Loading...
1995-09-19 - Zoning Board of Appeals - Minutes fIN 0 \I ED ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE, ILLINOIS TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19 , 1995 I . CALL TO ORDER Chairman Richard Heinrich called the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to order at 7 : 40 P . M . on Tuesday, September 19 , 1995 in the Council Chambers of the Village Hall , 50 Raupp Boulevard . II . ROLL CALL Commissioners Present : J . Paul , B . Entman, L . Windecker, L . Arbus and R . Heinrich QUORUM . Commissioners Absent : M . Kearns and H . Hefler Bldg . Dept . Liaison; Edward Scharf Deputy Building Commissioner Village Attorney : Richard Skelton III . APPROVAL OF MINUTES Postponed until after public hearings . IV . OLD BUSINESS A. 301 Vintage Lane , William Polansky Zoning Ordinance , Section 17 . 40 . 020 Motion to remove from Table was made by Com . Windecker and seconded by Com . Entman . Voice Vote - AYE Unanimously Item was Tabled to permit time for the Village Engineer to review plans to construct a stairway within the required side yard setback . Mr . Kuenkler' s Review, dated August 17 , 1995 , states : " . . . the con- struction technique required to protect the (exist- ing) storm sewer renders this location impractical . " Mr . Polansky withdrew his request for a variance per letter dated August 31 , 1995 . Li APP1r) !F"11 V . NEW BUSINESS A . 523 Estate Drive , Herbert and Jenny Dorn Zoning Ordinance , Section 17 . 40 . 020 Construction of Addition into Rear Yard Setback Mr . Herbert Dorn was sworn in and the public hearing notice was read . He submitted photographs and summarized the reasons for requesting a variance : 1 . The family needs a larger dining room . 2 . The addition would encroach a distance of eight feet (8 ' ) into the required thirty foot (30 ' ) rear yard setback . 3 . There are trees in the rear yard that will screen the addition from neighbors . Mr . Dorn said he has informed all his neighbors and there have been no objections . The materials for the addition will match the existing construction and the roof lines will be the same . Comments from Commissioners : Com . Paul : No questions . It will be a nice addition and the existing vegetation will screen it . Com . Windecker, Com . Arbus and Com . Entman had no objections . There were no comments from the audience . Com. Arbus made the following motion : I move we grant the request of Herbert and Jenny Dorn, 523 Estate Drive , for variance of Zoning Ordinance , Section 17 . 40 . 020 , pertaining to Area, Height , Bulk and Placement Regulations , for the purpose of constructing an addition that would encroach a distance of eight feet ( 8 ' ) into the required thirty foot (30 ' ) rear yard setback . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19 , 1995 - PAGE TWO Li APPAIREIr Unique conditions having been demonstrated, the proposed variation will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Com. Windecker seconded the motion. The Village Engineer' s Review, dated August 30, 1995 states : "The proposed addition need not affect the existing drainage in the area. " Roll Call Vote : AYE - Entman, Paul, Windecker, Arbus and Heinrich NAY - None Motion Passed - 5 to 0 . Findings of Fact Attached. Permit may be issued in fifteen (15) days - October 5, 1995 . B. 1308 Witney Lane, Jeffrey and Janice Pritikin Municipal Code, Section 15 . 20 . 040 Construction of six foot (6 ' ) wood fence . Mr. Jeffrey Pritikin was present with the fence con- tractor, Mr. John Tomassone of Custom Built Fence, 21227 Commercial, Mundelein, IL 60060 (623-6370) . Mr. Pritikin and Mr. Tomassone were sworn in and the public hearing notice was read. Com. Arbus disclosed that he is a close personal friend of the Pritikins . He recused himself from the discussion and vote. Mr. Pritikin summarized the reasons for requesting the variance : 1 . The rear yard slopes down along the south property line. 2 . The existing fence needs to be replaced and a six foot (6 ' ) fence along the rear lot line will provide privacy and will be more aesthetically pleasing than a five foot (5 ' ) fence. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS `./ SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE THREE APPArlE 3 . The fence would taper from six feet (6 ' ) to five feet (5 ' ) along the side lot lines for a distance of sixteen feet (16 ' ) to make the fence appear to be even all the way around. Mr. Pritikin said he has informed his neighbors and they have had no objections . Comments from Commissioners : Com. Entman: No objections . Com. Paul : The existing fence looks strange and the proposed fence will be much better. Com. Windecker: Confirmed that the entire fence will be replaced. No problem. There were no comments from the audience. Com. Windecker made the following motion: I move we grant the request of Jeffrey and Janice Pritikin, 1308 Witney Lane, for variance of Municipal Code, Section 15 .20 . 040, pertaining to Residential Districts, for the purpose of con- structing a six foot (6 ' ) board-on-board wood fence along the rear property line and tapering from six feet (6 ' ) to five feet (5 ' ) within a distance of sixteen feet (16 ' ) along the side lot lines, as indicated on the plat of survey submitted with the application. Petitioner has exhibited unique circumstances . The fence will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare . Com. Entman seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote : AYE - Paul, Windecker, Entman and Heinrich NAY - None ABSTAIN - Arbus Motion Passed - 4 to 0, 1 abstention. Findings of Fact Attached. Permit may be issued in fifteen (15) days - October 5, 1995 . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE FOUR 111;11111] C. 2916 Whispering Oaks Drive, Walter and Joan Osterman Municipal Code, Section 15 .20 . 040 6 ' Wood Privacy Fence Along 30 ' of Side Lot Line Walter and Joan Osterman were sworn in and the public hearing notice was read. Mrs . Osterman presented photographs of the yard and summarized their reasons for requesting a variance : 1 . There is about a three foot (3 ' ) grade difference between their lot and their neighbor' s lot at 2910 Whispering Oaks Dr. 2 . The proposed fence would be at the lowest part of the swale . 3 . The fence would provide noise attenuation to block the sound of their neighbor' s air- conditioning unit . 4 . The air-conditioner runs continually and the noise has prevented the Ostermans from enjoying the use of their deck for three (3) years . \✓ Ch. Heinrich read a letter of protest from Mr. David Olagunju, 2910 Whispering Oaks Drive. It reasons he stated for his objections include : 1 . The noise level of their air-conditioning unit is normal and the noise from the Osterman' s air conditioner is just as loud. 2 . The Osterman' s dog has disturbed them by coming into their yard and by barking in the early morning hours . 3 . The fence would be perceived as a single wall between neighbors and devalue the quality of life, property and Buffalo Grove. 4 . The fence would be a safety hazard because it would be subject to wind damage and could injure their children if it should be blown down. 5 . The Olagunjus have no objection to a fence surrounding the Osterman' s entire yard. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS �..� SEPTEMBER 29, 1995 - PAGE FIVE V ..I Mr. Osterman said he has discussed the situation with Mr. Olaganju and they agree that a fence is not the best solution to the problem. He referred to the variance that was denied by the ZBA and the Village Board in 1994 . He said his offer to pay for an inspection of the air conditioning unit by the Carrier A/C Company and pay for a sound device to block the noise still stands, but it has always been rejected for one reason or another. Mrs . Osterman said they have planted trees and Mr. Olagunju did plant a bush in front of the AC unit but the problem has not been solved. They have tried to work the problem out and they do not want a fence . Comments from Commissioners : Com. Arbus : Reviewed his comments from July 19, 1994 and said he has not changed his mind. He will not vote for a thirty foot (30 ' ) section of fence between two (2) yards . Such a fence would alter the character of the neighborhood. He has no objection to a fence around the entire yard. Com. Windecker: Said his two neighbors have Carrier air-conditioners larger than his own and they run constantly but they do not really hear them. He was out to the area Sunday and the unit was not running. This air-conditioner is no closer than many other units in neighboring houses in Buffalo Grove . He would object to any single thirty foot (30 ' ) piece of fence . Com. Paul : Said he understood the Osterman' s feelings but he doubted how much good the fence would do. It would have a negative effect on the neighborhood. There is nothing in the Code to prohibit a five foot (5 ' ) fence but he would not vote for a variance. Mr. Osterman said they are asking for a six foot (6 ' ) fence and that is only a one foot (1 ' ) difference. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE SIX AIDITTEI The swale is about three feet (3 ' ) deep so the fence will appear to be shorter to their neighbors . Mrs. Osterman said this is the only problem they have with their neighbors. They have a cordial relation- ship. Com. Entman: Reviewed his comments from the previous hearing and he is not sure a variance for a six foot (6 ' ) fence is the answer to the problem. Ch. Heinrich: Has not changed his opinion from the last time and he would object to a similar fence if it was requested by his neighbors. He would not object to a fence around the entire yard, but the proposed fence is essentially a wall and would affect the character of the neighborhood. In 1994 he did not think an eight foot (8 ' ) fence would take care of the noise and a six foot (6 ' ) fence makes no difference in his opinion. After further discussion, Ch. Heinrich advised the Ostermans of their right to appeal to the Village Board of Trustees if the variance is denied. Mr. John Tomassone, Custom Built Fence Company, 21227 Commercial, Mundelein, IL 60060 (623-6370) was present and he heard the air conditioner running. In his opinion it is defective and has a bearing problem. He has given the Ostermans an estimate for the proposed fence and therefore has a financial interest in the proposed fence. Ch. Entman made the following motion: I move we grant the request of Walter and Joan Osterman, 2916 Whispering Oaks Drive, for variance of Municipal Code, Section 15 . 20 . 040, pertaining to Residential Districts, for the purpose of constructing a six foot (6 ' ) wood fence for a distance of thirty feet (30 ' ) along the interior lot line on the south side of the property. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS �.,� SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE SEVEN iTirpri77 + , it i ,,i ;_ : . Com. Windecker seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: AYE - None NAY - Paul, Windecker, Arbus, Entman and Heinrich. Variance DENIED - 5 to 0 . Findings of Fact Attached. Reason for denial : The proposed fence would be detri- mental to the public health, safety and welfare and would alter the essential character of the neighbor- hood. The Ostermans were advised that written appeal must be made within fifteen (15) days. D. Route 83, Town Center - Street Furniture No. 2 Sign Code, Section 14 .40 . 020, Pertaining to: Animated and Intensely Lighted Signs Mr. Marc Schwartz, Attorney for Town Center, introduced Mr. Greg Kreeger, Simon Property Group, Inc. , Merchants Plaza, Post Office Box 7033 , Indianapolis, IN 46207 were present . The Public Hearing Notice was read and Mr. Kreeger was sworn in. Mr. Schwartz summarized the reasons for requesting a variance of the Sign Code for the purpose permitting a changeable copy board for the Buffalo Grove Theatres on Street Furniture No. 2 located on Route 83 . 1 . The Sign Code does not provide for manual changeable copy boards, but movie theaters require this type of advertising, so this is a unique circumstance. 2 . The reader board will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood inasmuch as signs are permitted on the Street Furniture which was con- structed about 1987 or 1988 . 3 . a financial hardship would occur if the theatre was not permitted to advertise the movies being shown. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS �.,/ SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE EIGHT 7117-En The Appearance Commission reviewed the proposed sign on July 27, 1995 and recommended that a variance be granted. Ch. Heinrich observed that Appearance Commissioner Cea objected the "reel" logo and asked if it would be retained? He also asked if the theater was part of a chain and how many screens it would have? Mr. Schwartz responded that they wanted to keep the reel because it identifies the type of business and that the theater is not part of a chain. There will be five (5) screens . Ch. Heinrich asked if the sign would be illuminated all night? Mr. Mark Stern, President of Chicago Area Theatres, a Liability Company 1122 Central Avenue, Wilmette, IL 60091 (251-7411) was sworn in. He said the lights would be turned on at dusk and the ushers turn them off after the last show starts, approximately 10 : 00 P.M. during the week and possibly later on Friday and i.J Saturday nights . Ch. Heinrich asked if the theater sign would be the only advertising on the north and south sides of Street Furniture No. 2 on Mc Henry Rd. and who would maintain the sign? Mr. Stern verified that only Street Furniture No. 2 would have the changeable copy signs and said they would be maintained by M & K Signs, a reputable firm. Movie titles would be changed by theater personnel . Mr. Schwartz added that the lease would require the sign to be maintained in good condition. Comments from Commissioners : Com. Arbus : No questions. Com. Windecker: Asked if there would be any midnight shows? ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS �,,� SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE NINE inD J Mr. Stern replied that there could be some late shows, but only on weekends and the sign would only be left on until the show started. Com. Paul : No objections. The theater could not survive without the sign. Com. Entman: No questions . Ch. Heinrich asked if second run movies would be shown? Mr. Stern said they would show second run family movies, as well as classics, such as "Driving Miss Daisy, " some novels and fine arts films . There were no questions from the audience. Com. Paul made the following motion: I move we recommend to the Village Board that the request being made by Buffalo Grove Joint Venture for variance of Sign Code, Section 14 .40 . 020, pertaining to Animated and Intensely Lighted Signs, be granted for the purpose of installing a changeable copy signs on the north and south sides of Street Furniture No. 2 located on Route 83 , north of Lake Cook Road, relative to the Buffalo Grove Theatres at the Town Center. Denial of the sign would be detrimental to the owners because they would suffer undue financial hardship. The proposed variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Sign is granted pursuant to Sign Code, Section 14 .44 . 010, Sub-section a. Com. Windecker seconded the motion. Ch. Heinrich disclosed that he had purchased shares of the REIT stock a year ago, but sold them and he has no interest in Simon Properties. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE TEN rr-V-nrril Roll Call Vote : AYE - Entman, Paul, Windecker, Arbus and Heinrich NAY - None Motion Passed - 5 to 0 . Findings of Fact Attached. Item will be on the October 2, 1995 Village Board Agenda. E. Scarsdale Development Limited Sign Code, Section 14 . 32 . 010 : Subdivision Development Signs (Size) Sign Code, Section 14 .40 . 145 : Off-Premise Signs Aptakisic Road, East of Buffalo Grove Road Mr. Charles Friedman, Purchasing Agent, represented Scarsdale Development Limited, 1608 Barclay Road, Buffalo Grove, IL 60089 (808-8500) and was sworn in. The public hearing notice was read. Request is being made for a variance that would permit construction of a sign that would be 10 'x 30 ' square feet (300 sf) in size and identifies three (3)unrelated Scarsdale projects under construction in Buffalo Grove. The sign would be set back fifty feet (50 ft . ) from Aptakisic Road. Mr. Friedman described the site. The land is owned by Scarsdale. It is vacant now, but Scarsdale will soon construct an office building on the site and they would like to put the sign up as a marketing tool . They do very little advertising in the newspapers and the sign will represent the potential for significant sales. Ch. Heinrich observed that this sign would be the largest sign in Buffalo Grove and the area is wide open so the sign would definitely be seen. Buffalo Grove has prided itself because three hundred square foot (300 sf. ) signs are not permitted. Granting of this sign is setting a dangerous precedence because others will be requesting similar signs . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE ELEVEN '' Frilrninr) 111"1 Comments from Commissioners : Com. Paul : Considers this a billboard sign and said it would detract from the attractive drive down Aptakisic Road. He finds the sign objectionable. Ch. Heinrich noted that the Appearance Commission denied the request for a recommendation for a variance by vote of 7 to 0 . Com. Windecker: It' s definitely a double faced off- premise billboard sign. Nothing on the sign relates to the proposed construction on the land on Aptakisic Road. He could not support a variance . Com. Arbus : No way! He does not want to see a three hundred sq. ft . (300 sf . ) billboard sign in Buffalo Grove on Aptakisic Road. Com. Entman: The sign is too large and does not serve a purpose in that location. Agrees with the Appear- ance Commissioners' comments . Com. Windecker made the following motion: I move we recommend to the Village Board that variance of the Sign Code requested by Scarsdale Development Limited, 1608 Barclay Boulevard, be granted that would permit construction of a 300 sq. ft . off-premise ground sign at Aptakisic Road, east of Buffalo Grove Road, pursuant to: Sign Code, Section 14 .32 . 010 pertaining to Subdivision Development Signs and Sign Code, Section 14 .40 . 145 pertaining to Off-Premise Signs . Variance recommended subject to Sign Code, Section 14 .44 . 010, Sub-section a. Condition being that the sign is to be constructed in conformance with plans and specifications submitted to and approved by the Village . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE TWELVE iDpirowEll Corn. Entman seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote : AYE - None NAY - Paul, Windecker, Arbus, Entman and Heinrich Variation Denied - 5 to 0 . Findings of Fact Attached. F. Walgreen' s - Pharmacy at 1300 W. Dundee Road Strathmore Square Shopping Center Sign Code, Sec. 14 .20 . 070 - Area of Ground Signs The Public Hearing Notice was read and Mr. Terrence Doyle, Doyle Signs, 232 Interstate Road, Addison, IL 60101 (543-9490)was sworn in. He is the authorized agent for Walgreen' s. The sign was approved by Norcor Investments, Inc. , 555 North Skokie Blvd. , Northbrook, IL 60062 (480-9700) per letter dated June 30, 1995 . Mr. Doyle presented a color rendering and described the proposed sign as an internally illuminated box sign that is 3 ' 6" x 11 ' = 38 square feet and it will be installed on the brick below the existing one hundred five square foot (105 sq. ft . ) Strathmore Square ground sign. There is an area approximately 28 sq. ft .at the lower left side above the proposed sign. The sign will be constructed of steel, aluminum and plexiglas. Walgreen' s is the oldest tenant at Strathmore Square and the sign is needed for identification. The store is set back approximately 230 feet from Dundee Road and the parking lot has mature landscaping that conceals the sign. The center has 430 feet of frontage on Dundee Road and 350 feet of frontage on Arlington Heights Road and this is the only ground sign on the site. The sign was reviewed by the Appearance Commission on August 24, 1995 and a variance was recommended. It is appropriate in size and design and will improve the overall visual appearance of the existing sign. The sign is an important tool for the efficient and successful operation of the Walgreen' s store and has ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS �./ SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE THIRTEEN nn � toi U proven to be beneficial at many other Walgreen' s locations. It will serve to increase business at the center and benefit the other tenants of the center. Ch. Heinrich had no questions or objections . Comments from Commissioners : Com. Paul : No objections. The sign is attractive. Com. Entman: No objections . Com. Windecker: Asked if the store is open all night? He questioned whether the sign would bother the tenants of the townhomes to the west? Mr. Doyle said he did not think Walgreen' s would ever be open all night at this location. Ch. Heinrich said the townhomes are far enough away so the sign would not beobjectionablee to the residents . Com. Arbus : No objections. No questions or comments from the audience . Com. Arbus made the following motion: Li I move we recommend that the Village Board grant the request made by Doyle Signs, Agent for Walgreens, for variance of Sign Code, Section 14 . 20 . 070, pertaining to Area of Ground Signs, for the purpose of installing a Walgreens- Pharmacy sign, as depicted in the picture presented by the petitioner, on the existing ground sign at the Strathmore Square Shopping Center, 1300 W. Dundee Road. Petitioner has demonstrated that without the sign, there might be undue and unnecessary financial hardship. The sign was designed to bring traffic to Walgreen' s and to the rest of the shopping center. Granting of the requested variance would not be materially detrimental to the property owners in the vicinity, since it is in a commercial area ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE FOURTEEN i t � , and the existing residential homes are far enough away. Sign is recommended in accordance with Sign Code, Section 14 .44 . 010, Sub-section a. Com. Windecker seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote : AYE - Entman, Paul, Windecker, Arbus and Heinrich NAY - None Motion Passed - 5 to 0 . Findings of Fact Attached. Item will be on the October 2, 1995 Village Board Agenda. VI . ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Gary Abrahams, 406 Woodbury, was present . He was granted a variance of Sign Code, Section 15 . 20 . 040, pertaining to Residential Districts, on July 18, 1995 for the purpose of constructing a five foot (5 ' ) wood fence at least ten feet (10 ' ) from the sidewalk along Woodbury Road that would be constructed a distance no greater than nineteen feet (19 ' ) from the foundation at the rear corner of the house . Mr. Abrahams misunderstood the location of the fence from the rear of the house and has indicated that he wanted the fence to start half way to the middle of the house. There was a question about whether the sidewalk was inside or outside the property line . Mr. Skelton said there was some confusion in the petitioner' s mind about the actual placement of the fence . He advised the Zoning Board that the motion could be clarified as to the position of the fence. Mr. Abrahams presented photographs of the area and said he would like the fence to be as depicted on the plat of survey. He had agreed to construct a five foot (5 ' ) fence a distance of ten feet (10 ' ) from the sidewalk along Woodbury Road. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE FIFTEEN 71,710 [L, ti) Mr. Schar informed the Zoning Board Commissioners that he checked with the Village Engineer after the July meeting and Mr. Kuenkler verified that the side- walk is outside the property line. Ch. Heinrich said he had no problem clarifying the motion and permit the fence as depicted on the plat . Com. Entman had originally questioned whether the fence would start at the back corner of the house. He thought the arrow indicating the distance between the house and the sidewalk was the fence line. He had no problem if the location is fourteen feet (14 ' ) closer to the front of the house. Com. Windecker: The motion was stated "as depicted on the plat of survey. " No problem with clarification. Com. Arbus : No problem. Ch. Heinrich made the following motion: I move we modify the original motion to `./ clarify the intent of the variation granted July 18, 1995, regarding 406 Woodbury Road, to permit the fence to conform with the plat of survey that was submitted with the application. Said fence to be constructed a distance of fourteen feet (14 ' ) from the rear corner of the house forward toward the front property line . Com. Entman seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote : AYE - Windecker, Arbus, Entman and Heinrich NAY - None ABSTAIN - Paul (not present July 18, 1995) Motion Passed - 4 to 0, 1 abstention. Findings of Fact Attached. No waiting for permit . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS `,i SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE SIXTEEN !Au h VI . ADJOURNMENT Com. Paul made a motion to adjourn. Com. Entman seconded the motion. Ch. Heinrich adjourned the meeting at 9 : 15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Shirley Bates Recording Secretary sb ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 - PAGE SEVENTEEN