Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/28/2012 P&Z Minutes 16-12MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ -16 -12 Hearing Date: June 28, 2012 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 900 Wolf Road PETITIONER: Northwest Assemblv of God PUBLICATION DATE: June 13, 2012 PIN NUMBER: 03 -26- 401 -016, -017, -021, -023, -025 REQUESTS: 1) Special Use: Electronic Message Center; 2) Variation to increase the number of permanent items of information from 6 to 7; 3) Variation to decrease the minimum displa�T time from 10 to 5 seconds; and 4) Variation to allow an LED sign Nvith animation, multiples colors, graphics, and fonts. MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Chair William Beattie Joseph Donnelly Tom Fitzgerald Leo Floros Jacqueline Hinaber Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Consuelo Andrade, Senior Planner Brian Simmons, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Robert Bouse, Michael Mallon, Bill Hollev Chairman Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. Mr. Youngquist made a motion, seconded by Mr. Donnelly to approve the minutes of the Mav 24, 2012 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting; the minutes Nvere approved 5 -0 Nvith Mr. Donnelly and Mr. Fitzgerald abstaining. After hearing two (2) previous cases, Chairman Rogers introduced Case PZ- 16 -12, 900 Wolf Road at 8:01 p.m. Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner for PZ -16 -12 Nvas seeking a Special Use for a freestanding sign consisting of an electronic message center on each face and Variations to increase the number of permanent items of information from six (6) to seven (7), allow a display time less than ten (10) seconds, and allow an LED sign Nvith animation, multiples colors, graphics, and fonts. Ms. Andrade said the Subject Property is located at the Northwest corner of Wolf and Kensington Roads and contains a church Nvith related improvements including a freestanding sign on the Southeast corner of the Subject Property. Ms. Andrade stated the existing freestanding sign is v- shaped and identifies the Northwest Assembly of God, including two (2) logos. Ms. Andrade said the Petitioner Nvould like to replace the existing freestanding sign Nvith a new v- shaped freestanding sign that consists of an electronic message center on each face. Per the Petitioner's sign draNving, the proposed freestanding sign Nvould measure eight (8) feet in height and measure approximately thirty -five (35) Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -16 -12 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2012 Page 1 of 6 square feet in area per sign face, including an electronic message center. The Village Sign Code allows electronic message centers to occupy up to fifty (50) percent of the total area of the sign face. In this case, an electronic message center up to seventeen (17) square feet Nvould be permitted. The proposed electronic message center on each face Nvould measure approximately fifteen (15) square feet in area. Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner Nvould like the proposed electronic message center to consist of a display time of less than thirty (30) seconds, which requires Special Use approval. HoNvever, the Village Sign Code requires an interval of no less than ten (10) seconds. The Petitioner Nvas requesting a Variation to decrease the minimum display period from ten (10) to five (5) seconds. Ms. Andrade referenced the folloNving table: Ms. Andrade said the table compared the proposed freestanding sign Nvith the Sign Code regulations. As proposed, the new sign Nvould consist of seven (7) permanent items of information, including the name and three (3) logos, when the Village Sign Code allows up to six (6). The Petitioner Nvas requesting a Variation to increase the number of permanent items of information from six (6) to seven (7). Ms. Andrade stated per the Petitioner, the electronic message centers Nvould be used to its fullest functional extent. The proposed electronic message centers would be full color LED signs that Nvould include animation, images and/or text. The sign Nvould include a variety of colors and text. The Village Sign Code requires uniformity in color, appearance, and font. Animation is not alloNved per the Village Sign Code. The Petitioner Nvas requesting a Variation to allow electronic message centers consisting of animation and a variety of colors, appearance, and font. She showed examples of other LED message center signs that illustrated the potential of the proposed sign. Ms. Andrade discussed the standards for a Special Use. The standards include: • Protection of public safety and Nvelfare; • Harmon -,T Nv th the scale and architecture of nearby buildings and signs; • Lack of negative impacts on adjacent properties or signs; and • Compliance Nvth other provisions of the Sign Regulations. Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -16 -12 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2012 Page 2 of 6 Code regulations Proposed Sign Height Max. 8' 8' Area Max. 40 sq.ft. 35 sq.ft. Setbacks Min. 5' 10' (corner) 17.10' (south) 17 10' Permanent Items of Information Max. 6 7 Electronic Reader Board Area Max. 17 sq.ft. 15 sq.ft. Distance to Another EMC Sign (display less than 30 seconds) Min. 600' ±6,000' to EMC on Rand Road Ms. Andrade said the table compared the proposed freestanding sign Nvith the Sign Code regulations. As proposed, the new sign Nvould consist of seven (7) permanent items of information, including the name and three (3) logos, when the Village Sign Code allows up to six (6). The Petitioner Nvas requesting a Variation to increase the number of permanent items of information from six (6) to seven (7). Ms. Andrade stated per the Petitioner, the electronic message centers Nvould be used to its fullest functional extent. The proposed electronic message centers would be full color LED signs that Nvould include animation, images and/or text. The sign Nvould include a variety of colors and text. The Village Sign Code requires uniformity in color, appearance, and font. Animation is not alloNved per the Village Sign Code. The Petitioner Nvas requesting a Variation to allow electronic message centers consisting of animation and a variety of colors, appearance, and font. She showed examples of other LED message center signs that illustrated the potential of the proposed sign. Ms. Andrade discussed the standards for a Special Use. The standards include: • Protection of public safety and Nvelfare; • Harmon -,T Nv th the scale and architecture of nearby buildings and signs; • Lack of negative impacts on adjacent properties or signs; and • Compliance Nvth other provisions of the Sign Regulations. Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -16 -12 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2012 Page 2 of 6 Ms. Andrade said the proposed freestanding sign complies Nvith Sign Code regulations in regards to the height, area, and setbacks. The proposed sign Nvould be compatible Nvith existing signs located along Kensington Road. The sign Nvould not negatively impact adjacent properties or existing signs. Ms. Andrade stated the Variations must comply Nvith the standards as listed in the zoning code. The Variation standards include: • The sign allowed under code regulations will not reasonably identifv the business; • The hardship is created by unique circumstances and not serve as a convenience to the Petitioner, and is not created by the person presently having an interest in the sign or property*; • The variation Nvill not be materially* detrimental to the public Nvelfare or injurious to other property* or improvements in the neighborhood; and • The variation Nvill not impair visibility* to the adjacent property*, increase the danger of traffic problems or endanger the public safety*, or alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and be in harmony* Nvith the spirit and intent of this chapter. Ms. Andrade said the Petitioner Nvas requesting a Variation to increase the number of permanent items of information from six (6) to seven (7). The permanent items of information Nvould consist of the church's name and three (3) logos. Staff Nvas not supportive of the Variation request to increase the number of permanent items as it feels that six (6) items of information and the proposed electronic message center can reasonably* identifv the church. Ms. Andrade stated in regards to the display* time, the Petitioner Nvas requesting a Variation to allow a minimum display* time of five (5) seconds when the Village Sign Code requires a minimum of ten (10) seconds. Per the Petitioner, they* Nvould like to maximize the number of announcements for service and events. The primary* mission is to reach out to residents in Mount Prospect and the surrounding communities. Staff can appreciate the Petitioner's need to promote the church's services and events but does not feel there is a unique hardship. Ms. Andrade said the third Variation request Nvas to allow electronic message centers Nvith animation, multiple colors, graphics, and fonts. Per the Petitioner, the proposed sign Nvould be used to its fullest functional extent. The sign Nvill be the sole source of signage for the church. The church Nvould no longer rely* on temporary* yard signs, building Nvall signs or any other promotional vehicles for outreach events and service announcements. Staff Nvas not supportive of the Variation request to allow animation, multiple colors, graphics, and fonts as it could be a distraction and potentially* cause traffic problems or endanger the public safety*. This can especially* be the case because of the proposed five (5) second display* time and animation, including multiple colors, graphics, and/or fonts. The Village has not supported requests for animation or differing fonts or colors in the past. A Variation Nvas supported for Randhurst Village to include multiple colors on an electronic message center sign Nvith the condition that messages Nvith multiple colors be limited to trademarked corporate logos of tenants of the shopping center. HoNvever, the Randhurst Village development is unique due to the scale and layout of the development and the subject request does not fit the criteria used to support this previous variation request. Ms. Andrade stated based on analysis, the proposed sign met the standards for a Special Use. Staff recommended that the Planning & Zoning Commission approve the freestanding sign consisting of an electronic message center on each face. Staff recommended that the Planning & Zoning Commission deny* Variation requests to increase the number of permanent items, decrease the minimum display* time and to allow a sign Nvith animation, multiple colors, graphics and fonts. The Subject Case is Planning & Zoning Commission final. Mr. Beattie asked Staff to clarifv the seven (7) permanent items on the proposed sign. Ms. Andrade said the seven (7) items include the three (3) logos and each Nvord in "NorthNvest Assembly* of God" Nvould count as an item of information. Ms. Hinaber asked if the address on the stonework below the message center Nvould count as a permanent item of information. Ms. Andrade stated that it is a part of the sign and Nvould not count as an item of information. Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -16 -12 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2012 Page 3 of 6 Mr. DonnelIv asked if the Village Code alloNved electronic message centers on RX zoned properties. Ms. Andrade said that the Code is based on the use of the property. The church is alloNved a freestanding sign for the Subject Property. Mr. Donnelly asked if there Nvere limitation on electronic signs in or near school zones due to distractibility. Mr. Simmons stated that Nvere no restrictions. Schools are alloNved ground signs and if they Nvanted an electronic message center, then they Nvould have to apply for Special Use approval. Chairman Rogers swore in the Petitioner, Robert Bouse, 1809 Taft Avenue, Rolling Meadows, Illinois. Mr. Bouse stated that NorthNvest Assembly of God has been located at the Subject Property for forty -five (45) Nears. He discussed the church's goals in reaching out to the community. Mr. Bouse said the existing ground sign is old and needs to be taken doN -,n and replaced. He stated an electronic message center would help the church communicate messages to the community on Nvhat they can offer. Mr. Bouse discussed the church's population and the variety of free programs and services that they offer to others in the community. He introduced members in attendance from the church board along Nvith representatives from the sign company and manufacturer. Mr. Bouse said that the church has historically put up temporary signs and banners to announce events. He questioned whN- the permitted temporary signs could be in multiple colors, but the message center Nvould have to be uniform in color. Mr. Bouse said that the church misstated a request in their original submittal for the subject zoning case. On the summary and justification for Special Use Permit Application, the Petitioner originally requested in Item C that "the Village permit Variation to the uniform color and size of the lettering of the changeable copy to permit full capability of the LED Watchfire message center as proposed by Bright Light Sign Company." Mr. Bouse stated the mistake Nvas Nvith the Nvords "full capability." He said the church had no intention at all of using the animation for the sign. Mr. Bouse stated that the church Nvas seeking permission for fixed graphics Nvith multi - colors on display, however there Nvould be no movement or scrolling. Chairman Rogers discussed how graphics have been a problem for electric signs as they are too distracting. There Nvas a brief discussion regarding the signs located across Wolf Road at the Safari Childcare Shopping Center. The Petitioner Nvas under the impression that those Nvere not electronic message centers. Chairman Rogers still believed that the electronic messages from all signs Nvould be too distracting. He Nvas opposed to any type of graphics. Mr. Bouse discussed the display period for the proposed sign. He stated the request from ten (10) seconds to five (5) seconds Nvould only be requested if graphics Nvere not alloNved. He Nvas in agreement that five (5) seconds Nvould be too fast for graphics. Chairman Rogers believed the sign Nvith the fast changing graphics and colors Nvould be a nuisance. He discussed how the intersection Nvhere the proposed sign Nvould be located is a highly traveled area. Mr. Bouse discussed the church's request for graphics. He stated that people are visual learners and remember and retain messages visually more so than plain text. Mr. Bouse said that he did not like signs that Nvere distractions. He stated that the proposed sign Nvould not be a distraction and Nvould Nvant it to be the sign that sets the example for the community. Mr. Bouse shoNved some examples of how the church Nvould like to convey a message to the community through a graphic versus text. Mr. Bouse discussed the Variation for number of items of information on the proposed sign. He said the Church's Mission Statement is on their Nvebsite. Their logo has three (3) pieces to it, but it is one (1) logo for the church. Mr. Bouse stated that they could not lose one of the logos because then their mission statement would be incorrectIv displayed. Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -16 -12 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2012 Page 4 of 6 Chairman Rogers swore in Michael Mallon, 501 N. Garfield, Lombard, Illinois. Mr. Mallon Nvanted to introduce himself to the Commission; he is employed by Watchfire Signs who is the maker of the LED display for the proposed sign. There Nvas general discussion regarding the illumination levels. Mr. Simmons stated the Code allows 5,000 nitts during the day and 500 nitts during the night. Chairman Rogers confirmed Nvith Mr. Mallon that the proposed sign Nvould conform to the Village Code's illumination levels. Mr. Mallon said that the proposed sign's illumination levels are adjustable. Mr. Mallon stated that he met Nvith the Village Board last fall regarding a proposed sign for Randhurst Village. He said there Nvere a lot of concerns from the Village Board regarding brightness. Mr. Mallon discussed meeting Nvith mariv members of the Village Board on a Saturday last Near and Nvas able to provide actual exhibits shoNving 10,000 nitts during the dad -mime. He said mariv of the Village Board members felt that 10,000 nitts during the daytime Nvas appropriate. Mr. Mallon discussed how the proposed sign Nvould adjust the brightness based on the existing Nveather conditions during the day and then the sign Nvould automatically adjust to 500 nitts at night. Chairman Rogers confirmed Nvith Mr. Mallon that the proposed sign for the Subject Case Nvould have these options along Nvith controls preventing the settings from being changed. Mr. Mallon discussed how LED signs are an emerging technology. He stated that he has met Nvith several Village Boards and Commissions on adjusting their Codes to the new type of signs. He said he Nvas unaNvare of any statistics showing that signs Nvith graphics cause more accidents than those Nvithout. Mr. Mallon discussed how the proposed sign Nvould allow the Petitioner to reach out to the community to those that are unaNvare of the services offered. Chairman Rogers said that the Village uses signs to identify a particular property or a particular business; they are not intended to provide advertisements. He stated that they may change someday Nvith the new technology, but the Commission needs to abide by the current Codes. Mr. Mallon stated that he Nvorked Nvith Naperville approximately three (3) to four (4) Nears ago to help revise their Sign Ordinance to allow full color message centers Nvith graphics. He said there Nvas all positive feedback regarding the changes that Nvere made. Chairman Rogers swore in Bill Holley from Bright Light Signs, 310 Telser Road, Lake Zurich, Illinois. Mr. Hollev stated that they are limited Nvith space on the message center portion of the proposed sign. He said the real purpose of an electronic message center is to advertise. Mr. Hollev stated the ten (10) second limit on the text type of message board Nvould be difficult to get enough text to convey messages. He believed the Petitioner could sav a lot more in their messages Nvith graphics. Mr. Holley discussed how technology has evolved and the graphics are no longer as distracting as the older signs Nvere. Chairman Rogers asked if there Nvas anyone else in the audience to address this case. Hearing none, he closed the public portion of the case at 8:44 p.m. and brought the discussion back to the board. Mr. DonnelIv asked Nvhat the difference Nvas between the proposed sign and the other signs at the same intersection. Mr. Simmons stated the Walgreens sign at the Southeast corners of the intersection is not an electronic sign; it is a manually changed sign. The signs for the shopping center at the Northeast corner of the intersection are considered changeable copy signs. Mr. Simmons said these signs are basically the same as Walgreens, but in an electronic format. The Code permits electronic changeable copy boards as long as the intervals are at least thirty (30) seconds or greater. Anything less than thirty (30) seconds Nvould be considered an electronic message center requiring Special Use approval. Mr. Simmons stated then there Nvould be restrictions in place how close message centers could be located Nvithin one another. Mr. DonnelIv still had concerns about the proposed sign because of the busy intersection, area school crossings, and increased traffic on Kensington Road Nvith the Randhurst Village. He did not Nvant to see additional distractions added to the area. Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -16 -12 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2012 Page 5 of 6 Mr. Floros made a motion, seconded by Ms. Hinaber to approve a Special Use permit to allow a freestanding sign consisting of electronic message centers on each face, for the property at 900 Wolf Road, as illustrated on the plans prepared by Bright Light Sign dated March 9, 2012, subject to the following conditions of approval subject to the following conditions: a) The electronic reader board shall have a display period of ten (10) seconds before changing; b) Compliance Nvith the standards for electronic message centers as listed in Section 7330 (A) of the Sign Code; c) Removal of the existing freestanding sign located at the southeast corner of the property; and d) Submittal of a revised landscape plan that shows the base of the sign Nvill be landscaped as required by the Sign Code. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Beattie, Fitzgerald, Floros, Hinaber, Youngquist NAYS: Donnelly, Rogers The motion Nvas approved 5 -2. There Nvas additional discussion on how the Commission could vote on the Variations. It Nvas suggested by Staff to vote on each Variation as a separate item. Mr. Donnelly made a motion, seconded by Mr. Youngquist to approve a Variation to increase the number of permanent items of information from six (6) to seven (7). UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Beattie, Donnelly, Fitzgerald, Floros, Hinaber, Youngquist, Rogers NAYS: None The motion Nvas approved 7 -0. Mr. Donnelly made a motion, seconded by Mr. Floros to approve a Variation to decrease the minimum display time from ten (10) to five (5) seconds. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: None NAYS: Beattie, Donnelly, Fitzgerald, Floros, Hinaber, Youngquist, Rogers The motion Nvas denied 7 -0. Mr. Donnelly made a motion, seconded by Mr. Beattie to approve a Variation to allow an LED sign Nvith multiple colors, graphics, and fonts for the property at 900 Wolf Road. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Floros NAYS: Beattie, Donnelly, Fitzgerald, Hinaber, Youngquist, Rogers The motion Nvas denied 6 -1. All items for the Subject case Nvere Planning & Zoning Commission final. Mr. Donnelly made a motion, seconded by Mr. Beattie to adjourn at 8:58 p.m. The motion Nvas approved by a voice vote and the meeting Nvas adjourned. Ryan Kast, Community Development Administrative Assistant Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -16 -12 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2012 Page 6 of 6