Loading...
Minutes - 11/30/2009 - Intergovernmental Joint Review BoardMINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 30, 2009 JOINT SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AND THE PLAN COMMISSION OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK APPROVED AS WRITTEN BY THE PLAN COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 15, 2010 AND BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ON MARCH 2, 2010. 1. CALUTO ORDER: CALL To ORDER The Special Meeting of the Plan Commission was called to order by Acting Chairman Gopal Lalmalani in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Butler Government Center at 7:07 p.m. The Special Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was called to order by Chairman Champ Davis in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Butler Government Center at 7:07 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: ROLL CALL Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons PLAN COMMISSION: PRESENT: Chairwoman Marcia Tropinski (arrived 7:15 p.m.), Members Thomas Doyle, Raymond Dunn, Raju Iyer, Gopal Lalmalani, Robert Lindgren and Mintu Sharma ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PRESENT: Chairman Champ Davis, Members Jeffrey Bulin, Natalie Cappetta, Baker Nimry, Joseph Rush, Steven Young and Wayne Ziemer IN ATTENDANCE: Mark Moy, Trustee, David Niemeyer, Village Manager, Mark Sterk, Village Attorney and Robert Kallien Jr., Director of Community Development 3. NEW BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK — ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT vOB - TEXT AMEND. - SIGN AMENDMENT — SIGN REGULATIONS REGULATIONS VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals and Plan Commission Joint Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 7 November 30, 2009 Chairman Davis swore in all those who would provide testimony in this matter. John Houseal, Houseal Lavigne Associates, reviewed the proposed Sign Regulations that, when approved, would replace the existing regulations in the Zoning Ordinance. A PowerPoint presentation was provided to review the highlights and provide visuals of how some of the signs could be placed on various buildings and sites. The B -2 District (the Oakbrook Center) and ORA -3 (McDonald's campus) were modified the least. He reviewed some of the major differences between the existing sign regulations and the proposed draft regulations as follows: Sign Heieht The existing regulations allow a maximum height of 35 feet. Tall buildings are at a disadvantage with this restriction and are inconsistent with the signage in neighboring towns. The proposed regulations allow signs to be placed at the top of buildings (excluding roof -top screening/mechanical rooms). Signs are permitted on two sides of a building and business logos are permitted. Ouantity of Signaee The existing regulations allow a minimum 100 square feet of signage per building and a maximum 240 square feet per lot. The controls make it difficult for sites with multiple buildings. The proposed regulations allow one square foot of frontage per zoning lot or 1500 square feet whichever is less. Number of Monument Signs Also known as ground signs. The existing regulations allow one sign per frontage. The proposed regulations allow one sign per frontage, one additional sign for frontages in excess of 700 feet, but they must be located 500 feet apart, which will provide for better signage and better notifications for motorists. Size of Monument Signs The existing regulations allow 66 percent of total signage and 66 square feet for office buildings that are less than 100,000 square feet. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals and Plan Commission Joint Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 7 November 30, 2009 The proposed regulations allow 100 -120 square feet per sign face, 200 -240 square feet total. Off - Premises ID Signs The existing regulations do not allow these signs. The proposed regulations allow these signs on Village (right of way) property for properties that cannot be located/identified /seen from major intersections. They would be permitted through the special use process and would require public hearing approval or a consideration for the Village to consider creating a way - finding program that would have a Village monument design feature with the gateway feature or streetscape. The Village would decide where they would be located and could issue permits for the placards that would be on the sign. It would help people to look at them for direction to other local businesses. Sign Measurement The existing regulations are subjective and can be confusing. The proposed regulations depict the area and sign face with diagrams showing how to measure. There is a maximum height and no ambiguity as far as allowable sign area. Temporary Signs The existing regulations do not allow temporary signs. The proposed regulations allow them for a limited duration with a permit and controlled by a certain size and location. Grandfather Clause The existing regulations allow them. The proposed regulations allow them to continue to exist. The signs can be maintained for maintenance purposes, but beyond that, they would have to comply with the new regulations. The illustrations identified that a sign could be placed on the top face of a building at the comer and anchored to the building. They cannot be located on the HVAC screening or parapet wall. They can be located on two sides of a VILLAGE OF OAK 13ROOK Zoning Board of Appeals and Plan Commission Joint Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 7 November 30, 2009 building, but cannot abut each other on adjacent walls. They cannot be located on a random floor of the building. Sign lettering must be one color, but the logos can match the corporate logo colors. William Lindeman, resident said that he was in support of the ordinance, but he did not allow himself enough time to fully comprehend it. He asked about light, color, illumination, source and box signs. He questioned allowing product names on buildings, such as Sharpie, etc. Mr. Houses] responded to the questions and identified the appropriate sections in the regulations. He clarified that an appeal could be filed as it exists in the zoning ordinance or a variation can also be sought. The Commissioners and Members raised questions on the following issues that were addressed by Mr. Houseal. • Remove off -site premises way - fording signs and recommend that the Village Board review it for further consideration. • The Scope section of the regulations lacks the language that signage is for the clear identification of property for safety, access and egress • Numbers should be required to be located on monuments signs. • Include residential signage. Director of Community Development Kallien commented that when the commercial revitalization plan was adopted as part of the Village's Comprehensive Plan there were specific recommendations, including the development of Planned Development Regulations, which has been accomplished along with an updated sign code. An issue that had been raised by staff is that the current sign ordinance has been an impediment regarding certain economic development activities. In today's world it appears that some companies make decisions on where they locate based on the amount of signage they could get. The existing sign code is very restrictive, not allowing signs above 35 feet for all of the office buildings and has been identified as an impediment for attracting new business into the community. The recommendations address those deficiencies that have been identified. The proposed code minimizes the impacts on adjacent properties, which is one of the key requirements of a text amendment. Member Bulin suggested that a landscape plan be required along with the requirement to maintain the landscaping. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals and Plan Commission Joint Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 7 November 30, 2009 Mr. Houseal said that the Plan Development Regulation process would not be held strictly to the proposed sign regulations. The applicant's package would contain all development details, including those for signage. They could seek relief to the sign regulations if they were requested and approved during the PD approval. Member Cappetta noted that the proposed way - finding program was deficient in details and could not be reviewed, so it should not be allowed as presented. She also noted that there was a limit of one political sign allowed on a property; and that requirement could impact free speech. Director of Community Development Kallien said that further refinements should be made on political signs with the input from the Village Attorney. Member Nimry said that most homeowner associations have common areas and all signs should be prohibited in those areas for any advertisements or political signs. He questioned if recourse could be provided to fine those that place signs in those areas. Member Dunn added that signage should also be prohibited from light poles and stop signs as well. Member Ziemer asked for clarification of the calculations of the sign measurements on the monument signs as depicted on the illustration. Mr. Houseal reviewed the calculations as shown. Mr. Houseal and Director of Community Development Kallien summarized the conditions and concerns to be recommended to the Village Board as follows: 1. Other than signs approved by a homeowner association, all other types of signs are to be prohibited in subdivision common areas. 2. Exclude any references in the ordinance to political signs, and direct staff and the Village Attorney to develop appropriate language to address this issue. The political sign issue will be added to the code as a separate amendment. 3. Require landscape plans for all monument signs, including maintenance of the landscaping as a requirement so that the sign remains visible. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals and Plan Commission Joint Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 7 November 30, 2009 RC 4. The proposed way - finding signage should not be part of the new sign code but should be addressed as a separate program, and an adequate study of all issues (location, design, size, utilization by private businesses, etc). The matter could come back as a future amendment to the Village Code. 5. Eliminate reference in the ordinance to off - premises signs and address this issue along with way- finding signage. 6. Establish additional clarification on what a parapet wall is. 7. Include the existing signage regulations to cover our residentially zoned areas. 8. Address numbers should be encouraged to be part of any monument signage. 9. Some additional standards need to be developed to permit larger signs that are on the buildings that are in excess of 150 feet in height. The140 square foot limitation is grossly inadequate for these structures. 10. Address concerns raised by the Village Attorney, which relate to minor editing and word - smithing. PLAN COMMISSION Motion by Member Doyle, seconded by Member Dunn to recommend approval of the text amendment to amend Chapter 11 of the Zoning Regulations as revised subject to the conditions stated at this hearing. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 7 — Members Doyle, Dunn, Iyer, Lalmalani, Lindgren, Sharma and Chairwoman Payovich. Nays: None. Motion Carried. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Chairman Davis noted that the Plan Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the proposed sign regulations as revised and that the applicant had addressed the standards as required for a text amendment. Motion by Member Young, seconded by Member Rush to recommend approval of the text amendment to amend Chapter 11 of the Zoning Regulations as revised subject to the conditions stated at this hearing. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 7 — Members Bulin, Cappetta, Nimry, Rush, Young, Ziemer and Chairman Davis Nays: None. Motion Carried. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals and Plan Commission Joint Special Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 7 November 30, 2009 a ADJOURNMENT: Motion by Chairwoman Tropinski, seconded by Member Dunn to adjourn the Plan Commission meeting at 9:28 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Rush to adjourn the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting at 9:28 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried ATTEST: Robert Kallien, erector of C munity Development Secretary VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals and Plan Commission Joint Special Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 7 November 30, 2009 ADJOURNMENT