1980-10-29 - Plan Commission - Minutes WORKSHOP MEETING
BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION
Village of Buffalo Grove
Comprehensive Plan Update
October 29, 1980
Chairman Shields called the Workshop Meeting to order in the Municipal Building,
50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove at 7:35 P.M.
Commissioners Present: Chairman Shields
Mr. Goldspiel - arrived at 7:50 P.M.
Mr. Davis
Mr. Shifrin
Mr. Glover
Mrs. Reid - left at 9:15 P.M
Mrs. Kaszubowski
Commissioners Absent: Mrs. Sheldon
Mr. Button
Also Present: Mr. J. Truesdell, Village Planner
Mrs. I. Park, Administrative Assistant
COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS
BDDC
Commissioner Glover stated that Ken Tucker and Associates made their presen-
tation at the last BDDC meeting for their development of the portion of the
Town Center and there was some discussion regarding the green space. Sugges-
tions were made to improve the concept plan.
Commissioner Davis - Being that it is at the south end of the district, who is
going to build Checker Road through so that it connects? '
Mr. Truesdell - The feeling is now that it should not connect.
Chairman Shields - They plan access from Buffalo Grove Road but it is not
decided exactly how yet.
Mr. Truesdell - They do show an entrance that lines up with Checker Road but
as to what kind of road, that has not been determined yet.
Chairman Shields - There is a problem as to who is going to own the green area.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980
- 2 -
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
Mrs. Park brieflyreviewed and summarized the fiscal as presented
analysis
to the Commission in her memo dated October 24, 1980 titled Additional
Information For Proposed Land Use Plan. She further stated that the method-
ology used was essentially the same as that used by Barton Ashman in the
Citrust/Hilltown property review but includes the changes that the staff
recommended. The different analysis were for 1) the land shown currently
within the Village limits both developed or committed; 2) the land uses
proposed within Alternative two for the area within the proposed ultimate
Village boundaries; 3) alternate two minus all areas which are currently
developed in unincorporated Cook or Lake Counties. Mrs. Parks further stated
that if you take a look at the Village and all the districts in analysis one,
there is a positive impact except for District 96. Alternative two is
essentially what you see on the map. This is what is proposed by the staff.
The analysis for each of the districts is more positive than in the existing
and committed analysis.
Commissioner Goldspiel - Is Citrust/Hilltown in alternative plan two?
Mrs. Park - The third plan includes all the districts in alternative plan two
excluding Horatio Gardens and those unincorporated pieces that have developed
along Milwaukee Avenue and some of those other areas shown on the map. Of
the school districts in analysis three, only 125 has a less positive analysis.
This is because those developments excluded generally generate more revenue
than costs. The Village, as it is currently developed with the exception
of District 96, will have a positive impact. It becomes considerably more
positive with alternate plan two minus those areas that are unincorporated.
Mr. Truesdell, with the aid of a map went through the changes from the
current plan to the revised plan following the outline of Mrs. Park's
October 24, 1980 memo.
Parcel A
Mr. Truesdell - This is Strathomore Grove. It is a single family home
development. It is currently shown on our plan as planned development 6.
We have revised it to single family. The Commission concurred.
Parcel B
Mr. Truesdell - This is bounded by Buffalo Grove Road extended and Villas
of Buffalo Creek south of Aptakisic Creek. It was shown as single family and
has been revised to public/semi public. That is the site recommended by
Kiefer Associates as the site for Well Number 7. The Commission Concurred.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980
- 3 -
Parcel C
Mr. Truesdell - On the original plan this is shown as single family. It
is revised as planned development six units per acre.
Commissioner Davis - Does the plan show that Aptakisic-Trip School is there?
Is that the area that Lincolnshire is showing as Billick Acres?
Mr. Truesdell - Yes, that is Aptakisic-Trip School. No Billick Acres is
located in another area. I attended the plan commission meeting in
Lincolnshire last night, October 28, 1980. Further discussion of Billick
Acres was defered The plan commission had a review from Lake County which
recommended that it be turned down. The only direction that the Village of
Lincolnshire gave to them was that 1) they are not prepared to discuss it
and 2) only after their master plan was finished would they be prepared to
discuss it. That updating should take about a year to a year and a half.
Commissioner Davis - What about our sewer sphere of influence area on that site?
Mr. Truesdell - Lake County pointed that out to the Lincolnshire Commission
Parcels C, D, E and F
Mr. Truesdell - On the original plan this was shown as industrial north of
Busch Road and industrial south of Weiland Road. Our feeling was that be-
cause this land had developed single family industrial uses south of Busch
Road, industrial uses north of Busch Road would not be appropriate. We
did shift some of the industrial land out and felt that the use of residential
in this area would be more appropriate. We show that Parcel C was changed
from single family to planned development six; Parcel D changed from commercial
to planned development six and Parcel E, which is a strip between the Common-
wealth Edison right-of-way and open space. We felt would provide a
good buffer for high density use. Parcel F we recommended a change from
industrial to single family.
Commissioner Reid - It seems we are moving a lot of land use from current
commercial and industrial to single family.
Mr. Truesdell - We are shifting industrial out of here. We are not dropping
it, we are shifting it around and it is still in District 102.
Commissioner Goldspiel - How much are we shifting to multiple family and
single family?
Mr. Truesdell - Alternate one is basically the current plan with changes
based on current land use. In alternate one we are loosing lqo industrial but
we are picking up 1% office. It evens itself out.
Commissioner Davis - District 102 is really not the crux of the problem.
Commissioner Shifrin - There is no commercial nor industrial in this area.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980
- 4 -
i
Mr. Truesdell - There is some unincorporated use.
Commissioner Davis - District 96 has nothing.
Commissioner Goldspiel - The problem that we have is that the portion of
District 96 that is in Buffalo Grove is either planned or developed. There
are a couple of things that bother me about C, D, E, and F. E has the more
dense development. I think that gets away from the idea of having the more
dense development on the major arterials.
Mr. Truesdell - The thought was that it could fit well in there in order to
keep single family more compatible.
Commissioner Goldspiel - My reaction was to place the multiple family across
from the industrial so that you could serve both by a major arterial.
Mr. Truesdell - Regarding C and D it has been suggested that it be planned
development ten with the south half between Prairie Avenue extended and the
industrial. D would be planned development six and the north half of C
would be planned development six. The south half of C would be planned
development ten. Parcel E would include the northwest corner of Busch Road
and Weiland Road as commercial and extend the open space down.
Mrs. Park - The percentage for the current plan of single family is 37. 4%.
Alternate two we are showing 38. 410, single family has increased 1%. Planned
development six currently is 6. 9%. In alternate two it is 12. 9%. We have
increased' . Planned development ten currently is 9.7% and alternate two is
5% which is a difference of 4.6%. Multiple family currently is 4. 84% and
alternate two is 5. 1% Commercial is currently 4. 1% and alternate 2 is 3.70.
We have gone down somewhat. Industrial currently is 12. 26% and alternate
two is 11. 6% In the current plan they do not have a catagory for office
so you have to combine the two.
Commissioner Davis - The strip of right.of-way owned by Commonwealth Edison
is a perfact spot for the gardens.
Commissioner Reid - The Village of Wheeling has their gardens under their
high tension wires.
Mr. Truesdell -Prairie Avenue runs, right now, between Aptakisic and Route
22. Weiland Road comes up towards the tracks and connects with Aptakisic
Avenue and the tracks. The county has in their plan, and is just about ready
to go ahead with, a realignment of this road to come up and connect with
Prarie Avenue. There will be a road that will go out to Route 22. It would
require open space and a place for people to cross over that street onto it.
Commissioner Goldspiel - Is that strip about seven hundred feet wide?
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980
- 5 -
Mr. Truesdell - It could be as much as eight hundred to one thousand feet
wide.
Commissioner Goldspiel - Where would you put the road to serve it?
Mr. Truesdell - The only access I could think of would be across the Common-
' wealth Edison right-of-way.
Commissioner Glover - The closing of this road does not really bother me.
! `J The Commission agreed that there be some green space by the transmission
lines and a different density pattern at the corner.
Parcel G
Mr. Truesdell - This was originally shown as commercial north of Busch Road
and Route 83. That is now part of Devonshire and the Green Knolls. The
Commission approved the change to single family and open space.
Parcels H and I
Mr. Truesdell - These were originally shown as open space. We think certain
funds could be available because of the wet lands. They would come from
federal funds. The idea was to try and get some type of major park area.
This could be a centrally located green area. This was originally shown as
single family. It seems that single family is an unsuitable use because of
the type of land.
Commissioner Goldspiel - I cannot see purchasing that whole piece.
Mr. Truesdell - If this plan was adopted, with that in there, it would take
quite a committment by the Village to actually purchase it as such.
Mrs. Park - At least 50% of that piece is flood plain. It is right on
Route 83, surrounded by Busch Road, Route 83 and, perhaps at some point,
Buffalo Grove Road. What I seem to hear is perhaps this is an area where
we can have a larger lot development but I cannot see this as a location where
people desiring large lots and homes will want to live. It is surrounded by
major arterials.
Commissioner Goldspiel - It is more suited for higher density. You have open
space, commercial and the town center.
Mr. Truesdell - It is suitable for multiple family. We said we do not want
to increase multiple family in our Village.
Commissioner Goldspiel - We could take it out of another area. My inclination
would be possibly a planned development six over all. Is this in District 96?
Mr. Truesdell - Yes.
The Commission decided to change this area surrounding the flood plain as
planned development six.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980
i
I
� ���
',,
,,,
- -6
Parcels J, K, L, M, and N
Mr. Truesdell - Parcel J is approved and part of the Dearborn development.
Parcels K, L, M and N are basically the Highlands Development which is also
an approved development. Parcels H, I and J would be built planned develop-
ment six. Parcels L, M and N reflect existing land uses. Commission concurred
with the staff's recommendation per the memo distributed earlier.
Parcel 0
Mr. Truesdell - This is shown as single family and is annexed and committed
to multi-family, twelve units per acre.
Commissioner Goldspiel - The garden plots are part of 0.
Mrs. Park - The western portion is open space.
Commission concurred with the multiple family designation.
Parcel P
Mr. Truesdell - This is currently shown and zoned as multiple family and
commercial. The Commission concurred with the staff's recommendation to
change this to office use.
Parcel Q
Mr. Truesdell - The plan shown it as single family. It is part of the same
parcel as P and is zoned R9. The Commission concurred with the multiple
family designation.
Parcel R
Mr. Truesdell - This piece was approved for that site as single family
The current plan shows industrial. The Commission concurred with single
family designation.
Parcel S
This is currently shown as industrial and is revised as office. There is
a boundary agreement with Arlington Heights that says it can go to either
Buffalo Grove or Arlington Heights. After discussion the Commission Con-
curred with the change to office use.
Parcel T.
This is single family on the plan. Because of the office area to the west and
multiple to the south, we thought it might serve in our plans as a transision
area and placed it in the planned development 6 category.
Commissioner Davis - Is it single family or should we make it 0/R?
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980
- 7
After some discussion it was determined to show it as single family.
Parcel U
Mr. Truesdell - Originally this was shown as commercial and was revised to
single family, planned development six and ten. This is really a result of
the Greater Neighborhood Study.
Commissioner Davis - We need tax base. You have to have commercial along
Route 83.
Commissioner Goldspiel - We are trying to develop a residential base to support
the commercial. The frontage is not so much on Route 83 there.
After discussion the Commission concurred with the uses resulting from the
Greater Neighborhood Study.
Parcel V
Mr. Truesdell - This was originally shown as commercial and revised to single
family and planned development ten. It is the Commons. Commission approved
of the change as recommended.
Parcel W
Mr. Truesdell - This was originally shown planned development six. We are
recommending single family. It is more compatible with the single family
that is there now. That was also a recommendation of the Greater Neighborhood
Study, The Commission agreed.
Parcel X
Mr. Truesdell - This is commercial in the plan and is better suited to multiple
family and is also a result of the Greater Neighborhood Study.
Commissioner Davis - I think it should be left commercial.
After discussion, the consensus was that multiple family was more approrpiate.
Parcel Y
Mr. Truesdell - It is the existing Horatio Gardens. It was shown as planned
development ten. We are showing it as single family. I do not see a reason
that that would be redeveloped multiple family in the near future. The
Commission agreed.
Parcel Z
Mr. Truesdell - This is shown as industrial on the current plan. We are
showing it as single family, planned development six and ten. The Commission
approved the change as recommended.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980
- 8 -
I
Parcel as
Mr. Truesdell - This is currently shown as industrial and was revised to
single family. This reflects existing land use, therefore the Commission
approved the single family designation.
Parcel bb
Mr. Truesdell - This was shown as planned development ten and is revised to
planned development six to reflect the approved plan for the area. The
Commission concurred.
Parcel cc
Mr. Truesdell - This was shown as commercial and was revised to single family
since it is existing. The Commission agreed.
Parcel dd
Mr. Truesdell - This was shown as commercial and changed to multi-family.
This was a result of the Greater Neighborhood Study. It is currently zoned
B2 commercial in the Village. After discussions the Commission agreed to
show it as commercial as was originally recommended.
Parcel ee
Mr. Truesdell - EE is the Ridgewood and Northwood subdivisions. It is
existing and that is what we are showing. The Commission concurred.
Parcel ff
Mr. Truesdell - This is the Johnson property. It could go to Wheeling. It
is shown as single family on the current plan. We are revising it to indus-
trial. The Commission felt industrial was the more appropriate use.
Parcel gg
Mr. Truesdell - This is shown as planned development six on the current plan.
Our thought was that because there is single family on both sides it should
be changed to single family. The Commission ooncurred with the staff's
recommendation.
Parcel hh
Mr. Truesdell explained that this parcel reflects the recently approved
plan for the Happ Farm. The Commission concurred with the staff's recommenda-
tion.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980
r
- 9 -
Parcel ii
Mr. Truesdell - This is the Cedar View development. We are reflecting the
current proposal. The Commission agreed.
Parcel jj
Mr. Truesdell - Currently this is shown as commercial and multiple. We
are changing it to public/semi public and open space. The thought was that
a portion of the golf course could remain and have multiple family around it.
Commissioner Goldspiel - I think we need to get the commercial up there.
After some discussion it was agreed that the staff's recommendation for open
space and public/semi public uses would be most desirable.
Parcel kk
Mr. Truesdell - Currently this is shown as planned development six and we
have revised it to commercial. Our thought was that with the type of deve-
lopment shown here, with the density, the small commercial could very well
increase to a larger area.
Commissioner Goldspiel - I think we should take a look at this area east of
the tracks. Are we going to go over there?
Commissioner Shifrin - This is the Santucci property.
Mr. Truesdell - We could go back over this whole area and take a closer
look at it.
Commissioner Davis - Why waste the staff's time if the Santucci property
has been recommended by the Village Board to us?
Commissioner Goldspiel - You want to know how it fits into the whole. I
am afraid that this area was not planned with the care that it needs.
Mr. Truesdell - We can go out and do a more detailed check of this area in
the field. We do have aerial photographs which we can bring to the next
meeting for everyone to look at.
Consensus of the Commission was to have the staff conduct a more detailed
study.
Parcel 11
Mr. Truesdell - This is shown as commercial in the plan. It is owned by the
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980
- 10 -
Wheeling Park District and is the club house. Consensus of the Commission
was that open space would be a more appropriate designation.
Parcel mm
Mr. Truesdell - This was not on the map. It is a piece of property about
four acres south of Dundee Road behind the Datsun dealer.
Commissioner Davis - It is land locked. Why not make it open space?
Commissioner Goldspiel- I cannot see how you have access for commercial
for that piece. Are we changing it to conform to current zoning?
Mr. Truesdell - Yes, what we will do before we go any further will be to go
out and check out Parcel kk.
The Plan Commission concluded they accepted the proposal as conforming to
the current zoning.
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Truesdell - The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended to the Village Board
there be conducted a review of the zoning ordinance. What we probably will
run into is that many people will want to serve on the zoning commission.
We thought we would form a zoning commission from the present commissions.
It would be a temporary commission that would be disbanded when their task
was completed.
Commissioner Goldspiel - Is this a legal or format type of change?
Mr. Truesdell - It is going to be more of a format change. The ordinance
is very difficult to follow, redundant and conflicting in areas.
Commissioner Davis - Why not have the staff rewrite it, submit it to each
one of the three commissions and get approval.
Commissioner Goldspiel - It makes sense to me.
Mr. Truesdell - The reason I bring it up is that, according to our attorney
Mr. Raysa, the Plan Commission would review it and hold a public hearing.
To form a zoning commission we would have to adopt an ordinance change
so that a zoning commission could be established.
Commissioner Goldspiel - I do not think the Plan Commission should let go
of any authority it has over the ordinance.
Commissioner Davis - I personally feel that the more people that look at it
the more imput you get regarding the ordinance. How big would the commission
be?
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980
- 11 -
I
Mr. Truesdell - It could be three or four people.
Commissioner Davis - That bothers me. You will get a very narrow point of
view.
Mr. Truesdell - So you want it to stay with the Plan Commission.
Chairman Shields - Regarding the front yard parking, are we going to have
a public hearing on that?
Mr. Truesdell - It has caused a lot of concern. The feeling was that it
may prohibit people from parking in their own driveway. The ordinance has
inconsistancies in it.
Chairman Shields - Can commercial vehicles be parked in the Village?
Mr. Truesdell - I would have to go back to the ordinance for that. As far
as a final determination on this issue we will wait for the review of the
zoning ordinance.
Commissioner Kaszubowski - The reason that I questioned Jim on this is
because I was in Wheeling when they revised their ordinance. Someone in
one of the municipal departments decided that he was not going to allow
a man to build a garage attached to his house. Then he couldn't park his
car in his driveway. The ordinance said that there was no parking in the
required front yard. We may have a problem with a building commissioner
stating that everyone parking on their driveway is illegal. You would have
to pull into your garage.
Mr. Truesdell - This is one of the problems that we have with the ordinance
regarding inconsistancies.
Commissioner Davis moved adjournment with Commissioner Glover seconding
the motion. Chairman Shields adjourned the meeting at 10:00 p.m.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980
f
- 12 -
Respectfully submitted,
(?7d---2710,1L../
Ka hleen Comer
Recording Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Patrick Shields
Chairman
1
1
1
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Workshop Meeting
October 29, 1980