Loading...
Minutes - 12/13/2004 - Plan Commission1. 2. 3. 9 5. MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 13, 2004 REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLAN COMMISSION OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK APPROVED AS AMENDED ON JANUARY 17, 2005 CALL TO ORDER: CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the Plan Commission was called to order by Chairwoman Payovich in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Butler Government Center at 7:30 p.m. R (1T .T . C A T .T . • ROLL CALL Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons PRESENT: Chairwoman Barbara Payovich, Members Paul Adrian, David Braune, Surendra Goel, Jeffrey Bulin, Marcia Tropinski and Gerald Wolin. IN ATTENDANCE: Robert L. Kallien, Director of Community Development and Dale L. Durfey, Village Engineer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MINUTES REGULAR PLAN COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 2004 Motion by Member Goel, seconded by Member Bulin, to approve the minutes of the November 15, 2004 Regular Plan Commission meeting as amended and waive the full reading thereof. VOICE VOTE: Motion Carried UNFINISHED BUSINESS UNFINISHED BUSINESS Chairwoman Payovich rearranged the agenda items with the Commissioners approval. They agreed that new business would be heard prior to the unfinished business. NEW BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 5. A. CSA FRATERNAL LIFE RESUBDIVISION — 122 22ND STREET — FINAL CSAFRATERNAL LIFE RESUB -122 PLAT OF SUBDIVISION WITH VARIATION — TWO -LOT SUBDIVISION 22ND STREET -FINAL — TITLE 14 OF THE VILLAGE CODE — SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS PLAT - TWO -LOT SUBDIVISION Director of Community Development Kallien reviewed the request. 122 22"d Street is presently a single lot improved with two buildings connected by a permanent covered walkway. The applicant has requested a subdivision to place each building on a separate lot. As part of the request they will need a variation that the Zoning VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Plan Commission Minutes Page 1 of 5 December 13, 2004 Board of Appeals will hear in January. They need approval from both hearing bodies and it will all come together before the Village Board. The ORA -1 District does allow for more than one building on a lot and other lots have been subdivided in the past. It is a little more complicated here because of the structure that links the two buildings. Kenneth Shaw, Attorney for the CSA Fraternal Life, identified the applicant, Daniel Wenzler, CSA Fraternal Life, and the Surveyor and Engineer, Paul Hendricks, Bollinger, Lach & Associates. There is no intention to change the use of the buildings. Mr. Shaw reviewed pictures of the buildings as shown on Page F -2 of the case file. There are two buildings currently on the property. There is a covered walkway that connects the two buildings. The doors are in the middle and are used by both buildings as the main entrance. The applicant is seeking to subdivide the entire lot which would in effect draw a line down the middle between the two buildings. He described the uses of the buildings and noted that they operate as two separate structures. There is no proposal for change for the structure. Currently CSA Fraternal Life occupies the west building and will maintain and operate the one building as its office and headquarters. The east building is used as rental to law firms and businesses for office space. There is parking in the rear as well as access to'the buildings. For the purpose of subdivision, one of the problems is the spacing of the corner markers. There is a provision to have the markers go down 30 inches into the ground. They are proposing mag nails to mark the space and the lot line in the rear. Both spots are asphalt and concrete and using the mag nails would be far more efficient for marking that line. A 10 -foot easement would be provided for proposed Lot 1. There is also a requirement for a 6 -foot easement on a side lot and they are seeking to have that waived. All of the public utilities are already in place for the structures so they are asking for that easement to be waived. Part and parcel there are zoning variances that they will be seeking. Currently there is a need for 30 foot setback for side yards. When the line goes through the property there will be approximately a 26 foot setback. With respect to the common walkway it is 14 feet wide and the request would be for a 0 setback. The balance of the setback line would be changed. They have a second option which would be a removal of the common walkway, and then there would be an approximate 26 foot setback line for the property. Member Wolin asked for the reason for requesting the subdivision. Mr. Shaw responded that, by subdividing the property it would make it possible to sell one lot and keep the other lot. Right now if they wanted to sell the property VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Plan Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5 December 13, 2004 they would have to sell both structures. CSA wishes to sell the one building which is the office space. In order to sell it, it must be 2 separate lots. Member Wolin asked when the building was sold, would they still want to maintain a common walkway. Mr. Shaw responded that at that time they could take the walkway down. Member Wolin said that he did not see the harm in keeping the utility easement in place. Mr. Shaw said that it could be done if necessary, but they do not see the need to keep it because all of the utility easements are already in place. Member Braune asked Dale for comments on the easements. Village Engineer Durfey said the property is well served by the current easements and that the only two variations would be for the mag nails and that request would be appropriate. Director of Community Development Kallien said that the variations are routine and have been dealt with before. You cannot have the subdivision without the variation. Member Braune asked if there was a lot of traffic on the walkway. Mr. Shaw responded that there is a lot of usage right now because it is the main entrance for both buildings. It is convenient for both buildings in bad weather. CSA said that to provide separate entrances would be a cost of approximately $100,000. They would like to avid the cost if possible. They expect the purchaser of the other building to find it beneficial. The use of it would be subject to cross - easements and covenants. Member Goel said that he does not see the need of removing the walkway just for the sake of removing it. If it is removed, he would like it suggested when it would be removed that it would meet the setback requirements. Member Wolin said that at one time it was 2 lots, and when subdivided it could not have met the setback requirements. Did it meet the setback requirements at one time. Member Bulin responded that when it was two lots there was only one building built, which met the 30 foot setback, after the lots were combined the second building was built. Director of Community Development Kallien said that we are being asked to create an arrangement that does not exist anywhere else in the community. This is not the VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Plan Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5 December 13, 2004 typical arrangement in the community. Member Goel said that the covered walkway is a convenience to the tenants and does not believe we should force them to take it down when it is sold. Motion by Member Wolin, seconded by Member Braune to recommend for approval the Final Plat of Subdivision as requested including the following: 1. The development will be in substantial conformance with the plans as submitted. Final Plat prepared by Bollinger, Lach and Associates, revision date December 6, 2004 on page H of the case file. 2. Final subdivision of the property is subject to approval of the side yard variation by the Village. 3. Subject to final engineering approval, including all items listed in Village Engineer Durfey's memo on page 4 of the case file. 4. Recommend to the Zoning Board of Appeals that if any portion of the covered walkway is removed, the entire walkway should be removed and the setback would revert to the 26 foot side yard setback for each building. 5. Approval of the variation requested to Section 14 -6 -3J to permit the use of 2 mag nails on the common lot line 6. Approval of the variation requested to Section 14 -6 -3K to permit the deletion of the six foot public utility easements along the common lot line. Roll Call Vote: Ayes: 7 — Members Adrian, Braune, Bulin, Goel, Tropinski, Wolin and Chairwoman Payovich Nays: 0 — None. Absent: Motion Carried 4. A. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK — ZONING ORDINANCE REVIEW PROJECT VOB - TEXT AMENDMENTS - - TEXT AMENDMENTS — TITLE 13 OF THE VILLAGE CODE - ZO - ADD CHAP 15 ZONING ORDINANCE — ADD CHAPTER 15 — TREE PRESERVATION - TREE PRESERVATION REGULATIONS REGULATIONS Chairwoman Payovich requested a motion to continue the matter to the February Plan Commission meeting. There will be discussion on the matter at that time. Motion by Member Braune, seconded by Member Wolin to continue the hearing on the Tree Preservation Regulations matter to the February Plan Commission meeting. VOICE VOTE: Motion°Carried 6. OTHER BUSINESS OTHER BUSINESS Director of Community Development Kallien reviewed possible future cases that may brought before the Plan Commission. There may be a request for a drive- VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Plan Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5 December 13, 2004 through bank. Also, it was noted in the newspaper that there may be a new development along Butterfield Road and there would be requirements possibly for subdivision, rezoning, text amendments, variations and storm water issues. There was no other business to discuss. 7. ADJOURNMENT: ADJOURNMENT Motion by Member Braune, seconded by Member Bulin to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. ATTEST: Robert L. Kallien, Jr. Robert Kallien, Director of Community Development Secretary VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Plan Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5 December 13, 2004