Loading...
Minutes - 05/19/2003 - Plan CommissionVILLAGE OF OAK BROOK PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:39 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: A quorum was present. H. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 19, 2003 Chairwoman Members Director of Community Development Barbara Payovich Paul Adrian David Braune Jeffrey Bulin Surendra Goel Marcia Tropinski Gerald Wolin Robert Kallien Member Braune moved, seconded by Member Bulin, to waive the reading of the April 21, 2003 Plan Commission meeting minutes and to approve them as amended. VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion passed. Ill. MCDONALD'S CORPORATION — SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SPRING AND COMMERCE — TEXT AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 13 OF THE VILLAGE CODE AND SPECIAL USE TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MCDONALD'S and CHIPOTLE RESTAURANT ON THE SITE TO ALLOW A DRIVE -IN ESTABLISHMENT AND OUTDOOR DINING AREAS Chairwoman Payovich advised that McDonald's Corporation had requested a continuance of this matter to the June 16, 2003 meeting. Member Goel moved, seconded by Member Bulin, to continue the matter to June 16, 2003 Plan Commission meeting. VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion passed. IV. WDONALD'S CORPORATION - SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SPRING AND COMMERCE — PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION — THREE -LOT SUBDIVISION Chairwoman Payovich advised that McDonald's Corporation had requested a continuance of this matter to the June 16, 2003 meeting. Member Goel moved, seconded by Member Bulin, to continue the matter to the June 16, 2003 Plan Commission meeting. VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion passed. PLAN COMMISSION Minutes 1 PC -MTG 03- MAY.doc May 19, 2003 V. FOREST PRESERVE DISTRICT OF DuPAGE COUNTY — SPECIAL USE AMENDMENT — 1717 OAK BROOK ROAD — TITLE 13 OF THE VILLAGE CODE — ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 13 -5 -3 to AMEND THE AREA OF SPECIAL USE ORDINANCE S -841 (Amended by S -1015) FROM 3.34 ACRES TO 46.42 ACRES AND TO ALLOW A PRODUCTION KITCHEN IN THE FORMER RETREAT WING Chairwoman Payovich said that the Zoning Board of Appeals sent this back to the Plan Commission, although the file was reviewed, they would like further clarification on some items. Director of Community Development Kallien said that the process is a two -step process. The Plan Commission reviews a request and forwards a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. It is not uncommon for a project to take a little longer at the Plan Commission stage. By statue, the Zoning Board of Appeals is the official hearing body for the Village; they hold the official public hearings. It is their job to look at the recommendation that comes out of the Plan Commission and ensure that the request meets all of the standards as detailed in the Zoning Ordinance. At the last meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, there was some confusion because when the Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed the recommendation from the Plan Commission, it appeared that some items were not formally discussed. There was at least one Zoning Board member that questioned whether some things might have been overlooked since they were not discussed. Instead of assuming anything, it was decided to send it back to the Plan Commission to review those specific issues. Director of Community Development Kallien advised everyone to review page D -3 and D -4 of the case file. The applicant has listed in summary form all of the improvements that are being requested in the special use amendment. On page D -3, each item was addressed in the minutes. However, on page D -4, the Zoning Board was concerned about some longer -term improvements. For the record, all of those issues should be addressed by the Plan Commission at this meeting. The Village of Oak Brook has zoning authority for all properties within this jurisdiction. However, because this is a County owned property, the Forest Preserve District will get their building permits through DuPage County. One of the difficulties we have is that, you may want to see what a gazebo would look like, but when it goes in for permit, the village is not part of that process. The Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals need to focus on use and how the structures or uses are in keeping with the overall Peabody Mansion. The Forest Preserve District may take out a permit for the gazebo, next year or in ten years, but we will not be able to see it until it is finished. Member Adrian said that the Forest Preserve District could tell us what the structure would look like and the Village can try to define what we think it should look like, but in actuality, it is up to the County. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that it is up to the Village from a zoning point of view. In this case, some of the design parameters can be defined. Member Tropinski said that the Forest Preserve District did say that they were going to design the elements with keeping with architect Marshall's style. It could be included in the recommendation that the design has to be compatible with what was typically built in 1921 and follow the style of Marshall, thus keeping it historically correct. She had done some research and found that since state funds are funding the project, it does have to pass a Section 707 review for historical correctness. Mike Palazzetti, Interim Director of Operations who oversees all of the operations for the Forest Preserve District, noted that Member Tropinski was correct. For example, the gardens were part of the original mansion plan but Peabody passed away within the first year he was on the property, so none of those other elements of the final design were actually put in place when it was sold. Some modifications were made to the original plan that shortened the Terrace garden to keep it away from the lake and off the utility easements. The Terrace garden will be a reduced version of what was originally planned. The same is true of the Formal garden. PLAN COMMISSION Minutes PC -MTG 03- MAY.doc May 19, 2003 Exhibit C highlights the elements the Forest Preserve District is going to construct with their first million - dollar grant. The Terrace and Formal gardens are all aspects from the original design plan. The gazebo is really a Victorian teahouse. It will be a wooden structure, very ornate, in keeping with the historic plan. As part of the review process, the Forest Preserve District must go through the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency for anything they are doing since the property is in the National Register of Historic Places. Everything they do will accent the original design style of the Tudor revival. Some elements such as the garage and the convent wing were added by the Friars. Those will be removed because they are not in keeping with the historic quality of the site. The Retreat Wing, which some felt should have been removed, blends fairly well with the design and with some additional fagade changes in the future could be integrated into the overall plan thus accenting the Tudor revival style of the mansion. Director of Community Development Kallien asked for comments regarding the use constraints for the Retreat Wing. Mr. Palazzetti said that from a historic perspective, the original special use obtained by the Mayslake Landmark Conservancy, really only had use of the mansion. The Forest Preserve Commissioners at that time said that they could use the mansion but they would have to renovate the support services, and other things that were needed, inside the mansion. The Forest Preserve District has utilized part of the retreat wing because they did not want to put all of their support services into the historic parts of the building and take away from it. When ADA issues surfaced, disputes arose between the various responsible groups. The historic group said no to the ADA changes, because it would destroy historic integrity of the building. A Life Safety review concluded that the general public could not be brought in nor could an occupancy permit be obtained unless ADA and Life Safety requirements were met. The Forest Preserve District worked very diligently with the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) to have the least intrusive installation of the sprinklers and alarm systems. If the buildings are used for any purpose allowed by the special use, it must be done in a manner that does not destroy the historic building. Offices for the theater group administrators, master gardeners, volunteers and docents (who are currently conducting the mansion tours) will be located in the Retreat Wing. In addition, it is planned to locate a Tea Room, a gift shop, and exhibit area in the Retreat Wing; thus, visitors will have a place to have a light lunch, purchase gifts and study the history of the site without taking space in the historic sections of the building. The Forest Preserve District will do displays within the Retreat Wing to show some of the history of the site, background regarding the architect (Marshall), the owner (Peabody), the Friars, plus other interesting area and site information. There is a large chapel area that would be used as a large multi - purpose room for a variety of activities, banquets, or business type meetings. The Forest Preserve District has been working with the Hyatt, who is looking at the site as an extension site for some of their activities because they like to do some things off -site. The Forest Preserve District is constrained by statue to not be able to offer office space to private businesses. The statutes allow them to license the use of some of those spaces to not - for - profit organizations. The Forest Preserve District currently has the Shakespearean summer theater group that performs on a temporary stage. When they initially started working with the Trinity Lakes homeowners group, Trinity Lakes asked if they could look at the landscaping and try to locate the theater so that the noise from events would be directed away from the local households. The District found a low area and, if it is built in the future, would turn the stage around so that the noise is directed in the opposite direction (toward Route 83) and they would also add a screen wall to further deaden the sound. The new configuration will have less impact than the current stage, which has been working well with the current neighbors. Member Bulin asked for an explanation as to how the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency is involved in the process. Mr. Palazzetti responded that when the District has an element in a project, it has to be submitted to the Agency representative that oversees the project. The representative gives the approval if it is in the keeping of the historic character of the site. PLAN COMMISSION Minutes 3 PC -MTG 03- MAY.doc May 19, 2003 Member Bulin asked for clarification that the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency would have oversight on all of the site features such as the gazebo, theater, etc. This includes everything that happens within the plan. Mr. Palazzetti confirmed that they do, because the site is on the National Register of Historic Places. One of the reasons the District wanted to relocate the entrance was because of the vibration on the site. They will close the old entrance and restore it; they are now trying to obtain funds to restore it. Member Adrian noted that there was some damage to the exterior stone wall. Mr. Palazzetti said that it is crumbling, and they are planning to repair it. Again, they have to work with the Illinois Preservation Agency, because they cannot repair it with modern mortar, it has to be stacked as it was originally built. Member Adrian asked if the box office would have to be constructed in a certain way. Mr. Palazzetti said that it has to be in keeping with the period. The whole point of this project is to make it consistent with the era in which the mansion was built; this is one of the reasons that the parking is so far away. In keeping with more of an estate atmosphere you get out and walk. Member Bulin asked about the design elements for the theater, since some artistic license will have to be given in order to implement it. Mr. Palazzetti responded that they have not fully thought that out yet, however, there would have been Shakespearean Theater in the Victorian period. It would not have been a normal element on the site. However there would have been events like that particularly for someone as wealthy as Peabody, who could have provided such events on the grounds. The District will try to mask off the modern aspects of that and it will have the same review. Member Tropinski asked how high they thought the stage would be. Mr. Palazzetti said that it could be a story to a story and a half. Those elements, however, would be set up and taken down. Perhaps a restriction could be put on the theater that the tallest element could not be any higher than to the eave of the mansion. Mr. Palazzetti said that the light standards are in keeping with the code. Member Adrian asked if they foresee other types of theater coming in when the theater is built. Mr. Palazzetti said that it would be designed for the Shakespearean theater, but that is not to say a group in keeping with the era could not be involved in a small production. There would not be large amplified activities on the site. They are restricted by noise requirements, which would not allow them to have events to be broadcast out to the neighborhood. Member Tropinski asked if IHPA (Illinois Historical Preservation Agency) reviewed this site plan yet. Mr. Palazzetti said that Chrissie Howorth works with the representative from IHPA, and she was not available to be at this meeting. It was his understanding that they have not had a formal review, but they are monitoring it. If they were to tell the Forest Preserve District that they do not approve what is presented, then it will not happen. Member Tropinski said that if the Zoning Board of Appeals has any questions, or would like to find out how strict the IHPA actually is and what the review requirements are, they can contact the IHPA through Carol Dyson, 217 - 524 -0276. They can also talk to the Landmarks Council of Illinois who are also very interested in this project and the contact there is David Bauman 312 - 922 -1742. They can further assure the Zoning Board members that there are indeed strict guidelines as to the design and materials that are used to preserve the historic character of the site. Mr. Palazzetti said as an example, Bollinger, Lach and Associates hired a subcontractor for their lighting plan. The lighting plan will meet the photometrics for the Village ordinance, but they gave them three or four different styles of lights that meet the requirements. Chrissie Howorth took them to the rep for IHPA for review and they selected the actual fixture that will be placed in the entrance row. All the lights will be more like the gas type lights and very ornate and very low lighting. Member Tropinski asked about the Victorian Teahouse and whether there will be utilities in it and if there would be any preparation of food in the structure. Mr. Palazzetti responded that it is not their intention to do food preparation. There will be minimal modern utilities, mostly electricity, and there PLAN COMMISSION Minutes PC -MTG 03- MAY.doc �4 May 19, 2003 may not even be plumbing. The size of the structure would not allow for a big gathering. It would be more of an attractive feature that would draw attention and have the gardens wrapped around it. Member Goel questioned that the theater would be located nearer to Route 83. He asked about the requirement for the wall. Mr. Palazzetti said the sound wall would be approximately 8 feet tall and its purpose is to cup the sound in because of the noise coming from Route 83 and 315' Street. The wall is going up grade and is located just behind the seating area. They have a somewhat established tree line, but it is unfortunate that they do not have sound walls on Route 83. Member Bulin noted that they have turned the current stage, which now faces the houses and redirected it so that the sound from the stage goes toward the prairie and the woods, to the benefit of the houses. Director of Community Development Kallien added that by protecting Trinity Lakes residents, the sound would not be pushed into a direction that would be burdensome to other residents to the east. Director of Community Development Kallien said that on page D -4 of the case file, it states, "The District will design any new improvements to coincide with the established site themes throughout the Estate." That is the operative phrase all for all the various elements that have been discussed. If any other elements came to play, the Forest Preserve District would need to come back to the Village to seek an amendment to the special use. Mr. Palazzetti said that they want to preserve the historic elements of the site. The parking requirement will meet the current uses of the site, because they are parking people on the turf, and when there is inclement weather, it is not always nice to walk through turf. He stressed that this is not to increase the number of parking spaces, but to meet the current Village standards, which includes curb and gutter, detention, etc. Chairwoman Payovich noted that on Page D -4 it is also stated they will be in accordance with the Village of Oak Brook building and engineering requirements. Director of Community Development Kallien asked if the IHPA reviews elements of the plan approved by the Village, and the IHPA does not agree with the location of the structures on the site plan and they require something to be moved some distance, at what point does it become an issue that would require a further amendment? Paul Mitchell, Attorney for the Forest Preserve District, responded that if something would be moved 5 or 10 feet that would be a minor change, if something is being moved 50 —100 feet, they would come back to the Village for an amendment to the site plan. They have stated that all proposed improvements would comply with all Village ordinances, besides any necessary state approvals. For anything other than a minor change they agreed to come back before the Village. Mr. Mitchell noted that the Zoning Board of Appeals was concerned about two things. 1. They did not think that the Plan Commission was aware of the future changes. The Forest Preserve District did not try to deceive anyone because the documentation presented to the Village clearly states future amendments. 2. They thought that at some time in the future the Retreat Wing might be opened as office space to private entities. The Forest Preserve District does not have the legal authority to rent or license to anyone other than not - for - profit or public bodies. They are not seeking a change to the special use, which limits the use to offices of the conservancy, and related not - for - profits sub - licensees engaged in maintaining all of the buildings or grounds. It also contains language that allows a gift shop, living quarters for caretakers and space needed for storage or other services, which are accessory to those historic uses. They are not seeking any changes to the existing language of the original special use permit. Mr. Palazzetti added that at this location, they have historic landscape — which is an out -of- bounds area; wetlands — which is an out of bounds area; woodlands — which they are going to reestablish on site by meeting forest preserve standards for the ecosystem; historic prairie — which is an out -of- bounds area; detention and all the limits required for stormwater — which is an out -of- bounds area. They are not going to encroach on 315' Street, so if this project is going to happen, it is going to be noted on the current drawings, because they cannot bring it into the lake area, which would bring it into the community. Some aspects of the plan may never occur, but if for example, they would PLAN COMMISSION Minutes 5 PC -MTG 03- MAY.doc May 19, 2003 need the box office the location is established. If they find that it will not work for them, it is more likely that it is a program that will be eliminated, as opposed to being relocated. Member Goel said that the Friary also is owned by the Forest Preserve District and they were leasing it to the DuPage Housing Authority, so what is the difference between that and something similar to this. Mr. Mitchell responded that the Forest Preserve District could convey real estate to other not - for - profit or public entities. The contract was for the Forest Preserve to convey the property to the DuPage Housing Authority that was going to rehab the property and lease it out. The Forest Preserve by statute does not have the authority to lease to any body other than Veterans organizations, which is the only lease that the Forest Preserve has the right to do under state statute. They can also enter into licenses that are for related forest preserve purpose. For instance, the special use says that they can license or subleases to people that have related activities to the historic facility. They do not have any right to lease or license to third parties (private or otherwise) under the state statute. They would have to go to Springfield to get an amendment. The District was selling the Friary to another public body. The Forest Preserve does not have the right under state statute to sell to private entities, but they can sell it to public bodies. Member Braune noted that there is a flat tent area next to the chapel and asked whether it is currently being used in the way proposed on the plan, and also whether the Urn garden was part of the original site plan. Mr. Palazzetti responded that the Urn garden was not part of the original site plan. The Mayslake Conservancy in trying to expand upon the types of activities that would happen on the site developed a Victorian style English garden concept. This was done in order to provide a focal point for that particular location that was in keeping with the historic integrity of the site. It is used for an interpretive note and it would be their intent that once the others were built, it would no longer be necessary unless it provided a nice element for the small chapel. The ground area was the former cemetery area. It was a roughed out lawn area. Some of their events do extend out there; they have put tents off to the side because of the rough area. However, it is a lawn area that could provide a reception -type activity area. Director of Community Development Kallien asked if there are currently tents allowed on the property. Mr. Palazzetti said that they left the area as open and showed the tent because that would probably be the preferred location for those types of events, so that when they look at future landscape that they did not encroach on the particular location. There have been tents over the driveway area for events. Tents go up and down over the weekend depending upon the event. Member Tropinski asked what were the plans for restoring the exterior of the mansion. Mr. Palazzetti said that just last year they had a $400,000 project which required the removal of all the existing roof tiles, replace rotting decking, replace all new tar paper, lay back all the removed tiles, replace tiles that were broken (with historic replica tiles), all gutters were done to historic standards. They saved all the water collection boxes. If you look at the site it looks all new, but it is in keeping with the historic design. They have had several restoration architects through IHPA and have budgeted $80,000 to give them a cost analysis on the replication. They are going to do everything they can to keep with the restoration. The consultants tell them how best to restore the building and will give them a cost on the different elements and then they will seek funding, either legislatively or through benefactors. Member Tropinski said that the District has been explained clearly the care with which the mansion will be restored; this should be an assurance that they will restore it with historic accuracy. Director of Community Development Kallien said that this is a similar process that the District went through with the Graue House to ensure that the fine detail of that period was maintained. Mr. Palazzetti said that the Graue House is not on the National Register of Historic Places; however, the funding project presented to the legislative branch stated that they were going to restore the exterior historically. The inside was remodeled more for utilization, but they even brought some Victorian elements into the interior although it is modern on the inside. They went into Chicago to find bricks to match the existing bricks on the house as best they could. PLAN COMMISSION Minutes PC -MTG 03- MAY.doc 6 lzwr May 19, 2003 Mr. Palazzetti said that even though the interior of the breezeway and foyer of the Retreat Wing are not historic, it is their intent to provide the feeling that when you exit the mansion you do not walk into something modern. A lot of effort was expended to maintain the wood features. It will blend throughout the interior of that building which is not historic, however, they do not want to have different elements in the two different wings. Member Bulin moved, and Member Braune seconded, that the petitioner has met the standards as required by ordinance to recommend approval of the proposed special use amendment to expand the special use area from 3.34 acres to 46.42 acres as submitted including all proposed site improvements and subject to the following conditions. 1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the plans as submitted (pages N and O of the case file MP1 -1 PH2 and MP1 -1). 2. The new stormwater management plan for the site will be designed so that it is not detrimental to the existing water features located east of the Trinity Lakes Subdivision, at the south end of the Mayslake property. 3. The new production kitchen will be designed to limit the emission of cooking odors as well as meet all requirements of the DuPage County Health Dept. 4. All lighting to be located within the new parking lot and along the new driveway shall be properly shielded in accordance to Village Code. All other provisions of Ordinances S -1015, S -986 and S -841 are maintained in full force and effect. 6. That the Retreat Wing will not be leased to the general public for office use. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 6- Adrian, Braune, Bulin, Goel, Tropinski and Payovich Nays: 0- Absent: 1 - Wolin Motion Carried. Vl. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business to discuss. VII. ADJOURNMENT Member Adrian moved, seconded by Member Bulin to adjourn. VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried. Meeting was adjourned at 8:32 p.m. L. Director of Com elopment Secretary PLAN COMMISSION Minutes 7 PC -MTG 03- MAY.doc June 16, 2003 Date Approved May 19, 2003