Loading...
Minutes - 10/03/2000 - Zoning Board of AppealsVILLAGE OF OAK BROOK ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES October 3, 2000 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Members MEMBERS ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: Village Trustee Director of Community Development Village Engineer A quorum was present. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Champ Davis Richard Ascher George Mueller Manu Shah Ayesha Zaheer Paul Adrian Louis Aldini Alfred Savino Robert Kallien Dale Durfey Member Shah moved, seconded by Member Adrian, to waive the reading of the August 1, 2000, regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting minutes and to approve them as written. VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried. Ill. HAFF/BRIARWOOD LAKES COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION — 32 REGENT DRIVE — FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE and VARIATION Hank Haff, petitioner and property owner, relayed the history of the sale of the property. The seller had owned the property for 30 years and many people were interested in buying it. He purchased the property and contracted with a buyer to build a new home on the site. When he applied for a building permit the Engineering Dept advised him that a portion of the property was in the 100 -year flood plain and the home could not be built as submitted. The property was nestled between two lovely homes and would never have suspected that it was in the flood plain. He tried to work with the realtor and the seller who knew but did not disclose the fact that the property was in the flood plain, but was unsuccessful. Finally, he was advised to approach Briarwood Lakes to see if they would allow the adjacent property to accommodate the compensatory storage requirements for the lot. He met with Briarwood Lakes Community Association President, Connie Xinos and was advised that they had a problem with the grading on the property where Haff was seeking the compensatory storage. Briarwood Lakes Community Association joined in the application for flood plain special use. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes 7 October 3, 2000 Chairman Davis questioned where the storage is in relationship to the subject property and how much fill is needed? Joe Hammer, Morris Engineering responded that the flood plain is at 669.8 and covers one -half to three - quarters of the property. The fill was calculated and relocated in the flood plain behind the proposed home and the compensatory storage will be provided on the Briarwood Lakes common area adjacent to the site. Chairman Davis asked if there are requirements as to where the storage is located in relationship to the property? Joe Hammer answered that it meets the requirements as long as it is connected to the subject property and will flow from the property into the storage area. Hank Haff stated that the development of the site is within the 100 -year flood plain which has a one percent chance or less of occurring each year. This development does not encroach on any of the more important or frequent events such as the 50 -year or 25 -year flood events. According to recent flood prevention projects in the watershed including the Quarry and dredging project, it is likely that the flood elevation has decreased since the most recent flood plain mapping and therefore, providing additional flood protection to neighbors. Hank Haff addressed the factors upon which recommendations for a flood plain special use permit shall be based. 1. The danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments. The proposed improvements will not put life or property in danger due to increase in heights or velocities. The improvements create additional flood plain that was not available prior to the proposed improvements. Therefore, there should be a decrease in flood elevation. Additionally, the compensatory storage at 1.5 to 1 will provide more storage than is actually on site right now. Instead of meeting the 205 cubic yards required, they are providing 220 cubic yards. Joe Hammer added that this would decrease the flood plain elevation, because they will be removing 50% more earth to provide more detention. 2. The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands, or cross - stream, upstream or downstream to the injury of others; The improvements will not introduce material that can be swept away during a flood. 3. The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of these systems to prevent disease, contamination and unsanitary conditions; The proposed improvements do not call for sanitary or water supply construction in flood plain. 4. The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owners; The proposed home will be no more susceptible to flood damage than either neighbor will on each side. The top of foundation is raised above flood plain and compensatory storage is provided. The top of foundation is going to be at 2 feet 2 inches above the base flood elevation, so they are sitting very secure. 5. The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community; The home will provide residence for a family and will void catastrophic economic hardship for the Haff family. The proposed improvements will create increased flood plain storage area, which improves the entire community and the ability to avoid major flood damage. Additionally, the improvements will eliminate a grading hazard at the shoreline. He phoned or visited with the surrounding property owners in the Brook Forest Subdivision and was delighted to see the support of a home being built there. Briarwood Lakes Community Association President, Connie Xinos visited with all the residents in the Briarwood Lakes Subdivision and received positive responses. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes October 3, 2000 2 6. The requirements of the facility for a waterfront location; The subject lot is adjacent to the Briarwood Lakes Community Association property where the watercourse exists. The original development of the subdivision intended for this lot to be built with a single family home. 7. The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development anticipated in the foreseeable future; The proposed improvements are the continuation of the surrounding subdivision. The subdivision is near build out, therefore, no more development will occur in the vicinity. The Briarwood Lakes Community Association has approved the compensatory storage and grading. 8. The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and flood plain management program for the area; It is anticipated that the proposed improvements meet both the comprehensive plan and flood plain management program. 9. The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles; Access to the property during a flood condition is not affected by the elevation of the flood. 10. The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport of the floodwaters expected at the site; It is anticipated that the heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport will be unaffected. 11. Such other factors which are relevant to the purposes of this article. Not applicable. In conclusion, the issues are in regards to the 100 -year flood event. They will be enhancing the property values and the Brook Forest Community Association is supportive of the project Approval to build the home as requested will not disrupt the community in any way. The changes in the grading along the shoreline are added safety factors. This is not about making money, it is about saving him and his family and also providing a home for the Mullins'. Most importantly, the project will be done the correct way and with the additional compensatory storage it will be a better situation than it is now. He respectfully requested a favorable recommendation. No one in the audience spoke in support of or in opposition to the proposal. Chairman Davis noted that the Plan Commission minutes reflected comments from the neighbor regarding his concerns regarding whether the development would cause flooding of his property. Hank Haff responded that the neighbor was concerned with water run -off onto his property. The neighbor was in agreement with the project so long as it is engineered to work the way it is designed. Member Mueller moved, seconded by Member Ascher, that the Flood Plain Special Use as requested is deemed necessary for the public convenience and will be operated so that the public health, safety and welfare are protected and there will be no substantial injury to other property in which it is located. The petitioner has met the requirements necessary to recommend the Flood Plain Special Use for approval subject to the development in substantial conformance with the plans as submitted. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 5 - Ascher, Mueller, Shah, Zaheer, and Davis Nays: 0- Absent: 2 - Adrian and Aldini Motion Carried. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes October 3, 2000 3 Chairman Davis asked the petitioner to proceed with his request for the Variation. Hank Haff said that the building plans submitted showed a walkout basement design, which was part of the contract with the buyers. He had a meeting with Engineer Durfey regarding the possibility of requesting a variation seeking two feet above the base flood elevation, rather than the three required by Village Code. He said that in 1977 when the code was adopted, the Village had based the three - foot figure to be conservative. However, Dale Durfey had indicated to Hank Haff that he would be comfortable with 2 feet 2 inches above the foundation. This will place the foundation higher than most on the block, but from an aesthetic value it will not tower over the other homes. He believes it is a fair compromise and will suit everyone's needs. Chairman Davis asked how much difference would exist between the homes. Hank Haff responded that the top of foundation would be 1.5 feet higher than the home to the north and .75 feet higher than the home to the south. Chairman Davis asked the distance between the structures. Joe Hammer responded that they would be 36 -50 feet apart. Joe Hammer responded to Variation standards set forth in Section 10.35 of the Zoning Ordinance as follows: 1. A showing of good and sufficient cause. The request for variance in this situation, lowering the required elevation above the base flood elevation to just over two feet is justifiable by current standards within surrounding jurisdictional agencies. DuPage County as well as many others required one foot above the flood plain. FEMA requires zero feet above. The State of Illinois requires only one foot and some local communities have one or two foot requirements. 2. A determination that failure to grant the variation would result in exceptional hardship to the applicant. The variance would allow the structure to be built on the site. Without the variance the proposed home cannot be built on the site and the contract would be lost. The failure to grant this variation would cause exceptional financial hardship for the Haff family and the loss of a home for the buyer. 3. A determination that the variation will not result in increased flood heights, additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, create nuisances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public, conflict with other existing ordinances or conflict with the intent of this article. The variance will not result in an increase in flood elevations. The variation does not affect the base flood elevation. It will not threaten public safety and the improvements will not increase flood elevations or impede flow of stormwater runoff. The extraordinary expense will be funded privately and will not require any additional public improvements. The variation will not create a nuisance as it will create a single - family home that will fit in with the community. The variation will not cause fraud on or victimize the public. The variation will not conflict with any other Village ordinances. The variation will not conflict with the intent of the ordinance. Reducing the minimum elevation to 2 feet 2 inches remains one of the most stringent requirements among other communities including the county and state. Chairman Davis questioned what was the hardship? Hank Haff responded that if the variation were not granted the windows would not be able to installed which would cause the loss of the contract and the beauty of this property is the view of the water. He said that he could not express the amount of money that has already been spent on this project. He is looking at trying to recover the costs and trying to resolve the situation and hopefully break even. Chairman Davis clarified that without the variation, the windows cannot be included. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes October 3, 2000 4 �k Joan Mullins, contract /purchaser of the proposed home, was sworn in and said that she is in support of the proposal and is not worried about the flood plain issue with the compensatory storage being provided as planned. She said that the property back ups to the water and it is a beautiful lot with the water view. They currently live in Oak Brook and said there are very few vacant parcels left. They were looking to move into the Brook Forest School District. They had contracted to have either a walkout or English basement installed which requires the granting of the variance. She had spoken to the neighbors and no one had a problem with the proposal. One neighbor had stated that they lived there during the flood in the 80's without a problem, and they are not concerned now. No one in the audience spoke in opposition to the variation request. Robert Kallien, Director of Community Development, said that item 4, in Dale Durfey's memo dated September 12, 2000, it clearly states that the new home will sit higher than the surrounding homes. This is a good compromise and shows sensitivity to the neighboring properties. Member Zaheer questioned Engineer Durfey whether the homes to the north and south of the property are in the flood plain? Dale Durfey responded that he believes one of the homes is in the flood plain. Hank Haff said that he had asked Mr. Skowron, who lives directly south, whether he pays any flood insurance, and he said that he does not. Member Shah, moved, seconded by member Zaheer that the petitioner has satisfied the statutory criteria to grant the request, and to recommend for approval the variation as requested subject to the development in substantial conformance with the plans as submitted. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 5 - Ascher, Mueller, Shah, Zaheer, and Davis Nays: 0- Absent: 2 - Adrian and Aldini Motion Carried. IV. ADJOURNMENT Member Shah moved, seconded by Member Mueller to adjourn the meeting. VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried. Meeting was adjourned at 8:09 p.m. --�L Director of Community Development Secretary December 5, 2000 Date Approved ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes October 3, 2000 5