Minutes - 12/19/2011 - Plan CommissionMINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 19, 2011 REGULAR
MEETING OF THE PLAN COMMISSION OF THE
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK APPROVED AS WRITTEN
ON JANUARY 16, 2012
1. CALL TO ORDER: 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
7:01 P.M.
ROLL CALL: ROLL, CAL.
Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons
PRESENT: Chairwoman, Marcia Tropinski, Members Thomas Doyle, Raju Iyer,
Raj Lal and Simon Sheers. Member Al Knuth arrived at 7:06 p.m.
ABSENT: Member Naveen Jain
IN ATTENDANCE: Trustee, Gerald Wolin and Director of Community
Development Robert Kallien Jr.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLAN COMMISSION OF OCTOBER 17, 2011
Motion by Member Iyer, seconded by Member Doyle to approve the minutes of the
October 17, 2011 Regular Plan Commission meeting as written. VOICE VOTE:
Motion Carried.
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS UNFINISHED
BUSINESS
A. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK — TEXT AMENDMENT — AMEND SECTION
13 -3 -6B OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS — FENCES
Director of Community Development Kallien reviewed the background of the
request and research that had taken place since the last meeting and noted that
fences are very important in Oak Brook. Some subdivisions have very restrictive
regulations that do not allow fences and in other subdivisions, fences are acceptable
and work well. The fence regulations are very basic and mostly relate to the use of
chain link material because some years ago the Village Board approved limitations
on chain link fencing.
The current regulations allow that fences can be no more than 42- inches in height
and not less than 50 percent open and there are significant restrictions on the use of
chain link material. Around swimming pools fences must be a minimum of 48
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Plan Commission Minutes Page 1 of 7 December 19, 2011
inches high and not more than 60 inches in height. There are no standards for
privacy fences or for properties that back up to major roadways, such as Route 83 or
I -294. The goal would be to broaden it so that it is more meaningful to the residents
that can benefit from fences.
The Proposed text is boded and italicized below. The Commissioner and staff
comments to each item is not italicized or bolded.
13 -3 -17. Fences:
A. For purposes of this section, a 'fence" is defined as a structure used to
delineate a boundary, or as a barrier, or as a means of confinement or for
confinement.
B. The following regulations shall apply to all fences:
1. A fence, including gates, which has, over its entirety, fifty percent (50016) of
the surface area in open space as viewed from an angle of ninety degrees
(90 °) from the fence line.
Member Doyle suggested that it be amended to a "minimum" of fifty percent open.
The commissioners agreed.
2. Fences shall be limited to a maximum height of 48 inches in height and
shall be constructed of wood, stone, brick, wrought iron, aluminum or
synthetic materials that are molded and give the appearance of wood,
stone, brick or wrought iron. The fmished side of the fence must face to
the outside.
The commissioners agreed with the proposed language on this item.
3. Solid fences shall be limited to a maximum height of 24 incites in height
and be constructed of ivood, stone, brick or other masonry material.
Director of Community Development Kallien noted that certain materials were
omitted such as wrought iron or synthetic materials
4. The minimum height for a fence surrounding any swimming pool or water
feature shall be 48 incites up to a maximum of 72 inches and shall also
comply with all applicable requirements of the Village's Building Code.
There was no discussion on this item.
5. Fences shall be constructed at natural grade with the exception of
engineered lots, the Village Engineer shall determine the base elevation.
Director of Community Development Kallien noted that when someone applies for a
fence permit there would be a check with the Engineering department to see if they
are using an existing grade or is a new grade being created. When engineered
subdivisions are approved and recorded, the grades are approved as well as the
individual lots to ensure that there is proper storm water management. There are not
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Plan Commission Minutes Page 2 of 7 December 19, 2011
approved elevations on other lots, for example in older subdivisions. If someone
wanted to modify the topography on their property, they would apply for a grading
permit with the Engineering department, which would approve a new elevation to
ensure that the water flows in the right way and not negatively impact the neighbors.
The fence application would then be based on the newly created elevation.
6. All fences must be located completely within the property, which the fence
is serving.
Director of Community Development Kallien noted that a plat of survey is required
to ensure that the fence is maintained on the property.
7. All fences shall comply Wilt all applicable Village Code requirements. All
fences shall be constructed and maintained to preserve their structural
integrity and appearance.
Director of Community Development Kallien explained that this relates to the
adopted building code with regards to footings and post holes. The greater integrity
applied when the fence is installed reduces property maintenance issues in the
future.
8. Fence type structures such as solid privacy screens and open patio
enclosures located in a buildable area, and not located in any required
yard shall not be considered fences. These structures can be built to a
maximum height of six (6) feet.
Director of Community Development Kallien noted that people have desired to have
structures for privacy on their property. Although other structures are allowed in the
buildable area such as houses, detached garages and other accessory structures that
can be built up to 15 feet, there has never been a provision in the code to allow for
privacy screening around a patio area, hot tubs, or other items within the buildable
area. This provision will allow people to build something to allow them some
privacy and the six foot height allows some flexibility.
Member Doyle recommended that the language be modified to read as follows:
"Fence type structure located in the buildable area and not located in any
required yard, such as solid privacy screens and open patio enclosures, shall not
be considered fences. "
Trustee Wolin questioned whether it could be abused and result in a privacy fence
being built around the entire house within the buildable area.
Discussions included controlling the percentage of buildable area that could be used
or for the sole purpose of enhancement around specific uses.
Director of Community Development Kallien noted that in many of the subdivisions
there are existing rules that would prohibit any type of structure. This section is not
intended to allow solid screening around the entire buildable area. Language will be
provided to provide better control.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Plan Commission Minutes Page 3 of 7 December 19, 2011
0
9. Electrified fences are not permitted in the Village.
Member Knuth noted that some people still have stables. Director of Community
Development Kallien noted that a clause would be added to allow them for stables
where a small charge is used.
C. Chain link or wire fencing, where permitted as set forth below, shall be at least
9 -gauge wire, shall be constructed with a top member or brace with a knuckle
design, shall be a wire material finished side) facing the neighboring
property, shall be painted or coated in a dark color (e.g., black, brown or dark
green), shall not include slats and shall be landscaped with bushes or trees on
both sides of the fence, except for dog runs/kennels, which shall be so
landscaped on the outside of the fence.
1. Ina buildable area — not permitter! with the exception for dog runs.
2. In any front or side yard —not permitted
3. In any rear yard —permitted to maximum height of six (6) feet if lot abuts
Ilse Village's boundary with another municipality.
Wording to be changed in #3 above to read "...six (6) feet for that portion of the lot
that abuts the Village's..."
4. Surrounding subdivisions —permitted to a maximum height of 42 inches if
landscaped on both sides of the fence with year round plantings /vegetation.
Non -chain link fencing is permitted to a maximum height of 48 inches and
is not subject to the landscape provisions.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that the provision has been
structured to encourage the replacement of chain link, so that if the fence material is
"not" chain link, a 48 -inch high fence would be allowed without vegetation being
added. However, they are allowed to maintain and repair an existing 42 -inch high
chain link fence, but must maintain vegetation on both sides of the fence.
S. Swimming pools — not permitted
6. Sports courts /fields —permitted around sports courts for tennis, basketball
and hockey andfields for baseball.
7. Construction sites — permitted as a temporary use. Height is established
with the approval of a building permit.
8. Road Right-of-;Pay (ROW) — permitted along County, State and Federal
Roadways.
Member Doyle noted that County roads include, York Road, Meyers Road and 31St
Sheet and chain link fencing would look terrible along those roads. In agreement
with the commissioner's Director of Community Development Kallien noted that
the word "County" in 48 above would be deleted.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Plan Commission Minutes Paagee-4 of 7 December 19, 2011
Director of Community Development Kallien noted that the above regulations are
part of the existing regulations and he did not anticipate any new chain link fences,
but rather more for maintenance of the existing fences. There is chain link fencing
around the sports fields at the park district, at schools, as well as around the
substations.
9. Dog runs/kennels — permitted in buildable area only. Non -chain link
fence material is required if located in any required yard
There was no discussion on this item.
D. Fences and barriers along major arterials: If a formal barrier or sound wall
system is not in place, a solid fence or wall may be erected subject to certain
conditions along the following major arterial streets,
1. Roosevelt Road
2. Illinois Route 83IICingmy Highway
3. Interstate High ways I -88 and I -294
a. On an individual lot that abuts one of these arterial streets, tile
maximum height of the fence or wall is six feet (69 and constructed
of wood, stone, brick or other masonry material.
b. For a residential subdivision, that abuts one of these arterials, a
single unified fence or wall system can be constructed if approved by
the affected property owners and/or subdivision. The maximum
height of that system will be determined after completion of a formal
sound study and approval of a permit by the Village.
Member Doyle suggested that item D.3.a. should not be included. Director of
Community Development Kallien said that it was included for those property
owners that have an issue and cannot get relief anywhere else.
Director of Community Development Kallien noted that sound walls are foreign to
Oak Brook with the exception of the formal sound walls constructed by the toll
authority along I -88 and I -294. Sound walls are being studied around the highway
system. The purpose would be to create a standard for those properties without the
opportunity to have a sound wall and without creating a visual problem.
Member Knuth noted that if a sound wall is to be effective, it cannot be hidden. To
be effective for controlling sound, it would need to be a certain height and using
certain materials and would be difficult to mask. It can be made to look more
attractive by adding some greenery.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that if a standard is created, we
do not want to create it so that it could be misused later on.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Plan Commission Minutes Page 5 of 7 December 19, 2011
The discussion among the commissioners included various locations, height, studies,
topography, decibel levels and the increase in traffic volumes.
Member Knuth suggested refining language in item D.3.b.above, but that in
principal it is important and should be included.
Director of Community Development Kallien summarized the changes to the
proposed text to be reviewed at the next meeting, as follows:
B.1. — Add the word "minimum" to fifty percent open.
B.2 — Add finished on all sides, unless board on board type fencing is used, then the
braces of any such style fence would face inside the property not to the outside.
B.8 — Revise the language to provide better control over privacy structures that they
are for the sole purpose of enhancement around specific uses and not intended to
allow solid screening around and privatize the entire buildable area. Perhaps list out
the features.
B.9 — Add a clause would be added to allow them for stables where a small charge is
used.
C. — Introduction should clarify that at least 9 -gauge should mean it could not be
thinner it has to be thicker. Clarify that the fence is to be "reasonably maintained ".
C3 —Correct wording. In any rear yard — permitter) to maximum height of six (6)
feet if lot abuts llte Pillage's boundary with another municipality. Wording to be
changed to read "...six (6) feet for that portion of the lot that abuts the Village's..."
C.4 — The provision has been structured to encourage the replacement of chain link,
so that if the fence material is "not" chain link, a 48 -inch high fence would be
allowed without vegetation being added. However, they are allowed to maintain
and repair an existing 42 -inch high chain link fence, but must maintain vegetation.
C.8 — The word "County" is to be deleted for roads in the right of way.
D.3.b — Refine language relating to sound walls.
Chairwoman Tropinski brought up driveway gates as addressed in the staff memo.
Director of Community Development Kallien responded that driveway gates are
regulated by the zoning ordinance and the rules work quite well.
Motion by Member Iyer, seconded by Member Knuth to continue the discussion
regarding fences to the next regular meeting. ROLL CALL VOTE
Ayes: 6 — Members Doyle, Iyer, Jain, Knuth, Lal, Sheers and Chairwoman
Tropinski
Nays: 0
Absent: 1 — Member Jain. Motion Carried.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Plan Commission Minutes Page 6 of 7 December 19, 2011
0
5. NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business to discuss.
6. OTHER BUSINESS
A. REVIEW OF FUTURE CASES /PROJECTS
Director of Community Development Kallien reviewed some upcoming cases. He
noted that at the next meeting there will be a new case regarding cemeteries. He
encouraged the commissioners to view the mausoleum, which is very tasteful, but
large at the south end of the Bronswood cemetery on the east side of Adams Road.
There has never been any enforcement by the Village in regards to setbacks for
cemeteries. There will be a review of other ordinances and we will seek reasonable
standards for enforcement of the zoning regulations going forward.
In 2012, there will be a case to review some housekeeping changes proposed to the
Sign Regulations.
There will also be a review of the Sound Regulations that is anticipated to be heard
as a joint meeting with the Zoning Board of Appeals.
7. ADJOURNMENT:
Motion by Member Iyer, seconded by Member Knuth to adjourn the meeting at 8:33
p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried.
ATTEST:
/s/ Robert Kalh Jr.
Robert Kallien Jr.,
Director of Community Development
Secretary
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Plan Commission Minutes Page 7 of 7 December 19, 2011
NEW BUSINESS
OTHER
BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT