Loading...
Minutes - 06/21/2010 - Plan Commission1. 2. 3. U MINUTES OF THE JUNE 21, 2010 REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLAN COMMISSION OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK APPROVED AS WRITTEN ON AUGUST 16, 2010 CALL TO ORDER: The Regular Meeting of the Plan Commission was called to order by Chairwoman Tropinski in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Butler Government Center at 7:35 p.m. ROLL CALL: Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons PRESENT: Chairwoman, Marcia Tropinski, Members Thomas Doyle, Raymond Dunn, Gopal Lalmalani, Robert Lindgren and Mintu Sharma ABSENT: Member Raju Iyer IN ATTENDANCE: Robert Kallien Jr., Director of Community Development APPROVAL OF MINUTES: REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLAN COMMISSION OF MAY 17.2010 Motion by Member Doyle, seconded by Member Lalmalani to approve the minutes of the May 17, 2010 Regular Plan Commission meeting as written. VOICE VOTE: Motion Carried UNFINISHED BUSINESS CALL TO ORDER ROLLCALL r•n.nyM UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK TEXT AMENDMENT — SIGN vOcs T VILLAGE REGULATIONS — VILLAGE OWNED WAY FINDING SIGNAGE AND OWNED WAY BANNERS DISCUSSION (LIMITED _ TO VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK FINDING BaANNAERS PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS) DISCUSSION TO PUBLIC ROW Director of Community Development Kallien said that the Plan Commission had agreed at the last meeting to separate the banner issue from the way finding signage review since they are completely different issues. BANNER DISCUSSION Substantial progress was made on the issue of banners. Originally the banner program was more commercially oriented, but based upon the input received from Chuck Fleming, General Manager of the Oakbrook Center and the Commissioners review, a modified proposal has been submitted in the case file that is more consistent with the types of banner programs seen in other communities. The program now is focused upon community events and not "for profit' activities. The VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Regular Plan Commission Minutes Page 1 of 5 June 21, 2010 proposal does provide for commercial businesses to sponsor those types of activities. The banner program area has been expanded to include Jorie Blvd due to the types of land uses located in that area. Member Doyle commented that the proposal captures just about everything discussed by the Plan Commission. Member Lindgren said that at the meeting with Chuck Fleming it was fairly clear that there could be some logistical problems with a commercial oriented program around the Oakbrook Center, but there was some support for an indirect program. His only concern was whether or not someone would be willing to pay for it rather than the Village. The proposed program does not allow for direct commercial advertising. Director of Community Development Kallien noted that from the perspective of the Village Board, if they would like to initiate such a program, there would need to be a mechanism in place to have it pay for itself because there would be a lot of expenses. When the banner program was initially discussed it was more retail oriented, which was the revenue source as a means of advertising to cover the operating expenses. The Plan Commission recommendation will go the Village Board and they could accept or stop the proposed program. If they decide to go forward it would be sent it to the Zoning Board of Appeals to hold the public hearing in order to amend the sign regulations or they could also send it back to the Plan Commission to study other options. Member Lalmalani questioned the program fees as proposed. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that if it moves forward, the Village Board would also obtain the input from the Public Works Director to determine the actual costs that would be associated with the program. Member Dunn said he was not opposed to the banner program, but questioned whether the program should be started gradually by initiating it around the Oakbrook Center. He also had concerns about banners being located along Jorie Blvd. He did not want to see restaurants advertising on the banners and that there was enough existing signage on the buildings. He was in favor of advertising events in Oak Brook. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that the program has been repackaged and does not promote advertising, but rather sponsorship of events. Motion by Member Doyle, seconded by Member Lahnalani to recommend approval of a banner program as proposed on page 37 of the case file. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 6 — Members Doyle, Dunn, Lalmalani, Lindgren, Sharma and Chairwoman Tropinski Absent:I — Member Iyer Nays: 0 — Motion Carried. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Regular Plan Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5 June 21, 2010 VILLAGE OWNED WAY FINDING SIGNAGE Director of Community Development Kallien provided an overview of the way finding signage. There are a number of sites in Oak Brook, such as Enterprise Drive, Kensington, Commerce Drive and Jorie Blvd that have issues with getting people to where they want to go, which was one of the recommendations that came out of the Sign Regulations update. Almost 100 surveys went out to building owners and businesses located on Kensington, Jorie, Enterprise, Commerce, Swift and Windsor. The areas were identified by the sign consultant as possible sites that would benefit from this type of opportunity. Linda Hunt, General Manager of the Residence Inn of Marriott located at 790 Jorie Blvd. said she was happy to receive the survey because one of the comments that they frequently receive from their guests is that they have a very difficult time finding the Inn. Most of the hotels she has worked at in the past typically have a monument sign to indicate that the hotel is located within an office park. Since the RSNA building is located at the entrance, they are required to drive past the RSNA building toward the back when you can finally see the Inn. The hotel is very visible from I -88 but when they turn on 2274 Street (with directions) and they turn on Jorie and especially when it is dark, they do not necessarily see the little Residence Inn sign across from the RSNA building, along with the listing of several other businesses. Many travelers are used to seeing a larger sign, which may be why it is so hard for them. From the highway they can see the large hotel, but it cannot be seen when you turn onto Jorie, so they rely upon signs to bring them in, and when they don't see one they just keep going down Jorie. Anyone coming to the Inn for the first time passes it. Since she is new to this hotel in this area, she is very interested in way finding signage or to have a sign located on 22nd Street with an arrow guiding them to the hotel. She believes the owners would be very interested if it became available and would definitely help their business. It would also help ease the frustration of the guests She supports the proposed signage. Director of Community Development Kallien said that the Residence Inn is a separate building on a 3 building parcel and prior to the adoption of the new sign code the available signage was very limited. They now have the ability to add signage to the top of the building on multiple sides. There may be a way to add signage that would help, because presently the signs for the Inn are very small. The Hyatt hotel on the McDonald's campus is an example where there is a hotel located on the property, but you could not tell that from Jorie Blvd. Member Lindgren questioned with the new sign regulations, whether off - premises signs are still not allowed. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that off - premises signage is not allowed in the Code. The code gives the Village Board •limited authority to allow signage in'the right of way. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Regular Plan Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5 June 21, 2010 Another area with issues is Swift Drive since it is accessed at 22nd Street and Windsor. When you drive down Windsor, you would not know that there are corporate headquarters located back there, such as Blistex. The way that some of the streets are laid out in town are not easily found by those that are unfamiliar or have not been in these areas before. Chairwoman Tropinski said that the next step may require a report from staff as to the next step for the way finding signage review. The Plan Commission had a general discussion regarding the updated Sign Regulations and issues that some of the businesses have regarding identifying locations that are not visible or difficult for the public to find. Member Doyle questioned whether the way finding signage could list major tenants within a building and what kind of rules would be applied. Director of Community Development Kallien said that directional signage is really meant to get people to places that they cannot find. In some of the buildings there could be a hundred tenants, so how would it be determined which tenants would be listed on a sign. Some municipalities have dealt with some of these issues and we may need to contact some of them to tap into how it was set up and what criteria was used, etc. Member Doyle noted that Glenview has wonderful way finding signage, but it was done as part of the original development. Motion by Member Doyle, seconded by Member Lalmalani to continue the way finding review to the next regular meeting. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. NEW BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK — TEXT AMENDMENT — DEFINITIONS — Dg>r moNSA - SETBACKS SETBACKS Director of Community Development Kallien reviewed the background of the request. The definition for setbacks and how they are measured has existed since 1966. This past year there was confusion during the construction of a new home that resulted in a variation request and the Village Board reluctantly granted permission so that the house could be occupied. The Board directed staff to process a text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance in order to clarify how setbacks are measured. The request adds a sentence to the existing definition, which currently states that the setback is measured to the edge of the structure, which is usually to the edge of the eave, but with single family homes there are eaves, gutters, etc. The change should eliminate any confusion as to how setbacks are measured. All of the homes in Oak Brook have been built to that standard. The new definition would read as follows: (underlined text is the proposed text): VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Regular Plan Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5 June 21, 2010 -2"� R1 SETBACK: The minimum horizontal distance between a street line and any part of a structure or any edge of the area of operation of a principal use when no structure is involved. For single - family homes the setback is measured between the street line and the outside edge of the eave (excluding gutters). Member Lindgren questioned whether the change would make any existing property nonconforming. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that the amendment would not have a negative impact on any existing structure or any future homes built. Motion by Member Doyle, seconded by Member Lindgren to recommend approval of the text amendment as proposed. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 6 — Members Doyle, Dunn, Lalmalani, Lindgren, Sharma and Chairwoman Tropinski Absent:) — Member Iyer Nays: 0 — Motion Carried. OTHER BU INESS OTHER SIN aUsnvESs There was no other business to discuss. ADJOURNMENT: ADJOURNMENT Motion by Member Lindgren, seconded by Member Lalmalani to adjourn the meeting at 8:26 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. ATTEST: Robert Kallien, Direc of Co unity Development Secretary VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Regular Plan Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5 June 21, 2010.