Loading...
2017-08-02 - Planning and Zoning Commission - Agenda Meeting of the Village of Buffalo Grove Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting August 2, 2017 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. Consider a Fence Variation for the Property at 1239 Devonshire Road (Trustee Stein) (Staff Contact: Brian Sheehan) 2. Consider a Special Use for a Child Day Care Home at 200 Timber Hill Drive (Trustee Ottenheimer) (Staff Contact: Brian Sheehan) 3. Consider a Special Use and Variation for Aptakisic School at 1231 Weiland Road (Trustee Ottenheimer) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling) III. Regular Meeting A. Other Matters for Discussion B. Approval of Minutes 1. Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting - Jul 19, 2017 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 fac ilities, contact the ADA Coordinator at 459-2525 to allow the Village to make reasonable accommodations for those persons. VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: August 2, 2017 SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 1239 Devonshire Road PETITIONER: Xiaofei Ma PREPARED BY: Brian Sheehan, Building Commissioner REQUEST: A variation to install a six (6) foot board on board wood fence into the corner side yard setback along Banbury Lane. EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is improved with a single family home currently zoned R4A Special Use COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The approved Village Comprehensive Plan calls for this property and the immediate neighborhood to be single family detached PROJECT BACKGROUND The Petitioner, Xiaofei Ma, is proposing to install a six foot (6’) board on board wood fence that will encroach into the corner side yard setback along Banbury Lane. Section 15.20.040.B. of the Village Fence Code allows fencing up to six feet in corner lots up to the building setback line. Therefore, a variation is required. PLANNING & ZONING ANALYSIS  The petitioner is proposing to install a six foot (6’) board on board wood into the corner side yard setback along Banbury Lane.  The minimum side corner yard setback in the R4A zoning district is 30 feet and the proposed fence would be setback five feet (5’) from the sidewalk.  Currently, there are two properties that abut Banbury Lane in the immediate vicinity of this property that have been granted variances for fences encroaching into the corner side yard.  The first is 1242 Brandywyn (the property directly east of the petitioner’s property) which has a five foot (5’) high wood fence which is setback approximately five feet (5’) from the sidewalk.  The second property is located at 1214 Brandywyn, which is across the street and east of the petitioner’s property. This is also a five foot (5’) high wood fence that is setback 2.1.a Packet Pg. 2 At t a c h m e n t : S t a f f R e p o r t ( 2 0 1 7 : C o n s i d e r a F e n c e V a r i a t i o n f o r t h e P r o p e r t y a t 1 2 3 9 D e v o n s h i r e R o a d ) approximately 15.7 feet from the sidewalk.  While the Village of Buffalo Grove has approved a few fence encroachments in this subdivision, all of the approved fences were allowed at five feet (5’) in height. Should the variation be approved, staff would recommend that the petitioner’s fence be reduced to five feet in height. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEWS Village Department Comments Engineering The Village Engineer has reviewed the proposed fence location and does not have any engineering or line of sight concerns or objections with the proposed height and location of this 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, several calls have been received from the public inquiring as to the nature of the public hearing. No further information or concerns were provided. 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. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the fence variation subject to the condition that the fence be reduced to be no more than 5 feet (5’) high. 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. 3 At t a c h m e n t : S t a f f R e p o r t ( 2 0 1 7 : C o n s i d e r a F e n c e V a r i a t i o n f o r t h e P r o p e r t y a t 1 2 3 9 D e v o n s h i r e R o a d ) 2.1.b Packet Pg. 4 At t a c h m e n t : A e r i a l ( 2 0 1 7 : C o n s i d e r a F e n c e V a r i a t i o n f o r t h e P r o p e r t y a t 1 2 3 9 D e v o n s h i r e R o a d ) 2.1.c Packet Pg. 5 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 ( 2 0 1 7 : C o n s i d e r a F e n c e V a r i a t i o n f o r t h e P r o p e r t y a t 1 2 3 9 D e v o n s h i r e R o a d ) 2.1.d Packet Pg. 6 At t a c h m e n t : P e t i t i o n e r s P i c t u r e s ( 2 0 1 7 : C o n s i d e r a F e n c e V a r i a t i o n f o r t h e P r o p e r t y a t 1 2 3 9 D e v o n s h i r e R o a d ) 2.1.e Packet Pg. 7 At t a c h m e n t : P r o p o s e d F e n c i n g ( 2 0 1 7 : C o n s i d e r a F e n c e V a r i a t i o n f o r t h e P r o p e r t y a t 1 2 3 9 D e v o n s h i r e R o a d ) 2.1.f Packet Pg. 8 At t a c h m e n t : R e s p o n s e t o S t a n d a r d s ( 2 0 1 7 : C o n s i d e r a F e n c e V a r i a t i o n f o r t h e P r o p e r t y a t 1 2 3 9 D e v o n s h i r e R o a d ) 2.1.g Packet Pg. 9 At t a c h m e n t : P l a t o f S u r v e y ( 2 0 1 7 : C o n s i d e r a F e n c e V a r i a t i o n f o r t h e P r o p e r t y a t 1 2 3 9 D e v o n s h i r e R o a d ) VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: August 2, 2017 SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 200 Timber Hill Drive PETITIONER: Roman Furman & Marina Furman PREPARED BY: Brian Sheehan, Building Commissioner REQUEST: Special Use for a child day care home within the R-5A Residential Zoning District. EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is currently improved with a single-family home and is currently zoned R-5A Residential. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The approved Village Comprehensive Plan calls for this property to be residential BACKGROUND The Petitioners, Roman Furman & Marina Furman would like to open a child day care home at 200 Timber Hill Road. This is the primary residence of Marina Furman. The child day care home would operate from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and would provide care for children from 18 months to 5 years of age. The petitioners have stated that they would like to have approval of up to 8 children. The petitioner previously operated a child care home in Wheeling. The petitioners are working with DCFS to obtain a License at this location. They have provided a copy of the DCFS License for their previous residence in Wheeling. PROCESS Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, Child Day Care Homes are required to addresses specific standards. The following is a current status of the standards (List response in Bold): 1. A special use for a child day care home shall meet the Special Use requirements of Section 17.28.040. The conditions are listed below and shall be addressed during the public hearing. 2. Verification that the day care provider is a full-time resident of the home. The petitioners have provided proof of residency and ownership. 3. Verification that the home is licensed by the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, and that applicable requirements of the Illinois Department of Public Health will be met. The petitioners are currently in the process of obtaining a license from Illinois DCFS. This will remain a condition prior to issuing the Village license. 4. Inspection by the Village Department of Building and Zoning, Health Officer and Fire Department to determine that all life-safety, health and other applicable codes will be met. The inspection has been conducted and staff identified that a self-closing gate need to be provided. This will remain a condition prior to issuing the Village license. 2.2.a Packet Pg. 10 At t a c h m e n t : S t a f f R e p o r t ( 2 0 1 8 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e f o r a C h i l d D a y C a r e H o m e a t 2 0 0 T i m b e r H i l l D r i v e ) 5. That 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. The petitioners have agreed to adhere to this condition during their operation. 6. The following standards shall be met: a. Provision of child care shall be limited each day to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Outdoor play shall not be allowed before 8:00 a.m. The petitioners have agreed to adhere to this condition during their operation. b. Adequate space shall be provided on the driveway of the property for parking while children are being dropped off or picked up at the home. The children will be dropped off no earlier than 8:00 am and picked up prior to 6:00 pm. The petitioners have included a drop-off and pick-up policy that they will be signed by their clients. The petitioners have one car garage and the car will be parked in the garage during daycare operating hours. Their driveway can accommodate up to 2 cars at a time. c. Traffic congestion or safety hazards shall not be created in the adjacent neighborhood. The petitioners have agreed to adhere to this condition during their operation. d. A play area shall be provided in the rear yard of the property. Said area shall be enclosed by a fence at least four feet in height to ensure the safety of the children. The fenced play area shall be secured with self-closing and self-latching gate(s) as approved by the Village. Said play area shall be screened from adjacent properties with fencing or landscaping . The petitioners have agreed stated that all outdoor play will be occurring in the rear yard, which is surrounded by a continuous 4 foot chain link fence. Based on staff’s inspection, a self-closing/self-latching gate is still required. e. The day care activities shall not create undue noise or other nuisances for adjacent properties. There shall be no outdoor sound amplification devices which produce distinctly and loudly audible sounds beyond the boundary of the property from which the sound originates. The petitioners have agreed to adhere to this condition during their operation. f. Employees who are not residents of the day care home may be employed by the day care provider, if it is determined by the Planning & Zoning Commission that this would not be detrimental to the neighborhood. Parking shall be provided on the property for any employee driving to the home. The petitioners have agreed to adhere to this condition during their operation. g. An approved day care home shall be subject to periodic inspection by the Village in accordance with Village procedures for inspections concerning health, life-safety and other applicable regulations. The petitioners have agreed to adhere to this condition during their operation. h. The Planning & Zoning Commission and Corporate Authorities may impose conditions and restrictions as may be necessary or appropriate to comply with the foregoing criteria and standards. The foregoing standards may be modified as deemed reasonable in specific cases. Following the testimony of the petitioner and other interested parties, the PZC shall determine if any additional conditions are necessary. i. The Planning & Zoning Commission shall consider the number and location of other child day care homes so as to avoid congestion and other negative impacts. There are no other day care homes in the adjacent areas. In addition to the above standards, Child Care Special Use are valid for two years at which point they may be administratively extended or referred back to the Planning & Zoning Commission for review based upon performance. 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 ( 2 0 1 8 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e f o r a C h i l d D a y C a r e H o m e a t 2 0 0 T i m b e r H i l l D r i v e ) Special Use Criteria Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, All special uses shall meet the following criteria 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. The petitioner’s response to the standards is attached. PUBLIC COMMENTS Pursuant to Village Code, property owners within 250 feet of the subject property were notified and a public hearing sign was posted on the subject property within the required timeframe. As of the date of this report, the Village has received one call for information regarding the public hearing sign. The caller did not provide any positive or negative feedback. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of a Special Use Ordinance for a Child Day Care Home for up to eight (8) children, subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall comply with the standards set forth in Section 17.12.141, Section 17.28.040 and Section 17.28.060 of the Village Zoning Ordinance. 2. The special use shall be in effect for a period of two (2) years from the date of this Ordinance. The Petitioner is required to apply to the Village for re-authorization of the special use pursuant to Section 17.28.060.C of the Village Zoning Ordinance. 3. The petitioner shall obtain a DCFS license. A copy of the DCFS license shall be provided to the Village prior to the issuance of a business license. 4. The special use shall be automatically revoked if the Petitioner fails, for any reason, to have a valid license issued by the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (IL DCFS). 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 ( 2 0 1 8 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e f o r a C h i l d D a y C a r e H o m e a t 2 0 0 T i m b e r H i l l D r i v e ) 5. The Petitioner shall obtain a Village business license prior to operation of the child day care home. 6. The special use does not authorize any use in violation of any covenants running with the Property. 7. No person who has been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor involving violence against a person shall be permitted to reside in the day care home at any time, on a temporary or permanent basis, or otherwise be allowed to be present in the day care home at any time when children are present. The petitioner must agree to permit the Village of Buffalo Grove to conduct, or cause to be conducted, a criminal background check of every person residing in the day care home. 8. Petitioner shall maintain the Property in full compliance with Village property maintenance standards at all times, as determined by the Village in its sole discretion. 9. This special use is granted to Roman Furman and Marina Furman jointly. Said special use does not run with the Property and is not granted to any business entity. Said special use is not transferable to another person or entity, and may not be used by any other person or entity. 10. Prior to the issuance of the Village business license, the petitioner shall install a self-closing and latching gate in a manner acceptable to the Village. 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. 13 At t a c h m e n t : S t a f f R e p o r t ( 2 0 1 8 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e f o r a C h i l d D a y C a r e H o m e a t 2 0 0 T i m b e r H i l l D r i v e ) 2.2.b Packet Pg. 14 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 & S u p p o r t i n g D o c u m e n t s ( 2 0 1 8 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e f o r a C h i l d D a y C a r e H o m e a t 2 0 0 T i m b e r H i l l D r i v e ) 2.2.b Packet Pg. 15 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 & S u p p o r t i n g D o c u m e n t s ( 2 0 1 8 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e f o r a C h i l d D a y C a r e H o m e a t 2 0 0 T i m b e r H i l l D r i v e ) 2.2.b Packet Pg. 16 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 & S u p p o r t i n g D o c u m e n t s ( 2 0 1 8 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e f o r a C h i l d D a y C a r e H o m e a t 2 0 0 T i m b e r H i l l D r i v e ) 2.2.b Packet Pg. 17 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 & S u p p o r t i n g D o c u m e n t s ( 2 0 1 8 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e f o r a C h i l d D a y C a r e H o m e a t 2 0 0 T i m b e r H i l l D r i v e ) 2.2.b Packet Pg. 18 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 & S u p p o r t i n g D o c u m e n t s ( 2 0 1 8 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e f o r a C h i l d D a y C a r e H o m e a t 2 0 0 T i m b e r H i l l D r i v e ) 2.2.c Packet Pg. 19 At t a c h m e n t : P l a t o f S u r v e y ( 2 0 1 8 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e f o r a C h i l d D a y C a r e H o m e a t 2 0 0 T i m b e r H i l l D r i v e ) 2.2.d Packet Pg. 20 At t a c h m e n t : A e r i a l ( 2 0 1 8 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e f o r a C h i l d D a y C a r e H o m e a t 2 0 0 T i m b e r H i l l D r i v e ) VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: August 2, 2017 SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 1231 Weiland Road PETITIONER: Aptakisic-Tripp School District 102 PREPARED BY: Christopher Stilling, Director of Community Development REQUEST: Petition to the Village of Buffalo Grove for preliminary plan approval and a special use for an elementary school with the following variation: 1. A variation to Section 17.40 of the Village of Buffalo Grove Zoning Ordinance (Table of Area, Height, Bulk and Placement Regulations) to allow for a side yard setback reduction for an existing building. EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is improved with the existing public elementary school and zoned RE. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The approved Village Comprehensive Plan calls for this property to be Public/Semi-Public. PROJECT BACKGROUND Aptakisic-Tripp School District 102 (District 102) is proposing an addition, along with other improvements, to the existing Aptakisic School located at 1231 Weiland Road. The school property is currently zoned RE and elementary schools are a special use. As a result of the changes, a special use is required. Furthermore, to accommodate the existing school, a variation for a side yard setback reduction is also required. PLANNING & ZONING ANALYSIS Zoning History  Currently, the Willow Grove School is zoned RE, which regulates elementary schools as a special use.  To date, the Village has no record of a special use being approved for the existing school. As a result of the proposed improvements, a new special use is required.  Furthermore, the existing school building currently does not meet the zoning requirements for the side yard setback to the north. The code requires a setback of 10% the lot width. Due to the large width (+/- 618 feet), a 61.8 foot setback is required. The existing school is setback 20.93 feet. 2.3.a Packet Pg. 21 At t a c h m e n t : s t a f f r e p o r t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) Proposed Improvements  The overall site is 9.3 acres in area and includes the school with multiple parking lots, playgrounds and track.  The project includes a 15,000 square foot addition to the school to accommodate the addition of 6 graders from Meridian School.  Furthermore, the administrative offices and facilities uses will be relocated to another site (TBD).  District 102 is also proposing improvements to both existing parking lots to improve traffic flow for school buses and emergency vehicles. RE District Dimensional Requirements RE District Requirements Proposed Se t b a c k s Front 50 feet 90.76 feet Side 10% of the lot width, but not less than 25 feet North- 20.93 feet South- 156.38 feet Rear 100 feet +/- 270 feet Parking 1 space per employee 92 spaces Parking  Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, elementary schools require parking at a ratio of 1 space per employee.  The site currently has 142 parking spaces, which was necessary to accommodate the administrative offices and facilities.  To accommodate better traffic flow, District 102 is proposing to reduce the required number of spaces to 92 spaces  Based on the information provided, the School District indicated at its maximum capacity, there will be 90 employees. Based on this information, the required number of parking spaces are being provided. Drop-Off/Pick-Up  As noted in the petitioner’s information, one of the key changes as part of the project includes improving the existing drop-off/pick-up operations.  The petitioner is currently working with Lake County Department of Transportation as part of the pending Weiland Road widening project to possibly relocate the existing light to the southern entrance. As a result, District 102 is providing 2 options: Option 1 o This option works with the existing conditions, however the bus pickup area is now on the west side of the building. 2.3.a Packet Pg. 22 At t a c h m e n t : s t a f f r e p o r t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) o Parents will now pick-up/drop-off on the south side, which allows for more stacking. o In order to prevent overflow stacking at the southern entrance from parents trying to turn left onto Weiland Road, the school is proposing a right in/out. o Once buses have cleared, parents could get access at the northern entrance to turn left at the light. Option 2 o This option would relocate the existing signal to the south. o Parents would still pick-up/drop-off on the south side, as shown on option 1. However, the signal will allow parents and buses to use the new light to turn left onto Weiland.  As of right now, no decisions have been made regarding the light, however as shown with both options, staff believes the proposed improvements will be an enhancement to overall access and circulation. Engineering  Since the proposed project is not increasing the required amount of impervious area, stormwater detention is not required.  The existing property does contain floodplain along the eastern boundaries.  The proposed project would not impact the existing floodplain. Variations The following is a summary of the requested variations: A variation to Section 17.40 of the Village of Buffalo Grove Zoning Ordinance (Table of Area, Height, Bulk and Placement Regulations) to allow for a side yard setback reduction for an existing building. The existing school building currently does not meet the zoning requirements for the side yard setback to the north. The code requires a setback of 10% the lot width. Due to the large width (+/- 618 feet), a 61.8 foot setback is required. The existing school is setback 20.93 feet. The property impacted by the setback encroachment is an existing industrial/office building. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEWS Village Department Comments Engineering The Village Engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and has no specific comments regarding the preliminary plans. The Village Engineer does note that the District still needs to complete final engineering. Fire Department The Fire Department has reviewed the proposed plans and does not have any objections. Based on the fire truck exhibit, the Village’s largest truck will have the proper turning radius at the southeast corner of the site. Police Department The Police Department has reviewed the proposed plans as they pertain to traffic and parking impacts and have no comments. 2.3.a Packet Pg. 23 At t a c h m e n t : s t a f f r e p o r t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 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, the Village has not received any comments. STANDARDS In order to receive approval for a variation, the petitioner must address the following s tandards for a variation: 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. The petitioner has provided a response to the standards (attached). In order to receive approval for a Special Use, the petitioner must address the following standards: 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 2.3.a Packet Pg. 24 At t a c h m e n t : s t a f f r e p o r t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 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. The petitioner has provided a response to the standards (attached). STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the special use and variations subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed development shall substantially conform to the plans attached as part of this petition. 2. Final engineering shall be revised in a manner acceptable to the Village Engineer. 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. 25 At t a c h m e n t : s t a f f r e p o r t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2.3.b Packet Pg. 26 At t a c h m e n t : A e r i a l ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d 2.3.c Packet Pg. 27 At t a c h m e n t : P & Z 8 . 2 M e e t i n g S e t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2.3.c Packet Pg. 28 At t a c h m e n t : P & Z 8 . 2 M e e t i n g S e t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) N 2.3.c Packet Pg. 29 At t a c h m e n t : P & Z 8 . 2 M e e t i n g S e t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2.3.c Packet Pg. 30 At t a c h m e n t : P & Z 8 . 2 M e e t i n g S e t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2. 3 . c Pa c k e t P g . 3 1 Attachment: P&Z 8.2 Meeting Set (2020 : Consider a Special Use and Variation for Aptakisic School at 1231 Weiland Road) 2. 3 . c Pa c k e t P g . 3 2 Attachment: P&Z 8.2 Meeting Set (2020 : Consider a Special Use and Variation for Aptakisic School at 1231 Weiland Road) 2.3.c Packet Pg. 33 At t a c h m e n t : P & Z 8 . 2 M e e t i n g S e t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2. 3 . c Pa c k e t P g . 3 4 Attachment: P&Z 8.2 Meeting Set (2020 : Consider a Special Use and Variation for Aptakisic School at 1231 Weiland Road) 2.3.c Packet Pg. 35 At t a c h m e n t : P & Z 8 . 2 M e e t i n g S e t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2.3.c Packet Pg. 36 At t a c h m e n t : P & Z 8 . 2 M e e t i n g S e t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2.3.c Packet Pg. 37 At t a c h m e n t : P & Z 8 . 2 M e e t i n g S e t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2.3.c Packet Pg. 38 At t a c h m e n t : P & Z 8 . 2 M e e t i n g S e t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2.3.c Packet Pg. 39 At t a c h m e n t : P & Z 8 . 2 M e e t i n g S e t ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.7 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.3 1.9 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.4 1.5 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.8 1.2 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.7 1.0 1.5 2.2 2.1 2.1 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 1.2 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.4 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.4 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.3 3.0 3.8 3.5 2.7 2.0 1.5 2.1 2.3 1.8 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.3 2.0 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.2 1.4 1.1 0.9 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.7 2.4 2.2 2.3 2.5 2.0 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.5 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.1 2.7 2.1 1.6 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.5 2.0 2.6 3.4 3.8 3.7 3.0 2.4 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.1 2.6 3.2 3.3 2.7 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.4 2.9 3.7 3.7 3.0 2.5 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.4 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.4 1.9 1.5 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.4 1.6 2.1 2.8 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.1 2.6 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.8 3.2 3.5 3.5 3.3 2.9 2.4 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.6 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.1 2.6 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.2 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.8 1.4 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.3 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.4 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.5 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.6 2.3 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.4 2.8 2.9 2.8 2.9 2.7 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.4 1.8 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.1 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.3 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.8 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.250.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 F1 @ 22.5' F1 @ 22.5' F1 @ 22.5' F1 @ 22.5' Plan View AP T A K I S I C J U N I O R H I G H S C H O O L Designer RD Date 6/7/2017 Scale Not to Scale Drawing No. 001 Summary 1 of 1 **This document contains confidential and proprietary information of KSA Lighting & Controls. This document may only be used by or for the benefit of KSA Lighting & Controls representatives and customers. FOR LIGHTING DESIGNS This lighting design is not a professional engineering drawing and is provided for informational purposes only, without warranty as to accuracy, completeness, reliability or otherwise. KSA Lighting & Controls is not responsible for specifying the lighting or illumination requirements for any specific project, including municipal or building code requirements. It is the obligation of the end-user to consult with a professional engineering advisor to determine whether this lighting design meets the applicable project requirements for lighting system performance, safety, suitability and effectiveness for use in a particular application. Field verification is recommended when calculations are based on end-user or customer-provided information. End-user environment and application (including, but not limited to, voltage variation and dirt accumulation) can cause actual field performance to differ from the calculated photometric performance represented in this lighting design. In no event will KSA Lighting & Controls be responsible for any loss resulting from any use of this lighting design. Schedule Symbol Label Image Quantity Manufacturer Catalog Number Description Lamp Number Lamps Filename Lumens Per Lamp Light Loss Factor Wattage F1 4 Lithonia Lighting DSX1 LED 60C 700 40K T3M MVOLT DSX1 LED with 60 LEDs @ 700 mA , 4000K , TYPE 3 MEDIUM OPTICS LED 1 DSX1_LED_60C_700_40K_T3M_MVOLT.ies 16020 0.95 131 Statistics Description Symbol Avg Max Min Max/Min Avg/Min ALL CALC POINTS - GRADE LEVEL 0.7 fc 3.9 fc 0.0 fc N/A N/A PAVED PARKING AREA ONLY 1.8 fc 3.9 fc 0.1 fc 39.0:1 18.0:1 NOTES: 1. CALCULATION POINTS ARE AT GRADE LEVEL. 2. FIXTURES ARE MOUNTED AT 22'-5" ABOVE GRADE (20' POLES ON 30" CONCRETE BASES) 3. CACULATIONS PROVIDED ARE NOT A GUARANTEE OF PERFORMANCE. ACTUAL LIGHT LEVELS MAY VARY.** 2. 3 . c Pa c k e t P g . 4 0 Attachment: P&Z 8.2 Meeting Set (2020 : Consider a Special Use and Variation for Aptakisic School at 1231 Weiland Road) 100% DD 06/21/2017 2.3.d Packet Pg. 41 At t a c h m e n t : C o l o r E l e v a t i o n s ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) FIRST FLOOR 0" FACE BRICK VENEER 16 ' - 5 " 1' - 7 " 21 ' - 6 " FIRST FLOOR 0" 21 ' - 6 " FACE BRICK VENEER ALUMINUM CURTAIN WALL SYSTEM 1' - 7 " 16 ' - 5 " FIRST FLOOR 0" FACE BRICK VENEER ALUMINUM STOREFRONT SYSTEM 21 ' - 6 " 16 ' - 5 " 1' - 7 " Project Number: Drawn By: Sheet: Wi g h t & C o . © C o p y r i g h t 2 0 1 6 A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . No p a r t o f t h e s e d o c u m e n t s m a y b e r e p r o d u c e d , s t o r e d, o r t r a n s m i t t e d i n a n y f o r m o r b y a n y m e a n s , e l e c tr o n i c , m e c h a n i c a l , p h o t o c o p y i n g , r e c o r d i n g o r o t h e rw i s e , w i t h o u t t h e p r i o r w r i t t e n c o n s e n t o f W i g h t & C o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wight & Company wightco.com 2500 North Frontage Road Darien, IL 60561 P 630.969.7000 F 630.969.7979NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONC: \ U s e r s \ j c o b l e r \ D o c u m e n t s \ 0 2 - 5 2 3 5 - 0 5 _ A J H S _ A r c h _ 2 0 1 7_ C e n t r a l _ j c o b l e r . r v t 6/ 2 1 / 2 0 1 7 9 : 2 0 : 1 5 A M APTAKISIC JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - ADDITION & RENOVATIONS 1231 Weiland Rd Buffalo Grove, IL CLASSROOM ADDITION ELEVATION 5235-05 Author ZA3.1 Aptakisic-Tripp D102 0' SCALE: 8' - 0" 16' - 0" 32' - 0" 1/16" = 1' - 0" 0' SCALE: 4' - 0" 8' - 0" 16' - 0" 1/8" = 1' - 0" 0' SCALE: 2' - 0" 4' - 0" 8' - 0" 1/4" = 1' - 0" 0' SCALE:3/8" = 1' - 0" 2' - 0" 4' - 0" 8' - 0"0' SCALE: 1' - 0" 2' - 0" 4' - 0" 1/2" = 1' - 0" 0' SCALE:3/4" = 1' - 0" 1' - 0" 2' - 0" 4' - 0"0' SCALE: 6" 1' - 0" 2' - 0" 1" = 1' - 0" 0' SCALE:1 1/2" = 1' - 0" 6" 1' - 0" 2' - 0"0' SCALE:3" = 1' - 0" 3" 6" 1' - 0" SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"ZA3.1 1 NORTH CLASSROOM ADDITION ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"ZA3.1 2 EAST CLASSROOM ADDITION ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"ZA3.1 3 SOUTH CLASSROOM ADDITION ELEVATION REV DESCRIPTION DATE 100% DD 06/21/2017 2.3.d Packet Pg. 42 At t a c h m e n t : C o l o r E l e v a t i o n s ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2.3.e Packet Pg. 43 At t a c h m e n t : T r a f f i c S u m m a r y ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2.3.e Packet Pg. 44 At t a c h m e n t : T r a f f i c S u m m a r y ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2.3.f Packet Pg. 45 At t a c h m e n t : S p e c i a l U s e S t a n d a r d s ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) 2.3.f Packet Pg. 46 At t a c h m e n t : S p e c i a l U s e S t a n d a r d s ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d R o a d ) July 18, 2017 Aptakisic Junior High Addition 1231 Weiland Road Dear Christopher Stilling Director of Community Development 50 Raupp Blvd. Buffalo Grove, IL 60089 We have received your comment letter dated July 3, 2017 in regards to the Aptakisic Junior High Addition Application for Building Addition and we offer the following responses. COMMENTS 1. The proposed project requires a Special Use for an elementary school in the RE zoning district. The following items are required to initiate the public hearing process: a -g. have been marked as addressed per Village Review #1 h. Comment: Final Site Plan: The project will require a variation for a setback reduction. The existing school building currently does not meet the zoning requirements for the side yard setback to the north. The code requires a setback of 10% the lot width. Due to the large width (+/- 618 feet), a 61.8-foot setback is required. The existing school is setback 20.93 feet. Staff will include this as part of your public hearing request. Prior to the hearing, please provide a written response to the following variation standards: i. 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; i. The encroachment on the setback for the north end of the building is an existing condition. No enhancements are to be made to the north side of the building. ii. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances; and ii. The encroachment is an existing condition. The variation is required based on the large width of the property and limited construction area due to the wetland and floodplain conditions at the east side of the property. iii. The proposed variation will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. iii. The proposed variation is for an existing portion of the building which will not be disturbed during the proposed addition. The building is an educational building which is consistent with the character of the residential neighborhood. i. Preliminary Engineering- Village Engineer Comments: 2.3.g Packet Pg. 47 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 1 7 . 0 7 . 1 7 V i l l a g e C o o r d i n a t i o n R e s p o n s e s ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d i. Comment: The written response to the village’s preliminary comments says the long water main/service is for fire sprinklers but it does not show a connection into the building. It just shows the long hydrant lead along the south side of the building. Please review and clarify. i. Response: The connection from the water line to the building for the fire sprinklers is now shown on the utility plan. ii. Comment: Can the sanitary sewer lift station just be pumped to the sewer in the other part of the building and avoid the long stretch of sanitary sewer? ii. Response: Portions of the building that are not under construction would need to be greatly renovated/impacted to accommodate the interior routing of the sanitary line. This would be a large cost impact to the district. iii. Comment: The proposed project required a WDO permit for disturbance. This will remain as a condition. iii. Response: This comment is noted. A WDO permit will be obtained. iv. Comment: An IEPA permit may be needed due to the length of the water main and sanitary services. iv. Response: We consider the new fire/domestic service as a private main unless the village is requiring a public utility easement, therefore we believe no IEPA permit is necessary. Please advise. An IEPA permit will be acquired if necessary. v. Comment: An IEPA permit for the NOI (Notice of Intent) is required 30 days prior to construction start. This will remain as a condition. v. Response: This comment is noted. An NOI permit will be obtained 30 days prior to construction. vi. Comment: Continue to work with Lake County for the entrance and exit discussions. This will remain as a condition. vi. Response: This comment is noted. Coordination with Lake County for the entrance and exit discussions will continue. 2. Comment: Specific details regarding drop-off/pick -up shall be provided. Given the changes to the existing site, staff recommends the completion of a traffic study. Please indicate if a traffic study is being conducted. If not, your team will need to be prepared to provide expert testimony regarding traffic impacts. 2. Response: A traffic study for drop-off/pick-up operations will be conducted for the site and is currently underway. 3. Comment: Staff is concerned about the overall circulation on the property, especially the parent drop- off/pick-up area. We believe significant vehicle stacking may occur as parents try to exit at the southernmost 2.3.g Packet Pg. 48 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 1 7 . 0 7 . 1 7 V i l l a g e C o o r d i n a t i o n R e s p o n s e s ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d exit, which is uncontrolled. We strongly recommend that you reach out to the Lake county DOT to setup a preliminary meeting to incorporate their comments into the plan. Please include the Village on that meeting. Village Review #1 Comment: Please be prepared to discuss this process in greater detail during the public hearing. 3. Response: A preliminary meeting with Lake County DOT and School District 102 on 6/13 also included Village Engineer Darren Monico. A traffic study is currently underway and will address traffic conditions for the site. We will be prepared to address any comments at the public hearing. 4. Comment: The Village requires 1 parking space/ employee. Please provide details on the total number of employees. Village Review #1 Comment: This item has been addressed. However, please note that questions may be asked by PZC members concerning the overall loss of parking from previously. 5. Comment: The bus pick-up area should include a pedestrian access area leading out of the front entrance that is free and clear of bus parking. Village Review #1 Comment: This item has been addressed. 6. Comment: The Fire Department has requested that the parent turn area be widened to accommodate the proper circulation of the Village’s fire engine. Please provide a turning template to show how this vehicle can be accommodated. Please contact Fire Chief Mike Backer at (847)-537-0995 to receive details concerning the size of the vehicle. Village Review #1 Comment: I am still awaiting the review from the Fire Department. Please clarify if the fire truck will interfere with the basketball hoops. 6. Response: An updated exhibit displaying the more exact locations of the basketball rims is provided with this response. The fire truck will have clearance from the basketball hoops. We are awaiting Fire Department comments. 7. Comment: Colored elevations showing materials shall be provided. 7. Response: Colored elevations have been provided with this response letter. We hope that these responses help in your continued review of the project. Please do not hesitate to call or email with additional questions and requirements. Thank you. Respectfully submitted, Wight & Company 2.3.g Packet Pg. 49 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 1 7 . 0 7 . 1 7 V i l l a g e C o o r d i n a t i o n R e s p o n s e s ( 2 0 2 0 : C o n s i d e r a S p e c i a l U s e a n d V a r i a t i o n f o r A p t a k i s i c S c h o o l a t 1 2 3 1 W e i l a n d 07/19/2017 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, JULY 19, 2017 Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:31 PM by Commissioner Eric Smith Public Hearings/Items For Consideration 1.Consider Variations to the Sign Code for the Four Points by Sheraton on 900 West Lake Cook Road (Trustee Stein) (Staff Contact: Brian Sheehan) Mr. David Steiner and Mr. Jim Hordewel, Four Points by Sheraton, were present and sworn in. Mr. Steiner explained that they are requesting two variations; one for a wall sign larger than permitted and one to relocate the ground sign onto the property owned by Hamilton Partners. Hamilton Partners has approved the sign location on their property. Com. Cesario believes that relocating the ground makes sense and provides more distance from the proposed wall sign and would provide better visibility from Lake Cook Road. He does have concerns regarding the size of the proposed wall sign and asked for justification. Mr. Steiner explained that the porte cochere originally was constructed with windows and has since been modified to remove the windows. They had proposed the wall sign to Marriott (parent company of Four Points) at the allowable size. Marriott felt that they needed more visibility. Com. Cesario confirmed with Mr. Steiner that the wall sign would be the same size as the temporary banner that is up now. He feels that it is difficult to see that part of the building due to the setback from the road. The ground sign is easier to see and would provide direction to the hotel. Mr. Steiner advised that Marriott feels that an illuminated wall sign would be easier to see. Com. Lesser asked if the proposed sign package is a requirement by Marriott. Mr. Steiner responded yes. Com. Lesser asked what would happen if the variation is not approved. Mr. Steiner stated that he would have to go back to Marriott. Com. Lesser advised that he does not have an issue with the ground sign but does not see the point of the wall sign because it is not visible from the road. Mr. Steiner agrees but was directed by Marriott to present the proposed wall sign. Com. Lesser cannot support the wall sign as proposed. Com. Goldspiel believes that the wall sign is too big and not attractive. He does not have an issue with the ground sign. The wall sign does not meet that standards criteria and he cannot support it. Com. Au believes that the wall looks disproportionate to the building. It should be designed to be more harmonious. Com. Moodhe went online and reviewed the design standards page and noticed that most of the wall signs were on larger buildings. There are waivers available that Marriott 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 50 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s ) 07/19/2017 can grant. He also suggested looking at relocating the proposed wall sign to the south elevation of the building. Otherwise scale the sign down to fit the elevation proposed. Com. Weinstein asked staff what percentage the proposed wall sign exceeds the maximum permitted area. Mr. Sheehan stated that it exceeds the maximum by approximately 50%. He asked to poll the Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) if they would be comfortable with recommending approval of the wall sign with the condition of not exceeding a certain percentage. He also noted that the shape of the building is unique and was not a hardship created by the Petitioner. Ch. Smith asked the PZC for a percentage. Com. Lesser would be okay with over 20% but less than 40%. Com. Weinstein suggested up to 35%. Ch. Smith polled the PZC if they would be in favor of limiting the wall sign to 35%. There were no objections. Ch. Smith entered Mr. Sheehan’s Staff Report dated July 7, 2017 as Exhibit 1. There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were no questions or comments from the audience. The public hearing was closed at 7:51 PM. Moved by Com. Weinstein, seconded by Com. Moodhe, to recommend approval of variation to Sign Code, Section 14.20.100, to allow an off-premises ground sign; and variation to Sign Code, Section 14.16.070, to allow a wall sign that would exceed the wall sign background area. The signs are to be installed per the plans submitted, subject to the total wall sign area not exceeding 35% of the wall sign background. RESULT:RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] Next: 8/21/2017 7:30 PM MOVER:Mitchell Weinstein, Commissioner SECONDER:Adam Moodhe, Commissioner AYES:Smith, Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Lesser, Weinstein, Au 2.Amendment to Ordinance 2013-70 for the Replacement of a Sign Panel at 201 N Milwaukee Ave (Trustee Stein) (Staff Contact: Brian Sheehan) Frank Petrich, Corporate Design & Development Group and Michael Mihalik, Speedway, LLC, were present and sworn in. Mr. Petrich explained that they are seeking an amendment to the existing Ordinance 2013-70. Speedway is requesting to remove the lowest fuel panel and replace it with a graphic insert to read “Beer Cave”. Because the original sign was approved as a variation, an amendment to the Ordinance is required. Last year the addition to the building was completed for the Beer Cave. Due to the location of the Beer Cave on the back side of the building, they are requesting the panel change. He reviewed the existing and proposed sign renderings. Com. Goldspiel asked about the Beer Cave. Mr. Mihalik explained that the addition was approved and constructed last year and is located on the back side of the building. Com. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 51 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s ) 07/19/2017 Goldspiel asked if there is an exterior entrance into the Beer Cave. Mr. Mihalik advised that the only entrance is from inside the store. Com. Cohn asked if the proposed sign will promote drinking and driving. Mr. Mihalik responded that his staff is very strict in following the liquor laws. Com. Cohn asked if there have been any issues at other locations. Mr. Mihalik stated no. Com. Cesario advised that historically the panels on these types of signs have been for informational purposes. This seems to be moving more towards advertising. However, he believes the sign panel is visually appealing. He would prefer informational signage over advertising. Com. Moodhe asked staff a procedural question. Ch. Smith entered Mr. Sheehan’s Staff Report as Exhibit 1 and the Sign Package as Exhibit 2. There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were no questions or comments from the audience. The public hearing was closed at 8:01 PM. Moved by Com. Weinstein, seconded by Com. Cesario, to recommend approval of the amendment to Ordinance 2013-70 allowing for the lowest level fueling pricing panel to be replaced as shown on the plan included with the petition. Com. Cohn is not in favor of the request and believes that Buffalo Grove is not that kind of community. Com. Weinstein is in favor of the request and responded to Com. Cohn that people drive to liquor stores all the time. Also, other advertising signage has been allowed. Com. Goldspiel agrees with Com. Cohn. Com. Cesario believes that the proposed sign panel is fine. The Village has allowed advertising. It is legal for Speedway to sell liquor. Com. Moodhe agrees with Com. Weinstein and Com. Cesario and is in favor of the request. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 52 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s ) 07/19/2017 RESULT:RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE [7 TO 2] Next: 8/21/2017 7:30 PM MOVER:Mitchell Weinstein, Commissioner SECONDER:Frank Cesario, Commissioner AYES:Smith, Moodhe, Cesario, Khan, Lesser, Weinstein, Au NAYS:Matthew Cohn, Stephen Goldspiel 3.Consider a Special Use for a Child Day Care Home at 330 University Drive (Trustee Ottenheimer) (Staff Contact: Brian Sheehan) Mariya Dytso and Stefaniya Senyk, 330 University Drive, were present and sworn in. Ms. Dytso explained that they would like to open a child day care home, Dandelion Home Daycare Center at 330 University Drive. This is their primary residence and the child day care home would operate from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and would provide care for children from 2 to 5 years of age. Drop off would be between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. on the driveway only and pick up no later than 6:00 p.m. The number of children that will attend the day care is to be determined, but the petitioners have stated that it will be no more than 8 children; her daughter and 7 daycare children. Com. Cesario asked about the proposed drop off and pick up if there is more than one car in the driveway. Ms. Dytso will ask parents to be patient and wait. Com. Cesario stated that it is important to keep the street clear but to re-evaluate the use of the driveway. He asked about the proposed outdoor activities. Ms. Dytso advised that all outdoor activities will be conducted in the backyard. They installed a new five foot high privacy fence to reduce noise. The outdoor activities for be for one and a half hours each in both the morning and afternoon. Com. Lesser asked if they have spoken with their neighbors. Ms. Dytso stated she spoke to two neighbors; one was okay with the proposed daycare and one was worried. The neighbor who expressed concern was present at the hearing. Com. Lesser agrees that the drop off and pick up procedures should be re-evaluated. Com. Moodhe asked about DCFS approval. Ms. Dytso explained that they are still under review by DCFS and they are waiting for them to inspect the property. Ch. Smith entered Mr. Sheehan’s Staff Report as Exhibit 1. Allen Bojes, 320 University Drive, was present. He was concerned about safety and traffic flow. University Drive is a bus route and is used as a cut through for Dundee Road. He would like to see DCFS approval. Mr. Sheehan explained that the Village license would not be issued until DCFS has approved the day care. Com. Au asked a procedural question. There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were no additional questions or comments from the audience. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 53 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s ) 07/19/2017 The public hearing was closed at 8:14 PM. Moved by Com. Weinstein, seconded by Com. Lesser, to recommend approval of a Special Use Ordinance for a Child Day Care Home for up to eight (8) children, subject to the following conditions: 1.Petitioner shall comply with the standards set forth in Section 17.12.141, Section 17.28.040 and Section 17.28.060 of the Village Zoning Ordinance. 2.The special use shall be in effect for a period of two (2) years from the date of this Ordinance. The Petitioner is required to apply to the Village for re-authorization of the special use pursuant to Section 17.28.060.C of the Village Zoning Ordinance. 3.The petitioner shall obtain a DCFS license. A copy of the DCFS license shall be provided to the Village prior to the issuance of a business license. 4.The special use shall be automatically revoked if the Petitioner fails, for any reason, to have a valid license issued by the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (IL DCFS). 5.The Petitioner shall obtain a Village business license prior to operation of the child day care home. 6.The special use does not authorize any use in violation of any covenants running with the Property. 7.No person who has been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor involving violence against a person shall be permitted to reside in the day care home at any time, on a temporary or permanent basis, or otherwise be allowed to be present in the day care home at any time when children are present. The petitioner must agree to permit the Village of Buffalo Grove to conduct, or cause to be conducted, a criminal background check of every person residing in the day care home. 8.Petitioner shall maintain the Property in full compliance with Village property maintenance standards at all times, as determined by the Village in its sole discretion. 9.This special use is granted to Stefaniya Senyk and Mariya Dytso jointly. Said special use does not run with the Property and is not granted to any business entity. Said special use is not transferable to another person or entity, and may not be used by any other person or entity. 10.The petitioner shall comply with the 2 conditions outlined in the Fire Department Inspection Report. 11.Provide a drop off and pick up schedule that is acceptable to the Village. RESULT:RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] Next: 8/21/2017 7:30 PM MOVER:Mitchell Weinstein, Commissioner SECONDER:Scott Lesser, Commissioner AYES:Smith, Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Lesser, Weinstein, Au 4.Proposed Link Crossing Subdivision (Trustee Ottenheimer) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling) Moved by Com. Weinstein, seconded by Com. Khan, to defer the public hearing for the proposed Link Crossing Subdivision to the August 16, 2017 Planning & Zoning Commission regular meeting. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 54 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s ) 07/19/2017 RESULT:REFERRED [UNANIMOUS] Next: 8/16/2017 12:00 AM MOVER:Mitchell Weinstein, Commissioner SECONDER:Zill Khan, Commissioner AYES:Smith, Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Lesser, Weinstein, Au Regular Meeting Other Matters for Discussion 1.Workshop to Review Various Plan Alternatives for the Proposed Link Crossing Subdivision (Trustee Ottenheimer) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling) Jim Truesdell, K Hovnanian Homes, explained that based on feedback after several workshops, two public hearings and a neighborhood meeting, they are presenting three concept plans to the Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) with the anticipation of being provided guidance on which plan to move forward with. He reviewed the history of the project and highlighted the items that seemed to be concerns across the board, including the three-story townhomes and the desire for more park space. They also heard a lot of conflicting opinions. Based on the cumulative feedback, they have created three concept plans. KHov still prefers to the Original Cluster plan and would like to keep with that concept. After they receive feedback on the concepts presented, they will refine the project development plan and return for another public hearing. Mr. Kurensky reviewed the details of each of the three concept plans; the Original Cluster Design, the Revised Cluster Design; and the Traditional Design. He confirmed that the three-story townhomes have been removed for the project completely and replaced with two-story, rear-loading townhomes. In all three concepts, they kept the open space and bike path and added two acres to the park. He reviewed the differences between the three concept plans and highlighted that the Revised Cluster Design is Code compliant concerning street widths and right-of-way and would be public streets. In this design, there is less green space and less guest parking. The Original Cluster Plan maintians the original concept with private steets and more guest parking and green space. KHov has added sidealks to the Original Cluster design. The Traditional Plan removes the cul-de-sacs and additional guest parking, would feature publics steets, adds more single family homes, would not be maintenance-free for the single-family homes. Mr. Truesdell reviewed the breakdown of units for each concept plan. He also advised that the basin at the northwest corner would be maintained as open space. Com. Goldspiel believes that the lots are smaller than standard on the Traditional Plan. Mr. Truesdell explained that the homes would meet the setback requirements. Com. Goldspiel feels the Traditional Plan would work best for this property. His second choice would be the Revised Cluster Design. He asked that developer consider adding an option to allow for stair climbers in the homes that are not ranch to accommodate people that can no longer climber the stairs. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 55 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s ) 07/19/2017 Ch. Smith requested that it be explained the difference between public and private roads. Mr. Stilling advised that staff prefers the Original Cluster option with the cul de sacs being private roads and all other roads being public. Com. Lesser feels that the developer is headed in the right direction but the plans still contain too many townhomes compared to single family homes. He recommended that the lots be ¼ acre lots and to add cluster homes in the southwest corner of the property. He does not like the concept of private roads. He would prefer to see the number of townhomes go down; the number of single family homes go up; and the roads be all public roads. Com. Cesario appreciates the changes to Section A (northwest corner). He personally prefers the cul de sacs, but professionally would prefer the Traditional. If the developer moves forward with the Cluster design, he would prefer the Original Cluster design. However, the Traditional design eliminates most of the concerns held by the PZC. He would like to see more ranch-style models offered. Also the Traditional Design would be easier to maintain. Com. Au also appreciates the cul de sacs and having private roads. SHe feels that private compnaies do often times a better job of of snow removel and open space maitnence (within the cul-de-sac) than the Village .She would prefer the Original Cluster design. Com. Moodhe asked about design restrictions on the cul de sac lots on the Original Cluster design. Mr. Truesdell advised that some of the lots would but most of the lots would comply. Com. Moodhe asked if the homes would be larger on the Revised Cluster plan. Mr. Truesdell replied that the lots with side-loading garages would be larger. Com. Moodhe asked about the differences in the two Cluster designs. Mr. Isherwood responded that they would prefer to move forward with the Original Cluster design. Com. Moodhe confirmed that the Association would maintain the green space in the cul de sacs in additional to maintaining the entire site. Com. Moodhe believes that the single family homes in the southeast corner of the property seem orphanrf. He asked if there would be separate associations for the single family homes and the townhomes. Mr. Isherwood confirmed the separate associations and added that there would be a master association for the entire property. He also responded that the single family homes in the southeast corner abut single family residential and they placed those single family homes there to match what exists to the east. Com. Moodhe asked if there would still be an access point off Buffalo Grove Road. Mr. Isherwood advised there would be a future access point. Com. Moodhe recommended a second access point for the townhomes off Brandywyn Lane. Mr. Stilling advised that the Village still needs to vet any future access point to Buffalo Grove Road with the County and will also need to re-confirm emergency vehicle access under the new proposed designs. Com. Moodhe would prefer the Original Cluster design. Com. Khan also appreciates cul de sacs. Snow removal is not much of an issue in a cul de sac. He asked if there will be a grass island in the cul de sacs. Mr. Truesdell confirmed there would be a grass island. Com. Khan asked how big the 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 56 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s ) 07/19/2017 grass island would be. Mr. Stilling responded that it would be about the same size Com. Khan has in his cul de sac. Com. Khan asked if the revised Cluster plan meets Village requirements. Mr. Kurensky advised that the Revised Cluster plan does meet Village standards.Mr. Stilling added that the Village would prefer the cul de sacs to be private and maintained by the Association. Com. Khan confirmed with Mr. Truesdell that the Revised Cluster plan also meets Village standards. Com. Weinstein would like to see more single family homes and less townhomes. He is leaning towards the original Cluster design. There were no additional questions from the Commissioners at this time. Kathy Arvanitakis, 401 English Oak Terrace, thanked the developer for eliminating the three-story townhomes and maintaining the detention at the northwest corner of the property. She is still concerned with the number of townhomes and proposed density of the project. She would like to see what the proposed townhomes will look like since they still seem large. Mr. Isherwood displayed the slide that shows the appearance of the townhomes. Ms. Arvanitakis still thinks they will be large buildings. Eli Sasson, 24 Chestnut Court West, believes that the issue of access to Buffalo Grove Road has not been addressed. He recommended reducing the number of units without access. He continues to have traffic concerns and wants the size of the roads increased. He also wants any construction traffic to use Aptakisic Road. Jeff Braiman, 26 Canterbury Lane, confirmed that the three plans are just concept plans. However, his concerns remain the same. The Comprehensive Plan calls for larger lots. The development should be all single family detached. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that any development should be 1/3 attached and 2/3 detached. This plan is the opposite. Each of the proposed plans has over 100 townhome units compared to approximately 60 single family units, which is too much. He requested a list be provided detailing the variation requests. Ms. Arvanitakis added that the revised proposals are still too dense. The townhomes look the same and it will look like a block of the same unit. She recommended mixing the single family cluster homes with the townhomes more and to reduce the total number of townhomes. Michael Lessner, 156 Ironwood Court, agrees with Mr. Braiman in that the proposals do not fit within the Comprehensive Plan. He asked to look at other access points along Brandywyn Lane. He is concerned about the impact on the development to the east. He continues to have traffic concerns. He believes the park should be developed and not just the land dedicated. He does not believe that the townhomes would create a sense of community. Al Murillo, 197 Hoffmann Drive, believes that the revised plans are an improvement but would prefer for the Park District to develop the additional park 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 57 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s ) 07/19/2017 space and not the developer. The density still needs to be improved. He does not believe that the project is limited to the three options. There were no changes to the townhomes, except eliminating the three-story townhomes. There should be more single family homes. Currently the plan only has access to the development from the north and the east. He recommended reconfiguring the ballpark to the west and having an access point line up with the ballpark entrance. Kyle Olson, 738 Aspen Drive, believes that the three new options do not address the density concern. Most people want between 80-120 single family homes on this site. There was not much done with access to the development. He would like to see the property developed according to the Comprehensive Plan with 120 single family homes. He also prefers the Traditional design. A resident of Arlington Heights explained that he has experience in homeowner associations. Villages love private roads that are maintained by associations. But those roads may not be constructed to Village standards. The proposed homeowner association structure does not always work. There could be a lot conflicts between the different associations. The Traditional Design could still have an association for basic maintenance. Mike Garfield, 2118 Jordan Terrace, doesn’t know anyone is his age group looking to downsize that would move to Lake County Buffalo Grove due to the property taxes. This development would attract families. Sammy Squire, 327 Satinwood Court South, noted that there is no guest parking for the townhomes and not enough resident parking. She suggested limited the number of townhome buildings along Brandywyn Lane. There were no additional questions or comments from the audience. Mr. Freeman asked the PZC for direction on which revised plan they should focus on to move forward with. Com. Moodhe would like to hear from the developer on addressing the concerns. Mr. Isherwood explained that it was not feasible to change the site access along Brandywyn Lane. They have followed the direction of the published traffic study reports. The financial impact of the project would benefit the Village and schools. They are not willing to move forward with a 120 single family home plan and found that plan would have a net negative impact on both the Village and the schools. Any plan they move forward with will be similar to the three options presented. They prefer the Original Cluster design. Com. Cohn does not agree on the financial impact and believes that the project as proposed would generate more children. Mr. Isherwood responded that the formula’s used to calculate the number of children that would be generated are accurate. Com. Cohn would like representatives from the schools and the park district to participate in the next public hearing. He also believes that 120 single 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 58 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s ) 07/19/2017 family homes, or at least a reduction in the number of townhomes to 1/3, would be appropriate. He hasn’t seen a plan for that yet. Com. Cesario summarized what he believes is the direction based on the comments; the Original Cluster plan with larger lots, less townhomes and more single family homes. Com. Au agrees with Com. Cesario’s summary. Com. Moodhe also agrees with Com. Cesario’s summary. He likes the Original Cluster plan for the aesthetics. He is happy with the open space. He noted that the Park District controls how the park property will be developed. Com. Lesser wants to see the roads as public roads. He would prefer the 120 single family homes but a small number of townhomes would be acceptable. Increase the size of the single family lots. Mix the Clusters with the Traditional. Com. Cohn agrees with Com. Lesser and cannot accept 2/3 townhomes to 1/3 single family homes. His preference is 0 townhomes to 120 single-family homes. Com. Goldspiel feels the single family homes are very attractive. They are smaller lots but not too small. He would prefer R4 or R5 zoning for the lot sizes as they are more popular. He believes that associations are expensive. He likes the townhome design. The number could be reduced but does not have to be. He would like the development to be more affordable and to reduce the association costs. The revised plans are an improvement. He likes the Clusters and townhomes but some Traditional could be mixed in as well. It is very important to make this development affordable. Com. Khan stated that the number of single family homes has gone down significantly but the number of townhomes remained the same. He would like the development to be 2/3 single family homes and 1/3 townhomes. He is in favor of public streets versus private streets. Associations are not able to manage the maintenance of streets whereas the Village has the knowledge and the manpower. Mr. Stilling advised that even private roads are built to Village standards. Ch. Smith likes the Original Cluster design but would like to see the density reduced. Mr. Isherwood would like to explore an alternate cul de sac that would be acceptable to the Village. Mr. Kurensky added that they could possibly decrease the public right-of-way and increase the pavement to maintain the radius. As private streets, the association would plow the driveways and streets at the same time. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 59 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s ) 07/19/2017 Mr. Truesdell briefly discussed some additional alternative plans. Approval of Minutes 1.Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting - Jun 21, 2017 7:30 PM Moved by Com. Cesario, seconded by Com. Au, to approve the minutes of the June 21, 2017 Planning & Zoning Commission regular meeting as submitted. RESULT:ACCEPTED [7 TO 0] MOVER:Frank Cesario, Commissioner SECONDER:Amy Au, Commissioner AYES:Smith, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Lesser, Weinstein, Au ABSTAIN:Adam Moodhe, Zill Khan Chairman's Report None. Committee and Liaison Reports Mr. Stilling provided an update on the Lake Cook Corridor Study and asked the PZC to complete the survey that was emailed out. Com. Moodhe recommended moving to an electronic packet. Mr. Stilling will review the current year budget for tablets. If there is no money available in the current budget, money will be added for next year. A poll of the PZC indicated that they are in favor of electronic packets. Staff Report/Future Agenda Schedule Mr. Stilling provided an update on the Woodman's project. Ms. Woods advised that an email blast went out with a survey and encouraged the PZC to complete the surevy and forward the email onto community members to complete as well. Mr. Stilling reviewed the items that are scheduled for the August 2, 2017 PZC regular meeting. Public Comments and Questions Michael Lessner, 156 Ironwood Court, questioned the PZC and staff about the lack of answers from the Link Crossing development. Ch. Smith advised that he has never seen a project come before the PZC as many times as this project has so far. Mr. Stilling added that the project is currently at a crossroads. Kyle Olson, 738 Aspen Drive, believes that the developer is not responding to the concerns. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 60 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s ) 07/19/2017 Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 10:16 PM Chris Stilling Director of Community Development APPROVED BY ME THIS 19th DAY OF July , 2017 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 61 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 u l 1 9 , 2 0 1 7 7 : 3 0 P M ( A p p r o v a l o f M i n u t e s )