Minutes - 07/17/2000 - Plan CommissionVILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES
July 17, 2000
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:31 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Stelios Aktipis
Members Stephen Allen
Surendra Goel
Barbara Payovich
MEMBERS ABSENT: Samuel Girgis
David Pequet
Anthony Tappin
ALSO PRESENT: Village Trustee
Alfred Savino
Village Manager
Stephen Veitch
Director of Community Development
Robert Kallien
Village Engineer
Dale Durfey
Fire Chief
Debra Jarvis
Fire Captain
Robert Cronholm
A quorum was present.
ll. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Member Goel moved, seconded by Member Allen, to waive the reading of the June 19, 2000,
Plan Commission Meeting minutes and to approve them as written.
VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion passed.
Ill. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK — MUNICIPAL BUILDING PROJECT — (1200 OAK
BROOK ROAD) — SPECIAL USE
Steve Veitch, Village Manager of the Village of Oak Brook, represented the Village in its petition
for an amendment to an existing Special Use, which includes a driveway serving a new fire
station which would be constructed at a width greater than that expressly permitted by the
Zoning Ordinance. The original application was worded to say amendment to Special Use and
Variation. Subsequent to that, the Village Attorney advised that the appropriate way in which to
handle such a deviation from the express terms of the Zoning Ordinance, is to include it within
the review of the Special Use and subject it to Special Use standards, as opposed to treating it
separately and subjecting it to variation standards. The application was amended to state that
the Village is seeking an amendment to a Special Use which includes this feature.
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes
July 17, 2000
Village Manager Veitch described the various Village functions and locations of the departments
within the Village Commons. Village Hall contains the Police, Finance, Information Services,
Purchasing and Engineering departments, as well as general administrative functions and
meeting facilities. Fire Station 1 is the administrative headquarters of the Oak Brook Fire
Department and houses half of the response operation, the Fire Prevention Division, and the
Community Development Department which is the aggregation of the Planning, Zoning and
Code Enforcement functions that are sometimes referred to as the Building Department. There
are two other buildings on the site, one is the old Butler School building which currently houses
the Oak Brook Public Library and the Public Works facility.
The Village Commons property is zoned R -3, single - family residence district. However,
government facilities, including municipal offices, public libraries, police and fire stations, public
works facilities, and the like are provided for as Special Uses in the R -1 through R -4 zoning
districts. The existing use is considered to be a legally valid special use, but it is also subject to
the provisions of the ordinance. In the event of a substantial alteration or expansion, it is
required to come through the public hearing process. In the case of this particular special use,
which does not seem to be governed by any ordinance or the usual attached site plans, this
request will bring the use into conformity with that practice. In other words, get the municipal
complex under a Special Use ordinance with an approved site plan.
The project seeks to consolidate, upgrade and improve the Village's facilities through
construction of an addition to the west side of Village Hall, approximately 32,700 square feet in
size. The net increase in floor space is only about 20,200 feet because the addition will replace
old Fire Station 1. The project also includes extensive changes and improvements to the
Village Commons site which will alter and improve the access to the site, circulation on the site,
provide stormwater management facilities and adequate off - street parking.
The addition will house Fire Station 1, Fire Administration, Fire Prevention, Community
Development, Engineering, Information Services and Purchasing. It also includes a divisible
multi - purpose conference and meeting room, which is also designed to function as an
Emergency Operating Center (EOC). A common break room is adjacent to that, which can
become part of the EOC if need be. A Communication Center is adjacent to that as well, which
is part of the EOC function.
The renovation of what is left behind then will result in a police facility mainly on the south side
of Village Hall and to some extent to the north side on the lower level. It will be approximately
30 percent larger than the existing Police Department. The project also includes an overall
upgrade of the almost 27 -year old electrical and mechanical systems.
The project as designed meets all applicable bulk regulations of the Zoning Ordinance with the
exception of the width of the apparatus apron of the Fire Station. The Ordinance states that
access driveways for nonresidential uses at the lot line can be no wider than 38 feet without a
median or 44 feet with a median. This apparatus apron of the four -bay fire station is about 65
feet wide where it meets the property line, before it begins to flare out. That is driven by the
operating requirements of a fire department and the size of its vehicles. They need to be able
to come in, swing around, and then back in. Two of the bays are flow through and two are not.
They want to be able to maneuver on the driveway and not be forced to do extra maneuvering
through any artificial necking down of the width of that apron, which in addition to being difficult,
might be impossible in the case of some of the vehicles. The driveway is comparable in width
along its shank to the apron at Fire Station 2 on Enterprise Drive and 22nd Street. In that case,
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes July 17, 2000
2
--► l
because Enterprise curves where the driveway meets the street, the dimension of that as it
meets the property line is actually a little over 100 feet.
The existing site suffers from a number of problems that will be addressed through the project.
1. One is the setback of the existing Fire Station, which is insufficient in terms of the
Zoning Ordinance; it is shorter than the truck that is housed in the apparatus room. The
driveway is about 31 feet from the back of the curb to the front of the building, and the pumper
is about 32 feet bumper to bumper. Obviously that is a problem, as is getting in and out onto
31St Street, without the benefit and protection of traffic signals. The site plan reflects fire
equipment access to and from Jorie Blvd. The traffic signal plan shows signalization controlled
by the station keeping the area clear for exiting of fire equipment by the stop bars and signage.
There will be access onto the minor street with traffic signal protection as opposed to the
current situation. The apron will be large enough to allow the apparatus to turn around on -site
and provide some space for training activities.
2. The main entrance to the complex will be located at Spring Road. The Jorie Road
entrance is intended to be for fire equipment ingress and egress and a minor entrance
principally for staff. The public would be encouraged to use the main entrance.
3. The existing development predates the DuPage County Stormwater Ordinance and
contains no on -site storage. The redevelopment of more than one acre requires that we
comply, so stormwater detention has been provided as required.
4. The site plan indicates a total of 200 parking spaces, which is more than double the
number presently on site. The Zoning Ordinance contains a very unusual provision that relates
the parking requirement to the number of employees. If it were assumed that every employee
of the Village works at this site that would yield the requirement of about 90 spaces, which
would seem to be inadequate. So the building was divided into its various uses, office, meeting
space and storage space and yields a requirement of about 190 spaces, which is met and
slightly exceeded in the design. 200 parking spaces is what is believed to be needed for the
activities that take place on this property. In addition to daily business, a number of meetings
are held on this property. Many of these meetings are quite beneficial to the Village and the
community. The Village has an attractive location and there has always been difficulty to
accommodate the demand for parking.
The standards for Special Uses are found in Section 7.2 of the Plan Commission Rules of
Procedure and provides that the Commission consider certain factors in its review of
applications for special uses.
a. For proposed uses operated by a public agency or proposed uses traditionally affected
with the public interest, the proposed building or use at the particular location request is
necessary or desirable to provide a service or a facility which is in the interest of the
public convenience.
This use has existed at this site for approximately 40 years. Many of its facilities are outmoded,
cramped, unsafe, not in compliance with various codes, and not conducive to serving the
public. An example of that is that someone who is trying to get a building permit needs to find
the "building department and engineering department' and all we know is that they go to the
wrong one first. Part of this design is to make Community Development and Engineering
neighbors in the building, indistinguishable from one another to the person who needs the
service. They come to one counter and deal with everyone they need to deal with, including
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes July 17, 2000
3
0-Li
Fire Prevention, which is just the next area over within the openly designed office wing. The
improvements are desirable in order to provide municipal services that are for the public
convenience. The site is centrally located in the community and is located at the intersection of
major thoroughfares, immediately adjacent to other nonresidential uses. (McDonald's to the
north and east and a nonresidential special use exists directly across Jorie.) The residential
uses to the south and west are both located across major 5 -lane thoroughfares.
b. The proposed building or use will not cause substantial injury to the value of other
property in the neighborhood in which it is located.
As proposed, the improved buildings on the site will be located further from the larger
residential community to the south. The most visible and audible activity (fire station) will be
occurring a little further away and going the other direction. The general traffic will be directed
to an established intersection at Spring Road. With respect to adjacent non - residential property
(McDonald's Corporation), there will be no material change other than the fact that the Village
will be retaining its stormwater rather than delivering it directly to them without benefit of delay.
C. The proposed building or use will be so designed, located and operated that the public
health, safety and welfare will be protected.
The complex provides the services that are essential to the community and in the interest of the
public health, safety and welfare. The proposed improvements will enhance the Village's ability
to deliver those services efficiently and safely, and enhance the convenience of the public as
business is conducted at the Village Commons.
The Village seeks approval of a special use amendment to improve and expand the municipal
complex at 1200 Oak Brook Road. Although there will be no increase in the level of activity, the
improvement will result in a far more efficient facility and better functioning site plan for delivery
of municipal services.
Member Goel questioned why in the Village of Oak Brook, in the Village Commons area, there
are only 3 oak trees being added to the site and believes more should be added. Tom Jacobs,
Project Architect, Earthtech International, responded that there are a significant number of oak
trees remaining on the site. They are located more toward the east end of the site, on the
detention basin and a substantial number are on the McDonald's property. They felt that variety
was needed on the site, and they wanted to mix the new planting with a couple different species
of trees. They are trying to maximize the landscaping where it is the most visible, along Oak
Brook Road and Jorie Blvd. There will be a concentration of landscaping made up of trees,
shrubs and berming in order to provide the proper screening requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance for parking. Village Manager Veitch added that when the plant list is finalized, if it is
the Plan Commission's recommendation, they will endeavor to add more oak trees. Chairman
Aktipis questioned whether the slow growth of the oak trees is a practical problem. Tom Jacobs
answered that it is practical to go up to four inches, if you go over that size a sizable premium
will be paid.
Member Payovich asked the size of the plants being added. Tom Jacobs responded that they
are larger than what is normally planted, by about 1 caliper, many of the bushes will be 24
inches when they would normally install 18 inch plants.
No one in the audience spoke in support of or against the proposal.
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes July 17, 2000
4
Member Allen moved, seconded by Member Payovich, that the Special Use as requested is
deemed necessary for the public convenience and will be operated so that the public health,
safety and welfare are protected and there will be no substantial injury to other property that it is
located. The petitioner has met the requirements necessary to recommend the Special Use for
approval subject to the following conditions:
1. Consideration should be given to increase the number of oak trees shown on the
landscape plan.
2. Allow the increased width of the apparatus apron of the Fire Station as requested to
accommodate its operating requirements and large vehicles.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 4 - Allen, Goel, Payovich and Aktipis
Nays: 0-
Absent: 3 - Girgis, Pequet and Tappin
Motion Carried.
IV. YORK ROAD PROPERTIES LLC - RESUBDIVISION OF LOT A OF SUNBEAM
CORPORATION SECOND ASSESSMENT PLAT — 2001 YORK ROAD —
PRELIM/NARY AND FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION — THREE -LOT
SUBDIVISION
Susan Hammersley, Project Manager for the J. Buck Company, represented the applicant in its
petition. The John Buck Company formed a joint venture with Citigroup (formerly Travelers
Investment Group). They acquired 2001, 2100 and 2122 York Road. In the fall of 1998 they
worked with the Village of Oak Brook to rezone the property from ORA -1 to 0 -4. In October of
1998 they began construction of 2001 York Center, which is a 184,000 square foot, five -story
office building. The building was completed in January of 2000, and is 100% occupied. There
are six tenants, with the main tenant being AT &T Broadband. They also have international,
national, and regional tenants.
York Road Properties is in the process of potentially conveying 2001 York Center to several
employees of the John Buck Company. As a requirement of their partnership, the property is to
be subdivided so they can move forward to develop the master plan that was proposed during
the time of their rezoning. They are still looking at developing three (3) buildings, totaling
approximately 500,000 square feet.
They are seeking a waiver of the utility easement that goes around the perimeter of the
property. They would like a waiver of the public utility easement between Lots 1 and 2 and
across Lots 2 and 3. They are requesting this waiver because they have the necessary utilities
to service the property and the surrounding owners. If other utilities need to come into the
property, they believe it can be provided on the perimeter of the site. They have a water /sewer
easement that goes straight across the property. When 2001 York Center was built, ComEd
installed a transformer in an easement along the south line of Lot 3 and carried it north into the
parking garage and then east into a vault within the building. Based on how they are planning
the project, they believe that ComEd planned it that way so that they could provide enough
power to service the next two buildings. In addition, there are a series of fiber networks that run
down York Road, 22nd and along Windsor. AT &T, Ameritech and MCI all run down the road,
and several run down Windsor Drive to service the surrounding property owners. They feel the
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes
5
�Y_
July 17, 2000
existing utilities plus the easement around the property should be able to provide for future
projects as well as for any surrounding property owners needs for the future.
They met with the Village Engineer prior to the meeting and believe they have addressed all but
one issue, which is that they need to show a 40 -foot rear setback, which will be revised on the
subdivision plat.
Danielle Cassel, from Piper, Marbury, Rudnick and Wolf is legal counsel for the John Buck
Company. She said that the three areas will be treated as one zoning lot for floor area ratio
(F.A.R.) purposes. Given they are in the 0 -4 District, there will be .80 F.A.R. limitation on all
three lots. A covenant will be recorded against the land that will allocate the .80 F.A.R. over the
three sites and the Village will have notice rights if there is to be any sort of amendment. The
owners will all have to agree to any sort of amendment to this allocation. The allocation will
begin with authorizing the existing improvements on Lot 1, authorizing the maximum
development that would be allowed on Lot 3, and reserving Lot 2 for the parking structure.
Director of Community Development Kallien advised the Commission that at the time of
rezoning to the newly created 0 -4 District, it was given a maximum F.A.R. of .8. There was an
assumption that if all the setbacks could be provided for and all the parking accommodated on
the site, there would be a .8 F.A.R. over the entire site.
Member Payovich asked if there was any reason the Village would not want to waive the public
utility easement where they are requesting it. Village Engineer Durfey responded that it is okay
to waive the easements on the interior lot lines, because they have enough along the outside
boundaries for any future items. He added that there will probably be an 80 -foot right of way on
the property in the future that will more than compensate.
Susan Hammersley explained that following the Village Code, this property is one zoning lot
divided into three pieces for the purposes of development. They want to be able to treat the
total allowable F.A.R. over the entire site and to allocate it based upon what they are actually
building. They want to be able to follow the Code as to how it relates to setback issues for front
yards, side yards and rear yards. They essentially have a front yard and a rear yard, but when
they subdivide the property they will have multiple, front, side and rear yards for each lot.
Chairman Aktipis stated that Village Code will apply within each separate Lot.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that those provisions will apply. The only new
building to be built north of the right of way line is the second phase of the parking structure.
The existing code will be used to make that determination.
Chairman Aktipis said that according to the long term plan, Clearwater Drive will connect York
Road and Windsor Drive, but that is not indicated on the current plans. Susan Hammersley
explained that they do show a road going through the site. When they build the next building,
they will have Metro Transportation do a study and that will indicate what type of traffic
improvements need to be made. At the time of permit, they will discuss a dedication of a road
going through the site.
Director of Community Development Kallien referred the Commission to page 5 -a of the petition
file. It refers to Section 5 (2) (n) of the Village Code, which basically says that if there is any
additional square footage built on the site, as a condition of getting a building permit, they need
to do a traffic study, which would call out all public improvements, as well as what is put in the
right of way and other off -site improvements. As a condition of occupancy for any additional
structure those improvements would have to be in place.
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes July 17, 2000
6
Susan Hammersley responded that they just finished 2001 York Road and there is surface
parking all around the site. They also have temporary parking to service the tenants where the
road will eventually go. When the second building is built they will need to put in structured
parking at that time to accommodate all of the parking needs on the site.
Community Development Director Kallien said that they do not really know what is going to be
built on the two lots. The determination as to what type of improvement will be required, will
come as a result as to what is applied for at the time of permit.
Chairman Aktipis raised the question, "why does the Village have to wait until that time to have
those items noted on the plan, if that is part of the plan ?" and also questioned whether a road
will have to be built no matter how high the buildings are, and why they did not come forward
with the entire plan?
Susan Hammersley said that right now they are just subdividing the property, they are not going
in for a permit to build anything on the property. The subdivision is needed so that they can
make a conveyance and obtain financing. Also, in the future, in order to apply for a building
permit, the lots have to be separate so that a permit can be issued. That would also be a
requirement of the Village and the construction lender. They initially started with one lot that had
a 4.5 F.A.R.; they reviewed their Master Plan and sought rezoning to .8 F.A.R.; they built the
first building according to what the Code called for, but they did not subdivide the property at
that time. Now they need to subdivide the property because a lender will not let the building be
purchased with all the excess land.
Community Development Director Kallien said that from staff perspective, there is a guarantee
to the adherence of the Codes that if a right of way is required and a roadway is to be built, it
will be built through the permit process. This particular process has been reviewed with the
Village Manager and the Village Attorney.
No one in the audience spoke in support of or against the proposal.
Member Allen moved, seconded by Member Goel that the petitioner has satisfied the applicable
requirements necessary to recommend for approval the Final Plat of Subdivision for the three -
lot subdivision as requested subject to the following conditions:
The rear yard setback be increased to a minimum of forty (40') feet.
2. Compliance with the items listed in the Village Engineer's memo dated July 13, 2000.
3. Final engineering approval.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 4 - Allen, Goel, Payovich and Aktipis
Nays: 0-
Absent: 3 - Girgis, Pequet and Tappin
Motion Carried.
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes July 17, 2000
7
V. ADJOURNMENT
Member Allen moved, seconded by Member Payovich to adjourn.
VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried.
Meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Director of Community Devel
Secretary
September 18 2000
Date Approved
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes July 17, 2000
8