Loading...
Minutes - 10/07/2003 - Zoning Board of AppealsVILLAGE OF OAK BROOK ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES October 7, 2003 1. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting was called to order at 7:32 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: ALSO PRESENT: A quorum was present. ll. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairman Members Trustee Director of Community Development Champ Davis Richard Ascher George Mueller Robert Sanford Manu Shah Steven Young Ayesha Zaheer Stelios Aktipis Robert Kallien Member Shah moved, seconded by Member Sanford to waive the reading of the September 2, 2003 Regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting minutes and to approve them as written. VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried. 111. UNITED FINANCIAL MORTGAGE /SURE LIGHT SIGN /PLUM TREE NATIONAL — 815 COMMERCE DRIVE — VARIATION — TITLE 13 OF THE VILLAGE CODE — ZONING ORDINANCE — CHAPTER 13 -11 -11 — TO ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL 55 SQUARE FOOT WALL SIGN ON THE BUILDING Chairman Davis said that the petitioner has requested the matter be continued to the next meeting. Chairman Davis moved, seconded by Member Mueller to continue this hearing to the next regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting scheduled for November 4, 2003. VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried. IV. SHAH — 3308 MIDWEST ROAD — MAP AMENDMENT — REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM R -2 to R -3 Chairman Davis swore in all parties testifying. John Brechin, Attorney for the petitioner, Mr. Shah, said that the property is located on the west side of Midwest Road, south of the Oak Brook Christian Center. It was originally a 3 -acre parcel, but because of condemnations and other takings by the county for the widening of Midwest Road, in reality the property is approximately 2.63 acres. The property was rezoned to R -2 within the last two ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes ZBA- MTG.2003 -OCT 30*1 October 7, 2003 years, in light of the continued widening of Midwest Road; it does not conform to R -2 standards. They are seeking a rezoning of the property from R -2 to R -3. R -2 district standards require a minimum of one acre and R -3 district standards require a minimum of 25,000 square feet. If the property is successfully rezoned to R -3, Mr. Shah intends to return to the Village with a proposed 4 -lot subdivision. They have prepared a concept plan. They anticipate that development on all the lots will be consistent with the R -3 standards and will not necessitate any anticipated variations. They are hopeful that the totality of the circumstances presented will result in a favorable recommendation. The Plan Commission unanimously recommended approval of the proposed text amendment. Chairman Davis noted that due to the widening of the roadway, subdivision of the property would allow only 2 buildable lots under the R -2 zoning. If the request is approved, it would allow 4 buildable lots. Robert Kirk, owner and president of Group A Architects, is the architect for this project. They are designing all four lots at the same time so that they will be able to work around the existing trees on the site. There are a number of specimen trees that they have allocated space for and have designed around. They are looking for a central entrance along Midwest Road into a cul -de -sac. All setbacks will meet the R -3 standards and they are not going to be seeking any variations. The intent is to design all four houses as well as the garages with consistent materials and roofs. They feel they have met the requirements to receive approval for the rezoning. They feel it is in character of the neighborhood because the adjacent land on the east and west sides of the property are zoned R -3 and that it is the highest and best use for the land. The Zoning Amendment Factors A. The character of the neighborhood. The character of the neighborhood is predominately residential. To the east is the Trinity Lakes single - family residential subdivision, zoned R -3. To the south and west of the subject property is the Midwest Club Subdivision, also zoned R -3. To the immediate west is a single - family residential property zoned R -1. Immediately north of the subject property is R -1 single - family residential with R -2 single - family residential north of that parcel. The property to the north is utilized for a church and a single - family residence. B. The extent to which property values are diminished by the particular zoning restrictions. The existing R -2 zoning inhibits the ability to sell or develop the subject property. The subject property, consisting of 2.8 acres, cannot be divided into three conforming R -2 lots, and there is limited market appeal for a lot of this size that fronts on a major arterial roadway such as Midwest Road. The fact that the property has remained vacant over more than 20 years illustrates the negative impact that the existing zoning has had on the subject property. C. The extent to which the removal of the existing limitations would depreciate the value of other property in the area. Rezoning of the subject property to R -3 will have no negative impact upon properties in the surrounding areas that are zoned R -3 and R -2. Moreover, such a rezoning should have no adverse impact upon property zoned R -1 to the west and north since the ultimate development of the subject property as single - family will be consistent of the character of the neighborhood, and will be on lots meeting or exceeding the minimum lot area requirements of the R -3 zoning district. D. The suitability of the property for the zoned purposes. Utilization of the subject property for single - family residence purposes is entirely consistent with the character of the area and the present uses of all surrounding properties. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes October 71 2003 2 ZBA- MTG.2003 -OCT E. The existing uses and zoning of the nearby property. The existing uses and zoning of nearby property are uniformly single - family residential, with the exception of the church parcel, north of the subject property, all as further detailed in the response to factor a. F. The length of time under the existing zoning that the property has remained unimproved considered in the context of land development. The property is a virgin piece of property and has never been developed. This is another reason why they want to keep the character of the land and the mature trees. It has remained undeveloped for a number of years, estimated to be between 15 -20, largely because of its zoning. The Midwest Club Subdivision to the west, and the Trinity Lakes Subdivision to the east both were developed in the late 1970's and early 1980's as high quality, single - family, residential communities with R -3 zoning. The location of the subject property on a busy roadway combined with the R -2 zoning has inhibited the ability to develop and utilize the property for its zoned purposes. G. The relative gain to the public as compared to the hardship imposed on the individual property owner. There is little if any public benefit to the R -2 zoning, which, as illustrated, has served as a substantial deterrent to any development of the property, thus representing a severe hardship to the owner of the subject property. Conversely, rezoning of the property to R -3 will serve to benefit the public as well as to remove the overly burdensome restrictions imposed by the present R -2 zoning. H. The extent to which the proposal promotes the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the public. Rezoning of the subject property to R -3 will allow for its single - family use, consistent with the character of the neighborhood, and would allow for high quality residential development consistent with surrounding properties, increasing the tax base for the Village and improving the overall aesthetics by the ultimate development of the property consistent with single - family residential zoning. The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed single - family use of the subject property is entirely consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will provide a reasonable and appropriate buffer to nearby R -1 properties, which already abut R -3 zoned properties. J. The Community need for the proposed use by the property owner. Oak Brook as a community and its residents has consistently expressed the desire and need for high quality single - family residential lots. The proposed rezoning will allow for the reasonable utilization of the subject property for single - family use in a manner consistent with the character of the neighborhood, and in a way that will enhance property values in the area. No one in the audience spoke in support of or in opposition to the request. Mr. Brechin said that the Plan Commission voted 6 to 0 to recommend approval and found that the applicant has met the applicable standards and requirements necessary for a map amendment. The Plan Commission recommendation letter stated that the Plan Commission found that the amendment would not effect the public health, safety and welfare and will not substantially injure adjacent property. Mr. Shah would like to control the development and will try to keep architectural consistency. Mr. Kirk said that there is a lot of demand, but the property is not on the open market yet. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes October 7, 2003 3 ZBA- MTG.2003 -OCT Member Zaheer asked how long the property has been owned by the applicant. Mr. Shah responded that he has owned the property for approximately one year. Chairman Davis noted that the standards have been satisfied. Member Shah moved, seconded by Member Young that the applicant has addressed the required factors to recommend approval of the request for a map amendment to rezone the property to R -2 and in making this recommendation found that: 1. The vacant 2.8 acres of land known as the subject property is located on Midwest Road and is presently zoned for residential use. 2. The Village of Oak Brook Comprehensive plan depicts the future land use for the subject property as residential. 3. The majority of the surrounding land uses are residential. 4. The existing zoning of the land directly to the east and south is R -3, which is the same as what has been requested. 5. The applicant has addressed all of the applicable factors in the Zoning Ordinance required for a map amendment on page E of the case file. 6. No comments have been received from the neighboring property owners that the proposed map amendment would negatively impact the adjacent properties. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 7- Ascher, Mueller, Sanford, Shah, Young, Zaheer and Davis Nays: 0- Motion Carried. V. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business discussed. V1. ADJOURNMENT Member Mueller moved, seconded by Member Shah to adjourn the meeting. VOICE VOTE: All in favor. Motion carried. Meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes 2 ZBA- MTG.2003 -OCT Director of CoZLn evelopment Secretary January 6. 2004 Date Approved October 7, 2003