Loading...
Minutes - 07/26/2006 - Zoning Board of Appeals2. MINUTES OF THE JULY 26, 2006 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK APPROVED AS WRITTEN ON SEPTEMBER 5, 2006 CALL TO ORDER: CALL TO ORDER The Special 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 7:04 p.m. ROLL CALL: ROLL CALL Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons PRESENT: Chairman Champ Davis, Members Richard Ascher, Baker Nimry, Jeffrey Bulin and Glenn. Krietsch and Steven Young ABSENT: Member Manu Shah IN ATTENDANCE: Robert Sanford, Trustee; Jeffrey Kennedy, Trustee; and Robert Kallien, Jr., Director of Community Development 3. NEW BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 3 A BRITTWOOD CREEK LLC — MAP AMENDMENT — sRITT WOOD CREEK, LLC - APPROX 57 APPROXIMATELY 57 ACRES OF VACANT PROPERTY LOCATED ACRES OF VACANT SOUTH OF 35th STREET AND EAST OF ROUTE 83 -- LAND LAND OF ROUT T STAND E E 83 -MAP AMENDMENT — TO REZONE THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE AMENDMENT - REZONE PORTION OF PROPERTY FROM R -1 to R -2 TIME PROPERTY FROM R -I to R -2 Chairman Davis announced that this hearing would not be concluded this evening. Mr. Cappetta, who has a presentation in opposition, would be continued to a special meeting on August 29, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Davis swore in the applicant, his attorney and all witnesses that would testify. Walter Morrissey, attorney for the petitioner said that two documents were presented to be made part of the case file. One was a copy of the presentation and the other was a response to the LaSalle Factors. The application is to amend the zoning map. The map amendment pertains to 34 out of the properties 57 acres. There are 23 acres along the eastern portion of the property that would remain R--1 zoning with a minimum of 2 -acre lots. A second application request is for certain variations of the subdivision regulations. The VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 1 of 23 July 26, 2006 applicant is prepared to stipulate that the 1 -acre plus lots that is designated in the middle corridor of the property, they refer to as R -2 plus would not be changed at the time of final plat approval or subsequent thereto. The 23 acres would have 10, R -1, 2 -acre plus lots. The middle corridor would have 12, R -2, 1 acre, plus lots of which the developer would stipulate would not change or be resubdivided into more lots; and the application calls for 13, R -2, 1 acre lots along Route 83. It is the position of the applicant that this application meets the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. In Chapter 5 of the Comprehensive Plan, General Objectives, Item A.l.a. (page 55) speaks of the "low- density character of the Village." The applicant is seeking 1 -acre plus and 1 -acre minimum lots and they believe that is genuinely consistent with low - density residential development. The General Objectives at item A.l.d., talks about "buffer low density from existing higher density." Their expert witnesses will testify that Route 83 is the most intense land use that land planners contemplate. At one time, there were stop signs at 31" Street and Route 83. Today, there is a 6 -lane metropolitan highway with 67,000 car movements a day, so it serves as a buffer. The General Objectives at item A. Le., talks about, "Promote aesthetic transitions between residential and other land uses, such as greenbelts, bike paths, lakes, etc." They believe the proposal in the application meets exactly that objective. It retains the 10, R -1, 2 -acre plus lots along the eastern corridor of the property. The center tier has R -2, 1 -acre plus lots (as demonstrated by the preliminary plat of subdivision). It then transitions to the 1 -acre lots along Route 83, which creates the buffering. In the Comprehensive Plan (page 58), Item E, sets forth the Residential Objectives and they believe the application, and they believe the Zoning Board will agree with their conclusion of the testimony presented would address each of the residential objectives in the Villages' comprehensive plan. Chapter 6 of the Comprehensive Plan mandates that any zoning application should remove as much uncertainty as possible from the development process. They submit that the application does that. The land is vacant open space at this time. The last time the owner was before the Board they sought to change it from R -1 to Institutional for dormitory use. That was denied. This application is focused and predicated upon low density, single - family residential R -2 lots for the 34 acres in question. On page 64 of the Comprehensive Plan there is a statement (paragraph 4) about Briarwood Lakes that it "provides a buffer between Route 83 and single- family detached houses to the west." In paragraph 2 of page 64, it states, "In addition, Route 83 and Jorie Boulevard are busy traffic arteries which restrict certain conventional residential planning options." They think it is important that it is VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 2 of 23 July 26, 2006 recognized that the impact on Route 83 to the business corridor on 22nd Street and it makes eminent sense then to do the transition on site, to R -2, 1 acre plus, to 1 acre lots along Route 83. Also on page 64, Item 4, it states, "vacant properties located generally south of 35`h Street and west of Adams Road, which are presently zoned residential, should be developed with single family detached houses." This is exactly what the application does. There have been several important documents that were filed with the Plan Commission, and include the credentials of each of the expert witnesses along with filed reports in the case file. They ask that those items be recognized. Allen Kracower, planning and zoning consultant said that his credentials are contained in the files and he has been doing this for about 40 years. The factors regarding a zoning amendment are similar to the LaSalle factors as used in the State of Illinois and are very similar to the Sinclair type case factors, which are used in the trial court cases of northeastern Illinois. He reviewed the presentation booklet starting with the Zoning Plan. He said that the area is 57 acres of land, but they are only requesting to rezone approximately 34 acres of land to R -2. Some time ago before the Plan Commission, they had started out with 42 -46 lots and they are now down to 35, so there has been a significant change in the land use density. He reviewed the previous Original Zoning Plan where the highest intensity land use of Route 83, R -3 zoning would serve as a transition toward the R -1 category. The Project Location is bordered by 35`h Street to the north; Route 83 is the western boundary. The Forest Preserve District has a small amount of land on the south side of the property and a small strip of land that runs between the subject property and the right of way of Route 83, which was the result of a condemnation action. Breakenridge Farms is to the west and Hunter Trails is to the north of 35`h Street, which is 1 -acre zoning. In terms of Governmental Jurisdictions, the land west of Route 83 is in the Village of Westmont and is a very intense land use. There is Route 83 with high volumes of traffic and mid -rise office buildings, which is a whole different character than the Village of Oak Brook. South of the subject property is the forest preserve property. South of that is the Village of Hinsdale, which occupies the entire frontage of Ogden Avenue. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 3 of 23 July 26, 2006 e The Community Facilities, includes the Hinsdale High School district, Butler School District (grades 6 -8), Brook Forest Elementary school (grades K -5), and the village's Police and Fire Department located at 1200 Oak Brook Road, so there are adequate community facilities to service the development, which is one of the LaSalle Factors. Zoning of the Subject Property and Nearby Properties. The land use immediately to the south of the subject property, and south of the forest preserve is zoned R -2 in the Village Hinsdale, however that designation is for lots of 20,000 square feet. To the east of the subject property, Breakenridge Farms is zoned R -1 in the Village of Oak Brook is 2 acre lots. The eastern boundary of the subject property is R -1, which is why they are leaving the area adjacent to it as existing R -1 so that there is a transition of the same land use zoning on the eastern side the property that currently exists in Breakenridge Farms. To the north of the property on 35th Street, is R -2 zoning. R -2 zoning is 1 acre zoning. All the land to the north of the property is 1 acre, the land to the east is 2 acres, and the land to the south of the forest preserve in Hinsdale is 1/2 acre. It is sort of a mixture of land use. To the west are 65,000 vehicles per day traversing Route 83; that is a very significant and dominating factor in looking at the land use here. Often looking at a land use of a piece of property, the character of it is taken by the highest intensity use adjacent to it. _Character of the Neighborhood The word trend means how land develops over a sequence in time. Character really means, how do things look; and what are the physical characteristics of use. To the north of the property is a water treatment, facility (picture 1) Hunter Trails (picture 2), single family, which is consistent with what they are doing here, but it is a little older subdivision. The forest preserve is depicted to the south (picture 4), Breakenridge Farms (picture 5) is to the east and more of an estate 2 --acre zoning. It is the largest zoning adjacent to Adams Road and they would transition off towards Route 83 and into Westmont. There is also a horse farm to the east (picture 6) and has been there for many years. 1959 Zoning -- South of Interstate 88 He reviewed the progress of zoning and went back to 1959 because that is when the land was originally zoned. There was a tremendous amount of R -1 zoning, which back then was not 2 acres, it was 1 acre zoning. The Village at some point in time switched the designations. 2005 Zoning of the Area Previously Incorporated into the Village as of 1959 The chart shows the changes in the Village. Ginger Creek went from the R -1 to R -2 (1 acre to 1 acre) classification. Brook Forest went from R -1 to R -3 VILLAGE OF OAK. BROOK. Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 4 of 23 July 26, 2006 (1 acre to 25,000 sq. ft); Briarwood went from R -1 to R -4 (1 acre to 18,000 sq. ft). The Butler Golf course and the McDonald's Campus was developed, Forest Gate came in from R -1 to R -3. The Oak Brook Polo Club came in as a recreational use and Hunter Trails came in. What was essentially R -1 (1 acre zoning) changed between 1959 and 2005 and went from R -1 to R -2, R -3, R -4, ORA, and CR. A little higher in intensity and a little more practical zoning as the Village of Oak Brook began to urbanize. Comparison of the 1959 and 2005 Route 83 Corridor Zoning The Route 83 corridor was probably. minimal. Most of the land in 1959 was in the R -2 category, but by 2005, they know they are generating about 65,000 cars per day, which is a lot of traffic. You can see how things change. There are no longer the R -1 holdings anymore. The last R -1 property that is on the Route 83 corridor is Breakenridge Farms and the subject property. It is the last vestige of the R -1, 2 -acre zoning in the Village of Oak Brook adjacent to Route 83 and it has been impacted. The traffic has changed, the land uses around it has changed and the Village itself has dramatically changed its zoning. Municipalities Adiacent to Route 83 that do not have 2 -acre zonin They reviewed towns going 24 miles north and 7 miles south and none of them have 2 -acre zoning on the Route 83 corridor and there is a reason for it. It is no longer appropriate. The corridor has adversities associated with it. There is housing along it, but there are not any 2 -acre zoning along it. Municipalities Ad'acent to Route 83 that do not have 1 -acre zonin Looking at 1 -acre zoning along the same area and again, only Oak Brook has it. Reviewing the general purpose of the Residence Districts in Oak Brook. It states in the Zoning Ordinance. A. Preserve and further promote low - density single - family detached dwellings consistent with the predominant character of the Village. B. Encourage the development of medium density single - family detached dwelling neighborhoods where it is possible to employ modern, efficient land planning techniques with smaller networks of utilities and pavements. C, Provide for the economically sound and aesthetically pleasing use of areas characterized by their proximity to heavy traffic, the regional shopping center and light industry, including the use of town houses and garden type low density multiple- family dwellings. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 5 of 23 July 26, 2006 They are not seeking such a use (as described in C), but they are saying that there is heavily trafficked route in this area and they think the land use they are proposing is reasonable at best. Prol2osed Rezoning from R -1 to R -2 This chart shows the statistics and how it is laid out. The entire parcel is 57 acres and of those 22.7 acres would remain R -1. It will be the transition and buffer area between R -1 and R -2. The R -1 winds along the southern part of 35t" Street so there is a buffer transition zone in there even though it would be developed with lots less than 2 acres. The last part consisting of about 34 acres would be R -2 zoning. Preliminary Plan for Brittwood Creek The land plan is the most significant thing. All the lots in the R -2 are larger than 1 acre. There are 2 numbers shown on each lot. The larger number includes the lot area to the centerline of the road. The smaller number on the lot is to the edge of the pavement. In either case they are all more than 1 acre. Looking at the transition of land use, it can be seen that of the 57 acres, there is a total of 35 lots, which is pretty low density. It calculates to .61 dwelling units per acre. It is almost one -half dwelling unit per acre. Anywhere you go in the metropolitan area; it is a very low density. There are 10 lots in the R -1 category that are next to Breakenridge Farm, which occupies almost 23 acres. In terms of R -2, there are 25 lots on about 34 acres of land. In the center tier of the lots are quite substantial, they are 1 acre plus lots. They are larger than what ever would be required by the 1- acre R -2 standard. From a planning point of view, it is a desirable transition going from 2 -acre lots, to about 1 V2 -acre lots, to one acre. It is about as good of transition land use that you could get. One might ask if there is a problem with and acre and a half or 1 acre versus 2 acre lots; and the answer in reality is no. They area not creating a lot more traffic, or environmental problems, noise or anything else that is harmful to the community to the north or to the east. The average lot size of the R -1 lots is approximately 2.2 acres, which is a little larger than what is required. There are some smaller and some larger, but they all are at least 2 acres. The average lot size of the R -2 lots is 1.2 and the total average lot size for the whole development is 1.5 acres. Original Plan "He briefly showed the original plan, where the R -3 zoning was proposed. It was taken away because people objected to them. Member Young said that in the testimony there were a number of properties listed along Route 83, and it was stated that none of them had 2 -acre designation. He asked in those communities do they have any zoning that is 2 acres. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 6 of 23 July 26, 2006 W-24 Mr. Kracower responded that the statement was that they did not have 2 acre zoning along the Route 83 corridor. He said that he was uncertain, but that Burr Ridge or possibly Hinsdale may have lots of I acre, 2 acres or more elsewhere in the town, but not along Route 83. Member Nimry asked if the subject property was zoned 1 or 2 acres when it was incorporated into Oak Brook in 1966. Mr. Kracower responded that it was 2 acres. Member Nimry asked for the net square footage for lots 7, 8, 10, 12, 24, 25 and 30 without the water. Chairman Davis asked what the reasoning was behind the thesis that the land use could be more intense if the adjacent land use is, such as Route 83. Mr. Kracower responded that normally, in most instances, a piece of property takes on its character from the greatest intensity of use adjacent to' it. What has happened here is that what may at one time been an ideal environment for large estate housing on a highway, really no longer exists because there are better places in the markei place and in the Oak Brook community to invest a substantial amount of money on a large lot and a large home. The problem with Route 83 is not just because there are a lot of cars, but also those cars create air quality problems. Most importantly, the greatest adversity is the noise. Noise becomes a very big issue. It is not that it would not be a problem for some of the lots on the property that are larger; because it is and it is still an adversity no matter what they do, because they cannot get rid of it totally. They are creating a berm and extensive landscape to try to soften some of the impact, but the greater value is the property off to the east. The eastern side of the property that will remain R -1 will be the least impacted by Route 83. The homes adjacent to it would be the most impacted and there will be somewhat smaller homes on those smaller lots, which in turn creates a smaller value in the marketplace. It would be difficult to build a $4 -5 million home on those lots and be able to sell it. It is a market' driven theory and it is practical. He said that he has driven along the site and gone outside to listen and you can hear the traffic noise and when you are close to Route 83 it is very noticeable. It is a market issue and a planning issue. Normally in planning, if possible, you try to transition a little of an intensity of use so that it is more economically viable and practical. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOD. Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 7 of 23 July 26, 2006 Member Ascher asked if the gross numbers for the lots included the street. Mr. Kracower said that the first number does include the street the second number does not. The lots with the water do include the water in the second number. Monica Patroscioiu said that they are the civil engineers for the subject property. They intend to comply with all local and county stormwater management regulations. The detention ponds proposed will be sized to reduce the peak runoff from the site. They intend to preserve the floodplain within the creek bed area. As well as preserving all of the existing vegetation within the floodplain limits along the creek on the eastern portion of the site. Basically, there will not be any flood plain impact along that corridor. The proposed topography for the site will follow the existing conditions, drainage patterns and will not be altered. Currently the site drains towards the creek east and they will maintain the same drainage patterns for the proposed conditions. The detention ponds will be planted with native landscaping and the ponds will be wet bottom. Those two things combined will help with the filtration of pollutants and sediments from the site and would basically promote water quality before the stormwater is discharged into the creek. The adjacent water system has the capacity to support this development. Currently there is a dead end water main in the Breakenridge Farm development, just east of the site. Their proposed plan is to connect to a dead end water main and create a loop, which will increase flow through their system and promote public health and safety by increasing the capacity of the adjacent subdivisions water main. The site is served by the Flagg Creek Water Reclamation District and they have had conversations with the engineer and he has informed them that there is adequate capacity for the sanitary sewer to serve this development. They will install a lift station. The reason for the lift station is to cross underneath the creek and connect to the existing sanitary sewer. The Village's stormwater consultant has reviewed the documents for the preliminary plat and they have concluded that it appears that the project can meet the village requirements. Member Ascher asked if the lift station would be visible. Ms. Patroscioiu responded that it is all placed underground. The most that would normally be seen is any ordinary manhole cover. Nothing will be exposed above ground. Member Ascher asked how it would impact Breakenridge Farms. Ms. Patroscioiu responded that the Flagg Creek district engineer had said that there VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 8 of 23 July 26, 2006 was adequate capacity to serve the development so there would be enough capacity through the line. Member Krietsch asked how tapping into the Breakenridge main would promote the health and welfare of the citizens of Breakenridge. Ms. Patroscioiu responded that it would be through fire protection, with the existing fire hydrants if there is not enough flow going to the hydrants in case of fire. Right now, the water main in Breakenridge ends. When they connect their water main to that system, what would happen is there would be two connections with two water flow directions, which increases the water flow. Member Bulin questioned the size of the dead end main. Ms. Patroscioiu responded that she was not certain. Mr. Callaghan added that it was an 8 or a 10 -inch line. Member Bulin questioned the size of the main on 35th Street, Mr. Callaghan responded that it was 12 or 14 inches. He said that the other thing that a water main does is to remove any stagnation. Currently the municipal employees must go to Breakenridge Farm on a fairly regular basis and flush the water main, or there would be bacteria in the water main connection. The proposed subdivision would alleviate that responsibility from the village employees. Member Bulin asked what the distance was between the development and the water main. Mr. Callaghan responded that it was 20 -25 feet and the sanitary sewer is approximately 90 feet. However, both are located in an existing easement. Chairman Davis asked if the property was developed with its current zoning the improvements proposed would still need to be undertaken. Ms. Patroscioiu responded that they would be. Member Nimry asked who would be responsible for the maintenance of all the retention ponds on the property. Mr. Callaghan responded that it would be the responsibility of the homeowners association. Member Nimry questioned where the access was to the ponds for maintenance. Mr. Callaghan responded that there are easements along the property lines that are required by the village engineering standards. Utility easements can and would also be used for foot traffic in order to maintain the ponds. There will also be regulations included with the landscaping when the houses are completed to ensure access to the ponds. It would be the same as it is for Forest Gate to allow access between the houses to access for maintenance. Mr. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 9 of 23 July 26, 2006 Morrissey added that there would be a Declaration of Covenants recorded by the homeowners association that would affect all of the lots in the subdivision, which would provide for access easements and would be on the final plat of subdivision. Member Young said that he toured the property and noticed some tributaries coming from the creek. It appears from the plans that they were expanded out with the 2 retention ponds and asked if they have been classified and whether they were covered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Callaghan said that with the improvements to Route 83 the tributary was cut. Looking from an aerial picture you would be able to see ponds to the west of Route 83 adjacent to the large commercial buildings and the water used to cut across Route 83 onto the subject property and then onto Bronswood Creek; it no longer does that. There are actually 2 ravines that could have been considered creeks 25 -30 years ago, but with the road improvements, they are not even listed on the U.S. Army Corps Engineers map that they are a tributary at all. Member Young asked if they had consulted with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers about them. Mr. Callaghan responded that they had. Ms. Patroscioiu said that the latest DuPage County flood plain maps that are published by FEMA do not show that area as a flood plain. The flood plain is strictly within the Bronswood Creek area, from their map of July 2004, which is their latest regulatory version of those maps. Member Young asked about an area of the property referred to an area known as the "dump" and the plans to remediate it. Mr. Callaghan responded that he was able to receive from the Institute a copy of the Phase 1 and Phase 2 study that was done during the DuPage County condemnation proceedings. After the Phase 2 study they did not find the toxic levels of lead from the guns that had been shot there to be above the EPA standards, therefore no special remediation was required of that soil. Member Young asked what the possibility there was of discharging fertilizers or other nitrates into the creek when they change the flow of the ground water to the creek. Mr. Callaghan responded that most of the new engineering publications over the last 15 years have actually promoted bringing back the ditch and swale and getting rid of curbs and for getting rid of dry detention and going to wet. Culverts and wet detention ponds provide a sedimentation basin by which the pollutants that are in the water to actually fall out of them and stay where they are at and not be deposited into Bronswood Creek and so forth. This is actually called a green - effect subdivision the way it has been designed. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 10 of 23 July 26, 2006 It includes the rural streets, no curb and gutter and wet detention ponds. They are appropriate for this location and he would like to compliment that look. Member Nimry commented that Salt Creek is depleted of oxygen and has all kinds of contaminants and it is probably due to all the retention ponds that have been built around this area. If there is no rain, they are like sewer plants, because the oxygen level goes to nothing over a short period. Mr. Callaghan responded that all the ponds would have aerators and will dug to, the depth of at least 15 feet below the surface of the water. The reason they do that and have done so in Forest Gate as well is to promote fish. Pristine ponds have been developed at Forest Gate as well as a 1.87- acre,wetland mitigation. In that 5- acre mitigation period, the Army Corps of Engineers told him that he was 1 out of 50 people that have done so. Member Nimry questioned when the 15 -foot depth ponds would be constructed, and if they are completed at the beginning of the construction, some of the ponds could be down to 10 -13 feet because of construction; how would that be prevented. Mr. Callaghan responded that the complete area would be developed at one time. All streets, ponds, sewers, water, streetlights will be installed 100% from the beginning. It will take about 1 t/2. years to complete the construction on the site. As part of the engineers design procedures, erosion control measures are done to prevent that. Eric Russell, with the traffic consultant, said that they did the traffic study for this project and pointed out the highlights from the study. The study focused on the area from Spring Road and Oak Brook Road on the north, down to Adams Road and Ogden Avenue to the south, including the intersection at 35th St. and Adams, which is the location that the project traffic will access the site. The counts at that intersection indicated that 35th Street carries a very low amount of traffic today, ranging from 17 to about 35 during the rush hours, either in the morning or afternoon; and about 300 vehicles on a daily basis. The project will generate a very modest amount of traffic. It will result in about twice as much traffic along 35th, but the numbers on 35th are very low. The project traffic can be adequately accommodated on the street systems. All of their evaluations of the intersections indicate that the levels of service during the peak hours will not change with the project traffic distributed across the various intersections that they studied. With the project, 35th Street will carry about 700 vehicles per day as opposed to a little over 300 that is there today. By national standards, local streets are designed to carry up to 1500 vehicles per day, which is considered to be satisfactory levels of service. With this project it is still less than half of what a typical threshold capacity would be for a local street such as this. 35th Street is presently an 18 -foot wide roadway. It is built to rural VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 11 of 23 July 26, 2006 standards, meaning gravel shoulders, a ditch and no curb and gutter. The national standards also indicate that an 18 -foot wide pavement is sufficient to accommodate low volume local roadways where there is no parking on the street. On this street there are signs posted for no parking on both sides of 35tH From their perspective, and from national standards, 35th Street is adequately designed to accommodate the additional traffic this project would generate. Sharon Lindgren, 1020 Birchwood Road, confirmed that he said there were currently 300 trips a day on that road. She said that there are only about 10 -12 homes in that area, so she asked if he was saying that the people that live there are making 50 trips a day. Mr. Russell responded that based on the counts, in an approximate 24-hour period they were about 300 vehicles using 35th Street. Mr. Morrissey added that the traffic counts take into consideration the south exit from Hunter Trails, which is a large subdivision, so it is not just the homes on 35tH Street. Testimony was heard at previous hearings that some of those residents prefer to use the south exit as a regular means of access. The traffic study takes that into account. Chairman Davis asked if a study had been undertaken to see what the traffic counts would be if the property remained R -1. Mr. Russell responded that they did and on a peak hour basis, there was very little difference, an additional 5 to 10 vehicles for the proposed project as compared to the current zoning, which over the course of a day is less than 100 vehicles difference. Member Young asked if 35th were flooded, how would the property be accessed. Mr. Russell responded that it could be through Hunter Trails. Mr. Morrissey responded that there was none. It is a unique piece of property and they contacted for DuPage County Forest Preserve District and IDOT about an emergency access off Route 83, and IDOT was less than amenable to the suggestion. The Forest Preserve District wrote a pleasant letter and said they were open to discussion, but nothing has gone forward. There are 3 impediments to the secondary access off Route 83. IDOT does not want any more entrance points. There are major pipelines and easements on the east side of Route 83. Finally, the Forest Preserve District has a 50 -foot corridor, which would require a process that they have not encouraged them to pursue. When contacted about it they advised that would not give it serious consideration coming from a private developer; the Village would have to join in the request to proceed beyond talking. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 12 of 23 July 26, 2006 Member Bulin asked if there was an impact on the other intersections. Mr. Russell responded that they looked at 35th and Adams, Adams and Spring, Spring and Oak Brook Road and Adams and Ogden Avenue. When the site traffic is added in the levels of service did not change. He said that does not mean it is not difficult to get out onto Oak Brook Road or Ogden Avenue, it is; however, the level of service did not change by the incremental increase from the site traffic. Steven Hovany, Strategy Planning Associates, Schaumburg, Illinois discussed the fiscal impact on the schools and community of the development. Mr. Hovany said that the homes as proposed would give an equalized accessed valuation of about $44.6 million. The average price is being estimated at about $3.8 million. They are substantial high value homes. The total EAV would produce about $1.2 million in property taxes. The Village of Oak Brook does not levy a property tax, except for township road and bridge would not get much of that. As the rest of the community gets a series of fees and charges and state fees and basically continues to fund the operations primarily through sales tax receipts from the commercial sector. They estimate approximately 126 new residents in the community. They used the Oak Brook formula in the Subdivision Regulations, which calculates 23 elementary, and junior high school aged children. They estimate real estate tax revenues to be $3$3,000 to the school district and utilizing the schools latest audit for expenses would be about $233,000. Therefore, there is a positive fiscal impact towards the schools operating funds. They estimate 11 high school aged children and would be collecting about $537,000 at a cost of about $113,000; so the high school is very positive fiscally. In both cases, the project will also pay toward the bond and interest rate of the existing outstanding bonds. The existing outstanding bonds for the elementary school district, net present value are about $42,000 over the 10 years. They are now considering the possibility of passing additional bonds for expansion; the $44.6 million EAV will give them a much larger tax base to spread the bonds across. Member Young asked if the possible rising mortgage interest rate change was taken into account. Mr. Hovany responded that they do a lot of economic analysis and some range into the millions it is unaffected by the economy or interest rates because these people do not take out mortgages, which was their finding when they investigated the project initially and they tried to track down what was going on mortgage -wise. At this range, they have the company sell stock or something. At a certain higher level, it seems not to be as effected by interest rates as it is with a lower level when everything is financed. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 13 of 23 July 26, 2006 Michael MaRous, said that he and his firm have been very active in DuPage County. They have worked for the Village of Hinsdale, Oak Brook, Elmhurst, DuPage County, York Township, Burr Ridge, among others in regard to land use and valuation issues. The highlight of his study was looking at the proposed plan and considered the engineering issues, traffic issues, land use issues, and particularly some of the issues in regard to trends and what has happened in this area since the early 1960's. They also looked at subdivisions in the area and their impact on value. They took into consideration recent transactions and in regard to the question about rising interest rates further highlights the concern in regard to planning issues and part of his concern about putting 2 -acre lots next to Route 83, with 67,000 cars per day. In fact, there is a concern with putting 1 -acre lots with $2 million houses in such proximity. What really happens as an appraiser, they look at price per foot or acre and make the comparables. Basically if you develop 2 -acre lots next to Route 83, they would probably reflect the lowest unit prices in the Village; which would not be beneficial to others in Breakenridge Farms with the 2 -acre plus lots. They looked at sales, resale, and impact of proximity to other developments. They looked at sales and resale in Brook Forest to see if they were impacted by Briarwood. They looked for the same situation in Hunter Trails, after Forest Gate was developed and they found no negative impact of those developments. They also looked at marketing times in the village and took into consideration competition in other areas. The higher priced homes have to be special. They have to have high quality in a manner very consistent with the proposed development. In summary (most is found in the written report), he found that there is demand for very good quality special development in an outstanding location, such as the subject. The proposed development is in keeping with trends of development. In his opinion, the proposed development would not cause a negative impact on value. In fact, it would be a positive impact on value for the immediate area. Sharon Lindgren said that everyone says the property is next to Route 83, but the plots that she has studied shows Route 83, then forest preserve and then the property, so it is not abutting Route 83. Mr. MaRous responded that from a legal standpoint, she was correct, there is essentially a minor buffer strip along Route 83, but that is a minor buffer. As a further buffer, the developer has proposed a landscaped berm in order to provide further protection from the noise and visual nature of Route 83. However, it is a thin strip of land; so in relationship to that whole area it is relatively de minimis. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 14 of 23 July 26, 2006 �c - Dan Callaghan said that a couple of plans have been submitted to the village before. This current plan is a compromise. The street design has stayed pretty much the same. He does not have all the answers, but he is an engineer and unlike some developers with no experience, he has used the experience he has to assist the land planner in designing the plan. He actually got some of his ideas from Paul Butler's other developed areas in the village. The outer ring road in Brook Forest which is adjacent to I -88, out of all the other subdivisions that border major roads in town, that was probably the most prudent thing that he could have done for Brook Forest to not have any houses back up to I -88. He borrowed the concept for Forest Gate and the same philosophy was used to put the road against the existing road, if it is a high intense road, without any houses backing up to the actual road. In the proposed design, he placed the ring road along the far west boundary line. He did that having had the experience of living by I -294 himself and had noticed from 1975 to 1990, the amount of noise that came off of 294 had quadrupled. He noticed that you could not sit out in the back yards of the houses that backed up to I -294. The houses that were across the street and had the house to protect them, which was a noise buffer, you could sit in the backyards and enjoy yourself. He did not take a simple Chicago grid system, and line the houses along Route 83; that would have been a disservice to the people that would buy those lots. There are specific reasons why the detention areas in the center section of the property as well as along the creek and forest preserve are in the locations that they are. If a developer mash earth grades the entire site, you will not find the developer spending the money to design 7 or 8 ponds; you would find 2. Look at some of the developments that have been built in town and that adds primarily to part of the problem with the erosions, because the detention areas are not in the most optimum location that they should be. They are in this plan. The reason that they were placed where they are is just like Paul Butler did in Ginger Creek, he did not mash earth the whole property. He cut out for the roads and utilities and left everything else alone; that is his intention for this property. In that philosophy, he is borrowing from him, having the utilities installed in the front yards. He did that in Ginger Creek and the reason for that was not to rip of the trees and the yards in the backyards. Since you are grading that area of the street, you can establish grades for the pedestals and transformers because you are grading for the street. Therefore, the design is with all those things in mind and in keeping. This property was R -1 when it was brought into the village for edification; it is state law. Every piece of property that is brought into any village must be brought in under its highest and most restrictive use. So everything had to be VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 15 of 23 July 26, 2006 �4 brought in as R -1. Unfortunately, this piece of property when it was zoned, the owner did not have an interest in developing it and left it R -1. The subsequent owners did not either, but all other R -1 properties in town as shown by Mr. Kracower that was originally 2 acres, 0 percent exist today. It was about 25 percent in 1959 and today, not one square foot has been kept R -l. This would be the first time. In regards to the emergency access, he would like to pursue it with the cooperation of the Village. He has two options here. IDOT did not say no, they said if they follow the rules and regs and follow the design standards and the Village proves there is an actual need for community safety that emergency access needs to come off of Route 83 they would give it; and that has been submitted to the Village. In option A, they do not need Forest Preserve District permission to put the emergency access because the 35t11 Street right-of-way goes through and would be good to other property owners. To show some cohesion with that he has added an emergency access to a hidden driveway. That would allow a second alternate exit. In the event the entrance would be blocked, the alternate exit would get them through the subdivision. Option B is in the event the village would be successful; the alternate would not be needed. The plan is site specific, he is doing nothing like Forest Gate. There are reasons that Forest Gate exists. The Zoning Code specifically states that, "developments shall be developed predominately in the character of the village." On the density comparison sheet, there has been nothing in Oalc Brook proposed with the density as low as he is proposing for this site. Old Oak Brook was the closest at 70,000 square feet. Hunter Trails is just below 60,000 square feet, Brittwood Creek is 71,000 square feet. Fullersburg Woods (31St to the southern border of Oak Brook from York to Route 83) is 60,000 square feet. His proposal is 15 percent less dense than the predominant character of the neighborhood, not just the village. He reviewed the gated landscape entry. There will be private roads, so the Village would not have to maintain them. It is designed for a guard, but that would be up to the homeowners association. It is in the old world look, which is stone with iron gates. He reviewed the landscaped berm that would abut western border by Route 83. The berm has been designed to allow a concrete enforcing wall on the west side of the berm. That would allow him to get some height so that with the shrubbery and vegetation that exists within the 50 -foot forest preserve buffer strip, the berm would not be seen unless it is the middle of winter and the leaves VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 16 of 23 July 26, 2006 are all gone. The landscape is a staggered triple row of evergreens in order not to have gaps. The berm along the west property line would be a solid screening. In addition to a visual buffer, he is hopeful that it would provide somewhat of a sound buffer. Unlike some of the other retaining walls in town it is a random size wall, with about 6 different sizes of block and it interconnects so that it has a natural contour stone look. The paver brick is also a tumbled random pattern. The Village Subdivision ordinance currently does not prohibit detention areas being within the area of the lot, which is fortunate in this community because the lots are oversized. The concept here and in Oak Brook for years has been a case by case basis. He noticed that lots in Ginger Creeks go into the water. In Old Oak Brook, the wet detention ponds on the west side of Natoma are on the private lots. There has been no concern or issues with the maintenance of those ponds. The entire back yards are flood plain. Forest Glen also has wet detention on private property. Falco Subdivision and Kanan Court have dry detention ponds. He is not seeking anything that does not exist in the village. He has tagged over 1100 trees on the property that are 10 -12 inches. He wanted a record of the exact species and wants to see the success rate of the trees. He is not expecting to build all the homes and if they do not sell it is not an impact on schools, because without the homes, there are not any children going to the school. The traffic engineer and village engineer have a statement that states 35th Street is adequate to can handle the capacity of the 35 lots and the traffic that brings with it. He can sympathize with the people that live on 35th. Given the condition that the street can remain the rural character that it is now. The development he would hope removes some uncertainty to the area. He is hopeful that as when they built Forest Gate, it has increased the values of properties of Oak. Brook, not diminished them. There are 66 homes occupied in Forest Gate right now, over 40 of them were current Oak Brook residents. Four of those people actually signed petitions objecting to the development of Forest Gate and then bought homes in the subdivision. He felt that was a reward because if at first they were opposed and then support it, then he must have done something right; and that is what he is attempting to do here, something right. Member Nimry said that Mr. Callaghan made a statement that the revised plan was the result of a compromise and asked for an explanation. Mr. Callaghan responded that it was based on the numerous public hearings with the Plan Commission and the public. He reevaluated the plan and was willing to reduce VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 17 of 23 July 26, 2006 WW-4-01 the density so that there would not be as much opposition. He thought that the original plan was acceptable, and reworked it to create a transition in zoning on the site. Member Nimry asked what the previous option C was in regards to emergency access. Mr. Callaghan responded that it was not included because it was no longer an option that would have meant access through Breakenridge Farm. They have already stated that litigation would take place to not allow emergency access go through, so he said he was not looking for a fight. Member Nimry said that the calculations provided did not deduct the pond areas. Mr. Callaghan responded that he did not deduct it for any of the subdivisions, He bought every preliminary plat in Oak Brook and on every plat, it shows gross acres and gross density, which are the numbers he used. The numbers were those stamped on each plat and on file with the village. Member Nimry asked how the ponds would be accessed. If someone comes in to do work on the pond, it will tear up someone's yard. Mr. Callaghan said that he'does that type of repair at Forest Gate now and none of the yards has gotten torn up. They have designed some 23 ponds, and have only had issue with one pond and they laid plywood down on the grass to drive over, picked it up, and within a week you could not tell it had been driven over. Member Ascher questioned the berm, because the wall in Forest Gate was a total surprise and asked how high the berm would be on the Route 83 side. Mr. Callaghan said that he has proposed a 9 -foot wall, 3 feet has to be below the frost line, so the concrete wall would be about 6 -feet wall exposed, which is nowhere as tall as the 18 --foot wall at Forest Gate and Jorie Blvd. He said that he is leaving an approximate 4 -foot distance between the concrete wall and the property. When they dig the foundation wall, 3 feet of over dig is required, because they cannot go onto their property. The over dig will also facilitate the ability to landscape along the concrete wall with ivy, etc. and with several years, the wall will be green. Member Ascher asked about the safety feature of the ponds. Mr. Callaghan said that they are at least 15 -feet depth, which is in the middle of the ponds. In the Subdivision Regulations, the village has instituted some policy for the design of the ponds. All ponds in the village are required to have an 8 -foot safety shelf, approximately 21 to 24 inches below the water level, which is usually at the edge of the sod. If a children or an adult that cannot swim would happen to fall in the pond, they would be able to stand up. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 18 of 23 July 26, 2006 Member Bulin questioned how many of the 1100 trees surveyed were over the 12 -inch caliper. He did not bring the tree survey, but could have the answer at the next meeting. All of the trees were 10 inches or larger. Member Bulin questioned the size of the walls around the ponds on the site. Mr. Callaghan said that they vary in size. The tallest retaining wall will not be higher than 5 feet. If necessary, any wall larger than that would be tiered to break it up. Mr. Callaghan commented about the "wall" at Forest Gate. He said that area was cut down approximately 2 feet. When the village improved Jorie Blvd., the elevation was changed to the property; the elevation was reduced and approximately 20 feet was cut out of Jorie Blvd., about 30 years ago. At that time, they just cut straight through leaving a one to one slope. No one ever saw it because of the existing vegetation that had grown on it to see how severe it was. Member Bulin asked if the private roads would meet the village standards. Mr. Callaghan said it would comply with village standards. He also noted the many lots in the village that are nonconforming lots that do not comply with the minimum lot area standards for the zoning district they are in. In Ginger Creek 3 out of 4, do not meet the minimum lot area requirements. Member Bulin questioned the economic factor in making the project work in rezoning the property. Mr. Callaghan responded that it should not be looked at as an economic factor for the developer; it needs to be looked at as an economic factor for the community. If there was a 2 -acre lot available on Adams and one by Route 83 for the same price, the one that would be bought would be the one on Adams. Chairman Davis asked if the project was approved, how long it would take for completion of the project. Mr. Callaghan responded that he is anticipating selling between one -half to two- thirds of all the lots. About 40 people are presently interested in buying them, around 20 are Oak Brook residents, and they are waiting to see what happens. He realizes with this type of housing it will take a long period of time, perhaps 10 -15 years. He is not interested in doing something that long. By selling those lots it will promote diversity in the neighborhood, because there will be other builders in the neighborhood. Member Ascher asked if the front entryway gates were conforming. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that they are. Mr. Callaghan added that the fire department has also reviewed them. Member Young asked if the mounds on the property were due to dumping on VILLAGE OF OAK. BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 19 of 23 July 26, 2006 the lot at one time. Mr. Callaghan responded no; that the mounds were due to the buckthorn mulch piles. Mr. Morrissey addressed the zoning amendment factors. He said that the application presented was supported by various experts' testimony. The memo on file correlates the LaSalle and Sinclair pipeline factors. 1. Character of the neighborhood • There has been testimony that Hunter Trails to the north is zoned R- 2. Old Oak Brook to the northeast was zoned R -1 and is now zoned R -2. The bulk of Fullersburg Woods has zoning from R -1 to R -3. To the southeast is Birchwood, Pine, Cheval Lane and is also R -2. The property to the south of the forest preserve is in the Village of Hinsdale and the zoning is foOr 30,00 square foot lots. They suggest that the proposal is compatible with the surrounding community. Testimony is in the record as to why they need to transition on the 34 acres. The 34 acres are part of the 57 -acre parcel because they need to deal with Route 83, which is a unique situation. They believe the proposal is compatible with the surrounding area and also believe that it meets the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Those pages were also cited for the record. 2. The extent to which property values are diminished by the particular zoning restrictions. • The evidence is to the contrary. Mr. MaRous testified to the impact of Briarwood Lakes on Brook Forest, which in fact was a positive impact. Mr. Callaghan spoke to the impact of Forest Gate on Hunter Trails and surrounding properties. They noted that the property along Route 83 takes longer to sell if it is along the boundary of Route 83, which can take up to a year to sell compared to 6 -9 months. 3. The extent to which the removal of the Existing Limitations Would Depreciate the Value of Other Property in the Area. • They do not believe anything has been presented into the record that would indicate the development would depreciate the value of the other homes in the area. The evidence is to the contrary. The proposal removes the uncertainty of what happens to the area. Factually, there is a low- density single - family residential proposed subdivision. Before the Plan Commission the project started out with 44 units and Mr. Cappetta was persuasive, public testimony was persuasive that there should be lower density. They did not VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 20 of 23 July 26, 2006 e7��e agree with the numbers that were given, however, in the spirit of compromise Mr. Callaghan has come up with a 35 -unit plan that they think meets, and exceeds the expectations of the Comprehensive Plan and the Ordinance. 4. The Extent to Which the Proposal Promotes the Health, Safety, Morals or General Welfare of the Public. The uncertainty is removed. Approval of this process will take the last large parcel of vacant land in the village and provide for it to be single family. It will be a rustic setting with an urban development surrounding it. They think that is very compatible with the neighborhood and what the public wants. The engineer testified that the loop water system would actually benefit the water supply to eliminate flushing and increase volumes not only for Breakenridge Farms but also for this development. The Flagg Creek Reclamation District has said that the sanitary sewer is adequate for this project. There is public benefit because there will be sales tax revenue, and real estate tax that will benefit the school districts 5. The suitability of the Property for Zoned Purposes • They cannot think of a better result than a low - density residential development that is compatible with the benchmark subdivisions that already exist in the community, which is what they are doing with this project. The project if approved will be the lowest density projects in the Village, which should be applauded in this day and age, which the board members have pointed out with the rising interest rates and an economy that is changing. They believe most of the people that come here will be able to do the financing. They are proud that they have come to the Village with the lowest density project in the community. Mr. Callaghan testified that the default zoning for the village is R -1. ■ The Oak Brook Club at 16th and Spring Road, which was built under DuPage County, remains R -1. The authors of the Comprehensive Plan said that they did not want to create a special category of zoning for that purpose, so they left it R--1 intestinally, because they did not want that high density. 6. Existing Uses and Zoning of Nearby Properties. ■ They have reviewed on the map the surrounding uses and zoning and reviewed the Comprehensive Plan. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 21 of 23 July 26, 2006 11�­� 7. The Length of Time Under the Existing Zoning that the property has remained unimproved considered in the context of land development. ■ In 1966, this property came into the village as R -l. All of the acreage around it was R -1. The only remaining R -1 is Breakenridge Farm and the eastern tier of this property that Mr. Callaghan testified will remain R -1. Hunter Trails came in as one acre and remained one acre, just a classification change. Old Oak Brook was R -1 it is R -2; Briarwood Lakes was R -1 it is R -4; Brook Forest was R -1 it is R -3; Trinity Lakes was R -1 it is R -3. Mr. Callaghan is not asking for R -3 or R -4; this project is consistent with the community, compatible with the village code and is what the members of the community expect. 8. The Relative Gain to the Public as Compared to the Hardship Imposed on the Individual Property Owner. ■ The uncertainty is gone. There would be a residential development of 35 homes. They project 121 -123 residents and approximately 24 new schoolchildren. The property will generate tax revenue for the school districts and for the Park District. They do not see any hardship or burden to the public. They understand and are sympathetic to the traffic volume on 35"' Street. They are dealing with the situation, as it exists. They had nothing to do with the condemnation that created the 50 -foot strip along the western boundary of the property; that is why there is access from 35th Street and nowhere else. Despite the written memorandum in the file from the Fire Chief, they will not seek access through Breakenridge Fanns for emergency access, in cooperation with the neighbors. The gain will be a development that everyone can be proud. , The gain is the development of the property, the tax revenue, and the single - family low - density development. 9. The Relationship of the Proposed Use to the Comprehensive Plan. They believe the plan is in spirit and in fact compatible with the comprehensive plan. On page 64 of the Comprehensive Plan, it suggests that the 34 acres on the east side of Route 83 at Kensington and Jorie would be appropriate for R -4 development. Mr. Callaghan is not seeking R -4 or R -3, that exists elsewhere in the village and that is appropriate where it is located. They are seeking R -2 for the 34 acres and they believe it is keeping and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 22 of 23 July 26, 2006 10, Community Need for the Use Proposed by the Property Owners. a The proposed use fits well with a need in the community. Mr. Morrissey noted that the written factors are contained in the case file. The ordinance uses similar and compatible language with the Sinclair pipeline and LaSalle Factors. The Illinois Supreme has said that the factor that is the most important, but not be taken separate from the others is the character of the neighborhood for the existing uses of nearby property. The Illinois Supreme Court has suggested this is a critical factor but you cannot detach or unlink it from the other factors in the ordinance. They all have to be looked at. Motion by Member Young, seconded by Member Nimry to continue the public hearing to a special meeting on August 29, 2006 at 7 :00 p.m. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 6 — Members Ascher, Bulin, Krietsch, Nimry, Young and Chairman Davis Nays: 0 -- None. Absent: 1 — Member Shah. Motion Carried. 4. ADJOURNMENT: ADJOURNMENT Motion by Member Krietsch, seconded by Member Nimry to adjourn the meeting at 9:26 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. ATTEST: Robert Kallien, recto ommunity Development Secretary VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 23 of 23 July 26, 2006 11��