Long Grove Plan Commission

June 6, 2006 Meeting Minutes

                                                                                                                            

 

Chairman Present:  Fred Phillips 

 

Commissioners Present: Charles Cohn, Nicholas Fasano, Tobin Fraley, Robert Jenkins, and Shelly Rubin

 

Commissioners Absent:  Eduardo L. Acuna, Joseph Di Iorio, Michael A. Dvorak

 

Also Present:  Village Planner James Hogue, Plan Commission Secretary Wendy Parr, and Village Attorney Julie Tappendorf

 

 

1.    Call to Order: Chairman Phillips called the meeting to order at 8:06 p.m.

 

 

2.    PLAN COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING:  Consideration of a request by Eleftherios & Niki Shinas in connection with a petition for special use permits to allow (i) an amusement / arcade use (“other business use” per 5-5-2-3 (A) of the Village Code), including limited food service and (ii) a “tavern” (per 5-5-2-3 (E) of the Village Code) and other zoning relief as necessary. Discussion by full PCZBA

 

Chairman Phillips swore in all those present who planned to give testimony at the hearing.

 

Petitioner Niki Shinas described the proposed business as a family type tavern with arcade games and food.  She stated that the business would be unique to Long Grove.  There are comparative businesses in other towns which have been successful.  This is not a hangout place and if this is a concern, they can establish a rule to make it for 21 year olds and over, after 7 p.m., unless accompanied by parent.  They plan a limited menu of “trail / western” food and other popular items.  She stated that she has 86 signatures of local residents in favor of the proposed business.  She already has had inquires about party bookings. 

 

The petitioner’s architect, George Prosiliakos showed pictures and drawings of the outside of the building and of the floor plan to the commissioners and audience.  The petitioner plans to add a porch.  The inside of the building will have a saloon décor.

 

Village Planner Hogue stated that he did not see the drawings shown when he reviewed the Special Use Permit so he can not comment other than it is an interesting use.  He stated that parking is likely an issue because the required parking is greater for a restaurant versus a commercial business.  He will need floor area figures in order to determine parking requirements.

 

Village Attorney Tappendorf agreed that square footage would need to be determined and the porch would also need to be looked at.  The parking requirement is one space per 75 square feet of restaurant space. 

 

Huey Adams of 3904 RFD asked how parking is calculated for existing restaurants.  Village Attorney Tappendorf cited the zoning code and that many of the existing businesses were operational prior to the current code.

 

Mrs. Barbara Turner stated that she would like to first hear from the Plan Commission on this issue.

 

Commissioner Jenkins inquired as to the principle business purpose.  The petitioner stated that the business purpose depends on the customer.  The petitioner stated that it is a saloon with games, food and TV.  The petitioner stated that they are also trying to appeal to cyclists. 

 

Commissioner Rubin inquired about the rules for underage children.  The petitioner stated that usually kids are in school.  Otherwise, they were considering a system whereby kids would always have a parent or a color coded bracelet or hand-stamp.  Commissioner Rubin asked what the proposed hours of operation are.  The petitioner responded 11:00 a.m. to midnight but she would like flexibility and would like to be closed on Mondays.  Village Attorney Tappendorf stated that the code requires closing at 10:00 p.m.  The petitioner stated that a 10:00 p.m. closing is acceptable.

 

The petitioner stated that her neighbors / tenants support the proposed business and other merchants in Long Grove also support it.

 

Commissioner Fasano stated that the staff and Plan Commission members need a copy of the floor plan.

 

Chairman Phillips asked if smoking would be permitted.  The petitioner stated that smoking would be up to the Village. 

 

Commissioner Fasano inquired about seating capacity and the architect stated that the planned seating capacity is 40.

 

Sue Adams stated that she is a wedding coordinator at the Long Grove Church.  She says people are really interested in a place like the petitioner is proposing.  The petitioner read a list of establishments that are similar to what she is planning whereas the age is limited after a certain time.  Village Attorney Tappendorf stated that restricting ages after a certain time can be a condition of the Special Use Permit (SUP).

 

Bonnie Keating, Attorney for the petitioner asked if it is possible to petition for longer hours after the SUP is granted.  Village Attorney Tappendorf stated that they may petition for longer hours at any time.  There was a general discussion about the classification of the proposed business for the purpose of establishing the hours of operation.

 

Commissioner Fraley recommended that the petitioner get together with Village staff regarding the parking issue because it is a big issue. 

 

Commissioner Fasano stated that he would like to see a plan for hours and restrictions.

 

Commissioner Cohn stated that it is not clear whether this business is going to be a family or an adult environment as the petitioner discussed various options.  Commissioner Jenkins stated that kids are not permitted in a saloon.  The petitioner stated that she is also putting in a themed boutique. 

 

Commissioner Rubin asked if the proposed enterprise significantly deviates from current business types.  There was a general discussion about whether the enterprise is appropriate for downtown Long Grove.

 

Mrs. Barbara Turner pointed out that water should be discussed since it was an issue that came up during the discussion about the last restaurant.  The petitioner stated that she has decided to limit water use in the building.  Most of the menu items and the manner in which they are served will limit water use.  They will not put in a commercial dishwasher and currently have two bathrooms.  Chairman Phillips stated that the adequacy of the bathrooms cannot be determined until the Plan Commission can look at the floor plan. 

 

Susan Van Der Bosch, 3253 RFD, stated that she would like to see more publicity about this project before a decision is made because this business is such a departure from Long Grove’s character.  The petitioner stated that the Village needs this type of business and plenty of residents and merchants support her plans. 

 

Huey Adams stated that he owns a business in Elgin and Elgin found that they needed at least one bar / restaurant for every 4 businesses to sustain a downtown.  He stated that this petition adds diversity.  He stated that the building itself if very attractive also.

 

Lee Bassett, 3713 RFD, stated a concern with kids in a bar.  He understands pool tables are heavy and is also concerned that the structure may not hold 3 pool tables.  The architect stated that the structure is adequate.

 

Commissioner Jenkins moved to continue the petition to the next meeting on July 18th and that the petitioner supply the Plan Commission with drawings and meet with staff to provide other necessary information.  Commissioner Cohn seconded the motion.  All Ayes.  No Nays.  The motion carried.

 

 

3.    Resolution referring to the Plan Commission for public hearing on possible amendments to the Long Grove Zoning Code and Zoning Map regarding Affordable Housing 

 

Village Attorney Tappendorf stated that two years ago, the Village adopted the affordable housing plan.  This topic is on the agenda because it was referred by the Village Board and should be part of the zoning workshop.  This will be addressed as we move along with the workshop sessions. 

 

 

4.    Approval of Minutes: March 21, 2006, April 4, 2006, May 2, 2006 and May 16, 2006

 

Commissioner Rubin moved to accept the March 21, 2006 minutes as amended.  Commissioner Jenkins seconded the motion.  All ayes. No nayes. The motion carried.

 

Commissioner Rubin moved to accept the April 4, 2006 minutes as amended.  Commissioner Fasano seconded the motion.  All ayes. No nayes.  The motion carried.

 

Commissioner Rubin moved to accept the May 2, 2006 minutes as amended.  Commissioner Jenkins seconded the motion.  All ayes. No nayes.  The motion carried.

 

Commissioner Jenkins moved to accept the May 16, 2006 minutes as amended.  Commissioner Fraley seconded the motion.  All ayes. No nayes.  Commissioner Fasano abstained because he was absent during the meeting. The motion carried.

 

There was a general discussion about writing minutes.

 

 

5.    PLAN COMMISSION WORKSHOP SESSION: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment (Chapters 9, 10, 11 & 12) Discussion by full PCZBA

 

Village Attorney Tappendorf noted that on page 57 – signs, section 5-9-5, there are two basic signs: those that require a permit and those that do not.  The draft also clarifies that Village staff cannot remove signs from private property.  Commissioner Jenkins suggested that neon beer signs in bars / taverns be permitted because they are appropriate signs.  Village Attorney Tappendorf stated that language can be adapted.  Commissioner Cohn stated that the concern is that neon signs impact the historic flavor of the community.  Village Planner Hogue stated that the provision, as written, is difficult to enforce. 

 

Commissioner Fraley stated that at a recent merchants meeting, there was a concern about recent enforcement of the no-neon rule. It was noted that neon has been around for a long time and to suddenly restrict neon, stating that it is not historically consistent, is not accurate.  The consensus among the merchants was to come up with some kind of light that everyone would agree is acceptable.  There was a general discussion about how to approve the use of neon lights.  Village Attorney Tappendorf suggested one option is to allow neon with a variation or allow neon within size limitations.  Village Attorney Tappendorf noted that all signs that require a permit also require Architectural Review Board approval.  There was a general discussion about signage.  The attorney asked the Plan Commission if temporary signs also need to be approved.  On the next draft, the size limitation requirement will be clarified.  There was a general discussion.

 

Village Attorney Tappendorf summarized the highlights of section 5-9-5 – antennae.  There was a general discussion about cell towers.  There was a consensuses to limit the height of cell towers to 125’.

 

There was a discussion about section 5-9-7 – screening, landscaping and buffer yard requirements. 

 

 

6.    Other Business.

 

There was a brief update about the Hampton Estates petition which had been cancelled by the petitioner.

 

 

7.    Adjournment; 

          

Commissioner Rubin moved to adjourn the meeting.  Commissioner Fasano seconded the motion.  All ayes. No nays.  The motion carried.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m.

 

 

8.    Next Regular Meeting – July 18, 2006 at 8:00 p.m.

 

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

Wendy Parr

Plan Commission Secretary