Loading...
Minutes - 07/11/2002 - Zoning Board of AppealsVILLAGE OF OAK BROOK ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES July 11, 2002 L CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Champ Davis Members Louis Aldini Richard Ascher George Mueller Manu Shah MEMBERS ABSENT: Member Ayesha Zaheer ALSO PRESENT: Village Trustee Susan Korin Village Trustee Elaine Miologos Director of Community Development Robert Kallien Village Attorney Richard Martens A quorum was present. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Member Mueller moved, seconded by Member Shah to waive the reading of the June 4, 2002 Regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting minutes and to approve them as written. VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried. Ill. WOLLENSAK — 3604 YORK ROAD — VARIATION — FRONT YARD SETBACK Chairman Davis swore in Daniel Wollensak, petitioner and owner of the property. Chairman Davis said that at the last meeting, this matter was voted on with a vote of 3 to 2 in favor of the petition as amended. A revised plat indicates a 13 to 14 foot setback as opposed to the original request for an 18 -foot setback. There was a proposal to approve the petition based on the findings having been satisfied. The motion did not garner the four required votes. Member Aldini was absent at the previous meeting, but said that he reviewed the tapes. Village Martens recommended that the Zoning Board revote on the matter. Director of Community Development Kallien stated that Trustee Savino contacted him concerning this case and wanted to know if this home could be positioned in such a way so that it fits within the buildable area. In this case, the applicant is asking for a substantial detached garage, a swimming pool and the home. He was able to place the home in such a way that it does fit the buildable area. Where they run into some conflict is with the swimming pool. The pool would have to be moved and the likely location for ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes ZBA- MTG.2002 -JUL 1�' July 11, 2002 it would be back into the northeast area where there is a drop in the grade. (A more detailed response to this can be found in the case file.) Chairman Davis said that he believes the Board has considered that and it has been noted that the pool could be placed at the rear of the property, but for safety concerns requested the pool be placed close to the house. Mr. Wollensak said that the request was based not only for safety, but also for the drainage issue. Chairman Davis noted that the drainage issue is that the corner of the property where it could be located, is approximately 6 to 7 feet lower and has standing water from time to time. Chairman Davis questioned whether the petitioner had done anything with respect to the sewer being placed in the rear of the property, where the consent of the neighbors would be required. Mr. Wollensak responded that he has done nothing since the last meeting. Member Shah said that the front setback is very important for widening York Road in the future. If a setback has to be reduced, it would be better to be in the rear. If the front setback is reduced then the road cannot be widened to the extent that it was designed for in the future. His feel was that it would be better to reduce the rear setback than the front setback because the rear setback is not as critical as the front setback. He asked if it were possible to move the house so that the front setback is not reduced. Chairman Davis noted that there are existing homes on both sides of the property that are nonconforming and substantially closer to the centerline of York Road than the proposed home. If there is an issue with respect to road widening, unless those houses are torn down and removed, that issue would exist in any event because of the existing houses. Mr. Wollensak said that the February 6, 2001 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting minutes addressed that issue regarding the road setbacks. "To establish specific setbacks along certain streets which contradict some setbacks which are listed in several of the zoning districts, also some of the assumptions which were used to establish these original setbacks may not be valid today. As an example, the current setback along York Road contemplates a five -lane cross - section through Oak Brook. However, today's traffic patterns and volumes do not support this original assumption. Therefore three alternatives are being offered for your review and recommendation." That was the 100 -foot setback. "It appears as though the foreseeable future would at most indicate a middle turn lane versus five lanes of traffic." With this proposal, it would not interfere with three lanes of traffic. No one in the audience spoke in support or in opposition to the request. Chairman Davis said that the motion is to support Mr. Wollensak's proposal to recommend the granting of a variation from the 100 -foot setback requirement from York Road. The findings, which are set forth in the minutes from the June 4, 2002 meeting and are part of the file, have been satisfied. Chairman Davis moved, seconded by Member Ascher that the petitioner has met the standards that are necessary to recommend for approval the Variation as amended. ROLL CALL VOTE Ayes: 5- Nays: 0 - Absent: 1 - Motion Carried. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes ZBA- MTG.2002 -JUL Aldini, Ascher, Mueller, Shah and Davis Zaheer July 11, 2002 2 IV. DuPAGE HOUSING AUTHORITY - 3400 ST. PASCHAL DRIVE - TEXT AMENDMENTS and SPECIAL USE IN THE CR DISTRICT TO CONVERT THE EXISTING FRIARY BUILDING INTO A SENIOR CITIZEN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY Chairman Davis advised the audience that there have been four hearings on this matter before the Plan Commission and this is the second hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals. At the last hearing on June 4, 2002, it was suggested that several of the Board members had not had the opportunity to tour the Friary, so the meeting was continued to this evening for any further input and to allow members the time to tour the building. Member Aldini was absent at the previous meeting, but said that he has reviewed the tapes and file and is prepared to participate in this meeting. John E. Day, President of the DuPage Housing Authority introduced those that would be providing testimony: Arnold Germain, DuPage Housing Authority Director of Development; Ellen Hoye, Senior Consultant, and Terrence R. Russell, LZT /Filliung Partnership, Project Architect. Chairman Davis reminded all that they were still sworn in from the previous meeting. No additional materials have been submitted to the Board for review. Chairman Davis referred to the Polach Appraisal Group report dated April 9, 2002. Pages 3 -6 of the report goes through the various aspects of the proposed use and the type of conclusions that would support the findings that were made in the motion and set forth in the June 4, 2002 meeting minutes. The findings for the text amendment and the special use are included in those minutes. This report supplements those findings. Member Ascher asked why a bond firm had already been hired. He asked whether finding a bond firm should go out for public bidding when it comes time to issue the bonds? Mr. Day responded that they went through a public selection process for an investment - banking firm to assist with the issuance of the bonds. Member Ascher said if they were just going to underwrite and sell them then there would not be a bid and asked whether that was unusual for a governmental body. Mr. Day said that it is not when doing a housing development like this. Member Ascher noted that the agreement between the Housing Authority and the Forest Preserve District appeared to last only until July 1, 2002, and asked if another amendment had been made. Mr. Germain said that a new agreement was not signed, just a motion to extend the agreement through December 2002. Member Ascher said that the Plan Commission recommendation was conditioned on the certificate of occupancy being secured within three years. He said that history tells him that the Housing Authority may be back seeking additional time to complete the project. Mr. Germain responded that they could not agree to those terms if they were starting the project from scratch. Member Ascher said that there is a letter in the file from an appraiser stating that the real estate taxes would be in excess of $127,000 on the property, but he was confused as to why a governmental body would pay taxes. Mr. Day answered that it is their attorney's opinion that the portion of the units that will be rented at market rates will be on the tax roles. Member Ascher said that it is important for him to know that they will be on the tax roles. He would hate to find out afterwards that taxes would not have to be paid and he is not comfortable with just an attorney's opinion on the matter. Mr. Day said that they have owned other property, which has been on the tax roles. The property was purely for development purposes, they appealed to the State Dept. of Revenue and they said that it did not qualify and would be on the tax roles. Chairman Davis questioned the theory of the 19 units not being on the tax role. Mr. Day responded that since they are affordable, that is part of the Housing Authority's mission as put forth in state regulations which is why they believe those units will not be on the tax roles. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes 3 ZBA- MTG.2002 -JUL July 11, 2002 Member Ascher said that he did tour the property and was reasonably impressed. He felt more comfortable with it than he did before, to the extent that he asked if a clause could be added that would stipulate that up to 20% of the units would be available to Oak Brook residents if they wanted them and if they were available. Ellen Hoye said that they are estimating approximately 15 to 20 of the units to be filled by Oak Brook residents. One of the main reasons that the site is so attractive is because there is no facility directly in this community for seniors. They fully intend to attempt to serve those seniors. There are residents in Oak Brook that would also qualify for the affordable housing units. Mrs. Hoye said that ideally they would like to have a waiting list. She could not see something like that could be done from a marketing standpoint. They will be part of the Oak Brook community and it will be their expectation to try to meet the demands for units here in the market. Chairman Davis questioned whether it would be possible to put a condition on the special use that a preference of up to 20% be given to Oak Brook residents, if after review of counsel that such a condition can be given. Village Attorney Martens agreed that it needs to be reviewed by the Petitioner's attorney because it may affect the sale of the bonds. Mr. Day said that it is a preference versus a set aside. A set aside would create a problem because they could literally have units vacant waiting for someone from Oak Brook to move in. There is going to be a DuPage County preference no matter what because it is Forest Preserve property bought by the people of DuPage County. Member Ascher said that he has done about a 100% turn on his view of the whole issue and he sees it as an attractive opportunity and would like to see a percentage available to qualified Oak Brook residents. Chairman Davis swore in Rajeem Nagpal, 822 St. Stephens Green who questioned that many Trinity Lake residents were not kept abreast with the news of this development and are not happy about what is happening. He asked if there is any way they still have a voice in this matter and that it would not be too late to voice their concerns. Chairman Davis advised him that he has a voice tonight. This Board makes a recommendation to the Village Board, who at their meeting will make a final decision on the matter. So Mr. Nagpal can provide testimony tonight and could also appear at the Village Board meeting. Mr. Nagpal said that when they bought their houses in Trinity Lakes they were led to believe that this was forest preserve property and would never be sold to anyone for any housing purposes. Today it could be approved for an old people's home and ten or twenty years down the road something could be put it. This is right in their backyard and as residents of Trinity Lakes, they are concerned. Most of the residents are busy and do not follow these happenings very regularly. When they heard it was coming to decision - making they were taken aback, which is why they came to this meeting. Chairman Davis commented that they would have time to express their concerns. He added that this matter has been in the newspaper for a substantial period of time and there have been at least four presentations at the Plan Commission, two through the Zoning Board and the petitioner will finally be heard by the Village Board. Member Mueller said that they have heard from people in Trinity Lakes that are in favor of the development, now they are hearing another side of it. Member Ascher added that there was an issue over the dredging of Mayslake and agreements with the forest preserve that they would make additional land available if it was necessary to store silt there. That was arranged by the Trinity Lakes Association and their president appeared at the public meetings. Mr. Nagpal said he does not know whether the president spoke for himself or the association, he confessed that he has been inactive in these happenings and would not put any blame on him. Issues have come up within the last two weeks within their homeowners association and they have become actively involved, which is why they decided to come to this meeting. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes ZBA- MTG.2002 -JUL July 11, 2002 Chairman Davis swore in Baker Nimry, 703 St. Joseph's. Mr. Nimry said that within the last few weeks they have found out things that were going on in Trinity Lakes that they were not aware of as residents. In reality, they were told that the Trinity Lakes board could do whatever they wanted to do. They have gone around to the Trinity Lakes residents trying to remove the present homeowner's association members. He said that they are not willing to spend six million dollars to clean detention ponds. He asked what residents could do to override what their board has done because they were not aware of all the negotiations that were going on. Chairman Davis said that issue is a political matter within their homeowners association. As individuals or as a group they still would have an opportunity to speak regarding this matter if they were not ready today. The public can review the minutes from all the meetings. They are also free to speak with representatives of the Housing Authority. The Board of Trustees makes the final decision. Director of Community Development Kallien said that the residents could come to the Community Development Department office to review the official file, which contains all of the minutes and materials. They can also go to the new library, which has a set of all the meeting minutes. Arnold Germain said that the DuPage Housing Authority would be very happy to meet with any resident and as far as the statement regarding negotiations made with the Housing Authority, there were no negotiations at all or at any level whatsoever with Trinity Lakes or any person within their association. It is his understanding that Trinity Lakes was working with the Forest Preserve District. As part of the hearing process in the DuPage Housing Authority's presentation, they were required to provide stormwater detention on the subject property. At one of the meetings, Mr. Cullum brought to their attention that Trinity Lakes was in negotiations with the Forest Preserve District to possibly store silt on part of their land. As a courtesy, the engineering has been provided to accommodate the future silt. So if it is every needed in the future it has been provided and will not require that Trinity Lakes go through public hearings at a later date to accomplish this. Mr. Germain said that they had sent mailings out to all the Trinity Lakes residents and they had a couple of meetings to explain what the project was about, so that this did not happen. They have tried to do everything to inform the residents in that area. Mr. Nagpal said that they are not here to object to what is happening, and it may be the best thing for that area, but they did not look into it carefully and they want to educate themselves at the last minute. Chairman Davis advised them to go to the village, or library and meet with Mr. Germain to help them get informed. Chairman Davis swore in Bob Willmschen 810 St. Stephens Green, resident of Trinity Lakes and on the board of the homeowners association. He said that he wanted to clarify a couple of things. He said that they have had discussions for some time with the Forest Preserve about the possibility of doing some work on the lakes. They did have a meeting on May 7, 2002 with the DuPage Housing Authority which all homeowners were invited to attend. At that meeting, these plans were discussed regarding the detention plan and the alternate plan for the silt. They agreed to the alternate plan, but that had nothing to do with blessing the DuPage Housing Authority project. As a board, they had no objections to the project itself. The dredging of the lakes has been discussed with the Forest Preserve for some time. There were numerous communications with the residents about it. He apologized on behalf of the board if there is a lot of confusion about this. They do think that they have kept everyone well informed as to what was going on. No one else testified or commented at the public hearing. Text Amendment Chairman Davis reviewed the request for the proposed text amendments. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes ZBA- MTG.2002 -JUL 5 -� July 11, 2002 • Text Amendment to Section 13 -5 -3 to allow Senior Citizen Assisted Living facilities owned and operated by an Illinois municipal corporation, or an instrumentality of an Illinois municipal corporation, as Special Uses which may be permitted in the Village's Conservation /Recreation District. • Text Amendment to Section 13 -5 -4 (c) to permit a maximum floor area ratio of .50 for Senior Citizen Assisted Living facilities permitted as a Special Use in Section 13 -5 -3 and located adjacent to open space of not less than 75 acres. • Text Amendment to Section 13 -5 -4 (E) (1) (b) to allow for a yard setback of twenty (20') feet from the right -of -way of any street for a Senior Citizen Assisted Living facility permitted as a Special Use in Section 13 -5 -3 and located adjacent to open space of not less than 75 acres. Member Ascher said that he is concerned regarding the 20 -foot setback because at the present time there are plenty of trees that make a sufficient barrier, but if should they die or come down the parking lot would be visible. Director of Community Development Kallien said that if the screening is called for in the Special Use, it is a requirement of the special use. In our zoning ordinance, there is also a provision that states landscaping which is required to screen parking lots has to be maintained in conformance with requirements of the ordinance. In essence, if some of the landscaping should die off, they (the owners) would have to make every effort to replace it so that it adhered to the intent of the ordinance of screening from the adjacent property. It may not be of the same height, but it would have to fully meet the intent of the ordinance. Arnold Germain said that the setback is not for the garages, but for the parking lot. The parking lot although flat is considered a structure. They are not seeking to change what currently exists, but rather to make it legal by this language. Chairman Davis noted that the standards were set forth in the minutes of the June 4, 2002 meeting and supplemented by the Polach Appraisal Group analysis of the proposed use dated April 9, 2002. Member Aldini moved, seconded by Member Davis that the petitioner has met the standards as required and to recommend approval of the text amendments as requested. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 5 - Aldini, Ascher, Mueller, Shah, and Davis Nays: 0- Absent: 1 - Zaheer Motion Carried. Special Use Chairman Davis reviewed the request as presented by the applicant. • A Special Use Permit to develop and operate an Assisted Living facility at 3400 St. Paschal Drive. He then reviewed the conditions imposed by the Plan Commission. Member Mueller moved, seconded by Member Aldini as amended, that the petitioner has met the standards for a Special Use as required at the Zoning Board Meeting on June 4, 2002 and to recommend approval of the special use on the 6.189 acres located at 3400 St. Paschal Drive, subject to the following conditions: 1. Development to be in substantial conformance with the architectural plans submitted (page L) of the petition file and the Revised Site Plan C1 -A dated May 13, 2002, which depicts Alternate A (page 35) that addresses the issues of the Trinity Lakes Homeowners Association if it is necessary to store silt on the site. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes 6 ZBA- MTG.2002 -JUL July 11, 2002 2. That the Special Use would run to the DuPage Housing Authority, an Illinois municipal corporation or an instrumentality of the DuPage Housing Authority. 3. A building permit is to be obtained within one year of the date of the approved special use ordinance by the Village Board of Trustees. 4. A Certificate of Occupancy is to be obtained with 3 years of any ordinance approving the special use. 5. Development is to have a maximum of 93 total units of those, a maximum of 19 units would be affordable units and in any event, the percentage of affordable units to total units would not exceed 19 over 93. 6. If at any time less than 20% of the occupants of the project are Oak Brook residents, persons who have been Oak Brook residents (Oak Brook being their primary residence) for at least two years shall be given priority in filling vacancies until the 20% figure is achieved. 7. The screening that currently exists along St. Paschal Drive be maintained. 8. In the event that the project fails, the property shall revert to the Forest Preserve District of DuPage County. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 5 - Aldini, Ascher, Mueller, Shah, and Davis Nays: 0- Absent: 1 - Zaheer Motion Carried. Member Ascher commented to the DuPage Housing Authority that he hoped before the appeared before the Board of Trustees to provide more than an attorney's opinion, to give the Village some assurance that the market value units will be taxable as property. Mr. Day said that he would pass that request along to their attorney to address the matter before it goes to the Village Board. V. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. VI. ADJOURNMENT Member Ascher moved, seconded by Member Shah to adjourn the meeting. VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried. Meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes 7 ZBA- MTG.2002 -JUL i Director of m ity Development Secretary `�Ft -, -1.0a z Date Approved July 11, 2002