Loading...
Minutes - 09/19/2005 - Plan Commission1. 2. a 0 MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLAN COMMISSION OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK APPROVED AS WRITTEN ON OCTOBER 17, 2005. CALL TO ORDER: CALL TO ORDER The Special 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 8:05 p.m. ROLL CALL: ROLL CALL Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons PRESENT: Chairwoman Barbara Payovich, Members Paul Adrian, Gopal Lalmalani, Moin Saiyed and Gerald Wolin IN ATTENDANCE: Jeffrey Kennedy, Trustee; Robert Kallien, Director of Community Development; Dale Durfey, Village Engineer; and Peggy O'Connell, Assistant Village Attorney APPROVAL OF MINUTES: - MINUTES REGULAR PLAN COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 20, 2005 Motion by Member Wolin, seconded by Member Adrian to approve the minutes of the June 20, 2005 Regular Plan Commission meeting as written and waive the full reading thereof. VOICE VOTE: Motion Carried. REGULAR PLAN COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 18, 2005 Motion by Member Wolin, seconded by Member Saiyed to approve the minutes of the July 18, 2005 Plan Commission meeting as written and waive the full reading thereof VOICE VOTE: Motion Carried. UNFINISHED BUSINESS UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business to discuss. NEW BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. DANA PARK SUBDIVISION — 3111. 3113 and 3115 MEYERS ROAD — DANA PARK SUB - 3111, 3113 and 3115 FOUR -LOT SUBDIVISION -- FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION AND MEYERS — 4 -LOT VARIATION TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS SUB — FINAL PLAT AND VARIATION TO THE SUB REGS VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 1 of 14 September 19, 2005 John Brechin, Attorney for Frank Drukas, the applicant and owner of the subject property, briefly reviewed the prior requests that were before the Plan Commission. Originally, there was a subdivision proposed for the east half of the property by Jim Flowers and after its review the Plan Commission recommended denial. When the matter went to the Village Board at that time Mr. Drukas met with Mr. Flowers and they proposed a collaborative effort known as the Villas of Oak Brook Subdivision. The proposal incorporated four lots owned by Vito Falco and three lots owned by Mr. Drukas that was reviewed and approved by the Plan Commission and ultimately approved by the Village Board. Correspondence has been submitted from Mr. Drukas indicating that shortly after Village approval, Mr. Flowers left the project and Mr. Falco had not decided how to proceed. Mr. Drukas made the conscious decision that he wanted to move forward with development of his property. What the applicant has proposed is in substantial conformance with what was approved. It is essentially the west half of the approved Villas of Oak Brook Subdivision. The roadway and the lots are substantially the same and the same size. The two major differences are where they have accommodated the stormwater detention and compensatory storage. It was shared between the two property owners and is now obligated to be taken care of entirely on this site. The Village's review of the stormwater management plan show that they are fully in conformance with the ordinance. Presently, there are 3 single - family residences on the property and the plan is for 3 new single- family residences and to incorporate the stormwater detention and the compensatory storage for the flood plain. The property is 3.55 acres. The out lot, Cara Lane is .54 acres and all three of the proposed buildable lots meet the one acre requirement for the R -2 District. Because the sanitary sewer would have been required to excavate a very lengthy area, they have opted to go with 3 forced mains, which will service the 3 lots to connect to a sewer in the Midwest Club Subdivision. The Flagg Creek Water Reclamation District (formerly the Hinsdale Sanitary District) has reviewed it and is comfortable that it is an appropriate plan. Forced mains are needed because of the gravity differential and one of the things that will be incorporated into the construction is a generator for each of the houses so if there is a power failure, the sewer system would still work. The private roadway known as Cara Lan will be gated. The design incorporates a change from the original Villas subdivision. The roadway was moved 11 feet to the north at the request of the neighbors in the Midwest Club who also requested that the roadway be gated to minimize traffic. The roadway in terns of pavement width and turning radius for the cul -de -sac conforms to the Village requirements. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOD Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 2 of 14 September 19, 2005 There will be decorative iron fencing along Meyers Road with lighting on top the stone pillars that will be done pursuant to a building permit, which is separate and apart from the subdivision request. They will be making a very good effort to make the visual sides of the subdivision very attractive for all concerned. There will also be a subdivision monument gateway and Village Engineer Durfey's memo pointed out that they do not meet some Subdivision Regulation requirements. That document has been revised so that it conforms to the requirements for setback as set forth in the Subdivision Gateway regulations. One minor alteration was made to the Village's bike path, which dips slightly into the lot. They are going to put it back out into the public right of way. In addition, as a good safety aspect there will be pathways adjacent to Cara Lane so as to provide pedestrians the ability to move onto the property without conflicting with vehicular traffic. They think it is a good safety aspect and would also be an aesthetically pleasing amenity. The subdivision is consistent with the Villas Subdivision that was approved by the Village but for the location and sizing of the storm water detention and flood plain compensatory storage and the different provision for sanitary sewer. He compared the lots sizes that were previously approved on the Villas Subdivision Plat and compared it to the lot sizes that are proposed. Using the net buildable lot area, this means the net area taking away the required front, side and rear yard and anything that is devoted primarily to stormwater detention or floodplain compensatory storage. Lot 1 in the Villas Subdivision had 8174 square feet of net buildable area and under the proposed plan has 8365 square feet. Lot 2 had 8679 square feet and the proposed has 8437 square feet. Lot 3 had 10,459 square feet and the proposed has 8391 square feet. The basic reason for that difference is because under the previous Villas plan they were able to utilize a portion of the neighbor's property for detention of water, which obviously they cannot use now so it requires a modest reduction in the buildable area. The net buildable area under the approved plan was 27,312 square feet, which is substantially similar to what they are proposing. They believe they have been very consistent with the previously approved plan. The footprint for the typical home would have a first floor ground area coverage of a little less than 3000 square feet with a total home size around 6000 square feet. Since the building pads exceed 8000 square feet they are covering less than 50% of the net buildable area with the first floor. There will be significant room for any desired improvements or amenities in terms of accessory uses. They are requesting three variations. 1. To waive the requirement for sidewalks in light of the existing pedestrian VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 3 of 14 September 19, 2005 i�J bicycle path that surrounds the property on the west and north 2. To allow a private street. They think the nature and character of the street serves only three lots and renders making it private a compelling reason so that the Village Public Works Dept. would not have to maintain a small private street. 3. To allow a reduction of the required right- of-way from sixty -six feet (66') to forty -five feet (45') and that would allow them to significantly landscape along the south property line, which was the suggestion of the neighbors. There will be significant landscaping as well as berming. He displayed a conceptual plan that showed how homes might look on the site. The cul -de -sac center will be landscaped with plantings and the gateway will be approximately 55 feet back from Meyers Road. A typical 18- wheeler is 52 feet long so it is believed that 55 feet would easily accommodate 4 or 5 traditional passenger vehicles and should provide a very large measure of safety. There will be pedestrian pathways on both sides of Cara Lane so that the residents can utilize it. In the prior subdivision they had two actively wet areas storing water. Both the stormwater detention and the compensatory storage proposed will be dry bottom, so there will not be an influx and out flux of water or some of the maintenance issues. There is going to be an extensive landscape plan throughout the property, which has had a preliminary review by the village. He reviewed the entrance way and the cul -de -sac. They have eliminated any conflict between pedestrians and vehicles and it is very aesthetically pleasing. The fence will go along Meyers Road and up through the north property line. No one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to the request. Member Wolin asked if the property flooded in 1987 at the time of the big flood. Mr. Brechin responded that back in 1987 he was Village Manager and he was not aware of many properties that did not have water in some way, shape or form. The Village's well house site did in fact have water, but he did not know if the subject property had water. The proposed improvements within conformance to the provisions of the ordinance tremendously minimize that possibility. Member Adrian questioned the reduction in the right-of-way width. Mr. Brechin responded that it was in a 3 -lot subdivision there is no reason to expand the roadway became it will always be no more than 3 homes. Member Lamalani questioned if there was a median on Meyers Road when you come out of Cara Lane. Mr. Brechin responded that there is no median. Presently there are 2 curb cuts in front of the homes that will be reduced to 1 curb cut to be located at Cara Lane. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 4 of 14 September 19, 2005 Member Adrian said that the plan shows a portion of the bike path to be relocated and questioned whether it was necessary to contact the Bike Path Committee regarding the proposed change and if change was okay from an engineering standpoint. Village Engineer Durfey responded that the committee has been disbanded and indicated that it was okay from an engineering standpoint. Assistant Village Attorney O'Connell asked if the neighbors south of the property had approved the concept for the private road. Mr. Brechin responded that they did not express any objections and added that they were pleased with what is proposed. He added that they were concerned about the possibility of traffic and the fact that the road is proposed to be private should have a positive impact on diminishing traffic. Director of Community Development Kallien noted that there are 3 existing houses on the site that are small by Oak Brook standard. Because of the flood plain delineation there is very little opportunity for those houses to be upgraded or replaced without some type of action by the Village. In his opinion, the applicant has shown a development pattern that really works around a lot of significant obstacles that most properties do not have. They are yielding an opportunity to replace 3 outdated houses with three modern houses that are very consistent with the neighborhood. Member Saiyed questioned issues of the Julie system and the Flagg Creek Reclamation District. Mr. Brechin responded that Flagg Creek has reviewed the forced mains and they did not have a problem with it and believe it is the most appropriate way. Many sanitary districts or villages would prefer that they have the maintenance responsibility since each of the forced mains only services a single lot. They do not have a problem with that and they will be prepared to talk to Flagg Creek as to the Julie situation and assume that they will in some way take upon a notification responsibility for those lines. He suggested that in addition they may want to include some sort of active notice in their subdivision covenants because the most likely people to do any work in that area would be the residents of the Dana Park Subdivision so if it is in the covenants that would be a backstop against what Julie might and might not do. Village Engineer Durfey referred to Item 5 in his memorandum on page 8.a of the case file and asked for an explanation regarding the proposal for using the Village property for the two pipes. Mr. Brechin responded that the pipes would discharge the water on the subdivision property that naturally flows down to the Village's property and would allow it to be done in a more orderly fashion. In correspondence to the village they are prepared to give the village $15,000 for the VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 5 of 14 September 19, 2005 right to utilize the area to put the pipe in. The pipe will be augured so there will not be any surface disturbance and no actual disturbance to the wetlands. The ability to maintain the flow and not need to maintain slopes or take away garbage debris will be a benefit to both the Village as well as the subdivision residents because it will be a self-executing system as opposed to relying on overland flow and the vagaries of vegetation that grows, etc. Chairwoman Payovich asked Village Engineer Durfey if there was a detriment created from an engineering standpoint. Village Engineer Durfey responded that he believes it is just a policy issue and did not see it as a detriment. Member Wolin said that he did not think it was a serious problem, however, without the pipe there would be water flowing all across the lots and the pipe would allow it to come out of one spot. Village Engineer Durfey responded, roughly, yes. Member Wolin asked how the water would get from there to where it is supposed to go. Village Engineer Durfey responded that the water would go into the pipes underground and would flow into the lake on the south side of 31St Street. Chairwoman Payovich asked what the donation to the Village was for. Mr. Brechin responded that it was their best effort at thinking of a reasonable amount. There is no surface alteration; there is no obligation for maintenance on the part of the Village. It helps them and they believe that it would help the Village. If the Village has another number in mind they would listen to that. Chairwoman Payovich said that the pipes are going to be on private land and the discharge is going to be on Village property but the Village would not have any maintenance associated with the pipes. Mr. Brechin responded that they are prepared to assume all or as much of the maintenance obligation as the Village would want them to, which is a policy question for the Village to answer. They are prepared to take up the responsibility for it totally. It is in their best interest to make sure that it works so that the water flows. Director of Community Development Kallien asked Village Engineer Durfey if the issue would be memorialized by the Village Board, who would ultimately act on it; and that it would be contained in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. Village Engineer Durfey responded that was correct. Mr. Brechin said that he would suspect it would be contained within a separate easement document so that it would be very hard for someone to miss. The agreement would state something that if their obligation would be breached, then the Village would have the right but not the obligation to undertake the maintenance and to lien the property, which would only be appropriate. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 6 of 14 September 19, 2005 .....mot= Member Wolin said that like many things there are pluses and minuses to this proposal. There are big pluses that allow the removal of three small homes to be replaced with homes that are more in keeping with the area. The existing homes are on lower property and subject to flooding and sooner or later there will be another large rain. The new homes will be built on higher ground than they are now so the odds of flooding are significantly reduced if not eliminated. On the minus side because the property is largely in the flood plain and some of it cannot be used in a way that may like to use your property because much of the area is detention basin or compensatory storage. There can be a few trees located there but not much more can be done. There are benefits but there are some areas that are not as desirable as they could be. Motion by Member Wolin, seconded by Member Lalmalani to recommend approval of the request from Frank Drukas, applicant and owner of the properties at 3111, 3113 and 3115 Meyers Road for a four -lot final plat of subdivision and variation to the Subdivision Regulations as proposed. In making this recommendation, the Plan Commission wishes it to be recognized that the subject property has substantial flood plain resulting in a significant portion of the property with dedicated basins and compensatory storage areas, and states further: 1. The proposed land subdivision creates four lots that are in substantial conformance to the approved preliminary plat for the Villas of Oak Brook; 2. The proposed building envelopes stormwater management -areas are in substantial conformance with the approved preliminary plat; 3. The proposed lots conform to the underlying zoning district of R -2; 4. The proposed subdivision satisfies all requirements for a final plat of subdivision as contained in the Village of Oak Brook Subdivision Regulations; 5. The design of the proposed subdivision is in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood and does not negatively impact any adjacent property; 6. Subject to the approval of the Earth Tech review of the landscape plans with the detention basins and compensatory storage areas. 7. Subject to the conditions contained in Village Engineer Durfey's memorandum dated September 13, 2005; $. Approval of the requested variations as follows: Waiver of requirement for sidewalks, allow the private street, Cara Lane and allow the reduction of the right of way width from 66 feet to 45 feet as requested; and 9. The Plan Commission does not object to the requested easement from the Village for the purpose of stormwater management and floodplain compensatory as proposed by the applicant for the sum of $15,000 and will comply with Village requirements for stormwater management and VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 7 of 14 September 19, 2005 all maintenance is to be assumed by the subdivision. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 5 — Members Adrian, Lalmalani, Saiyed, Wolin and Chairwoman Payovich Nays: 0 — None. Absent: 2 — Members Iyer and Tropinski. Motion Carried. 5. B. DUKE REALTY LLC PARTNERSHIP -- 2000 YORK ROAD --- MAP DUKE REALTY LLC - 2000 YORK RD - AMENDMENT — ORA -1 to 0-4 DISTRICT — TITLE 13 OF THE VILLAGE MAP AMENDMENT CODE — ZONING ORDINANCE - ORA -I to o -a DISTRICT - ZO Director of Community Development Kallien said that around 6 -7 years ago the John Buck Company owned property at 2001 York Road as well as property just south of the subject property and worked with the Village to enact a new zoning district, which was called the 0-4 District, The 0 -4 District was set up to allow for slightly greater density and higher building heights in specific areas. One of the areas identified for the appropriate application for the 0 -4 District was in the vicinity of the petitioner's property which is north of 22nd Street both on the east and west sides of York Road and south of the tollway ramp that runs to I -294. At that time, the John Buck Company built on the east side of York Road located at 2001 York Road, a 5 -story office building which is zoned 0-4. It is anticipated that there will be some additional development on that site. Also, the John Buck property located on the northwest corner of 22nd and York is currently zoned 0 -4. The applicant has property in close proximity and is seeking similar zoning. Steven Schnur and Johana Vargas with Duke Realty said that they are seeking rezoning of the property from ORA -1 to 0 -4. Duke Realty purchased the property, which is known as the CLTV building in June of 2005. CLTV is the major tenant in the building and there are about ten other small tenants. Currently the building is about 90% leased and most of the leases expire prior to mid 2008, which includes CLTV's lease as well. They looked at the 2000 York Road property and were attracted to it from its identity on the tollway, the Oak Brook address and what John Buck has been able to accomplish on 2001 York Road. They proposed a map amendment in order to increase the density on the property for, if and when, the tenants vacate sometime after mid 2008, They would develop something along the lines of what has been constructed to the east of the building. They are looking at two 6 -story office buildings, about 190,000 square feet each with a parking deck behind it. Getting off of I -88 coming eastbound you would come right up to the main entrance of the property. The plan provided was conceptual in nature, but they think that this sort of density would be needed to make it work. They believe it would be a benefit to the community and surrounding property owners. CLTV has a very nice studio but the building was built in the 1960's and has a big interior truck court. The building is fairly outdated and in some respects obsolete in today's market. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 8 of 14 September 19, 2005 They talked to the property owner to the south and made them well aware of what is being planned and also talked to them about the property they own along Salt Creek and they do not have any plans at this time. John Buck's long term plans for their building to the south is probably to redevelop that property as well. That is also their vision for this property, which is a long -term office redevelopment. They think this plan is consistent after talking with the village prior to purchasing the property. No one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to the request. Director of Community Development Kallien said that when you look at the ORA- 1 District versus the 0-4 District the only appreciable difference is that ORA -1 is limited to a maximum F.A.R. of .48 and a maximum building height of 5 stories. The 0-4 District allows a slightly higher F.A.R. of .8 and allows up to 8 stories. It basically permits for a slightly greater opportunity for redevelopment, which is consistent with what the Plan Commission has been speaking about and what the Village Board has been discussing in terms of an overall redevelopment effort for the Village and this paves the way. The market will ultimately determine when these buildings would ever be built, but it does provide for the opportunity to make that happen. Mr. Schnur added that CLTV is obviously a major employer in the community and has a right to renew its lease in the building. If they chose to renew it they have the right to do so and in which case, the building would stay as it is for as long as their lease allows. They are not trying to run them out of Oak Brook. Director of Community Development Kallien asked if there would ever be an opportunity to include CLTV as part of the redevelopment. Mr. Schnur responded, yes, that they would entertain that. Member Wolin said that it looks like a win -win for everyone. He added that there was a comment in the file regarding a big demand for Class A office development in this area and asked if that were true. Mr. Schnur responded that office statistics indicate that the east end of the corridor is fairly tight especially on new developments. John Buck and the Hines building which was developed on Commerce Drive are fully leased assets. The next newest development is the Lincoln Center in Oakbrook Terrace and Highland Landmark in Downers Grove; all of that is very well leased. They are the newer Class A buildings for a variety of reasons and that market is fairly tight. Member Saiyed said that he would like to see the development as soon as possible, but that was based upon CLTV lease renewal. He asked how long that would be if they renewed their lease. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 9 of 14 September 19, 2005 Mr. Schnur responded that it has not been discussed yet. They have the right to renew the lease for five years and they currently occupy about 65% of the building. They are a good user for the building; they park the big satellite trucks inside and if they ever left, he doesn't know who would ever use it. CLTV knows the long term plans for the property because Duke has not been secretive about it. CLTV also knows that they have the right to renew their lease if they so choose. Member Saiyed asked if it could see redevelopment in the next several years. Mr, Schnur responded that they would like that and that the current lease goes until April of 2008. Assistant Village Attorney O'Connell asked if CLTV chose to renew the lease at what point would the shortest period of time for expiration be required for them to notify Duke. Mr. Schnur responded that their lease provides for a 5 -year renewal option and they would provide them with notice a year prior to that. Member Saiyed said that if the demand for Class A would allow for up to an 8- story building, why would they take a 5 -story building and make it a 6 -story building instead of building 8 stories. Mr. Schnur responded that they would not want to overpopulate the site. They think that would be the right mix along with multi -story parking. Member Saiyed asked if they meet the parking space requirements. Director of Community Development Kallien said that the current minimum parking ratio is 3.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet. All of the recent projects have had parking ratios ranging from 4.5 to 5; that is in fact what the market calls for. He would expect that Duke would provide the same amount of parking. Ms. Vargas added that the parking space issue would be determined at the time of site plan review. Member Lalmalani noted that a little further north of the property in the town of Elmhurst they are building a new hospital and it would be likely that they would be in need of office space. Director of Community Development Kallien said that the area within the arc of 22nd Street and 1 -88 is ripe for redevelopment and as time goes on and as the Village proceeds with its analysis of the corridor these areas will be prime sites for redevelopment and developers will be conning to the Village for a variety of different things. John Buck requested a change a few years ago, now Duke has requested a change and in the future there will be others. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 10 of 14 September 19, 2005 M-4000 Motion by Member Saiyed, seconded by Member Wolin Adrian to recommend approval of a map amendment to rezone the property located at 2000 York Road from ORA -1 to 0 -4 as requested. In making this recommendation, the Commission finds that the applicant has met the requirements for approval of a map amendment. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 5 — Members Adrian, Lalmalani, Saiyed, Wolin and Chairwoman Payovich Nays: 0 -- None. Absent: 2 — Members Iyer and Tropinski. Motion Carried. 6. OTHER BUSINESS OTHER BUSINESS Chairwoman Payovich said that the Commission would continue the discussion of teardown requirements. Director of Community Development Kallien recapped that in July at the urging of Member Wolin he presented a number of ideas relative to teardowns as it relates to residential structures. Oak Brook has been somewhat lucky up to this point because there are much larger properties and the housing is relatively newer so that we have not been impacted by the sheer number of teardowns in other towns like Elmhurst and Hinsdale that has had thousands of teardowns, Downers Grove, Naperville and so forth. In an attempt to be proactive and address some issues that have recently surfaced he has proposed a number of things that the board should consider enacting. It would allow us to better control the impact of teardowns. The list is rather bland in terms of its overall impact, but it will help to lessen the impact on the neighbors. The best practices of other municipalities were reviewed and identified as to what was working successfully and the appropriate language has been prepared. 1. Fencing. We currently do not have a hard and fast requirement to fence properties but we strongly urge them to do so. The McDonald's property cooperated by putting up a fence when they constructed the building on Spring Road and 22" Street. We want to memorialize that to make sure a site is safe. 2. Litter. There have been recent problems where houses are built in the middle of developed areas and there has been a problem with litter and controlling the site in terms of cleanliness. This needs to be memorialized as to what the expectation is and put it into writing so that the applicant and the landowner keep the property orderly. 3. Because the area is rather developed, the impact of building a 20,000 square foot home is immense. There are many workers involved in these projects with many cars and vehicles on the site. We need to make sure that the VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 11 of 14 September 19, 2005 roadways are kept open for emergency vehicles and normal traffic. A plan needs to be developed to make sure that the parking of the cars does not conflict with the other use of the property. 4. Sanitation Facilities. Most construction sites put up a port a potty and we would like to memorialize it to make sure it is put in the right location and maintained. 5. Silt Fencing. As part of the Public Works Standards it is required. Some times people ask where it is specifically located in the Code and he would like to make sure that it is easily located. He said that these items do not need to be in the Zoning Ordinance and he would recommend all these items be placed in the Villages Building Regulations. When they are located there they are much easier adopted and cane be updated on a regular basis. When something is in the Zoning Ordinance it tends to go through a more lengthy review period and the hearing process is slightly more difficult. d. Wet Saw. All new homes involve the cutting of stone and brick and it does impact the neighbors. If a wet saw is required it would help to eliminate the amount of dust. 7. Dust Abatement. Whenever a building is demolished, especially when it is knocked down there is a lot of dust and debris that goes up into the air. There are ways to mitigate that with the application of water. 8. Written Notice. A number of communities have done this. It can be rather traumatic in established areas when a house is taken down in a very developed area and it causes conflict. In Hinsdale they make the applicant send a notice to the neighbors to let them know they are applying for a demolition permit and can deal with village staff to air any concerns. 9. Bonds. There have been some problems with contractors /owners that demolish a house and then do not finish the project. In Ginger Creek there are two locations that a house was taken down and construction never proceeded past the demolition. Something needs to be added to the code that would provide a little encouragement, such as penalties. If the work is not proceeding within certain time limits then it may cost more in terms of fees and fines, which is more than reasonable. If the work is completed, the bonds would be refunded. 10. Demolition Permit Bonds. Hinsdale and Downers Grove require a cash bond for a demolition permit. If the project does not go forward then the Village has some funds available to renovate the site. It is very consistent with the Public Work Standards with the requirement for a right of way bond. It gives the village some opportunity to correct a worst -case scenario. If the money is not utilized, and the project works to completion the money would be refunded. The residents in Ginger Creek said that they would be VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 12 of 14 September 19, 2005 very interested in this. 11. Tree Preservation. When there is a teardown, many times the property is somewhat vegetated. A house was demolished on Canterberry and York and the first inclination was to clear the entire buildable area and then build the home. There were probably a couple of trees within that area that may have been prematurely taken down. When someone comes in for a demolition permit he would like the opportunity to look on the property to see if larger trees exist and if there would be a way to maintain a few of them. It is too easy to wipe the slate clean and it is hard to replace a 12 or a 16 -inch tree. A lot of what has been proposed is common sense and gives the village a little more ammo when dealing with some of these issues. As time progresses we have the opportunity to strengthen the regulations or make them more lenient. Member Wolin said that Director of Community Development Kallien has done a very good piece of work and has hit the high points without getting overly complicated and still outlining all of the key points. He recommended, if agreed that they ask the village attorneys to draft up the language in the building code or whatever location is most appropriate. It might be a good idea to review a dollar amount in terms of the cash bonds. Village Engineer Durfey said the cash right of way bond is $2,000. If a new home is being built on a lot that is less than one acre there is a $5,000 erosion control bond and if it is more than one acre then it is $10,000. There are also some things in the ordinance that can be meld into this. Director of Community Development Kallien said that with property becoming sparser most of what is left in terms of residential development is teardowns. When there is development on virgin property it is not an issue, but when it is in the middle of a subdivision, such as Trinity Lakes it can have a big impact. There is one in Ginger Creek that was torn down several years ago and they cannot get the property reconciled beyond getting the house demolished. They are now left with a property that is being marginally maintained and is a negative eyesore on the community. Member Adrian asked if the funds from the bonds would be used to maintain the property. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that we would make sure that the property is properly graded and seeded and if needed a lien could be placed on the property. There is another lot on Oak Brook Road where the house was taken down and there is an absentee landowner that cannot be found. The property has become overgrown with weeds and the basement was only partially filled in. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 13 of 14 September 19, 2005 Director of Community Development Kallien said that he would like to get something adopted soon. When there is a draft proposal it should be sent to the homeowners associations because some need our help. It was the consensus of the Plan Commission to proceed with draft language. The Village has appointed a Redevelopment Task Force which is made up of Trustees Kennedy and Sanford, Village President Quinlan, Chairwoman Payovich and Zoning Board Chairman Champ Davis, Village Manager Boehm and the Director of Community Development Kallien. There may be other committees created and as progress is made it would be proper to keep the Plan Commission up to date on any significant events. There was no other business to discuss. 7. ADJOURNMENT: Motion by Member Saiyed, seconded by Member Wolin to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. ATTEST: Robert Kallien, Di for om nity Development Secretary VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Special Plan Commission Minutes Page 14 of 14 September 19, 2005 ADJOURNMENT