The URL can be used to link to this page

2018-01-03 - Planning and Zoning Commission - Agenda Packet Meeting of the Village of Buffalo Grove Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting January 3, 2018 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 an Amendment of Village Ordinance 2015-47 to Allow for a Name Change for 55 Dundee Road (Trustee Stein) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling) 2. Consider a Special Use and Variation for Buffalo Grove High School at 1100 W Dundee (Trustee Stein) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling) 3. Consider an Amendment to Chapter 17.36 Zoning Ordinance and Section 8.24.170 of the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code Concerning RV Regulations (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 - Dec 6, 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 facilities, contact the ADA Coordinator at 459-2525 to allow the Village to make reasonable accommodations for those persons. Updated: 12/21/2017 1:39 PM Page 1 Action Item : Consider an Amendment of Village Ordinance 2015-47 to Allow for a Name Change for 55 Dundee Road Recommendation of Action Staff recommends approval of the amendment, subject to the conditions in the attached staff report. In 2014, the Village Board approved Ordinance 2014-56 granting a rezoning and special use for the Buffalo Grove Auto Center and Car Wash to Regina Melman. In 2015, the Village Board approved Ordinance 2015-47 granting an additional special use for the ability to sell up to seven (7) used automobiles on the property. Ordinance 2015-47 was specifically granted to certain business entities and individuals. The current property owner, Regina Melman, has notified the Village that her tenant Randhir Patel of APR Car Wash Inc. is no longer operating the business (car wash, auto repair and auto sales) and that she will be taking over all operations. Although Ordinance 2015-47 specifically granted rights to Regina Melman of EDR Unique LLC, she is changing the business entity name to BG Auto Inc./D.B.A EDR Auto Sales. As a result of the change, an amendment to Ordinance 2015-47 is required. An amendment to Ordinance 2014-56 is not required as there were no specific conditions granting the rights to a single entity. ATTACHMENTS:  staff report (DOCX)  2015-47 (PDF) Trustee Liaison Staff Contact Stein Chris Stilling, Community Development Wednesday, January 3, 2018 2.1 Packet Pg. 2 VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: January 3, 2017 SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 55 Dundee Road PETITIONER: Regina Melman, President of BG Auto, Inc./DBA EDR Auto Sales 55 Dundee Road, Buffalo Grove, IL PROPERTY OWNER: Red West, LLC 55 Dundee Road, Buffalo Grove, IL PREPARED BY: Christopher Stilling, Director of Community Development REQUEST: An amendment of Village Ordinance 2015-47, allowing for a name change EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is improved with a single-story commercial building located in the B-2 Commercial Zoning District. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The 2009 Village Comprehensive Plan calls for this property to be Commercial PROJECT BACKGROUND In 2014, the Village Board approved Ordinance 2014-56 granting a rezoning and special use for the Buffalo Grove Auto Center and Car Wash to Regina Melman. In 2015, the Village Board approved Ordinance 2015-47 granting an additional special use for the ability to sell up to seven (7) used automobiles on the property. Ordinance 2015-47 was specifically granted to certain business entities and individuals. The current property owner, Regina Melman, has notified the Village that her tenant Randhir Patel of APR Car Wash Inc. is no longer operating the business (car wash, auto repair and auto sales) and that she will be taking over all operations. Although Ordinance 2015-47 specifically granted rights to Regina Melman of EDR Unique LLC, she is changing the business entity name to BG Auto Inc./D.B.A EDR Auto Sales. As a result of the change, an amendment to Ordinance 2015-47 is required. An amendment to Ordinance 2014-56 is not required as there were no specific conditions granting the rights to a single entity. PLANNING & ZONING ANALYSIS  Ordinance 2015-47 allowed for the property to sell up to seven (7) used cars on the property.  The approved site plan identifies that three (3) vehicles are to be displayed along the Dundee Road frontage and the remaining four (4) vehicles being stored at the rear of the building in existing parking spaces would remain the same.  The petitioner is proposing no changes to the operations and is just requesting the name change to the Ordinance. 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 1 7 1 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t o f V i l l a g e O r d i n a n c e 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 t o A l l o w f o r a N a m e C h a n g e f o r 5 5 D u n d e e R o a d ) DEPARTMENTAL REVIEWS None SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS Pursuant to Village Code, the surrounding property owners within 250’ were notified and a public hearing sign was posted on the subject property. The posting of the public hearing sign and the mailed notifications were completed within the prescribed timeframe as required. As of the date of this Staff Report, no comments have been received from the public concerning this project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the amendment, subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use granted to BG Auto, Inc. D/B/A EDR Auto Sales is assignable to subsequent petitioners seeking assignment of this special use as follows: i. Upon application of a petitioner seeking assignment of this special use, the Corporate Authorities, in their sole discretion, may refer said application of assignment to the appropriate commission(s) for a public hearing or may hold a public hearing at the Village Board. ii. Such assignment shall be valid only upon the adoption of a proper, valid and binding ordinance by the Corporate Authorities granting said assignment, which may be granted or denied for any reason. 2. The maximum number of vehicles for sale on the property shall not exceed seven (7) vehicles. Said vehicles shall be stored in accordance with the approved site plan as identified as Exhibit C in Ordinance 2015-47. ACTION REQUESTED The Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) shall open the public hearing and take public testimony concerning the amendment. 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 ( 2 1 7 1 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t o f V i l l a g e O r d i n a n c e 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 t o A l l o w f o r a N a m e C h a n g e f o r 5 5 D u n d e e R o a d ) 2.1.b Packet Pg. 5 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 ( 2 1 7 1 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t o f V i l l a g e O r d i n a n c e 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 t o A l l o w f o r a N a m e C h a n g e f o r 5 5 D u n d e e R o a d ) 2.1.b Packet Pg. 6 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 ( 2 1 7 1 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t o f V i l l a g e O r d i n a n c e 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 t o A l l o w f o r a N a m e C h a n g e f o r 5 5 D u n d e e R o a d ) 2.1.b Packet Pg. 7 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 ( 2 1 7 1 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t o f V i l l a g e O r d i n a n c e 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 t o A l l o w f o r a N a m e C h a n g e f o r 5 5 D u n d e e R o a d ) 2.1.b Packet Pg. 8 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 ( 2 1 7 1 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t o f V i l l a g e O r d i n a n c e 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 t o A l l o w f o r a N a m e C h a n g e f o r 5 5 D u n d e e R o a d ) 2.1.b Packet Pg. 9 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 ( 2 1 7 1 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t o f V i l l a g e O r d i n a n c e 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 t o A l l o w f o r a N a m e C h a n g e f o r 5 5 D u n d e e R o a d ) 2.1.b Packet Pg. 10 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 ( 2 1 7 1 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t o f V i l l a g e O r d i n a n c e 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 t o A l l o w f o r a N a m e C h a n g e f o r 5 5 D u n d e e R o a d ) 2.1.b Packet Pg. 11 At t a c h m e n t : 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 ( 2 1 7 1 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t o f V i l l a g e O r d i n a n c e 2 0 1 5 - 4 7 t o A l l o w f o r a N a m e C h a n g e f o r 5 5 D u n d e e R o a d ) Updated: 12/21/2017 4:22 PM Page 1 Action Item : Consider a Special Use and Variation for Buffalo Grove High School at 1100 W Dundee Recommendation of Action Staff recommends approval, subject to the conditions in the staff report. Township High School District 214 (District 214) is proposing an addition, along with other improvements, to the existing Buffalo Grove High School located at 1100 W Dundee Road. The school property is currently zoned R1 and schools are a special use. As a result of the changes, a special use is required. Furthermore, to accommodate the existing school, a variation to allow for a setback reduction for an existing building is required. ATTACHMENTS:  staff report (DOCX)  Aerial (JPG)  Project Narrative (PDF)  Response to Special Use Standards (PDF)  Plan Set (PDF) Trustee Liaison Staff Contact Stein Chris Stilling, Community Development Wednesday, January 3, 2018 2.2 Packet Pg. 12 VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: January 3, 2018 SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 1100 W Dundee Road, Buffalo Grove, IL PETITIONER: 102 Township High School District 214 (Buffalo Grove High School) PREPARED BY: Nicole Woods, Principal Planner REQUEST: Petition to the Village of Buffalo Grove for a plat of subdivision and preliminary plan approval and a special use for a public 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 setback reduction for an existing building. EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is improved with the existing public high school and zoned R1. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The approved Village Comprehensive Plan calls for this property to be Public/Semi-Public. PROJECT BACKGROUND Township High School District 214 (District 214) is proposing an addition, along with other improvements, to the existing Buffalo Grove High School located at 1100 W Dundee Road. The school property is currently zoned R1 and schools are a special use. As a result of the changes, a special use is required. Furthermore, to accommodate the existing school, a variation to allow for a setback reduction for an existing building is required. PLANNING & ZONING ANALYSIS Zoning  Currently, the Buffalo Grove High School is zoned R1, 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 front or corner side yard setback. The code requires a setback of 40 feet for the front yard and 40 feet but not less than 50 feet combined side yard setback. The school’s existing 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 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W D u n d e e ) stairwells located on the south and west sides of the building encroach within this forty foot setback requirement.  In addition, the existing bleachers and press box are considered non-conforming accessory structures as they exceed the maximum height. The current plan shows minor modifications to the bleachers to make them ADA compliant. These changes are permitted, however any substantial changes in the future may require a public hearing and variation.  In terms of parking, the proposed improvements would not generate an increase in parking as that is based on student population and employees. Based on Village Code, the High School requires 472 spaces. The existing site has 630 spaces. Proposed Improvements As proposed, all improvements will meet Village Code. The following is a summary of the new improvements: Building Addition  District 214 is proposing an 8,500 square foot addition to the 296,000 square foot existing high school building that has a height of 40 feet tall.  The addition will be used for fine arts classes and activities.  It will be located on the grassy area the southwest corner of the building and not be displacing any parking spaces.  The addition will be 34 feet tall at its highest point. The addition’s height as well as its materials (steel frame, concrete block, face brick and metal panel fascia) will match the existing high school building. The proposed addition meets all bulk standards. Accessory Structures Improvements District 214 is also proposing several improvements to the existing accessory structures. The following is a brief summary of those improvements Ticket Booth/Bathroom  District 214 is proposing a new ticket booth and bathroom building that is 41’-3” by 24’-9” and 12’ tall. It will be located north of the stadium entrance. This type of structure is considered an accessory structure in the Village’s Zoning Code and meets all bulk standards.  The bathrooms associated with this improvement will not be serviced by a public sewer. The bathrooms will have a holding tank which will be serviced regularly. Staff has reviewed this item and finds that it may be permitted provided that District 214 receives a MWRD and IEPA permit. Furthermore, approval from the Regional office of Education will also be required. This will remain a condition. Storage Buildings  Two new storage facilities on the baseball diamonds are also being proposed. One storage facility will be 16’ by 30’ and 12’6” tall. The other will be 16’ by 24’ and 12’6” tall. This type of structure is considered an accessory structure in the Village’s Zoning Code and meets all bulk standards. 2.2.a Packet Pg. 14 At t a c h m e n t : s t a f f r e p o r t ( 2 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W D u n d e e ) Variations The following is a summary of the requested variation: 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 code requires a setback of 40 feet for the front yard and 40 feet but not less than 50 feet combined side yard setback. The existing school’s stairwells located on the south and west side of the building encroaches within the forty foot setback requirement. As this is an existing improvement, staff supports the request. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEWS Village Department Comments Engineering The Village Engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and has no specific comments regarding the preliminary plans. 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. Village Staff has received one inquiry regarding the project. 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 shall provide a response to standards at the meeting. 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; 2.2.a Packet Pg. 15 At t a c h m e n t : s t a f f r e p o r t ( 2 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W D u n d e e ) 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 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. 3. Approval from MWRD, IEPA and the Regional Office of Education shall be obtained for the proposed holding tank. 4. A final plat of subdivision consolidating all the lots shall be submitted in a manner acceptable to the Village. 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. 2.2.a Packet Pg. 16 At t a c h m e n t : s t a f f r e p o r t ( 2 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W D u n d e e ) 2.2.b Packet Pg. 17 At t a c h m e n t : A e r i a l ( 2 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W Township High School District 214 – Buffalo Grove High School Summary of Proposed Work, Spring through Fall 2018 Proposed are the following renovations and modifications to Buffalo Grove High School, 1100 W Dundee Rd, Buffalo Grove, Illinois 60089, estimated to begin spring 2018, with completion approximately December 2018: • Fine arts addition – to be constructed near the existing theater. Addition is estimated at 8,500 square feet, to be located on the grassy area between the theater and auto shop at the southwest corner of the building. The addition is proposed to be 34’0” high, at the highest point. The addition will be constructed using a steel frame, concrete block, face brick, and metal panel fascia to match the existing high school building. • Stadium Concession Stand, Athletic Storage, Stadium Seating Accessibility Upgrades, and Toilet Facility – this renovation includes several parts: o renovation of the existing concession stand/athletics storage building to the north of the home bleachers into a repurposed storage facility. This building is currently a metal clad shed, and will remain unchanged but will receive paint to refresh the appearance; o construction of a new building within the stadium perimeter at the northwest corner to house ticket sales, concessions, and toilets. This building will be constructed using concrete block and face brick to match the appearance of the high school; o the stadium entrance gateway will be improved to include branding of the stadium, similar to what was installed at John Hersey High School in Arlington Heights two years ago. This improvement will push the existing entrance gates and portion of surrounding fence into the plaza area near the concession stand to increase safety for spectators by creating a dedicated plaza area at the ticket sales/concession/toilet building and reducing the need to stand in the parking lot to purchase tickets to enter the stadium for events. o there will be a new storage facility located at the varsity baseball field for storage near the existing batting cage area along the north drive near the fieldhouse and pool. This is a prefabricated structure measuring 16’wide x 30’ long x 12.5’ high, constructed of wood and wood siding; o A second baseball storage facility will be located behind the backstop of the varsity baseball field, near the intersection of the main lot, basin lot, and north drive, near the tennis courts. This is a prefabricated structure measuring 16’ wide x 24’ long x 12.5” high, constructed of wood and wood siding. o The home and visitor stadium grandstands will receive disabled accessibility ramps and platforms at the front of each set of grandstands. No change will be made to the grandstands themselves; the existing structures are to remain as-is with the ramps and platforms added to the front for wheelchair access to the seating area of each. All work will be permitted through the Illinois State Board of Education, Regional Office of Education for Northern Cook County. Construction, called inspections, and occupancy permits will be issued and regulated by the State. Township High School District 214 has already submitted a proposal of work to the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago for permitting and comment/revision of site plans as necessary to comply with storm water management requirements. No new water, sewer, or other utility connections are expected; all services for the proposed facilities will be provided by existing utility connections. 2.2.c Packet Pg. 18 At t a c h m e n t : P r o j e c t N a r r a t i v e ( 2 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W D u n d e e ) Township High School District 214 – Buffalo Grove High School Response to the Special Use Standards Page 1 of 2 20 November 2017 Criteria for special use. 1. The special use will serve the public convenience at the location of the subject property; or the establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare; a. The special use is accessory to a public high school, serving the secondary education needs of the Cook County portion of the Village and neighboring communities. All construction and use of Buffalo Grove High School is in accordance with the Illinois School Code, the School Building Code (105 ILCS 5/2-3.12), review of Building Plans and Specifications (105 ILCS 5/3-14.20), Inspection of Schools (105 ILCS 5/3-14.21), and all other applicable health and life safety Acts related to the School Code. 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; a. The special use has been continuously operated as a public high school, in the current location, on land dedicated for such purpose and purchased by the Board of Education of Township High School District 214 in 1962, and construction of facilities to serve as Buffalo Grove High School by approval of referendum by the voters in the general election of 1971. Buffalo Grove High School was originally constructed on 40 acres of property, and then was expanded by an additional 8.65 +/- acres in 1989 to continue adequately serving the needs of the community and school population. The special use of the expansion and renovation of the buildings on the campus furthers the goals of the Board of Education to provide adequate facilities to support the programs of the School District. Located at the intersection of Dundee Road and Arlington Heights Road, the access to the site is adequate and prevents disruption to the residential neighborhoods surrounding the site. 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; a. The continual investment in the Buffalo Grove High School building, grounds, and support facilities by the Board of Education reinforces the commitment of the Board to the community and the Village of Buffalo Grove to provide facilities that meet the needs of the community for secondary education and community education purposes. There is not anticipated to be any devaluation of other properties by the renovation and addition to the High School. 2.2.d Packet Pg. 19 At t a c h m e n t : R e s p o n s e t o S p e c i a l U s e S t a n d a r d s ( 2 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W Township High School District 214 – Buffalo Grove High School Response to the Special Use Standards Page 2 of 2 20 November 2017 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; a. All of the land surrounding Buffalo Grove High School is built up in specific zoned parcels. While some are currently vacant, the further development of the Buffalo Grove High School campus will have no effect on the development or use of any neighboring property. 5. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and/or other necessary facilities have been or will be provided; a. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and all other necessary facilities are currently in place on the campus to service all users of the property. 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. a. Parking areas are adequate for the campus. Per Village ordinance 17.36.040(A)(11), designated is 1.0 space per employee plus 1.0 space per every six students based on rated design capacity. There are approximately 250 employees at Buffalo Grove High School, and the building has a design capacity of 2,500 students, totaling 667 required spaces. There are 701 actual spaces in the parking lots on the campus, exceeding the Village’s definition of adequacy. All parking areas are several hundred feet from adjoining residential uses. The School District has developed a three-way intergovernmental agreement between the School District, the Village of Buffalo Grove, and the Village of Arlington Heights, for the installation and maintenance of a traffic signal at the driveway on Dundee Road, as well as worked directly with the Cook County Department of Transportation and Highways in the redesign and rebuilding of Arlington Heights Road in 2010/11 to provide for safety in access to the two driveways on Arlington Heights Road. The School District and the Village have worked collaboratively to install push-button traffic signal control for police use for large events at the Dundee Road exit, to work in conjunction with existing traffic signal emergency preemption systems. The School District reimburses the Village for a full-time police officer to be present each school day at the campus, whose duties include assistance with traffic control as needed by the administration of by direction of the Village, and also reimburses the Village for the services of additional police officers as necessary for special events throughout the school year for traffic control and direction, augmented by the School District’s security employees. 2.2.d Packet Pg. 20 At t a c h m e n t : R e s p o n s e t o S p e c i a l U s e S t a n d a r d s ( 2 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W KEY PLAN • CIVIL ENGINEERING / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: The Structural Group, Ltd. 707 Lake Cook Road, Suite 107 Deerfield, IL 60015 (847) 562-1977 CS2 Design Group, LLC 837 Oakton St. Elk Grove Village, IL 60007 (847) 981-1880 Eriksson Engineering Associates, Ltd. 145 Commerce Drive, Suite A Gryslake, IL 60030 (847) 223-4804 • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING: • MEP/FP ENGINEERING: ARCHITECTS: STR Partners LLC 350 West Ontario Street | Suite 200 Chicago IL 60654 T: 312.464.1444 www.strpartners.com STR-SEG STR Building Resources, LLC 2015 S. Arlington Heights Rd., Suite 108 Arlington Heights, IL (847) 652-6115 • ROOFING AND BUILDING ENVELOPE: This drawing is one drawing within a complete set of documents and shall not be considered separately from the Drawings as a whole. The Drawings indicate the general scope of the project in terms of architectural design concept, the dimensions of the building, the major architectural elements and the type of structural, mechanical, and electrical systems. As Scope Documents, the Drawings do not necessarily indicate or describe all work required for full performance and completion of the requirements of the Construction Documents. On the basis of the general scope indicated or described, the Contractor shall furnish all items required for the proper execution and completion of the Work. STR PROJECT NUMBER CLIENT PROJECT NUMBER 17041 PROJECT SCOPE DOCUMENT D214 CPP 2018-2019 RN 1100 W Dundee Rd. Buffalo Grove, IL 60089 The Board of Education Township High School District 214 2121 South Goebbert Rd. Arlington Heights, IL 60005 Copyright Notice, Copyright © 2016 STR PARTNERS LLC The information in this document is the intellectual property of STR Partners LLC. It is intended solely for use by the “Client” during only this specific project. Reproduction of any portion of this document for any purpose other than for its intended use is not permitted without specific written permission of STR Partners LLC. NUMBER DATE COMMENTS SCOPE PLAN A1.0 DRAWING TITLE DRAWING DATES SHEET NUMBER • • # M D, YEAR TITLE OF REVIEW IN-PROG R E S S NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N 12/15/17 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 I N 2 I N 0 I N Ac t u a l s i z e t o r e a d a t s c a l e • CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: Pepper Construction Company 411 Lake Zurich Road Barrington, IL 60010 (312) 266-4700 DUNDEE ROAD AR L I N G T O N H E I G H T S R O A D 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 NO P A R K I N G 40'-0" required setback Property line SCOPE OF WORK: MUSIC ADDITION AND RENOVATION -HEIGHT: 30'-0" - MATCHES ELEVATION OF ADJACENT EXISTING BUILDING ON DUNDEE ROAD -SET BACK: WITHIN SET BACK OF EXISTING BUILDING ON DUNDEE ROAD. COMPLIANT WITH VILLAGE SET BACK REQUIREMENT OF 30'-0". SCOPE OF WORK: BLEACHER MODIFICATION REPLACE EXISTING NON-ADA COMPLIANT PLATFORMS AT HOME AND AWAY BLEACHERS WITH ADA COMPLIANT ACCESSIBLE PLATFORMS. NO MODIFICATION TO EXISTING BLEACHER STRUCTURE. SCOPE OF WORK: 16' x 24' ACCESSORY BUILDING HEIGHT: 12'-6" EXTENT OF NEW FENCING 1100'-6" Building Setback SCOPE OF WORK: TICKET BOOTH / BATHROOM BUILDING ADDITION, AND STADIUM ENTRY WORK HEIGHT: 12'-10" SCOPE OF WORK: 16' x 30' ACCESSORY BUILDING HEIGHT: 12'-6" N SCALE: 1" = 50'1 SCOPE PLAN 2.2.e Packet Pg. 21 At t a c h m e n t : P l a n S e t ( 2 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W D u n d e e ) KEY PLAN • CIVIL ENGINEERING / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: The Structural Group, Ltd. 707 Lake Cook Road, Suite 107 Deerfield, IL 60015 (847) 562-1977 CS2 Design Group, LLC 837 Oakton St. Elk Grove Village, IL 60007 (847) 981-1880 Eriksson Engineering Associates, Ltd. 145 Commerce Drive, Suite A Gryslake, IL 60030 (847) 223-4804 • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING: • MEP/FP ENGINEERING: ARCHITECTS: STR Partners LLC 350 West Ontario Street | Suite 200 Chicago IL 60654 T: 312.464.1444 www.strpartners.com STR-SEG STR Building Resources, LLC 2015 S. Arlington Heights Rd., Suite 108 Arlington Heights, IL (847) 652-6115 • ROOFING AND BUILDING ENVELOPE: This drawing is one drawing within a complete set of documents and shall not be considered separately from the Drawings as a whole. The Drawings indicate the general scope of the project in terms of architectural design concept, the dimensions of the building, the major architectural elements and the type of structural, mechanical, and electrical systems. As Scope Documents, the Drawings do not necessarily indicate or describe all work required for full performance and completion of the requirements of the Construction Documents. On the basis of the general scope indicated or described, the Contractor shall furnish all items required for the proper execution and completion of the Work. STR PROJECT NUMBER CLIENT PROJECT NUMBER 17041 PROJECT SCOPE DOCUMENT D214 CPP 2018-2019 RN 1100 W Dundee Rd. Buffalo Grove, IL 60089 The Board of Education Township High School District 214 2121 South Goebbert Rd. Arlington Heights, IL 60005 Copyright Notice, Copyright © 2016 STR PARTNERS LLC The information in this document is the intellectual property of STR Partners LLC. It is intended solely for use by the “Client” during only this specific project. Reproduction of any portion of this document for any purpose other than for its intended use is not permitted without specific written permission of STR Partners LLC. NUMBER DATE COMMENTS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - AREA A - ADDITION A1-3.0 DRAWING TITLE DRAWING DATES SHEET NUMBER • • # M D, YEAR TITLE OF REVIEW IN-PROG R E S S NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N 12/11/17 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 I N 2 I N 0 I N Ac t u a l s i z e t o r e a d a t s c a l e • CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: Pepper Construction Company 411 Lake Zurich Road Barrington, IL 60010 (312) 266-4700 19 ' - 0 1 / 2 " T/ SLAB +0'-0" T/ COPING +30'-0 5/8" ALUMINUM GLAZING SYSTEM ,TYP. MTL RIBBED PANEL TO MATCH EXISTING, TYP. FACE BRICK to match existing TYP roof top unit screen existing building to remain EXISTING BUILDING NEW CONSTRUCTION T/ SLAB +0'-0" T/ COPING +30'-0" ALUMINUM GLAZING SYSTEM ,TYP. MTL RIBBED PANEL TO MATCH EXISTING, TYP.EXISTING MTL PANEL FACE BRICK to match existing TYP roof top unit screen EXISTING BUILDING NEW CONSTRUCTION T/ SLAB +0'-0" T/ COPING +30'-0" ALUMINUM GLAZING SYSTEM ,TYP. MTL RIBBED PANEL TO MATCH EXISTING, TYP. FACE BRICK to match existing TYP roof top unit screen existing building beyond existing building beyond SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 SOUTH ELEVATION ADDITIONADDITION ADDITION 2.2.e Packet Pg. 22 At t a c h m e n t : P l a n S e t ( 2 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W D u n d e e ) KEY PLAN • CIVIL ENGINEERING / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: The Structural Group, Ltd. 707 Lake Cook Road, Suite 107 Deerfield, IL 60015 (847) 562-1977 CS2 Design Group, LLC 837 Oakton St. Elk Grove Village, IL 60007 (847) 981-1880 Eriksson Engineering Associates, Ltd. 145 Commerce Drive, Suite A Gryslake, IL 60030 (847) 223-4804 • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING: • MEP/FP ENGINEERING: ARCHITECTS: STR Partners LLC 350 West Ontario Street | Suite 200 Chicago IL 60654 T: 312.464.1444 www.strpartners.com STR-SEG STR Building Resources, LLC 2015 S. Arlington Heights Rd., Suite 108 Arlington Heights, IL (847) 652-6115 • ROOFING AND BUILDING ENVELOPE: This drawing is one drawing within a complete set of documents and shall not be considered separately from the Drawings as a whole. The Drawings indicate the general scope of the project in terms of architectural design concept, the dimensions of the building, the major architectural elements and the type of structural, mechanical, and electrical systems. As Scope Documents, the Drawings do not necessarily indicate or describe all work required for full performance and completion of the requirements of the Construction Documents. On the basis of the general scope indicated or described, the Contractor shall furnish all items required for the proper execution and completion of the Work. STR PROJECT NUMBER CLIENT PROJECT NUMBER 17041 PROJECT SCOPE DOCUMENT D214 CPP 2018-2019 RN 1100 W Dundee Rd. Buffalo Grove, IL 60089 The Board of Education Township High School District 214 2121 South Goebbert Rd. Arlington Heights, IL 60005 Copyright Notice, Copyright © 2016 STR PARTNERS LLC The information in this document is the intellectual property of STR Partners LLC. It is intended solely for use by the “Client” during only this specific project. Reproduction of any portion of this document for any purpose other than for its intended use is not permitted without specific written permission of STR Partners LLC. NUMBER DATE COMMENTS ELEVATIONS AND SECTIONS - AREA D - TOILET ROOM / TICKET BOOTH A4-1.1 DRAWING TITLE DRAWING DATES SHEET NUMBER • • # M D, YEAR TITLE OF REVIEW IN-PROG R E S S NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N 12/11/17 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 I N 2 I N 0 I N Ac t u a l s i z e t o r e a d a t s c a l e • CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: Pepper Construction Company 411 Lake Zurich Road Barrington, IL 60010 (312) 266-4700 T/ HIGH SLAB +0'-0" T/ COPING +12'-10" T/ LOW SLAB -8" ALUMINUM VENDOR WINDOW ,TYP. MTL RIBBED PANEL fascia chained metal fence - match existing MTL coping FACEBRICK T/ LOW SLAB -8" T/ COPING +12'-10" T/ HIGH SLAB +0'-0" chained metal fence - match existing MTL coping FACEBRICK chained metal fence - match existing T/ HIGH SLAB +0'-0" T/ COPING +12'-10" MTL coping FACEBRICK chained metal fence - match existing T/ HIGH SLAB 0'-0" T/ COPING +12'-10" MTL RIBBED PANEL fascia chained metal fence - match existing MTL coping FACEBRICK chained metal fence - match existing SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 EAST ELEVATION TOILET ROOM / TICKET BOOTH TOILET ROOM / TICKET BOOTH TOILET ROOM / TICKET BOOTHTOILET ROOM / TICKET BOOTH 2.2.e Packet Pg. 23 At t a c h m e n t : P l a n S e t ( 2 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W D u n d e e ) 2.2.e Packet Pg. 24 At t a c h m e n t : P l a n S e t ( 2 1 7 3 : 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 B u f f a l o G r o v e H i g h S c h o o l a t 1 1 0 0 W D u n d e e ) Updated: 12/21/2017 1:51 PM Page 1 Action Item : Consider an Amendment to Chapter 17.36 Zoning Ordinance and Section 8.24.170 of the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code Concerning RV Regulations Recommendation of Action Staff recommends approval of the attached draft Ordinance. Based upon several complaints from village residents concerning the permissiveness of Buffalo Groves current regulations concerning the parking and storage of recreational vehicles on residentially zoned lots, the Village Board directed the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&ZC) to review the matter and to provide a recommendation. Additional information can be found in the attached staff report. ATTACHMENTS:  Staff Report (DOCX)  Draft Ord 12.21.17 (DOC) Trustee Liaison Staff Contact Ottenheimer Chris Stilling, Community Development Wednesday, January 3, 2018 2.3 Packet Pg. 25 Page 1 of 2 VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE MEMORANDUM DATE: December 21, 2017 TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Christopher Stilling, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Amendment to Chapter 17.36 and Section 8.24.170 of the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code concerning Recreational Vehicles. BACKGROUND Based upon several complaints from village residents concerning the permissiveness of Buffalo Groves current regulations concerning the parking and storage of recreational vehicles on residentially zoned lots, the Village Board directed the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&ZC) to review the matter and to provide a recommendation. STAFF ANALYSIS The P&ZC reviewed and discussed the issue at its August 16, 2017, November 1, 2017 and November 15, 2017 meetings. The current Village regulations as well as the regulations of several surrounding communities were also reviewed. Several residents also appeared and provided input over the course of the meetings. Based upon this review and input, village staff was given direction to amend the Village’s current regulations. Attached is a draft Ordinance for review and consideration by the P&ZC . The following is a summary of the changes: Definition:  Recreational vehicles (RVs): Vehicles or trailers for recreational or non- commercial uses that can be driven, towed, sailed, or hauled. This includes, but is not limited to, those vehicles commonly referred to as RVs, such as motor homes and travel trailers, as well as any snowmobiles, pull campers, all-terrain vehicles (ATV), tent trailers, special purpose trailers, cargo trailers, horse trailers, utility trailers used for hauling, or other similar vehicle; water-oriented vehicles and their trailers including, but not limited to, power boats, cruisers, jet skies, fishing/hunting boats, pontoon boats, personal watercrafts (PWC), as well as, row boats, sail boats, and other non-motorized watercraft. A recreational vehicle(s) such as an ATV, PWC or boat on a trailer shall constitute one recreational vehicle. General and Locational Regulations  RVs of any size and any number can be parked in a fully enclosed garage unless such parking specifically prohibited elsewhere in the Code.  No more than one RV may be parked outside on any residential lot.  RVs that are parked outside shall conform to the following regulations: o RVs shall be within size regulations (staff is proposing 30 feet in length, 10 feet in height and 8 feet in width) o RVs shall not have their wheels removed or be affixed to the ground o RVs shall be parked on a hard surface driveway (i.e. asphalt, pavers, or other similar materials resulting in a dust free surface) 2.3.a Packet Pg. 26 At t a c h m e n t : S t a f f R e p o r t ( 2 1 7 2 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t t o C h a p t e r 1 7 . 3 6 a n d S e c t i o n 8 . 2 4 . 1 7 0 o f t h e M u n i c i p a l C o d e C o n c e r n i n g R V ' s ) Page 2 of 2 o RVs shall not encroach into the right-of-way or over the public sidewalk o RVs shall be operable and moved at least once in any calendar year  Parked RVs should not be used for living, sleeping or other purposes or as accessory structures.  RVs that are being repaired, in an inoperative condition, or not licensed, may be parked outside on a temporary basis (no more than a total of 48 hours in any calendar year), otherwise they are to be in an enclosed garage. Location  RVs of any size may be parked in the front yard only on a temporary basis for no more than a total of 10 days per calendar year for the purpose of loading, unloading, cleaning, and maintenance. RVs shall not encroach into the right-of-way or over the public sidewalk.  An RV can be parked in the interior side yard of a residentially zoned lot provided that it is effectively screened from the public view and it meets the required side yard setback of the zoning district. Adequate screening (fencing or landscaping) shall be a minimum of 5 feet in height as installed and properly maintained.  An RV can be parked in the rear yard of a residentially zoned lot provided that it is effectively screened from the public view and it meets the required rear yard setback of the zoning district. Adequate screening (fencing or landscaping) shall be a minimum of 5 feet in height as installed and properly maintained.  An RV shall not be located in the corner side yard setback.  Any property no meeting these regulations shall require a variation pursuant to the terms established in Chapter 17.52 of the Buffalo Grove Zoning Ordinance. Amendment to Section 8.24.170 of Village Code As part of the proposed changes, staff is also amending the Village’s nuisance provisions. This will allow for greater enforcement. Effective Date Currently, staff is proposing that the Ordinance take effect on June 1, 2018. This will allow time for staff to canvas the community and identify (where possible) those properties that may be impacted by the new regulations. Those that are identified will be provided a notice that highlights the new regulations. The June 1st date will allow them sufficient time to comply with the Code (landscaping, pavers, fencing, etc). PUBLIC COMMENTS Several members of the public appeared at the public meetings and spoke in support of an ordinance that would minimize the impact of recreational vehicles being parked on a residentially zoned lot including time and size limitations as well as parking location and screening. Staff has notified those residents of the upcoming public hearing. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the attached draft Ordinance. 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. 2.3.a Packet Pg. 27 At t a c h m e n t : S t a f f R e p o r t ( 2 1 7 2 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t t o C h a p t e r 1 7 . 3 6 a n d S e c t i o n 8 . 2 4 . 1 7 0 o f t h e M u n i c i p a l C o d e C o n c e r n i n g R V ' s ) 1 DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES Underlined = addition Strikeout = deletion 12/21/2017 #705653 ORDINANCE NO. 2018 - ______ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 17.36.030, ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS- PARKING, AND SECTION 8.24.170, DESIGNATIONS, OF THE BUFFALO GROVE MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, the Village of Buffalo Grove is a Home Rule Unit pursuant to the Illinois Constitution of 1970; and WHEREAS, the Village has received several complaints from residents concerned that the Village’s parking regulations for recreational vehicles (“RV”) are too permissive; and WHEREAS, the Village conducted a survey through the Northwest Municipal Conference (NWMC) to see how RVs are regulated in other communities; and WHEREAS, proposed RV parking regulations were discussed at several Planning & Zoning Commission meetings; and WHEREAS, a violation of Sections 17.36.030. H.3 and H.4.is found to be a nuisance. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE, COOK AND LAKE COUNTIES, ILLINOIS, as follows: Section 1. The foregoing recitals are hereby adopted and incorporated into and made a part of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein. Section 2. Subsection H, Parking in Residential Districts of Section 17.36.030, Additional Regulations-Parking, of the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 17.36.030, Additional Regulations-Parking. H. Parking in Residential Districts. The following restrictions and regulations shall apply to parking and storage on private property in all residential districts. 2.3.b Packet Pg. 28 At t a c h m e n t : D r a f t O r d 1 2 . 2 1 . 1 7 ( 2 1 7 2 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t t o C h a p t e r 1 7 . 3 6 a n d S e c t i o n 8 . 2 4 . 1 7 0 o f t h e M u n i c i p a l C o d e C o n c e r n i n g R V ' s ) 2 1. Commercial vehicles. One commercial vehicle up to the following size including appurtenances and attachments per zoned residential lot shall be permitted: Length 18 feet Width 8 feet Height 7 feet No parking of any commercial vehicle shall be allowed on Village streets except for deliver or service. 2. Definition of recreational vehicle (RV): Vehicles or trailers for recreational or non- commercial uses that can be driven, towed, sailed, or hauled. This includes, but is not limited to, those vehicles commonly referred to as RVs, such as motor homes and travel trailers, as well as any snowmobiles, pull campers, all-terrain vehicles (ATV), tent trailers, special purpose trailers, cargo trailers, horse trailers, utility trailers used for hauling, or other similar vehicle; water-oriented vehicles and their trailers including, but not limited to, power boats, cruisers, jet skies, fishing/hunting boats, pontoon boats, personal watercrafts (PWC), as well as, row boats, sail boats, and other non-motorized watercraft. A recreational vehicle(s) such as an ATV, PWC or boat on a trailer shall constitute one recreational vehicle. 3. Parking or storage of recreational vehicles. a. General Regulations (i) Recreational vehicles of any size and any number can be parked in a fully enclosed garage unless such parking specifically prohibited elsewhere in the Code. (ii)No more than one recreational may be parked outside on any residential lot. (iii) Recreational vehicles that are parked outside shall conform to the following regulations: o Recreational vehicles shall be within size regulations of: 30 feet in length, 10 feet in height and 8 feet in width. o Recreational vehicles shall not have their wheels removed or be affixed to the ground. o Recreational vehicles shall be parked on an approved hard surface (i.e. concrete, asphalt, pavers, or other similar materials resulting in a dust free surface). o Recreational vehicles shall not encroach into the right-of- way or over the public sidewalk. o Recreational vehicles shall be operable and moved at least once in any calendar year. At t a c h m e n t : S t a f f M e m o ( 2 1 3 9 : R e c r e a t i o n a l V e h i c l e ( R V ) P a r k i n g i n R e s i d e n t i a l D i s t r i c t s ( W o r k s h o p ) ) 2.3.b Packet Pg. 29 At t a c h m e n t : D r a f t O r d 1 2 . 2 1 . 1 7 ( 2 1 7 2 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t t o C h a p t e r 1 7 . 3 6 a n d S e c t i o n 8 . 2 4 . 1 7 0 o f t h e M u n i c i p a l C o d e C o n c e r n i n g R V ' s ) 3 (iv) Parked recreational vehicles should not be used for living, sleeping or other purposes or as accessory structures. (v) Recreational vehicles that are being repaired, in an inoperative condition, or not licensed, may be parked outside on a temporary basis (no more than a total of 48 hours in a calendar year), otherwise they are to be in an enclosed garage. b. Location. (i) Recreational vehicles of any size may be parked in the front yard only on a temporary basis for no more than a total of 10 calendar days per calendar year for the purpose of loading, unloading, cleaning, and maintenance. Recreational vehicles shall not encroach into the right-of-way or over the public sidewalk. (ii) A recreational vehicle can be parked in the interior side yard of a residentially zoned lot provided that it is effectively screened from the public view and is not parked within the required side yard setback of the zoning district. Adequate screening (fencing or landscaping) shall be a minimum of 5 feet in height as installed and properly maintained. (iii) A recreational vehicle can be parked in the rear yard of a residentially zoned lot provided that it is effectively screened from the public view and it meets the required rear yard setback of the zoning district. Adequate screening (fencing or landscaping) shall be a minimum of 5 feet in height as installed and properly maintained. (iv) A recreational vehicle shall not be located in the corner side yard setback. (v) Any property not complying with the regulations set forth in this Subsection H. shall require a variation pursuant to the terms established in Chapter 17.52 of the Buffalo Grove Zoning Ordinance. 2. Parking or storage of recreational vehicles. a. Standards: (i) At no time shall a parked or stored recreational vehicle be used for living, sleeping or housekeeping purposes. No recreational vehicle shall be connected to gas, water or sanitary sewer servi ce. Temporary electrical hookup shall be permitted. (ii) Recreational vehicles shall not be used as accessory structures in any district. 2.3.b Packet Pg. 30 At t a c h m e n t : D r a f t O r d 1 2 . 2 1 . 1 7 ( 2 1 7 2 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t t o C h a p t e r 1 7 . 3 6 a n d S e c t i o n 8 . 2 4 . 1 7 0 o f t h e M u n i c i p a l C o d e C o n c e r n i n g R V ' s ) 4 (iii) Recreational vehicles shall not have their wheels removed or be affixed to the ground so as to prevent ready removal of the vehicle. (iv) Recreational vehicles shall not be parked or stored in such a way as to create a dangerous or unsafe condition. (v) No recreational vehicle including attachments and appurtenances shall be parked or stored within one foot of a public sidewalk. (vi) The ground under and surrounding where any such recreational vehicle is parked or stored must be free of noxious weeds or over-growth or debris. b. Parking and storage restrictions. (i) Not more than two recreational vehicles co nforming to the size restrictions stated below may be parked or stored in the open on a lot in a residential district, except as set forth in Section 17.36.030.H.3.b hereof. Recreational vehicles exceeding the size restrictions below shall not be stored or parked in any residential district. (ii) Recreational vehicles may be parked or stored in the side yards, rear yard and required front yard on the driveway, subject to the standards set forth in Section 17.36.030.H.2.a, but no more than one of the side yards of any residential lot may be used for parking or storage of recreational vehicles. c. Size restrictions. No recreational vehicle parked in a residential district shall exceed thirty-five feet in length, ten feet in height (excluding mast and measured at the top of roof from ground level) and eight feet in width. 3.4. Multiple-Family Districts (R-7, R-8, and R-9). a. In multiple-family districts (R-7, R-8, and R-9) the requirements of Section 17.36.030.H.2.b. (i) shall apply where a driveway is present on the zoned lot. b. In multiple-family districts (R -7, R-8, and R-9) where no driveway is present and where common parking areas are provided, then the number of recreational vehicles shall not exceed the number of units on the zoning lot. In all other respects, the requirements of Section 17.36.030.H.2.b . (i) hereof shall be applicable. 2.3.b Packet Pg. 31 At t a c h m e n t : D r a f t O r d 1 2 . 2 1 . 1 7 ( 2 1 7 2 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t t o C h a p t e r 1 7 . 3 6 a n d S e c t i o n 8 . 2 4 . 1 7 0 o f t h e M u n i c i p a l C o d e C o n c e r n i n g R V ' s ) 5 c. Parking of recreational vehicles shall be in a designated area separate from general parking. Section 3 Subsection I of Section 8.24.170, Designation, is hereby added to the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code to read as follows: Section 8.24.170 I. To cause or allow a violation of Sections 17.36.030.H.3. Or H.4.of the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code. Section 4. If any section, paragraph, clause or provision of this Ordinance shall be held invalid, the invalidity thereof shall not affect any other provision of this Ordinance. Section 5. Any person violating any portion of this Ordinance shall be punished according to the provisions of Chapter 1.08 of the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code. Section 6. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication. This Ordinance may be published in pamphlet form. The implementation of this Ordinance shall be delayed until June 1, 2018. AYES:_____________________________________________ NAYES:____________________________________________ ABSENT:___________________________________________ PASSED:____________________________________, 2017 APPROVED:_________________________________, 2017 PUBLISHED:_________________________________, 2017 APPROVED: _____________________________ Beverly Sussman, Village President ATTEST: _______________________ Janet Sirabian, Village Clerk #705653 2.3.b Packet Pg. 32 At t a c h m e n t : D r a f t O r d 1 2 . 2 1 . 1 7 ( 2 1 7 2 : C o n s i d e r a n A m e n d m e n t t o C h a p t e r 1 7 . 3 6 a n d S e c t i o n 8 . 2 4 . 1 7 0 o f t h e M u n i c i p a l C o d e C o n c e r n i n g R V ' s ) 12/6/2017 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, DECEMBER 6, 2017 Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM by Chairman Frank Cesario Public Hearings/Items For Consideration 1.Consider a Variation for a Side Yard Setback Reduction for 1118 Alden Lane (Trustee Stein) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling) Mr. Matthew Levin, 1118 Alden Lane, was present and sworn in. Mr. Levin advised that as requested, he provided general plans and elevation details on the requested second story addition. He has reduced the width from 11.75 feet to 11.5 feet. He explained that the extra four (4) feet at the rear of the proposed addition only adds three (3) inches into the side yard. He is requesting to add a second car garage to the side of the house. The additional four (4) feet at the rear of the proposed addition would also allow him to add a master suite at the back of the house on the second floor. Com. Weinstein asked Mr. Levin to describe the variation request. He asked how far the neighboring home is from the side lot line. Mr. Levin did not have the distance of the neighboring home to the side lot line. Com. Weinstein asked Mr. Levin if he considered just extending the addition to the required setback. Mr. Levin advised that he did consider it. However that would not allow for a second car garage. The proposed garage door is only eight (8) feet wide. Com. Weinstein asked if Mr. Levin can condense the garage doors. Mr. Levin responded no, the existing garage door is twelve (12) foot wide. He is squeezing in the second car garage by reducing the total width to 11.5 feet. Com. Moodhe asked about the additional four (4) feet at the back of the addition. If the additional four (4) feet was not added to the back of the garage addition, a variation would not be required. Mr. Levin advised that a variation would still be required but he would not be able to stack two (2) cars in the garage addition and he would not be able to add the master suite on the second floor. The required length for two (2) cars stacked tandem is thirty three (33) feet. That is what he is requesting. Com. Moodhe asked staff if that measurement is correct. Mr. Sheehan advised that he has not done the calculation but that a distance of thirty three (33) feet sounds correct for two (2) cars stacked tandem. Ch. Cesario asked if Mr. Levin has spoken to the neighbor. Mr. Levin advised that he has spoken to the neighbor. The neighboring house is a rental and he has not shown the plan to the owner, but he did speak with them and they were okay with it. Mr. Levin advised that staff made him aware of the tapering requirement for the driveway addition and that he will work with staff to meet the requirement. Ch. Cesario entered the Staff Report dated December 1, 2017 as Exhibit 1. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 33 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 D e c 6 , 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 ) 12/6/2017 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 7:43 PM. Moved by Com. Weinstein, seconded by Com. Moodhe, to approve the request for a variation for a side yard setback reduction for 1118 Alden Lane, subject to the following: 1.The proposed addition is constructed pursuant to the plans and specifications submitted to and approved by the Village; and 2.The driveway is tapered to meet Village Code. Com. Goldspiel stated that most homes built in this subdivision had two car garages. He believes that room was left to add a second car garage at this home. The reduction is only a matter of inches. He understands the desire for additional car storage space. He believes that this request is acceptable and he supports the request. Ch. Cesario appreciates the changes made and the submittal of more detailed plans. RESULT:APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER:Mitchell Weinstein, Commissioner SECONDER:Adam Moodhe, Commissioner AYES:Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Lesser, Weinstein, Au 2.Petition to the Village of Buffalo Grove for Consideration of an Annexation, Pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of an Annexation Agreement, with a Zoning to the R6A One- Family Residential District and R9 Multiple-Family District Along with a Special Use for a Residential Planned Unit Development and Approval of a Plat of Subdivision and Preliminary Plan with Variations for the Property at 16802 W Aptakisic Road (Link Farm) (Trustee Ottenheimer) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling) Mr. James Truesdell, K Hovanian Homes; Mr. Lawrence Freedman, Attorney; Mr. Jon Isherwood, K Hovanian Homes; Javier Millan, KLOA; Steven Kaminski, Mackie Consultants; Zoran Milutinovic, Kane, McKenna and Associates; and Mark Kurensky, HKM Architects & Planners; were present and sworn in. Mr. Truesdell explained that K Hovanian has requested to proceed with the project with the clustered plan. The latest plan maintains the original intent of the project while reducing the overall unit count from a total of 214 units to 192 units. This is a 13.5% reduction. The plan includes 59 clustered SF detached homes and 133 2-story townhomes with an overall gross density of 3.84 units/acre. The streets will be public streets, except for the alleys that serve the proposed townhomes. They have now provided the sidewalks in the cul de sacs to complement the rest of the sidewalks in the development. They added additional quest parking and have maintained open green space. They have eliminated the proposed three-story townhomes all together. They have agreed to take ownership of and maintain the detention pond and will maintain it in its current condition. They have agreed to pay almost double the financial impacts to School District 102. He also reviewed the proposed landscape plan. The proposed plan provides connectivity to future site development. He reviewed the correspondence from the Lake County Department of Transportation, which does not want to allow direct 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 34 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 D e c 6 , 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 ) 12/6/2017 access to Buffalo Grove Road. However, Lake County DOT will consider a future access point at Churchill Park dependent upon the development of the property to the south. He discussed access points along Brandywyn Lane and Meridian Way and again discussed possible future access points along Aptakisic Road and Buffalo Grove Road. He reviewed the differences in the traffic impact from the previously proposed plans to this current proposed plan. He reviewed the street and sidewalk plans. He explained that the proposed architectural elevations have stayed the same. He quickly reviewed the proposed elevations for the single family detached models and the two-story townhomes. The end units of the townhomes would have first floor masters while the interior units would have second floor masters. He explained that this proposed development does meet many of the goals and objectives of the 2009 Comprehensive Plan. The development would continue to be 100% maintenance-free. He explained that they did look at other alternative plans and that they had various plans developed, including 100 single family homes and 50 townhomes. They analyzed each plan and decided to move forward with the proposed plan. Based on the calculations, the alternative plan of more single family homes would have added more school children to the school districts and generate less property tax revenue. Also more maintenance would have been required by the Village for the public right-of-ways. The alternative plan would be more detrimental to both the school districts and the Village financially. The annual impact of the proposed 192 SFD unit development would be positive by approximately $150,000. Over ten years, that would be an additional $1.5 million dollars to the School District 102. Based on the formulas, School District 125 would have a similar positive impact. The Estimated Development-Generated Traffic Volumes Tables were reviewed. Mr. Truesdell concluded that K Hovanian has worked hard to develop a plan that works and addresses the concerns of the school impacts, traffic and density. They believe this is the best plan for the community and asked for a favorable vote. Com. Goldspiel asked Mr. Truesdell to address the proposed variations. Mr. Truesdell explained that the single family detached homes best meet the R6A zoning requirements. However, they need to request setback and right-of-way variations. The cul de sacs meet the turning radius requirements. They are asking for a 20 foot front yard setback. The covered front porches would extend out six (6) feet from the house for both the single family attached and detached units. They would also need side yard setback variations for the single family detached homes. Com. Goldspiel asked how many lots would be less than the required 6,600 square foot lot size. Mr. Truesdell did not have the number available but will get it. He added that they are proposing the single family clusters to keep the development maintenance-free. Com. Goldspiel asked about the 5 foot setback reduction on the ranch models. Mr. Truesdell explained that the ranches are deeper and include the first floor master. They will be marketing the project to people that are not looking for large yards and want maintenance-free living. He advised that the number of lots that would be less than the required minimum lot size is 17. They had provided additional ranch style homes based on previous Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) feedback. Com. Goldspiel advised that the R6A Zoning Districts were not intended for new developments, they were created to allow existing properties to conform to current zoning district designations. He is concerned about the proposed required yard reductions. A 14 foot setback is desirable for safety reasons. Mr. Truesdell responded that the proposed setbacks are safe and will not create building code or life safety issues. The proposed development would be a Planned Unit Development (PUD). They chose R6A zoning because it was the closest fit. The development would be maintenance-free and there will be Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCR’s). This is different than the old R6A zoning districts. Com. Goldspiel asked if there are any other areas in Buffalo Grove that are zoned R6A. Mr. Stilling advised that page 18 of the Packet describes the surrounding developments and their density. He added that there would be a buffer of 20 to 25 feet of open area around the lots. Mr. Truesdell advised that they could remove the 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 35 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 D e c 6 , 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 ) 12/6/2017 buffer and increase the lot sizes. However, they wanted to make more open, public space for the community. A PUD is a Special Use and they chose the closest zoning. Com. Goldspiel believes that the proposed plan is greatly improved. Com. Au asked staff about the economic impact reports and if they have been verified to be correct. Mr. Stilling responded yes, K Hovanian had worked with the school districts to ensure accuracy. Mr. Truesdell confirmed that they worked very closely with the school districts to verify accuracy. Com. Lesser understands that they are promoting the development to be age-targeted. However, K Hovanian had stuck to the original thesis. Some changes were made and some were not. He asked if, by design, they are suggested to be age-restricted. Mr. Truesdell responded that theywill market to appeal to empty nesters but will not be age- restricted. Com. Lesser asked if Mr. Truesdell believes that this development will appeal to empty nesters. Mr. Truesdell responded yes. He added that there will be some families that prefer this type of housing. Com. Lesser asked if the fiscal and traffic impact studies were calculated based on empty nesters. Mr. Truesdell responded no, the fiscal impact numbers were based on State/Village standards. Com. Lesser asked for an explanation of Tables 2 & 3 and the Daily Two-Way Traffic calculations regarding the traffic impacts. Mr. Javier Millan from KLOA, Inc., explained that the calculations for the tables were based on hundreds of surveys of many different developments and based on the number of occupants. Com. Lesser said that the numbers indicated that there would be fewer occupants in the townhomes compared to the single family homes. He is troubled by the development. Direction was given to where the project should go. To date, the PZC has not seen that. Mr. Truesdell explained that they put together many different plans. They developed a plan that best addresses the major concerns. They feel very strongly that this is the right product for this location. The market has changed since the Comprehensive Plan was updated in 2008/2009. They chose what they feel is the best plan. Com. Lesser advised that he would have liked to have seen a mix of 1/3 single family attached and 2/3 single family detached. Mr. Truesdell advised that they did take a look at that and did not feel that it was the right fit. Com. Moodhe asked if the rear yard setback reduction would be applied to all the ranches. Mr. Truesdell responded yes, but the reduction may not be necessary for all of them. Many lots will back up to a common, open area. Com. Moodhe asked if the ranch homes would be restricted to specific lots. Mr. Truesdell advised that the L-shaped ranches would be restricted to specific lots. Com. Moodhe asked if they are asking for a blanket variance. Mr. Truesdell responded yes, but that not all lots will be ranches. Com. Moodhe talked about the 20 foot buffer along Meridian Way. If the buffer was removed, a variation would not be needed. Mr. Stilling advised that to add to the cul de sacs they had to push the other lots back. Mr. Truesdell stated that they can work with Village staff to limit models to certain lots. Com. Moodhe asked if the CCR’s have been developed yet. Mr. Truesdell explained that the CCR’s have not yet been developed. Com. Moodhe asked if fences would be allowed. Mr. Truesdell stated that perimeter fencing will not be allowed. However, they will allow for privacy fencing around the patios. Com. Moodhe asked if the fence restriction would preclude people with pets. Mr. Stilling advised that the CCR’s will be developed to allow the fencing around the patios to include owners that have pets. Com. Moodhe asked about the streets on the south end of the development. Mr. Stilling explained that the two out lots on the south end would be owned and maintained by the HOA and be conveyed to the Village at a later date when there is future development on the land to the south. A deed restriction would be imposed to require the homeowners along the south end of the property to acknowledge that they are aware of the out lots. Even though the Village is not sure what could happen with the property to the south, the Village wants the ability to have future access through to that 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 36 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 D e c 6 , 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 ) 12/6/2017 property. Com. Moodhe noted that the townhomes in the southwest corner of the property have no guest parking available. Mr. Truesdell advised that the townhomes in the southwest corner could have potential street parking for guests. He also advised that they could add guest parking to the out lots. Mr. Stilling explained that there was a method on how the plan was laid out. There could be potential guest parking on the out lots knowing that there could be on-street parking in the future. Ch. Cesario confirmed with Mr. Stilling that page 24, item O of the Packet reads correctly that on-street parking in the cul de sacs and streets shall be prohibited. Com. Khan stated that Tables 1, 2 and 3 in the Estimated Traffic Volumes is pretty accurate most of the time. There is not much difference between Tables 2 and 3. Mr. Millan stated that is correct. The difference is minimal. Com. Khan stated that the difference in Table 3 could be less if the development is targeted to people 55 years of age and older. Mr. Millan agrees. Com. Khan asked Mr. Truesdell what the annual budget for School District 102 is. Mr. Stilling responded that it is about $38 million. Com. Khan stated that $121,000 less would be a drop in the bucket. Mr. Stilling advised that staff has spoken with District 102 and they are concerned about approving a project that would have a negative financial impact on the District. $121,000 a year is a major impact. School District 102 was very concerned about having a negative impact. Com. Khan asked about the street and public versus private streets. Some of the service drives will continue to be private. He thought the private streets were eliminated. Mr. Truesdell explained that the service alleys for the townhomes would remain private. All other streets, including the cul de sacs, would be public streets. Com. Khan asked about the Comprehensive Plan and where the proposed single family attached dwellings meet the intent of the Plan. Mr. Truesdell advised that the number of total housing units has been brought down to fewer than 4 units per acre and the development meets the Comprehensive Plan’s housing goals He also advised that the developed plan meets the 2016 Economic Strategic Plan by providng the community with a diverse housing mix and this development in particular provides density and pedestrian orientation, which is unquie to the Village. Based upon the Economic Strategic Plan and current market trends, the proposed development plan meets the needs of the community. Com. Lesser asked about the fiscal impact to the school district. Mr. Truesdell explained that the proposed 192 unit plan would provide a surplus to the school district of $182,000. The 150 unit, mostly single family detached, plan would be an annual deficit to the school district. Com. Lesser confirmed that based on the Estimated Development-Generated Traffic Volumes the original plan would generate an increase of 1,640 daily two way traffic and the 150 unit plan, which consists of 100 single family detached homes, would reduce the daily two way traffic from the original plan by 248. Mr. Truesdell stated that is correct. Com. Goldspiel asked about the open space and for the character of the open space to be described. Mr. Kurensky advised that the proposed open space and proposed landscaping has not changed. There would be detention with a combination of wet and dry land. The dry land and grassy areas would be located closer to the bike paths and homes. It would look like mowed lawns. The wet areas would be a more naturalized look. Com. Goldspiel asked if the open space could be used for recreation. Mr. Kurensky responded yes. It would be a public access bike path system. They would be dedicating land to the Park District and installing the path and bridge with cut outs in numerous areas. The cut out areas could be used for art display by the Park District or for leisure. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 37 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 D e c 6 , 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 ) 12/6/2017 There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners at this time. Ch. Cesario entered the Staff Report dated December 6, 2017 as Exhibit 1, the Lake County correspondence dated December 1, 2017 as Exhibit 2, and the Traffic Volume study as Exhibit 3. Ch. Cesario entertained questions and comments from the audience. Multiple people in the audience stood to speak. Ch. Cesario swore them in. Mike Garfield, 2118 Jordan Terrace, believes that something does not smell right. The developer is age-targeting. There would be no children and no playsets. How can you have a development that is targeted to empty nesters have an impact on the schools. Buffalo Grove should not be intimidated by the school districts. You can make data say whatever you want it to say. They have not made any significant changes to the plan. The current plan is not 2/3 single family detached and 1/3 single family attached. It essentially is the same plan. Samara Squire, 327 Satinwood Court S, disagrees with the 6 unit townhomes. They do not fit with the other developments in the area. She agrees with Mr. Garfield. The proposed housing units are 3 and 4 bedrooms. Empty nesters will not go for 3 bedroom units. Empty nesters will not pay the housing cost and taxes if they are looking to downsize. She would like to see the 100 single family detached unit plan. She asked if the number of 3 and 4 bedroom units will be limited in number. She wants to see landscaping along the south line of the property. Currently there are no trees proposed along the south property line. She wants to see trees. She still believes that traffic on Brandywyn Lane will be excessive. Traffic will be blocked. Overnight parking is a big concern. In her CCR’s, owners are not allowed to use the guest parking spaces. There is not enough guest parking to accommodate 3 and 4 bedroom units. Adam Kann, 1906 Jordan Terrace, explained that his mother is an empty nester and she has more people over to her house than he does. Most empty nesters are 2 people. No on-street parking will be an issue. He feels like every time the proposed plan is too dense. Jeff Braiman, 26 Canterbury Lane, advised that all of his previous comments still apply. He agrees there is a lack of street parking, which could be very dangerous. He is not sure if there are sufficient sidewalks. The cul de sacs do not integrate into the community. He also agrees with Mr. Garfield. A senior-only development would have no negative impact on the schools. He has an issue with the proposed R6A zoning. The developments to the south and east are zoned R3, which are much larger lots. R6A are the smallest lots. He would insist on the property being developed similar to the surrounding area. The 1989 Comprehensive Plan originally had the proposed zoning of RE, which are the largest lots allowed. Then the Plan changed the proposed zoning to R3 with single family detached homes on large lots. It is important to do this project right. The property to the south will be impacted by this project. The Comprehensive Plan called for 70% single family detached and 30% single family attached. Look at the surrounding area. He asked for the PZC to vote to not recommend this proposal to the Village Board. Jennifer Murillo, 197 Hoffman Drive, asked the PZC to look at the Comprehensive Plan. She is concerned with the proposed density. The numbers are based on the total 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 38 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 D e c 6 , 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 ) 12/6/2017 acreage, not the buildable acreage. She is concerned about the traffic. She is concerned about who the potential buyers would be. Marketed buyers and actual buyers may differ. The attractiveness of the Blue Ribbon schools will also impact the area. She believes a lot of children will come in. Two neighbors have moved out of the area because their children have finished school. She is concerned about the street parking, the layout and the lack of consistency with the surrounding area. She is concerned about the home values in the area. She would like to see the 100/50 plan or a similar plan. Julie Lefar, 2038 Jordan Terrace, believes that market research shows that these types of units are not attractive to a move-down buyer. She is concerned about the traffic that would be generated. With the proposed federal tax overhaul, property tax deductions would be limited to $10,000.00. She is concerned with the townhomes. Some of the buildings are 7 units. She asked what the length of a 7 unit building is. Mr. Truesdell responded that the 7 unit buildings would be approximately 170 feet in length. Ms. Lefar asked where there are 7 unit townhome buildings in Buffalo Grove. Kris Donaldson, 89 Chestnut Terrace, lives at the corner of Brandywyn Lane and Chestnut Terrace. The land is currently elevated. Will the land remain elevated? What will be located behind these homes? She does not want to look at windows. She is also concerned with the safety of children crossing Brandywyn Lane. She asked if the sidewalk would end at the property on Buffalo Grove Road. She is disappointed that nothing in the proposed plan has really changed. Lawrence Gluskin, 623 Raintree Road, is an empty nester and is in the process of looking for a move down unit. A large amount of people are looking for 3 and 4 bedroom ranches. Many people are fleeing to Vernon Hills, Glenview, Waukegan and Northbrook looking for this type of housing product. He asked the PZC to try an accommodate people looking for this type of housing. Com. Cohn asked Mr. Gluskin if this project was 2/3 single family detached would it still serve his needs. Mr. Gluskin said it could. He likes the open space. It is attractive and in an ideal location. Maintenance-free ranch homes are important to him. Kyle Olson, 738 Aspen Drive, agrees with most of the public comments. Nothing has really changed except a very small reduction. Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan, there should be a 62% reduction in density. This plan would not have that much of a positive fiscal impact for the schools. He asked why the only formulas being looked at to determine the school impacts are from 1996. It has been mentioned that some fiscal accommodation has been made with District 102 for the number of students but he has never seen the actual numbers. You can manipulate the numbers to make it look worse for the 100/50 unit plan. If you reduce the number of single family detached units to 70, they will save $378K with $142K of that going to District 102. He does not believe the calculations. The surrounding developments are zoned R3, this is proposed to be R6A. He likes the cluster look but still thinks it is too dense. He likes the proposed setbacks because he likes open space. He was impressed with the process of the Lake Cook Corridor project and believes that the Village should allow for more public input of the future development of this site. Roberta Young, 50 Carlyle Lane, stated that this is not Waukegan and not the Glen. She agrees with the other public comments. With the current tax situation most owners are looking at a $3,000 increase in their property taxes. People will not give money away to downsize. Taxes are a problem in Buffalo Grove. She does not see this project being marketed for empty nesters. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 39 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 D e c 6 , 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 ) 12/6/2017 Janet Preston, 403 English Oak Terrace, said that the townhomes have never been addressed. She has not seen any big changes in the single family attached, only changes in the single family detached. The townhomes will bring more children. She thought the Didier property would be developed with 80 to 90 single family detached homes. The view from Buffalo Grove Road will be massive townhomes. She does not feel this project fits with the surrounding area. This is a residential area. She believes that developer is trying to make more money because they paid too much for the property. Kathy Arvanitakis, 401 English Oak Terrace, agrees with the public comments. She is surprised that no changes have been made to the proposed development. She believes that the Developer is trying to wear down the residents to get what they want. She wants to see a single family detached plan. She believes the proposed homes are ridiculous, over-sized buildings. Eric Brehm, 191 Hoffman Drive, advised that most of his son’s friends live in single family attached homes and that the townhomes will generate more density and traffic. Com. Au asked Mr. Truesdell if they had modeled any less dense plans for the property. Mr. Truesdell stated that they did prepare a 50/50 plan but they ruled that out because it did not create a very good layout. They feel the proposed plan fits the area and the property. Mr. Truesdell added that they submitted full fiscal impact reports. They used accepted formulas to generate the reports. They verified that the reports were accurate. They worked with District 102. The projections could vary over time. However, they used the best numbers they could. The proposed townhome buildings would be 4 to 7 units, which is not unusual. The garages would be located at the back of the buildings, which is different from what people are used to seeing. They worked on the elevations to make the buildings more attractive. They are marketing the homes to empty nesters but will not include an age restriction. They have a full landscape plan for both the single family attached and detached homes. They believe they have sufficient guest parking. They have added guest parking in the cul de sacs. He is not sure about the concern for lack of sidewalks. They tied the streets, sidewalks and bike paths together. He is comfortable with the proposed lot sizes and does not want this development to be like everything around it. There are a lot of existing homes on the market that fall under the R3 zoning. They are investing a great deal in this property. The traffic studies did not come from the 1970’s and 1980’s. They are from the 1970’s to current. The development will not be for every move down buyer. Their business is to build and sell homes that are marketable. They have no control over the property taxes. Mr. Stilling added that the fiscal analysis was developed with District 102. A 100/50 plan actually creates higher counts. Mr. Isherwood advised that K Hovanian worked with District 102 and the fiscal analysis was confirmed to be accurate, if not overstated, by District 102. Demand for ranch-style, maintenance-free homes is desired. If they were to develop a plan of non-maintenance free, the number of 4 bedroom units would increase. Those numbers are based on current market data and trends. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 40 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 D e c 6 , 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 ) 12/6/2017 Mr. Millan added that the traffic projections are compared to the average daily traffic counts, including evening peak hours. He reviewed the average number of trips per day for both the single family attached and detached homes and the morning and evening peak hours. There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were no additional questions or comments from the audience. The public hearing was closed at 10:09 PM. Moved by Com. Weinstein, seconded by Com. Khan, to recommend to the Village Board to approve the zoning to the R6A One-Family Residential District and R9 Multiple-Family District along with a special use for a Residential Planned Unit Development and approval of a Plat of Subdivision and Preliminary Plan with variations, subject to the following conditions: 1.The Developer shall enter into an annexation agreement in a form and manner acceptable to the Village. Said agreement shall incorporate the following additional conditions: a.The proposed development shall substantially conform to the plans submitted as part of this petition. b.The Developer shall make the necessary land donation and improvements to the surrounding development in accordance to the draft plans attached and as approved by the Buffalo Grove Park District. Any remaining land donation contributions as required by Title 19 of Village Code shall be paid at time for building permits. c.The Developer shall pay a cash contribution to School District 102 in accordance to their letter/proposal to District 102 dated April 3, 2017. d.The Developer shall pay an annexation fee of $1500 per residential unit. e.The Village shall convey and the Developer shall accept the existing Village owned detention pond located at the southeast corner of Brandywyn and Buffalo Grove Road. All future maintenance responsibilities of this pond shall be borne by the future HOA. f.Final architectural plans and elevations (including colors and materials) shall be revised in a manner acceptable to the Village. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for a residential unit/building, the developer shall prepare and submit a final architectural package that shall be reviewed and approved by the Village. Said approval may require a meeting by the PZC. g.All building elevations (detached and attached) that abut existing/future ROWS and private streets shall include foundation landscaping and additional architectural treatments in a manner acceptable to the Village. h.Draft CCR’s shall be submitted in a manner acceptable to Village. All landscaping embellishments (arbors, trellises, fences, etc.) shall be standardized with 1 option and incorporated into the CCR’s. i.The Declarations shall indicate that certain private streets and/or cul-de-sacs will remain private with the maintenance responsibility of the association in a manner acceptable to the Village. j.The final plat of subdivision shall be revised in a manner acceptable to the Village. The future right-of-way (ROW) at the southernmost terminus of Street G and 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 41 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 D e c 6 , 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 ) 12/6/2017 Street I shall be identified as out lots. At the request of the Village, these out lots shall be conveyed to the Village for future ROW. All future and subsequent homeowners shall sign a disclosure acknowledging that these out lots will become a future public road. A sign shall also be posted on the property, in a form and manner acceptable to the Village, indicating that this area will be future ROW. k.Turning radii throughout the development shall be revised in a manner acceptable to the Village. This may require the need to limit on-street parking in a manner acceptable to the Village. l.Final engineering shall be revised in a manner acceptable to the Village. m.The final landscape plan shall be revised in a manner acceptable to the Village. n.All medians and islands located in public ROW shall be identified as out lots and shall be the ownership and maintenance responsibility of the HOA. o.On-street parking in the cul-de-sacs and streets shall be prohibited. p.Setbacks for all units shall be in accordance to the approved site plan. q.An emergency access to Buffalo Grove Road shall be provided in a manner acceptable to the Village. This shall include an additional emergency access to Buffalo Grove Road from Street J and from Street I. Ch. Cesario stated that he has heard the development should comply with the 2009 Comprehensive Plan. He has heard about the taxes. If large, single family homes are constructed, they will have large taxes. What is being presented addresses the issues based on the market trends. If large homes, with large tax bills, are constructed on this site, will the homes sell? He has to consider the need to diversify the housing stock. He believes this development will help the Village. Com. Goldspiel stated that he is disappointed in the plan presented. The PZC gave feedback which was ignored. The proposed plan is too dense and should be R3 or R4 zoning. It should also be 2/3 single family detached housing with more townhomes eliminated. The public does not support the project as proposed. He wanted K Hovanian to listen to what the PZC and public have said. He believes that K Hovanian should demonstrate their anticipation of the project appealing to empty nesters by making the development age-restrictive. He cannot support the project as proposed. Com. Au agrees with most of what Ch. Cesario had stated. She disagrees with Com. Lesser. The people who do support the project are probably not in attendance. The only changes made to this plan were some added sidewalks and open space. She would like to have seen a 50/50 plan, or at least a compromise. She supports the project but would have liked to have seen more concessions made based upon the public comments. Com. Cohn believes that the project is a major departure from the Comprehensive Plan. It is incompatible with the surrounding area. Homes that meet the R3 and R4 zoning do sell. He does not agree that the project will appeal only to empty nesters. He agrees that the development should be age-restricted. This type of development does not allow people to put down their roots in a community. The proposed development plan has not changed in the 2 years since it first came before the PZC. There was only one witness in support of the proposed development. He cannot support the project as proposed. 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 42 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 D e c 6 , 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 ) 12/6/2017 Com. Goldspiel supports the comments of Com. Cohn and Com. Lesser. This is mostly a plan with single family attached homes. The plan should be developed with R6 zoning, not R6A. He has concerns about the parking. The proposed homes need not be 3,500 square feet or larger. 1,800 square foot homes would be a better fit. The single family attached townhomes are too dense. He cannot see this project being successful. He opposes the plan as proposed. Com. Moodhe sees the need for maintenance-free housing. However the HOA fees and property taxes will preclude empty nesters from the development. Marketing to empty nesters is a weak point to hold onto. The plan has not really changed since the last plan presented, only the three-story townhomes were eliminated. He is disappointed. Com. Au stated that the housing market is changing. Something on the proposed plan would need to change to fit the Comprehensive Plan. Or maybe the Comprehensive Plan needs to change to accommodate the current market. The density of the single family attached needs to be lowered. She sees the need for the project on this property, but the plan still needs some changes. Com. Khan is torn between the development and the residents. He wants to see this project more forward but the existing residents could not foresee what the future development would be. The developer had reduced the number singe family detached homes to reduce the overall density. Progress toward an acceptable project has been slow. The plan still needs tweaking. He cannot support the plan as proposed. RESULT:RECOMMENDATION TO NOT APPROVE [2 TO 6] Next: 1/22/2018 7:30 PM MOVER:Mitchell Weinstein, Commissioner SECONDER:Zill Khan, Commissioner AYES:Frank Cesario, Mitchell Weinstein NAYS:Moodhe, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Lesser, Au Regular Meeting Other Matters for Discussion None. Approval of Minutes 1.Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting - Nov 15, 2017 7:30 PM Moved by Com. Goldspiel, seconded by Com. Lesser, to approve the minutes of the November 15, 2017 regular Planning & Zoning Commission meeting as submitted. RESULT:ACCEPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER:Stephen Goldspiel, Commissioner SECONDER:Scott Lesser, Commissioner AYES:Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Lesser, Weinstein, Au Chairman's Report 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 43 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 D e c 6 , 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 ) 12/6/2017 None. Committee and Liaison Reports Mr. Stilling advised that the Village Board approved both Sky Fitness and Meridian Middle School. Staff Report/Future Agenda Schedule Mr. Stilling advised that the December 20, 2017 regular meeting will be cancelled. Ms. Woods provided an update on the Lake Cook Corridor project. Com. Au asked if there are alternate plans in place based on economic conditions. Mr. Stilling answered Com. Au's question. Public Comments and Questions None. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 PM Chris Stilling Director of Community Development APPROVED BY ME THIS 6th DAY OF December , 2017 3.B.1 Packet Pg. 44 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 D e c 6 , 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 )