G-476 - 11/12/1991 - PERSONNEL RULES & REGS - Ordinances ORDINANCE G- 476
ORDINANCE APPROVING EMPLOYEE SAFETY INCENTIVE PRnGRAX
AND AMENDING THE PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS
OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
WHEREAS, the Village Manager has recommended an Employee Safety
Incentive Program to the President and Board of Trustees in an effort to
reduce accidents and injuries on the job; and
WHEREAS, the Village Manager has recommended that gift certificates be
awarded to eligible full-time employees under the proposed Employee Safety
Incentive Program; and
WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees find that it is in the best
interest of the Village to accept the Village Manager's recommendation in an
effort to increase safety on the job.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, DU PAGE AND COOK COUNTIES, ILLINOIS as follows:
Section 1: That the "Village of Oak Brook Employee Safety Incentive
Program" as set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, is approved.
Section 2: That Section 3(e) entitled "Rewards" of Article II (Pay
Plan) of the Personnel Rules and Regulations of the Village of Oak Brook
(Appendix D of the Code of Ordinances) is amended to read as follows:
"(e) Rewards. No reward in addition to regular compensation
shall be received from any source by individual employees for the
performance of their duties except for outstanding performance
upon written recommendation of the Village Manager to the Board of
Trustees or in accordance with the Village's Safety Incentive
Program."
Section 3: That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from
and after passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form as provided by
law.
PASSED THIS 12th day of November , 1991.
Ayes: Trustees Bartecki, Krafthefer, Payovich, Shumate, Skinner and Winters
Nays: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
ordinance G- 476
Approving Employee Safety
Incentive Program and
Amending Personnel Rules and
Regulations
Page 2
APPROVED THIS 12th day of November , 1991.
Vil ge President
ATTEST:
Village Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Village Attorney
Published 11-13-91 Pamphlet form
Date Paper
Not Published
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK EMPLOYEE SAFETY INCENTIVE PROGRAM
I. Goals and Objectives
The Goals and Objectives of the Employee Safety Incentive Program are:
A. To instill in employees the concept that the safe way to perform a task
is the most efficient and the only acceptable way.
B. To directly compensate those full-time employees who demonstrate a concern
for their safety and the safety of others.
II. Jurisdiction
The Employee Safety Incentive Program shall apply to all Regular Full-Time
Employees and will be calculated from January 1 to December 31 for each year
beginning January 1, 1992. Eligible employees who begin work with the Village
after January 1, 1992 and who do not have an avoidable accident by December
31, 1992, will have a pro-rated gift certificate award for the balance of the
year. On January 1, 1993, the new eligible employee will begin a new 12-month
period for participation in the Program. The same procedure will apply
whenever a new employee begins with the Village.
Gift certificates will be awarded to eligible employees. The amount of the
gift certificate will be determined by the risk group the eligible employee
belongs to. The Safety Committee will assign employees to the three (3) risk
groups.
Determination of avoidability will be made jointly by the Department Head and
the Safety Committee. The Department Head will make a recommendation that
will be forwarded to the Safety Committee as to whether an accident was
avoidable or unavoidable. This recommendation will be reviewed by the Safety
Committee and be the equivalent to one (1) vote when votes are taken
concerning avoidability. All votes will be made at regular Safety Committee
meetings after review and, if necessary, investigation of each accident. A
simple majority of a quorum of four (4) members is needed to make a
determination of avoidability or unavoidability.
jr/b4:eng.safety program(3)
1-131 B I '2' A
Page 1 of 3
. ..:._._. .. ,... ... .._.:..:. ... ... ..... ..... ........ .. .. .._. _ ..... . .. ..........._�.....�W..w..1.a...sv.L.i1'.tiaast...a.r�>aarui... n._u..... ...i...L....fA.<—.Lt..�... .. ... .
r
�.. FULL TIME JOB
CLASSIFICATIONS FOR
EMPLOYEE SAFETY INCENTIVE PROGRAM
POLICE DEPARTMENT GROUP
Chief A
Lieutenant A
Sergeant C
Desk Sergeant A
Patrolman C
Detectives C
CSO B
COs A
Secretary A
Clerks A
FIRE DEPARTMENT GROUP
Chief B
Captain C
Lieutenant C
Firefighter/Paramedic C
Secretary A
BUILDING DEPARTMENT GROUP
Assistant Commissioner A
Director of Code Enforcement A
Secretary A
PUBLIC WORKS GROUP
Superintendent B
Foreman C
Maintenance Man I & II C
Bldg./Maint. Journeyman C
Mechanic C
Secretary A
WATER DEPARTMENT GROUP
Foreman C
Maintenance Man I & II C
ADMINISTRATION & LIBRARY GROUP
Village Manager A
Assistant to Village Manager A
Administrative Assistant A
Executive Secretary A
Secretary A E XH= B = T A
Receptionist A
L Page 2 of 3
Librarian A
llcci c}�n� T.i}\r�ri nn T
Page 2
FINANCE GROUP
Finance Officer A
Assistant Finance Officer A
Account Clerk A
ENGINEERING GROUP
Village Engineer B
Civil Engineer B
Secretary A
SPORTS CORE GROUP
Manager A
Greens Superintendent C
Maintenance C
Bath & Tennis Club Director A
Chef B
Secretary A
Account Clerk A
Mechanic C
CATEGORIES
Group A: Personnel whose duties are primarily administrative
Group B: Employees who do considerable driving and perform Group C duties `
Group C: Emergency services personnel and maintenance personnel -
INCENTIVES
Group A: $25.00 gift certificate for personnel without an avoidable accident
for one year.
Group B: $50.00 gift certificate for employees without an avoidable accident
for one year.
Group C: $100.00 gift certificate for personnel without an avoidable accident
for one year.
6-18-91
(JR)a:SDAY
r E XH S B 2 T A
Page 3 of 3
OF OgKe
�P Apo
�v ems ,f
•1
FCOUNt�
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS 60521 -2255
708990- 3000
February 28, 1992
Mr. & Mrs. James Rys
2421 35th Street
Qak Brook, IL 60521
Mr. & Mrs. Rys:
The Board of Trustees at their meeting of February 25 , 1992 ,
voted by a margin of 5 to 1 to deny your variation request..
Your letter of February 24 , 1992 was distributed to President
Bushy and to the Board prior to .the meeting. The contents of the
letter were discussed and I have been asked to respond to you in
detail .
App) i cation_ Fees
The application fees that are charged for variation applications
and other planning and zoning petitions are based on the average
costs incurred in processing such requests.
110 Intention of Approving
With respect to your comment that the Village has no intentio:i of
approving a .fence height, the Village over the past 20 years has
received 13 petitions for fence height variations . Of these,
four were approved.
?aking AAp _lip ants. Situation into Consideration
The Board of Appeals dial take into account what you presented as
your unique circumstances. Unfortunately, they found that your
"unique situation" with respect to the security of your chi.ldxert
and dogs was not in fact unique and that the same situation
exists for many other Home owners within the community who have
small children and pets.
RYS.6
Page 2 of 2
There are no secret agreements regarding any of the standards
within the Zoning Ordinance.
Not Properly Informing Applicants
It is my understanding that you were informed by Mrs. Lakosil of
the requirements necessary for variation approval at the time the
petition was submitted.
In addition, prior to the public hearing, I talked at length with
Mr. Rys and explained the necessity of establishing a unique
situation and hardship.
I do feel badly, that you feel we were not effective in providing
you with the information you needed to understand the variation
process . I will be examining our procedures to see if we can
improve them to avoid this kind of situation.
Village of Oak Brook Intentions
The Village' s intentions are the standards that are found within
the Zoning Ordinance - in your case the 42 inch maximum fence
height. The variation procedure in the Zoning Ordinance is the
avenue by which relief can be obtained from these standards where
it can be justified under the law. All of the criteria pertain-
ing to variation requests are contained within the Zoning Ordi-
nance. There are no unpublished lists.
Closing
Since all of the above was covered during our telephone conversa-
tion last Friday, I don't expect that this letter will change how
you feel.
It was our intent with your petition as it is with all the peti-
tions that we receive, to give you every assistance that we can
in the processing of your request.
Please feel free to call me if you have any further thoughts on
this matter or if I may be of any assistance.
Sincerely,
Thomas R.
Director of Code Enforcement
cc: President Bushy
Stephen Berley
Robert Nielsen
Petition file
RYS.6
'� I
` VILLAGE. OF OAK BA Minutes Feb. 25, 1992
UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROIF BY BOARD,.
APPROVED AS WRITTEN V_ OR APPROVED
WI CORRECTIONS , BY VILLAGE BOARD
1. MEETING CALL: CALL TO ORDER
The Regular Meeting of the Board of Trustees was called to order by President
Bushy in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Village Commons at 7:30 p.m.
Pledge of Allegiance was given.
2. ROLL CALL: ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll with the following persons
PRESENT: President Bushy, Trustees Bartecki, Krafthefer, Shumate, Skinner and
Winters.
ABSENT: Trustee Payovich.
IN ATTENDANCE: Stephen Berley, Village Manager; Richard A. Martens, Village
Attorney; Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , Village Engineer; Charles G. McAdams, Sports
Core Manager and Tom Hawk, Director of Code Enforcement.
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS & OPEN FORUM:
None.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MINUTES
Trustee Skinner moved to approve the Minutes of the Committee-of-the-Whole
Meeting of February 10, 1992 as presented and waive the full reading thereof.
Seconded by Trustee Winters. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried.
Trustee Skinner moved to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
February 11, 1992 as presented and waive the full reading thereof. Seconded
by Trustee Bartecki. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried.
5. CONSENT AGENDA:
Trustee Skinner moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Seconded by Trustee
Winters. Roll Call Vote:
Ayes: 5-Trustees Bartecki, Krafthefer, Shumate, Skinner and Winters.
Nays: O.-None
Absent: 1-Trustee Payovich. Motion carried.
A. DU PAGE COUNTY AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION 5K RUN: Approved Omnibus Vote. AMER. F_EART
ASSOC. 5h RU`:
B. PAYOUTS: PAYOUTS:
1. JAMES J. BENES & ASSOCIATES - PAYOUT #4 - JORIE BOULEVARD FAUS - BENES-JORIE
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES: Approved Omnibus Vote. BLVD. FAUS
__$15,114.27
2. JAMES J. BENES & ASSOCIATES - PAYOUT #8 -- 1991 PAVING PROJECT - BENES-1991
ENGINEERING SERVICES: Approved Omnibus Vote. PAVING PROJ.
$3,662.56
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes -1- February 25, 1992
_
would be a philosophical change for the Bath &..Tennis Club and require
major physical changes.
Trustee Krafthefer moved to pass Ordinance No. G-481 as presented and
waive the full reading thereof. Seconded by Trustee Skinner. Roll Call
Vote:
Ayes: 4-Trustees Krafthefer, Shumate, Skinner and President Bushy.
Nays: 2-Trustees Bartecki and Winters.
Absent: 1-Trustee Payovich. Motion carried.
Trustee Winters moved to direct Staff to prepare a daily fee structure
proposal for the Bath & Tennis Club for the next Regular Meeting.
Seconded by Trustee Skinner. VOICE VOTE: Motion fails with Trustees
Skinner and Winters voting aye.
E. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2-225 "FEES" OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF
THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK:
This item was placed later on the agenda pending the arrival of Trustee
Payovich.
8. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS - SPECIALTY AREAS:
None.
9, FINISHED BUSINESS:
A. RECONDATION RYS REAR YARD HEIGHT VARIATION (2421 35th Street) : RYS-REAR YARD
VAR.
Application has been made for a fence variation. The Zoning Board of (2421 35th St
Appeals have recommended denial of the requested fence variation to vary
the maximum height permitted by the Village of 42 inches and allow
construction of a 60-inch high fence.
Trustee Krafthefer stated he would vote "nay" on the recommended denial
from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the requested fence variation due to
the $300.00 application fee required when most fence variations are
denied.
Trustee Skinner stated Director of Code Enforcement Hawk is assembling a
packet for residents explaining application fees and guidelines for
proposing any variations for Board approval.
Trustee Skinner moved to concur with the recommendation of the Zoning
Board of Appeals for denial due to no uniqueness of circumstances for the
requested fence variation. Seconded by Trustee Winters. Roll Call Vote:
Ayes: 4-Trustees Bartecki, Shumate, Skinner and Winters.
Nays: 1-Trustee Krafthefer.
Absent: 1-Trustee Payovich. Motion carried.
B. OAK BROOK PARK DISTRICT - DISCUSSION REGARDING UTILITY TAX .
: UTILITY TAX
President Bushy noted Oak Brook Park District President Johnson, Park
commissioners Madda and Linquist were in attendance at the meeting.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes -3-
-- February 25, 1992
♦.. '9lC6d;++B':S .rr ei^':t tM+79.lTL4� _ - ..
•ov .e+.en+rswr.arwc* nwrw.w..c AIM&
e'i+r�lM! .k fl
�4�K� `!..'"r"^4; �s*arc 3�"«.- -`'�...��..`.�„ ...Rr.,. '�.� +.�s'LS ti� • r `r � � �
-
i.S.4il►'.a_....a... r_ _s.'!? +' • +4 C1•b nlF�waCAYKf!.lY�' �'�Yft k'Ma ,P. Rs
r
i+1 3s�a�r-ticacX6 •IFS .
s 4.
EW: 7
— — -
_. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
BUREAU OF 06PECnoN
2421-West. 35th Street
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
February 24, 1992
Mr. Thomas R. Hawk
Director of Code Enforcement
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521-2255
Dear Mr. Hawk:
i
As you are aware, my wife and I are currently involved in
applying for a fence variation. I would like to share our
findings with you.
1. The Village of Oak Brook accepts resident' s
application fees ($300.00) for fence variations
with absolutely no intention of approving a
variation in excess of 42" .
2. The majority of the Zoning Board members do not
take the applicant' s "unique situation" into
consideration at all -They seem to be in
secret agreement- that no variance in excess of
" 42" be_allowed:for,;any reason- whatsoever-. _ -
- 3. The :Village=of. Oak Brook takes applicant' s 3 -
money without--properly making .them aware of._the:.. .
position of-.-those on -the..-Zoning Board.- �- . ._.. . -
It'would- seem`the Vill"age---of_.Oak Brook''has a=responsibility_to _. __. : --
its`.: residents to- make their intentions known to possible
---- - applicants requesting-fence variations -before they accept
their application fees,', It was apparent at -the . Zoning -_Board" -;
Meeting we =attended- that there-_is an "unpublished list-_of
'`''criteria_ that='must--be-`'met°before a waranceis�"_considered."
r_<• - Yet, no: one -bothered to let`�us know-'that thlii- nfidential
° of requir m e
ents existed "`="
k Nx..1 .fit:
.._�.� .at•+4.-#� �. � �`�'�+awMi •4•�—iMV � -~ � h4 5198.x]. +,
t''..y"..,'•r,�1."��: "`�s��" ��.3 •'�-,'�'*��'i��*�'�:."•�':+..Y'± 16A=,"�'9�G ._+iS'S..1�"�""' �?xFY��1aS 3'-"c:$t..y.�`�i.�s.Y'�'x� 3H'-aa.•.�rz'-� n
;;3�a SP,x -y+- s�_ s �. --• -._ -� as' .--3Lw--�--= -a+...a.... _..�° -�'"aa'."a'.�:� - a^564 -- _.�,ah.' _.e-e
-
..M...-= ,ems= _1-._ -� .sue -, ._- _ _-•s-,• .,...
=.x ' '�nP•e�w...ti-...L.w..,.a e.Zti+c•.^.�—�- .� _.c ->-W. 'a�_. _'���3 m''sc ...rw-' awsw�+�_yYira�.rra....w...
:�• _ �r_ con, _ _
r
..._ �`_..X��_.r •• —,,T,..�_ ..__.� �„'cm. .. ...���. _ ... � �.—S�Sw��.-XSSSClCSf.T -a.;T-l-r! . TC.'
��K 3� � 7rtr'S6"i-.3'- __'[°”' 6� aLF�I III fir. - „-}ka�� ' •u
> .:--•=-��''�''���� -�- - off^-�.��r.a.s�c —' _ _ +LC _
�d
. ...,.Y c a•,ti>'•#�'.aswaa'�#cAC':w''1'iE'Bt4S4 3tto�.
I g. -.•.s .,F.�.si emu✓ mx s. P a.. - -,.- •xr�.. J.,
.. z •.-tom �
. _.- _ Yr E.-r �-`1�--"' � 3 u f'Fi�'"^41'Lt2�1.»±5�+�.sa:'�•- �'si e _
MINIM 11
_ - _2 -� ��- r•Februar 24 ` 1992
Mr. Thomas Hawk y
We feel your "system" cheated us out of both -- our time and
our money -- and we feel taken advantage of by the very
organization and process you ask us to vote for in community
elections.
You may choose to write this off as a letter from an applicant
who is angry simply because he was told "no" . This is , instead,
a letter from an angry taxpayer who feels he paid his fee and
never had a chance.
Very truly yours,
i
. James J. !Rys
v `
JJR/rr
cc: Ms. Karen Bushey
President, Board of Trustees
, _ ......ys :r :ir�3 F�r '�r`-•.• ?. .:�a µ-^j sw.a�.�+,.._�w{�i�.t -+ �.,Feror.
- - _
_�-.'gds- � "-�'--�-=-�:s= •-�"""^��.:..+�''s"�' ..�e�"�S� P -
-- �.+.•� :av= �e'in- -- t-..„essaa."= nom.-�..ws� fir+*.r-+....�. �,_„ _- -
.__ -._... -_� .s -:. 1 '. "+�• -T3..'"mil -.F _ _
... •:++.a , . ....'r;. ..":ryR?a.z�-m=:sd° 3"c.:.':G�....:..evi7��. -.__�,ranaKkw+ -- -,:?t.,,.. m,�,.�c:<
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
A.
RECOMMENDATION RYS REAR YARD FENCE HEIGHT VARIATION (2421 35th REAR Y� ST.
Street) : FENCE HEIGHT
Applicant requested to table the application for a fence variation to the VARIATION
February 25, 1992 Regular Meeting of the Board of Trustees.
Trustee Skinner moved to table the requested fence variation application
to the Regular Meeting of February 25, 1992. Seconded by Trustee
Payovich. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried.
B. RECOMMENDATION OAK BROOK DARK DISTRICT COM!fMTY CENT°R ( 1425 KensLncton1425 KEN=:C
Road Site) - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE: O.B.PK.DIST.
FPS U
The Oak Brook Park District requests a Flood Plain Special Use; withdrawal
of the proposed Text Amendment and Special Use regardi.ag the proposed
Community Center.
Trustee Skinner moved to direct the Village Attorney to draft an ordinance
relative to the requested Flood Plain Special Use subject to the removal
of the Conmumity Center from the Site Plan and final engineering approval
by Village Engineer Durfey. Seconded by Trustee Payovich• Roll Call
Vote:
Ayes: 6-Trustees Bartecki., Krafthefer, Payovich, Shumate, Skinner and
Winters.
Nays: 0-None.
Absent: 0-Bone. Motion carried.
C. RECOMMENDATION ASSOCIATED EQUIP!E*TT DISTRIBUTORS (AED) FLOOD PLAIN 615 22nd ST.
SPECIAL USE (615 22nd Street
Both the Plan Commission and the Zoning Board of Appeals have recommended
approval of this requested Flood Plain Special Use subject to the
following conditions:
1) final engineering approval; agencies such as IDOT-DWR
2) permits from all other required regulatory a g
and the Corps of Engineers; and
3) resolution of the maintenance requirement issue raised by IDOT-DWR.
Trustee Skinner moved to direct the Village Attorney to draft an ordinance
relative to the requested Flood Plain Special Use subject to the following
maintenance requirements:
1) maintenance will be the responsibility of the property owner;
2) in the event the property owner defaults in its maintenance
responsibility, the Village of Oak Brook will perform the necessary
maintenance;
llage the right to enter upon the property and
3) language granting the Vi
perform the necessary maintenance; and the Village shall be
4) the cost of all maintenance work performed by g
paid by the property owner.
Seconded by Trustee Payovich. Trustee Bartecki stated that because he was
a member of AID, he would abstain from .voting. Roll Call Vote:
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes
_4_ January 28, 1992
1.�FZ.I�r 1
III. ASSOCIATED RS AED _ FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE
EOUIPMDNT DISTR
Engineer Dale Durfey reported that he had met with Bill Lindley, the engineer for the petitioners, and mem-
bers of the county staff; and they had reviewed AED propos9l. Bill Lindley distributed a revised plan based
on previous discussions.
Engineer Durfey reported, at this point, the plans are in accordance with the Village and County's require-
ments, though Engineer Durfey still has to do a final detail examination for any minor problems.
The AED discussion was put on hold because of the fact that Bill Lindley was not present at this time. The
AED discussion will continue when Bill Lindley is present.
IV. RYS VARIATION REOUEST
for the board and a general discussion ensued.
Mr. Rys restated his.request
Mr. Rys explained his petition was for a 5 foot fence to extend from the rear of his home to the rear lot
Line along both sides of his rear yard. The fence would be a an open weaved cyclone fence and would abut
with the existing fence which is approximately a 5 foot high fence which is on the adjacent property which
is located in Westmont.
Mr. Rys's request is to vary the maximum height permitted by the Village of 42 inches and to allow Mr. Rys
to construct a 60 inch high fence.
Member Martis moved, seconded by Member Martinello, to recommend denial of the request of the 5 foot fence
along the sides of the rear yard.
This motion was based on the fact that the circumstances are not unique and similar situations do occur in a
number of other properties within the Village.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Paul Martis
Roy Martinello
Elaine Herman
Claybourne A. Crouch
Nays: Raymond White
Motion passed - a recomendation for denial will be reported to the Board of Trustees.
V. MC DONALD'S L OAK BROOK PARK DISTRICT _ FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE
Attorney Dave Gooder, Engineer Mike Lach, and Ken Pardue were sworn in by Chairman Kenny.
Mr. Gooder described the request. His description included the following items:
1) The location and size of the property and the adjacent property uses
2) The request is to modify the floodplain, making the floodplain boundary more or less paralell to
South property line, which also runs paralell to Ginger Creek thereby improving the usefulness
of the balance of the site and in'accordance to the previously approved site development p(an.
4) The ftoodway is not included.
5) Compensatory storage will be provided at a ratio of 1 to 1.
6) There will be no change to the velocities of water movement either within the floodplain or
within the ftoodway.
7) The flood elevation will not be increased.
8) There will be no detrimental effects to any other property owners either upstream or downstream
of this request. January 7, 1992
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
-2-
ZBA01-92.D0C
G OF OA/f
t__ 0
C.
10
CoUN'O,
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS 60521 -2255
708 990-3000
2421 35th Strcz�t
Cnj!,, 60521
Pear Mr. & Mt-S . TZY 5,
ht yc)ur rcqoF-'t, the Poard of Trustees tabled consideration of
1992 meeting.
vc,�ir var.i.,Aiol', JC-qjj,��-,t ii.riti-1 tb.cir February 25,
.1
In 4--he inear,,L-Iine, pleases feel free to call on me if I may be of
Y
Hawk
CC:
P,Y S.
2421 West 35th Street
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
January 28 , 1992
Mr. Thomas R. Hawk
Director of Code Enforcement
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521-2255
Dear Mr. Hawk:
Per our telephone conversation of today, please accept this
letter as a request to table our application for a fence
variance until the February 25th, 1992 Board of Trustees
Meeting.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
Rose Ann Rys
RR
• ypGfc OF Oqk
9CFCOUN.1
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS 60521 -2255
January 10, 1992 708 990-3000
MEMO: President & Board of Trustees
FROM: Stephen Berley
Thomas R. Hawk
SUBJECT: Rys Variation Request
The Rys variation request is to vary the 42 inch fence height
requirement and to allow a 60 inch fence height.
The Rys ' s want to fence along both sides of their lot from the
house back to the rear lot line with a 60 inch high cyclone
fence. The reasons they have given are for the security of their
children and dogs and to discourage trespassing, vandalism, and
trash thrown onto their property.
The Rys' s rear lot line is on the Village limits with Westmont.
There is s a 5 distance to bothllthe east rand west.property which
extends for so me ais
The Zoning Board of Appeals voted by a margin of 4 to 1 to recom-
mend denial of this request on the basis that the circumstances
were not unique - similar circumstances exist for many other
properties within the Village - and that a particular hardship
has not been established.
If it is your wish to approve this request, it would be appropri-
ate to authorize the attorney to draft the necessary ordinance.
Respectfully submitted,
Stephen B rley
AomR.
Village Manager Director of Code Enforcement
r
p8bt-rys.mem
G
f
If Olt
V1 LLAG E OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS 60521 -2255
708 990-3000
January 10, 1992
i
Letter to President and Board of Trustees
Dear Madam President and Board Members:
The Zoning Board of Appeals has held a public hearing regarding
thf� petition by Mr. & Mrs. Rys, 2421 35th Street.
The Rys ' s have asked for a variation to the fence height require-
nien} of 42 inches to permit them to construct a 60 inch high
c.ycl rune fence along both sides of their property from the rear of
t?le. hr,use to the rear of the lot.
The ,zoning Board of Appeals voted by a margin of 4 to 1 to recam-
mend denial of this request based on the findings that the Rys's
circumstances were not unique and that the same situation is
true for a great many other properties within the Village. It
was also stated that a 42 inch high fence adequately serves the
security needs of residential properties.
Respectfully submitted,
William Kenny
Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
P881-RYSAET
i
�9
JAN 2 0 1992
D. ORDINANCE NO. G-476 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING EMPLOYEE TY AK SR G 476
PROGRAM AND AMENDING THE PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS OF � V 'SAFETY E
OAK BROOK: Approved Omnibus Vote. INCENTIVE
E Referrals: REFERRALS:
1) R s Rear Yard Fence Height Variation (2421 35th Street) -- Referred RyS(2421 35T
to Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of December 3 1991 Approved R.Y.FENCE
HEIGHT VAR.
Omnibus Vote.
2) Cladek Side Yard Variation (408 Luthin Road) -- Referred to Zoning CLADEK (408
Board of Appeals Meeting of December 3, 1991. Approved Omnibus Vote. LUTHIN)
S.Y.VAR.
F. Payouts: PAYOUTS:
1) Dominic Fiordirosa Construction Company. - Payout #1 - 1991 Drainage 1991 DRAIN-
Project #91-1302 (North Side 35th Street (Saddle Brook Drive to Cass.. AGE
Court) , Lot 18 Yorkshire Woods (Storm Sewer Extension), 3602 Madison FIORDIROSA
Street (Removed by Board action Se tember 24, 1991), Lots 81/82. $61,749.02
B_aybrook Court) : Approved Omnibus Vote.
2) Pavement Technolo Inc. - Pa out #1 & Final- - 1991 Pavement 1991 PAVEMEN
REJUVENATIOr
anger
Rejuvenation Project No. 91-1115 (Forest Glen Subdivision, H roved PAVEMENT TEC
Road, Madison Street, Kensington Road, Kensington Cow, APP
NOLOGY
Omnibus Vote. $37,459.52
3) DuPaae Water Commission - Payout #34 - Fixed Costs: Approved Omnibus DWC-FIXED
Vote. COSTS
6. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA:
A. RESOLUTION NO. R-543 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYEE PAY RES. R-543
PLAN FOR 1991 (PART TIME EMPLOYEES): PAY PLAN
(PART-TIME
Trustee Shumate moved to pass Resolution No. R-543 as presented and waive EMPLOYEES)
the full reading thereof. Seconded by Trustee Skinner. Roll Call Vote:
Ayes: 6-Trustees Bartecki, Krafthefer, Payovich, Shumate, Skinner and
Winters.
Nays: 0-None
Absent: 0-None. Motion carried.
7. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
A. RESOLUTION H0. R-544 A RESOLUTION TO PETITION THE DU PAGE COUNTY RES. R-544
STORMWATER COMMITTEE FOR COMPLETE WAIVER COMMUNITY STATUS: DPCOUNTY
STORMWATER
The Board noted a memo from the Oak Brook Park District's Executive WAIVER
Director Sommer, dated November 12, 1991, requesting that the proposed STATUS
Community'Center site remain on the Official List of Exempt Developments
regarding the County of DuPage's Stormwater and Floodplain Ordinance,
further requesting that the Oak Brook Village Board reactivate the tabled
request for a Flood Plain Special Use for this site based upon plans
previously approved by the Plan Commission, Zoning Board- of Appeals
the Village Engineer.
VILLAGE /OF/ OAK BROOK Minutes -2-
November 12, 1991 A
L� _ -
�! ! 5• f
vPG�OF OA/t e�G
G�
G O
o y\2
CFCOUNt*4 `
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS 60521 -2255
708 990-3000
November 5, 1991
MEMO TO: President and Board of Trustees
FROM: Stephen Berley and Tom Hawk
SUBJECT: Referrals
We have received two petitions for variations as follows:
1. Mr. and Mrs. Rys, 2421 35th Street, rear yard fence height
variation
2. Mr. and Mrs. Cladek, 408 Luthin Road, side yard variations
Please refer these requests to the Zoning Board of Appeals for public
hearings at their December 3, 1991 meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Stephen Berley
Village Manager
Tom Hawk
Director of Code Enforcement
r (� f11�1 � D
N 2 0 1992
_ p tf\
GE OF OAK Ei�0OK 4 � JAU OF lelSpECTION ��
I
O�OF Oq„B
A
P oOt
G O
F
COU y
v
C Njr,`
VILLAGE O F OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS 60521 -2255
708 990-3000
i
January 10, 1992
Mr. & Mrs. Rys
2421 35th Street
Oak Brook, IL 60521
Dear Mr. Rys:
This letter will confirm our phone conversation of January 9 ,
1992 regarding your variation request.
The Zoning Board of Appeals voted by a margin of 4 . to 1 to
recommend denial . The Board of Trustees will have your request
on their agenda at their January 28, 1992 meeting.
It is my understanding that, at this time, you will accept what-
ever decision is made by the Board of Trustees. You will , of
course, have the opportunity to address the Board prior to their
voting of this issue if you so desire.
Please let me know if their i5 any change in your position and
also feel free to call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Thomas R. Hawk
Director of Code Enforcement
cc: petition files
rys.4
r -DRAFT
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES
December 3, 1991
1. CALL MEETIN TO ORDER
This meeting was called to order at 7:37 P.M.
Members Claybourne A. Crouch
MEMBERS PRESENT: Elaine Herman
William Kenny i
Raymond White
Members Roy Martinello
MEMBERS ABSENT Paul Mortis
Trustee Kelly Skinner
ALSO PRESENT
Director of Code Enforcement Thomas R. Hawk
A quorum was declared.
it. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the November 14, 1991 meeting were not distributed with the packets of this meeting they will '
have to be reviewed for approval at the January meeting.
III. RYS VARIATION _ 2421 35TH STREET _ Fence Height _ Public Hearin
The variation requested, is to permit a 5 foot high fence instead of the 42 inch height which is permitted
by the ordinance. This will allow the Rys's to construct a 5 foot high chain link fence along both sides of
.their lot.
The fence will extend from the house to the rear lot line where the fences will abut with the existing
neighbor's fence to the South which runs along the rear of the Rys' property and extends some distance to
the East and West. This adjacent fence is a fence belonging to the condominium devolopment to the South
which is the Village of Westmont.
Mr. Rys was sworn and gave the following presentation.
Mr. Rys indicated that they have lived at the home for approximately three months and had experienced a
continuing problem of debris and refuse being thrown on their property from the condominium development from
the South. They have had some experience with transient persons cutting across the property getting to and
from that condominium development. They also testified that they do have several dogs, one hunting dog and
two large collies, and children. They feel a higher fence is important to both keeping the dogs under con-
trol and also for the security of their children in dissuading them from leaving the property. The fence
along both sides will be approximately 250 feet long. Their house is set back considerably from the front
of their property. Their property is approximately 500 fee.t deep. it will be a green vinyl coated 5 foot
high chain link fence. it was noted that the property immediately to the South is in within the Village of i
Westmont. The property both East and West of this property are other single-family homes which are resider- `
tint lots within the village of Oak Brook.
It was noted by Tom Hawk that the condominium development is nearing completion of its first phase and
—_- should be seeing some level of occupancy in the future. Having the property occupied may have a positive
effect in reducing the problems of the attractive nuisance that construction sights tend to be, and also,
discourage debris and refuse from being thrown over the fence onto the Rys property. December 3, 1991
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
ZBA12-91.DOC
Member White moved, Seconded by Men*rouch, to approve the requested variation Oe following basis:
1) The property is a uniquely located and that It abuts on to a high density multi family develop•
•ment within the village of Westmont. i
2) The fence will have no detrimental effect on the health, welfare, and safety of the occupance of
this property or neighboring properties.
3) The proposed fence will have no harmful effects on the environment of the are @.
Member Kenny noted that he did not feel that there was in fact unique circumstance that the conditions rated
were similar to conditions that could be stated for most properties.
Member Crouch noted that the 42 inch height restriction of the Village was appropriate, however, that this
property being located at the edge of the village abutting other property not within the control of the
Village does constitute as a unique circumstance.
Ayes: Claybourne Crouch
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Raymond White
Mays: Elaine Herman
William Kenny
,I
Motion failed.
After explaining to Mr. Rys possible procedural steps available to him, he requested that his request be
tabled for further eondlderation. Nis request will be tabled until the January 7, 1992 meeting to allow
the possiblity that a more coaptete board may give him the necessary votes to approve his request.
0 A nation was made by Member White, seconded by Member Crouch, to this effect.
VOICE VOTE: All in favor - motion passed.
This item is tabled until the January 7, 1992 Zonning Board of Appeals Meeting.
IV. CLADEK VARIATION _ 408 LUTHIN ROAD - BUILDING SETBACK _ PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. Cladek and his architect Mr. Mazzani and several neighbors were sworn. Presentations were made by Mr.
Cladek and Mr. Mazzani that generated the following information:
1) The proposed request will have no detrimental effects on any neighboring properties it will be
healthy for the area and is based on the need to expand the home.
2) Mr. Cladek has worked for several months with architect Mazzani to attempt to design a reasona-
ble and exceptable renovation of his home.
3) The preexsisting conditions which make compliance with the letter of the ordinance difficult:
a) The Lot is 132 feet wide as opposed to the 150 foot minimum width provided for in the R-2
Zoning District. The eriginal home was positioned off center and closer to the East lot
line than it is to the West.
b) The configuration of the floor plan of the home restricts the possible expansion plans.
4) includes work done in all areas of the home.
5) The front eave setback Is approximately in line with the other homes in the neighborhood.
6) These variation requests were only made after the examining extensive alternatives that were .
found to be not effective in dealing with the need problems and coming up with an attractive i
design for the property.
7) The Cladeks have three cars that are in use virtually everyday and consequently generates the
-- need of a three car garage.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -2- December 3, 1991
ZBA12-91 Page 2 Of 5
GOOF 04ka
p, 00
f
i� �
O N
G O
4 �2
COUN�r
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1 ' 00 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS 60721 - 2255
708 990. 3000
December 6, 1991
Mr. & Mrs. Rys
2421 35th Street
Oak Brook, IL 60521
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Rys:
This letter is regarding your request of variation. At the
Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting on December 3, 1991, a motion to
approve your variation request failed by a vote of 2 to 2 . In
order for your request to receive a positive recommendation by
the Board of Appeals, it will require four affirmative votes.
Upon your request, a motion was made to table further the consid-
eration of your variation until the next meeting in the possibil-
ity that a full board vote may give you the affirmitive votes
that you need. The next scheduled meeting for the Zoning Board
of Appeals is January 7, 1992 at 7:30 p.m.
If, in the meantime, you have any questions regarding your re-
quest feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
All
Thomas R. Hawk
Director of Code Enforcement
rys. 3
)3
D. ORDINANCE NO. G-476 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING ENiPLOYEZ SAFETY INCENTIVE ORD. G-476
PROGRAM AND AMENDING THE PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS OF TFU; VILLAGE OF EMPLOYEE
OAK BROOK: Approved Omnibus Vote. INCENTIVE
REFERRALS:
E. Referrals:
1 - Rear Yard Fence Height Variation 2421 35th Street -- Referred RRYY(2421 35-
R s
to Zonin Board of A eals Meeting of December 3 1991: Approved HEIGHT VAR.
Omnibus Vote.
2 Cladek - Side Yard Variation 408 Luthin Road -- Referred to Zoning CLADEK (408
Board of Appeals Meetin of December 3 1991: Approved Omnibus Vote. LUTHIN)
S.Y.VAR.
PAYOUTS:
F. Payouts:
Payout #1 - 1991 Drainage 1991 DRAIN-
1) Dominic Fiordirosa Construction Compare - Cass.Sa Broo AGE
Pro'ect #91-1302 North Side 35th Street ddle k Drive to FIORDIROSA
Court Lot 18 Yorkshire Woods (Storm 19911°nLots-AV-82-Madison $61,749.02
Street Removed b • Board action Sep
� •brook Court) : Approved Omnibus Vote
u
2) Pavement Technol
Inc. - Payout #1 1991 Pavement 1991 PAVEMEr;
Re'uvenation Pro'ect No. 91-1115 Forest Glen Subdivision xazroved PAVEMENT TTEC
Road, Madison Street, Kensington Road, Kensington C°�' APP NOLOGY
Omnibus Vote. $37,459.52
3) DuPage Water Commission - Payout #34 - Fixed Costs: Approved Omnibus DWC-FIXED
COSTS
Vote.
6. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA:
A. RESOLUTION NO. R-543 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYEE PAY RES. R-543
PAY PLAN
PLAN FOR 1991 (PART TIME II+iPL MKS Z: (PART-TIME
Trustee Shumate moved to pass Resolution No. R-543 as presented and waive EMPLOYEES)
the full reading thereof. Seconded by Trustee Skinner. Roll Call Vote:
Ayes: 6-Trustees Bartecki, Krafthefer, Payovich, Shumate, Skinner and
Winters.
Nays: 0-None
Absent: 0-None. Motion carried.
7. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
A. RESOLUTION N0. R-544 A RESOLUTION TO PETITION TEE DU PAGE COUNTY DPCOUNTY44
STp p,TER COMMITTEE FOR COMPLETE WAIVER COMMUNITY sTATQs- STORMWATER
The Board noted a memo from the Oak Brook requesting that the Executive WAIVER STATUS
Director Sommer, dated November 12, 1991, raga Developments
Community'Center site remain on the Official List ofExempt Ordinance,
regarding the County of DuPage's Sto=water and Floodplain
requesting that the Oak Brook Village Board reactivate the tabled
further raga 4 site based upon plans
request for a Flood Plain Special Use for this Board of Appeals and
previously approved by the Plan Commission, Zoning
the Village Engineer.
_2_ November 12, 1991
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes j�
r � •
G�OF Oqk 94
p�
i V4
j
N
I G 3 0
4 �
�COUNIr'
p
V1 LLAG E OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS 60521 -2255
708 990-3000
November 5, 1991
MEMO TO: President and Board of Trustees
FROM: Stephen Berley and Tom Hawk
SUBJECT: Referrals
We have received two petitions for variations as follows:
1. Mr. and Mrs. Rys, 2421 35th Street, rear yard fence height
variation
2. Mr. and Mrs. Cladek, 408 Luthin Road, side yard variations
Please refer these requests to the Zoning Board of Appeals for public
hearings at their December 3, 1991 meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Stephen Berley
Village Manager
Tom Hawk
Director of Code Enforcement
�pF OAI�6
ECOUNt''
VI LLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS 60521 -2255
708 990-3000
October 28, 1991
Mr. & Mrs. James & Rose Ann Rys
2421 35tH street
Oak Brook, IL 60521
Dear. Mr. & Mrs. Rys:
Yvur application for a fence variation to the Village of Oak
Brook's Zoning Ordinance has been accepted.
The Zoning Board of Appeals will hold a public hearing at the
Village Hall, 1200 Oak Brook Road, on December 3 , 1991, at 7 : 30
p.m. regarding this request. 'Your attendance at this hearing is
necessary.
Please be prepared to describe your request and to provide the
necessary information regarding the fa_llcwillg:
1. ) Tnract or neighbors
2 . ) unique circumstances
3 . ) Hardsh-i ps
At::ached is a copy of the variation provisions of the ordinance
which must be satisfied to qualify for the granting of a varia-
tion.
I
The recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals will be trans-
mitted to the Board of Trustees and will tentatively be on their
agenda for their January 14, 1992 meeting.
Please feel free to call me if you have any questions,
(708) 990-2382.
sincerely,
T omas R. Hawk
Director of Code Enforcement
cc: petition files
rys.1
�O
OAK BROOK CODE
Sec. XIII
i (G) Variations
(1) Authority: The Board of Trustees shall decide all applica-
tions for variations of the provisions of this ordinance
after a public hearing held before the Zoning Board of
Appeals on such notice as shall be required hold public
hearings upon all applications for variations and shall by
Illinois Statutes. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall re-
port its recommendations to the Board of Trustees as to
whether a requested variation would be in harmony with its
general purpose and intent, and shall recommend a varia-
tion only where it shall have made a finding of fact speci-
fying the reason or reasons for recommending the variations.
Such findings shall be based upon the standards prescribed
in Section XIII-G4 of this ordinance. No variation shall be
granted by the Board of Trustees without such findings of
fact. In the case of a variation where the Zoning Board of
Appeals fails to recommend the variation, it can only be
adopted by an ordinance with the favorable vote of two-
thirds of the Trustees.
(2) • Initiation: An application for a variation shall be in
triplicate and may be made by any governmental office,
department, board, bureau or commission, or by any person,
firm or corporation having a freehold interest, a possessory
interest entitled to exclusive possession, a contractual
interest which may become a freehold interest, or any exclu-
sive possessory interest applicable to the land or land and
improvements described in the application for a variation.
(3) Processing: An application for a variation shall be filed
with the Village Clerk who shall forward one copy of such
' application to the Zoning Board of Appeals for processing in
accordance with applicable Statutes of the State of Illinois
i and one copy to the Board of Trustees.
i
I
APPENDIX A - ZONING
Sec. XIII
(4) Standards:
� 4 (a) The Zoning Board of Appeals shall not recommend a
variation of the provisions of this ordinance as autho-
rized in this section unless it shall have made find-
ings of fact based upon the evidence presented to it on
the following specific issues that:
(1) The property in question cannot yield a reasonable
return if permitted to be used only under the
conditions allowed by the regulations governing
the district in which it is located.
(2) The plight of the owner is due to unique circum-
stances.
(3) The variation, if granted, will not alter the
essential character of the locality.
(b) For the purpose of supplementing the above standards,
the Zoning Board of Appeals, in making the determina-
tion whether there are practical difficulties or par-
ticular hardships, shall also take into consideration
the extent to which the following facts, favorable to
the applicant, have been established by the evidence
i that:
(1) The particular physical surroundings, shape, or
topographical conditions of the specific property
involved would bring a particular hardship upon
the owner as distinguished from a mere inconve-
nience if the strict letter of the regulation were
to be carried out.
(2) The condition upon which the petition for varia-
tion is based would not be applicable generally to
the other property within the same zoning classi-
fication.
i
i
r
I
APPENDIX A - ZONING
i Sec. XIII
t
(3) The granting of the variation will not be detri-
mental to the public welfare or injurious to other
property or improvements in the neighborhood in
which the property is located.
I
(4) The proposed variation will not impair an adequate
supply of light and air to adjacent property, or
substatially increase the danger of fire, or
otherwise endanger the public safety or substan-
tially diminish or impair property values within
the neighborhood.
(5) That the purpose of the variation is not based
exclusively upon a desire to make more money out
of the property.
(6) That the alleged difficulty or hardship has not
been created by any person presently having an
interest in the property.
(c) The Zoning Board of Appeals may recommend and the Board
of Trustees may require such conditions and restric-
tions upon the premises benefited by a variation as
may be necessary to comply with the standards set forth
in this section to reduce or minimize the injurious
effect of such variation upon other property in the
neighborhood, and to implement the general purpose and
intent of the ordinance.
a
(5) Unauthorized Variations: The variation procedure shall in
. no case be used to accomplish a result which could otherwise
be achieved by a rezoning of the property involved, such as,
but not limited to, establishment or expansion of a use not
permitted in a residence district; authorizing the con-
struction of residences in other than residence districts;
nor authorizing other than single-family detached residences
i
in the R1, R2, R3 , and R4 Districts.
I
I
3
i
t
APPENDEX A - ZONING
Sec. XIII
I
(6) Re-applications: Any person, firm, or corporation having
been denied a variation to the Zoning Ordinance respecting a
specific parcel of property may not re-apply for a like
variation on said real property until the period one (1)
year has elapsed since the denial of the appplication for
variation by the President and Board of Trustees. (Ord. No.
G-137, 9-14-71)
I
ver.doc 10/25/91
-
I
I
c
7 = ili
f U
ZONING ORDINANCE FLOOD PLAIN
VI LLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
Appeal Variation
OAK BROOK, IL 60521 $100 $300
990-3000 ��
I" i Variation Q Special Use
$300 $675
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING
ElAmendment
TO BE FILED WITH VILLAGE CLERK $650
Special Use
$400
I
ALL APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY PROPER FEE, PLAT OF SURVEY, AND 18 COPIES OF A ,
SCALE DRAWING, SHOWING ALL PERTINENT APPLICABLE INFORMATION; i.e. , PROPERTY LINES,
EXISTING BUILDINGS, LOCATION OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, ANY BUILDINGS ON ADJACENT
PROPERTY WITHIN 100 FEET OF SUBJECT PROPERTY.
DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE -- FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Date Filed: /��Q� Board of Trustees Referral: /-, �S J
Notice Published: 7 Newspaper: 0�2 'V _
Date Adjacent Property Owners Notified: ,2 ,Iq Staff Referral:
T �
Public Hearing Dates: Plan Commission: /IJ Zoning Board: 3 i
Board of Trustees: /� Board of Trustees:
(Approval of Ordinance)
FEE PAID: $ Receipt No. 60 3(pS'�j Receiv d By:
Village Clerk
APPLICANT TO COMPLETE
LOCATION
OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: Oak Brook, Ill. PERMANENT PARCEL NO. 06-33-400-009
1 LOT NO:ue a SUBDIVISION: none ADDRESS:2421 West 35th Street
ZONING: R 2 ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION: V G 3 h 6
ACTION REQUESTED: See attached.
PROPERTY INTEREST OF APPLICANT: OWNER 0 CONTRACT PURCHASER F-1 AGENT
OWNERS) OF RECORD James J. & Rose Ann Rys PHONE NO. (708) 789-2123
Office: (708) 655-0200
ADDRESS 2421 West 35th Street ZIP 60521
BENEFICIARY(IES) OF TRUST PHONE NO.
ADDRESS ZIP
NAME OF APPLICANT Same as Above PHONE NO.
i
ADDRESS ZIP
j I (we) certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any
papers or plans submitted herewith are true to the best of my (our) knowledge and
belief.
! IZ7/5 g/ Oct. 15, 1991
�a �
i 6 it ) I1 ��_k ly. hate (Si ature) ApplicavV Date
� i+ I
! NOTICE TO APPLICANTS
� S
Filing Schedule - Available on Request
i
A Variation is a zoning adjustment which permits minor changes of district requirements
where individual properties are both harshly and uniquely burdened by the strict
application of the law. The power to vary is restricted and the degree of Variation is
limited to the minimum change necessary to overcome the inequality inherent in the
' property.
1. A Variation recognizes that the same district requirements do not affect all j
properties equally; it was invented to permit minor changes to allow hardship properties
i to enjoy equal opportunities with properties similarly zoned. You must prove that your
land is affected by special circumstances or unusual conditions. These must result in
uncommon hardship and unequal treatment under the strict application of the Zoning
Ordinance. Where hardship conditions extend to other properties, a Variation cannot be
granted. The remedy for general hardship is a change of the map or the text of the
Zoning Ordinance.
e 2. You must prove that the combination of the Zoning Ordinance and the uncommon j
t conditions of your property prevents you from making any reasonable use of your land as
i permitted by your present zoning district. Since zoning regulates land and not people,
+ the following conditions cannot be considered pertinent to the application for a
! Variation: (1) proof that a Variation would increase the financial return from the
land, (2) personal hardship, (3) self-imposed hardship. In the last case, the
recognition of conditions created after the enactment of the Zoning Ordinance would
encourage and condone violation of the law.
4 3.• ,No Variation may be granted which would adversely affect surrounding property or the
li
general neighborhood. All Variations must be in harmony with the intent and purposes of
the Zoning Ordinance.
Names of Surrounding Property Owners
Following are the names and addresses of surrounding property owners from the property
in question for a distance of 250 feet in all directions, and the number of ' feet
occupied by all public roads, streets, alleys, and public ways have been excluded in
computing the 250-foot requirement. Said names are as recorded in the office of the
County Recorder of Deeds (or the Registrar of Titles of the County) and as appear from
the authentic tax records of this County.
NAME ADDRESS
,i
{ Dr. Albert Al Diepstra 2417 wPGt 35th Street
(neighbor to the East) Oak Brook, Ill. 60521
i
Mr. Jim Dyer 2501 WPSt ISth street
(neighbor to the West) Oak Brook, Ill. * 60521
i
! Royal Hills Club Condominium
Complex
n. 3525 rn„r+ Westmont, Ill,
(708) ' 323-8540
t
t
i
:1
ACTION REQUESTED
We are requesting approval for construction of a 5 ft. brown
vinyl-clad chain link fence around the perimeter of the backyard.
(Picture of fence along with pictures of backyard attached)
Area to be fenced is heavily wooded on both sides which makes
a fence completely unnoticeable from the street.
Outlined below are the major reasons we are requesting a fence
as enclosed:
1. Security and protection of property. There is heavy
traffic from the condominium parking lot directly
behind us which borders Westmont.
2. To prevent the collection of unwanted materials and
garbage thrown on our property from the condominium
area directly to the rear of our lot. (Picture
enclosed)
3. The fence will be located approximately 180 ft. from
the street and will not be visible from 35th Street.
4. We have been burglarized in the past and feel this
fence would be a deterrent to any unwanted traffic.
5 . We .have a large hunting dog and several of our
neighbors also own dogs. We feel a fence will allow
for better control and safety of our pet.
1.) James Dyer
2501 35th Street
2.) Arne Aalrust
2505 35th Street
3.) Albert Diepstra
2417 35th Street
4.) Maynard J. Jaffee
1616 Midwest Club 416
5.) Glen G. Glista
1617 Midwest Club 4416
6.) Dr. P. Shirazi
1618 Midwest Club 4416
7.) Frank Madda
1506 Midwest Club 415
8.) Marilyn Kolbusz
1507 Midwest Club #15
9.) Dilip Shah
1508 Midwest Club 4415
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60646 LCK1INDICV ,VKVC T `We 71
PLAT OF SURVO FAX # 776
That part of the North 7.3 chains of the East 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 33, Township 39 North
East of the 3rd Principal Meridian in DuPage County, Illinois, described by: Commencing at the Northwc
said East 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 33 and running thenoe East along the North line of said 9'
703.2 feet for a place of beginning; thenoeoontinuing East along the North line of said Southeast 1/4 e
thence South parallel with the West line of said East 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 491.13 feet to a fence;
Westerly along said fence 88.83 feet; thence North parallel with said West line of is East 1/2 of %has(
E 491.43 feet to the place of beginning.
w
SI Z • 100!Ar Ml"rus 7
w
a �
O
w I 46 tW�
w :Isa
qj
N ` Q W Uj 4�
LL
OD
• , a � V)
Z V�'
z .4) �
� J i ► Q I
1 �
IK
o + +
.1Ce W)IN BOX MOANO TNIO 9YOV9Y HAD 0e8N eY1LOINO I.INee AND sAeeMeMTe ADe eNOWN ON�V WNeae TMOT 960 DOMFAI1e A&L MUTO eeFOae DYLe1Ne BY eANe AN
on use IM OONNe0T10N WITH A MORTeAOe WAN 11i00110e0 IN TNe MAFO.OTNenerlae seven TO YOUR De s0 Oa AO ACT. ANY DI►FeaeweL
.ACTION AND 10 NOT TO se we""a ANT DTNen
-41O Ste% ell Illinois l $hh of Illinois l
-.elOMe A11a NOT w De AOOYMW►OeM OOALINe ,�oy of Cook aa. County of Cook f a•
r No. 7�L�'7 We.CERTIFIED SURVEY CO.de hereby esrtify#hot we have We,CERTIFIED SURVEY CO.do hereby es•
located the building on the above property. swvoyed the above described property and thr
1 inch- feet drawn is a correct representation of said survey
JAMES J. RYS 8-84 1732
ROSE ANN RYS
2421 W. 35TH ST.
OAK BROOK, IL 60521
"� 2-Ii710
T.'
( n )t—Za' L OD
$ 200 rC
-- —--- }(
FIRST CHICAGO Private
t The First National Bank of Chicago Financial
Chpi(c�ago.Illinois 80/870 Services
anal 0-1
1.0 7 10000 1 31: 79 08 3 181I' 173 2
CHECK CHECKS ! CASH INV k DATE ?�
NUMBER NAME G.L.ACCOUNT N DESCRIPTION
E ,k VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK INVALID
SIGNATURE
GNATURE
BUREAU OF INSPECTION 6 03683
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
u
PHONE: (708) 990-3000
RETAIN THIS RECEIPT
FOR YOUR RECORDS
FEGUARD BUSINESS SYSTEMS