Minutes - 08/02/2011 - Zoning Board of AppealsMINUTES OF THE AUGUST 2, 2011 REGULAR
MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF
THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK APPROVED AS
WRITTEN ON FEBRUARY 7, 2012
1. CALL TO ORDER: CALL To ORDER
The 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 7:01 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL: ROLL CALL
Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons
PRESENT: Chairman Champ Davis, Members Natalie Cappetta, Baker
Nimry, Steven Young and Wayne Ziemer.
ABSENT: Member Jeffrey Bulin
IN ATTENDANCE: Robert Kallien, Jr., Director of Community Development
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MINUTES
REGULAR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF MARCH 1
2011
Motion by Member Young, seconded by Member Ninny to approve the
minutes of the March 1, 2011 Regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting as
written. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried.
REGULAR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF JUNE 27,2011
Motion by Member Ziemer, seconded by Member Young to approve the
minutes of the June 27, 2011 Regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting as
written. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried.
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS UNFINISHED
BUSMSS
A. GROTTO OAK BROOK — 3011 BUTTERFIELD ROAD — SPECIAL GROTTO - 3011
BUTTERFIELD RD -
USE —AMEND CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN ORDINANCE S -1117 SPECIAL USE -
AMEND ORD S -1117
Chairman Davis reviewed the procedure for this meeting advising the public to
keep comments and testimony regarding the Grotto to events that have taken
place since the last Zoning Board meeting because previous testimony has
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 1 of 13 August 2, 2011
already been heard.
Chairman Davis swore in those that testified at this hearing.
Don Lullo, General Manager, the Grotto Oak Brook, reported that Mr. Cline,
from Cline & Associates performed the acoustical studies requested by the
Village. They collected data from two testing points in from the perimeter of
the site and one set of data collected from the 12'h floor patio of a residence of
the tower facing the site.
The Cline and Associates report stated that while the Village "Performance
Stands" in Section 13 -3 -10, calls for measurements to be taken from a point not
less than 25 feet from the property line noise source, this area is covered by the
retention pond. In discussions with Robert Kallien, Director of Community
Development Kallien of Community Development, it was agreed to take
measurements at two points along the property line. The first test point along
Butterfield Road to the south and a second test point along Meyers Road to the
northeast of the pond in line with the direction of the residential towers. Both
test points were located well back from the road along the berm leading down
to the pond. They also performed testing from a 12'h floor residence patio at 20
N. Tower facing the site to track general ambient noise levels and attempted to
identify music levels coming from the patio DJ activities. Test point locations
were annotated on the GIS study map provided by the Village and included in
the case file.
The results noted that the site is located within a contiguous commercial district
along a six -lane divided highway. Similar light to moderate traffic movements
were noted during all testing periods late in the evening. Not surprisingly for a
commercial district, ambient noise levels were somewhat high especially in the
lower frequency bands. They also noted music emissions coming from the
Champps restaurant patio across Butterfield Road to the south that could be
contributing noise reaching the residential tower.
Measurements showed ambient levels during DJ activities tracking relatively
closely to measurements taken just prior. Clearly levels at both test points were
well below the Village 60 -dba limits in all frequency ranges.
Measurements at the residential tower were inconclusive showing generally
higher ambient noise levels associated with adjacent commercial districts
slightly below those measured on site. Listing tests indicated only occasional
designable crowd or musical content coming from the Grotto patio masked
within ambient noise levels. It was important to note that the resident reported
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 2 of 13 August 2, 2011
that perceivable noise levels from the club had dropped recently perhaps
attributable to management actions as recommended in their earlier report.
He had summarized the noise reduction recommendations sent in an email to
the Village and summarized it by stating, that per Cline & Associates they have
followed all of their recommendations, they relocated patio speakers to the
canopy frame side and aimed laterally (north to south) along the seating area
versus outward. This was done to minimize direct transmission over the pond
towards the residential towers.
They have rotated wall mounted speakers 90- degrees taking advantage of the
U- bracket mounting system to aim the loudspeakers downward towards the
center of the adjacent patio dining areas.
The patio foreground music speakers are fed from the portable DJ system and a
separate control has been installed to keep remote loudspeaker levels in check
to management established levels. Additionally, sourcing from the left -right
mono sum bus is better suited for the remote fill loudspeaker applications such
as applied, have been set up. This is the result of the testing done by Cline &
Associates.
On behalf of the Grotto, he said that they have spent over $6,000 trying to
comply in order to get a recommendation. The testing results, as requested were
presented to the board in the case file.
He noted that on July 14, 2011, there was a call made from the residential
towers to the Oak Brook Police Department and that the responding officer
stated as follows: "The responding officers responded for loud music complaint
by a resident of the Oak Brook Towers possibly coming from the Grotto
Restaurant. Upon their arrival the responding officer checked the area and
observed that the Grotto was closed for the evening. Upon checking the area
further, the responding officers observed that there was loud music coming
from the patio area of the Redstone restaurant, which partially faces the Oak
Brook Towers."
The Grotto followed up on any complaints that were received. The past Friday
they had a temporary DJ and the music did get a little loud, which was
corrected immediately. Their normal DJ's know that they have been working
with the Village and with Cline & Associates to keep the music levels down to
an acceptable level.
He has spoken strongly on behalf of the Grotto and has monitored that there
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 3 of 13 August 2, 2011
have not been any complaints from any other residential building, condo or
apartment, except for the Towers. It just seems hard to believe that this music
is only affecting a certain group of people, when no one else around the area
hears or has complained from any other location.
They followed all of the recommendations made by Cline & Associates and the
reports are in the case file. The speakers have all been relocated.
Member Young referred to the conclusion of the Cline & Associates report
(page 32.b of the case file) and noted that the noise measurements were well
within or below the Village limitations. In addition, on top of that, the Grotto
has implemented controls to reduce the noise further.
He asked several questions of Mr. Lullo, such as whether any complaints had
been received regarding the noise from co- workers, OSHA, or patrons of the
Grotto. He questioned whether any letters had been received from any citizen
group, National Association of Realtors or anyone else saying that property
values have been diminished due to the noise. He asked if he had received
anything from an engineering or structural engineering firm that any of the
Tower buildings had been damaged by noise from the Grotto. He asked if any
medical evidence had been received from any doctor or specialist saying that
the music has aggravated anyone's condition. He questioned whether he had
received any contrary measurements or engineering controls by a registered
Illinois engineer.
Mr. Lullo responded no to each question posed by Member Young.
Chairman Davis questioned the date and day of the week of the noise complaint
that was made when the Grotto was closed.
Mr. Lullo responded that it was Thursday, July 14, 2011.
Member Ziemer questioned the time that the DJ's stop. He also questioned
whether the aerators in the pond run 24 hours. He asked if all the
recommendations made by Cline & Associates had been implemented.
Mr. Lullo responded that they stop at approximately 1:30 a.m. He added that
on the complaint dated July 8, 2011 the officer said that when they came to the
Grotto the music had already stopped for the evening. As far as the aerators,
they are supposed to be on in order to control the algae, but sometimes they are
not on. He personally went over all of the recommendations with Cline &
Associates to ensure that they had been implemented.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 4 of 13 August 2, 2011
,VL�
Robert Mesch, 20 North Tower Road, 31d floor, questioned if the testing had
been as a blind test or if the Grotto knew they were being tested.
Mr. Lullo responded that they did know the test date, but that Cline &
Associates would not allow anyone from Grotto management around when they
were doing the testing or to be around the equipment. When the testing was
done on the resident's patio, neither the resident nor Mr. Lullo was allowed on
the patio.
Mr. Mesch said that since the Grotto knew when the testing was being done the
volume level could have been turned down and questioned whether the
Member Young questioned whether the Homeowner association had hired an
engineer or someone that had provided counter test measurements or testimony.
Mr. Mesch responded no.
Dominic Ruggerio, 3 North Tower Road, President of the Oak Brook Towers
townhome and homeowner associations, in unincorporated DuPage County,
said that on behalf of the homeowners he phoned and left a message for Mr.
Lullo at the Grotto on Saturday evening at 11:35 p.m. He did not receive a
response. He was on his patio that evening and the music was very loud. He
took exception to a comment in the Cline report that some of the music was
coming from Champps. He noted that the speakers at Champps are little
speakers that can barely be heard at the restaurant. At no time have the
members of the Plan Commission or Zoning Board made an effort to go listen
to the music. It has been over 2 '/x years and they have operated without a
permit and he there hasn't been any help given by the Village. They are aware
they are in unincorporated DuPage County. A lot of money goes from the
Towers to the businesses in the Oak Brook community.
Chairman Davis addressed the comment regarding board members not going to
visit the Grotto. He noted that he has been there on a couple of occasions, one
being very late on the past Friday evening. The music was loud on the patio,
then they drove in the car down Butterfield Road they could not hear anything.
They drove through the Towers parking lot and could not hear any music at all
from the Grotto, but they could hear the music coming from the Redstone.
They continued down Butterfield Road, and the music that was coming from
the Redstone was extremely loud. That was all they could hear on Butterfield
Road was the music that was coming from the Redstone. The Village is
involved and concerned about the matter and he took issue with the comment
that was made.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 5 of 13 August 2, 2011
Member Young said that he was in the Towers parking lot with an octave band
meter and the cicadas actually spiked the meter reading.
Mr. Ruggerio said that none of that had been brought forth at the meetings. He
added that several residents offered their residences for testing.
Member Young said that he had a few questions and noted that considerable
testimony was given regarding not getting sleep, etc., and he noted that this
goes to damages, since this could ultimately go to the Illinois Pollution Control
Board courts. He questioned whether anything had been presented from any
doctor or specialist, citing any damages directly related to the music from the
Grotto. He questioned whether there had been any structural damage done to
any of the structures related to the music from the Grotto.
Mr. Ruggerio responded no.
He noted that from a court standpoint the applicable law would be under the
DuPage County Health Dept. noise ordinance, not Oak Brook, which is
enforceable. He clarified that he was not trying to insult Mr. Ruggerio. He said
that if there is tangible damage, he would vote against the request.
Mr. Ruggerio noted that an elderly resident testified that she had selpt on the
bathroom floor and her doctor had put her on medication. He did not have the
report and was not prepared to play 20 questions about health issues.
Member Young asked if an engineering firm had been hired to check for cracks
in the buildings or damage to windows as a direct result of the noise from the
Grotto or to refute the testimony given by Cline and Associates.
Mr. Ruggerio responded no. He said that he would not take homeowners money
for an engineering study for something that is not their issue. He added that it
has been going on for 2 '/z years without a permit and the matter keeps being
deferred.
Chairman Davis noted that the Grotto matter has not been before the Zoning
Board for 2 '/2 years. The Board is required to hear all of the evidence and the
Grotto was in the process of getting a report and making improvements to
lessen the sound and it is only fair that they were given the opportunity to do
that, which is why it had been continued to the present meeting.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 6 of 13 August 2, 2011
H�
Mr. Ruggerio said that with all the adjustments made, it has not quelled the
music.
Chairman Davis responded that there may be a real question where the music is
coming from and asked if thought had been given to that possibility and
whether they had driven by Redstone and heard that music playing.
Mr. Ruggrio responded that he had heard the music on Thursday, but not on
Saturday.
Chairman Davis said that it was very loud on Friday evening because he could
hear it from Butterfield Road.
Member Ziemer said that after the very first meeting he went to Redstone to
hear what was going on, as well as to the Grotto in order to hear it for himself,
firsthand.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that the residents have been
very patient and in Oak Brook there is a two step process that involves not only
the Plan Commission, but also the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ultimately the
Village Board will make the final decision. In all of his years as a planner, this
has been one of the most difficult cases that he has ever had.
William Lindeman, 11 Pembroke Lane commented that for almost eight months
sounds levels have been discussed along with the interference from the pond in
measuring the sound levels as specified in the ordinance. In his opinion the
pond does not interfere with the 25 foot measurement because there is adequate
space from the edge of the patio to the water.
Director of Community Development Kallien explained that when it is
measured fiom different locations from the edge of the patio wall to the wall it
varies from 38 to 42 feet, but there is a substantial elevation change from the
floor of the patio to the actual ground level, moat area with taller grasses and
the actual water feature. Technically, the 25 foot measurement would be
somewhere in mid -air; or 25 feet would not reach the water, and would be
somewhere below the patio into the grassy area. If the sound were measured at
the lower level, it would not give a reading that is being heard and expressed by
the residents of the Tower. In his opinion, what is shown at the perimeter has
greater bearing than what it does down below the patio.
Mr. Lindeman questioned if Mr. Kallien was qualified to offer that testimony
based certification in the measurement of sounds.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 7 of 13 August 2, 2011
V"-
Member Young responded that there is no measurement of sound certification.
Member Ziemer questioned that is was measured from the property line and
questioned if that was at the edge of the patio.
Director of Community Development Kallien responded that there are multiple
uses on the lot. Technically the property line is at Butterfield and Meyers Road
and goes to I -88. He said that he believed that there has to be some practical
judgment.
Mr. Lindeman said that he was disappointed that there was no attempt to
determine that the elevations would impact the readings. The Code reads that is
measured 25 feet from the source. He said that the source does not relate to
elevation, The main factor is that the code prohibits live entertainment, and
dancing. There was no request by the Grotto to approve dancing. He gave an
album for Mr. Kallien to view. He believed that in this recovering economy,
based upon the obvious large number of patrons as seen in the photographs, the
relief requested is not appropriate and would have extensive repercussions.
Member Nimry noted that some of what Mr. Lindeman noted was outside the
scope of the Zoning Board of Appeals and should be brought to the Village
Board.
There was a brief discussion on where the sound should be measured.
Director of Community Development Kallien responded that the ordinance was
modeled after many other sound ordinances and states that sound is to be
measured 25 feet from the sound source and/or the property line. The
differentiation is that most parcels have a physical nature to them that there are
not many uses placed on a single lot, similar to that of the Oakbrook Center.
He was of the opinion that if the sound reading is taken from below the decibel
level would be lower than what is taken at the sheet level. Sound is an energy
and tends to go in straight lines, and can be deflected by physical properties.
Member Young said that it is affected by physical properties such as water and
vapor, because sound carries.
Chairman Davis asked for comments from the board. He noted that the Zoning
Board of Appeals is an advisory board with a recommendation going to the
Village Board, which makes the ultimate decision.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 8 of 13 August 2, 2011
�i
Member Young said that the issues fall under two items in the special use
permit and whether or not they fall under the public health, safety provision and
whether it would impact the value of real estate and no evidence has been
provided. As to the questions he asked, they were from the interest of protecting
the Village from ancillary liability and litigation. The questions were on point
and needed to be asked in order to protect the Village.
Member Nimry suggested that a condition that both parties pay for two studies
that would be done unannounced and performed by the Village over the next 12
months.
Member Cappetta said that she did not believe a condition could be attached to
the residents since they are not a party to the request.
Chairman Davis suggested that the condition could be included that blind
studies be done.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that there is not a standard in
place to deal with the issue, which is part of the problem. The sound regulations
are in place to measure the sound, As such, the Village could conduct a few
unannounced sound tests. The village needs to create a standard by which
could be measured to say whether it is over or under.
Member Cappetta noted that there are parameters in place with a timeframe and
decibel level, so it is not whether or not it "seems" to be loud, Looking at the
police reports, where they say that it does or does not sound loud. The Village
has created sound regulations that either cannot be enforced or is not enforced.
She questioned whether the _police officers have the ability to test decibel levels,
as to whether they are trained or have the necessary equipment. If they don't
have the equipment or have not been trained, then either the ordinance or the
enforcement of the ordinance needs to be fixed. The only testimony that has
been received is that the Grotto is within the limits. The testimony where it is
stated that it is loud or not loud is subjective and does not address the
ordinance. The only hard numbers the board has is what was in the report from
Cline & Associates, which states the numbers are okay with the ordinance.
Because it is okay, does not necessarily mean that it is not too loud. If the
numbers are not good, then something needs to be done, which would mean it
would go the Village Board, to be referred back to review the ordinance. The
numbers are concrete.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 9 of 13 August 2, 2011
g /1,
Member Young said that DuPage County has adopted the Illinois Noise Control
Ordinance from 1972. For an A regulated area, the decibel readings are
between 72 to 75 decibels, which are 5 to 8 percent higher than Oak Brook's.
He noted that this adds to the frustration, since the DuPage County Noise
Ordinance applies to the Tower residents. He questioned which one should
prevail. From an enforcement standpoint, should this be something that the
police depatKment is involved in, or should it be handled by the DuPage County
Sheriff's office. Should it be handled by the DuPage County Health Dept., and
should the IEPA (Illinois Environmental Protection Agency) come in to do a
study. The question is where the line is drawn. These are all valid ways to
look at this issue. In addition, there has not been any testimony given regarding
Butterfield Road, and the noise, which is an ancillary issue, as well as things
like Redstone and how much noise is being generated from there. All of these
things are going to contribute to the noise pattern in their building.
Member Ziemer said that the ordinance has time controls, from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
and then from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. He questioned whether there could be another
set of standards providing a middle ground, from midnight to 7 a.m., where a
level of reduction should be in force, because people need to sleep. At
midnight a resident may expect things to settle down a bit. There may be
another level of sound reduction that may be appropriate.
Member Cappetta said that was a great point, but that it may not be appropriate
to make it an exception to the request. The issues should not be micromanaged
and dealt with as they come up. If the 60 decibel reading is a problem with
Grotto, then it is a problem everywhere. If 60 is determined to be too loud, then
it is too loud.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that when the sound
ordinance was reviewed by the Zoning Board, it was suggested that if it was
found to be deficient at the time of enforcement, then it would be fixed.
Suggestions have been made by the members to make it better. He suggested
that as part of the recommendation to ask that the ordinance be reviewed to
make it as good, clear, concise and create expectations that everyone would
understand.
Member Cappetta noted that under special use conditions, she did not believe
that the Grotto could be held to a different standard than what is contained and
allowed in the zoning ordinance If the ordinance is wrong, then in a separate
action the ordinance should be reviewed and amend and correct it. If it is then
determined that different standards, time or decibels then those changes would
apply to everyone in the Village, including the Grotto.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 10 of 13 August 2, 2011
��jc.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that some reasonable
conditions could be attached to an approval by agreement with the applicant,
such as the operational plan, as long as it does not go against the intent of the
underlying Village Code.
Member Nimry noted that the Grotto has already done a lot of things requested
by the board as conditions, including moving the speakers.
Member Young said that the decibels numbers that are currently in the Code are
very consistent with the Federal Noise Control Act and the State Noise Control
Act, which has been adopted by DuPage County and twelve local ordinances.
The Village Code is actually quieter than the state and the county, which is a
positive aspect. If the Village desires to tighten it more, that could be done
later.
Chairman Davis reviewed the request for the timeframe and noted that the
timeframe has been eliminated in subsequent outdoor dining requests due to the
climate and weather. The intent is not to permit outdoor dining year round, but
rather to have the flexibility to operate at times before or after the imposed
dates.
Chairman Davis asked Mr. Lullo if all the recommended improvements by the
consultant been implemented at the Grotto. He also asked if it had been
discussed with the consultant to bring the music indoors after a certain time.
Mr. Lullo responded that they have all been made and that they had never
discussed bringing the music indoors. The patio is quite large which allows for
a comfortable environment for the patrons. The bar area takes up half of the
lounge area, and would probably only allow 20 -30 patrons indoors, due to the
location and layout.
Chairman Davis noted that the standards have been addressed by the applicant
in the case file.
Motion by Member Nimry, seconded by Member Ziemer to recommend
approval of the elimination of the timeframe for the outdoor dining areas as
stipulated hi special use Ordinance S -1117 for the Grotto Oak Brook, Kona
Grill and McCormick and Schmick. ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: 5 — Members Cappetta, Nimry, Young, Ziemer and Chairman Davis
Nays: 0
Absent: 1 — Member Bulin, Motion carried.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 11 of 13 August 2, 2011
�P�.
Motion by Member Cappetta, seconded by Member Young to recommend
approval of amending the condition in special use Ordinance S -1117 to allow
live music in the .outdoor dining area of the Grotto Oak Brook, subject to the
following conditions:
I. That the Grotto Oak Brook be required to continue and maintain the
operational plan that is in place along with the improvements that have
been made with regard to the placement of speakers and volume
controls as recommended by Cline & Associates. The improvements
are not to be changed or altered and to continue to look for ways to
improve the sound situation.
2. That the log book that is in place be maintained with any complaints
logged and addressed.
3. That on occasion the Village conducts blind tests with a noise meter to
ensure that the Grotto is complying with the Sound Levels as contained
in Section 13 -3 -10 of the Zoning Regulations,
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: 5 — Members Cappetta, Nimry, Young, Ziemer and Chairman Davis
Nays: 0
Absent: 1— Member Bulin. Motion cared. readdress
It was also recommended that the Village Board refer a review of the Sound
Regulations contained in Section 13 -3 -10 of the Zoning Regulations to the Plan
Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals. As part of that review process to
determine whether sound measurement readings should be taken from different
locations.
Chairman Davis also said that it should be noted that he was also concerned
that sound was coming from other areas beside the Grotto, such as the music
that had been heard coming from the Red Stone Restaurant.
5. NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business to discuss.
6. OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business to discuss
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 12 of 13 August 2, 2011
-P-1-
NEW BUSINESS
OTHER BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT:
Motion by Member Young, seconded by Member Ziemer to adjourn the
meeting at 8:32 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried
ATTEST:
/s/ Robert Kallien, Jr.
Robert Kallien Jr.
Director of Community Development
Secretary
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 13 of 13 August 2, 2011
ADJOURNMENT