Loading...
Minutes - 03/07/2017 - Zoning Board of AppealsVILLAGE OF OAK B R9K, CALL TO ORDER: MINUTES OF THE MARCH 7, 2017 REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK APPROVED AS WRITTEN ON APRIL 4, 2017 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 6:59 p.m. UnN�C4.):i 2. ROLL CALL: ROLL CALL Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons PRESENT: Chairman Champ Davis, Members Jeffrey Bulin, Natalie Cappetta, Baker Nimry, Alfred Savino and Wayne Ziemer ABSENT: Member Steven Young, IN ATTENDANCE: John Baar, Trustee, Robert L. Kallien, Director, Development Services, Rebecca Von Drasek, Planner and Gail Polanek, Planning Technician 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MINUTES SPECIAL MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 17.2017 MEETING JANUARY 17, 2017 Motion by Member Savino, seconded by Member Ziemer to approve the minutes of the January 17, 2017 Special Zoning Board of Appeals meeting as amended. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business to discuss. 5. NEW BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. JULIE OLAFSON TRUST — 25 ROBIN HOOD RANCH — VARIATION — OLAHONTRUST25 IN HOOD ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 13 -11 -9 — ACCESSORY STRUCTURES — ROBRANCH - lsa I -9 TRELLISES ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TRELLIS VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 1 of 14 March 7, 2017 Chairman Davis announced the public hearing. All witnesses providing testimony were sworn in. Walter Morrissey, Lillig & Thorsness, Ltd., Attorney for the Petitioner requested a continuance of the matter to the next regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting on April 4, 2017 so that the application could be amended with additional details to be provided to staff. A written request was made part of the case file. No one in the audience objected to the requested continuance. Motion by Chairman Davis, seconded by Member Ziemer to continue the public hearing to the next regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. B. HUB GROUP — 2000 CLEARWATER DRIVE — VARIATIONS — ZONING ORDINANCE • SECTION 13 -15 -2A — PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS — ELIMINATE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROCESS REQUIREMENT; AND • SECTION 13- 10E -3C.2 — 0-4 DISTRICT — REDUCE REQUIRED INTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK C. HUB GROUP — 2000 YORK ROAD — VARIATIONS — ZONING ORDINANCE • SECTION 13 -15 -2A — PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS — ELIMINATE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROCESS REQUIREMENT; • SECTION 13- 10E.3C.1 — 0-4 DISTRICT — REDUCE REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK: AND • SECTION 13- 10E -3C.2 — 0-4 DISTRICT — REDUCE REQUIRED INTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK Chairman Davis announced the public hearing and reviewed the requests of both applications. All witnesses providing testimony were sworn in. Bridget O'Keefe, Daspin and Aument, Attorney for the petitioner provided a summary of the requested variations for each parcel. She noted that 2000 Clearwater Drive is the location of the Hub Group corporate headquarters. They were seeking several variations that would allow for the expansion of their corporate headquarters to the property directly adjacent to the north at 2000 York Road. They were seeking a total of five (5) variations. The first variation applies to both properties and would allow the yard variances of the subject properties without the need of going through the planned development process as required by the Zoning VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 2 of 14 March 7, 2017 HUB GROUP - 2000 CLEARWATERDR- VARIATIONS - ZO - PD REGS SEC. 13- 15- 2.A AND- SEC. 13-16E-3.C.2 - SIDE YARD SETBACK HUB GROUP - 2000 YORK ROAD - VARIATIONS - ZO- PI) REGS SEC. 13- 15-2.A AND- SEC. 13- 10E.3.C.1 - FRONT YARD SETBACK, AND SEC 13- IOE3.C.2- SIDE YARD SETBACK Ordinance. The yard variations are minor in nature and they have a tough construction deadline that must be met in order to open the building by next summer, so there was not enough time to go through the planned development process. Hub approached the Village Board and Village Attorney about the possibility of pursing the variance process without the requirement of going through the Planned Development process. They are seeking this variation for each property. For 2000 York Road, a variation is being sought from Zoning Ordinance Section 13- 10E.3.C.1, which is the front yard setback requirement of 100 feet along York Road to allow for an 85 -foot front yard setback. They are also seeking a variation to Section 13 -I OE -3.C.2 for both properties to allow a zero foot side yard setback for the area of construction for the sky bridge that would connect the new building to the existing building. Douglas Beck, Executive Vice President and General Counsel for Hub Group, 2000 Clearwater Drive, provided an overview of Hub Group. Hub is a transportation management company and their headquarters is located in Oak Brook on 2000 Clearwater Drive. They provide intermodal, highway and logistic services. They are a 45 year old publically traded company with $3.6 billion in revenue. Hub is a family company and their current CEO is the son of the founder and his children are in the business as well. They moved their headquarters from Downers Grove to Oak Brook in 2013 and are glad that they did. Currently, they have 2,725 employees, approximately 700 of which are in Oak Brook. They have already outgrown the headquarters building at 2000 Clearwater, which is why they were before the Zoning Board seeking the variations. They are currently renting additional office space at 700 Commence Drive until they can get into the new building. They are seeking to expand their headquarters to the adjacent property at 2000 York Road and their intent is to match the architecture and design of the existing headquarters building at 2000 Clearwater Drive and to link them with a sky bridge. The new building will give them room for an additional 700 employees, which will make them one of the largest employers in Oak Brook. This will in turn create economic benefits for the Village with employees shopping and going out to lunch. People are also brought in to attend meetings and conferences and they occupy the Oak Brook hotels, shopping and restaurants as well. The development of both lots is the best option for traffic flow, which is a concern in that area. It minimizes traffic congestion by providing 3 access points to the property. A model of the proposed development was provided showing the access points and the requested variations. There will be cross access between both properties allowing access at the lighted intersections on York Road and Clearwater Drive, in addition to an access point on Clearwater going south toward 22 "a Street. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 3 of 14 March 7, 2017 They believe it will be a beautiful entryway with curb appeal into the Village. The current building is an environmentally friendly LEED Gold building and the new building will be a LEED Gold building as well. The setback variation on York Road will be shielded from public view due to the 15 foot grade change and the location of the overpass on York Road. The prior development on the property had a parking lot that extended up to 15 feet from York Road, so the new development will be a significant improvement. They have a tight development schedule and the proposed building will need to be ready for occupancy by the summer of 2018 in order to accommodate their growing employee base. Their plan is to commence construction by May and to have it completed by June 2018. This was the main reason for seeking the variation process rather than the Planned Development process. Steven Olson, Associate Principal, Architect, Solomon Cordwell Buenz, 625 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 800, Chicago, IL, reviewed slides of the overall site and layout plans of the development. He reviewed the variations in the context of the development, such as matching the buildings setbacks along York Road and the zero foot setback for the area needed for the sky bridge to connect the two buildings at the third floor, which will be particularly useful during inclement weather. The previous development on the site was a large sprawling single -story structure with a lot of parking and there was 2.28 acres of pervious land. The new development with the new building and parking will have 5.13 acres of open pervious land. They have the option of a future land bank parking that is well down the road if that would likely have to happen. The site continues the high quality landscaping that exists at the existing headquarters building, which will add to the look and feel of York Road. Mr. Olson noted that a letter was received from the Forest Preserve District about environmental products and sealers that are used on the pavement for future maintenance. They are targeting LEED Gold for this building. They are capturing storm water to use in lieu of using potable water for flushing toilets and irrigation for the landscaping. It is a high performance building envelope and mechanicals, high end air quality, etc. He noted that the aerial view slides depict the view of the site from York Road, which will be two high quality detailed glassy buildings with an elegant sky bridge connecting them. All the buildings would be equally set back with a good entryway from the tollway ramp. There will be a lot of native and adaptive plantings that will thrive in this climate. He reviewed each elevation of the new building. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 4 of 14 March 7, 2017 Chairman Davis questioned the size of the sky bridge. Mr. Olson responded that it was approximately 10 -feet across to allow for comfortable two -way traffic and will be approximately 15 -feet in height. It is basically a steel truss with a glass curtain wall. Chairman Davis confirmed that the area of the variation to the side yard was only for the sky bridge. Member Bulin questioned that the support posts would be behind the setback. Mr. Olson confirmed that it would be behind the required setback. Member Cappetta questioned what parcel the driveway under the sky bridge was located. Mr. Olson responded that it was located entirely on 2000 York Road. Chairman Davis noted that the standards were addressed in writing in the case files on pages C -C.3 Variation to the Planned Development Regulation Requirements for the properties located at 2000 Clearwater Drive and 2000 York Ms. O'Keefe responded to the standards for the variation to the Planned Development Regulations applies to both parcels. The need arises from the schedule for construction since Hub has grown so fast between 2013 and 2017 and has already outgrown their space for 700 people and need to occupy the new building by next summer for 700 additional employees. The parcels were purchased at different times and are separate lots. If the parcels were on one lot, there would not be a need for any variations. Due to the construction constraints, it makes it difficult to process a planned development, which is why they approached the Village Board in January to see if they would consider this type of variance. It was also discussed with the Village Attorney to see if there were any issues with this process; no issues were raised and it was then referred to the Zoning Board of Appeals. l.a the need for the variation that the property could not yield a reasonable return operating under the current regulations, that to engage in such a lengthy process for such minor variations especially when there is such a significant benefit being brought to Oak Brook with the creation of the 700 jobs. l.b. the plight of the owner is due to the unique circumstances created by Hub's success and the need to move forward expeditiously. l.c. The variation will not alter the essential character of the area, in that it will remain office and commercial in nature. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 5 of 14 March 7, 2017 Some of the responses did not relate to the issue. 2.b. The variation would not be applicable generally to other properties in the same zoning classifications, in that this expedited process is unique to Hub and to the economy. Director Kallien noted that the applicant had explained and addressed the legal aspect of the request, and added that from a staff prospective the planned development regulations exist to provide flexibility to applicants as a trade off for certainty to the Village. We have that with the planned developments that have been approved with Rush, Hyatt House, Pinstripes and the Oakbrook Center. There were certain give and takes, which allowed them to do things outside the Zoning Ordinance and the Village got things in return. In this application the Village has received key things in regards to the development, including building elevations, the use is already allowed in the underlying zoning district, and there is a very detailed site plan that includes landscaping, so all of the things required under a planned development guarantee were provided. If the Village had not been provided these items, then the applicant would not have been advised to pursue this process. The applicant was very upfront with the Village Board as to what they needed and wanted to do and the Village Board and Village Attorney did not express concerns that they were pursing this process. Chairman Davis said that the applicant had addressed the main standards and the standards were addressed in writing on pages C -C.3 and J -13 of the case file. Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Ziemer to recommend approval of the variation to Section 13 -15 -2A of the Zoning Ordinance to eliminate the Planned Development process requirement for the properties located at 2000 Clearwater Drive and 2000 York Road. ROLL CALL: Ayes: 6 — Members Bolin, Cappetta, Nimry, Savino, Ziemer and Chairman Davis Nays: 0 — Absent: 1 — Member Young. Motion Carried. Side Yard Setback at 2000 Clearwater and 2000 York Ms. O'Keefe responded to the standards for the requested variation to Section 13- 10E.3.C.2 to reduce the side yard setback for both properties located at 2000 Clearwater and 2000 York in order to reduce the interior side yard to zero feet in order to construct the sky bridge. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 6 of 14 March 7, 2017 La The need for the variation that the property could not yield a reasonable return operating under the current regulations, that to allow the variation for the construction of the sky bridge would allow for the efficient movement of employees within the headquarters at all times, and in particular during inclement weather. Lb The plight of the owner is due to the unique circumstances creating the need for the side yard is the development of the second building on the adjacent parcel which was purchased by Hub after the development of the initial headquarters building at 2000 Clearwater and the need to connect the two buildings. l.c. The variation will not alter the essential character of the area, in that it will remain office and commercial in nature. 2.b. The variation would not be applicable generally to other properties in the same zoning classification. The purchase of the additional property was due to the success of the business and there was not time to consolidate the parcels or to seek a planned development. It is not applicable to other properties. The side yard setback provision will not have a negative impact on the public as the reduction of the setback will occur above grade and will not have an impact on the public welfare or nearby properties. It will not impair light, increase the danger of fire or affect public safety and will not have an adverse impact on property values. The attractively designed building and landscape, the creation of new jobs and improved traffic conditions will actually enhance the area. The purpose of the variation is to allow the movement of employees efficiently through Hub and the hardship was derived from the fact that the properties were purchased at different times and was not created by Hub. Front Yard Setback at 2000 York Ms. O'Keefe responded to the standards for the variation requested to Section 13- 10E.3.C.I in order to reduce the front yard setback variation for the property located at 2000 York Road to 85 feet at is farthest point in order construct the new office building that would be parallel to the existing headquarters building. La Hub is a nationally traded company and its existing headquarters is located on a very well designed site at 2000 Clearwater, which focuses on the efficient use of building and space. Lining up the buildings would continue the well - designed aesthetics of the site in keeping with other attractively designed headquarters in Oak Brook. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 7 of 14 March 7, 2017 l.b. The need for the front yard variation is due to the unique circumstances that have been caused by York Road as it slowly widens at the bridge by I -294. Aesthetically, the variance will allow York Road and both buildings to appear parallel to each other, which will improve the aesthetic design of the site and surrounding area. l.c. The variation will not alter the essential character of the area, which is office and commercial. 2.b. The need for the front yard variation arises from the location of York Road in relation to the subject property, which presents a hardship when trying to design a symmetrical site and efficient building placement. The variation sought would not be applicable generally to other properties in the same zoning classifications because they are not in such close proximity to the bridge on York Road and are not adversely affected by its widening. The front yard variation will not cause an adverse effect on the public or the adjacent property owners. Due to the grade difference the subject property will not be visible to pedestrians or cars traveling on York Road. The proposed variation will not impair light or air, will not increase the danger of fire, will not endanger public safety or diminish property values. The attractively designed building and site will enhance property values. The purpose of the front yard variation is to provide an efficient site design and create symmetrical building placement and would not provide any profit for Hub from its approval. The hardship is derived from the design of York Road and the properties being purchased at two different times. No one in the audience commented or objected to the requested variations. Chairman Davis said it appeared that the standards had been addressed both orally and in writing in the case file. Member Savino noted that the Forest Preserve District had submitted a letter dated March 3, 2017 on page 7.0 of the case file and suggested that a condition be included in the motion that no coal tar products are to be used on the parking lots. Motion by Member Savino, seconded by Member Ziemer to recommend approval of VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 8 of 14 March 7, 2017 the variations to the Zoning Ordinance to construct a new office building and proposed sky bridge between a future building at 2000 York Road and the existing headquarters building at 2000 Clearwater Drive, as follows: 2000 York Road: • Section 13- 10E -3C.2 — to reduce the side yard setback to zero feet for the construction of the sky bridge; and to Section 13- 10E -3C.1 to reduce the front yard setback to 85 -feet as shown on the plans submitted; and 2000 Clearwater Drive: • Section 13- 10E -3C.2 — to reduce the side yard setback to zero feet for the construction of the sky bridge; The recommendations for approval are subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed development shall be constructed in substantial conformance to the approved plans as submitted. 2. Coal tar products will not be used on the parking lots as described in the letter from the Forest Preserve District dated March 3, 2017 on page 7.0 of the case file. 3. Notwithstanding 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: Ayes: 6 — Members Bulin, Cappetta, Nimry, Savino, Ziemer and Chairman Davis Nays: 0 — Absent: 1 — Member Young. Motion Carried. The public hearing was concluded. 5. D. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK — 1200 OAK BROOK ROAD — SPECIAL USE — ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 13 -6A -2 — NEW VILLAGE COMMUNICATION TOWER Chairman Davis announced the public hearing. All witnesses providing testimony were sworn in. He noted that the Plan Commission had reviewed the application and recommended approval by a vote of 5 to 0. Member Savino disclosed that he and Mr. Howley had a distant relationship. There was no objection from the Board to require his recusal from the hearing. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 9 of 14 March 7, 2017 VOB -1200 OAK BROOK RD - SPECIAL USE - ZO - SEC/ 13 -6A -2 - COMMUNICATION TOWER Jim Fox, IT Director, Village of Oak Brook provided the history of the existing telecommunication tower and an overview of the request to construct a new 120 -foot tower. He noted that the original tower was an 80 -foot lattice tower that may have been constructed around the time the main Village Hall or Public Works building were constructed in the late 1970's. It supported the services for the antennas used by the public safety divisions. In 2005 -2006, Sprint/Nextel approached the Village with the possibility of constructing a cell tower 80 foot in height to improve cellular service. At no cost to the Village, Sprint constructed the tower that also supported all of the Village public safety equipment. They also constructed a 10 x 20 foot shelter at the base of the tower. The Village did not want two (2) towers on the ground of the Village property, so the lattice tower was removed. In 2010, the Village approved AT &T to construct a 15 -foot extension to add a cell site to the tower. In addition to providing cellular service, there was additional revenue received from the cellular carriers. Construction was completed in 2011. Approximately two years ago, Mike Howley, Insite Inc. an acquisition company, representing Verizon Communication, approached the Village about adding another 15 -foot extension on the tower. The existing tower was designed for a single carrier and not for an extension to hold three (3) cellular carriers. It was determined that the cost to modify the existing tower to handle the proposed extension was comparable to the construction of a new tower. It was also found that the existing tower leans to the northeast about 6 -8 inches and that over time the structure had actually been overloaded. The original carrier Sprint had put antennas on the tower that actually started twisting the tower, although there is no structural danger of the tower collapsing. There is a concern to adding another 15 -foot section to the 95 -foot tower. The higher it goes the lean would be more pronounced and more visible. In addition, the co -ax cables would need to be located on the outside of the tower, which would not be visually desired. There are four (4) main carriers in the Chicagoland market, Sprint/Nextel, AT &T, Verizon and T- Mobile. Currently, T- Mobile is located on the McDonald's building. It was determined that the cost of a new tower would be similar in cost to adding to the existing tower. The new tower would also be able to structurally hold all four carriers. The proposal from Verizon is that they would construct a new tower, turn over ownership of the tower to the Village upon completion, and then would pay a monthly lease to the Village. All of the radio equipment would be migrated to the new tower and the Village would be in a much better position. Many residents are interested in having good cell signals within their homes. Pictures of different views were shown of the existing tower and conceptual pictures of how the proposed tower would look. The tower is located on the Village property at 1200 Oak Brook Road, north of Oak Brook Road and east of Jorie Blvd. They VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 10 of 14 March 7, 2017 also propose to build a new equipment building to store their equipment that will be similar to what exists. Three trees would be removed and eight additional trees would be added. A standby generator would also be installed for backup power, if needed. Resident calls are received with concerns for cell phone coverage throughout the Village. Mike Howley, Insite Inc., represented Verizon Wireless. He noted that he had been working with the Village for the past two years to present the current design. There have been a number of options over that time. What has been presented is the best possible scenario. If approved, it would be a Village owned asset and has the possibility of increasing from two to possibly four carriers that would provide additional revenue streams for the leased spaces. He reviewed a propagation exhibit that represented the current and proposed coverage of Verizon wireless service in the area. Currently from a radio frequency perspective there is inadequate coverage. People inside of their residences /offices with Verizon service would have problems with voice and data capabilities unless they are near a window. Current estimates are that about fifty percent of people have discontinued using landlines and a big part of the new site was designed to bring much improved building coverage to the residents in Hunter Trails, Forest Gate and the Mayslake area and those within an approximate one -half mile area in each direction. As more people get on, it puts a burden on the data streaming. Some services may be impacted by the topography. Verizon has been working with the Village for approximately two years to find a location in the area to bring improved service to its wireless subscribers. The new tower may also help to improve the service for AT &T and Sprint depending upon the placement of their equipment on the new tower. Given the higher and more structurally robust tower, Village communications may improve. IT Director Fox summarized that the Village's position is that it will be an asset to the Village and it will help improve cellular communication for the residents and the public safety officer's vehicles use Verizon equipment. The property is zoned for a 120 -foot tower. Director Fox reviewed the special use standards as follows: 1. Is of the type described in subsection Al of this Section, is deemed necessary for the public convenience at that location. It will provide improved communication to the residents. In addition, with the tower elevation the Village has the need for communications within its water tower system. Over the years they were told if they could get up to the 120 foot level communications would improve over these towers. Some of the public radio system for emergency operations could also be addressed. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 11 of 14 March 7, 2017 2. Is so designed, located and proposed to be operated that the public health, safety and welfare will be protected; As mentioned, more and more people are relying on their cell phones over land lines. All of the Police, Fire and Paramedics units rely on cellular technology. The residents are relying on fast reliable data networks that support its operations. It supports the busy lives of people who live and work in the community. 3. Would not cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood in which it is located. The biggest impact would be on Forest Gate. Although it would be 25 feet taller, it would be the same color, same type of construction and would be similar to what currently exists. Mr. Howley added that it would enhance property values in the area. There would not be a big change for what is proposed. The first thing people and businesses do when they relocate is to ensure that there is good quality wireless service. Member Nimry noted that in Trinity Lakes many people have wireless security systems and when there is poor service, the security system does not work. The proposed tower is great, but the Village needs to look beyond this tower. Verizon may be great but there are some issues with other carvers. Director Fox responded that these towers are macro cell sites and will be around for years to come. However, there is a new technology out there for micro cell sites. In other communities they may be located in public right of ways, such as on a ComEd utility pole. The companies are aware of the signal strength and where they need to be boosted. He suggested that complaints go directly to the carrier to indicate where those spots are. Mr. Howley said that the macro sites are going to remain being the backbone and will be a critical piece of infrastructure. One of the things coming along is small cells, although not all of the carriers are doing this yet. A couple of the major wireless carriers are looking to compliment their network to be more robust in difficult areas by attaching a small antenna to an existing right of way infrastructure. He also noted that it was important to make complaints because if they get enough complaints it will go to the radio frequency engineers and then they authorize companies to find needed sites. Member Nimry noted that AT &T said that the problem was with the Village of Oak Brook. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 12 of 14 March 7, 2017 Director Fox said that the Village is limited in what it can do and it was difficult to report the problems for individuals. There have also been issues with Comcast and AT &T land lines. AT &T does not want to support the ground infrastructure. Member Nimry said that he cannot fight all of the unities, ComEd, AT &T and Comcast. There are ongoing issues and although the tower is a great idea, there are otherissues. Director Kallien responded that this tower is just one project that the Village was working on and has engaged a communication consultant that will look at other types of services. There is also legislation being proposed at the State level. The telecommunications industry has been moving so quickly that they are going to be filling the voids with additional equipment and will go to great length to address some of those issues. The Village needs to stay in front of it and to manage it. Director Fox noted that different elevations impact service. Lower elevations and foliage are a problem and create dead spots. He also noted that the Village shares the frustration with the residents in regards to the issues with utilities and other services and has contacted them, but again has been limited in what it can do. Chairman Davis noted that in the Plan Commission recommendation five (5) conditions were included and confirmed the Village was willing to comply with those conditions. Director Fox and Mr. Howley agreed. There was no public comment in support of or in opposition to the request. Chairman Davis noted that the applicant had addressed the standards or the special use in testimony and in writing. Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Ziemer to recommend approval of the special use as requested to construct a 120 foot telecommunication tower to be located approximately 25 feet north of the existing tower, which is to be removed upon completion, subject to the following conditions: 1. The development is to be constructed in substantial compliance with plans as submitted. 2. The proposed tower will meet all FCC and FAA governing construction requirements, technical standards, interference protection, power and height limitations and radio frequency standards. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 13 of 14 March 7, 2017 3. The plans submitted to the village for building permit shall be signed and sealed by a structural engineer. 4. All other applicable provisions of Ordinance S -1300 and S -972 shall remain in full force and effect. 5. Add the provision "Notwithstanding 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: Ayes: 6 — Members Bulin, Cappetta, Nimry, Savino, Ziemer and Chairman Davis Nays: 0 — Absent: 1 — Member Young. Motion Carried. The public hearing was concluded. 6. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business to discuss. 7. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no additional comments from the public. 8. ADJOURNMENT: Motion by Member Savino, seconded by Member Bulin to adjourn the meeting at 8:31 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. ATTEST: /s/ Robert L. Kallien Jr. Robert Kallien, Jr. Director of Community Development Secretary VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 14 of 14 March 7, 2017 OTHER BUSINESS PUBLIC COMMENT ADJOURNMENT