The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About03-02-21 Plan Commission Agenda PacketZoning Board of Appeals & Plan Commission Tuesday, March 02, 2021 7:00 PM Village Boardroom 24401 W. Lockport Street Plainfield, IL 60544 Agenda ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS A.CALL TO ORDER, PLEDGE TO THE FLAG, ROLL CALL B.APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the Minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on February 16, 2021. 02-16-21 ZBA Minutes.pdf C.PUBLIC COMMENTS • Please email public comments to publiccomments@goplainfield.com, please note PUBLIC COMMENTS - ZBA in the email subject line. Comments must be received by Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 3:00 p.m. • Village Meetings are livestreamed on the Village’s Website - https://plainfield-il.org/pages/agendasmeetings, click “in progress” when available. • Live meetings are broadcast on Comcast Channel 6 and AT&T U-verse Channel 99 D.DEVELOPMENT REPORT E.OLD BUSINESS F.NEW BUSINESS CASE NUMBER: 1910-012721.VAR REQUEST: Variance (Public Hearing) LOCATION: SWC of West Ryan Lane and South Lucas Drive APPLICANT(S): Jaci Garcia Ramos and John F. Grundy Please email public comments to publiccomments@goplainfield.com, please note PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS - ZBA in the email subject line. Comments must be received by Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 3:00 p.m. 1 Zoning Board of Appeals & Plan Commission Page - 2 25321 W. Ryan Ln. Staff Report and Attachments.pdf G.DISCUSSION PLAN COMMISSION A.CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL B.APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the Minutes of the Plan Commission meeting held on February 16, 2021. 02-16-21 Plan Commission Minutes.pdf C.PUBLIC COMMENTS • Please email public comments to publiccomments@goplainfield.com, please note PUBLIC COMMENTS - PLAN COMMISSION in the email subject line. Comments must be received by Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 3:00 p.m. • Village Meetings are livestreamed on the Village’s Website - https://plainfield-il.org/pages/agendasmeetings, click “in progress” when available. • Live meetings are broadcast on Comcast Channel 6 and AT&T U-verse Channel 99. D.DEVELOPMENT REPORT E.OLD BUSINESS F.NEW BUSINESS CASE NUMBER: 1912-020921.SU.PP REQUEST: Special Use for Planned Development (Public Hearing), Preliminary Plat LOCATION: SWC of West Renwick Road and South Illinois Route 59 APPLICANT: AlphaLandmark LLC. / Gene Kripak Please email public comments to publiccomments@goplainfield.com, please note PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS - PLAN COMMISSION in the email subject line. Comments must be received by Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 3:00 p.m. Pavillion Staff Report.pdf Aerial Overlay.pdf Pavillion Development Packet.PDF Pavillion Plat.pdf CASE NUMBER: 1914-022621.FP REQUEST: Final Plat LOCATION: North of 127th Street, west of Book Road APPLICANT: M/I Homes of Chicago Lansdowne Phase 2 Staff Report & Final Plat.pdf G.ADJOURN 2 Zoning Board of Appeals & Plan Commission Page - 3 REMINDERS - March 15th - Village Board Meeting at 7:00 p.m. March 16th - Zoning Board of Appeals & Plan Commission at 7:00 p.m. 3 Zoning Board of Appeals Record of Minutes Date: February 16, 2021 Location: Village Hall (Zoom Meeting) CALL TO ORDER, PLEDGE & ROLL CALL Chairman Kiefer called the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the Pledge. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Heinen, Minnis, Renzi (7:03 p.m.), Ruane, Seggebruch, Womack, and Chairman Kiefer were present. OTHERS PRESENT: Jonathan Proulx, Director of Planning; Jessica Gal, Associate Planner; and Yuchen Ding, Associate Planner. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting held on December 15, 2020 were approved as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chairman Kiefer stated no public comments were received via email. DEVELOPMENT REPORT No Development Report. OLD BUSINESS No Old Business. NEW BUSINESS 1907-010821.VAR 15715 S. ROUTE 59 ANTHONY PENDOLINO Ms. Gal stated the applicant is seeking a variance in order to install a new +/- 12-foot-tall LED sign on the subject property. The proposed sign would incorporate a 22.5 square foot LED face, as well as a static sign face with the business name. The applicant is requesting a variance to permit a number of variations from the Village’s Zoning Code in order install a sign that is consistent with signage in the vicinity of the property, but not currently permitted in the BTD district. In accordance with the public hearing requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, notice of the subject request was published, posted on the property, and provided to abutting property owners. Ms. Gal reviewed the staff report dated February 12, 2020. Ms. Gal concluded staff recommends approval. Chairman Kiefer asked staff to comment on the public comments received from the adjacent Dunkin Donuts. Ms. Gal reviewed the comments received from Dunkin Donuts (see attached email). Chairman Kiefer swore Anthony Pendolino, applicant. Mr. Pendolino had nothing to add at this time. Commissioner Heinen asked how the LED portion of the sign compares to St. Mary’s and Dunkin Donuts. Ms. Gal stated the LED portition of the Dunkin Donuts sign is smaller and the St. Mary’s LED is larger than what the applicant is proposing. Commissioner Heinen asked if the sign will be same height of as the Dunkin Donut sign. Ms. Gal confirmed. Commissioner Heinen asked if the sign will obscure the St. Mary’s sign. Ms. Gal stated it will not but there is a large evergreen on the adjacent residential that does obscure the St. Mary’s sign. 4 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 16, 2021 Page 2 of 3 Commissioner Minnis indicated that he supports the variance only if the sign is in harmony with the neighboring parcels signs in the area. Commissioner Renzi asked if during the sign permit review by staff the applicant will need to identify the exact sign location. Ms. Gal confirmed and provided the setback location of the adjacent property signs, she also added there is no requirement per code to have the signs line up. Ms. Gal stated that if the sign complies with setback requirements and vision clearance staff would be able to approve a sign. Ms. Gal indicated that the applicant is proposing to place the sign north of the driveway. Mr. Pendolino stated he was considering placing the sign center of the house, which would be roughly 20 feet north of the driveway. Commissioner Renzi asked if all this information is taken into consider during a sign permit review. Ms. Gal confirmed. Commissioner Renzi asked if the applicant is proposing wood planking at the bottom of the sign. Mr. Pendolino confirmed. Commissioner Renzi asked how high the landscaping will be around the sign. Ms. Gal stated the landscaping purpose is to obscure half of the base and soften the base. Commissioner Renzi suggested ground covering and border plantings landscaping, so the sign is more visible. Commissioner Renzi indicated he does not have a problem with the LED portion of the sign. Commissioner Renzi suggested adding to the motion the applicant can build up to have the sign at grade level with the street, which has been allowed in previous case for signs along Route 59. Commissioner Ruane asked how the brightness of the LED signs are being measured, he is concerned that LED signs could be a distraction to drivers. Ms. Gal stated there are existing sign regulations, which include a dimmer control and lighting intensity. Ms. Gal indicated that Code Enforcement should be able to measure the brightness level. Commissioner Ruane stated he feels the sign is redundant and seems out of proportion and harmony with the house. Commissioner Ruane would like the sign to be smaller and static. Commissioner Seggebruch stated the signage the applicant currently has is more in line with the BTD district and feels that zoning should not limit the applicant if the adjacent properties are more commercial. Commissioner Seggebruch suggested he does not have any concerns regarding the LED portion of the sign, the sign height, and the landscaping. Commissioner Seggebruch indicated he does not want to the LED sign to have distracting messages; it should advertise services related to the business. Commissioner Womack stated he agrees that the sign is too big in relation to the size & scale of the building. Commissioner Womack wants staff and the applicant to work on having the sign be in harmony with the scale of the building. Commissioner Womack asked what will be advertised on the LED sign. Mr. Pendolino stated the services that they offer, no outside advertising. Commissioner Womack asked if the variance is tied to another ordinance regarding message frequency, light intensity, etc. Ms. Gal stated the sign will need to follow the sign code and provided some examples from the sign code. Commissioner Womack is all for affording the applicant the same opportunities as the adjacent properties have but has an issue with the scale of the sign. Mr. Pendolino indicated that LED signs sizes are very limited. Commissioner Womack asked with a smaller sign if the aspect ratio would be the same since there are two LED signs. Mr. Pendolino stated the sign in the middle is LED and the other sign faces are static. Ms. Gal added if the commission’s motion decreases or increases the size of the sign, code states the LED portion cannot exceed 50% of the total sign area, so Ms. Gal wants them to keep that in mind if the motion is amended. Commissioner Womack asked if the base is included in the calculation. Ms. Gal stated the base is not include in the calculation. Commissioner Minnis made a motion to adopt the findings of fact of staff as the findings of fact of the Zoning Board of Appeals and recommend approval of a variance to permit an LED sign that is up to 12 feet in height and located within 400 feet of nearby animated signs for the property located at 15715 S. Route 59. 5 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 16, 2021 Page 3 of 3 Second by Commissioner Heinen. Vote by roll call: Womack, no; Seggebruch, yes; Ruane, no; Renzi, yes; Minnis, yes; Heinen, yes; Kiefer, yes. Motion carried 5-2. DISCUSSION Commissioner Ruane asked if something changed because the signs at the Sanctuary are light. Mr. Proulx stated that there was a text amendment last year that was approved that allows internal illumination. Mr. Proulx stated the signs are illuminated per a sign permit that was issued. Commissioner Renzi stated to stay consistent with the signs along Route 59 all future motions should include the applicant bring the sign up to street level grade. Chairman Kiefer agreed. Commissioner Seggebruch stated that tonight is a good example of how zoning changes over time and what would it take to have the Village rezone the property, since he feels that the BTD zoning does not make sense in that area. ADJOURN Zoning Board of Appeals meeting adjourned at 8:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Tracey Erickson Recording Secretary 6 From:Michelle Gibas To:Jonathan Proulx Cc:Tracey Erickson Subject:FW: PUBLIC COMMENTS - ZBA Date:Tuesday, February 16, 2021 11:39:21 AM From: Hank Zuwala Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 11:39 AM To: Michelle Gibas Cc: Dipa Patel ; Nikhil Patel Subject: PUBLIC COMMENTS - ZBA Good morning! Please accept this email as public comments associated with Case Number 1907-010821.VAR. Ownership of the Dunkin' located at 15719 S. Route 59 request that these comments be included as public comments for the above referenced Case Number. PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS - ZBA; Variance for illuminated ground sign at 15715 S. Route 59 My name is Hank Zuwala, acting as Agent on behalf of Ownership of the Dunkin' parcel located at 15719 S. Route 59. My firm, D.Z.A. Associates, Inc., was the architect of record for the Dunkin' project. Ownership's comments are as follow: In general terms, Ownership of the Dunkin' parcel does not object to the sign as a concept for constructing a commercial-type sign on the property located at 15715 S. Route 59 in the BT Zoning District. However, there are several comments that Ownership has, that, hopefully can be addressed and resolved during a meeting between both property Owners if determined appropriate by the ZBA. Per Staff's Report, The applicant is requesting a variance to permit a number of variations from the Village's Zoning Code in order to install a sign that is consistent with signage in the vicinity of the property, but not currently permitted in the BT Zoning District. We would like to highlight the following phrases, "...number of variations..." and "but not currently permitted". We understand, that, this is the reason why this request is presented to the ZBA today. There are several items included in the Analysis section of Staff's Report that we would like to bring to the ZBA's attention. They are as follow: 1. The Report states, With the new sign, the applicant intends to publicize new services available at the subject location, beyond the chiropractic services currently provided. 7 Please note, that, the proposed sign includes two panels; one of which includes the Doctor's name and the other, of equal size, the phone number to "book an appointment". However, the proposed sign does not identify "new services", nor does it advertise chiropractic services. We would appreciate clarification of the "new services" and whether or not these services are permitted in the BT District. 2.The Report states, The Dunkin' business has a sign that is comparable to what is proposed by the applicant. We believe this statement is accurate with respect to allowable sign area, but not sign height; one of the variance items. It is our understanding, that, the reason the Applicant is requesting a 12' high sign, is because the existing grade in the Applicant's parcel is +/- 2' lower than the grade in the adjacent Dunkin' parcel. If the proposed sign is approved by the ZBA, Ownership of the Dunkin' parcel requests that the sign height be limited to 10' as allowed by Ordinance for Ground/Monument signs, or, if the ZBA approves the 12' high sign, Ownership of the Dunkin' parcel requests that the ZBA include a Condition of Approval that restricts the Applicant from increasing the grade at the sign such, that, the modified grade is 2' higher than the existing grade. 3.Under the Zoning subsection of Analysis in the Report, the Report states, that, "...the sign provisions of the Zoning Ordinance are intended to preserve the historic and residential character of the area. Some of these differences include no LED signs and no signs incorporating internal illumination." The Report states that the Applicant is proposing a new LED sign. This is another Variance item. 4.Under the Proposed Sign subsection of the Analysis, there appears to be a conflict between Paragraph a) (2) and the last paragraph in Paragraph d) on Page #4 of 5. Paragraph a) (2) on Page #3 of 5 states, that sign regulations are adopted for the following reasons...Regulating outdoor advertising and signs of all types, in an effort to reduce visual confusion and restrict signs which increase the probability of accidents by distracting attention, obstructing vision, or otherwise affecting the public good; However, the last paragraph on Page #4 of 5 states,...Staff recognizes that the incorporation of an animated or LED sign within close proximity to other LED signs has the potential to be distracting to drivers as well as act as a disturbance to adjacent property that is still used for residential purposes. Staff would be open to encouraging a smaller sign LED sign display or incorporating only messaging (no moving images) into the electronic display. Ownership of the Dunkin' parcel could not find anything in the packet that specifically documents the location of the proposed chiropractic sign. Ownership of the Dunkin' parcel understands, that, at some point, the parcel at 15715 S. Route 59 may be rezoned to B-3 and developed for commercial use. Whether that happens next year or 5, 10 years down-the road, Ownership of the Dunkin' parcel requests that the ZBA, when considering approval of the sign, consider stipulating the location of the sign towards the north end of the parcel for two reasons; avoid the potential for distracting drivers as noted in the Ordinance, and, avoid "screening" the existing Dunkin' sign from southbound traffic on Route 59 and "screening" the proposed chiropractor sign from 8 northbound traffic on Route 59. If considering approval of the proposed sign as submitted, Ownership of the Dunkin' parcel also requests, that, the ZBA consider requesting the Applicant locate the west edge of the new sign in alignment with the west edge of the existing Dunkin' sign. It is Ownership's belief, that, this will create uniformity for locating future Ground/Monument signs as other parcels in the BT District on Route 59 are developed in the future as B-3 Districts. As stated earlier, Dunkin' Ownership does not object to the concept of the sign, but ask that the ZBA consider the items noted above when making their decision. Dunkin' Ownership is willing to meet with the adjacent property Owner and Staff to achieve an amicable solution that will satisfy both property owners and the Village. In closing, Dunkin' Ownership understands that signage is a key component for exposure and success for commercial businesses, particularly retail and restaurant uses. A new sign for 15715 S. Route 59 should also provide that Owner with exposure that will, ultimately, help translate to success as well. The new Dunkin' located at 15719 S. Route 59 is still working towards developing its presence in the area. The ground/monument sign contributes to developing that presence. Ownership of the Dunkin' parcel supports local business/development in the area, but needs to protect its ability to survive especially during this unique period in history. Ownership of the Dunkin' parcel is hopeful that the ZBA considers the requests noted in this presentation, and, if considering approval of the proposed sign, do so with the condition that both property Owners and Staff meet to hopefully come to terms on the design, height and location of the sign that will not cause undue hardship for either Owner. Respectfully, on behalf of Nikhil and Dipa Patel, Hank Zuwala, ALA D.Z.A. ASSOCIATES, INC. 2625 Butterfield Road, Suite 233N Oak Brook, IL 60523 630-230-1020 www.dzarch.com ATTENTION: This email originated from a sender that is outside the Village of Plainfield's email system. Please exercise caution when replying to this message or clicking on links or attachments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egend 13 ƗzƗ ĐnƗ Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ ĨƗŁƗ ƗƗƗƗƗ ƗƗ Ɨ ƗĩƗƗ" ƗƗƗ ƗƗƗÿƗ ƗƗƗƗƗ(DƗ nƗ % Ɨ ƗƗƗ Ɨ %Ɨ ƗƗƗ ƗƗ ƗoƗ,½Ɨ Ɨ Ɨč;ƗƗƗ ƗƗ Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ OƗ6¾Ɨ ƗƗ ƗīƗƗ Ɨă Ɨ ƗƗƗiƗ (Ɨ ƗDƗ!OƗ Ɨ ƗƗƗ Ɨ ƗĬƗ ƗƗ ƗƗƗƗ ƗƗƗƗ ËS3/23ƗƗDƗ ƗĄđ Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ ƗƗ ƗƗ ƗƗƗ Ɨ ƗąƗƗĆƗ%Ɨ Z¯ZZd®ƗćƗ ƗƗ ƗƗĈƗƗ Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ %Ɨ ƗƗ Ī ƗƗ Ɨ Ɨ ¿Ɨ 8pƗ ƗƗƗƗƗĒ Ɨ ƗƗÀƗ Ɨ ƗƗƗ Ɨ ƗƗƗ©Ɨ «ƗãqƗ Ď%ƗƗƗƗƗ Ɨ Ɨ ƗƗ Ɨ ƗƗiƗ (Ɨ ƗƗ; Ɨ Ɨ ƗƗƗ Ɨ Ɨ ƗƗ ƗƗ%Ɨ ƗƗƗƗƗ %Ɨ Ɨ ƗƗƗù ƗƗrƗÌrƗ(æƗ Ɨ!!Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ(AƗ; Ɨ Ɨ jƗ ƗƗƗƗƗƗ Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ pƗ !,,8 8Ɨ ƗB F Ɨ (ƗƗƗƗƗƗ Ɨ ƗƗƗƗ(ƗƗĀƗƗ ƗƗ Ɨ ÁƗ Ü 6 O ' ' Ɨ ĽƗ6! ƗƗ (ƗƗ ƗƗ /ƗƗƗ ƗƗ ƗƗƗ Ɨ1R,ƗƗƗjƗ Ɨ ƗƗƗƗ1RƗƗƗ '/Ɨ Ɨ !ƗAƗ ƗäkƗƗƗƗ Ɨ Ɨĥ kƗ ħƗƗƗ ƗƗ Ɨ Ɨ6°Ɨ!ƗƗ ;ƗƗ!!,'/Ɨ ƗƗƗ%Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ ƗƗ!mÍ 'AƗƗ Ɨ±Ɨ %Ɨ |[X|çƗtØ/yyvƗPĉƗ³ ÉvÓßƗñö[XƗ Ɨ íÂ!17ÃÝƗ HGYG:úéƗ C ?c)>Ɨ Ɨ ´ ^<#eƗžƗ µ<Ɨ?)Ɨ 3$,"C 8+-9C B #>Ɨ Ɨ #$Ɨ Ɨ A4C (.C -ƗgƗ&ŮƗ C 4ŠfńżhƗūŏ#Ɨ@ſƗ Į $ŐőfƗ >afƗ 4ƀŊaƗ4ŽbƗ \R¶>$Ɨ`Ɨ#hƗ --Ə4Ɨ MŒƊƒƗ šŋƗ C Ņ=ŨƗ`Ɨ?e<Ɨ C =$Ɨ m" ?Ŗŗ#cƗŴƐƗ · ŌŚƗ -Ɨ`Ɨ@)KƁŢƗ ¦ -ƗŔƗ##>Ɨ Ɣ§ @b=-K&Ɨ$&$hƗ4*$Ɨ 5C72:;%2/C0C ¸ $-Ɨ ÆƗ?6).C?6!*2BC2=<C ŎƗ M*)Ɨ?<Ɨ ¼ $űƗ KƗ#ś&Ɨ gƗ#&Ɨ ó÷Ɨ ľƗ Ĕ Ɨ Ŀ¹º²Ɨ ĻƗáåƗ ĸƗ ĴƗ ûƗï!Ƃ 7ƖƗ ŵƗ ĹƗ ĕƗ ðƗ¡ƗŸƗ Ɨ MƗŕƗ@<*Ɨ ª"""""¬Ɨ M^ƗŬņƃbƗ """P""Ɨ*B@ţ&$Ɨ&#$Ɨ Ɨ» g^ŹƗƗ >7@ C &Ɨ Ɨ Ɨ c_ƎŤ*Ɨ _)*$4ŭƗ Ɨ &_=Ƅ=ƗƗ ŲōƗ ĞƗ Ɨ ƗƑƗ ĠƗ Ɨ Ɨ #*ƗƅƗ ĖƗŇ)ƌ*ƗėƗ ŘƆŜƗ ƗÒ1o+ƗęƗ Ä87.Ɨ ĜƗÏ3 Qdd+ƗĝƗ 3Q''.Ɨ 7&1#C Ɨ6!8., ƗƗ a)Ɨ Ɨ !'Å3+Ɨ ĚƗ 3q'+Ɨ Ɨ '8<.C 1D+Ɨ WƗĵ:YõF:ƗƗĶHFģ:GHƗ Ö9Ɨ 5ť55Ɨ LũNLƓlƗļƍŦƇ5ƗÞƗ ëƗ 7! Ɨ ĦVƗ Ɨ WƗ7 ÐƗ ƗƗ Ɨ AƗ Ɨø/Ɨ %;Ɨ % Ɨ(Ɨ ìƗ 0UÇtÕÈ2020Ɨ 220U20âUƗ ü[ďƗ ~{ƗƗ ý&ƈŞlƗ}Ɨx9Ɨ şVƗQS9ÛP99xƗ łŷů&ƗĊźœ5{ƗETTT×àÑSEƗ NNN]LŻƉ5ňų)]ŰLŪ]ŶƗ įıIĤJƗķ\ċāJJI}İƗ þĂJIƗČ\ĲƗIƗuEÙuBEƗ ƋƗÊƗŉƗ ĺ~òĭXèƗîƗÔ0.Ɨ ws¢Ɨ ĳ£Ɨ ¥ÎƕƗ ws¤Ɨ ēƗ !## ### # # "# ŝe)ƗKŧřƗ ĘƗ ŃġHĢ:YƗGŀôFêƗ Ɨ '.ƗƗ Ɨ,Ú.ƗƗƗ ğƗ ěƗ zƗ ¨Ɨ VƗ+Ɨ WƗ1+Ɨ ƗƗ Ɨ Proposed Fence 14 15 *L3EU=D;M9q#&q$3Ud3]kqq q .d5G;7bq 03]D3U7<qYYLD73bEWU ;U7;q=W^qq1q,k3Uq'Uq /WqhBWSqEbqS3kq7WU7;]Uq "WYEU@qbBD`qL;bb<^q=EU9`qkWdqh<LMqh;qhWdM9qLDJ;qbWq`b3b;qbB;qV3bd];qW=qbBD`qf3]E3U7;q^<[d;`b q *;^qbB;q3bb37B;9q3YYLD73bEWUq3U9q7WYkqW=q`d]f;kqDU7Md9EU@q9]3hDU@qW=q=;U7;qLW73bEWUqh;q B;^;5kq];`Y;7b=dLLkq ^<[d;`bq7WU`E9;^3bDWUqW=qWd^q =;V7;q3YYLD73bEWUq bB;qY]WZW`<9q=;U7;qhWdL9q ;U9q3bqbB;q <9@;qW=qbB<qBWd`;q3U9qhWdM9q5;q3q=bqBE@Bq7L3``E7q3LdSDUdSq=;U7; q )e^q8X^V<^qNXcqEaqX::NkqaC4Z<:q4aqcC<qac^<<cqV<jcqcXqeaq(e84aq^qEaq4q8e^f<:qac^<<cqd^EVAqXe^qCXT<q Ze^8C4aEVAqZ^X8<aaqi<qC4:qciXqcCEVAaqEVqTEV:qXV<q6<EVAqEVc<^EX^q8C4^48c<^EacE8`q4V:qcC<qXcC<^qXV<q 6<EVAqcC<q`El<qX>qcC<qk4_:q2<qXiVqciXq^<a8e<q:XA`qcC4cqg<^kqTe8Cq<VHXkq^eVVEVAq>^<<Nkq4^XeV:qcC<q k4^:q AEg<VqcC<q>48cqcC<^<q4^<q8XkXc<`qFVqXe^q4^<4qcC<kq4^<q8e^^<VcNkqeV46N<qcXq6<qXecaF:<qX?q4qN<4aCqi<q 4^<q4OaXqZN4VVEVAqXVqC4gEVAq8CEN:^<VqaXXVq4V:qcC<qa4><ckq4q><V8<qZ^XgE:<aq6<8XS<aqEV8^<4aEVANkq ETZX^c4VcqcXqeaq#>qi<qi<^<qcXq6eEP:qcCEaq><V8<q>XNNXiFVAqcC<q8d^g<qX>qcC<qac^<<cq4aqcC<q8X:<q^<\eE^<aqi<q iXeN:qNXa<qXe^q46ENEckqcXqa4><QkqdcEREm<q4V:q<VIXkqTXacqX>qXe^qk4^:q 2<q8XVaE:<^qXd^qZ^XZXa<:q><V8<qNX84cEXVq:X<aqVXcqV<A4cEg<Nkq4>><8cq4:I48<VcqZ^XZ<^cE<aqX^qX6ac^d8cq gEaE6ENEckqcXqEV8XTEVAqX^qXecAXFVAqc^4>>E8q 2<qCWZ<qkXeq>FV:qXe^q^<\e<acq^<4aXV46N<q4V:qcC4VKqkXdqEVq4:g4V8<q>X^qkXd^qcET<q4V:q8XVaE:<^4cFXVq -n op %XCVq q!^eV:kq4V:q%48Eq!4^8Naq q2q -k4Vq(Vq +N4EV>E<N:q#(qq 16 17 Plan Commission Record of Minutes Date: February 16, 2021 Location: Village Hall (Zoom Meeting) CALL TO ORDER, PLEDGE, & ROLL CALL Chairman Kiefer called the Plan Commission meeting to order at 8:02 p.m. immediately following the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Heinen, Minnis, Renzi, Ruane, Seggebruch, Womack, and Chairman Kiefer were present. OTHERS PRESENT: Jonathan Proulx, Director of Planning; Jessica Gal, Associate Planner; and Yuchen Ding, Associate Planner. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of the Plan Commission meeting held on December 15, 2020 were approved as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chairman Kiefer stated no public comments were received via email. DEVELOPMENT REPORT No Development Report. OLD BUSINESS No Old Business. NEW BUSINESS Case No. 1906-123020.TA ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS VILLAGE OF PLAINFIELD Commissioner Womack made a motion to we continue the Public Hearing for case number 1906- 123020.TA to the March 16, 2021 meeting of the Plan Commission. Second by Commissioner Minnis. Vote by roll call: Heinen, yes; Renzi, yes; Ruane, yes; Seggebruch, yes; Minnis, yes; Womack, yes; Kiefer, yes. Motion carried 7-0. DISCUSSION No discussion. Chairman Kiefer read the reminders. ADJOURN Plan Commission meeting adjourned at 8:08 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Tracey Erickson Tracey Erickson Recording Secretary 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0.15 AERIAL OVERLAY - PAVILLION 0.3 miles0 0.15 (scale approximate)27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52