2018-08-15 - Planning and Zoning Commission - Agenda Packet
Meeting of the Village of Buffalo Grove
Planning and Zoning Commission
Regular Meeting
August 15, 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 a Variation to the Sign Code for 3 Replacement Signs at the Courtyards at the
Woodlands Development (Trustee Stein) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling)
2. Consider a Variation to the RV Regulations, Section 17.36 of the Zoning Ordinance, for
the Property at 15 Chevy Chase Drive (Trustee Ottenheimer) (Staff Contact: Chris
Stilling)
III. Regular Meeting
A. Other Matters for Discussion
B. Approval of Minutes
1. Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting - Jul 18, 2018 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 Disab ilities 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: 8/10/2018 2:35 PM Page 1
Action Item : Consider a Variation to the Sign Code for 3
Replacement Signs at the Courtyards at the Woodlands
Development
Recommendation of Action
Staff recommends approval, subject to conditions in the staff report.
At the July 18, 2018 Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) meeting, the subject property petitioned the
Village for approval of two replacement subdivision identification signs. At the PZC meeting, it was
indicated that a third sign was already approved by the Village's building department. Ultimately the PZC
recommended approval of the two replacement signs.
Subsequent to the meeting, staff researched the matter further and determined that the third sign was
NOT approved by the Village and also needed a variation. Since the petitioner had not included the third
sign in their application, staff determined that the best path forward was to initiate a new public hearing for
all three signs. Staff would also like to note that as part of the first public hearing, the proposed signs were
referenced as ground signs. After further discussion with the petitioner and analysis of the Sign Code, the
proposed signs are defined as subdivision identification signs which are regulated by Section 14.16.010
of the Sign Code. This Section is different from the regulations for ground signs. As a result, the petitioner
is now requesting variations to allow three subdivision identification signs.
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report (DOCX)
Plan Set (PDF)
Trustee Liaison Staff Contact
Stein Chris Stilling, Community Development
Wednesday, August 15, 2018
2.1
Packet Pg. 2
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 15, 2018
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 55 Willow Pkwy
PETITIONER: Parvin-Clauss Sign Co.
PREPARED BY: Rati Akash, Planner I
REQUEST: A variation from Section 14.16.010 of the Sign Code to allow three
subdivision identification signs
EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is improved with several townhomes and zoned R-8 multi-
family dwelling district
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The 2009 Comprehensive Plan calls for this property to be a residential
use
PROJECT BACKGROUND
At the July 18, 2018 Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) meeting, the subject property petitioned the Village
for approval of two replacement subdivision identification signs. At the PZC meeting, it was indicated that a third
sign was already approved by the Village’s building department. Ultimately the PZC recommended approval of
the two replacement signs.
Subsequent to the meeting, staff researched the matter further and determined that the third sign was NOT
approved by the Village and also needed a variation. Since the petitioner had not included the third sign in their
application, staff determined that the best path forward was to initiate a new public hearing for all three signs.
Staff would also like to note that as part of the first public hearing, the proposed signs were referenced as
ground signs. After further discussion with the petitioner and analysis of the Sign Code, the proposed signs are
defined as subdivision identification signs which are regulated by Section 14.16.010 of the Sign Code. This
Section is different from the regulations for ground signs. As a result, the petitioner is now requesting variations
to allow three subdivision identification signs. The variations include:
1. Variation to allow more than 1 subdivision identification sign pursuant to Section 14.16.010 B of the Sign
Code; and
2. Variation to allow subdivision identification signs to exceed the maximum height of 5 feet and encroach
into the required building setback of 25 feet, pursuant to Section 14.16.010 E of the Sign Code.
PLANNING & ZONING ANALYSIS
The subject property had seven existing wooden identification
signs located on the Courtyards at the Woodlands. These
seven existing identification wooden signs were slowly
decaying and not visually appealing, and hence the petitioner
is proposing to replace these seven existing identification
signs with three identical larger single face illuminated
subdivision identification signs.
Existing Identification signs
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
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
)
Proposed New Signs
Locations
As noted, the petitioner is proposing three identical
subdivision identification signs that will be replacing the
seven existing signs on the Courtyards at the
Woodlands. Two of the proposed subdivision
identification signs will be located along Willow Pkwy
and Half Day Rd and will maintain the same setback as
the existing signs. The following is a summary of the sign
locations along Half Day Rd:
The first proposed identification sign on the
southwest corner of Willow Pkwy and Half Day
Rd is setback six (6) feet six (6) inches from the
sidewalk along Half Day Rd, and setback five (5)
six (6) inches from the sidewalk along Willow Pkwy.
The second proposed identification sign on the southeast corner of Willow Pkwy and Half Day Rd will be
setback ten (10) feet from the sidewalk along Half Day Rd, and setback six (6) feet eight (8) inches from
the sidewalk along Willow Pkwy.
It should be noted that the sidewalk is approximately 1 foot from the property line (in the ROW) along
both Willow Pkwy and Half Day Rd.
The petitioner is also proposing a third subdivision identification sign
that will be located on the north corner of Buffalo Grove Rd and
Brandywyn Ln. This is a new sign for this location. The proposed sign
would have a slight angle towards the corner, however the petitioner
indicated that they still wanted to capture traffic heading south on
Buffalo Grove Rd. The proposed sign would be setback ten (10) feet
from the sidewalk along Buffalo Grove Rd and fifteen (15) feet from
the sidewalk along Brandywyn Ln. It should be noted that the
sidewalk is approximately 1 foot from the property line (in the ROW)
along both Buffalo Grove Rd and Brandywyn Ln. This location at the
north corner of Buffalo Grove Rd and Brandywyn Ln has a transformer in the same corner. The petitioner has
done a J.U.I.L.I.E LOCATE to make sure the proposed sign is located outside any utility easement. The proposed
sign location has been clearly marked at the corners by flags and spray painted. The Village Engineer has visited
the site where this sign has been marked and does not have any engineering or line of sight concerns or
objections with the proposed location. As proposed, the sign would not be located in any easements.
Sign Size
The three proposed subdivision identification signs will be an improvement to the seven existing wooden
identification signs. The seven existing wooden identification signs are two (2) foot in height and five (5) foot
wide. The proposed identification signs will be a single face
illuminated identification sign and the material will comprise of
fabricated aluminum. The following is a summary of the proposed
replacement signs as they relate to the existing signs and Village Code:
Area Height Count
Sign Code 32 s.f. 5 feet 1
Existing Signs 10 s.f. 4 feet 7
Proposed Signs 24 s.f. 6 feet 3
Existing Identification signs
Half Day Rd
New Sign Location at Brandywyn
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
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
)
Per Code, only one identification sign, no greater than 5 feet in height is
permitted for each residential development, and in this case there are
three proposed identification signs which will require a variation.
Landscaping
As part of the improvements, the petitioner is adding new landscaping
around the signs. Overall, staff finds the new landscaping an
improvement. It should be noted that as part of the petitioner’s plans,
they show new landscaping in the median located in Willow Pkwy. The
Village Forester did review the plans and indicated that landscaping
within the median must be revised to meet Village Code. The petitioner has shown materials that are not
approved within the Village right-of-way. This will remain as a condition.
Variations requested
The following is a summary of the required variations:
1. Section 14.16.010 from the Buffalo Grove Residential Sign Code allows for one development sign not to
exceed 32 square feet in area. As shown, the petitioner is proposing to replace seven existing
subdivision identification signs with three proposed subdivision identification signs. Staff finds that
the proposed new signs are an aesthetic improvement. Furthermore, the reduction in the number of
signs brings the property into closer compliance with code. Therefore s taff supports the request.
2. Section 14.16.010 from the Buffalo Grove Residential Sign Code provides a maximum height of five feet
(5’) and states that the sign shall meet the required building setback (25’). As shown, the petitioner is
proposing six (6) foot tall signs. All three proposed identification signs encroach into the building
setback. Staff finds that the proposed signs are an aesthetic improvement. Furthermore, the reduction
in the number signs brings the property into closer compliance with code. Therefore staff supports the
request.
VARIATION STANDARDS
Pursuant to the Village Code, the Planning & Zoning Commission is authorized to make a recommendation to
the Village Board based on the following criteria:
A. Except for Prohibited signs (Chapter 14.32), the Village Planning & Zoning Commission may recommend
approval or disapproval of a variance from the provisions or requirements of this Title subject to the
following:
1. The literal interpretation and strict application of the provisions and requirements of this Title would
cause undue and unnecessary hardships to the sign user because of unique or unusual conditions
pertaining to the specific building, parcel or property in question; and
2. The granting of the requested variance would not be materially detrimental to the property owners
in the vicinity; and
3. The unusual conditions applying to the specific property do not apply generally to other properties in
the Village; and
4. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the purpose of this Title pursuant to Section
14.04.020
Proposed identification sign
2.1.a
Packet Pg. 5
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
)
B. Where there is insufficient evidence, in the opinion of the Planning & Zoning Commission, to support a
finding under subsection (A), but some hardship does exist, the Planning & Zoning Commission may
consider the requirement fulfilled if:
1. The proposed signage is of particularly good design and in particularly good taste; and
2. The entire site has been or will be particularly well landscaped.
The petitioner shall respond to the standards at the public hearing.
DEPARTMENTAL REVIEWS
Village Department Comments
Engineering The Village Engineer has reviewed the proposed identification signs
location and does not have any engineering or line of sight concerns or
objections with the proposed location of this identification sign.
SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS
Pursuant to Village Code, the property owners within 250 feet of the subject property 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. To date, staff has received 5 inquiries
of the proposed identification signs, however no objections were expressed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the three new subdivision identification signs, subject to the following conditions:
1. The proposed sign shall be constructed in accordance to the plans attached as part of the petition.
2. The landscape plan shall be revised in a manner acceptable to the Village Forester.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) shall open the public hearing and take public testimony concerning the
two variations. The PZC shall make a recommendation to the Village Board.
2.1.a
Packet Pg. 6
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
)
July 24, 2018
Letter to the Planning and Zoning Commission:
This letter is to request a variance for the purpose of installing three new signs at the
Courtyards at the Woodlands entrances. Parvin-Clauss has submitted their sign design
and dimensions and where these signs will be located at the property. The Board of
Directors has given the authority to Parvin-Clauss to represent them in the permitting
and the variance process with the Village of Buffalo Grove.
We have seven existing signs at the entrances to our property. They are wood signs and
over the years they have deteriorated. Their present condition does not effectively
represent the Courtyard of the Woodlands as the wood is rotting and the sign design is
dated. The seven existing signs will be removed and replaced with three signs: two at
the Willow Parkway entrance and one at the Brandywyn entrance.
The current signs were put up by the developer when the complex was built, however,
they do not represent our legal name. “The Woodlands” incorporates both our complex
and the single family homes located south of our Willow Parkway entrance. Our legal
name is “The Courtyards at the Woodlands” and our Board feels our signage should
reflect that.
In addition, the new signs are part of a one million dollar investment the Association
will be making to upgrade our landscape and entrances over the next five years to
rebrand the Courtyards at the Woodlands as the premiere condominium community in
the area. We feel strongly that the upscale and updated signs are essential to that
repositioning effort. While we agree that “less is more” when it comes to signs, the
locations of the signs were carefully chosen to reflect the north and east-most and south
and west-most points of entry to the complex. This rebranding/signage initiative was
unanimously voted on by a committee of representative homeowners and the by Board
and has widespread community support.
Included in the submittal is the Declaration and Article of Incorporation that includes
the proof of ownership of the 448 homeowners comprising the community of the
Courtyards at the Woodlands. The elected Board has the authority to act on behalf of all
owners at the Woodlands.
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 7
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
)
We hope that you will award the Board the variance so we can move forward with the
project with Parvin-Clauss to enhance the look of the Courtyards at the Woodlands.
Thank you for your consideration.
Beth Black,
Property Manager
Agent for the Board of the Courtyards at the Woodlands
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 8
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
)
7 existing identification signs
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 9
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
3 proposed identification signs
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 10
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
2 Identification signs located at the Southwest and Southeast corner of Half Day Rd and Willow Parkway
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 11
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
Southwest corner existing identification sign
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 12
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
Southeast corner existing identification sign
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 13
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
Proposed two signs at the southwest and southeast corners of Half Day Rd and Willow Parkway
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 14
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
Landscape Plan for the Southwest and Southeast signs at the corner of Half Day Rd and Willow Parkway
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 15
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
Third
Identification
sign located at
the north corner
of Buffalo Grove
Rd and
Brandywyn Rd
Proposed third sign at the north corner of Buffalo Grove Rd and Brandywyn Rd
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 16
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
)
Proposed third sign at the north corner of Buffalo Grove Rd and Brandywyn Rd
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 17
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
Proposed third sign at the north corner of Buffalo Grove Rd and Brandywyn Rd
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 18
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
(35)Karl Forester
(15)Allium Summer Beauty
(9)Arrowwood Viburnum - 48"
(2)Freemanii Maple
(3) Arrowwood Viburnum - 48"
The Courtyards at The Woodlands
Landscape Plan for the third proposed sign
2.1.b
Packet Pg. 19
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
i
g
n
C
o
d
e
f
o
r
3
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
S
i
g
n
s
a
t
t
h
e
W
o
o
d
l
a
n
d
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
)
Updated: 8/10/2018 1:43 PM Page 1
Action Item : Consider a Variation to the RV Regulations, Section
17.36 of the Zoning Ordinance, for the Property at 15 Chevy Chase
Drive
Recommendation of Action
Staff recommends action at the discretion of the Planning & Zoning Commission.
In February, 2018, the Village Board approved Ordinance 2018-007 which amended Chapter 17.36 and
Section 8.24.170 of the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code concerning Recreational Vehicles. The new
Ordinance (attached) took effect August 1, 2018. Under the new regulations, a single-family property is
allowed to store up to 1 RV on their driveway from May 15th to September 30th. At all other times of the
year, the outside storage of a RV is allowed in the rear and/or side yard of a lot and it must meet the
zoning setbacks. The homeowner at 15 Chevy Chase Drive, Susan Wiebe, has filed a petition for a
variation to allow the year-round storage of their boat and trailer in their driveway. As a result, a variaition
is required.
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report (DOCX)
Plan Set (PDF)
Ordinance 2018-7 (PDF)
Trustee Liaison Staff Contact
Ottenheimer Chris Stilling, Community Development
Wednesday, August 15, 2018
2.2
Packet Pg. 20
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: August 15, 2018
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION: 15 Chevy Chase Drive
PETITIONER: Susan Wiebe, Owner
PREPARED BY: Christopher Stilling, Director of Community
Development
REQUEST: A variation to Section 17.36.030 of the Village of Buffalo
Grove Zoning Ordinance to allow for the storage of a
recreational vehicle (boat and trailer) in a residential
driveway.
EXSITING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is improved with a single-family home
and is zoned R5.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The 2009 Comprehensive Plan calls for this property
to be single family detached housing.
BACKGROUND
In February, 2018, the Village Board approved Ordinance 2018-007 which amended Chapter 17.36 and
Section 8.24.170 of the Buffalo Grove Municipal Code concerning Recreational Vehicles. The new
Ordinance (attached) took effect August 1, 2018. Under the new regulations, a single-family property is
allowed to store up to 1 RV on their driveway from May 15th to September 30th. At all other times of the
year, the outside storage of a RV is allowed in the rear and/or side yard of a lot and it must meet the
zoning setbacks. The RV shall also be screened from
public view (landscaping or fencing) and parked on a
hard surface (asphalt, pavers, etc.). The following is a
link the Village’s website which provides details on
the new regulations.
The homeowner at 15 Chevy Chase Drive, Susan
Wiebe, has filed a petition for a variation to allow
the year-round storage of their boat and trailer in
their driveway. As part of the new Ordinance and at
the request of the Village Board, the Planning &
Zoning Commission (PZC) was granted the authority
to approve or deny any variation request.
PLANNING & ZONING ANALYSIS
Zoning History of Columbian Gardens Subdivision
The subject property is located in the Columbian Gardens subdivision.
2.2.a
Packet Pg. 21
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
The subdivision was originally developed under the jurisdiction of Lake County and the majority
of the Columbian Gardens subdivision was annexed by Ordinance No. 2004-32 on March 15,
2004. The residential subdivision consists of 79 single-family homes.
The subdivision is zoned R5 which allows for smaller lot sizes and a side yard setback of 6’. Given
the lot sizes, many of the homes in the subdivision would have difficulty meeting the RV
regulations for storage in the side or rear yard.
Proposed Storage
The petitioner currently has a 17’ long boat on
a trailer in the driveway. Based on staff’s
measurements, it appears that the total
length of the boat and trailer is approximately
23’.
The petitioner is seeking approval to store the
boat in its current location year-round.
The petitioner has indicated that they have
had some type of boat or RV in that location
since 1987. Based on staff’s observations,
their driveway has been widened to
accommodate the RV for many years.
Furthermore, when the Village made
improvements to Chevy Chase Drive, the
petitioner also requested that the apron be
widened to accommodate the wider driveway
for their boat.
The petitioner’s driveway is 23’-6” wide. Since
the boat is approximately 7’ wide, the
petitioner has 16’-6” to store 2 vehicles side-
by-side. Furthermore, the petitioner does
have full access to their garage which is also
16’ wide.
As shown in the photo, the petitioner does
have solid landscape screening on the east
side of the boat. The petitioner also notes that their home does not front other homes across
the street as that area is improved with the Chevy Chase Golf Course.
In the petitioner’s letter, they indicate that do not have access to the side or rear yard as the
setbacks are less than 6’ on either side.
Other than off-site storage, the petitioner has indicted that they do not have any other options
to meet the new RV regulations. During the public hearings regarding the new ordinance, the
petitioner did attend the meetings expressing concern about the new regulations and the need
for a variation.
Variation request
As outlined the in new regulations, the boat is only permitted to park in its current location from
May 15th to September 30th.
The petitioner’s request is to allow the storage of the RV (boat) year-round in the driveway as
shown and depicted in the plans and exhibits as part of the petition.
2.2.a
Packet Pg. 22
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
Other than the outside storage during the non-permitted timeframe, all other provisions in the
new RV regulations would be met by the petitioner.
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, the Village has not received any inquiries into the variance request.
STANDARDS
The Planning & Zoning Commission is authorized to grant variations to the regulations of the Zoning
Ordinance based upon findings of fact which are made based upon evidence presented at the hearing
that:
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 (not applicable in this case);
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 will need to respond to the standards for variation at the public hearing.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends action at the discretion of the Planning & Zoning Commission.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) shall open the public hearing and take public testimony
concerning the variation. The PZC shall make a final decision on whether or not to approve or deny the
variation. Should the variation be denied by the PZC, the petitioner may appeal the decision to the
Village Board.
2.2.a
Packet Pg. 23
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
S
t
a
f
f
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
To whom it may concern,
I would like to obtain a variation that will allow me to continue storing my boat on the side portion of my driveway.
Since moving into my home in 1987 I have stored some type of water recreational vehicle on the side portion of my
driveway.
This side driveway area was built shortly after moving into my home. This area was updated, with the approval of
the Village of Buffalo Grove, when curbs were added to my subdivision. I was granted an extension to my drive,
when the apron portions were replaced, that increased the width to include my side area allowing me to move my
boat in and out easily.
I am not able to comply with the storage rules created by the new village ordinance as I do not have adequate side
acreage on my property to accommodate my boat.
My current storage area is completely hidden from view when traveling from east to west down my street by a
hedge of lilac bushes. My drive slopes down which minimizes my boat profile. I have no residential neighbors
across the street. My boat is properly covered.
Investigation into alternative storage shows a range of $250.00-350.00/month for a space large enough to
accommodate my 17 foot boat on it's 20 foot trailer, that is close by and reasonable accessible. That is an annual cost
of $3000.00-4000.00 to do something I have been doing for 30 years without incident or complaint.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan Wiebe
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 24
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 25
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 26
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
View Looking West
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 27
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
View Looking East
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 28
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 29
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
View Looking East
2.2.b
Packet Pg. 30
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
P
l
a
n
S
e
t
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
2.2.c
Packet Pg. 31
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
8
-
7
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
2.2.c
Packet Pg. 32
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
8
-
7
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
2.2.c
Packet Pg. 33
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
8
-
7
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
2.2.c
Packet Pg. 34
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
8
-
7
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
2.2.c
Packet Pg. 35
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
8
-
7
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
2.2.c
Packet Pg. 36
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
2
0
1
8
-
7
(
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
V
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
V
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
t
1
5
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
D
r
i
v
e
)
07/18/2018
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 50 RAUPP BOULEVARD,
BUFFALO GROVE, ILLINOIS ON WEDNESDAY, JULY 18, 2018
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 to the Sign Code for 2 Replacement Signs at the Woodlands
Development (Trustee Stein) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling)
Lisa Staszak, Parvin Clauss Sign Company, 165 Tubeway Drive, Carol Stream, IL 60188
and Maria Besbeas, Association Board President, 29 Willow Parkway, Buffalo Grove, IL
60089, were present and sworn in.
Ms. Staszak explained that the variance request is for two (2) ground signs to be located
at Half Day Road and Willow Parkway. The existing signs are constructed of wood and
are currently located within the ten (10) foot setback. There is a brick feature with a
wrought iron fence located in the area that limits how far back they can set the signs. The
original plan was to replace the existing signs with more modern signs in the existing
location. However, after becoming aware of the setback requirement, they found that they
could not get the signs further than ten (10) feet from the property line. They are
requesting a variation to place the new signs in the same location as the existing signs.
This entrance is considered the Woodlands main entrance. The Association is trying to
freshen up the entrance and make the signs more visible.
Com. Goldspiel stated that there is another Woodlands sign along Buffalo Grove Road
and asked if that is for the same development. Ms. Staszak advised that it is the same
development. Com. Goldspiel asked if there are three (3) signs, not just two (2). Ms.
Staszak advised that they are modifying the two (2) signs at Half Day Road and Willow
Parkway and adding a third sign. However, the third sign falls within the required setback
at Brandywyn Lane and Buffalo Grove Road. Com. Goldspiel asked staff if the Petitioner
is allowed three (3) signs under the Ordinance. Ms. Akash was not sure as to the number
of signs allowed. Com. Goldspiel asked the Petitioner to justify the need for three (3)
signs. Ms. Staszak advised that there are multiple entrances to the development. Ms.
Akash stated that when the Village received the variation request, only the two (2) signs
were included. Com. Goldspiel responded that he is now aware of a third sign. Ms.
Woods stated that the Village was not aware of the third sign being proposed. Ms.
Staszak advised that the third sign met the setback requirement so she applied for a
regular permit for it. Ms. Akash confirmed that the variation application only included the
two (2) signs. Ms. Staszak stated that the sign at Buffalo Grove Road and Brandywyn
Lane is a double-sided sign but because the sign met the setback requirement, their
permit coordinator was just going to apply for the permit. Com. Goldspiel asked staff
about the number of signs allowed for a development. Ch. Cesario advised that the
number of signs is determined by the frontage of the development. This is not three (3)
signs in one (1) location. He believes that Mr. Stilling would concur the number of signs
allowed is frontage driven. Ms. Staszak stated that it is a large development and the
signs are spread out. Com. Goldspiel asked the Petitioner to describe the proposed
signs. Ms. Staszak explained that the signs will be a fiber-resin material on the face and
the lettering will be cut out of the sign face and the sign will be internally illuminated with
LED lighting. At night the light will be subtle and not overly bright, making it look like a
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
J
u
l
1
8
,
2
0
1
8
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
07/18/2018
halo. Com. Goldspiel asked if all three (3) signs would be the same. Ms. Staszak
responded yes.
Com. Khan asked about the existing signs. Ms. Staszak explained that currently there are
six (6) signs that were originally installed when the development was built. She believes
their application included what the current signs look like. They are old. The Association
is just trying to freshen up the look. Com. Khan does not have an issue with the look of
the signs. He is trying to get a handle on the number of signs existing and being
proposed. He asked if three (3) of the six (6) signs are being replaced. Ms. Besbeas
explained that they are trying to update the look of the community. They are removing all
of the existing signs and only replacing three (3); two (2) at Half Day Road and Willow
Parkway and one (1) at Buffalo Grove Road and Brandywyn Lane, which are the main
entrance points to the complex along the golf course. Com. Khan confirmed with Ms.
Besbeas that the proposed sign at Buffalo Grove Road and Brandywyn Lane is a new
location for a sign and not a remove and replacement. Com. Khan confirmed with Ms.
Besbeas that all of the six (6) existing signs are being removed; two (2) of the proposed
new signs will be replacement signs located at Half Day Road and Willow Parkway and
the third proposed new sign will be a new location at Buffalo Grove Road and Brandywyn
Lane. Ms. Besbeas responded yes. Com. Khan confirmed with Ms. Besbeas that the
proposed sign at Buffalo Grove Road and Brandywyn Lane does not require a variation.
Ms. Besbeas responded yes. Com. Khan confirmed with Ms. Besbeas that the total
number of signs is being reduced from six (6) signs to three (3) signs. Ms. Besbeas
responded yes.
Ch. Cesario stated that Sign Code, Section 14.16.060 defines the number of signs
allowed based on frontage and if the frontage is adequate, that determines the number of
signs permitted. This development has a lot of frontage. The frontage is then divided by
800 and that determines the number of signs allowed.
Com. Goldspiel asked if there is an existing sign at Buffalo Grove Road and Brandywyn
Lane. Ms. Staszak stated that there is not an existing sign at that location. That will be a
new sign location. Com. Goldspiel confirmed with Ms. Besbeas that the other existing
signs will be removed and will not be replaced.
Com. Moodhe wants assurance that the other signs that are being removed and not
being replaced will not be replaced at a later time. Ms. Besbeas explained that the
proposed signs were reviewed by a panel of residents and are now finalized by the
Association Board. Com. Moodhe stated that the proposed signs are the types of signs
that many developments are going to. They are more efficient and more permanent. He
is not concerned about the design of the proposed signs. He asked staff about
Brandywyn Lane and Buffalo Grove Road and what will happen if Link Crossing wants a
sign at the southeast corner of Buffalo Grove Road and Brandywyn Lane. Ms. Woods
explained that staff will look at that if and when Link Crossing submits for a sign. Com.
Moodhe tried to confirm with staff that the proposed sign at this location would be a new
sign, not a replacement, and that only a permit is required. Ms. Woods responded that
this is the first time staff is hearing about a third sign.
Ch. Cesario advised that the Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) is looking at whether
the proper code sections were published for. Ch. Cesario asked Village Attorney Raysa if
the PZC can move forward with a recommendation. Mr. Raysa advised the PZC can
move forward. Ch. Cesario advised that page 7 of the packet shows the overall
development. He has no doubt that the development could possibly have five (5) or six
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
J
u
l
1
8
,
2
0
1
8
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
07/18/2018
(6) signs permitted based upon the overall frontage of the development. Ms. Besbeas
advised that the Association cannot afford that many signs. Ch. Cesario confirmed that
the two (2) signs required the variance for the setback of the signs and the signs also
need a variance for the height. He asked the Petitioner to describe the difference in size
from the old signs and the proposed signs. Ms. Staszak explained that the current wood
signs are two (2) foot high by five (5) foot wide. The current signs are anywhere from four
(4) feet to five (5) feet high overall. The proposed signs are six (6) feet high overall with a
solid base. Ch. Cesario confirmed with Ms. Staszak that the signs are going from five (5)
foot high to six (6) foot high.
Com. Khan confirmed that Ms. Besbeas represents the Association and not the
management company. He asked how many members are on the Association Board. Ms.
Besbeas responded there are five (5) Board members. Com. Khan asked if the three (3)
proposed signs were discussed during a Board meeting of the Association and if that
could be found in the minutes of the Board meeting. Ms. Besbeas responded yes.
Ch. Cesario asked staff if there have been any inquiries with regards to the variance
request. Ms. Akash advised that staff received several calls regarding the public hearing
but the inquiries were only to find out what the hearing was for. None of the callers had
any issues.
Com. Weinstein asked if the square footage of the proposed signs provided included the
base. Ms. Staszak responded that the base is not included. Com. Weinstein is fine with
the appearance of the proposed signs and asked about the internal illumination. Ms.
Staszak advised that the internal illumination will be LED lighting. Com. Weinstein asked
about the picture on page 11 of the packet that shows an empty spot. He asked if that is
where the new sign is going to be located. Ms. Besbeas advised that is the southeast
corner of Half Day Road and Willow Parkway. Page 10 of the packet shows the
southeast corner before the sign was removed. The old sign has already been removed.
Com. Weinstein asked about the light. Ms. Staszak stated that the light will be removed.
Ch. Cesario entered the Staff Report dated July 18, 2018 as Exhibit 1.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were
no questions or comments from the audience.
The public hearing was closed at 7:57 PM.
Moved by Com. Weinstein, seconded by Com. Khan, to make a positive recommendation
to the Village Board to approve the variation request for the two (2) ground signs subject
to the following conditions:
1.The proposed signs shall be constructed in accordance with the plans attached as part of
this petition.
2.The landscaping plan shall be revised in a manner acceptable to the Village Engineer.
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
J
u
l
1
8
,
2
0
1
8
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
07/18/2018
Ch. Cesario believes that the proposed ground signs look nice. The two (2) signs off Half
Day Road are atypical and the PZC usually does not see two (2) signs in such close
proximity. However, he is comfortable since the signs are being replaced like for like.
Overall it is a nicer look and he is comfortable with changing the height from five (5) feet
to six (6) feet. He is supportive.
Com. Moodhe does not have a problem with the height change. He also believes that the
PZC may see more of these requests in the future as landscaping around the subdivision
signs become more mature.
RESULT:RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
Next: 9/17/2018 7:30 PM
MOVER:Mitchell Weinstein, Commissioner
SECONDER:Zill Khan, Commissioner
AYES:Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein, Au
ABSENT:Scott Lesser
2.Consider a Variation for an Electronic Ground Sign at 10 W Dundee Road (Trustee
Ottenheimer) (Staff Contact: Chris Stilling)
Mr. Carlos Corniffe, Territory Manager, Buchanan Energy, 2500 Brickvale Drive, Elk
Grove Village, IL 60007, was present and sworn in.
Mr. Corniffe explained they are requesting to install a new identification and price sign.
The requested variations are to install a 91 square foot price sign that would encroach
into the 15 foot required setback. They meet the setback requirement along Dundee
Road. However, along Buffalo Grove Road the sign would be located 9 feet from the
property line.
Com. Moodhe asked how far back the old was located from Buffalo Grove Road. Mr.
Corniffe does not have the exact measurements, but there was the addition of the right
turn lane. The proposed sign is moving more inside the property line than the old sign
was. Com. Moodhe confirmed with Mr. Corniffe that the old sign was hit by a vehicle. He
would not want to see that same situation again. He asked if Mr. Corniffe feels that the
proposed sign will be set far enough back to avoid being hit in the future. Mr. Corniffe
believes so and added that the proposed sign meets the recommendation by the Village
Engineer not to be located over the watermain easement. He cannot tell what other
people might do, but he feels comfortable with the sign being further inside the property
line, they can avoid that type of accident.
Ch. Cesario referenced page 16 of the packet and noted that the proposed sign would be
located approximately 3 feet west of the old sign location.
Com. Goldspiel is troubled by the proposed sign. This is a very significant corner in the
Village. While 3 out of 4 corners at the intersection are nicely developed, the fourth
corner has had some discussion. He is concerned that the extra sign area would further
detract from the appearance of the corner. There is a lot on the sign and he believes that
it is too much. There is a lot of signage on Dundee Road and it is difficult to distinguish
one sign from another. The proposed sign seems to have too much copy for a nice-
looking corner. The proposed sign looks like something that would be located on a
highway, which Dundee Road and Buffalo Grove Road is not. The proposed sign detracts
from the appearance of the area and work needs to be done to improve the look of the
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
J
u
l
1
8
,
2
0
1
8
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
07/18/2018
area. There is land available to provide some landscaping around the base of the
proposed sign.
Com. Weinstein is concerned about the number of panels on the proposed sign. He
asked Mr. Corniffe is there is currently any signage for the car wash on the property. Mr.
Corniffe believes there was a sign on the car wash building, but that it was removed
because they changed the type of wash from a touchless wash to one with brushes. He
does not believe that there is currently a sign with the Wash n Run message. Com.
Weinstein confirmed with Mr. Corniffe that the proposed sign will be located 3 feet to the
west of the old sign location, farther away from Buffalo Grove Road. He believes that the
setback reduction is due, in part, to the expansion of the road, which the property owner
had nothing to do with. He also confirmed with Mr. Corniffe that the total sign area will be
91 square feet, which does not include the base of the sign.
Ch. Cesario asked about the size of the old sign. Mr. Corniffe does not have that
information with him. The old sign had the Mobil panel and manual changeable gas
prices. It did not have the Wash n Run or the Bucky’s panels. Ch. Cesario asked if the
proposed sign is the same dimensions as the Bucky’s sign located on Route 83, which is
referenced in the packet on page 17 in the Staff memo.
Com. Moodhe asked Mr. Corniffe about the acreage for the Bucky’s at 1251 McHenry
Road and the Bucky’s at 10 W. Dundee Road. Mr. Corniffe knows that 1251 McHenry
Road is larger but he does not have the acreage. Com. Moodhe asked if 1251 McHenry
Road is almost twice the size as 10 W. Dundee Road. Mr. Corniffe responded that it most
likely is as the McHenry Road property had another building on it, the old school house.
Com. Moodhe asked if any consideration was given to going with a smaller ground sign.
Mr. Corniffe explained that they have already reduced the size of the proposed ground
sign, specifically the price numbers.
Com. Cohn asked staff if staff is recommending approval of a 91 square foot sign in lieu
of an 80 square foot sign due to the approved sign at 1251 McHenry Road. Ms. Wood
responded that there are two rationales: one being that this is a reasonable request; and
two that historically the Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) has approved similar
requests. Com. Cohn asked if staff took into consideration that this proposed sign is for a
different roadway in a different area. Ms. Woods responded that staff always considers
the topology of the area and that staff still felt comfortable with this request. Com. Cohn
stated that the sign may be overwhelming for the area and may affect development of
other properties in the area. Ms. Woods stated that staff would never support a sign that
may have adverse effects on future development of the area.
Ch. Cesario asked staff is there was any consideration of the proposed sign possibly
blocking the Taco Bell ground sign due to the height of the proposed sign. Ms. Akash
explained that the proposed sign was submitted to the Village Engineer, who did not have
any line-of-sight issues. Ch. Cesario believes that it would be helpful to have the
dimensions of the previous ground sign. In his opinion, the colors of the proposed sign
are pleasant. He believes that the price numbers are a little small. He would like to see
the price numbers a little larger. However, he believes the bottom half of the sign is
visually pleasing. He is struggling a little with the size, but it is not a huge change from 80
square feet to 91 square feet in terms of sign area.
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
J
u
l
1
8
,
2
0
1
8
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
07/18/2018
Com. Khan asked if the sign on the property now was part of the sign that was knocked
down or was it brought in to replace the sign that was knocked down. Mr. Corniffe stated
that the sign there now is a portable, temporary sign that was brought in because the sign
that was hit was about to fall down and it was removed based upon a request from
Village staff. The base of the old sign is still there. Com. Khan seems to believe that the
old sign was much smaller than the sign at 1251 McHenry Road. He wished he had the
dimensions of the old sign as well. Mr. Corniffe responded that the price numbers are
smaller on the proposed sign. He is not sure of the dimensions of the sign on McHenry
Road. Com. Khan stated that when staff refers to the proposed sign as being similar to
the sign on McHenry Road, he is assuming that staff means similar in size and
dimensions. Mr. Corniffe stated that the look is similar, but he is not sure about the
dimensions.
Com. Au asked if Buchanan Energy considered reducing the proposed sign to 80 square
feet in area. Mr. Corniffe responded that he is asking for approval of what he has
presented. They wanted larger price numbers for visibility and traffic flow but they
reduced those based upon the suggestions made by staff. He would like to stick with the
proposal made. Com. Au stated that the price numbers are not that big and occupy less
than 50% of the height. Over 50% of the proposed sign is other signage. Obviously the
Petitioner would want the “Mobil” panel to identify the brand, but the other panels occupy
a big portion of the proposed sign. Does the Petitioner need a “Bucky’s” panel that is
larger than the “Mobil” panel? Mr. Corniffe responded that the “Bucky's” name has
recognition and has grown in this area since 2010. It goes a long way from a competitive
standpoint.
Com. Cohn read Municipal Code Chapter 14.40.010 and stated that staff believes that
the request is reasonable. There is a conflict between what is reasonable and whether
there is undue and unnecessary hardship. Does staff find that there is an undue and
unnecessary hardship because of unique and unusual conditions? What facts is staff
relying on to reach that conclusion? He asked Mr. Corniffe to answer these questions as
well. Ms. Woods responded that signs are changing across the board. The request to
accommodate the changing needs of the gas station is reasonable Mr. Corniffe believes
that the requested size is reasonable. It is typical of what he is seeing throughout the
market. In locations where they sell diesel fuel, customers did not know they sold diesel
until they added the diesel price sign. They would like larger price numbers but went with
the recommendation of staff. He understands that the roadway is not a highway.
However, it is a busy intersection.
Com. Khan stated that there is not much competition in this area. Advertising of the car
wash is not necessary. What’s the difference of having the panel that identifies “Mobil”
and remove the “Bucky’s” panel? Mr. Corniffe explained that their customers want to
know what services are offered at the different locations. What makes them competitive
is their product and their pricing. He wants to link the 3 Bucky’s locations. Com. Khan
asked if the old sign had both a “Mobil” and “Bucky’s” panel on the sign. Mr. Corniffe
stated that the old sign only had a “Mobil” panel.
Com. Weinstein stated that the main difference between this proposed sign and the sign
on McHenry Road is the “Synergy” panel and the “Wash n Run” panel. The difference in
area is only a one and a half foot difference in the overall height of the sign. He asked Mr.
Corniffe if he would be interested in removing the “Synergy” and “Wash n Run” panels,
which would reduce the overall height and may eliminate the need for the size variation.
Mr. Corniffe explained that “Synergy” is a big marketing push for ExxonMobil and they
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
J
u
l
1
8
,
2
0
1
8
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
07/18/2018
are upgrading many locations to include the “Synergy” branding. The “Wash n Run” is to
let customers know that they have a car wash. They would like to keep both.
Ch. Cesario explained the options available to the Petitioner. Mr. Corniffe would like the
PZC to vote on what is presented.
Ch. Cesario entered the Staff Report dated July 18, 2018 as Exhibit 1.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were
no questions or comments from the audience.
The public hearing was closed at 8:29 PM.
Moved by Com. Weinstein, seconded by Com. Khan, to make a positive recommendation
to the Village Board to approve the variation request subject to the following condition:
1.The proposed electronic fuel ground sign shall be constructed in accordance to the plans
and documents submitted as part of this petition and shall not be located in the existing
watermain easement.
Com. Cohn stated that he generally does not have an issue with the size. He is trying to
figure out if the proposal is sufficient to meet the variation criteria standard. The criteria
provides that there has to be undue and unnecessary hardship and unique and unusual
conditions. All he has heard, from both staff and the Petitioner, that the request is not
unreasonable. He does not know if not being unreasonable meets the criteria.
Ch. Cesario explained that there are two variations, the first is the setback. He believes it
is clear that meeting the setback would be very difficult. With that, the circumstances are
clear. We think it is reasonable to announce who it is, what it is, gas prices, etc. The
question is how big of a sign is needed to communicate that. The Code also allows a
variation to be granted when the sign is of particularly good taste and well landscaped.
That is incredibly subjective. He is willing to take that stance and feels that the criteria
has been met. The variation for the setback is very clear to him. The total size he is
struggling with. He does not like the proposed height of 15 feet with the Taco Bell sign
behind it and not knowing what was there previously. The elimination of the “Wash n
Run” panel would bring the size down to almost 80 square feet. However, he likes the
sign telling him that there is a car wash. Based on that line of thought, he is supportive of
the proposal. It would have been helpful to know the height and size of the old sign.
Com. Au asked if the motion could be contingent upon the proposed sign not blocking the
Taco Bell sign. Mr. Raysa advised that a condition could be added that, in the Village’s
discretion, the proposed sign does not unduly block the Taco Bell sign.
Com. Weinstein amended the motion to include a condition that the proposed sign will
not unduly interfere with the signage behind the Petitioner’s sign, subject to staff’s
determination. Com. Khan seconded the amendment.
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
J
u
l
1
8
,
2
0
1
8
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
07/18/2018
Com. Goldspiel stated that this is a busy intersection. The proposed sign is very busy. He
does not believe that the PZC has to grant variations on everything that is requested. It
seems to him the proposed sign is out-sized for the location. It would fit much better
along McHenry Road. He believes that the sign would be a problem for redevelopment of
the area. The intersection is a gateway to the Village. No effort has been made to provide
for landscaping around the sign base. He believes the proposed sign would be
detrimental to the future development of the area.
Com. Weinstein stated that this is one business, Mobil, and there are four things
advertised on the sign in addition to the prices; Mobil, Synergy, Bucky’s and Wash n Run.
What is the purpose of the sign? He will know that this is a gas station before he sees the
sign. When he sees the Mobil sign, he will know it is a Mobil gas station and he will know
there is a car wash well before he sees the one and a half foot high panel. He does not
feel that the Wash n Run panel is adding anything to it because he will see the car wash.
He was trying to lead the Petitioner to downsize the sign so the Petitioner would not have
to deal with the variation for size. He is not in favor of the numerous panels on the sign.
Com. Moodhe believes that the sign could be reduced to the 80 square feet with some
work. One means is the Bucky’s panel itself. The similarity between this proposed sign
and the one on McHenry Road differs in that the Bucky’s on McHenry Road is huge. This
location is barely big enough to hold the cash register and a couple of coolers. He
believes the Bucky’s panel can be reduced to be proportional to the size of the store.
That could bring the sign into compliance regarding size and still be able to keep all the
panels on the sign. He asked the Petitioner if he understood what Com. Goldspiel was
talking about as far as that particular corner is concerned. This intersection, Dundee
Road and Buffalo Grove Road, is a little more compact. The proposed sign would be a
much larger embodiment there. He is having a hard time it. He would have felt better if
the Petitioner was willing to consolidate a bit.
Com. Cohn stated that he has not heard any hardship in the testimony presented. He is
still struggling to see where the hardship is. There was no testimony that if there was a
smaller sign that they would sell less gas and would not make a profit. The Village has a
Code for a reason and someone determined that an 80 square foot sign is standard. He
just does not see the hardship.
Com. Moodhe asked the Petitioner if he would like to reconsider and work with staff and
come back with a slightly different proposal.
Ch. Cesario discussed with the PZC Sign Code, Section 14.40.010, subsection B.
Com. Goldspiel stated that he would like to see the property particularly well landscaped.
Ch. Cesario asked Mr. Corniffe what he would like to do. Mr. Corniffe stated that the
hardship was the damage caused to the old sign by a consumer. He wished he had the
information and dimensions of the old sign and the sign on McHenry Road. He is not sure
if that would make a difference. He would like to move forward as presented.
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
J
u
l
1
8
,
2
0
1
8
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
07/18/2018
Com. Au recommended amending the motion to include a condition that the site is to be
well landscaping in a manner acceptable to Village staff. Mr. Raysa recommended
making the motion subject to Sign Code Section 14.40.010, subsection B.
Com. Weinstein made a second amendment to the motion to include Sign Code, Section
14.40.010, subsection B. Com. Khan seconded the amendment.
Com. Khan noted that there used to be a gas station at the northwest corner of Dundee
Road and Arlington Heights Road. The gas station has been gone for at least 10 years.
However, the landscaping is still there. He asked staff if the old sign was granted a
variation. The PZC has been struggling to compare what the size of the old sign was
compared to the proposed sign. Ms. Akash replied that she is not sure if the previous
sign was granted a variation.
Roll Call to accept the second amendment concerning the requirement for landscaping:
AYE - Au, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Moodhe, Weinstein, Cesario
NAY - None
ABSTAIN - None
Motion passed.
Roll Call to accept the first amendment concerning the proposed sign not impeding any
other signage:
AYE - Au, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Moodhe, Weinstein, Cesario
NAY - None
ABSTAIN - None
Motion passed.
RESULT:RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE [3 TO 4]
Next: 8/20/2018 7:30 PM
MOVER:Mitchell Weinstein, Commissioner
SECONDER:Zill Khan, Commissioner
AYES:Frank Cesario, Mitchell Weinstein, Amy Au
NAYS:Adam Moodhe, Matthew Cohn, Stephen Goldspiel, Zill Khan
ABSENT:Scott Lesser
Regular Meeting
Other Matters for Discussion
None.
Approval of Minutes
1.Planning and Zoning Commission - Rescheduled Regular Meeting - Jul 9, 2018
7:30 PM
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 45
Mi
n
u
t
e
s
A
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
:
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
o
f
J
u
l
1
8
,
2
0
1
8
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)
07/18/2018
Moved by Com. Moodhe, seconded by Com. Khan, to approve the minutes of the
July 9, 2018 Planning & Zoning Commissioner Special meeting as submitted.
RESULT:ACCEPTED [6 TO 0]
MOVER:Adam Moodhe, Commissioner
SECONDER:Zill Khan, Commissioner
AYES:Moodhe, Cesario, Cohn, Goldspiel, Khan, Weinstein
ABSTAIN:Amy Au
ABSENT:Scott Lesser
Chairman's Report
None.
Committee and Liaison Reports
Com. Khan advised that he attended the July 16, 2018 Village Board meeting. Both
recommendation items were approved; Small Wireless Facilities and the Fourth Amendment to
the Plaza Verde East PUD.
Com. Cohn will be attending the August 20, 2018 Village Board meeting.
Staff Report/Future Agenda Schedule
Ms. Woods advised that the August 1, 2018 PZC regular meeting is tentatively cancelled. She
also advised that the PZC training will be held on October 30, 2018 as a Special Meeting and
asked the PZC to save the date.
Public Comments and Questions
None.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:59 PM
Chris Stilling
APPROVED BY ME THIS 18th DAY OF July , 2018
3.B.1
Packet Pg. 46
Mi
n
u
t
e
s
A
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
:
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
o
f
J
u
l
1
8
,
2
0
1
8
7
:
3
0
P
M
(
A
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
)