2017-02-01 - Planning and Zoning Commission - Agenda Packet
Meeting of the Village of Buffalo Grove
Planning and Zoning Commission
Regular Meeting
February 1, 2017 at 12:00 AM
Fifty Raupp Blvd
Buffalo Grove, IL 60089-2100
Phone: 847-459-2500
I. Call to Order
II. Public Hearings/Items For Consideration
1. Consider an Amendment to Ordinance 78-55 to Allow for a Variation to the Zoning
Ordinance for 1556 Brandywine Lane (Trustee Weidenfeld) (Staff Contact: Brian
Sheehan)
III. Regular Meeting
A. Other Matters for Discussion
B. Approval of Minutes
1. Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting - Jan 4, 2017 12:00 AM
C. Chairman's Report
D. Committee and Liaison Reports
E. Staff Report/Future Agenda Schedule
F. Public Comments and Questions
IV. Adjournment
The Planning and Zoning Commission will make every effort to accommodate all items on the
agenda by 10:30 p.m. The Board, does, however, reserve the right to defer consideration of
matters to another meeting should the discussion run past 10:30 p.m.
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: 1/27/2017 8:42 AM Page 1
Action Item : Consider an Amendment to Ordinance 78-55 to Allow
for a Variation to the Zoning Ordinance for 1556 Brandywine Lane
Recommendation of Action
Staff recommends approval of the amendment and variation for this request.
The petitioner, Judy Tollberg, is requesting a variance to allow the installation of a screen porch addition
to the rear of her existing home. The townhome is located in the Villas of Buffalo Creek, which was
approved in 1978 as a Planned Development with R7 Zoning. The propos ed screen porch addition will
encroach 9.875 feet into the required 35 foot rear yard setback.
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report (DOCX)
1556 Brandywyn Ln - Aerial (PDF)
Petitioners Letter (PDF)
Letter of Support from Neighbor (PDF)
Plans (PDF)
Plat of Survey (PDF)
Trustee Liaison Staff Contact
Weidenfeld Brian Sheehan, Community Development
Wednesday, February 1,
2017
2.1
Packet Pg. 2
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: February 1, 2017
SUBJECT PROPERTY Location: 1556 Brandywyn Lane
PETITIONER: Judy Tollberg, Property Owner
PREPARED BY: Brian Sheehan, Building Commissioner
REQUEST: Petition to the Village of Buffalo Grove for an amendment to
Ordinance 78-55 to allow for a variation to Zoning Ordinance,
Section 17.40.030
EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is improved with a single family attached dwelling
(duplex) and is zoned R7.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The 2009 Comprehensive Plan calls for this property to be
single family attached housing.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The petitioner, Judy Tollberg, is requesting a variance to allow the installation of a screen porch addition
to the rear of her existing home. The townhome is located in the Villas of Buffalo Creek, which was
approved in 1978 as a Planned Development with R7 Zoning. The proposed screen porch addition will
encroach 9.875 feet into the required 35 foot rear yard setback.
PLANNING & ZONING ANALYSIS
The existing Villas of Buffalo Creek development was approved in 1978
as a planned development with R7 Zoning. The project established a 35’
rear yard building line, which is consistent with the R7 requirements
established in the Zoning Ordinance. The petitioner is seeking to add a
screened porch to the rear of the unit. The porch addition would match
the existing home trim and gutters in color and the asphalt shingle
roofing materials will match the existing roofing in color and style.
In additon to the variaiton, the petitioner also requires an amendment
to the exsting Planned Development Ordinance 78-55.
Surrounding property owners
The property has been posted with the public hearing notice and the
adjacent property owners have been notified as required. The most
impacted neighbor, owner of the attached dwelling, provided a letter of
support which is included as an attachment to this report. To date, staff
has received a few other inquiries about the project. Those residents
also expressed support for the project.
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
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
B
r
a
n
d
y
w
i
n
e
)
Departmental Reviews
Village Department Comments
Engineering The Village Engineer has reviewed the proposed improvements and does not
have any engineering concerns with the proposed improvements.
STANDARDS
The Planning & Zoning Commission is authorized to grant variations to the regulations of the Zoning
Ordinance based upon findings of fact which are made based upon evidence presented at the hearing
that:
The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances;
The proposed variation will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
The petitioner has addressed the standards for the variation and has identified how this petition meets
the criteria established for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance. That document is included as an
attachment to this report.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the amendment and variation for this request.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) shall open the public hearing and take public testimony
concerning the variation. The PZC shall make a recommendation to the Village Board.
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
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
B
r
a
n
d
y
w
i
n
e
)
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 5
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
1
5
5
6
B
r
a
n
d
y
w
y
n
L
n
-
A
e
r
i
a
l
(
1
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
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
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
B
r
a
n
d
y
w
i
n
e
)
2.1.c
Packet Pg. 7
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
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
B
r
a
n
d
y
w
i
n
e
)
2.1.d
Packet Pg. 8
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
L
e
t
t
e
r
o
f
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
f
r
o
m
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
(
1
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
2.1.e
Packet Pg. 9
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
s
(
1
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
B
r
a
n
d
y
w
i
n
e
)
2.1.e
Packet Pg. 10
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
s
(
1
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
B
r
a
n
d
y
w
i
n
e
)
2.1.e
Packet Pg. 11
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
s
(
1
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
B
r
a
n
d
y
w
i
n
e
)
2.1.e
Packet Pg. 12
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
s
(
1
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
B
r
a
n
d
y
w
i
n
e
)
2.1.e
Packet Pg. 13
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
s
(
1
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
B
r
a
n
d
y
w
i
n
e
)
2.1.f
Packet Pg. 14
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
t
o
f
S
u
r
v
e
y
(
1
8
1
0
:
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
7
8
-
5
5
t
o
A
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
1
5
5
6
B
r
a
n
d
y
w
i
n
e
)
01/4/2017
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, JANUARY 4, 2017
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:33 PM by Commissioner Eric Smith
Public Hearings/Items For Consideration
1. Consider Amendments to the Village's Sign Code and Zoning Ordinance (Trustee
Weidenfeld) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling)
Mr. Christopher Stilling, Director of Community Development was present and sworn in.
Mr. Stilling noted that there are several proposed text amendments before the Planning &
Zoning Commission (PZC) this evening to address item that have frequently come before
the PZC in the past.
In 2012 the Village Board passed a comprehensive amendment to the Village’s Sign
Code in order to address sign trends, improve the sign review process and to enhance
the business environment in Buffalo Grove. At that time, the Village Board encouraged
staff to monitor and continually make recommendations for modifications on an ongoing
basis. At the July 2016 Committee of the Whole meeting, staff sought the input of the
Village Board about the possible future amendments to the sign code. These
amendments were based on commonly approved variation requests. Based upon this
analysis and feedback from the Village Board, staff is recommending several minor
amendments to the Sign Code in order to improve efficiency and to incorporate some of
the more commonly approved variance requests into the Sign Code.
Pursuant to the Sign Code, each tenant is allowed only 1 wall sign at their primary
entrance. A second sign may be allowed in certain circumstances provided that the
tenant space is a corner end cap with its secondary second frontage along a public right-
of-way. Staff has found that many end cap spaces abut private access drives or out lots
and therefore would not be allowed a second sign. Furthermore, staff has found that
variations have been granted to tenants who occupy large spaces such as a grocery
store or general merchandise retailer. As currently provided in the Sign Code, only 1 wall
sign is permitted, regardless of the size of the space, unless the space abuts multiple
rights of way. Staff is recommending that tenants in the Business Districts that have
frontages that exceed 300 lineal feet be allowed to have a single primary and up to two
(2) secondary wall signs that would be limited in size. Currently the only retail stores that
would fit this parameter are Mariano’s; Garden Fresh; Jewel; and the vacant Dominick’s
at Lake Cook & Arlington Heights Road’s. To address both matters, staff is proposing
amendments to Section 14.16.030 and Section 14.16.070 to allow multiple wall signs.
The first amendment, to Section 14.16.030, would allow businesses with frontages
exceeding 300 lineal feet to be allowed up to a total of 3 wall signs however the total area
for all 3 signs combined shall not exceed the maximum allowable sign area.
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 15
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
J
a
n
4
,
2
0
1
7
1
2
:
0
0
A
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
01/4/2017
The second amendment, to Section 14.16.070, would allow corner units to have a
second wall sign. Provided that the second wall sign shall not be larger than the wall sign
located over their primary entrance.
The third amendment, to Section 14.16.060, would reduce the separation distance
between permanent ground signs located on the same side of the street. Based on staff’s
analysis, the Village has granted 11 variations allowing for signs to be closer than 250’.
Staff is recommending that the minimum distance be reduced to 150 feet. Staff has found
that single user commercial lots are generally 100-150 feet wide. By reducing the
separation requirements, two commercial lots located next to each other will still be able
to provide a ground sign.
Currently Section 17.20.030.I.5 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that air conditioning
units be located in the interior side or rear yards only. Over the last several years, the
Village has received a number of permit requests from residents concerning the
replacement of central air conditioner unit that had been originally located in a corner
yard.
The relocation of the air conditioning unit involves significant time and cost to the
homeowner over and above the normal replacement cost due to the re-working of the
electrical and condensing lines which can involve unanticipated cosmetic work to the
interior of the home in the case of a finished basement. In many cases, the replacement
is being scheduled due to equipment failure not giving the homeowners the time
necessary to go through the variance approval process. Those that do go through the
process have been granted variance approval. Due to these circumstances, staff is
recommending amending the current Zoning Ordinance language to allow a replacement
air conditioning unit to be located in the same location as an existing air conditioning unit
without having to go through the variance process. New units will still be required to be
placed in the interior side, or rear yards.
The suggested language is as follows:
Central air conditioning units - New central air conditioning units shall be located in the
interior side or rear yards only. In no case shall the unit be located on any easement.
Replacement central air conditioning units may be permitted in the same location as the
previous central air conditioning unit. The replacement central air conditioning unit shall
not encroach further into the required yard than the previous central air conditioning unit
and in no case shall the unit be located on any easement.
As discussed previously, staff is proposing an amendment to Section 17.36 of the Zoning
Ordinance reducing the minimum parking space depth and drive aisle width for parking
lots. Currently Village Code requires that parking stalls be 18.5 feet deep and drive ais les
be 26 feet wide, although Code does allow for 24’ in certain circumstances. Staff is
proposing an amendment to Code to reduce the stall depth to 18’ and clarify that aisle
widths be 24’ wide. Based on staff’s research, several nearby communities as wel l as
Lake County allow for 18’ deep parking spaces and 24’ wide drive aisles. This size is also
recommended by traffic consultants and the Urban Land Institute (ULI). The reduced
size results in in less pavement, thus reducing the amount of storm water ru noff.
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 16
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
J
a
n
4
,
2
0
1
7
1
2
:
0
0
A
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
01/4/2017
Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval of the
amendments to the Sign Code and Zoning Ordinance.
Com. Goldspiel asked about the justification for the smaller spaces. Mr. Stilling replied
that staff looked at neighboring towns and most had an 18’ depths. It is also
recommended by engineers. It will reduce the storm water runoff and will accommodate
today’s standards.
Com. Goldspiel asked about the justification for the change for ground signs. Mr. Stilling
responded that the amendment is not increasing the number of grounds signs, just
reducing the separation distance. This will pertain mostly to out lots. The impact will be
minimal. Com. Goldspiel stated that when the Sign Code was created, it wasn’t intended
to have signs packed on top of each other and asked if the 150’ separation would be
enough. Mr. Stilling responded that development over the years has changed.
Com. Cohn asked if the wall sign amendment to allow a second sign wall pertain to the
second frontage. Mr. Stilling replied yes. Com. Cohn recommended adding language that
the second wall sign would be allowed on the second frontage. Mr. Stilling stated that is a
good point.
Com. Cesario advised that he supports the proposed amendments. These are routine ly
granted. He also likes the maximum area restriction for all signs. He supports Com.
Cohn’s suggested language for corner units. The proposed 150’ separation for ground
signs is the equivalent to two residences. As far as the proposed amendment for air
conditioner units, he cannot see making someone move their unit just to replace one that
was existing. He also supports the proposed amendment for parking.
Com. Weinstein asked if the Sign Code amendments would create more variance
requests. Mr. Sheehan advised that he spot checked numerous locations and most do
not get close to the proposed separation requirement. Mr. Stilling added that Village staff
may not be supportive of a request after the requirements have been amended and
would provide that in a staff report.
Com. Moodhe confirmed with Mr. Stilling that the proposed Sign Code amendment for
corner units would still apply even if the primary entrance frontage is 25’ and the
secondary frontage is 70’ deep. He also asked about air conditioner units if they would be
required to move or request a variance if the tonnage size of the unit increases. Mr.
Stilling stated that most units are smaller in size, even if they are larger tonnage. Com.
Moodhe asked if staff knew approximately how many of these air conditioner units are
non-compliant. Mr. Sheehan responded that there are only a handful that staff is aware
of. Co. Moodhe does not have an issue with the proposed amendments.
Com. Goldspiel is still concerned with the parking spaces. Aisles would be reduced by
two and a half feet. Mr. Stilling responded that there is confusion in the existing Code and
the amendment is to clarify things. 24’ is viewed as an industry standard. Com. Goldspiel
is concerned because over the years, vehicle sizes have changed. Th e Ford F150 with a
20.3’ bed and 17.44’ bed are the most popular vehicle in the country. The 20.3’ bed
model would hang out over two feet into the aisle. Mr. Stilling replied that would be when
the overhang comes into play. Most rucks and larger vehicles are higher off the ground
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 17
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
J
a
n
4
,
2
0
1
7
1
2
:
0
0
A
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
01/4/2017
and can use the overhang. It is smaller vehicles that cannot due to the bumper guard on
the front. He is comfortable with the proposed 18’ depth. It is approved nationally.
Com. Moodhe noted that when a parking is re-striped, based upon the reduction in space
and aisle size, it could increase the number of spaces. He asked if the Village could
require them to add more landscaping in lieu of adding spaces. Mr. Stilling replied that is
a possibility.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were
no questions or comments from the audience.
Ch. Smith accepted the Staff Report prepared by Mr. Sheehan as Exhibit 1.
The public hearing was closed at 8:01PM.
Moved by Com. Weinstein, seconded by Com. Moodhe, to recommend to the Village
Board to approve the amendments to Section 14.16.030 and Section 14.16.070 to allow
multiple wall signs with the added language that the second wall sign must be on the
second frontage; Section 14.16.060 A to reduce the ground sign separation to 150’;
Section 17.20.030.I.5 regarding air conditioner units; and Section 17.36 regarding parking
stall depth and aisle width.
Com. Goldspiel stated that he is not ready to approve an amendment to the parking
standards. Vehicles are getting bigger. He does not believe it is a good idea.
RESULT: RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE [6 TO 1]
Next: 1/23/2017 7:30 PM
MOVER: Frank Cesario, Commissioner
SECONDER: Mitchell Weinstein, Commissioner
AYES: Smith, Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Khan, Weinstein
NAYS: Stephen Goldspiel
ABSENT: Scott Lesser, Amy Au
Regular Meeting
Other Matters for Discussion
None.
Approval of Minutes
1. Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting - Dec 7, 2016 7:30 PM
Moved by Com. Moodhe, seconded by Com. Cesario, to approve the minutes of
the December 7, 2016 Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting.
Com. Goldspiel stated that the Roll Call was missing from the minutes. Mr.
Stilling advised that it was a software glitch and will be corrected.
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 18
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
J
a
n
4
,
2
0
1
7
1
2
:
0
0
A
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
01/4/2017
RESULT: ACCEPTED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
AYES: Smith, Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein
ABSENT: Scott Lesser, Amy Au
Chairman's Report
Ch. Smith wished everyone a Happy New.
Committee and Liaison Reports
Mr. Stilling advised that the Woodman's project was approved by the Village board and thanked
the Commissioners for their hard work and dedication on that project. Woodman's will be looking
to break ground in the spring or summer. He advised that the Burdeen's amendment was
approved as well by the Village Board.
Staff Report/Future Agenda Schedule
Mr. Stilling advised that the next regular meting, scheduled for January 18, 2017, will be
cancelled.
The Commission can expect the Link Farm project to come before them sometime in February.
There will be a Year End summar y in the next Village Newsletter. Over 3,100 permits were taken
in along with over $1,000,000.00 in permit fee revenues.
Mr. Stilling provided an update on the Lake Cook Corridor study and encouraged the
Commissioners to assist with citizen participation in the upcoming public meetings.
Com. Moodhe added that the Village Board did have some concerns with the trash locations for
the Shorewood project as well as cross-access.
Mr. Stilling advised the Commissioners of the upcoming Volunteer Reception to be held on
February 12, 2017 at the Arboretum.
Public Comments and Questions
None.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:19 PM
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 19
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
J
a
n
4
,
2
0
1
7
1
2
:
0
0
A
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
01/4/2017
Chris Stilling Director of Community Development
APPROVED BY ME THIS 4th DAY OF January , 2017
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 20
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
J
a
n
4
,
2
0
1
7
1
2
:
0
0
A
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)