Loading...
1995-06-21 - Plan Commission - Minutes PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION June 21, 1995 Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 17.36) and Development Ordinance (Section 16.50.080) - Amendments concerning driveway and apron widths and front yard pavement area in residential districts Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston called the hearing to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston read the Notice of Public Hearing as published in the Buffalo Grove Daily Herald, explained the procedure for the hearing and swore in all persons who wished to give testimony. Commissioners present: Mr. Krug Mr. Rosenston Mr. Samuels Mr. Berman Mr. Lundine Mr. Ottenheimer Mr. Trilling Commissioners absent: Chairman Goldspiel Ms. Howard Also present: Mr. John Green, SDG,Inc. Mr. Mark Spivak Mrs. Spivak Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer Ms. DeAnn Glover, Village Trustee Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Mr. Pfeil reviewed the proposed text changes for Section 17.36.030.F.4. of the Ordinance presented in his memo dated June 19 , 1995 stating the text reflects it was decided not to try to correlate driveway width to lot width. It also provides flexibility for smaller lots that might have the ability to do three-car garages. The text as written has one limitation concerning 40 percent of the required front yard which would be allowed to be covered by paved surface including driveways and walkways. The rest of the text gets into specifics regarding different types of garages and driveway widths. Mr. Pfeil stated residences with attached one-car or two car garages would have a maximum driveway width of 18 feet at the property line. Residences with three-car or larger garages would have a maximum driveway width of 27 feet at the property line. Two curb cuts would be allowed for lots in the Residential Estate, Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 21, 1995-Page 1 R-1 and R-2 districts. In this situation, the text recommends the use of the 18-foot driveway width and apron at the property line because on lots of this size there is enough room in the front yard area to have a driveway system large enough to allow turning movements. Taper rate is also addressed for most general situations with special situations perhaps handled as variances. There are some properties in the Village with detached garages in he rear yards. In this situation the ordinance would allow only an 18-foot driveway in the front yard. Mr. Kuenkler reviewed the Development Ordinance changes stating that the Development Ordinance needs to be consistent with the proposed changes to the Zoning Ordinance, particularly the 27 foot driveway width. He said that a standard for service walks is also being added to the ordinance. Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston stated he noticed the ordinance initially says a maximum driveway width of 18 feet, but the language prepared by Mr. Kuenkler states ". . .shall have a width" which implies in one case that it must either be 10 feet or 18 feet and the other case speaks of a maximum. He asked if this is perhaps a conflict needing change. Mr. Pfeil asked if there is any flexibility in the width of aprons or is it strictly a choice of 10, 18 or 27 feet widths. Mr. Kuenkler stated that the original ordinance was drafted with the intent that one of three choices - 10, 18 or 27 feet could be used for a driveway/apron width at the property line. Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston asked if it is necessary to specify the width of the driveway where it meets the apron. Mr. Kuenkler stated it probably not necessary to add this item to the ordinance. Commissioner Krug stated he feels the ordinance should be 20 feet instead of 18 feet because the shorter the parkway, the more chance there is of creating a mud ditch where you turn in. He further stated the taper is ridiculous. If it goes from 20 feet down to 18 feet you are a foot away from the property line and then you go back to the taper. That one foot area will be nothing but mud. He stated he would rather see a. maximum driveway width of 20 feet all the way down to the taper. Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston asked if the property line is always a foot away from the sidewalk. Mr. Kuenkler stated it is generally one foot away but not always. Commissioner Krug reiterated he would like to see a 20 foot driveway straight down without tapering in. Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 21, 1995-Page 2 Mr. Kuenkler stated the language could read up to the sidewalk or in the absence of a sidewalk, up to the property line. Commissioner Berman stated he cannot see anyone backing up out of their driveway and not realizing they are backing up onto the grass. He further stated the problem is with the wider garages coming down to a 27 foot apron at the property line or sidewalk. He stated this would take up a substantial portion of the street frontage along lots. It would also create a problem with front coverage. He stated it would not be a good idea to have 20 or yardg 25 foot wide aprons at the sidewalk for narrow lots. He stated that open space and green area must be preserved. Commissioner Trilling stated the curb width at his own home is at 24 feet which is 3 feet on each side instead of the 3 feet in total being proposed under the driveway apron and service walk section of the ordinance. Mr. Kuenkler stated he did not believe that has ever been the standard. Commissioner Trilling stated from a practical standard and driveability standard, it would be better to have 18 feet at the sidewalk with 3 feet on each side at the curb. This makes it much easier to set out trash and make a right turn into the driveway. Mr. Kuenkler stated he would be surprised if the 24-foot apron width as noted by Commissioner Trilling has been used on properties in the Village, because the standard has always been 18 feet with 3 feet greater at the curb. Mr. Green stated they are typically dealing with 3 foot aprons on either side rather than a single apron on one side. A one and one-half foot apron does not give you a lot of flare for maneuvering, especially if you are dealing with a 10 or 12 foot parkway width. Mr. Green suggested the language for a service walk be changed from 30 inches wide to 36 inches wide to go along with the standard required for disabled individuals. Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston asked if the developments Mr. Green has been involved in within the Village have dealt with 3 foot wide tapers on each side. Mr. Green stated most of the newer developments have all used 3 foot tapers. Mr. Green suggested calling the apron defined as the distance in the parkway between the sidewalk and the street, the public apron because often if there are any ribbons on either side of the driveway, they are also referred to as an apron. Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 21, 1995-Page 3 - - it Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston stated the following items need to be addressed: 1. Change maximum driveway width from 18 feet to 20 or 22 feet for one and two-car driveways 2. Change curb tapers from 3 feet to 6 feet evenly on both sides 3. Change service walk width from 30 inches to 36 inches 4. Clarification of the term apron to reflect "public apron" Commissioner Krug asked for a change in the language which states "Driveways serving detached single-family residences shall comply with the following standards except as noted herein:" to state ". . .except as noted elsewhere" in this ordinance. Mr. Mark Spivak, 1999 Sheridan Road, presented pictures of his new driveway which has been poured in excess of the currently allowed limits. He stated he is currently going through the Zoning Board of Appeals process. He further stated his driveway does have a three foot taper on each side. Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston noted the pictures reflect the point made by Commissioner Krug to be somewhat valid in that the one foot taper at the property line almost does not make any sense. He further noted something like this could go to the Zoning Board for a variance. Mr. Green asked what the condition would be for an outside corner side yard with a side load garage with regard to percentage of coverage. Mr. Pfeil stated the intent of the ordinance is to correlate the 40 percent coverage with the yard where the driveway is located. He noted that if there is a concern that property owners will pave up to 40 percent of large corner side yards, then the ordinance should address this possibility. Mr. Green stated the Village ordinance already designates which is the required front yard. Commissioner Berman stated the whole idea is to effectively tie this into the size of the required front yard. Therefore, if there is an 80-foot required front yard width by 35 feet, the driveway is limited to 40 percent of the area of 80 X 35 feet even with a sideyard orientation. He stated that the intent of the ordinance should be to limit the driveway to 40 percent of the area of the required front yard as designated by the ordinance, even if the driveway is actually in a corner side yard. Mr. Green stated it is his opinion that the required front yard Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 21, 1995-Page 4 should establish the total amount of impervious surface that is allowed. II Commissioner Krug noted there are many developments with required front yards that are less than the actual front yards. Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston asked for the definition in the ordinance of the front yard. Mr. Pfeil stated the front yard is the yard extended across the full width of the zoning lot line between the front lot line and the closest point to the building. The key is the full width of the zoning lot. Mr. Pfeil stated Mr. Green is raising a point that needs clarification and the ordinance should be revised to avoid ambiguity. There being no further comments or questions from anyone else present, Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston closed the public hearing at 8:25 p.m. Resp ully s itted, Fay Rub n, Recording Secretary APPROVED: ALLEN ROSENSTON, Chairman Pro-tem I I Buffalo Grove Plan Come-Public Hearing-June 21, 1995-Page 5 REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION June 21, 1995 Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 17.36) and Development Ordinance (Section 16.50.080) - Amendments concerning driveway and apron widths and front yard pavement area in residential districts Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston called the meeting to order at 8:25 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Commissioners present: Mr. Krug Mr. Rosenston Mr. Samuels Mr. Berman Mr. Lundine Mr. Ottenheimer Mr. Trilling Commissioners absent: Chairman Goldspiel Ms. Howard Also present: Mr. John Green, SDG, Inc. Mr. Mark Spivak Mrs. Spivak Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer Ms. DeAnn Glover, Village Trustee Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Samuels, seconded by Commissioner Trilling to approve the minutes of the public hearing of June 7, 1995. Commissioner Ottenheimer noted a correction in grammar on page 2. All Commissioners were in favor of the motion as amended and the motion passed unanimously. Moved by Commissioner Berman, seconded by Commissioner Ottenheimer to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of June 7, 1995. Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston noted the addition of a word on page 6 was needed. All Commissioners were in favor of the motion as amended and the motion passed unanimously. COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS Commissioner Lundine attended the board meeting on June 19, 1995 at which the subject of the Shell Oil station on the corner of Arlington Heights Road and Route 83 was again discussed but not Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 21, 1995-Page 1 J referred to the Plan Commission. Shell Oil was asked to return to the residents of the area for further discussion. ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 17.36 AND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTION 16.50.080) - AMENDMENTS CONCERNING DRIVEWAY AND APRON WIDTHS AND FRONT YARD PAVEMENT AREA IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Moved by Commissioner Berman, seconded by Commissioner Lundine to recommend to the Village Board approval of the proposed amendments to Chapter 17.36 of the Buffalo Grove Zoning Ordinance and Section 16.50.080.A.2 of the Buffalo Grove Development Ordinance concerning driveway and apron widths and paved surfaces in front yards in residential zoning districts, in accordance with the testimony given at the public hearing and the text provided in Mr. Pfeil's memo dated June 19, 1995, subject to: 1. Changing Mr. Kuenkler's proposed amendment to the Development Ordinance to reflect a 36 inch service walk and drafting language to accommodate this change 2. 3 foot tapers on either side of the aprons reflecting that the apron issue is the "public apron" or "in the public right-of-way" Commissioner Krug stated he would like the language changed on page two, item four of Mr. Pfeil's memo stating, "Driveways serving detached single-family residences shall comply with the following standards except as noted herein". Mr. Pfeil stated the sentence could be ended at the word "standards" as all of the qualifications are within one of the succeeding sections. 3 . End sentence on page 2, section 4 of Mr. Pfeil's memo at the word standards Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston stated there was one other item regarding the taper rate of one foot to one foot to meet the driveway apron at the property line. 4. The addition of the words, "not greater than" one foot wide for every one foot in length 5. Items b, c, d, and e of Mr. Pfeil's memo shall state ". . .at the sidewalk or in the absence of a sidewalk at the property line Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston called for a polling on the issue of Commissioner Krug's suggestion of a 20 foot driveway width as opposed to an 18 foot width. A vote of yes is to be given for a driveway width in excess of 18 feet and a vote of no is to be given for a driveway width of 18 feet. Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 21, 1995-Page 2 The polling was as follows: Yes: Krug No: Rosenston, Berman, Ottenheimer, Trilling, Lundine Abstain: Samuels Commissioner Krug asked if residences in the Residential Estate, R-1, and R-2 districts that have two driveway connections to a street can be connected to two streets. Mr. Pfeil stated the current language states, "Only one curb crossing or connection of a driveway to the roadway per lot shall be permitted for any one-family residence except in the R-E, R-1 and R-2 zoning districts where two such connections shall be permitted". Mr. Pfeil stated that the intent of the ordinance is to have no more than two total curb cuts for the larger lots, so the language needs to be clarified if the current text does not communicate this intent. Commissioner Berman stated language should be drafted to the ordinance to limit same to one curb cut per lot except for R-E, R- j 1 and R-2 zoning. 5. Clarification of definition of required front yard Chairman Pro-tem Rosenston called for a vote on the motion and the vote was as follows: AYES: Rosenston, Berman, Ottenheimer, Trilling, Lundine NAYES: Krug ABSTAIN: Samuels ABSENT: Goldspiel, Howard The motion passed 5 to 1. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT - None FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE Mr. Pfeil stated the July 5, 1995 meeting will be cancelled and the next meeting will be on July 19, 1995. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND OUESTIONS - None STAFF REPORT - None Mr. Pfeil stated the Twin Rinks Pavilion was up for a hearing on the annexation agreement which was continued to July 10, 1995. The Village Manager has spoken to Mr. Weiner of the Concrete Doctor and everything looks hopeful concerning implementation of the loop road. Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 21, 1995-Page 3 ANEW BUSINESS - None ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Trilling, seconded by Commissioner Krug, and carried unanimously to adjourn. Chairman Pro-tem adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m. Resp ctfully witted, Fay Rub n, Recording Secretary Ii APPROVED BY: ALLEN ROSENSTON, Chairman Pro-tem Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 21, 1995-Page 4