Loading...
2007-05-15 - Zoning Board of Appeals - Minutes , [proncri, t-' ; ,--:i -ii REGULAR MEETING hs su \��E b b ( 1006-1 BUFFALO GROVE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY 15, 2007 Chairman Entman called the Zoning Board of Appeals regular meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, May 15, 2007 in the Council Chambers of the Village Hall, 50 Raupp Boulevard. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Commissioner Stein Commissioner Dunn Commissioner Windecker Commissioner Lesser Commissioner Shapiro Chairman Entman Commissioners Absent: Vice Chairman Sandler Also Present: Edward Schar, Building Commissioner William Raysa, Village Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 17, 2007 minutes: Corn. Windecker made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted of the Zoning Board of Appeals regular meeting held on Tuesday, April 17, 2007. Com. Dunn seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: AYE — Stein, Dunn, Windecker, Lesser NAY — None ABSTAIN - Entman BUSINESS 1011 HILLDALE LANE, VENKATA KANCHARLA — FENCE CODE, SECTION 15.20.040, TO CONSTRUCT A 5' FENCE EXTENDING NORTH FROM THE HOUSE A DISTANCE OF 10', CONTINUING PARALLEL TO HOBSON DRIVE TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, THEN SOUTH AND RETURNING TO THE BUILDING SETBACK LINE Mrs. Santhi Muvva, 1011 Hilldale Lane, was present and sworn in. The public hearing notice published in the Daily Herald on April 20, 2007 was read. Li ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 1 of 9 — MAY 15, 2007 n t� ADQD Mrs. Muvva explained that they have small children that play in the backyard and they would like to have the fence for safety reasons. They live on a corner lot. They do not want their children running into the road. Ch. Entman read the Village Engineer's memorandum addressed to Edward Schar dated May 1, 2007 which states: "The proposed fence should be setback 10 feet from the sidewalk. The abutting property has a near side driveway." Ch. Entman read the Building Commissioner's memorandum dated May 3, 2007. Ch. Entman asked about the type of fence that would be installed. Mrs. Muvva was not sure of the type of fence. She believed it would be white plastic. Com. Windecker stated that the fence would be one half the distance from the house. He has no objection. Com. Stein stated that he would like to see what type of fence will be installed. Ch. Entman would also like to see the type of fence. Mrs. Muvva asked to Table the request in order to supply the information the Commissioners are requesting. Com. Lesser made a motion to Table the request made by Venkata Kancharla, 1011 Hilldale Lane, to the next regular meeting scheduled for June 19, 2007. Com. Dunn seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: AYE— Stein, Dunn, Windecker, Lesser, Entman NAY—None ABSTAIN—None Motion Passed 5 to 0. Item to appear on the June 19, 2007 Zoning Board of Appeals agenda. 999 COMMERCE COURT, JOHN S. SWIFT III — ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 17.48.020.F.6, TO ALLOW A 20' ENCROACHMENT INTO THE REQUIRED 60' TRANSITIONAL YARD (REAR YARD) SETBACK FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING AN ADDITION TO THE BUILDING Mr. Robert Masters, Vice President of Operations, John S. Swift Company, 999 Commerce Court, was present and sworn in. The public hearing notice published in the Daily Herald on April 26, 2007. Mr. Masters explained that John S. Swift Company is a commercial printing company that is requesting a variance to construct a building addition forty feet (40') from the rear property line instead of the sixty feet (60') that is stipulated in the current Zoning Ordinance. They need to better utilize the land space in order to add web printing to their portfolio of capabilities. The current building footprint is too small to accommodate the addition of web printing presses and ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 2 of 9—MAY 15, 2007 nippArlEIT to provide the flexibility that they need to maintain profits. They also need additional storage space for printing materials. Ch. Entman read the Village Engineer's memorandum addressed to Edward Schar dated May 1, 2007 which states: "I have no comments on the building expansion proposal." Ch. Entman stated that he is hesitant due to the residential neighborhood located behind the building. Corn. Lesser questioned the reference in the letter submitted by the Petitioner dated April 17, 2007 to the setback for the building located at 951 Commerce Court. The setback for the building at 951 Commerce Court adjacent to Horatio Boulevard is maintained at sixty feet (60') and the setback adjacent to the unincorporated property is forty feet(40'). Mr. Schar advised that the required setback would be sixty feet(60') whether it was incorporated or not, if it is a Residential District. He believes that a variation was granted approximately eight to ten years ago. Mr. Masters advised that he measured that distance from the building at 951 Commerce Court to the fence adjacent to the properties on Horatio Boulevard, which was sixty feet (60'). He also measured the distance from the building to the unincorporated properties, which is forty feet (40'). Com. Lesser advised that he resides in this neighborhood, although he does not abut the Industrial-zoned property. He stated that if the property was not adjacent to a Residential District he would not have any issues granting the variation. But in this situation, he does not support the request. Mr. Masters replied that they are not adding any additional noise and will be enhancing that side of the building. Corn. Lesser responded that the sixty foot(60') setback was put in place to create a buffer between residential uses and commercial uses. He has not heard any compelling evidence to meet the criteria to grant the variation. Mr. Mike Ford, President,John S. Swift Company, 999 Commerce Court, was present and sworn in. Mr. Ford stated that in order to be viable they need to continue to grow the business. One of the issues they are facing is having to provide multiple capabilities to their customers. Right now they do sheet-fed, but the majority of their competitors have web capabilities. The viability of their business depends on them being able to bring in web presses into the facility. Without the variance, they do not have the room to bring in that equipment. They have mature landscaping behind the building and the neighbors are seeing trees, not looking out onto a building. This addition would not disrupt the neighbors. He asked Com. Lesser what type of criteria needs to be met. Corn. Lesser responded that there are unique circumstances that need to be met and they need to show that the addition would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. He believes that the addition would impact the character of the neighborhood. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 3 of 9—MAY 15, 2007 AFEATIrt.-: � Mr. Ford added that they have been in Buffalo Grove since 1993. They do not believe that the addition would have an impact on the four of five houses adjacent to the property that are separated by mature landscaping. The addition is critical to the viability of the business. Ch. Entman asked about the possibility to reconfigure the current space with some type of addition. Mr. Ford explained that they are proposing the addition to be wider in order to avoid having to expand back even further. The web presses are large pieces of equipment and need a certain amount of space. There is also paper storage and work flow issues that necessitate the square footage they need. Mr. Masters added that the current building is maxed out on space. Com. Stein asked about how much time are they anticipating until they will need to expand again. Mr. Ford stated that this addition would cover them for the foreseeable future. Com. Stein commented that the parking lot would be closer to the residential properties than the addition. Mr. Ford replied that there would not be any parking in the rear in the building, only on the side and that the existing trees are approximately thirty feet (30') tall. Com. Stein asked about the distance of the proposed parking to the residential properties. Mr. Ford was not sure but believed it to be twenty feet(20')to thirty feet(30') away. Corn. Dunn asked if the twenty-five foot (25') landscape buffer is included in the forty feet(40') that would remain. Mr. Ford advised that it would. Corn. Windecker stated that the exhibit depicting the setbacks at 951 Commerce Court is not to scale. He believes that if the addition was built to be in line with the rear of the building at 951 Commerce Court there would be room for a web press. Mr. Ford stated that they are building for the future and that they need more than one web press which requires that extra space. Corn. Windecker asked if they would consider expanding to the setback line as opposed to expanding beyond the setback line. Mr. Ford stated that they would not have the room for the equipment or the storage that they need. Mr. Masters added that at least thirty percent (30%) of the addition is to accommodate storage. A lot of paper would go through those presses. This is a multi-use facility. Com. Windecker asked if there is sufficient storage in the current building. Mr. Masters advised that they are currently storing paper and supplies in the shipping docks. Com. Lesser stated that the testimony given is that the addition is needed to accommodate the additional presses and understands that no one wants to move presses due to the cost. He does not believe that the addition would be a real term solution. He is concerned that if the variation was granted, that in five to seven years from now the space will again be too small and the company will relocate to a new building. Then the next occupant of the building may not be as good of a neighbor. Mr. Ford replied that this addition would position this facility to be viable long term. He does not see a need to expand again or moving to another facility. They also have facilities in New Jersey and Cincinnati. Mr. Masters added that this is a third generation business. Swift came to Chicago and opened a building on Loomis and Madison in the early 1900's. They stayed in that building, which is smaller than what they have now, until 1993. Ch. Entman asked if there any questions or comments from the audience. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 4 of 9—MAY 15, 2007 Appn [36ED Mr. Allen Kolesky, 747 Horatio Boulevard, was present and sworn in. Mr. Kolesky stated that when they purchased their homes, they knew that the properties backed up to a business park. They did so relying on the fact that the Village's zoning code would continue to protect our quite enjoyment through the setback buffer and performance standards. They are there to oppose the request and to request that the request for variance be denied. The request should be denied because it does not meet any of the criteria for variation listed in the Zoning Ordinance, Section 17.52.070, and if granted would be contrary to the public interest and would violate the criteria set forth in Section 17.52.020. It would negatively impact the character of the neighborhood and the value of many of the homes on the east side of Horatio Boulevard that back up to the business park. The property has not had a prolonged vacancy and has been occupied and has been operated within the code for many years. The owner has no unique circumstances other than to save money at the expense of the marketability and values of their homes. They bought their homes with the knowledge of the business park behind them. He bought or leased the building with the knowledge that the rear yard setback was to remain sixty feet (60'). The residential property owners adjacent to industrial properties are the ones with unique circumstances. The variation would alter the essential character of the neighborhood and granting the variance would be forever. Would the Board want an industrial building located forty feet (40') or sixty feet (60') from their back door that would include the following: noise from employees cars in and out of the parking lot; noise from the employees talking and yelling to each other as they arrive in the morning and leave at night; noise from machinery and products in the building; and noise from employees radios blasting in the warehouse, especially in the warming months. There have been several homes for sale on the block of Horatio Boulevard during the past year. There have been three on the east side of Horatio and two on the west side. Of the three on the east side, two have been on the market for over a year with one finally selling last month. The realtors have indicated that the homes on the east side take much longer to sell because they back up to the business park. If the variance is granted, the business will be brought closer to their back yards'and impacting the marketability, value, and quiet enjoyment of their homes. Cary Rosenbloom, 741 Horatio Boulevard, was present and sworn in. There are two trees located behind his house. He brought a photograph taken on his cellular phone that was shown to the Commissioners. The photograph shows that the building at 999 Commerce Court can clearly be seen from his property. Sue Rosenblatt, 737 Horatio Boulevard, was present and sworn in. Her home is one of two homes for sale on the east side of Horatio Boulevard and has been on the market for the least amount of time. She has had approximately fifty showings of her home and the feedback that she receives from agents is always the industrial property in back. People are very nervous abut buying a property adjacent to a business park. She has lived here for thirteen and a half years and has put up a lot of landscaping. Her property is located at the south end of the Swift property and overlooks the parking lot. Buyers are concerned with trucks going in and out. Dave Bieber, 753 Horatio Boulevard, was present and sworn in. He lives directly behind the building. The landscaping is not that tall and full. There have been a few storms over that past few years that have actually taken a few trees down. He would welcome any members of the ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 5 of 9—MAY 15, 2007 Appin;ilet---j committee to meet with him and see his perspective of the landscaping.The huge gray building can clearly be seen from any of the backyards.It is not that private.There is a lot of noise that comes from the property including roof top units and employees in the parking lot late at night. Dennis Grant,769 Horatio Boulevard,was present and sworn in.The noise is a problem.They are not abutting another industrial property; they are abutting a residential property. He is concerned that during construction the workers would begin early and work until late hours. Mr.Allen Kolesky asked if a plan was available to view.Will the height of the addition be the same as the current building. Ch.Entman advised that plans are available to view at the Building and Zoning Department and asked the Petitioner to answer concerning the height of the building.Mr.Masters advised that the addition would be thirty feet(30')tall. Ch. Entman asked the objecting neighbors if sufficient landscaping were put on the property, would that alleviate concerns or are the concerns beyond being able to see the building through the current landscaping.Mr.Kolesky advised that it is still an encroachment from an industrial park into a residential neighborhood. Mr.Dean Fraiser,Vice President of Production,John S.Swift Company,999 Commerce Court, was present and sworn in.He stated that they do not believe that the noise level will increase at all.They are not adding any additional docks.The plans show the current dock would be blocked even more because the building would extend beyond that dock. There would be no parking behind the building.They currently one have one shift.There is no noise at night.The building would block some of the parking.They can plant more trees,such as pine trees.He currently has a house on the market that has been for over a year. It is just a bad real estate market. If the variance is not granted,they would need to move from this location sooner.The twenty feet(20') that they are requesting would maintain two presses. Com.Dunn asked how many employees are there currently.Mr.Fraiser responded they current have forty employees and there is one and a half shifts working. They would need to add approximately fifteen to twenty new employees. Com. Stein asked if the Petitioner anticipates any other equipment to be removed. Mr. Fraiser replied they do not.Corn.Stein asked if they could shift any of the work to other facilities.Mr. Fraiser replied they will not and that this will be the only facility with web capacity. He added that their facility in Des Plaines,Des Plaines Publishing Company,backs up to about eight houses to the north.There is the building and parking lot.The cars pull up to the fence that separates the facility from the residential homes.In the thirty-five years he has been employed there,there has never been a complaint from the residents due to noise. At the Buffalo Grove location,the presses cannot be heard from outside and the back wall of the proposed addition will not have any windows. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 6 of 9—MAY 15,2007 iFFaMELTh Corn. Stein asked Mr. Schar how close the parking lot can get to the residential area. Mr. Schar replied that there is a thirty foot (30') required setback for parking. Corn. Stein asked if the addition could be wider instead of deeper and provide parking in the rear of the building. Mr. Fraiser responded they would not be able to get around the building if the addition were to be wider. He also believes that parking in the rear would be less desirable to the residents. Mr. Fraiser stated that the drawings for the addition that were given to Mr. Swift at the time of purchase of the building showed a thirty foot (30') rear yard setback. They do not know when it was changed to sixty feet (60'). Ch. Entman confirmed that the Petitioner will be adding seven new parking spaces on the north side of the building. Corn. Lesser asked if they have looked at other buildings that could accommodate the additional presses. Mr. Ford responded that they have not pursued other locations because they bought this building with the intent to expand and it would be too expensive to move. Mr. Fraiser added that they could control the construction start times. The back wall is currently constructed of cinder block. They are proposing a prefabricated concrete that can designed to look like brick or stone. They feel that the addition would look better than the current building. Ch. Entman stated that he would like to see color renderings of the proposed addition, a landscape plan, and any alternative floor plans. Corn. Stein would like to know if the thirty foot (30') rear yard setback ever existed. Mr. Schar advised that he would look into the matter atte and provide the information to the Commissioners prior to the next meeting. Mr. Masters asked to Table their request to the next regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals in order to provide the requested information. He also offered to meet with the neighbor's prior to the next meeting. Corn. Stein made a motion to Table the request to the next regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting scheduled for June 19, 2007. Corn. Windecker seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: AYE — Stein, Dunn, Windecker, Lesser, Entman NAY — None ABSTAIN — None Motion Passed 5 to 0. Item to appear on the June 19, 2007 Zoning Board of Appeals regular meeting agenda. 1200 N. ARLINGTON HEIGHTS ROAD, SHELL OIL COMPANY — SIGN CODE, SECTIONS 14.20.030, 14.20.070, AND 14.40.025, TO REPLACE THE SIGN FACES ON THE THREE (3) EXISTING GROUND SIGNS WITH NEW SHALL LOGO, PRICE SIGN, V-POWER PANELS, AND MC DONALDS SIGN PANELS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 7 of 9 — MAY 15, 2007 AppirmrER Mr.Ron Ambrose,Warren Johnson Architects,19 N.Greeley Street,Palatine,Illinois,60067, was present and sworn in.The public hearing notice published in the Daily Herald on April 20, 2007 was read. Mr.Ambrose explained that variations were granted previously in 2005 for the signs.The sign contractor went out of business before the signs could be installed.There is only a slight change to what was previously approved.There will only be one(1)price sign in lieu of the three(3) that were previously granted and the addition of the V-Power panel.The sign faces will be replaced on the three(3)existing ground signs. There were no questions or comments from the Commissioners.There were no questions or comments from the audience. Com.Windecker made the following motion: I move we recommend to the Village Board to grant the request made by Warren Johnson Architects,19 N.Greeley Street,Palatine,Illinois 60067 on behalf of Shell Oil Company,1200 N.Arlington Heights Road,for variance of Sign Code,Section 14.20.030,pertaining to Business Districts;Section 14.20.070,pertaining to Ground Signs;and Section 14.40.025,pertaining to Changeable Copy Signs,for the purpose of replacing the sign faces on the three(3)existing ground signs with new Shell logo,price sign,V-Power panels,and McDonalds sign panels. Pursuant to Sign Code,Section 14.44.010,Sub-section B. Com.Lesser seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote:AYE—Stein,Dunn,Windecker,Lesser,Entman NAY—None ABSTAIN—None Motion Passed 5 to 0.Findings of Fact attached.Item to be placed on the June 4,2007 Village Board agenda. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Schar advised that there were two (2) appeals scheduled to appear on the June 4, 2007 Village Board agenda. Ch. Entman and Com. Stein advised that they would be at the June 4, 2007 Village Board meeting. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Com. Windecker and seconded by Com. Dunn. Voice Vote—AYE was unanimous. Ch.Entman adjourned the meeting at 8:45 P.M. Submitted by, ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 8 of 9—MAY 15,2007 APPELY/E0 J lie Kamka Recording Secretary ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 9 of 9 — MAY 15, 2007