissioner Cesario asked about parcel pickup.
Mr. Fox said that this was the traditional out front parcel pickup, but there would
be a separate area anticipated for online pickup. Commissioner Cesario said that
this was well off the road from Deerfield and made sense to have a higher
elevation; he was not concerned about this. Mr. Stilling said that the east
elevation where the Woodman’s sign was planned could be broken up if desired.
He also noted the picture of the latest Woodman’s store in Wisconsin.
Commissioner Cesario asked about how this would interact with the development
to the south. Mr. Stilling said that there was an annexation agreement with the
development to the south, and Staff was looking for mutual cross -access.
Commissioner Goldspiel asked about full access off of Deerfield with a proposed
signal. Mr. Fox said that initial reports did not indicate a problem with this.
Commissioner Goldspiel asked if any others were full access; Mr. Fox said that
there was also a full access to the rear of the store; other accesses were right-
in/right-out. Commissioner Goldspiel said that the rear perspective was very long
and visible; to the west was open space as this was a retention area. He had
hoped that the elevation might be able to be broken up; it was noted that this was
being worked on in the revisions. Commissioner Goldspiel asked for confirmation
that there was not a flood plain issue; Mr. Stilling said that there was still a flood
plain, but very few (if any) parking spaces would be in the flood plain.
Commissioner Goldspiel asked about the cross-hatched marking for carts. It was
confirmed that this was a walkway for carts, and there was a brief discussion
regarding how grocery pick-up would work. Commissioner Goldspiel asked
where the pickup was and if stacking space was required for this. Mr. Fox said
that there were three lanes for pickup, so there could be up to nine cars under
the canopy with possibly another nine available for stacking. Mr. Stilling said that
2.3.d
Packet Pg. 55
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
Z
C
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
f
r
o
m
7
.
1
3
.
1
6
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
07/13/2016
the drive aisles were also very wide which would allow for vehicles to get around
any stacking. Commissioner Goldspiel asked about handicapped parking; Mr.
Fox showed where these would be and noted that there were no curbs to allow
for handicap access and carts.
Commissioner Au asked about the parking spaces facing the other way; Mr. Fox
said that this developed from the store in Kenosha. They were told that this
allowed for a landscape buffer and easier access; the plan had been successful
so it was incorporated into future plans. Commissioner Au asked about Deerfield
Road getting backed up and asked if this would help or hurt traffic. Mr. Stilling
said that this was one of the worst intersections in Lake County; the
improvements planned included dual left-turn lanes to help alleviate bottlenecks.
There were also plans for widening and median work to avoid left turns out.
Commissioner Khan said that he travelled on I-94, and he asked how the store
size in Kenosha compared to this one. Mr. Fox said that Kenosha’s was 250,000
square feet; the proposed site would be slightly smaller. Commissioner Khan
asked how this compared to Costco; Mr. Stilling said that a typical Costco was
approximately 130,000 square feet. Mr. Fox explained that the Woodman’s
model was based on each store also being a warehouse; there was no
distribution center. Commissioner Khan asked if this was a membership type
store; Mr. Fox said no that this was not membership and was not a bulk store. He
noted that Woodman’s did not accept credit cards and was a debit and cash only
business. Commissioner Khan asked about the proposed traffic signal on
Deerfield - and there was a note that this would be constructed by others. Mr.
Stilling said that this note was not for the Village but rather for design
responsibility. Commissioner Khan asked how confident the petitioner was, when
the final plans were approved, that IDOT and Lake County Highway would not
disrupt this. Louis Schreiber (Shore Development) said that the preliminary
design to IDOT was for a larger vehicle capacity. He said that confidence was
high with the lower traffic count of the Woodman’s plan.
Commissioner Weinstein said that on the north side there was a note about
landscaping; there did not seem to be any on south side. He was in favor of
putting in more setback and landscaping if there was parking capacity to do so.
He also asked about gas service on both sides; Mr. Fox said that one station was
unattended and the other was attended with a lube service and wash.
Commissioner Weinstein wanted to be mindful about the car wash backing up to
a residential area, knowing the distance and noise effects. Commissioner
Weinstein also asked if this was consistent with all or most recent Woodman’s
stores. Mr. Fox said that this was consistent with almost all of the stores;
Woodman’s was working on getting all stores to reflect this model. Commissioner
Weinstein asked about the signage; 26-feet by 15.5-feet was the biggest sign
proposed. Mr. Stilling said that the Village had received 60 sign variances over
the past few years, so the Village Board was looking to review the code. There
was some discussion regarding the ratio to the building size and the number of
signs.
Commissioner Moodhe asked if the light setup on Deerfield would be similar to
the Garden Fresh set-up. Mr. Monaco agreed that this would be timed with the
main light on Milwaukee and Deerfield. Commissioner Moodhe said that he felt
that the parking layouts seemed safer; Mr. Fox agreed that there were not cars
coming down aisles and turning in front of the store. Commissioner Moodhe said
2.3.d
Packet Pg. 56
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
Z
C
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
f
r
o
m
7
.
1
3
.
1
6
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
07/13/2016
that he anticipated a sign issue particularly as this was competing with
businesses up and down a major road. He also said that he did not notice a snow
removal plan; Mr. Fox said that this would generally be pushed to the outside
limits for the parking lot. If it was too much, the snow would likely be moved off
property; Mr. Fox said that employee parking would be along Deerfield Road.
Commissioner Moodhe said that the gas storage tanks were situated on the edge
close to the lake; he was concerned about that. Mr. Fox said that they could look
at moving this if it was a concern.
Commissioner Cohn asked what was going on in the southeast corner by
Riverwoods. Mr. Stilling said that nothing was on the corner piece; to the east of
that, a storage facility was being constructed. Riverwoods owned the parcel and
was marketing it for commercial, so it would probably become a small
commercial area. Commissioner Cohn said that he shared concerns about the
proximity of the storage tanks to the surface water; he also said that for cars
coming out and going east - there would be gas stations on both sides of the
road. He was not sure if that much fuel was needed; Mr. Fox said that lines had
gotten long at other stores with only one fuel station due in part to competitive
pricing. Mr. Stilling said that this could end up being one of the highest grossing
gas stations in the Midwest. However, he was sensitive to how this looked and
could try to help soften it. Commissioner Cohn asked for a possible drawing or
rendering of what this would look like from the east.
Commissioner Weinstein asked if the gas, lube, and car wash was 24 hours. Mr.
Fox said no, this was attended and probably closing at 9pm. Mr. Stilling said that
this could be stipulated in the plan because Bucky’s was open until 10pm.
Commissioner Goldspiel asked about sidewalks on Milwaukee Avenue and
Deerfield as he noted that there was bus service in the area. Commissioner
Goldspiel said that this could be warehousing for other Woodman’s stores since
each store warehoused for other stores; he asked how tractor trailers would
access the warehouse portion of the building. Mr. Fox said that if trucks were
coming from Kenosha, they would likely be coming down Milwaukee. From the
north, they could access on the northerly drive; there were also truck
turnarounds. From the south, they would turn left onto Deerfield and come into
the store entrance or go up to the gas entrance. Commissioner Goldspiel asked if
this was the 66-foot radius circle; Mr. Fox confirmed this. Commissioner
Goldspiel was concerned about how this would work for trucks coming from the
south. Mr. Fox said that this was not preferred and hoped to have a better access
off Milwaukee by the gas station. There was some discussion regarding the exits.
Commissioner Goldspiel asked about the compactors; Mr. Fox said that these
were closed compactors with room for additional trucks to pass by.
Commissioner Goldspiel asked if this was truly an unattended gas station; Mr.
Fox said that yes and that there were emergency shut offs if needed.
Mr. Stilling said that a final revision would come back with a public hearing
around September. Chairman Smith asked if the surrounding stores would be
part of this. Mr. Stilling said that it would for a full review. Mr. Schre iber said that
there was a plan on the southeast corner was well. Retailers were interested
again, and he was expecting six or seven quick service restaurants and stores
throughout the center. They were in talks with a sit-down restaurant as well as a
financial institution. Mr. Schreiber said that he would address the landscaping
plans and concerns on the proposal. Mr. Stilling said that he expected this to be
2.3.d
Packet Pg. 57
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
Z
C
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
f
r
o
m
7
.
1
3
.
1
6
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
07/13/2016
high quality like their other properties. Mr. Schreiber said, regarding the office
component, he was expecting the Shorewood Development group to use the
office space above.
Commissioner Cohn asked if there had been feedback from the community. Mr.
Stilling said that there had been a lot of feedback. Ms. Woods said that she had
fielded numerous calls on this, and they had all been positive. Mr. Stilling said
that notices had not gone out, but they had not heard from any neighboring
properties yet. Commissioner Cohn asked if there were any other unattended
gas stations in Buffalo Grove. Mr. Stilling did not believe so. Commissioner Cohn
wanted to make sure that this was safe. Mr. Stilling said that they would talk to
the petitioner about how to get signage and knowledge to the patrons of these
stations. There was brief discussion regarding a callbox.
There was brief discussion regarding the stores on the preliminary plan for the
southeast corner. Mr. Schreiber said that since then, a cross access was added
to the PJ’s and McDonald’s property. This was in discussions but would be
installed.
Richard Silverman (Potbelly) said that he was in favor of this development. He
urged the council to continue to push the cross-access as this was mutually
beneficial. He said that he had some concern about signage as his property had
been pushed to an 18-foot sign.
Commissioner Goldspiel said that a gas pump had gotten stuck in an incident,
and he wanted to reiterate the safety issues.
Approval of Minutes
1. Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting - Jun 15, 2016 7:30 PM
Commissioner Cesario moved to approve the meeting minutes from June 16,
2016. Commissioner Cohn seconded the motion.
Commissioner Goldspiel said that on page 3D1 (first page of the minutes) it was
noted that Commissioner Goldspiel referred to “payment widths”, and it should be
“pavement widths”.
RESULT: ACCEPTED [7 TO 0]
AYES: Smith, Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein
ABSTAIN: Amy Au
ABSENT: Scott Lesser
Chairman's Report
Chairman Smith welcomed Amy Au to the commission.
Committee and Liaison Reports
Commissioner Goldspield attended the June 20 Board meeting. There were a few items of
possible interest - the Woodman’s matter brought forward and the appointment of planning and
2.3.d
Packet Pg. 58
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
Z
C
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
f
r
o
m
7
.
1
3
.
1
6
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
07/13/2016
zoning commissioners. There had been a comment from Trustee Berman that the Planning &
Zoning Commission should do their duty when the Woodman’s project came through as it was
not a done deal.
Staff Report/Future Agenda Schedule
The meeting on July 20 would be cancelled. The next meeting was anticipated to be August 3.
There might be some text amendments on the agenda.
Public Comments and Questions
None
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 PM
Chris Stilling Director of Community Development
APPROVED BY ME THIS 13th DAY OF July , 2016
2.3.d
Packet Pg. 59
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
Z
C
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
f
r
o
m
7
.
1
3
.
1
6
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
2.3.e
Packet Pg. 60
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
c
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
e
o
f
p
u
b
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
Overall Site Plan
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 61
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
DEERFIELD PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
sh
o
r
e
w
o
o
d
SK
E
T
C
H
1
(
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
)
(N
W
C
&
S
W
C
)
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
&
D
E
E
R
F
I
E
L
D
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
DA
T
E
:
0
9
-
1
2
-
1
6
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 62
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Woodman’s Site Plan on
Development Parcel 1
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 63
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
DEERF
I
E
L
D
PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
LAKE
LAKE
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
F
O
O
D
M
A
R
K
E
T
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
SI
T
E
P
L
A
N
SHEET NUMBER
Know what's
R
PRE
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
FOR
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
RE
V
I
E
W
P:
\
3
1
6
0
1
8
3
\
D
w
g
\
S
H
E
E
T
S
\
S
P
0
0
1
D
6
0
.
d
w
g
,
C
1
0
0
,
8
/
2
5
/
2
0
1
6
1
:
4
2
:
4
4
P
M
,
a
j
s
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 64
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
DEERF
I
E
L
D
PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
LAKE
LAKE
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
F
O
O
D
M
A
R
K
E
T
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
TR
U
C
K
A
C
C
E
S
S
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
SHEET NUMBER
N
( IN FEET )
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 80402020
P:
\
3
1
6
0
1
8
3
\
D
w
g
\
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
s
\
A
u
t
o
T
u
r
n
\
A
T
0
0
1
E
4
0
.
d
w
g
,
A
T
1
,
8
/
4
/
2
0
1
6
4
:
0
2
:
5
1
P
M
,
a
j
s
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 65
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Woodman’s Preliminary
Engineering on Development
Parcel 1
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 66
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
DEERF
I
E
L
D
PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
LAKE
LAKE
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
F
O
O
D
M
A
R
K
E
T
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
SHEET NUMBER
Know what's
R
PRE
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
FOR
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
RE
V
I
E
W
P:
\
3
1
6
0
1
8
3
\
D
w
g
\
S
H
E
E
T
S
\
G
P
0
0
1
D
5
0
.
d
w
g
,
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
,
9
/
1
4
/
2
0
1
6
1
:
3
3
:
2
4
P
M
,
A
j
s
3
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 67
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
DEERF
I
E
L
D
PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
LAKE
LAKE
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
F
O
O
D
M
A
R
K
E
T
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
P
L
A
N
SHEET NUMBER
Know what's
R
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
FOR
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
RE
V
I
E
W
P:
\
3
1
6
0
1
8
3
\
D
w
g
\
S
H
E
E
T
S
\
U
P
0
0
1
D
5
0
.
d
w
g
,
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
P
L
A
N
,
9
/
1
4
/
2
0
1
6
1
1
:
1
1
:
0
6
A
M
,
A
j
s
3
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 68
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Woodman’s Landscape Plan on
Development Parcel 1
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 69
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
OFFSITE
IMPROVEMENTS
BY OTHERS
PROPERTY
LINE
PROPOSED
BUFFALO GROVE
WELCOME SIGN
PROPOSED
RETAINING
WALL
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
PROPERTY
LINE
EXISTING
LAKE
DEERFIELD PARKWAY
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BY
OTHERS
PROPOSED
WOODMAN'S
FOOD MARKET
PROPOSED
SIGN
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
PROPOSED
FENCE
PROPOSED
FENCE
PROPOSED
SIGN
PROPOSED
SIGN
PROPOSED
WOODMAN'S
GAS & LUBE
CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULE
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
F
O
O
D
M
A
R
K
E
T
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
OV
E
R
A
L
L
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
SHEET NUMBER
Know what's
R
25 50 100
GRAPHIC SCALE
0
NORTH
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
FO
R
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
RE
V
I
E
W
8'-0"
6'-0"
4'
6` CEDAR FENCE DETAIL
2 x 4 Stringer (top)
4 x 4 Cedar post
2 x 6 Stringer (bottom)
Compacted Traffic
Bond gravel
Finish grade
1 x 6 Cedar boards with
dog-eared tops
1
P:
\
3
1
6
0
1
8
3
\
D
w
g
\
S
H
E
E
T
S
\
L
S
P
0
1
D
2
0
.
d
w
g
,
L
1
0
0
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
,
8
/
2
6
/
2
0
1
6
2
:
3
6
:
3
6
P
M
,
n
j
p
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 70
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
PROPOSED
WOODMAN'S
FOOD MARKET
PROPOSED WOODMAN'S
FOOD MARKET
OFFSITE
IMPROVEMENTS
BY OTHERS
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
PROPOSED
FENCE
PROPOSED
SIGN
PROPOSED
FENCE
SEE DETAIL
SHEET L100
MI
L
WAU
KEE
AVEN
UE
DEERFIEL
D
PARKWAY DEERFIELD ROAD
CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULE
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
F
O
O
D
M
A
R
K
E
T
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
NO
R
T
H
E
A
S
T
SHEET NUMBER Know what's
R
10 20 40
GRAPHIC SCALE
0
NORTH
PRE
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
FOR
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
RE
V
I
E
W
P:
\
3
1
6
0
1
8
3
\
D
w
g
\
S
H
E
E
T
S
\
L
S
P
0
1
D
2
0
.
d
w
g
,
L
1
0
2
N
O
R
T
H
E
A
S
T
,
8
/
2
6
/
2
0
1
6
1
2
:
5
9
:
5
6
P
M
,
n
j
p
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 71
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
PROPOSED
WOODMAN'S
FOOD MARKET
ED
PROPOSED
RETAINING
WALL
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
PROPOSED
FENCE
SEE DETAIL
SHEET L100
MILWA
U
KE
E
AVEN
U
E
DEERFIEL
D
PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULE
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
F
O
O
D
M
A
R
K
E
T
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
NO
R
T
H
W
E
S
T
SHEET NUMBER
Know what's
R
10 20 40
GRAPHIC SCALE
0
NORTH
PRE
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
FOR
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
RE
V
I
E
W
P:
\
3
1
6
0
1
8
3
\
D
w
g
\
S
H
E
E
T
S
\
L
S
P
0
1
D
2
0
.
d
w
g
,
L
1
0
1
N
O
R
T
H
W
E
S
T
,
8
/
2
6
/
2
0
1
6
1
2
:
5
8
:
3
3
P
M
,
n
j
p
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 72
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
PROPOSED WOODMAN'S
FOOD MARKET
PROPERTY
LINE
PROPOSED
BUFFALO GROVE
WELCOME SIGN
DEERFIELD PARKWAY
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
PROPOSED
SIGN
MI
LWAU
K
EE
AVE
N
UE
DEERFIEL
D
PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULE
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
F
O
O
D
M
A
R
K
E
T
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
SO
U
T
H
E
A
S
T
SHEET NUMBER Know what's
R
10 20 40
GRAPHIC SCALE
0
NORTH
PRE
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
FOR
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
RE
V
I
E
W
P:
\
3
1
6
0
1
8
3
\
D
w
g
\
S
H
E
E
T
S
\
L
S
P
0
1
D
2
0
.
d
w
g
,
L
1
0
4
S
O
U
T
H
E
A
S
T
,
8
/
2
6
/
2
0
1
6
1
:
0
5
:
2
9
P
M
,
n
j
p
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 73
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
PROPOSED WOODMAN'S
FOOD MARKET
PROPOSED
RETAINING
WALL
DEER
F
I
E
L
D
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
PROPOSED
SIGN
MILW
A
U
K
EE
AV
ENUE
DEERFIE
L
D
PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULE
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
F
O
O
D
M
A
R
K
E
T
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
SO
U
T
H
W
E
S
T
SHEET NUMBER
Know what's
R
1/2 X X 2X
GRAPHIC SCALE
0
NORTH
PRE
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
FOR
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
RE
V
I
E
W
P:
\
3
1
6
0
1
8
3
\
D
w
g
\
S
H
E
E
T
S
\
L
S
P
0
1
D
2
0
.
d
w
g
,
L
1
0
3
S
O
U
T
H
W
E
S
T
,
8
/
2
6
/
2
0
1
6
1
:
0
4
:
2
1
P
M
,
n
j
p
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 74
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
PROPERTY
LINE
EXISTING
LAKE
DEERFIELD PARKWAY
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
BY OTHERS
PROPOSED
SIGNSNOW
STORAGE
AREA
SNOW
STORAGE
AREA
PROPOSED
FENCE
SEE DETAIL
SHEET L100
MI
L
W
A
UK
EE
AVEN
U
E
DEERFIEL
D
PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULE
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
F
O
O
D
M
A
R
K
E
T
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
CO
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
GA
S
A
N
D
L
U
B
E
O
U
T
L
O
T
SHEET NUMBER
Know what's
R
10 20 40
GRAPHIC SCALE
0
NORTH
PRE
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
FOR
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
RE
V
I
E
W
P:
\
3
1
6
0
1
8
3
\
D
w
g
\
S
H
E
E
T
S
\
L
S
P
0
1
D
2
0
.
d
w
g
,
L
1
0
5
G
A
S
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
,
8
/
2
6
/
2
0
1
6
1
:
0
6
:
1
0
P
M
,
n
j
p
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 75
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
7
6
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 77
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 78
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 79
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 80
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
8
1
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
Woodman’s Architecture and
Renderings on Development
Parcel 1
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 82
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Aluminum Composite Material - Bone White
Face Brick #1 (Light) - Bowerston Shale Co. - Hanover Plant #43 Utility
Cast Stone (Neutral) - Big River Cast Stone Inc. - #8-19
Face Brick & Inset #2 (Dark) - Interstate Brick - L-4 Copperstone2
3
Sheet Metal Trim - Cardinal Red
Aluminum Composite Material - TBX Silver5
6
4
1
&
East Elevation
North Elevation
1
2
3
7
4
3
2
6
5
4
3
1
2
7
4
5
7
4
3
5
2
3
7
4
6
4
Aluminum Composite Material - Gray
7
Buffalo Grove Gas & Lube Elevations
Date: 8/4/2016
Revised:
ABuilding Systems
General Corp.
Building Design Group, Inc.B D G
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 83
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
&
Face Brick #1 (Light) - Bowerston Shale Co. - Hanover Plant #43 Utility
Solider Course (Light) 1/2" Inset Brick Face (Light)
Cast Stone (Neutral) - Big River Cast Stone Inc. - #8-19
Face Brick & Inset #2 (Dark) - Interstate Brick - L-4 Copperstone
1
2
3
Sheet Metal Trim - Cardinal Red
Aluminum Composite Material - TBX Silver5
6
4
Aluminum Composite Material - Gray
7
1
2
3
7
4
5
2
1
4
3
3
1
2
7
4
1B
7
4
3
5
2
3
7
4
6
4
Aluminum Composite Material - Bone White
7
Buffalo Grove Gas & Lube Elevations
Date: 8/31/2016
Revised:
B
West Elevation
South Elevation
1A 1B
1A
Building Systems
General Corp.
Building Design Group, Inc.B D G
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 84
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Gas & Lube Perspective
Buffalo Grove Gas & Lube Elevations
Date: 9/2/2016
Revised:
C
Gas & Lube Birdseye
Building Systems
General Corp.
Building Design Group, Inc.B D G
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 85
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Deerfield Parkway West Approach
Buffalo Grove Gas & Lube Elevations
Date: 9/2/2016
Revised:
D
Overall Side Birdseye
Building Systems
General Corp.
Building Design Group, Inc.B D G
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 86
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Buffalo Grove Food Market Elevations
Date: 8/4/2016
Revised:
1
2
3
Sheet Metal Trim - Cardinal Red
Metal Frames - Clear Anodized Aluminum
5
6
41
Partial South Elevation
1
EIFS - STO White - (9433)Partial South Elevation
4
5
55 5
5
5
1
1
2
22
5
5
4
4
6 6 633 3
2
3
6 366
2
5 4
2
333
Elastomeric Coating - Coast Point - (SW 2053)
Elastomeric Coating - Mocha - (SW 6067)
Elastomeric Coating - Bedouin Beige - (SW 2044)
Building Systems
General Corp.
Building Design Group, Inc.B D G
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 87
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Buffalo Grove Food Market Elevations
Date: 8/4/2016
Revised:
2
Elastomeric Coating - Coast Point - (SW 2053)
2
3
Sheet Metal Trim - Cardinal Red
Metal Frames - Clear Anodized Aluminum
5
6
41
East Elevation
Elastomeric Coating - Mocha - (SW 6067)
Elastomeric Coating - Bedouin Beige - (SW 2044)
EIFS - STO White - (9433)
West Elevation
5 1
3
2
5
4
2
333
2
54
4
5
5
3
24
2
333
2 5
4
451
25
6
6
Building Systems
General Corp.
Building Design Group, Inc.B D G
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 88
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Rear (North East) Perspective
Buffalo Grove Food Market Elevations
Date: 8/4/2016
Revised:
3
Front (South) Elevation
Building Systems
General Corp.
Building Design Group, Inc.B D G
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 89
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Partial Front (South) Elevation
Buffalo Grove Food Market Elevations
Date: 8/2/2016
Revised:
4
Partial Front (South) Elevation
Building Systems
General Corp.
Building Design Group, Inc.B D G
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 90
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Enlarged South East Perspective
Buffalo Grove Food Market Elevations
Date: 8/2/2016
Revised:
5
East Elevation
South East Perspective
Building Systems
General Corp.
Building Design Group, Inc.B D G
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 91
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Enlarged South West Perspective
Buffalo Grove Food Market Elevations
Date: 8/2/2016
Revised:
6
West Elevation
South West Perspective
Building Systems
General Corp.
Building Design Group, Inc.B D G
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 92
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
FS
TSTS
TS
DR
A
W
N
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DRAWING NO.
SCALE:
DATE:
16-100
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Su
i
t
e
1
0
0
M
a
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
SHEET NO.
REVISION:
PROJECT NO.
2351E
W
O
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B
DG
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
S
I
G
N
G
R
O
U
P
,
I
N
C
IL
D
E
S
I
G
N
F
I
R
M
N
O
.
:
1
8
4
.
0
0
7
4
5
5
-
0
0
0
4
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
A0
PA
W
JR
A
G
W
F
PROJECT
NORTH
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 93
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
FS
TS TS
TS
DR
A
W
N
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DRAWING NO.
SCALE:
DATE:
16-100
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Su
i
t
e
1
0
0
M
a
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
SHEET NO.
REVISION:
PROJECT NO.
2351E
W
O
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B
DG
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
S
I
G
N
G
R
O
U
P
,
I
N
C
IL
D
E
S
I
G
N
F
I
R
M
N
O
.
:
1
8
4
.
0
0
7
4
5
5
-
0
0
0
4
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A1
PA
W
JR
A
G
W
F
PROJECT
NORTH
PROJECT
NORTH
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 94
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
DR
A
W
N
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DRAWING NO.
SCALE:
DATE:
16-100
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Su
i
t
e
1
0
0
M
a
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
SHEET NO.
REVISION:
PROJECT NO.
2351E
W
O
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B
DG
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
S
I
G
N
G
R
O
U
P
,
I
N
C
IL
D
E
S
I
G
N
F
I
R
M
N
O
.
:
1
8
4
.
0
0
7
4
5
5
-
0
0
0
4
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A2
PA
W
JR
A
G
W
F
PROJECTNORTH
PROJECT
NORTH
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 95
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
DR
A
W
N
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DRAWING NO.
SCALE:
DATE:
16-100
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Su
i
t
e
1
0
0
M
a
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
SHEET NO.
REVISION:
PROJECT NO.
2351E
W
O
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B
DG
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
S
I
G
N
G
R
O
U
P
,
I
N
C
IL
D
E
S
I
G
N
F
I
R
M
N
O
.
:
1
8
4
.
0
0
7
4
5
5
-
0
0
0
4
A3
&
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
S
I
G
N
A
G
E
PA
W
JR
A
G
W
F
G
A
S
/
L
U
B
E
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 96
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
ENTER EXIT EXIT EXIT
ENTEREXIT ENTER ENTER
DR
A
W
N
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DRAWING NO.
SCALE:
DATE:
16-100
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Su
i
t
e
1
0
0
M
a
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
SHEET NO.
REVISION:
PROJECT NO.
2351E
W
O
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B
DG
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
S
I
G
N
G
R
O
U
P
,
I
N
C
IL
D
E
S
I
G
N
F
I
R
M
N
O
.
:
1
8
4
.
0
0
7
4
5
5
-
0
0
0
4
A4
G
A
S
C
A
N
O
P
Y
&
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
S
I
G
N
A
G
E
PA
W
JR
A
G
W
F
C
A
R
W
A
S
H
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 97
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Woodman’s Sign Package on
Development Parcel 1
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 98
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
DR
A
W
N
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DRAWING NO.
SCALE:
DATE:
16-100
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Su
i
t
e
1
0
0
M
a
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
SHEET NO.
REVISION:
PROJECT NO.
2351E
W
O
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B
DG
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
S
I
G
N
G
R
O
U
P
,
I
N
C
IL
D
E
S
I
G
N
F
I
R
M
N
O
.
:
1
8
4
.
0
0
7
4
5
5
-
0
0
0
4
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
SIGN1
PA
W
JR
A
G
W
F
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 99
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
S
u
i
t
e
1
0
0
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Ma
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B|
|D
G
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
0
0
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
S
u
i
t
e
1
0
0
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Ma
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B|
|D
G
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
0
1
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
S
u
i
t
e
1
0
0
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Ma
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B|
|D
G
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
0
2
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
S
u
i
t
e
1
0
0
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Ma
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B|
|D
G
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
0
3
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
S
u
i
t
e
1
0
0
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Ma
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B|
|D
G
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
0
4
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
S
u
i
t
e
1
0
0
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Ma
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B|
|D
G
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
0
5
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
S
u
i
t
e
1
0
0
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Ma
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B|
|D
G
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
0
6
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
$19.99
OIL CHANGE
STARTING AT
BASIC
$19.99
OIL CHANGE
STARTING AT
BASIC
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
S
u
i
t
e
1
0
0
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Ma
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B|
|D
G
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
0
7
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
S
u
i
t
e
1
0
0
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Ma
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B|
|D
G
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
0
8
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
$4.00
CAR WASH
STARTING AT
TAX INCLUDED
ENTEREXIT
$4.00
CAR WASH
STARTING AT
TAX INCLUDED
WO
O
D
M
A
N
'
S
59
7
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
S
u
i
t
e
1
0
0
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
0
0
Fa
x
:
(
6
0
8
)
2
7
6
-
4
4
6
8
Ma
d
i
s
o
n
,
W
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
n
5
3
7
1
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
,
I
n
c
B|
|D
G
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
r
p
.
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
0
9
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
Shorewood’s Site Plan on
Development Parcel 2
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 110
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
DEERFIELD PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
sh
o
r
e
w
o
o
d
SK
E
T
C
H
1
(
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
)
(N
W
C
&
S
W
C
)
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
&
D
E
E
R
F
I
E
L
D
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
DA
T
E
:
0
9
-
1
2
-
1
6
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 111
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
DEERFIELD PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
sh
o
r
e
w
o
o
d
SK
E
T
C
H
1
(
E
N
L
A
R
G
E
D
)
(N
W
C
&
S
W
C
)
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
&
D
E
E
R
F
I
E
L
D
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
DA
T
E
:
0
9
-
1
2
-
1
6
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
1
2
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
DEERFIELD PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
15
10
1
510
15
15
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
DEERFIELD PARKWAY
DEERFIELD ROAD
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
MA
G
N
E
T
I
C
sh
o
r
e
w
o
o
d
TR
U
C
K
T
U
R
N
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
(N
W
C
&
S
W
C
)
M
I
L
W
A
U
K
E
E
A
V
E
N
U
E
&
D
E
E
R
F
I
E
L
D
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y
BU
F
F
A
L
O
G
R
O
V
E
,
I
L
DA
T
E
:
0
9
-
1
2
-
1
6
MA
G
N
E
T
I
C
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
1
3
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
Shorewood’s Landscape Plan on
Development Parcel 2
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 114
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 115
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Shorewood’s Building
Renderings on Development
Parcel 2
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 116
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
NOTE:
ELEVATIONS ARE
PRELIMINARY AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE
SDG BUFFALO GROVE, IL BUILDING 'A' 3D IMAGES
A5
BUILDING 'A' - NORTH-WEST VIEW
BUILDING 'A' - NORTH-EAST VIEW
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
1
7
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
NOTE:
ELEVATIONS ARE
PRELIMINARY AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE
SDG BUFFALO GROVE, IL BUILDING 'B' 3D IMAGES
B4
BUILDING 'B' - NORTH-WEST VIEW
BUILDING 'B' - NORTH-EAST VIEW
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
1
8
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
2207 SF
RESTAURANT 5
2244 SF
RETAIL B
2214 SF
RETAIL A
5005 SF
RESTAURANT 4
1724 SF
RESTAURANT 3
1877 SF
RESTAURANT 2
2227 SF
RESTAURANT 1
92 SF
RISER
225 SF
EXIT STAIR #2
600 SF
PATIO
470 SF
PATIO
170 SF
PATIO
185 SF
PATIO
320 SF
PATIO
21
3
S
F
EX
I
T
S
T
A
I
R
#
1
35' - 3"12' - 3"29' - 0"56' - 0"
49' - 0"11' - 0"20' - 0"107' - 0"
67
'
-
8
"
44
'
-
6
"
559 SF
OFFICE LOBBY
71 SF
ELEV.
AREA TYPE
CIRCULATION
OFFICE
PATIO
RESTAURANT
RETAIL
UTILITY
30
'
-
0
"
24
'
-
0
3
/
4
"
22
'
-
1
0
3
/
4
"
29' - 7 3/4"29' - 1 1/4"
30
'
-
6
"
45
'
-
1
0
"
39
'
-
4
"
78' - 1 1/2"
32' - 6"
28
'
-
0
"
24' - 0"
24
'
-
0
"
32' - 9 3/4"
61
'
-
8
1
/
2
"
NOTE:
PLANS ARE PRELIMINARY
AND ARE SUBJECT TO
CHANGE
SDG BUFFALO GROVE, IL BUILDING 'A' PRELIMINARY GROUND FLOOR PLAN
A1
BUILDING 'A' - AREA SCHEDULE (FIR...
NAME AREA
ELEV.71 SF
EXIT STAIR #1 213 SF
EXIT STAIR #2 225 SF
OFFICE LOBBY 559 SF
RESTAURANT 1 2227 SF
RESTAURANT 2 1877 SF
RESTAURANT 3 1724 SF
RESTAURANT 4 5005 SF
RESTAURANT 5 2207 SF
RETAIL A 2214 SF
RETAIL B 2244 SF
RISER 92 SF
TOTAL 18658 SF
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
1
9
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
6330 SF
OFFICE 1
3222 SF
OFFICE 2
2607 SF
PATIO
932 SF
PATIO
10
9
'
-
4
"
279 SF
EXIT STAIR #2
1064 SF
OFFICE CORRIDOR
72 SF
ELEV.
21
0
S
F
EX
I
T
S
T
A
I
R
#
1
89 SF
STOR.
100 SF
CUST.
142 SF
WOMENS
143 SF
MENS
15' - 0"71' - 5"
AREA TYPE
CIRCULATION
OFFICE
PATIO
UTILITY
NOTE:
PLANS ARE PRELIMINARY
AND ARE SUBJECT TO
CHANGE
SDG BUFFALO GROVE, IL BUILDING 'A' PRELIMINARY SECOND FLOOR PLAN
A2
BUILDING 'A' - AREA SCHEDULE...
NAME AREA
CUST.100 SF
ELEV.72 SF
EXIT STAIR #1 210 SF
EXIT STAIR #2 279 SF
MENS 143 SF
OFFICE 1 6330 SF
OFFICE 2 3222 SF
OFFICE CORRIDOR 1064 SF
STOR.89 SF
WOMENS 142 SF
TOTAL 11651 SF
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
2
0
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
3528 SF
RESTAURANT 7
4143 SF
RESTAURANT 6
88 SF
RISER
674 SF
PATIO
757 SF
PATIO
19
'
-
0
"
13
'
-
9
"
12
'
-
6
"
25
'
-
0
"
116' - 0"
28
'
-
9
"
15
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
10' - 0"
6' - 7"
2' - 0"
AREA TYPE
PATIO
RESTAURANT
UTILITY
47' - 0"59' - 0"
1' - 10 1/2"
45' - 0"4' - 0"41' - 0"20' - 0"
67
'
-
0
3
/
4
"
69
'
-
6
1
/
2
"
NOTE:
PLANS ARE PRELIMINARY
AND ARE SUBJECT TO
CHANGE
SDG BUFFALO GROVE, IL BUILDING 'B' PRELIMINARY GROUND FLOOR PLAN
B1
BUILDING 'B' - AREA SCHEDULE
NAME AREA
RESTAURANT 6 4143 SF
RESTAURANT 7 3528 SF
RISER 88 SF
TOTAL 7759 SF
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
2
1
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
Shorewood’s Signage Package
on Development Parcel 2
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 122
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
Ground Level
0' - 0"
Second Floor
16' - 6"
Roof
30' - 6"
Roof Parapet
32' - 6"
Low Parapet
21' - 0"
Mid Parapet
23' - 0"
High Parapet
26' - 0"
RESTAURANT 1
30' - 0"
RESTAURANT 2
24' - 0 3/4"
RESTAURANT 3
22' - 10 3/4"
RESTAURANT 4
62' - 8 1/2"
22' - 6"
19' - 8"
6'
-
0
"
18' - 2"
6'
-
0
"
19' - 6"
11
'
-
0
"
16
'
-
2
"
10
'
-
0
"
110' - 0"
4'
-
0
"
OFFICE
110' - 10 1/2"
RED IRONSPOT BRICK LIGHT GRAY METAL PANEL ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WITH LOW-E GLASS COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL
SLATE COLOR CAST STONE BASE DARK GRAY METAL PANEL
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
GRAY BLEND BRICKCHARCOAL FABRIC AWNING ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WITH LOW-E GLASSCHARCOAL METAL PROFILE SILL
Ground Level
0' - 0"
Second Floor
16' - 6"
Roof
30' - 6"
Roof Parapet
32' - 6"
Low Parapet
21' - 0"
Mid Parapet
23' - 0"
High Parapet
26' - 0"
RESTAURANT 4
79' - 1 3/4"
RETAIL A
32' - 9 1/2"
OFFICE
6' - 7 1/4"
RETAIL B
38' - 9 3/4"
RESTAURANT 5
31' - 7 3/4"
OFFICE
141' - 8 1/4"
19' - 6"
11
'
-
0
"
23' - 0"
6'
-
0
"
29' - 0"
6'
-
0
"
28' - 0"
10
'
-
0
"
11' - 0"
9'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
"
141' - 0"
LIGHT GRAY METAL PANELALUMINUM STOREFRONT WITH LOW-E GLASS COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL RED IRONSPOT BRICKRED IRONSPOT BRICK
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY SLATE COLOR CAST STONE BASE CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY DARK GRAY METAL PANEL GRAY BLEND BRICKCHARCOAL FABRIC AWNING CHARCOAL METAL PROFILE SILL ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WITH LOW-E GLASS
WALL SIGN ZONE
TENANT DEMISING WALL
SIGN LEGEND
WALL SIGN CRITERIA
TENANT WALL SIGN LOCATED AS SHOWN
IN EXHIBIT
TENANT SIGN CONSTRUCTION AND
DESIGN SHALL BE INTERNALLY
ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS
MOUNTED INDIVIDUALLY AND DIRECTLY TO
THE BUILDING WITHOUT THE USE OF A
RACEWAY
TENANT SIGN SHALL BE CENTERED
HORIZONTALLY AND VERTICALLY IN THE
SIGN ZONE
NOTE:
ELEVATIONS ARE
PRELIMINARY AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE
SDG BUFFALO GROVE, IL BUILDING 'A' PROPOSED SIGN EXHIBIT
A3
BUILDING 'A' - EAST ELEVATION
BUILDING 'A' - NORTH ELEVATION
SIGN AREA PROPOSED
TENANT SIGN AREA
OFFICE (E) 100 SF
OFFICE (N) 100 SF
OFFICE (W) 100 SF
OFFICE LOBBY 40 SF
RESTAURANT 1 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 1 (S) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 2 75 SF
RESTAURANT 3 75 SF
RESTAURANT 4 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 4 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 5 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 5 (W) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 6 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 6 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 7 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 7 (W) 150 SF
RETAIL A 75 SF
RETAIL B 75 SF
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
2
3
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
WALL SIGN ZONE
TENANT DEMISING WALL
SIGN LEGEND
Ground Level
0' - 0"
Second Floor
16' - 6"
Roof
30' - 6"
Roof Parapet
32' - 6"
Low Parapet
21' - 0"
Mid Parapet
23' - 0"
High Parapet
26' - 0"
RESTAURANT 1
80' - 0 1/2"
10
'
-
0
"
23' - 0"
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WITH LOW-E GLASSCOPING TO MATCH METAL PANELLIGHT GRAY METAL PANEL RED IRONSPOT BRICKCHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
?GRAY BLEND BRICKCHARCOAL METAL PROFILE SILLHOLLOW METAL DOOR PAINTED TO MATCH BRICKSLATE COLOR CAST STONE BASE
GLASS
Ground Level
0' - 0"
Second Floor
16' - 6"
Roof
30' - 6"
Roof Parapet
32' - 6"
Low Parapet
21' - 0"
Mid Parapet
23' - 0"
High Parapet
26' - 0"
RESTAURANT 5
72' - 6"
OFFICE
62' - 11 1/8"
62' - 0"
4'
-
0
"
10
'
-
0
"
23' - 6"
LIGHT GRAY METAL PANELALUMINUM STOREFRONT WITH LOW-E GLASS COPING TO MATCH METAL PANELRED IRONSPOT BRICK
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WITH LOW-E GLASS GRAY BLEND BRICK HOLLOW METAL DOOR PAINTED TO MATCH BRICK CHARCOAL METAL PROFILE SILL SLATE COLOR CAST STONE BASE
COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL
WALL SIGN CRITERIA
TENANT WALL SIGN LOCATED AS SHOWN
IN EXHIBIT
TENANT SIGN CONSTRUCTION AND
DESIGN SHALL BE INTERNALLY
ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS
MOUNTED INDIVIDUALLY AND DIRECTLY TO
THE BUILDING WITHOUT THE USE OF A
RACEWAY
TENANT SIGN SHALL BE CENTERED
HORIZONTALLY AND VERTICALLY IN THE
SIGN ZONE
NOTE:
ELEVATIONS ARE
PRELIMINARY AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE
SDG BUFFALO GROVE, IL BUILDING 'A' PROPOSED SIGN EXHIBIT
A4
SIGN AREA PROPOSED
TENANT SIGN AREA
OFFICE (E) 100 SF
OFFICE (N) 100 SF
OFFICE (W) 100 SF
OFFICE LOBBY 40 SF
RESTAURANT 1 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 1 (S) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 2 75 SF
RESTAURANT 3 75 SF
RESTAURANT 4 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 4 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 5 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 5 (W) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 6 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 6 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 7 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 7 (W) 150 SF
RETAIL A 75 SF
RETAIL B 75 SF
BUILDING 'A' - SOUTH ELEVATION
BUILDING 'A' - WEST ELEVATION
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
2
4
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
WALL SIGN ZONE
TENANT DEMISING WALL
SIGN LEGEND
WALL SIGN CRITERIA
TENANT WALL SIGN LOCATED AS SHOWN
IN EXHIBIT
TENANT SIGN CONSTRUCTION AND
DESIGN SHALL BE INTERNALLY
ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS
MOUNTED INDIVIDUALLY AND DIRECTLY TO
THE BUILDING WITHOUT THE USE OF A
RACEWAY
TENANT SIGN SHALL BE CENTERED
HORIZONTALLY AND VERTICALLY IN THE
SIGN ZONE
Ground Level
0' - 0"
Second Floor
16' - 6"
Low Parapet
21' - 0"
High Parapet
26' - 0"
RESTAURANT 6
70' - 3"
11
'
-
0
"
13' - 0"
COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL RED IRONSPOT BRICK DARK GRAY METAL PANEL
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPYALUMINUM STOREFRONT WITH LOW-E GLASS
GRAY BLEND BRICK
SLATE COLOR CAST STONE BASE CHARCOAL METAL PROFILE SILL
Ground Level
0' - 0"
Second Floor
16' - 6"
Low Parapet
21' - 0"
High Parapet
26' - 0"
RESTAURANT 6
61' - 0"
RESTAURANT 7
49' - 0"
44' - 6"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
0
"
14' - 0"
COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL RED IRONSPOT BRICK DARK GRAY METAL PANEL GRAY BLEND BRICK COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
SLATE COLOR CAST STONE BASECHARCOAL METAL PROFILE SILL ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WITH LOW-E GLASS
NOTE:
ELEVATIONS ARE
PRELIMINARY AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE
SDG BUFFALO GROVE, IL BUILDING 'B' PROPOSED SIGN EXHIBIT
B2
SIGN AREA PROPOSED
TENANT SIGN AREA
OFFICE (E) 100 SF
OFFICE (N) 100 SF
OFFICE (W) 100 SF
OFFICE LOBBY 40 SF
RESTAURANT 1 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 1 (S) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 2 75 SF
RESTAURANT 3 75 SF
RESTAURANT 4 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 4 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 5 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 5 (W) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 6 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 6 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 7 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 7 (W) 150 SF
RETAIL A 75 SF
RETAIL B 75 SF
BUILDING 'B' - EAST ELEVATION
BUILDING 'B' - NORTH ELEVATION
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
2
5
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
WALL SIGN ZONE
TENANT DEMISING WALL
SIGN LEGEND
WALL SIGN CRITERIA
TENANT WALL SIGN LOCATED AS SHOWN
IN EXHIBIT
TENANT SIGN CONSTRUCTION AND
DESIGN SHALL BE INTERNALLY
ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS
MOUNTED INDIVIDUALLY AND DIRECTLY TO
THE BUILDING WITHOUT THE USE OF A
RACEWAY
TENANT SIGN SHALL BE CENTERED
HORIZONTALLY AND VERTICALLY IN THE
SIGN ZONE
Ground Level
0' - 0"
Second Floor
16' - 6"
Low Parapet
21' - 0"
High Parapet
26' - 0"
COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL GRAY BLEND BRICK
HOLLOW METAL DOOR PAINTED TO MATCH BRICK
RED IRONSPOT BRICK
SLATE COLOR CAST STONE BASE CHARCOAL METAL PROFILE SILL
Ground Level
0' - 0"
Second Floor
16' - 6"
Low Parapet
21' - 0"
High Parapet
26' - 0"
RESTAURANT 7
69' - 9"
10
'
-
0
"
22' - 0"
RED IRONSPOT BRICK COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL GRAY BLEND BRICK
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WITH LOW-E GLASS CHARCOAL METAL PROFILE SILL SLATE COLOR CAST STONE BASECHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
NOTE:
ELEVATIONS ARE
PRELIMINARY AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE
SDG BUFFALO GROVE, IL BUILDING 'B' PROPOSED SIGN EXHIBIT
B3
SIGN AREA PROPOSED
TENANT SIGN AREA
OFFICE (E) 100 SF
OFFICE (N) 100 SF
OFFICE (W) 100 SF
OFFICE LOBBY 40 SF
RESTAURANT 1 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 1 (S) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 2 75 SF
RESTAURANT 3 75 SF
RESTAURANT 4 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 4 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 5 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 5 (W) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 6 (E) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 6 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 7 (N) 150 SF
RESTAURANT 7 (W) 150 SF
RETAIL A 75 SF
RETAIL B 75 SF
BUILDING 'B' - SOUTH ELEVATION
BUILDING 'B' - WEST ELEVATION
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
2
6
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
250.0 SF
11' - 6"
21
'
-
8
"
25
'
-
0
"
3'
-
4
"
14' - 0"
METAL PANEL
RED IRONSPOT BRICK
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL
168.7 SF
11' - 6"
14' - 0"
14
'
-
8
"
RED IRONSPOT BRICK
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
METAL PANEL
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL
3'
-
6
1
/
4
"
5' - 7 1/2"
20.8 SF
25
'
-
0
"
2' - 6"
RED IRONSPOT BRICK
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
METAL PANEL
GLASS
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL
SIGN CABINET
18
'
-
0
"
2' - 6"
RED IRONSPOT BRICK
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
GLASS
METAL PANEL
CHARCOAL PAINTED STEEL CANOPY
COPING TO MATCH METAL PANEL
SIGN CABINET
5' - 7 1/2"
2'
-
4
1
/
4
"
13.2 SF
NOTE:
ELEVATIONS ARE
PRELIMINARY AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE
SDG BUFFALO GROVE, IL MONUMENT SIGN PRELIMINARY DESIGN
1
FRONT VIEW
FRONT VIEW
MONUMENT SIGN 'A' AT DEERFIELD PKWY AND MILWAUKEE AVE
MONUMENT SIGN 'B' AT PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL ON DEERFIELD PKWY
TYPICAL PANEL
SIDE VIEW
SIDE VIEW
TYPICAL PANEL
2.
3
.
f
Pa
c
k
e
t
P
g
.
1
2
7
Attachment: Complete Plan Set 9.15.16 (1689 : Consider Approval of a New Commercial Development at the Former Berenesa Plaza Property)
Proposed Bank Building on
Development Parcel 2
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 128
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
LIF-WBO-30E.1
57.6 s.f.
57.6 s.f.
LIF-WBO-30E.2
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 129
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
LIF-WBO-30E.3
57.6 s.f.
LIF-WBO-30E.4
57.6 s.f.
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 130
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
2.3.f
Packet Pg. 131
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
9
.
1
5
.
1
6
(
1
6
8
9
:
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
a
N
e
w
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
a
t
t
h
e
F
o
r
m
e
r
B
e
r
e
n
e
s
a
P
l
a
z
a
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
)
08/17/2016
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 17, 2016
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:31 PM by Commissioner Eric Smith
Public Hearings/Items For Consideration
1.O-2016-42 Consider Approval of a Variation for a Rear Yard Setback Reduction for 958
Parker Lane (Trustee Weidenfeld)
Mr. Dennis Schultz and Mrs. Merritt Schultz, 958 Parker Lane, were present and sworn
in.
Mr. Schultz explained that they had a screen room of the same size as the proposed but
the snowloads were too much for the roof to bear. They would like to replace what they
with a newer, safer, more attractive room. The screen room will not impair an inadequate
supply of light and air to adjacent properties. The screen room will not unreasonably
diminish the values of adjacent properties. The screen room will not unreasonably
increase congestion in the public streets or otherwise endanger public safety. The screen
room will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
Com. Cesario asked if the previous screen room generated any complaints from the
neighbors. Mr. Schultz responded no. Com. Cesario confirmed with the Petitioner that
they are replacing like for like. Com. Cesario asked Mr. Sheehan if the Village had
received any public comment regarding the proposed screen room. Mr. Sheehan stated
that the Village received one inquiry about the proposed screen room but there were no
issues.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were
no questions or comments from the audience.
Ch. Smith entered the staff report as Exhibit 1.
The public hearing was closed at 7:38 PM.
Moved by Com. Weinstein, seconded by Com. Khan, to approve the request for variation
to Zoning Ordinance, Section 17.40.020, pertaining to Area, Height, Bulk and Placement
Regulations, to allow the installation of a screen room addition to replace the screen
room that was damaged and removed past winter. The proposed screen room addition
would be setback approximately 25.5 feet from the rear lot line.
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 132
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
A
u
g
1
7
,
2
0
1
6
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
08/17/2016
RESULT:ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
AYES:Smith, Cesario, Cohn, Khan, Lesser, Weinstein, Au
ABSENT:Adam Moodhe, Stephen Goldspiel
Regular Meeting
Other Matters for Discussion
1.Workshop #2- Proposed Woodman’s Development on the Berenesa Plaza
Property (Trustee Berman)
Mr. Stilling re-introduced Mr. Gary Fox, who appeared before the Planning &
Zoning Commission (PZC) about a month ago. Mr. Fox will be reviewing the
enhancements made to the proposed development based on the feedback
received at the last meeting.
Mr. Fox reviewed the revised east and west building elevations. Along Milwaukee
Avenue they have added a second raised marquee, windows and lighting. They
have added features to the west elevation as well. The enhanced the proposed
landscaping to provide screening along Milwaukee Avenue.
Com. Moodhe arrived at 7:74 PM.
Mr. Fox continued to explain the proposed truck delivery traffic flow. They expect
20-30 truck deliveries a day.
Com. Lesser asked about the hours of the truck deliveries. Mr. Fox is not sure
but believes that the majority of deliveries are during the day.
Mr. Fox explained that the plan now shows the designated snow storage areas. If
there is more snow than can be stored on site, the snow will be removed. He
went to describe the car wash noise. The car wash would operate 24 hours a
day. The doors would be completely closed during the entire wash operation. Mr.
Stilling advised that the car wash is a permitted use and will work with the
Developer on the 24 hour operation. Mr. Fox continued to explain that the car
wash and gas pumps would operate 24 hours a day. However the convenience
store would be open from 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM. The Lube Center would be open
7:00 AM to 6:00 PM Monday through Saturday, closed Sundays. The unattended
gas pump are controlled by the State. Automatic shut-offs are required and tied
directly into the Fire Department. There would be a heat detection system built
into the canopy. Fire extinguishers would be located at each island. They have
two other operations in Illinois with the unattended gas pumps. They also have
provide a top view elevation from Deerfield Parkway as requested.
Com. Cesario asked about the underground fuel tanks. Mr. Fox explained they
are double-walled with a leak detection system. No different that the underground
fuels tanks at marinas.
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 133
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
A
u
g
1
7
,
2
0
1
6
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
08/17/2016
Com. Lesser asked about the construction materials of the buildings. Mr. Fox
advised that the market building will be pre-cast with scored panels and brick and
stone stamping. The red accents are metal panels. The pillars that would not be
scored will be simulated brick. Com. Lesser asked if the panels will be painted
on-site. Mr. Fox responded yes and added that the fuel station will be brick. Com.
Lesser asked Mr. Fox to consider berming along Milwaukee Avenue and
Deerfield Parkway to screen the parking lot. Mr. Stilling added that staff is
working with Woodman's on granting an easement to create a gateway feature at
the northwest corner of the intersection. Com. Lesser stated that the intersection
is not pedestrian-friendly and asked if any improvement were planned to add
crosswalks. Mr. Stilling responded that he is not sure if IDOT would put
crosswalks where there are dual turning lanes. There will be walk and bike paths
around the development.
Com. Moodhe asked about the distance from the unattended pumps to the
property line. Mr. Fox stated it is approximately 25 to 30 feet. Com. Moodhe
stated that he is still concerned about the underground storage tanks and asked
for consideration to move them further inland. He also asked Mr. Stilling about a
possible future fire station that may be located at the CAFT site. Mr. Stilling
responded that is only in the idea stage. Com. Moodhe recommended that the
Village consider to put a 2 bay station at the CAFT site.
Com. Cesario asked Mr. Stilling if there are any plans for the property on the
southwest corner of Deerfield Parkway. Mr. Stilling advised that is still a work in
progress, but they plan for retail activity.
Com. Cohn asked if a snow storage area will be located to the west of the
unattended gas pumps. Mr. Fox responded yes. Com Cohn advised that he is
nervous about the snow plows being so close to the pumps and described a
scenario where a plow hit a pump and fuel leaked. Mr. Fox explained that the
State limits fuel spills to 50 gallons before it automatically shuts off. Com. Cohn
asked where the sensor is located. Mr. Fox is not sure. Mr. Stilling asked Mr. Fox
if the gas pumps are under 24 hour surveillance from inside the store. Mr. Fox
responded yes.
Com. Au asked if there are any studies that can be provided concerning the
safety between attended and unattended pumps. Mr. Fox will look into it.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There
were no questions or comments from the audience.
Mr. Stilling advised that staff will prepare Woodman's for the public hearing which
most likely will be the second meeting in September. In addition to preliminary
plan approval, variations will be sought for driveway aisle widths and signage and
a special use for the drive-thru. The building should meet the setback
requirements.
The workshop ended at 8:11 PM.
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 134
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
A
u
g
1
7
,
2
0
1
6
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
08/17/2016
2.Workshop #3- Proposed Residential Development at 16802 W Aptakisic
Road/Link Farm (Trustee Berman)
Mr. James Truesdell, KHovnanian Homes, was present. He explained that they
have worked hard to address all the concerns that the Commissioners had at the
last workshop held on July 13, 2016. Based upon their analysis, they feel that
their product is a good fit. He introduced a new member of their development
team, Mr. Dick Greenwood, Director of Builder Marketing for Coldwell Banker.
Mr. Greenwood reviewed the changes in the market trends since the recession.
The Plan A Townhomes styles are now selling to people 55 and older just as
much as they are selling to the millennials. The Villages (2-story) Townhomes
are the biggest trend. More and more have their parents in their 80’s and 90’s
living with them. He noted that only about 12% of people want to leave their
community where they have resided for many years and is familiar with. The
products being offered here allows residents to stay within their community as
well as provide the amenities they desire. 3 out of the 5 Cottages have masters
on the first floor. This is a very desirable feature to people, it’s what they want.
When asked, Millennials have been responding that they intend to only purchase
one home throughout their lifetime. People want smaller homes that are
maintenance free. The product mix they are offering is the perfect fit. He believes
that based upon the current trends, in the next 40 to 50 years the majority of
homes will be multi-generational.
Mr. Kurensky reviewed the information provided in the Link Crossing Concept
Submittal dated August 10, 2016 in support of Mr. Greenwoods’ testimony. They
looked at both the national trends and the local trends. A local market analysis of
a similar project located in an adjacent town reveals that 30% of the buyers are
55 and over. Link Farm units will start at $300,000 and range up to $650,000
offering modern, maintenance-free homes with a unique style. They will focus on
units ranging from 1,500 square feet to 3,200 square feet. He reviewed the
owner-retention statistics for similar developments in the Village, Waterbury,
Mireille and Tenerife. The majority of the owners are the original owners. He
reviewed the school impacts as shown in the packet and advised that the full
impact study will be provided with the petition.
Mr. Jon Isherwood reviewed the changes that have been made to the plan based
upon comments for the Commissioners. The standard public right-of-way is not
60 feet. They took the two closet units to Buffalo Grove Road out. They
increased the back to back setback in the single family clusters to 60 feet. The
have added a ranch model and have left the ability to add an additional ranch
model. However, the ranch model would be 5 feet deeper and two ranches back
to back would have a 50 foot separation in lieu of 60 foot. The homes along
Meridian Way across from Prairie Grove Park now have their front doors facing
the park to better with the surrounding developments. The Park District has
asked for park improvements in lieu of land donation. He reviewed the proposed
park improvements. They have added a second point of access to the
development along the east and they have removed the round-about. He
discussed the changes in the walk/bike path system. They moved the bridge
further south and created more separation between the paths and homes. They
have allowed for potential future access to the commercial development to the
south. He also explained how the development is centrally located and provides
walkability to nearby destinations.
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 135
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
A
u
g
1
7
,
2
0
1
6
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
08/17/2016
Mr. Truesdell thanked the Commission for their feedback and requested to move
forward to the public hearing.
Com. Cesario likes the increased buffer in Section A and believes that the plan
seems a lot more livable. He recommended that the Developer be prepared to
walk thru the parking concept at the public hearing. He also believes that the
southeast corner better matches the surrounding community.
Com. Moodhe is disappointed to see the round-about removed from the plan and
asked if the houses that will face the park feel like they are part of this
community. Mr. Kurensky believes they will. The only difference is that the
Village will be conducting the snow removal of the street they front.
Com. Lesser is surprised at the findings of the school impacts and asked how
those figures were determined. Mr. Truesdell explained that they are still
finalizing the numbers with the school districts but will have the full reports at the
public hearing. The projections were calculated according to Title 19 of the
Village’s Municipal Code. The revenues were determined based upon home
prices and the current tax base. Com. Lesser asked Mr. Stilling if recent
developments are super ceding the projections that were calculated based upon
our current Code. Mr. Stilling advised that the numbers were off on previously
approved developments. Com. Lesser asked how far off the numbers were. Mr.
Stilling responded that the formulas for the calculations are based on law and
must be abided by. The Village, Developer and School Districts are working to
come up with an agreement that will be satisfactory to everyone. Lengthy
discussion ensued regarding the school impacts. Com. Lesser added that there
has not bee any substantive changes to the proposed development. He thought
there would be more changes.
Com. Cohn would like to hear form established residents on what their thoughts
are of this proposed development. He does not put a lot of stock into the trend
analysis of millennials only buying one house throughout their lifetime. This
proposal is not the typically suburban development. He would also like to know
what the residents want for the park and not just what the Park District wants.
Mr. Jeff Braiman, 26 Canterbury Lane, was present. Mr. Braiman agrees with
Com. Cohn. He is not sure why only 7 years of ownership data was used for the
owner-retention statistics for Mireille and Tenerife. There has been little change
to the density of the proposed development. The number of single family
attached units still exceeds the number of single family detached at 60%. Little
has changed on the lot sizes. He has major concerns with the impacts on the
schools.
Mr. Stilling advised that staff will continue to work with the Developer and expects
the plan to go to public hearing in the next 60 days or so.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There
were no additional questions or comments from the audience.
Approval of Minutes
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 136
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
A
u
g
1
7
,
2
0
1
6
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
08/17/2016
1.Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting - Jul 13, 2016 7:30 PM
Moved by Com. Cesario, seconded by Com. Khan, to approve the minutes of the
July 13, 2016 Planning & Zoning Regular Meeting as submitted.
RESULT:ACCEPTED [7 TO 0]
AYES:Smith, Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Khan, Weinstein, Au
ABSTAIN:Scott Lesser
ABSENT:Stephen Goldspiel
Chairman's Report
None.
Committee and Liaison Reports
None.
Staff Report/Future Agenda Schedule
Mr. Stilling advised that ThermFlo was approved at the August 15, 2016 Village Board meeting
and they will be having a ground-breaking ceremony on August 29, 2016. The Planning & Zoning
Commission was invited.
He stated that the next regular meeting scheduled for September 7 will most likely be canceled.
At the August 15, 2016 Village Board meeting staff was authorized to begin negotiations with two
firms on the Lake Cook Road project.
Public Comments and Questions
None.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:18 PM
Information Items
Chris Stilling Director of Community Development
APPROVED BY ME THIS 17th DAY OF August , 2016
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 137
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
A
u
g
1
7
,
2
0
1
6
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)