Minutes - 03/15/2004 - Plan CommissionMINUTES OF THE MARCH 15, 2004 REGULAR OF
THE PLAN COMMISSION OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK
BROOK APPROVED AS WRITTEN ON APRIL 19, 2004.
1. CALL TO ORDER: CALL TO ORDER
The Regular Meeting of the Plan Commission was called to order by
Chairwoman Payovich in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Butler
Government Center at 7:29 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL: ROLL CALL
Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons
PRESENT: Chairwoman Barbara Payovich, Members Paul Adrian, David
Braune, Jeffrey Bulin and Marcia Tropinski.
ABSENT: Members Surendra Goel and Gerald Wolin.
IN ATTENDANCE: Robert L. Kallien, Director of Community Development
and Dale L. Durfey, Village Engineer.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MINUTES
REGULAR PLAN COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 16, 2004
Motion by Member Braune, seconded by Member Tropinski, to approve the
minutes of the February 16, 2004 Regular Plan Commission meeting as
amended and waive the full reading thereof. VOICE VOTE: Motion Carried
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS UNFINISHED
BUSINESS
A. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK — ZONING ORDNANCE REVIEW VOB - TEXT
AMENDMENT -
PROJECT — TEXT AMENDMENT — TITLE 13 OF THE VILLAGE TREE
CODE — ZONING ORDINANCE — ADD CHAPTER 15 — TREE PRSERVATION
PRESERVATION REGULATIONS
Director of Community Development Kallien said that it was decided at
the last meeting that we would take the best of the existing regulations
reviewed and create our own draft set of regulations. This turned out to be
a very large task. He requested the matter be continued to the next meeting.
Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Tropinski to continue the
hearing on the Tree Preservation Regulations to the next regular Plan
Commission meeting scheduled for April 19, 2004. VOICE VOTE:
Motion carried.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Plan Commission Minutes Page 1 of 8 March 15, 2004
., mm
NEW BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
A. 700 -800 COMMERCE DRIVE RESUBDIVISION — FINAL PLAT OF 700-800 COMMERCE
SUBDIVISION — VARIATION TO 14 -6 -3 -J OF THE SUBDIVISION VARIATION to o
IVIS
VARIAT
REGULATIONS — 700 AND 800 COMMERCE DRIVE SUBDIVISION REGS.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that this request is part
of a two -lot subdivision that was recommended for approval by the Plan
Commission. When the Village Board approved the subdivision, it
included a variation to the Subdivision Regulations. It was determined that
the Village Board could not grant the variation without a formal request
and review by the Plan Commission. There is a memorandum in the file
from the Village Engineer addressing the issue.
Barbara Raffaldini, Attorney for the applicant, said that they did not realize
when they went through the resubdivision process, that it would become a
hardship to put iron stakes within the interior lot lines until the matter went
to the Village Board. They are now seeking a variation.
No one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to the request.
Motion by Member Tropinski, seconded by Member Adrian to recommend
approval of the proposed variation to Section 14 -6 -3.J of the Subdivision
Regulations relative to the requirement for iron pipe monumentation. In
making this recommendation the Plan Commission finds that:
1. The property at 700 -800 Commerce Drive is developed with two
office buildings and parking facilities.
2. The Plan Commission has previously recommended approval of a
final plat of subdivision that would create separate lots of the two
buildings.
3. Because of the developed nature of the property the applicant has
shown that a hardship exists to require iron pipe monumentation.
4. Village Engineer Durfey recommends in his memorandum that this
request is reasonable and is acceptable. ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: 5 — Members Adrian, Braune, Bulin, Tropinski, and Payovich
Nays: 0 — None
Absent: 2 — Members Goel and Wolin. Motion carried.
5. B. GVA WILLIAMS — 814 COMMERCE DRIVE — TEXT AMENDMENT — GVA WILLIAMS -
ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 13- 12- 3 -H(2) — AMEND OFF - STREET ""' AMEND - zO-
SECTION 13-12-3 -
PARKING REGULATIONS H(2) PARKING REGS
Director of Community Development Kallien said that all of Commerce
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Plan Commission Minutes Page 2 of 8 March 15, 2004
Drive is developed for office -type uses. The Contract - Purchaser of the
building at 814 Commerce Drive has had several meetings with him and
they are seeking to increase the number of parking spaces. At the present
time the site does not meet the minimum requirements of the Village Code.
To do any type of redevelopment on the property they would need to
provide additional parking.
The petitioner reviewed two different scenarios. They could have
requested a variation to the parking requirements. The Ordinance states
that in the ORA -1 District only 6 parking spaces are allowed in the
required front yard. The required front yard is 100 feet. The ordinance
does not differentiate the front yard between local streets or major streets
such as 22 °a Street and York Road that are thoroughfares. As a result, it
was determined that the best thing to do would be to seek a text
amendment, which would apply to all properties on Commerce Drive,
because other similar situations exist. If the Village Board's are supportive
of this request, Director of Community Development Kallien will request
that the Village look at other streets such as Swift, Enterprise, and
Windsor, which are very similar streets. This could have ramifications
down the road in terms of allowing a limited amount of parking in the
required front yard.
Larry Debb, Contract - Purchaser of the property located at 814 Commerce
Drive, said that they are providing a landscape plan that exceeds the
requirements of the Village because they would like to hide the parking so
that it is not visible from the street. Their current problem is not only that
the building does not meet the Village Code requirements for required
parking; it does not meet the market requirements as well. The market has
changed since these buildings were built and they have found that they
need significantly more parking. Many of the buildings on Commerce
Drive have already received variances. Some of the other buildings
already park in the front of the building. Instead of dealing with the issue
by piece meal, they would like to solve the problem once and for all, which
is the reason they are seeking the text amendment. They will be doing
significant improvements to the building itself. They plan to remove one
of the three entrances, which has been the source of some accidents on
Commerce and it will help clean up some of the traffic problems.
Director of Community Development Kallien added that they reviewed a
few scenarios to resolve the problem. There is an existing parking deck in
the rear of the building and they had looked at opportunities to expand it.
In order to expand the parking deck, relief would have been sought to the
rear yard. The parking deck faces Steeplechase Subdivision and the
requirements are significant in terms of the setback requirements for
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Plan Commission Minutes Page 3 of 8 March 15, 2004
structures in that area, which abut a residential district. Not only have
other properties on Commerce Drive been granted variations, but there are
also properties on similar type streets such as Enterprise Drive that have
been granted multiple variations on an individual basis to allow additional
parking. Once you have reached a certain threshold of variations, the
cause of the requests should be looked at. The basis of the matter is that
there is an extraordinary setback on Commerce, which is a cul -de -sac type
of street. There are other ways of landscaping to encourage green space
between the street and the building.
Chairwoman Payovich questioned how many properties on Commerce
have received variations. Director of Community Development Kallien
responded that several have received variances. On Enterprise Drive there
were numerous variations granted in the early 1960's due to the same sort
of problems. These are small lots that back up to roadways and needed
variations to build parking for the existing office buildings.
Member Bulin said that he believes it is reasonable to allow the proposed
text amendment. The quality of the front yard could be enhanced with
intensified landscaping in the parkway strip. He would recommend that a
minimum size should be established for a shade tree. 4 -inch caliper trees
are more desirable.
Director of Community Development said that this would be a good first
step in dealing with commercial office structures.
No one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to the request.
Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Tropinski to recommend
approval of the text amendment to Section 13 -12 -311.2 of the Zoning
Ordinance to permit additional parking in the required front yard setback
for property located on Commerce Drive. The Plan Commission found that
the petitioner has satisfied the standards for approval of a text amendment.
In making this recommendation the Commission finds that:
1. In the ORA -1 and ORA -2 Districts, a 100 -ft. building setback is
required. Within this area only six off - street parking spaces are
permitted.
2. The primary reason for this provision is to increase the amount of
landscaping/open space along the thoroughfares.
3. Office uses in ORA -1 and ORA -2 front major thoroughfares such
as 22nd Street and York Road, as well as local collector streets such
as Commerce Drive, Enterprise Drive, Windsor Drive and Swift Dr.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Plan Commission Minutes Page 4 of 8 March 15, 2004
4. The Village has issued a number of variations for similar properties
along Enterprise Drive to permit parking in the required front yard
setback.
5. The request to permit additional parking in the required front yard
setback along Commerce Drive is deemed reasonable and will
permit additional development /redevelopment.
6. Adequate landscaping of parking facilities in the required front yard
will maintain the open space concept originally called for in the
overall development scheme for Oak Brook. Staff should review
4- inches as the minimum size caliper for trees.
7. No testimony or comments have been received which show that this
text amendment will have a negative impact on any property along
Commerce Drive.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: 5 — Members Adrian, Braune, Bulin, Tropinski, and Payovich
Nays: 0 — None.
Absent: 2 — Members Goel and Wolin. Motion Carried
5. C. TUSCANY OF OAK BROOK, INC. 1415 22nd STREET — SPECIAL USE — TUSCANY
O sCANY — 1415
ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 13- 10 -D -2 — 0-3 DISTRICT — OUTDOOR OOP
OUTDDOOR DINING
DINING ADJACENT TO A RESTAURANT
Director of Community Development Kallien said that there has been a
renewed interest in outdoor dining. Last month the Plan Commission gave
a recommendation of approval to allow outdoor dining areas as a permitted
use in the 0-3 District. This case is also in the 0-3 District.
Steven Morin, Manager at Tuscany of Oak Brook reviewed the proposal.
There will be minimal construction, such as a 3 -foot high metal fence
around the outdoor dining area. The proposed site for the outdoor dining
has existed since the restaurant opened. They will just be adding fencing
around the area and gates. There have never been any safety issues with
the proposed area.
Member Adrian said that in the past with applications for other outdoor
dining areas, there has been an issue of safety. At Tuscany, there is not
an issue of safety because the road is not traveled, it is more of a valet area.
He said that he supports the application.
Member Bulin added that the patio space already exists.
Member Braune questioned whether the plantings and bushes already exist.
Mr. Morin responded that there are mature existing plantings and the fence
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Plan Commission Minutes Page 5 of 8 March 15, 2004
17�?e
will be located inside the bushes.
Motion by Member Adrian, seconded by Member Braune that the
petitioner has satisfied the applicable standards required to recommend for
approval of the special use as stated above subject to the following
conditions. In making this recommendation, the Commission finds that:
1. Tuscany Restaurant is zoned 0-3 Office District in the Village.
2. The Plan Commission has previously recommended approval of a
text amendment to permit outdoor dining arrangements as a special
use in the 0-3 zoning district. Approval of this special use will be
conditioned upon approval of the text amendment by the Village
Board.
3. Several restaurants in the Village including a number located at the
Oakbrook Center have approved special uses for outdoor dining
arrangements and successfully operate those facilities for the benefit
of their patrons as well the community.
4. Tuscany of Oak Brook, Inc. proposes a 56 seat outdoor dining
arrangement that will be available between April 1st and October
15th of each year (weather permitting).
5. Tuscany of Oak Brook has submitted a list of conditions on page F
of the case file that is to be made part of the special use approval.
6. The outdoor dining arrangement proposed by the applicant is
consistent with previously approved special uses for other outdoor
dining arrangements.
7. The proposed layout for the outdoor dining arrangement
incorporates additional safety measures including a three -foot high
decorative metal and canvas railing inside of an existing landscaped
area to offer a reasonable level of protection for the patrons.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: 5 — Members Adrian, Braune, Bulin, Tropinski, and Payovich
Nays: 0 — None.
Absent: 2 — Members Goel and Wolin. Motion Carried
5. D. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK — REVIEW PROJECT — PLANNED UNIT Vos - REVIE w
PROJECT - PUD
DEVELOPMENTS (PUD)
Director of Community Development Kallien said that the Village is very
limited in its ability to control architecture. Being a non -home rule
community, the only opportunities that exist are either through a special
use or through a planned unit development, where as part of the approval
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Plan Commission Minutes Page 6 of 8 March 15, 2004
process you can negotiate different architectural features, landscaping,
layout, etc. It gives you the opportunity to include a lot of different
conditions relevant to different things.
The Village Board looked at this issue a couple of years ago, and at that
point they were not interested in a text amendment. Trustee Aktipis felt
that it was reasonable to look at it again.
The information that was previously sent to the Village Board has been
provided for the Plan Commission to review. He asked the Commissioners
to review the information and then the discussion process can begin at the
next Plan Commission meeting.
Member Braune asked for an explanation of the concept of a PUD.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that under Zoning there
are permitted uses and very specific controls regarding setbacks, height,
bulk, etc. If something is not listed, it is not permitted. Under a Planned
Unit Development scheme, everything is negotiable. Some PUD's allow a
mixture of land uses so that residential and commercial offices uses can be
combined in an individual building. Heights, setbacks, parking can be
used as a trade -off to get additional landscaping, etc. A project can
manipulate the regulations so that you can get something a little different.
The office complex on Highland and 31St Street is a PUD. They were able
to orient the buildings and parking structures differently, without the need
for variations.
Member Bulin said that the advantage of establishing a PUD is in the event
of redevelopment or rezoning. It then becomes attractive for a developer
to redevelop some of the current areas. There is potential for it.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that in a PUD, uses
could be mixed in a single structure. If a site is redeveloped, the entire
proposal comes as a package and if any element is altered it has to go back
through the process. It allows developers to be creative.
Chairwoman Payovich asked if there were any downsides to a PUD.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that the reluctance to go
to Planned Unit Developments is that they can involve a lot of variations in
various degrees to the Zoning Ordinance. Oak Brook has always been
known to look at variations negatively. It is difficult to get a variation in
Oak Brook. He would never advocate doing a subdivision under a PUD.
Some of the Golf Course communities in the area have clubhouse facilities
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Plan Commission Minutes Page 7 of 8 March 15, 2004
r
7
and meeting spaces along with single family and townhouse development
and packaged under a single plan, which is a PUD.
Motion by Member Adrian, seconded by Member Bulin to continue the
review of Planned Unit Developments to the next regular Plan Commission
meeting scheduled for April 19, 2004. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business to discuss.
ADJOURNMENT:
Motion by Member Braune, seconded by Member Adrian to adjourn the
meeting at 8:10 p.m.
ATTEST:
Robert Kallien, D' ctor of ommunity Development
Secretary
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Plan Commission Minutes Page 8 of 8 March 15, 2004
OTHER BUSINESS
ADJOURMENT