2009-03-17 - Zoning Board of Appeals - Minutes DD E-,
REGULAR MEETING sue*CTTE,b
BUFFALO GROVE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS tar la 9
MARCH 17, 2009
Chairman Entman called the Zoning Board of Appeals regular meeting to order at 7:32 P.M. on
Tuesday, March 17, 2009 in the Council Chambers of the Village Hall, 50 Raupp Boulevard.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Commissioner Stein
Commissioner Dunn
Commissioner Lesser
Commissioner Au
Chairman Entman
Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Windecker
Commissioner Shapiro
Also Present: Brian Sheehan, Deputy Building Commissioner
William Raysa, Village Attorney
DeAnn Glover, Village Trustee
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
February 17, 2009 minutes:
Corn. Stein made a motion to approve the minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeals regular
meeting held on Tuesday, February 17, 2009. Corrections were submitted by Com. Dunn. Corn.
Dunn seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote: AYE — Stein, Dunn, Au, Entman
NAY — None
ABSTAIN — Lesser
Motion Passed 4 to 0, 1 Abstention. Minutes approved as corrected.
OLD BUSINESS
400 W. DUNDEE ROAD, VILLAGE PLAZA — SIGN CODE, SECTIONS 14.20.030;
14.20.070; AND 14.40.025, FOR THE PURPOSE OF INSTALLING A GROUND SIGN
THAT WOULD BE LOCATED CLOSER THAN THE 13.5' TO THE PROPERTY LINE
AS REQUIRED BASED UPON THE SIGN HEIGHT AND MAY CONTAIN
CHANGEABLE COPY FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 400 W. DUNDEE ROAD
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PAGE 1 of 11 — MARCH 17, 2009
Mr. Barry Millman, Horizon Realty Services, 1130 Lake Cook Road, Suite 280, Buffalo Grove,
Illinois, was present and sworn in. The public hearing notice published in the Daily Herald on
February 25, 2009 was read.
Corn. Stein recused himself from the public hearing due to a possible conflict of interest and left
the room.
Mr. Millman reviewed the previous request for a new sign for the Village Plaza Shopping center.
At that time, they indicated that the tenants are looking for every edge possible in order to sustain
their businesses. The property is not suffering terribly from the standpoint of tenants going out of
business, but that is because they have allowed each of their tenants to reduce their rent in order
to stay in business. Each tenant has asked if there is any way possible for them to be identified to
the traffic traveling east and west along Dundee Road. For some time, they did have a sign in
front of the property that just said "Village Plaza 400 W Dundee Road". That sign has always
been a bone of contention for leasing as well as retention because the tenants say as people drive
by, there is no stop light or stop sign and people tend to miss the center. This is especially true
now that they have obtained a few new tenants. The tenants are saying that their customers
cannot locate their new location. At the last meeting he presented a full tenant directory which
would list all fourteen (14) tenants in the center as well as the four (4) office tenants. The board
felt that would be too many. The Board felt that the sign size and the sign position were alright,
but having all the tenants listed was not appropriate. He then suggested they could provide fewer
tenant panels. They provided a new proposal with six (6) tenant panels, which would be
interchangeable. The sign is designed in such a way that they can open the side panel and replace
it with a different tenant. They would work with each of the tenants to determine a rotating basis
so each tenant would have a period of time on the sign.
Mr. Millman submitted additional documentation including photographs and a letter addressed to
the Zoning Board of Appeals dated March 6, 2009. This was accepted and marked as Exhibit
"F". Mr. Millman explained the photographs show shopping center ground signs along Dundee
Road that have all the center tenants listed on the ground sign. The tenants feel that they are
being put into a second class status because this is the only shopping center on Dundee Road that
does not have a full tenant listing. They are not asking for a full tenant listing,just six (6)tenants.
He advised that they are starting to lose tenants here and there to another shopping center across
the street, in Arlington Heights. That center has a full tenant listing. Chase Staffing relocated
there because of the sign. The documentation also includes signatures of each of the tenants
indicating that they support the request.
Ch. Entman read the Village Engineer's memorandum addressed to Brian Sheehan and dated
February 2, 2009 which states: "I have no comments on the proposal."
Ch. Entman read the email sent by Kenny and Sandra Holm addressed to the Building
Department dated February 27, 2009.
Com. Dunn asked about the color and illumination of the panels. Mr. Millman explained that the
panels would be internally illuminated on a white background and black or bronze lettering. He
is not yet certain as to the exact color of the lettering. Corn. Dunn asked if there would be any
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PAGE 2 of 11 —MARCH 17,2009
pictures or logos. Mr. Millman stated that at this point, it would only be letters. Com. Dunn
asked if it would be a problem if the Board restricted the lettering to one (1) color. Mr. Millman
would prefer not to,but it is important that he receives approval for the sign. Corn. Dunn asked if
it would be a problem if the Board restricted the panels to lettering only. Mr. Millman would
prefer not to. He would like to be as flexible as possible. Many national tenants, such as Subway,
will not come to a property unless they are allowed to put their own logos and colors on the sign.
He has one (1) tenant right now in the center that does require in his lease that the lettering used
in his signage at least be in his logo type. He could accept no pictures. If there will be a
restriction he would agree to no pictures and no specific logo but would allow tenants to use their
trademarked logo type. Corn. Dunn asked about the font on the signs. Mr. Millman advised that
they would be all the same size font.
Corn. Lesser was not present at the last meeting but did read the minutes. He stated that he would
like to restrict the hours of illumination of the sign. The center is adjacent to a residential area
and he does not want the sign to be on all night. The businesses are not operating in the wee
hours of the night. He asked if the existing wall signs above the tenant space would remain. Mr.
Millman stated that the ground sign would be in additional to the wall signs. Corn. Lesser asked
if the tenants are permitted to have logos above their spaces. He does not see a need to duplicate
if the signage above the space already has logos. He would also like to see a standard for the
color of the lettering and the font size on the panels.
Mr. Millman asked about the hours of illumination. Corn. Lesser stated he feels that 10:30 P.M.
or 11:00 P.M. would be sufficient. The businesses should be closed well in advance of that time.
Mr. Millman stated that should not be a problem.
Ch. Entman asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak.
Mr. Kenny Holm, 401 Chenault Road, Buffalo Grove, Illinois, was present and sworn in. Mr.
Holm stated that the homes were built before the shopping center. When the center was built, the
elevation was not level and there was a gradual slope going down. There is a four (4) foot drop
two (2) homes down from him. The lights from vehicles come right into the yard. There were
bushes installed, a live fence, along the rear as part of the agreement when the center was built.
Two (3) or three (3) years ago the bushes were taken out. The Village was not aware that the
bushes were removed. They want the live fence put back in. This has been on ongoing issue for
two (2) years. They continue to receive excuses from the management company such as, they
had to wait for bids for new bushes; they had to choose one; it was too hot to plant bushes; it was
too late in the season to plant bushes. They had finally put some bushes in. However, the bushes
were twigs, not a live fence. They were planted six (6) feet on center and they did not get the
approval from Rick Kuhl, Village Forester. They were supposed to be kept up to date on what
was happening. No one ever called. The bushes planted will not provide adequate screening. He
planted similar bushes three (3) feet on center. He feels that two (2) years is too long to wait to
resolve the matter. He wants the center to be in compliance by May 31, 2009. If the center is not
in compliance by then a fine should be imposed for every day that matter continues.
Ch. Entman asked if Mr. Holm had any issues with the sign that is being proposed. Mr. Holm
stated that he feels the Board should not consider anything being done with the sign until the
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PAGE 3 of 11 —MARCH 17, 2009
bush issue is resolved. Ch. Entman asked if Mr. Holm has any objection to the sign. Mr. Holm
stated his issue is regarding the bushes. Ch. Entman explained that the issue of the bushes is not
something that is in the purview of the Zoning Board of Appeals. He explained that the Zoning
Board of Appeals can impose conditions concerning the sign, but not that matter of the bushes.
Mr. Holm asked who would address the issue of the bushes. Mr. Sheehan stated that Mr. Holm
can contact him to discuss the matter of the bushes.
Mr. Ted Albers, 393 Chenault Road, Buffalo Grove, Illinois, was present and sworn in. Mr.
Albers explained that he hopes that Mr. Millman was using Subway as a metaphor because food
services are not a permitted use at this center. He is concerned about the lighting. He lives
directly behind the center and has to look at a big ugly building, door number 14, door number
15, that are lit up all different hours of the night. Snow gets shoveled at midnight. He would like
to see a restriction on the illumination. He is also concerned about the bushes.
Mr. Scott Kamish, 365 Chenault Road, Buffalo Grove, Illinois, was present and sworn in. He
lives on the east side of the center. He has concerns about the timing of the lights. He is not sure
if the sign will be located on the east side or the west side of the center. Because the bushes are
not that tall, the light shines through from the center into his property. There have been a lot of
things going on the last few years and he would like the Board to make sure that things are
carried out properly. They have had to call the Village numerous times on things throughout the
years.
Mr. Bill Raysa explained that the Zoning Board of Appeals is an appointed Board by the Village
Board. He gets the impression that some believe that this is the elected Board, the Trustees of the
Village. This is not the Village Board. This is a subsidiary Commission of the Village Board. It
only has certain authority. The Zoning Board of Appeals can not go outside of that authority.
Ch. Entman stated that he recalls that the size of the sign was an issue last month. He remembers
discussing that he was not in favor of the size of the sign as it was proposed at thirteen and one-
half (13-1/2) feet high. He also remembers discussing a possibility of the limited number of
tenant panels. He recalls discussing three (3) tenant panels that would be rotated on a periodic
basis as determined by the tenants and Mr. Millman. He continues to have an issue with the
height of the sign. He also has seen that national tenants are stuck on their logos and colors. They
have not allowed that. There have been some circumstances in the past where a national tenant
agreed to change their signage. They have allowed national tenants in the Village. He is not
aware of any national tenants in this center now. If a national chain does come into the center,
the Board could look at it individually. He agrees with the comments concerning the color of the
panels. He also agrees with the comments concerning logos. He is not in favor of approving
anything right now that would allow multiple colors or multiple logos. As far as the tenants
claiming that they are treated as a second class status, he has no idea of what that means. He
cannot believe that the type of sign they have will somehow implicate the nature of their business
or somehow impugn their ability to provide their goods or their services. He has not been
convinced of that before. If tenants are moving, as a landlord, that would bother him. He also
finds it hard to believe that tenants are leaving because of their sign identification. The cost of
moving alone would prohibit them from moving if they didn't have to. The photographs
submitted as Exhibit "F" show long standing centers in the Village. The signs are just as old as
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PAGE 4 of 11 —MARCH 17,2009
the centers. If these signs are proof of the types of signs allowed, that would not be relevant.
These signs were not reviewed or approved by this Board any time recently.
Mr. Millman explained that the photograph on the lower left side is a brand new sign.
Ch. Entman is not in favor of the newly proposed sign. He would have liked to see something
smaller and limited to less tenant panels. These businesses are not impulse locations.
Mr. Millman stated that the neighbors caught him off guard. He apologized for not being
prepared to respond to each item mentioned. He can report that they are in communication on a
regular basis with the Building Department and the Village Forester. He is not familiar with the
terms used regarding the spacing of the bushes. They are trying to and have a plan to correct the
problem. They know that they are obligated to do so. The plan has been submitted to the Village,
which has been accepted. He will be happy to meet with the homeowners individually to discuss
their concerns. They want to be good neighbors.
Mr. Millman also stated that they were told that the height of the sign was alright because it is a
replacement of a previously existing sign. He would like to know what size sign the Board would
approve. They thought that since they are replacing the sign, they would improve it by putting a
limited tenant directory on it. There are sixteen (16) tenants in the building in eleven hundred
(1100) to twenty-four(2400) square feet spaces. It is hard to depict which three (3) would get on
the sign. It would be much easier to do with six (6) tenant panels. He wants to be fair to the
tenants. It would not be worth it if they could only have three (3) panels. He disagrees with the
comment that signs do not generate business. He manages one million three hundred thousand
(1,300,000) square feet of properties. He leases seventy (70) centers. He has been doing this for
many years. Even though the Board feels that signage is not important, the retailers believe that
signage is everything and has an impact on their business.
Ch. Entman advised that most of the tenants in this center are not retailers. There may be a few,
but the majority of the center is non-retail. He is not saying that businesses don't need signage.
He is saying that this is not the type of center that is an impulse location by seeing a sign. Mr.
Millman responded that the tenants are complaining that their clients cannot locate the center.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were no
additional questions or comments from the audience.
Com. Dunn made the following motion:
I move we recommend to the Village Board to grant the request made by Horizon Management,
1130 Lake Cook Road, Suite 280, Buffalo Grove, Illinois 60089, 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 installing
a ground sign that would be located closer than the thirteen and one half (13.5) feet to the
property line as required based upon the sign height and may contain changeable copy for the
property located at 400 W. Dundee Road. Sign to be constructed pursuant to Exhibit "E2"
submitted with the variation application. Subject to the Village Engineer's memorandum dated
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PAGE 5 of 11 —MARCH 17, 2009
February 2, 2009. The color of the font on the panels to be one color, black; to be in the same
font as the Village Plaza; is limited to a single line of copy; no pictures, logos, or symbols; and
hours of illumination limited to 7:00 A.M. until 10:30 P.M.
Pursuant to Sign Code, Section 14.44.010, Sub-section B.
Com. Lesser seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote: AYE—Lesser, Au
NAY—Dunn, Entman
ABSTAIN—None
Motion DENIED 2 to 2. The Petitioner was notified of their right to appeal the decision to the
Village Board.
14 UNIVERSITY COURT, ROBERT AND CAROL CLARK — ZONING ORDINANCE,
SECTION 17.40.020, FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING A SCREEN PORCH
THAT WOULD ENCROACH A DISTANCE FOUR (4) FEET INTO THE REQUIRED
THIRTY (30) FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK
Mr. Robert Clark and Mrs. Carol Clark, 14 University Court, were present and sworn in. The
public hearing notice published in the Daily Herald on February 25, 2009 was read.
Mr. Clark explained that they would like to have a screened porch to enjoy the outdoors. The
size of the room would be twelve (12) feet by fourteen (14) feet and would extend over a
staircase that is four(4) feet in width. The room is their 50th wedding anniversary gift.
Ch. Entman read the Village Engineer's memorandum addressed to Brian Sheehan dated
February 27, 2009 which states: "I have no comments on the proposal."
Com. Lesser does not have an issue with the request but would like more information on what
the screen porch would look like.
Julie Kamka, Recording Secretary, advised that the construction drawings with permit
application are in the Building Department and asked if the Board would like to see them. Corn.
Lesser asked to see them. A break was taken so the plans could be retrieved.
Corn. Lesser reviewed the construction plans and confirmed that the materials would match the
existing home. He asked if the room would be heated. Mr. Clark advised that the screen room
would not have heat. There will be electric in the room. Com Lesser did not have any issues.
Corn. Au asked if the screen room is being placed to purposely enclose the staircase. Mr. Clark
advised that it is their intention to enclose the staircase.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioner. There were no
questions or comments from the audience.
•
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PAGE 6 of 11 —MARCH 17, 2009
Com. Lesser made the following motion:
I move we grant the request made by Robert and Carol Clark, 14 University Court, for variance
of Zoning Ordinance, Section 17.40.020, pertaining to Area, Height, Bulk and Placement
Regulations, for the purpose of constructing a screen porch that would encroach a distance of
four(4) feet into the required thirty(30) foot rear yard setback.
Subject to the Village Engineer's memorandum dated February 27, 2009. Materials to match the
existing construction in like kind and quality. The Petitioner has demonstrated hardship and
unique circumstances. The proposed screen room will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety and welfare and will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
Corn. Stein seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote: AYE—Stein, Dunn, Lesser, Au, Entman
NAY—None
ABSTAIN—None
Motion Passed 5 to 0. Findings of Fact attached. Permit may be issued in fifteen (15) days —
April 2, 2009.
388 LAUREN LANE, THERESA PRINDIVILLE — ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTIONS
17.32.020 AND 17.40.020, TO CONSTRUCT A 1-1/2 STORY ADDITION THAT WOULD
REDUCE THE REQUIRED SEPARATION OF THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE AND
THE DETACHED GARAGE TO FIVE (5) FEET AND TO CONSTRUCT A ROOFED-
OVER FRONT PORCH THAT WOULD ENCROACH THREE (3) FEET SIX (6)
INCHES INTO THE REQUIRED TWENTY-FIVE (25) FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK
Mr. Michael Sayers, 27 S. Pistakee Lake Road, Fox Lake, Illinois, was present and sworn in. The
public hearing notice published in the Daily Herald on February 25, 2009 was read.
Mr. Sayers distributed a packet of the information to the Commissioners. This was marked as
Exhibit"E".
Ch. Entman asked if the Petitioner was present. Mr. Sayers explained that Theresa Prindiville
was not present but that her son Raymond Prindiville was present.
Mr. Sayers explained that two (2) variances are being requested. The first variance is to add a
roofed-over front porch that would encroach into the front yard setback. They currently have a
simple eve. It is a very modest house. She is looking to add a return gable that would allow her
guests and visitors to step outside under the roof for protection from the elements. Curb appeal is
important and she wants to dress up the front of the house.
Mr. Sayers explained that the second variance is for the distance between a proposed addition
and the existing detached garage. Cost is a huge consideration for this customer and they are
trying to keep it simple and maintain as much backyard as possible. It also has a direct relation as
to how they can use the existing house. Mr. Sayers directed the Commissioner to the last page of
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PAGE 7 of 11 —MARCH 17,2009
Exhibit "E" and reviewed the layout of the proposed addition. The location of the addition and
the layout from right to left is very important.
Ch. Entman read the Village Engineer's memorandum addressed to Brian Sheehan dated March
3, 2009 which states: "I have no comments on either of the proposals at this location."
Ch. Entman would like a letter of authorization from the Petitioner to allow Mr. Sayers and
Raymond Prindiville to represent the owner.
Corn. Dunn asked about the materials for the addition. Mr. Sayers stated that the house is
currently aluminum sided and the owner will do a complete update, replace windows and reside
the house. The house will be completely resided in either aluminum or vinyl. Corn. Dunn asked
about the roof. Mr. Sayers stated that the roof will match. The roof is fairly new so they will
match the existing shingle for the addition.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were no
questions or comments from the audience.
Com. Stein made the following motion:
I move we grant the request made by Theresa Prindiville, 388 Lauren Lane, for variance of
Zoning Ordinance, Section 17.40.020, pertaining to Area, Height, Bulk and Placement
Regulations, for the purpose of constructing a roofed-over front porch that would encroach a
distance of three (3) feet six (6) inches into the required twenty-five (25) foot front yard setback
subject to a letter of authorization being submitted.
Subject to the Village Engineer's memorandum dated March 3, 2009. Materials to the match the
existing construction in like kind and quality. Pursuant to plans and specifications submitted to
and approved by the Village. The Petitioner's agent has demonstrated hardship and unique
circumstances. The proposed roofed-over front porch will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety and welfare and will not alter the existing character of the neighborhood.
Corn. Dunn seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote: AYE—Stein, Dunn, Lesser, Au, Entman
NAY—None
ABSTAIN—None
Motion Passed 5 to 0. Findings of Fact attached. The permit can be issued in fifteen (15) days —
April 2, 2009.
Corn. Stein made the following motion:
I move we recommend to the Village Board to grant the request made by Theresa Prindiville,
388 Lauren Lane, for variance of Zoning Ordinance, Section 17.32.020, pertaining to Location of
Accessory Buildings and Structures, for the purpose of constructing a one and a half(1-1/2) story
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PAGE 8 of 11 —MARCH 17, 2009
addition on the rear of the home that would reduce the separation of the principal structure and
the detached garage to five(5) feet subject to a letter of authorization being submitted.
Subject to the Village Engineer's memorandum dated March 3, 2009. Materials to the match the
existing construction in like kind and quality. Pursuant to plans and specifications submitted to
and approved by the Village. The Petitioner's agent has demonstrated hardship and unique
circumstances. The proposed reduced separation will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety and welfare and will not alter the existing character of the neighborhood.
Corn. Dunn seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote: AYE—Stein, Dunn, Lesser, Au, Entman
NAY—None
ABSTAIN—None
Motion Passed 5 to 0. Findings of Fact attached. This item will appear on the April 6, 2009
Village Board agenda.
301 NORTH RIVERWALK DRIVE,HAMILTON PARTNERS -REVIEW OF THE
STATUS OF THE THREE (3)EXISTING LEASING SIGNS FOR RIVERWALK PLACE
APARTMENTS
Mr. Kirk Hamilton, Hamilton Partners, 1130 lake Cook Road, Suite 190, Buffalo Grove, Illinois
was present and sworn in.
Mr. Hamilton explained that they had leased eighty-seven(87) of the ninety(90)units. But they
are facing fourteen(14) move outs by the end of April. They are requesting an extension for the
three(3) signs.
Ch. Entman asked if the leases are typically for one(1) year. Mr. Hamilton explained that they
are typically for one(1) year.
Ch. Entman does not have any issues with granting an extension for six (6)months.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were no
questions or comments from the audience.
Corn. Stein made a motion to allow the three(3)existing"For Rent, Sale, Lease"signs to remain
located at Riverwalk Place Apartments, 301 North Riverwalk Drive. Hamilton Partners shall
appear at the September 2009 Zoning Board of Appeals regular meeting to review the status of
the temporary signs. Com. Dunn seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote: AYE—Stein, Dunn, Lesser, Au, Entman
NAY—None
ABSTAIN—None
Motion Passed 5 to 0. Item to appear on the September 2009 Zoning Board of Appeals agenda
for status review.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PAGE 9 of 11 —MARCH 17,2009
BUFFALO GROVE BUSINESS PARK, HAMLITON PARTNERS — REVIEW OF THE
EXISTING LEASING SIGNS LOCATED AT 135 ARLINGTON HEIGHTS ROAD AND
1110 LAKE COOK ROAD
Ms. Valerie Loughman, Hamilton Partners, 1130 Lake Cook Road, Buffalo Grove, Illinois, was
present and sworn in.
Ch. Entman stated that he is a tenant in the 1130 Lake Cook Road building, but this will not
affect his decision.
Ms. Loughman explained that they are requesting the extension to allow the leasing signs along
Lake Cook Road and Arlington Heights Road to remain due to the economy. Photographs of the
existing signs and leasing information were reviewed by the Commissioners.
Ch. Entman stated that the percentage of occupancy has been steady for about the year.
Ms. Loughman stated that the lease for the 1120 Lake Cook Road building is up in April and
they have not heard anything about renewing.
Ch. Entman believes that the signs should be reviewed in six (6)months.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners. There were no
questions or comments from the audience.
Corn. Dunn made a motion to allow the two (2) existing temporary signs to remain located at 135
Arlington Heights Road and 1110 Lake Cook Road. Hamilton Partners shall appear at the
September 2009 Zoning Board of Appeals regular meeting to review the status of the temporary
signs. Corn. Stein seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote: AYE—Stein, Dunn, Lesser, Au, Entman
NAY—None
ABSTAIN—None
Motion Passed 5 to 0. Item to appear on the September 2009 Zoning Board of Appeals agenda
for status review.
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT TO FENCE CODE, SECTION 15.20.110,
PERTAINING TO VARIANCE—AUTHORITY TO GRANT
Mr. Raysa explained that the brackets were removed and this was added to the agenda as
requested.
There were no additional questions or comments from the Commissioners.
Com. Lesser made a motion to recommend to the Village Board to approve the proposed text
amendment to Fence Code, Section 15.20.110 concerning the Fence Code Criteria as drafted and
dated February 27, 2009. Corn. Dunn seconded the motion.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PAGE 10 of 11 —MARCH 17, 2009
Roll Call Vote: AYE — Stein, Dunn, Lesser, Au, Entman
NAY — None
ABSTAIN — None
Motion Passed 5 to 0. Item to appear on the April 6, 2009 Village Board agenda.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
A new photograph of the Zoning Board of Appeals will be taken at the May 19, 2009 meeting. A
reminder will be sent out in advance. If you are aware that you cannot attend the May 19, 2009
meeting, please advise Julie Kamka.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Corn. Lesser and seconded by Com. Stein. Voice
Vote — AYE was unanimous.
Ch. Entman adjourned the meeting at 8:57 P.M.
Submitted by,
c--)
ttacaLL
J ie Kamka
ecordin Secretary
ary
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PAGE 11 of 11 — MARCH 17, 2009