1992-06-03 - Plan Commission - Minutes PUBLIC HEARING
BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION
June 3 , 1992
Rogers Center For Commerce - East
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 p.m.
in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove,
Illinois and read the Notice of Public Hearing as published in the
Buffalo Grove Daily Herald, explained the format of the meeting
and swore in persons who were giving testimony at the public
hearing.
Commissioners present: Vice Chairman Goldspiel
Mr. RJiodes
Ms. Howard
Mr. Rosenston
Ms. Genell
Mr. Samuels
Commissioners absent: Chairman Silbernik
Mr. Krug
Also present: Mr. William Schmitz, Arthur J. Rogers & Co.
Mr. Mark Poliak, The Brickman Group, Ltd.
Ms. Kathi Rogers, Arthur J. Rogers & Co.
Ms. Jeanne Rogers, Arthur J. Rogers & Co.
Mr. Martin Kennelly, Arthur J. Rogers & Co.
Mr. Charles Hendricks, Village Trustee
Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer
Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney
Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner
The following exhibits were presented by the petitioners at the
public hearing:
Exhibit A: Preliminary Plan dated May 15, 1992
Exhibit B: Preliminary Plan with landscaped areas depicted
Exhibit C: Perspective drawing of typical building elevation
Exhibit D: Landscape Plan dated May 20, 1992
Mr. William Schmitz stated that Arthur J. Rogers and Company is
proposing to construct four one-story buildings on Lots 1, 2 and 3
of the Arbor Creek Business Centre. The 12 .25 acre site is
located at the southeast corner of Barclay Boulevard and Aptakisic
Road which is zoned Industrial. He stated that the four buildings
would be leased to tenants in the range of 1, 500 square feet to
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 3, 1992-Page 1
6, 000 square feet and the buildings would range in size from
37, 000 square feet to 41, 000 square feet. He noted that the
design of the development mirrors the Rogers Center project to the
west although there have been some aesthetic improvements added
such as gray limestone bands around the buildings.
Mr. Schmitz further stated that the two retention ponds are
located on outlots and would be considered part of the common area
owned and maintained by the Arbor Creek Business Centre.
Mr. Schmitz noted that the Preliminary Plan has been revised in
response to Plan Commission comments at the last workshop. The
parking area in the southwest corner of the site has been re-
designed so that no parking spaces encroach in the 35-foot
landscaped yard along Barclay Boulevard.
Mr. Schmitz stated that a variation is still requested for the
parking area in the northeastern area of the site. This parking
area would be within fifteen feet of a property zoned residential
by Lake County. He noted that they have obtained a letter from
the owner of the residentially zone property indicating that it is
being used to operate a business and the understanding is that
Lincolnshire's planning concept for this area is office and
industrial use.
Mr. Schmitz further noted that the driveways line up with the
driveways across the street for easier access to either
development. Crosswalks have been added to ensure tenant safety
and in response to Plan Commission comments.
Mr. Mark Poliak of the Brickman Group stated that Arthur J. Rogers
and Company is concerned with maintenance and the looks of the
site in years to come. They are also very concerned in
maintaining a good neighbor image.
Mr. Poliak stated that Arthur J. Rogers has authorized the use of
an irrigation system as well as a reforestation program to help
conserve as many of the large trees as possible and the use of
perennials which will cut the cost of maintenance and water.
Mr. Poliak stated that some changes have been made to the
landscape plan in response to the changes made in the Preliminary
Plan. He stated that they have now added green space at the
southwest corner of the property as well as changes to the south
boundary which will have trees planted on the retention parcel
with wetlands. The species and sizes of the trees will be varied
in order to add interest to the site.
Mr. Schmitz stated that another change made in response to Plan
Commission comments includes the addition of parking lot islands
between every 20 parking spaces and a one and one-half foot
overhang for the spaces abutting the retention pond in the
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 3, 1992-Page 2
southeast corner of the site.
Commissioner Rhodes asked where the sanitary sewer lines are
located.
Ms. Kathi Rogers stated that the sanitary lines run along Barclay
Boulevard and join the lines across the street.
Commissioner Rhodes asked if the Arbor Creek Association maintains
the retention ponds.
Ms. Kathi Rogers stated that Arthur J. Rogers and Company would
probably ask the Arbor Creek Association if the Rogers Company
could take care of the maintenance.
Commissioner Rhodes asked what kind of landscaping is planned for
the parking lot islands.
Mr. Poliak stated that the islands would be planted with low two
and three foot shrubs as well as perennials.
Commissioner Rhodes asked when construction would begin and if all
buildings would be constructed at the same time.
Ms. Kathi Rogers stated that their target date is July 6th to
begin construction, and that the entire development would be built
at one time.
Commissioner Howard stated that she sees no problem with a fifteen
foot setback from the unincorporated residentially zoned property
to the east because the house is in an area planned for industrial
use and is being used for business purposes.
Commissioner Rosenston asked if the sidewalk along the south edge
of the property is on wetlands.
Ms. Kathi Rogers stated that the sidewalk will be a nature trail
to the north of the wetlands on the retention parcel.
Commissioner Genell stated that she has been very interested in
the tenant profiles and is very pleased with the information
presented by Arthur J. Rogers and Company concerning how the space
will be marketed and leased.
Commissioner Goldspiel asked if it is correct that this develop-
ment does not need a side yard on the south edge of the site for
the service driveway.
Mr. Pfeil stated that a fifteen foot building setback is required
but the pavement can go up to the side and rear lot lines in the
Industrial District if the site does not abut residentially zoned
property.
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 3, 1992-Page 3
Commissioner Goldspiel asked if all utilities are present and if
the stormwater detention is adequate for the site.
Mr. Kuenkler stated that utilities and detention are sufficient
for the site and a final engineering plan will be submitted for
the building permit review.
Mr. Raysa stated that any signs shown on the Preliminary Plan are
not as yet approved and will need to be presented to the
Appearance Commission.
There being no further comments, Vice Chairman Goldspiel closed
the public hearing at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Fay Rubin, e rding Secretary
APPROVED BY:
TPH N GOLDSPIEL, Vice Chairman
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 3, 1992-Page 4
REGULAR MEETING
BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION
June 3, 1992
Rogers Center for Commerce - East
Consideration of an Amendment to the Village
Zoning Ordinance - Section 17.28.030.D. - Special Uses
Busch Grove Professional Center - Final Plat of Subdivision
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called the meeting to order at 8: 05 p.m.
in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove,
Illinois.
Commissioners present: Vice Chairman Goldspiel
Mr. Rhodes
Ms. Howard
Mr. Rosenston
Ms. Genell
Mr. Samuels
Commissioners absent: Chairman Silbernik
Mr. Krug
Also present: Mr. William Schmitz, Arthur J. Rogers & Co.
Mr. Mark Poliak, The Brickman Group, Ltd.
Ms. Kathi Rogers, Arthur J. Rogers & Co.
Ms. Jeanne Rogers, Arthur J. Rogers & Co.
Mr. Martin Kennelly, Arthur J. Rogers & Co.
Mr. Charles Hendricks, Village Trustee
Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer
Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney
Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Moved by Commissioner Genell, seconded by Commissioner Howard, to
approve the minutes of the public hearing of May 20, 1992 and the
minutes of the regular meeting of May 20, 1992. All Commissioners
were in favor of the motion, and the motion passed unanimously
with Commissioner Rosenston abstaining.
COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS
Commissioner Howard reported on the Village Board meeting of May
18, 1992 stating:
1. Ordinance 92-45 concerning partisan elections was approved.
This ordinance authorizes continuation of partisan elections
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 3, 1992-Page 1
in Village of Buffalo Grove and reinforces home rule
authority.
2 . Ordinance 92-46 was approved concerning the Special Use in the
Industrial District for the Buffalo Grove Gymnastics Training
Center on Barclay Boulevard. There was some discussion
regarding issuing a Special Use to individuals or the property
in order to acquire more control over use of the property,
particularly if new owners ever operate the business.
Commissioner Genell reported on the meeting of the Lake County
Regional Planning Commission stating that in response to a survey,
county residents noted the major concern is the increase in
property taxes; 55 percent of county residents feel that taxes are
a very serious problem. The report also stated that there is a
strong desire among residents to preserve open space; 50 percent
of the respondents favor preserving open space by requiring
developers to set aside land for green space even if it means
increased home prices for consumers. Residents also approve of
government purchase of open land which would mean a tax increase.
The report further stated that traffic congestion is a real
concern for residents with many approving the widening and
improving of existing roads. New road construction is opposed.
ROGERS CENTER FOR COMMERCE - EAST
Moved by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner Genell, to
recommend approval of the Rogers Center for Commerce - East (Arbor
Creek Business Center) Barclay Boulevard/Aptakisic Road, Planned
Unit Development and Preliminary Plan in the Industrial District
in accordance with petitioners' Exhibits A, B, C and D, including
the 15-foot yard variation on the east property line.
Commissioner Rhodes stated it is a pleasure to support a quality
development such as this for Buffalo Grove.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel stated that the variation that is being
requested is acceptable because of the letter that was provided
regarding the use of the adjacent property. Therefore the
criteria for a variance have been met.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called for a vote on the motion and the
vote was follows:
AYES: Rhodes, Howard, Rosenston, Genell, Samuels, Goldspiel
NAYES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Silbernik, Krug
The vote was 6 to 0 in favor of the motion.
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 3, 1992-Page 2
Moved by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner Genell to
amend the order of the agenda to consider the plat for the Buffalo
Grove Professional Center as the next item for discussion. All
Commissioners were in favor of the motion, and the motion passed
unanimously.
BUSCH GROVE PROFESSIONAL CENTER - FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION
Vice Chairman Goldspiel noted that there is a motion on the floor
which had been tabled at the last meeting.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel noted that there are differences in the
plat being presented tonight from the plat which was presented at
the previous meeting and asked that those differences be
addressed.
Mr. Kuenkler noted that the .building setback has now been adjusted
to reflect a 30 foot setback from Busch Road and Route 83 instead
of the 25 foot setback previously shown. He further noted that
the stormwater detention basin and access will be addressed with
easements so that Lots 1 and 2 will share the use and maintenance
of these areas.
Commissioner Genell inquired what constitutes a minor or major
change for an approved site plan.
Mr. Raysa stated that it is at the discretion of the Village Board
as far as what is considered minor or major. On annexation
agreements and PUDs the Village Manager has the authority to
approve a two percent increase in building area as a minor change.
Building area changes in excess of two percent are presented to
the Village Board for determination of whether the change is major
or minor. Major changes are usually returned to the Plan
Commission for review. In the case of the proposed child care
center on the Busch Grove Professional Center site, the Village
Board determined that the increased building area is a minor
change.
Commissioner Genell stated that she had been informed that this is
a major change from the plan approved by the Plan Commission.
Commissioner Rosenston inquired if there is a definition in the
ordinance concerning major and minor changes to a site plan.
Mr. Raysa said that the Development Ordinance does not define
major and minor changes, but the Village Board' s policy is that
changes that are considered "major" are sent back to the Plan
Commission for review.
Mr. Raysa stated that his concern for cross easements had been
addressed by Abbott's attorney, George Maurides g Mr. Maurides has
drafted a cross easement agreement so that the detention area
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 3, 1992-Page 3
- I
would be accessible to both lots with an agreement for the
maintenance of the area. Access to the two lots is also addressed
in the cross easement agreement. Mr. Raysa said he has reviewed
the cross easements and finds them acceptable.
Commissioner Samuels asked if this is the first time this plan has
been presented as two lots.
Mr. Raysa stated that if the question asks if this property can be
sold as two separate lots, the answer is yes. He noted that the
cross easements for the detention basin and for access obligate
the two potential lot owners concerning the use and maintenance of
these areas.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel noted it is a bad practice to have the two
lot issue come up after the Plan Commission has already reviewed
the Preliminary Plan.
Mr. Kuenkler stated that there had been no lot line shown on the
Preliminary Plan, but he thinks the developer's intent has always
been to plat two lots for the site.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel noted that there has been no harm done but
that in the future the Plan Commission should be made aware of
this kind of situation.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel also noted that in terms of future policy
it may be advisable to develop a larger setback standard than 25
feet along major arterials.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel also noted that on the previous plat there
was a portion of the bikepath along Route 83 that was over the
property line which did not now appear on the plat.
Mr. Kuenkler stated that there is still a sidewalk easement along
Route 83 which will have one or two feet of the sidewalk within
the 30 foot building setback.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called for a vote on the motion to approve
the plat and the vote was as follows:
AYES: Goldspiel, Howard, Rosenston
NAYES: Rhodes, Genell, Samuels
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Krug, Silbernik
The vote was three "ayes" and three "nayes", so the motion to
approve failed.
Commissioner Rhodes stated that he is not happy with the minor
change that was approved for the Preliminary Plan without review
by the Plan Commission.
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 3, 1992-Page 4
Commissioner Genell stated that the concept for this site was
poorly planned and that Buffalo Grove does not have to settle for
second best.
Commissioner Samuels said he is still very concerned that in
approving a plat the Plan Commission is acting only as a "rubber
stamp" and does not seem to have any authority over site planning
items that may be pertinent to the plat.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel stated that approving a plat is a very
serious job and it is important to carefully review a plat. It
is, however, different from approving a plan. It is fine to vote
no on a plat if it is an inaccurate portrayal of the site plan. If
the plat accurately portrays the site plan as approved by the
Village Board and if it does meet the ordinances and plat
requirements, then a yes vote would be proper. He indicated that
if a Commissioner does not want to vote "yes" on a plat that meets
the technical requirements of the ordinances, then a vote to
abstain would be more appropriate that a "no" vote.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel asked Mr. Raysa the status regarding
voting on plats. He asked what was being voted on, the accuracy
and compliance of the plat, or the approval or disapproval of the
site plan.
Mr. Raysa stated that the Commission' s role in approving a plat is
to determine that the plat complies with applicable provisions of
the Development and Zoning Ordinances and complies with the
Preliminary Plan as approved by the Village Board. He noted that
State statute requires Plan Commission review of plats.
Commissioner Rosenston said he agrees that the Commission's job is
to verify that the plat complies with the approved plan. The
Commission's opinion concerning the approved site plan should not
affect the technical review of the plat.
Commissioner Rhodes made a motion to reconsider the vote to
approve the plat. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Howard
and was approved by a voice vote.
The vote on reconsideration of the motion to approve the plat
dated June 1, 1992 was as follows:
AYES: Rhodes, Howard, Rosenston, Goldspiel
NAYES: Genell
ABSTAIN: Samuels
ABSENT: Silbernik, Krug
The motion to approve the plat passed by a vote of 4 to 1 with one
abstention.
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June
9 3, 1992-Page
Page 5
CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE VILLAGE ZONING ORDINANCE
SECTION 17.28.030.D. - SPECIAL USES WORKSHOP #2
Mr. Raysa, the Village Attorney, stated that he recommends that
Section 17.28. 030.D. of the Zoning Ordinance which now reads as
follows:
After any special use is discontinued for more than
one year, the special use shall be automatically revoked.
be amended as follows:
Whenever a special use has not been established on an
approved site within two years of the date of the
Corporate Authorities' acting to authorize the special
use, or whenever a special use ceases to operate or is
discontinued for a period of over one year, the Corporate
Authorities may revoke the special use unless other
provisions are made by the Corporate Authorities.
Mr. Raysa noted that on several occasions he has used this section
when he was involved in litigation and has been uncomfortable with
the wording of this section. Therefore, he would recommend
amending this section in order to avoid any problems in the
future.
Mr. Raysa stated that the simplest suggestion would be language to
the effect that after any special use is discontinued for a period
of a year, or after abandonment for a period of a year or if it is
not ever started for a period of a year, it shall be automatically
revoked. However, since the Village Board and Plan Commission
have previously indicated that they don't favor automatic
revocation, this language provides a different way of handling
revocation and the language providing for two years has been used
to allow some time and for starting a project.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel noted that perhaps special uses related to
land plans should be treated differently than those not related to
any land plans.
Mr. Raysa stated that would necessitate listing all of the special
uses and what category they fall into.
Commissioner Rosenston stated that the criteria that would be used
�./ to delineate the one or two year status may not be fair in all
cases.
Commissioner Samuels commented that using two classes for special
uses is valid, but he questioned whether or not the difference
between one and two year terms is really significant.
Commissioner Rosenston asked what the negative side would be to a
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 3, 1992-Page 6
straight two year period.
Mr. Raysa stated that one negative condition would be a
neighborhood changing and thereby needs of the community would
also change.
Commissioner Samuels noted that neighborhood changes do not occur
very quickly and he did not see any need for a distinction in the
terms. He stated that he feels a two year all around period is
reasonable.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel commented that neighborhood change may not
be necessary to make a special use inappropriate; there may be
situations when a special use is no longer needed at a particular
site.
Commissioner Genell stated that she too felt that a two year
period would work out fine.
Mr. Pfeil stated that he felt the language as drafted is workable.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called for a polling as to approval of
language that calls for both one and two year distinctions or
approval of a straight two year period for new uses only.
Abandoned uses are to be one year only.
The polling was as follows:
One and two year times: Goldspiel, Howard
Straight two year time: Rhodes, Rosenston, Genell, Samuels
Mr. Raysa further stated that he would also like language added
stating that if the special use is revoked the property reverts to
its prior zoning.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel asked for a polling on Mr. Raysa's
recommendation.
All Commissioners were in favor of adding this language to the
section.
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT - None
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Pfeil stated that the Department of Public Works will be
grinding off the old pavement stripping on Busch Parkway as of
June 1st.
NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Raysa stated that it had been his suggestion to add language
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 3, 1992-Page 7
to the ordinance approving the Buffalo Grove Gymnastics Center to
the effect that as long as the current petitioners are the owners
of the facility they continue to have the special use which would
not be carried over if the operation sold. He stated that many
Board members felt this language was too restrictive.
Mr. Raysa stated that he has noted that many times both the Plan
Commission and the Village Board tends to rely on the petitioners'
representations and their good intentions. He noted therefore,
that many times the special use may actually be granted to the
petitioners rather than to the plan.
Commissioner Samuels stated that granting a special use to a
person rather than to a property violates the constitutional
guarantee of equal protection.
Mr. Raysa noted that the Village Board wants the ordinance for the
gymnastics center to address standards; these standards would
apply to the property regardless of who owned the facility.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel commented that if there is more than one
property being used for a certain type of special use, such as for
a home day care operation, then the Zoning Ordinance should have
criteria that all petitioners must meet.
Commissioner Howard stated that she has a problem with the Plan
Commission or Board trying to regulate how a petitioner runs a
gymnastics business. She stated that the Village should be careful
not to over-regulate businesses.
Commissioner Samuels stated that he can see some kind of bond or
insurance requirement for uses such as a gymnastics center.
Commissioner Rosenston stated that a special use should not be
granted to the petitioner as a personal issue but rather to the
property.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner Genell and
unanimously carried to adjourn. Vice Chairman Goldspiel adjourned
the meeting at 9:30 p.m.
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 3, 1992-Page 8
Respectfully sub 'tted,
-4..4Fay Ru in, c rding Secretary
APPROVED BY*
STE HEN GO DSPIEL, Vice Chairman
Li
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Regular Meeting-June 3, 1992-Page 9