Loading...
Minutes - 06/05/2007 - Zoning Board of AppealsMINUTES OF THE JUNE 5, 2007 REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED AS WRITTEN OR AMENDED ON _ , 2007 CALL TO ORDER: CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was called to order by Chairman Champ Davis in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Butler Government Center at 7:31 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: ROLL CALL Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons PRESENT: Chairman Champ Davis, Members Richard Ascher, Jeffrey Bulin, Glenn Krietsch, Baker Nimry and Steven Young ABSENT: Member Richard Ascher IN ATTENDANCE: Robert Sanford, Trustee; Gerald Wolin, Trustee; and Robert Kallien, Jr., Director of Community Development 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MINUTES REGULAR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF APRIL 3, 2007 Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Young to approve the minutes of the April 3, 2007 Regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting as written. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. DLC MANAGEMENT CORP a/a/f OAKS IMPROVEMENTS, LLC by MID-AMERICA MID- AMERICA ASSET MANAGEMENT — 1600 16TH STREET — B -1 1600 16TH STRBI~T DISTRICT — VARIATION TO SECTION 13- 11 -7A.5 — SIGN SIGN R EGGS S To SIGN B REGULATIONS Chairman Davis swore in all parties that would testify. Member Ascher stated that he was absent at the last meeting but reviewed the minutes, the case file and the CD of the April 3, 2007 public hearing on this matter and is aware of the facts that have been presented. Jean Klein, Development Manager with Mid - America Asset Management said VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 1 of 8 June 5, 2007 that they are the managing and leasing agent for the Oaks Improvements, LLC c/o of DLC Management Corp., who are the new owners of the Oaks of Oak Brook Shopping Center. They took into consideration all of the Zoning Board's input, comments and suggestions from the April 3, 2007 meeting and resubmitted the revisions for the proposed sign design. They are seeking approval of a variation to Section 13- 11 -7A.5 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a ground sign 24 feet in height with 8 tenant panels. Currently the Zoning Ordinance allows a 16-foot sign with only the name of the center and the address. The relief they are seeking is to allow a larger sign with tenant identification. The Zoning Board of Appeals had a few comments that they have incorporated into design. They are using the actual font and letter size for the tenant panels on the sign. The increased size will allow for better visibility for their site. They have used the elements of the shopping center. They believe that the revised design meets the requirements. As evidenced in their presentation at the last meeting, along with the tenant witnesses, and pursuant to the Zoning Board's comments, a new sign is definitely needed at this site. They have had several challenges with retaining and attracting new tenants and they also have a very high vacancy rate (30 %), which are the reasons why they need approval of the variance. Chairman Davis said that the standards were addressed at the last meeting and are on page 8 of the case file. They indicate the uniqueness of the site and the hardship that exists without the tenant names and the inability to see the sign from Route 83. Member Krietsch questioned if they were any changes to the standards. Ms. Klein responded they have not. Chairman Davis asked if the tenants have seen the revised sign. Ms. Klein responded that the tenants that appeared at the last meeting have seen the sign. She explained that while each tenant would like their name on the sign, it is not possible to put all 20- tenant names on the sign. It would not look nice and the visibility would decrease. The placement will be based upon the tenant's square footage of space and lease terms. Chairman Davis questioned the statement that the sign blends in with the shopping center. Ms. Klein responded that the sign color is very close to the actual building and they will pick up the exact color of the drivet on the fagade. The frame for the sign will be painted a drivet color and will be textured with a VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 2 of 8 June 5, 2007 stone appearance. Some of the members indicated at the last meeting that they did not like the peak on the previous sign, so that was eliminated and they kept it a very straight simple line, which is consistent with the balance of the center. Chairman Davis questioned the size of the sign across from the shopping center. Ms. Klein responded that she believed it to be about 30 feet. Chairman Davis asked when it was anticipated to replace the sign, if ultimately approved by the Village. She said that it would take about 8 weeks after the approval of the design for fabrication. Director of Community Development Kallien said that if approved, all other areas of the sign requirements in the code would need to be complied with. Ms. Klein acknowledges that they would comply with all other Village requirements. No one in the audience spoke in support of or in opposition to the request. Member Young questioned whether the revised sign was constructed of the same material as the previous sign. Todd Jackson, Principal at American Sign and Lighting said that the tenant panels on the old sign were going to be a white Lexan and just the tenant names would be dark in color or have a translucent bottom so that the whole background would have been white and illuminated. Mr. Nimry requested that they flip that, have the background opaque, and just have the text be illuminated so that it was not glaring at people. The sign will be aluminum faced that is painted and the copy would be cut out and backed up with white plastic so that only the text would illuminate. Director of Community Development Kallien commented that the body of the sign was in a drivet material. Mr. Jackson said that it was going to be fabricated from aluminum and then painted with a textured paint to give it a drivet look. Chairman Davis asked if that would give the sign the same look as the shopping center itself. Mr. Jackson agreed. The center itself is drivet and granite. Member Nimry said that he did not see any improvement from the last meeting. The proposed sign would be downgrading from what now exists at the center, since it is being constructed of aluminum. He would like to see the existing VILLAGE OF OAK. BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 3 of 8 June 5, 2007 LG sign made 24 -feet tall so that it would be using the same material, because the existing sign is a wonderful sign compared to the one proposed. Director of Community Development Kallien said that the sign across the street at the Container store is a similar design, but it has some brick because that center is constructed primarily of brick. The Shops of Oak Brook at 22nd Street and Midwest Road has a similar design as what has been proposed, but integrates brick into the overall design. Member Nimry said that the Beautification Committee might be asking that some of the old signs be changed in the future. He questioned, why should they do this now and then three years from now require them to change it. Chairman Davis said that his opinion differs because he does not believe that you would want drivet and brick and wood because these things, should blend in and believes this is a good sign. Even though the front may be made of aluminum, if it is covered in a textured paint to look like the drivet, he would much rather see a sign that blends in with the shopping center. He commented that the proposed sign looks better than the one across the street. Also, the sign cannot be seen coming into the center, which is where you want to see it. They only people that can see it are the people driving away, so it does not do any good at all. Mr. Jackson said that the increase in size was at the suggestion of the board, not one they had requested. Chairman Davis commented that the traffic coming into that center would see this sign. He was not sure that would have been true of the other sign. He also understands that cost may have been an issue and a sign made out of granite and being 30% under leased at the present time, they are probably trying to get back into a good financial situation and hopefully under the circumstances this sign will do the job. Signage design is very personal. Chairman Davis said that the applicant addressed the standards their testimony and they were also submitted in writing on pages D -D3 and C.1 of the case file. Motion by Chairman Davis, seconded by Member Krietsch that the applicant has addressed and satisfied the applicable standards required to recommend approval of the requested variation as revised to allow a 24 -foot high ground sign with tenant panels as proposed, subject to the following conditions: 1. The development is to be constructed in substantial conformance with the plans for the sign as submitted and revised on pages 12 and 12.a VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 4 of 8 June S, 2007 s (dated May 3, 2007) of the case file. 2. All other provisions of Section 13- 11 -7A -5 of the Zoning Ordinance shall be followed relative to the design and construction of the sign. 3. Notwithstanding the exhibits contained in the case file, the applicant shall meet all Village ordinance requirements at the time of building permit application, except as varied or waived. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 5 — Members Ascher, Bulin, Is'-rietsch, Young and Chairman Davis Nays: 1 -- Member Nimry Nays: 0 — Motion Carried. 5. NEW BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. SEAN HU — 11 DOVER DRIVE -- VARIATION TO YORK ROAD HU - 11 DOVER DR VARIATION - SETBACK — ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 13 -3 -5 — SETBACKS YORK RD ALONG STREETS SETBACK Chairman Davis swore in all parties that would testify. Scott Wendell, General Contractor for the garage construction, said that he was assisting Mr. Hu in the request for the variation. Director of Community Development said that this is a somewhat unique case. Within our Zoning Ordinance, the subject property is located in York Woods Subdivision and is zoned R -3. It is a flag lot with access to Dover Drive and backs up to York Road. In that portion of York Road, the right of way is approximately 125 and 150 feet wide. It is very wide at that point, located north of the Butler School. In this case, Mr. Hu along with all those properties that back up to York Road is subjected to a number of setbacks. They have the setbacks that apply to the R -3 District, which are 40 -foot front yard, 12 -foot side yard and '40 -foot rear yard. For any accessory structures located in the rear yard are allowed to be located within 5 feet of the rear yard setback. However, there is a section in the code that deals with extra ordinary setbacks. He discussed this with Village Engineer Durfey, who 'has been with the village for over 30 years, and they are of the opinion that the primary reason that extraordinary setback of 100 feet along 22'd Street, York Road and along Oak Brook Road was developed that way in 1966 when Oak Brook was much smaller. Most of the roads were two lanes and they knew that they had to have adequate room to widen them without creating a conflict with a potential house or business in the future. Now, 31't Street /Oak Brook Road has been improved to four lanes and divided highway along a portion; York Road north of 31" Street is a finished 5 -lane roadway; 22;'d Street varies from 4 lanes to 6 lanes VILLAGE OF OAI, BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 5 of 8 June 5, 2007 and some areas are wider. In all of the areas that they anticipated the need for improvements, those improvements for all intents and purposes have been done. There are property owners that back up to some of these major roadways and the setbacks are a significant impediment on their property. There are 13 properties on the east side of York Road in York Woods and when applying the front yard setback they are all fine. When the 100 -foot setback is applied to the rear yard, many of the properties and all of the houses are nonconforming. They have no ability to have a deck, pools, or any other accessory structure. This was brought to the attention of staff, when the plan reviewer looked at the sections of the code for Mr. Hu's permit for a detached garage that was approved by the York Woods Homeowner Association; it appeared that it could be located within 21 feet of the rear yard. There is extensive vegetation along York Road and on his property. His property literally cannot be seen. There is still almost 80 feet between the roadway and the proposed garage. It was then discovered that there was this conflict in the code. It was his suggestion that Mr. Hu's situation be addressed by the requested variation, but the next step is that we have undertaken a study to review the rear yard setbacks, including those along Midwest Road and Meyers Road, which are also major roadways, but do not have 100 -foot setbacks. Properties in Saddle Brook that abut Meyers Road can build houses with a 30 -foot rear yard setback. There is a tremendous inconsistency on how the code is applied and how it ultimately impacts these properties and we are working to correct that. Chairman Davis said that in his view a variation is not needed in this case because one section of the Code states 40 feet, another states 100 feet, but then a section states that an accessory structure can be located within the rear setback, so he did not see a conflict. Director of Community Development Ka.11ien said that the Village did not want to allow construction to continue and then, in the future, if he tried to sell it and have the questioned raised at that time. This will ensure that it is conforming. This particular case has generated a lot of public comment, in excess of 30 calls. The vast majority was supportive of the request once they understood what the issues were. There was no one in the audience that spoke in support of or in opposition to the request. Member Bulin questioned that the Zoning Ordinance was adopted about the same time that York Woods was developed. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 6 of 8 June 5, 2007 Director of Community Development Kallien responded that it was, however, the permit dates for many of the houses were after the fact. 'whoever was implementing the Code was inconsistent, and there may have been dispensation for that rear yard the way it was written in the Code as noted by Chairman Davis. The R -3 District clearly states that the front yard or side yard abutting York Road is 100 feet, but the rear yard is silent so the authors of the Code may have actually meant that. The Final Plat only requires the front yard setback. Member Bulin noted that the 100 -foot setback almost makes the lots unbuildable. Chairman Davis said that his argument is in the accessory section of the Code, which states that an accessory structure can be built within 5 feet of the lot line. In his opinion, you could be within 5 feet of the rear lot line whether there is a 40 or 100 -foot setback. It is the same proximity to the lot line either way because it is an accessory use. Director of Community Development Kallien said that the Ordinance should be made very clear so that whoever reads it, will understand it, and it can be implemented. Member Nimry questioned how many more variations would need to be approved before the study is completed. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that it is being worked on now and it is envisioned to be completed by the Plan Commission in July and may be to the Zoning Board by August. This is the only case that would involve this issue. Chairman Davis said that there have been many discussions with the Hu's and Mr. Kallien. He pointed out that the standards were addressed in the testimony provided and were also addressed in detail on pages C and C.1 of the case file. It appears that the standards had been adequately addressed. There were no further questions by the Members. Motion by Member Young, seconded by Member Nimry that the applicant has addressed and satisfied the applicable standards required to recommend approval of the requested variation to allow the construction of the garage as ,requested, subject to the following conditions: 1. The development is to be constructed in substantial conformance with the plans as submitted and approved under permit number 07 -2 -210 as VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 7 of 8 June 5, 2007 W 7. shown on pages J, K and L of the case file. 2. Notwithstanding the exhibits contained in the case file, the applicant shall meet all Village ordinance requirements in the building permit process. 3. Any engineering requirements should be discussed with Village Engineer Durfey. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 6 — Members Ascher, Bulin, Krietsch, Nimry, Young and Chairman Davis Nays: 0 — Motion Carried. - OTHER. BUSINESS OTHER BUSINESS A. RESCHEDULE THE REGULAR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESCHEDULE JULY 3, 2007 MEETING DATE OF JULY 3, 2007 MEETING There was a general discussion regarding the need to reschedule the July 3, 2007 regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting due to the conflict with the Independence Day holiday. After the members were polled, it was agreed to reschedule the regular meeting. Motion by Member Krietsch, seconded by Member Bulin to reschedule the regular July 3, 2007 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to Monday, June 25, 2007 at its regular time. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. There was no other business to discuss. ADJOURNMENT: ADJOURNMENT Motion by Member Young, seconded by Member Krietsch to adjourn the meeting at 8:14 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. ATTEST: Robert KallienjfireptKr of Community Development Secretary VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 8 of 8 June 5, 2007