Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/26/2009 P&Z minutes 06-09 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-06-09 Hearing Date: February 26, 2009 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 606 W. Northwest Highway PETITIONER: John Graham PUBLICATION DATE: February II, 2009 PIN NUMBER: 03-34-324-008-0000 REQUEST: Sign Variations: . Number and Size of Wall Signs (Northwest Hwy) . Height and Setback of Freestanding Sign (Northwest Hwy) MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Chair William Beattie Leo Floros Marlys Haaland Ronald Roberts Keith Youngquist MEMBER ABSENT: Joseph Donnelly STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian Simmons, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development Consuelo Andrade, Development Review Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: John Graham, Don Hansen, John Streetz, Nancy Fritz Chairman Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Leo F1oros made a motion to approve the minutes of the January 22, 2009 meeting; Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. The minutes were approved 4- 0; with Marlys Haaland and Ronald Roberts abstaining. After hearing three previous cases, Chairman Rogers introduced Case PZ-06-09, a request for sign Variations at 606 W. Northwest Highway, at 8:28 p.m. Consuelo Andrade, Development Review Planner, stated the Petitioner was requesting five Variations for signage. The subject property is located on the north side of Northwest Highway between Forest Avenue and Fairview A venue. The subject property is zoned B-5 Central Commercial and contains a gas station, convenience store, and related improvements. The Petitioner submitted information that the existing Citgo gas station with convenience store would be converted into a Shell gas station and a 7-11 convenience store. Ms. Andrade said the Petitioner proposed to remove existing signage that fronts Northwest Highway and was seeking relief from the Village's sign code regulations for the new proposed signage. Ms. Andrade showed a table of sign code regulations and pictures of the existing and proposed wall signs. There are currently three wall signs on the building. The wall signs that front Northwest Highway are presently non-conforming and are allowed to stay on the property. Ms. Andrade stated replacement of such signs would have to comply with Village sign code regulations. The code allows one wall sign per street frontage that covers up to 40 percent of the signable area. The Petitioner was seeking a Variation to install two wall signs that exceed the 40 percent signable area along Northwest Highway. Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting February 26, 2009 PZ-06-09 Page I of5 Ms. Andrade said the subject property has one freestanding sign on the southeast corner of the site. A Variation for the existing freestanding sign was approved in 1992 that allowed the fifteen (15) foot height and 3.75 foot setback. By removing the sign and replacing it, the new sign would have to comply with the Village's sign code regulations. The Petitioner was proposing to install a free standing sign that measured 17 feet 6.5 inches high, 72.5 square feet, and setback 3.5 feet from the front property line. Ms. Andrade stated as currently designed, the freestanding sign would not comply with the design standards in the sign code. The freestanding sign would have to provide a pole skirt to screen the poles at the base ofthe sign. As stated earlier, the Petitioner proposed to install the freestanding sign at the southeast corner of the site where the existing freestanding sign is located with a 3.5 foot setback from the property line. Ms. Andrade said Staff had discussions with the Petitioner regarding selecting a new location for the freestanding sign and redesigning it to comply with code. Ms. Andrade stated that installing a freestanding sign with a horizontal design on the southwest corner of the site would not require a Variation for the height or setback requirement and would conform to the Village's sign code regulations. Ms. Andrade showed a picture of the landscaped area on the western side of the property for this alternative option. She also showed an illustration of a freestanding 7-11 / Citgo sign that is currently located at 1740 W. Dempster. The sign at this location did not require a Variation and conforms to the sign regulations. Ms. Andrade summarized the sign Variation standards. She said Staff is supportive of the Variation request for the two wall signs along Northwest Highway as the building's front fayade is unique because it angles at the center and has two wall sections. Staff recommended that the Planning & Zoning Commission approve this Variation. Ms. Andrade stated Staff is not supportive of the Variation requests to increase the size of the wall signs, increase the height of the freestanding sign, and reduce the setback of the freestanding sign. She said there are no hardships in the Variation requests as they are a convenience to the Petitioner. Ms. Andrade stated the subject property is not unique compared to other commercial properties. The Petitioner could comply with the sign code regulations by redesigning the freestanding sign and moving it to the southwest corner of the site. Staff recommended that the Planning & Zoning Commission deny these motions. Chairman Rogers said he appreciated Staff for sticking with the code. He stated it took ten years for the signs in Mount Prospect to conform to code. Chairman Rogers swore in all the speakers representing the Petitioner. John Graham, 446 Morris Street, Mundelein, IL, stated maintaining the freestanding sign where it currently exists is very important. He believed the alternate option developed by Staff would alter the traffic flow for his business. Mr. Graham said the gas station primarily deals with west bound traffic as the pumps are oriented for cars going in this direction. He stated that the price point for gasoline is sensitive. Mr. Graham felt that the sign that was granted a Variation in the past is in the proper spot. He said moving this sign would put the station at a competitive disadvantage. Mr. Graham stated the need for increased height was based on standards set forth by Shell and 7-11. He said based on their confined location, it is almost impossible to market the two brands and price point for gas. He stated that customers make impulse decisions when buying gas. It would affect their business significantly if the sign was located past the station for west bound traffic. Mr. Graham said cars exiting the station would block the alternate sign that was proposed by Staff. He stated that he was looking to increase the free standing sign 2.5 feet larger than the 15 foot current sign. Chairman Rogers stated that very few signs in the Village that are at the height of the existing Citgo sign. The larger signs are at shopping centers, not gas stations. Chairman Rogers said he knew the Petitioner's existing sign is at 15 feet, but would like it reduced to 12 feet to conform to code since it's proposed to change. Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting February 26, 2009 PZ-06-09 Page 2 of 5 There was general discussion regarding the location of the freestanding sign. Don Hansen, 1715 Squirrel, Cary, IL, represented 7-11. He said by moving the sign further in the setback would place it in the drive aisle. Mr. Hansen stated moving the sign to the west would be a hazard because of impulse buyers turning into the site at the last second. He said signs are normally placed before gas stations to allow customers to see a price and to make a decision. Chairman Rogers said the freestanding sign is in an ideal situation where it currently is, he didn't realize with the setback requirement that they would be in the driveway. William Beattie stated there was not another competing gas station in the area to draw the customer away. He said the price point on the proposed freestanding sign was only six to seven feet off the ground. Mr. Beattie stated that the only reason the freestanding sign was extended was because of the Shell and 7-11 logos. He said with canopies and everything else, the whole building is a sign identified by the brand. Mr. Beattie stated that people know the gas station is there without a large freestanding sign. He does not see a problem with a sign being placed on the western side of the property. Mr. Hansen said one car would block the proposed alternate sign by Staff. Mr. Simmons confirmed that the maximum height for a monument sign is twelve feet. Mr. Graham stated 7-11's presence needed to be the same as Shell's based on standards. Mr. Roberts reemphasized Mr. Beattie's point by stating that 7-11 and Shell are well known brands; the colors brand the building. He said if price point is a concern, then the Petitioner has up to twelve feet to let the customer know about the price. Mr. Hansen stated the concern is the amount of time that the customer has a decision to make. He said potential customers make a decision after they see a price. Mr. Hansen stated there is a building to the east across Fairview A venue that is out to the street. He said visibility to the building is restricted. He stated the 7-11 signage on the building is inadequate because the convenience store is located behind a canopy, hidden behind pumps, and traffic. Mr. Hansen said there is only one small sight line where one of the driveways is located. He stated signage is very critical. Chairman Rogers asked if all three elements (Shell, 7-11, and price point) could be included on a twelve foot sign. Mr. Graham stated that they could accept a fifteen foot sign to accommodate landscaping and snow banks. There was general discussion about branding and placement of the freestanding sign. Mr. Youngquist asked why the canopies could not be co-branded. There was general discussion regarding the brand operations of Shell and 7-11. Mr. Graham discussed the need for teaming up with Shell and 7-11. He said he could do a twelve foot sign with three feet allocated for landscaping. Mr. Graham stated that if he can show that a seventeen foot sign is unacceptable by the Village, Shell would grant an exemption to their standard. Chairman Rogers asked the Petitioner if he looked at all the items up for approval and denial. Mr. Hansen stated there were some errors and calculations in regards to the wall signs. Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting February 26, 2009 PZ-06-09 Page 3 of 5 John Streetz, 232 W. Interstate, Addison, IL represented Doyle Signs. He stated that they are requesting an additional sign Variation in which it would allow an additional sign on the south elevation. He said they would need a Variation of approximately 4 square feet on the southwest elevation. Mr. Streetz said both elevations faced Northwest Highway. He wanted to correct the Staff report; based on the survey, it indicated the sign band area is bigger than how it was calculated. The Staff report showed the sign band at 3 feet tall; it was actually 3 feet 11 inches tall. Mr. Streetz stated on these dimensions, the southwest elevation would allow a 53 square feet wall sign; the south elevation would allow approximately 69.4 square feet. He said one sign on one side would be okay based on the signable wall area and the other side would be over by four square feet. Mr. Streetz stated code would normally allow one wall sign per street frontage. He said this would translate into potential signs on Fairview and Henry in additional to the proposed signs on Northwest Highway. Mr. Streetz stated that they are not requesting any additional signs on Fairview or Henry; he asked the fact the they are not proposing additional signage be included in the Variation request. Mr. Streetz said the wall signs are not overbearing or cumbersome on the store front. He stated by having an equal size on both sides would create balance. Mr. Streetz stated the building has a unique layout, so only one sign is seen from a distance going in either direction on Northwest Highway. Chairman Rogers asked if the Petitioner would be able to live with the one wall sign smaller by four square feet to meet the 40% requirement. Chairman Rogers wanted to make sure they are in compliance with both wall signs. Mr. Streetz said he could do this. Chairman Rogers stated the Petitioner currently has a fifteen foot pylon sign. He said this property is one of the few properties that have a fifteen foot pylon sign. Chairman Rogers asked if the Petitioner could live with a fifteen foot Pylon sign that would allow: four feet for Shell, four feet for 7-11, and give 3 feet at the bottom to raise the sign above the ground. Mr. Graham said he could do it and he is willing to compromise. Chairman Rogers said everything else in the Staff Report would remain the same as far as approvals, with the exception of the actual dimensions of the wall signs. He stated as long as the Petitioner stayed within the 40 percent of the actual dimensions of the wall signs. Don Hansen asked Chairman Rogers if they were talking about keeping the pylon sign in its present location. Chairman Rogers stated that he didn't see how the sign could be moved into the driveway and said the sign would have to be kept where it's at and go to the 15 feet max, which they have know. Chairman Rogers swore in Nancy Fritz, 103 N. MacArthur Drive, Mount Prospect, Illinois. Ms. Fritz attended the meeting to address the signage issues. She said seventeen feet for the freestanding sign was a major concern. She wanted to compliment the owner of the gas station. Ms. Fritz said the gas station has been a presence for the neighborhood. She preferred the wall signs to be similar to the existing wall signs. Chairman Rogers asked if there was anyone else in the audience to address this case. Hearing none, he closed the public portion of the case at 9: 12 p.m. and brought the discussion back to the board. Mr. Simmons clarified the motion with the Commission; to approve the two wall signs facing Northwest Highway contingent they meet the 40 % signable wall area and approve the ground sign maintaining the existing 15 foot height, which was approved in the 1992 Variation, and also the existing setback in its current location. Chairman Rogers stated that was correct because it was the only place it can be. He stated that everything remains the same as staff, with the exception of the maintaining the 15 foot height and leaving the location where it's at. Mr. Floros made a motion; seconded by Mr. Youngquist to approve the following motions: 1) A Variation to install two wall signs along Northwest Highway Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting February 26, 2009 PZ-06-09 Page 4 of 5 2) A Variation request to increase the maximum height for a freestanding sign from twelve (12) feet to fifteen (15) feet, and 3) A Variation request to reduce the required sign setback for a freestanding sign from five (5) feet to three and three quarter (3.75) feet, subject to the Petitioner obtaining a permit from the Community Development Department and the following conditions: a. The existing changeable copy wall sign on the south fayade shall be removed. b. No additional wall signs shall be permitted to be installed on the building. c. Wall signs shall not exceed forty percent of the signable area in size. d. The freestanding sign shall include a pole skirt as a base for the sign. The Planning and Zoning Commission's decision is final for this case. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Beattie, Floros, Haaland, Roberts, Youngquist, Rogers NAYS: NONE Motion was approved 6-0. After hearing one additional case, Mr. Beattie made a motion to adjourn at 9:57 p.m., seconded by Mr. Roberts. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Ryan Kast, Community Development Adm in istrative Ass istant Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting February 26, 2009 PZ-06-09 Page 5 of5