1991-06-12 - Plan Commission - Minutes PUBLIC HEARING
BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION
June 12, 1991
Development Ordinance Amendments
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called the meeting to order at 7: 30 p.m. 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: Mr. Goldspiel
Mr. Rhodes
Ms. Howard
Mr. Rosenston
Mr. Charlette
Ms. Genell
Mr. Silbernik
Mr. Samuels
Commissioners absent: Mr. Krug
Also present: Mr. Thomas Dempsey, Village Attorney
Mr. Jeffery Braiman, Village Trustee
Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer
Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner
Mr. Pfeil stated that the Development Ordinance amendments had been
reviewed at two workshops. He referred to his memo dated June 6,
1991 which contained several sections that needed further
clarification based on the Plan Commissioners' request at the
previous two workshop meetings.
Section 16.20. 020.H. basically states that if there is a lapse of
six months between preliminary plan workshops, the developer may be
asked to return to the Village Board for referral once again to the
Plan Commission.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel asked if most developers proceed in a timely
manner and he inquired how long it typically takes developers to
prepare revised plans between workshops.
Mr. Pfeil stated that most developers are able to revise their plans
and submit them for another workshop or hearing within six to eight
weeks after the previous workshop. Some developments, however, are
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 12, 1991-Page 1
not pursued in a timely manner and this may be because the projects
do not have secured financing.
Commissioner Rosenston suggested that language be added to
specifically indicate the six month clock starts running from the
point at which the Plan Commission states that a project is ready to
move on to public hearing.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel asked Commissioner Rosenston to develop
specific language that could be used to revise Section 16. 20. 020.H.
during the discussion portion of the meeting.
Mr. Pfeil noted that Section 16.20. 030.A. had added landscaping as a
specific plan element that may be required on a separate plan sheet
and that the Preliminary Plan may be drafted on separate sheets.
The previously phrase "if necessary" has been eliminated from the
text.
Section 16. 20. 030.A. 24 adds a requirement that wetlands information
must be included as part of the Preliminary Plan.
Section 16.20.045 adds language that gives a two year life span on
plan and plat approval. This language gives the Village an
opportunity to either revoke or extend the effective period of a
plan.
Mr. Dempsey stated that the language of this section requires an
affirmative action by the Commission. In the case of a default in
action, the plan would continue.
Commissioners Goldspiel and Rosenston expressed concern that if the
Village did not take an affirmative action, a plan would be
effective for an indefinite period.
Commissioner Silbernik suggested that a maximum time limit for an
extension if a default occurs would be helpful.
After discussing possible revisions to the proposed language, the
Plan Commission determined that the language would give the Village
adequate control concerning extension or revocation of plans.
Commissioner Rosenston stated that the record should be clear that
the Corporate Authorities do not lose their authority to revoke or
affirm a plan if action is not taken within the two year period.
Section 16. 50. 120.C. of the proposed Development Ordinance
amendments has been clarified to indicate that a Tree Survey and
Preservation Plan is required at the time of Concept Plan submittal.
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 12, 1991Pa e
g - g 2
Commissioner Samuels suggested the language be changed to clarify
the intent of this section is that trees of four inches in diameter
or larger are to be surveyed, not all trees on a property.
Commissioner Silbernik inquired if the Tree Survey requirement is
intended to inventory all trees or just trees four inches or larger
in diameter.
Mr. Pfeil and Mr. Kuenkler concurred that the intent of the
Ordinance is to survey four inch in diameter or larger trees. Mr.
Kuenkler noted, however, that the Village Forester will require a
developer to inventory trees smaller than four inches in diameter in
cases where the Forester believes there are high quality trees that
need to be preserved or relocated.
Mr. Pfeil explained proposed changes to certain time requirements
concerning Preliminary Plan approval in Section 16.20. 040 of the
Ordinance. The Ordinance now requires the Plan Commission to make a
recommendation on a Preliminary Plan within 90 days after the
developer has submitted all required documents for public hearing.
The proposed amendment would extend this time period to 120 days.
Village Board action on a Preliminary Plan is now required within 30
days after its next regular scheduled meeting following the action
of the Plan Commission. The proposed amendment would extend this
period to 90 days.
Mr. Pfeil also explained that Section 16.20. 100.A. now requires the
Village Board to take action concerning a plat within 60 days from
the date of filing all required items; the proposed amendment would
extend this period to 120 days. Section 16.20. 100.D. now requires a
developer to record a plat with six months of Village approval; the
proposed amendment would reduce this period to two months.
The Plan Commission discussed the proposed time changes and
determined that the time periods are reasonable.
Mr. Pfeil reviewed the proposed increase in the fees for Concept
Plan review. Section 16.20. 020.B. now requires a filing fee of
$50. 00 plus $5. 00 for each acre in excess of five acres. The
proposed amendment would require a minimum fee of $150.00 dollars
and a $25. 00 fee for each acre in excess of five acres, with a
maximum fee of $1, 000. 00.
Commissioner Genell inquired if the staff's survey of fees charged
by other municipalities had included Long Grove. She also suggested
that the Village review its fees on a regular basis and increase
them as needed.
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 12, 1991-Page 3
Mr. Pfeil indicated that Long Grove had not been surveyed because he
had tried to focus on communities of a similar size and development
pattern as Buffalo Grove. He agreed that the development fees
should be reviewed on a regular basis.
Commissioner Samuels stated that even the proposed fees may be too
low, and he suggested that they could be increased even more than
what is being proposed.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel requested a polling to determine each
Commissioner's opinion concerning the proposed fees. He stated that
a yes vote would indicate support for the increased fees as proposed
and a no vote would indicate objection to the proposed fees.
The polling indicated that all Commissioners present were in favor
of the proposed increase. Commissioners Rosenston, Samuels and
Silbernik indicated that although the proposed fees are acceptable,
they would support an even large increase in fees. Commissioner
Genell indicated that she strongly suggests that the Village review
the fees annually.
Mr. Pfeil noted that other amendments are being proposed to the
technical standards of the Development Ordinance and these changes
are noted by section number in the Notice of Public Hearing. An
example of a proposed technical amendment is that the side slope in
storm water detention basins is being changed from the current 6: 1
ratio to 4: 1.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel inquired if any Commissioner or anyone else
in attendance at the meeting wanted the Village Engineer to review
any of the proposed technical amendments.
Commissioner Genell inquired why in Section 16.50. 040.C. the
Village uses the design manual of the Metropolitan Sanitary District
of Greater Chicago.
Mr. Kuenkler replied that this is a manual in common use by Buffalo
Grove and other municipalities. He indicated that he would survey
some Lake County communities to determine if any other reference
source is being used.
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing-June 12, 1991-Page 4
There being no further comments, Vice Chairman Goldspiel closed the
Public Hearing at 8:45 p.m.
Respectf ly subm' ted,
Fay Rubin, ecording Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Y `
STEP EN GOLDSPI L, Vice Chairman
Buffalo
Grove Plan Comm-Public Hearing_June 12, 1991-Page 5
SPECIAL MEETING
BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION
June 12, 1991
Amendments to the Village Zoning Ordinance Amendments
Woodland Commons Shopping Center and Commerce Center
Plat of Resubdivision
Chevy Chase Business Park East No. 2
(Angus Chemical Company) - Plat of Vacation
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called the meeting to order at 8 :45 p.m. in
the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois.
Commissioners present: Mr. Goldspiel
Mr. Rhodes
Ms. Howard
Mr. Rosenston
Mr. Charlette
Ms. Genell
Mr. Silbernik
Mr. Samuels
Commissioners absent: Mr. Krug
Also present: Mr. Thomas Dempsey, Village Attorney
Mr. Jeffery Braiman, Village Trustee
Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer
Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Moved by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner Howard to
approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 15, 1991. All
Commissioners were in favor, with Commissioner Genell, Samuels and
Silbernik abstaining, and the motion carried.
COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS
Commissioner Howard reported on the Village Board Meeting of June
13 , 1991. Commissioner Howard stated the meeting dealt with the
Rohrman car dealership proposal. Commissioner Howard noted that
discussion dealt with landscaping aspects of the property in order
to effectively control excessive noise, reconfiguration of the lakes
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Special -Pa Meeting-June 12, 1991-Page 1
q
on the parcel and downsizing of the proposed plan. Commissioner
Howard stated that School District 214 would pursue condemnation
proceedings if the Rohrman proposal is not approved. Commissioner
Howard also noted that a decision on referral of the Schwennesen
property was deferred until the Village Board Meeting of June 17,
1991.
DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
Moved by Commissioner Silbernik, seconded by Commissioner Charlette
that the Plan Commission recommend to the Village Board approval of
the Buffalo Grove Development Ordinance subject to:
1. Re-wording of Section 16.20. 020.H. to provide that if a
developer does not submit the required documents for the
second workshop within six months of the first Plan
Commission workshop, or does not submit required documents
for the public hearing within six months of the second Plan
Commission workshop (or subsequent workshops) , the Corporate
Authorities may require the proposed development to be re-
submitted to the Village Board for reconsideration of
referral to the Plan Commission.
2 . Language in Section 16. 50. 120.C. stating all developers with
sites containing any trees four inches in diameter or
greater, calipered at six inches above the ground level,
shall prepare a Tree Survey which shall certify the locations
of all trees and the species of each at the time of Concept
Plan submit. A Tree Preservation Plan shall be submitted
showing such existing trees that are proposed to be raised
and those that are proposed to be saved and shall include a
grading plan.
Commissioner Rhodes noted that the proposed amendments to the
Development Ordinance were long overdue and would be beneficial for
the Village. He stated that the new Development Ordinance would be
a help both to the Village and to developers.
Commissioner Rosenston stated that he concurs with Commissioner
Rhodes ' statement that the amendments to the Development Ordinance
would be beneficial to both the Village and developers and also
noted that they would make the job easier for both the Village and
developers.
Commissioner Charlette stated that the proposed Amendments to the
Development Ordinance would help developers be better prepared for
workshops.
Buffalo Grove
Plan Comm-special Meeting_June 12, 1991-Page 2
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called for a vote on the motion and the vote
was as follows:
AYES: Rhodes, Howard, Rosenston, Charlette, Genell,
Silbernik, Samuels
NAYES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Krug
The motion carried 7 to 0.
Moved by Commissioner Charlette, seconded by Commissioner Samuels
that the Plan Commission recommend to the Village Board review of
development fees either on a yearly or bi-annual basis.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called for a vote on the motion and the vote
was as follows:
AYES: Rhodes, Howard, Rosenston, Charlette, Genell,
Silbernik, Samuels
NAYES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Krug
The motion carried 7 to 0.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel directed staff to report to the Plan
Commission in June, 1992 concerning possible fee increases.
Moved by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner Howard to
allow a change in the order of agenda.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called for a vote on the motion and the vote
was as follows:
AYES: Rhodes, Howard, Rosenston, Charlette, Genell,
Silbernik, Samuels
NAYES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Krug
The motion carried 7 to 0.
WOODLAND COMMONS SHOPPING CENTER AND COMMERCE CENTER -
PLAT OF VACATION
Moved by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner Howard to
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Special Meeting-June 12, 1991-Page 3
recommend to the Village Board approval of the Plat of Re-
Subdivision of Lot 2 dated May 21, 1991.
Mr. Kuenkler stated that the plat is in accordance with all plans.
Moved by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner Howard that
the Plan Commission recommend to the Village Board of the Plat of
Re-Subdivision subject to the addition of two concrete monuments.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called for a vote on the motion and the vote
was as follows:
AYES: Rhodes, Howard, Rosenston, Charlette, Genell,
Silbernik, Samuels
NAYES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Krug
The motion carried 7 to 0.
Moved by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner Howard to
allow a change in the order of agenda.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called for a vote on the motion and the vote
was as follows:
AYES: Rhodes, Howard, Rosenston, Charlette, Genell,
Silbernik, Samuels
NAYES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Krug
The motion carried 7 to 0.
CHEVY CHASE BUSINESS PARK EAST NO. 2 PLAT OF VACATION
Moved by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner Rosenston
that the Plan Commission recommend to the Village Board approval of
the Plat of Vacation dated May 30, 1991.
Mr. Kuenkler noted that this plat basically eradicates some
easements and relocates other easements to confirm to the location
of the proposed Angus Chemical building and site improvements.
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Special Meeting-June 12, 1991-Page 4
Vice Chairman Goldspiel called for a vote on the motion and the vote
was as follows:
AYES: Rhodes, Howard, Rosenston, Charlette, Genell,
Silbernik, Samuels
NAYES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Krug
The motion carried 7 to 0.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE
SECTION 17. 28. 030.D. - TIME PERIOD FOR SPECIAL USES - WORKSHOP #1
Mr. Pfeil stated that this amendment would allow for consistency
with the proposed amendment to the Development Ordinance which
establishes a two year period for approval of Preliminary Plans.
The proposed amendment to this section of the Zoning Ordinance
pertains to the effective period of special uses. Mr. Pfeil
introduced the Village Attorney's draft of the revision to Section
17. 28. 030.D. which grants a two year period of approval for a
special use; if the development has not been established within this
period, the Village may revoke the special use.
All Commissioners agreed to the proposed amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance and agreed that this matter be approved for public
hearing.
PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT
CELLULAR PHONES AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION - WORKSHOP #1
Mr. Pfeil stated that the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
would allow the sale and installation of cellular telephones and
similar electronic equipment for automobiles as a permitted use in
the B-2 District, which would also make it a permitted use in the
B-4 District, and the B-3 District unless specifically prohibited by
the Village. Mr. Pfeil noted that the proposed amendment would
specifically preclude other more intensive automotive uses.
Commissioner Goldspiel noted that approval of this type of amendment
would allow just about anyone to install an overhead door in back of
a shopping center.
Commissioner Rosenston noted that that was not necessarily so, as
installation of an overhead door would require a review by the
Appearance Commission.
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Special Meeting-June 12, 1991-Page 5
II
- I
Commissioner Silbernik noted that proper language for the proposed
amendment such as "consumer use electronic equipment" would prevent
more intensive automotive uses. He suggested that the text refer to
"motor vehicles" rather than automobiles.
Trustee Braiman suggested that this amendment would be better
handled as a special use; the Commissioners concurred that this type
of use needs careful attention and should be handled as a special
use.
The Commissioners noted that they would like to see language
included in this proposed amendment that would preclude any auto
maintenance work and would specifically require that all
installation work be done only inside the premises.
The Commissioners recommended this matter go to public hearing.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE
IMMEDIATE CARE MEDICAL FACILITIES - WORKSHOP #1
Commissioner Charlette questioned the definition of the word
"admitted" in Section 17. 12. 145.
Commissioner Silbernik commented that a key distinction between
medical offices and an immediate care facility is that immediate
care can be a 24-hour operation. Immediate care, however, does not
admit patients overnight as a hospital does.
Trustee Braiman commented that an immediate care facility serves
outpatients as opposed to a hospital which can serve overnight
patients.
Vice Chairman Goldspiel suggested that perhaps immediate care
facilities and hospitals could be allowed as permitted uses in some
districts such as Office and Research and Industrial. He also
suggested that criteria such as access to a major street be
considered as conditions that would need to be met.
After lengthy discussion, the Commissioners felt it would be best if
hospitals, emergency rooms, and immediate care facilities were under
special use in certain zoning districts. They concurred that
L/ current terms in the Zoning Ordinance such as "medical office" and
"clinic" need to be reviewed and probably should be revised.
Mr. Pfeil noted that hospitals are currently a permitted use in some
business districts, and are typically a more intensive use than
immediate care facilities.
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Special Meeting-June 12, 1991-Page 6
-- I
The Commission directed the staff to provide further information and
recommendations concerning the appropriate zoning controls for
various medical uses. The Commission indicated that another
workshop would be needed on this matter.
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT - None
../ FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE
Mr. Pfeil stated there was a tentative meeting scheduled for either
July 10, 1991 or July 17, 1991.
PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS - None
STAFF REPORT - None
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Commissioner Silbernik, seconded by Commissioner Howard,
and unanimously carried to adjourn. Vice Chairman Goldspiel
adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m.
Resp f lly s itted,
Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary
APPROVED BY:
ST P EN GOLD PIEL, Vice Chairman
1
Buffalo Grove Plan Comm-Special Meeting-June 12, 1991-Page q 1991 Page 7
II