Loading...
Minutes - 08/04/2009 - Zoning Board of AppealsMINUTES OF THE AUGUST 4, 2009 REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOD. APPROVED AS WRITTEN ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2009 1. CALL TO ORDER: CALL TO ORDER i 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 7:30 p.m. ' 2. ROLL CALL: ROLL CALL i Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons PRESENT: Chairman Champ Davis, Members Jeffrey Bulin, Baker Nimry, Joseph Rush and Steven Young ABSENT: Members Glenn Krietsch and Wayne Ziemer IN ATTENDANCE: Mark Moy, Trustee and Robert Kallien, Jr., Director of j Community Development 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MINUTES REGULAR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF JULY 7, 2009 Motion by Member Young, seconded by Member Rush to approve the minutes of the July 7, 2009 Regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting as written. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business to discuss. UNFINISHED BUSINESS S. NEW BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. GROTH — 44 WINDSOR DRIVE — VARIATION — SECTION 13 -3--14 44 WI-I - 44 WINDSOR DR TO ALLOW DRIVEWAY GATES ON A LOT OF LESS THAN TWO VARIATION - (2) ACRES DRIVEWAY GATES i Chainnan Davis swore in all parties that would testify. David Jolivette, 10 S. LaSalle Street, Chicago, IL. 60603, Attorney for the VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 1 of 10 August 4, 2009 applicant reviewed the request for approval of a variation to allow driveway gates on a property with less than the 2 acre minimum requirement. He noted that the property is part of the York Woods Subdivision, which does not have an architectural review committee and there is nothing in the covenants to prohibit driveway gates. The property is unique in that it is a .95 acre flag lot and the house cannot be seen from the street because of the long drive. The property abuts the Drake Hotel and they have had problems for years with people walking down the driveway perhaps thinking that it goes to the hotel. The driveway is over 400 feet long and the house is located toward the back of a very long narrow driveway. The problem is not those that pull in to turn around on the apron, it has been a problem when they do not turn around, but instead drive up to the house. One time someone drove down to the house and hit it with her car, in an attempt to trying to turn the car around. It becomes a security situation due to the unique layout of the lot because it is not obvious that a house is located back there until people come down. The gates intend to stop people from coming all the way down to the house, because it is quite isolated. The gates would be set back about 200 feet from the street. They are not seeking to make the gates prominent, but have them setback farther down the drive. The gates are wrought iron and there is landscaping on both sides of the driveway and will not change the character of the neighborhood. They will not be precedent setting, since they will not be located close to the street and will not be visible. Most long driveways in the area are 60 --100 feet long, but none are set back like these. The uniqueness of this lot is the shape of the lot and the hotel allows for strangers coming into the area and getting lost, which is not a problem that the other neighbors have. The gates will not have a detrimental impact on any of the surrounding property values. Marilyn Groth said that they submitted many details so the board would understand the problems they are having on their property. Chairman Davis said that he visited the property but did not see the tie-in into the Drake Hotel. Mrs. Groth responded that some of the problems are related to the tremendous amount of joggers, along with holiday and weekend guests of the hotel that i think they can go for a walk through their property. The gates tie into the traffic that people think they can get from Windsor Drive to the Drake hotel VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 2 of 10 August 4, 2009 through their driveway. People tour Oak Brook on the weekends looking at homes and their driveway looks more like a street than a driveway. The top of the Drake Hotel can be seen from the street and many of those walking from the offices in the area think that it is a short cut to go back through the Drake to the corporate offices. Chairman Davis questioned how the gate would prohibit that from occurring. Mrs. Groth said that anyone seeing a gate would stop and it would act as a deterrent from those attempting to access to the other side. They have had issues with solicitors, damage to their home, those that are lost and lewd acts having being done on their property. Mr. Groth responded that the issue of safety has become a big concern to them. A car drove back to the house at 1:00 in the morning blasting a boom box looking for the Drake Hotel; and they approached the door of their home. People are curious and drive back there frequently. Private property signs have been posted in an attempt to try to deter that from happening. Mrs. Groth added that it was amazing how many people tour the neighborhood. If there is a garage sale, hoards of people come; and have no idea where they are going and are confused. Chairman Davis asked if it was their perception that people mistake the driveway for a road. r ' The applicants agreed. Member Young asked whether a traffic study had been done by an engineer to see how many cars had come down their driveway. Mrs. Groth responded that she would not know that she would need to provide a traffic study for cars going on to her private property. Member Young asked for the gate details. Mr. Groth responded that it was a manual gate. Director of Community Development Kallien commented that the applicant was seeking relief to be able to place a gate on their property. The size and mechanical details of the gate would be controlled and regulated through the issuance of a building permit, if they successful and received approval for the VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 3 of 10 August 4, 2009 REM M-- -1 variation. Gates can exceed the height of fences. People have been creative with gates, which are usually tapered down at the ends. Member Young questioned whether they had considered adding any additional fencing around their property, Mrs. Groth responded that they had considered -adding a fence. Most of the time it has been curiosity that has drawn people back there. They have had people look into the windows and you do not know who is looking in. Their home is beautiful and they have a lot of art work; the situation has become a concern. Member Young questioned what the crime statistics were for the neighborhood. Mrs. Groth said that they were advised by the homeowner association in June that there had been two break -ins within the prior week. A young gentleman had come to their home soliciting and tried to break the door down. They did call the police who caught him in the bushes on the Drake property. Member Young asked whether police presence was adequate. Mr. Groth said that the police patrol and drive by; however, they are very far from the street at Windsor. Member Nimry noted that there are several issues occurring on their property. He drove onto the Drake property and noted that there were several properties that abut the hotel. Part of the problem is the bike path where people go from it onto the property. Mr. Groth said that the main problem they have is people driving down the driveway, which is the real intrusion. People from out of state tour the neighborhood and pull into the driveway, thinking perhaps that it is a road. Mrs. Groth said that in June two trespassers came onto their property at 1;00 in the morning and came to the front door, asking where the hotel was. She did tell a police officer the next morning who told her that he would file a report. Chairman Davis said that the intent behind the ordinance appears to be that the gates are located off of a roadway for aesthetics and the issue of safety. The proposed driveway gates are located well in back of the property as more of an accessory structure issue. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 4 of 10 August 4, 2009 Director of Community Development Kallien said that they would be held to the driveway gate section of the ordinance. Member Rush said that years ago, there were not many flag lots. Director of Community Development Kallien said that most of the flag lots in the Village are located within York Woods. The code is silent to driveway gates as an accessory structure; The front yard setback would not include the flag portion of the lot. Member Young questioned the safety issue for emergency access onto the property. He questioned that if the gates were not locked how they would provide security. Mr. Groth said that there would not be a lock on the gates. There is a rod and a latch, which would require the gates to be opened manually. The gates are meant to be a detergent. The property at 26 Baybrook has two gates on the driveway, set back about 20 feet from the end of the driveway, which are electrified; however the gates can be pushed open. Those gates are on a property with less than two acres and are definitely a deterrent. They have had people drive up, sit in the car and watch the house until they see someone look out the window, then they drive away, and he questioned who does something like that. Mr. Jolivette said that part of the problem is that the house is located so far back on the lot and with the angle of the driveway, if someone gets back there with a car, they can park it and no one would know that a car is there, which is unlike a typical house where the house is visible and anyone that would park a car on the driveway would be seen. Not only can a car not be seen from the street, but cannot be seen by any of the other houses adjacent to it. Mrs. Groth said that when they went on vacation last January they had asked friends to check on the house. When they got there, the window had been broken and their dog, which had been checked on daily, was in the basement. It appeared that someone tried to get into the house. There were tire tracks going up and down the driveway. They also have a security system on the house. Director of Community Development Kallien said that the way the Code is written, the key standard is that driveway gates are only allowed on properties with 2 acres or more. Out of all the properties in Oak Brook, 99 percent do not have the situation with the flag (lot). The language related to driveway gates in the Code was drafted without considering those few properties that are flag lots VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 5 of 10 August 4, 2009 and how a driveway gate request would relate to those. There are fewer than two dozen lots within the Village that are flag lots. There are some awkward shaped lots in the Fullersburg 'Woods area. Member Rush questioned why they wanted the gates placed back so far on the property, since it would seem that if the gates were closer to the roadway, people would stop before they turned onto the driveway because they would see the gates. i Mrs. Groth said that they were at that location because they could see the gates from their home and if they needed to open the gate, they wouldn't be walking several hundred feet to get to it. Member Nimry said that it would make more sense to have it closer to the road to prevent traffic from going down the driveway. Director of Community Development Kallien said that Oak Brook Hills Road has driveway gates at both ends of the street, which is a private street. The gate can be controlled by a keypad and the homeowners also can control it from within their house. If it is electrified, there could be an opticom signal or a Knox box that would contain the key for the gate. Mrs. Groth said that they decided on a manual gate in order to keep it simple and create privacy. They were not opposed to making it electrified. The driveway is wider than the standard driveway and their lot is the largest flag lot in York Woods. Virtually all of the other homes on flag lots in the subdivision can be seen as well as the house on the other lot against the Drake. Chairman Davis commented that all of the other homes can be seen from the street, but this one cannot, so it appears to look more like a street than a driveway. Mr. William Lindeman, 9 Pembroke Lane, commented that perhaps enough room could be provided on the lot to accommodate a three -point turn. Also, they could add a sign that says private property and no trespassing and identify it as not being a public thoroughfare. In regards to the issue of the site line to the home, many gated subdivisions have intercoms that allow approval of entry. It would be preferable to know the identity of a person rather than looking at a car. He noted that those were just some thoughts that he had. i Director of Community Development Kallien said that the comment to create a turn around area on the property would not be possible, since the width is only VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 6 of 10 August 4, 2009 20 feet, which is only 2 feet longer than an average parking stall. It would be physically impossible to make a three -point turn, unless you drove onto the neighbors' property. Chairman Davis commented that it was not difficult to drive in reverse in order to exit the driveway. i No one in the audience spoke in support of or in opposition to the request. i Chairman Davis noted that the standards had been addressed in the testimony presented and were provided in writing on page C of the case file. Mr. Jolivette summarized the standards as follows: 1. a. The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations governing the district in which it is located. RESPONSE: The property is already built out. 1. b. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances. RESPONSE: The property is unique as testified to. 1. c. The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. RESPONSE: It will not alter the essential character of the community. 2. a. The particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific property involved would bring a particular hardship upon the owner as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulation were to be carried out. RESPONSE: They testified to the conditions and hardships. 2. b. The condition upon which the petition for variation is based would not be applicable generally to the other property within the same zoning classification. RESPONSE: This is not a variation that would be generally applicable to other flag lot properties. 2. c. The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 7 of 10 August 4, 2009 neighborhood in which the property is located. RESPONSE: It would not be injurious or a detriment to the public or adjacent property owners. 2. d.The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the danger of fire, or otherwise endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. RESPONSE: Not applicable. 2. e. That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to make more money out of the property. RESPONSE: They are not seeking to make more money out of the property. 2. £ That the alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. RESPONSE: They have responded to this issue and the hardship has not been created by the applicants. Member Nimry questioned whether the motion should include the location for the gates. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that as part of the request the applicant has provided a picture of the gate that they would like to install and have identified a location where they would like to place the gate. Member Rush commented that the property owner already has signs posted on the property, so if someone does not obey the signs, then they can back out. Member Bulin commented that the applicant adequately explained why they would like to be able to have the gates located so that they can be seen from the house. With the passive nature of the gates, they do not need to be located by the street. The gates provide a barrier to keep people from driving back to the house. Motion by Member Rush, seconded by Member Bulin that the applicant addressed the required standards to recommend approval of the request to allow the construction of driveway gates on a property containing less than two acres and to be located as submitted on the plans. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 8 of 10 August 4, 2009 F 0 Pt- i V00to 1. Comply with all other applicable rules and ordinances of the Village of Oak Brook. 2. Add the provision "Not withstanding the attached exhibits, the applicant shall meet all Village Ordinance requirements at the time of building permit application except as specifically varied or waived." ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 4 — Members Bulin, Nimry, Rush and Davis Nays: 1 -- Member Young. Absent: 2 — Members Glenn Krietsch and Wayne Ziemer. Motion Carried. G. OTHER BUSINESS William Lindeman provided documents that he had intended to submit to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding McDonald's request for a variation. Chairman Davis asked Trustee Moy whether the McDonald's request for the parking variation had been voted on by the Village Board. Trustee Moy said that the matter has already been heard by the Village Board and had been approved unanimously. Chairman Davis advised Mr. Lindeman that the Zoning Board of Appeals did not have any authority to reconsider the request. Member Nimry noted that when the Village Board approved the request, two conditions had been included that were discussed and were part of the Zoning Board of Appeals recommendation. A condition was included that the Village, McDonalds and IDOT try to work on providing landscaping on IDOT property when the construction had been completed. Additionally, the approval included the provision that when all construction work was complete that McDonald's would discuss the reduced height of the landscape with Village staff, and at that time determine whether the landscape should be a minimum of two feet, or up to the required four feet. Director of Community Development Kallien said that the final ordinance would be on the Village Board agenda on August 11, 2009. Mr. Lindeman said that he believed it was a very unusual hearing held by the Zoning Board of Appeals. The file included a memo by Village Engineer Durfey that mentioned some of the approvals could be precedent setting. (Pictures of the trees on the McDonald's property were given to each Member). He is having an arborist examine the trees. They dre very healthy and have a VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 9 of 10 August 4, 2009 i OTHER BusNBSs VA lifespan in excess of 100 years as opposed to 50 as stated by McDonald's. He believed there was erroneous and misinformation given in this case. He also believed that it can now be determined how the project will look when the construction is finished. Director of Community Development Kallien said that when a landscape plan is required, it is usually based on a request for a special use, such as for the new McDonalds, the Promenade and Clearwater, because it became part of the site plan. The Village did not have Planned Unit Development Regulations effective at that tune. Under the PUD Regulations, landscape plans would become part of any development. Member Nimry said that the trees are on private property and the Village cainiot stop an individual from removing trees on their property. McDonald's stated that they would try to put some trees in when they build the parking lot. He attended the Village Board meeting and said that McDonald's made that commitment. Chairman Davis noted that the Zoning Board cannot reconsider the decision made in its recommendation. Mr. Lindeman said that by removing the trees, it makes the new McDonald's highly visible, which may have been their intention for wanting the trees removed. There was no other business to discuss. ADJOURNMENT: Motion by Member Rush, seconded by Member Nimry to adjourn the meeting at 8:42 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried ATTEST: Robert Kallien, D' ctor of Co unity Development Secretary VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 10 of 10 August 4, 2009 ADJOURNMENT