Loading...
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