Minutes - 10/03/2017 - Zoning Board of AppealsVILLAGE of MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 3, 2017
OAK B R92.,,K, REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
APPROVED AS WRITTEN ON DECEMBER 5, 2017
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 7:00 p.m.
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, Steven Young and Wayne Ziemer
IN ATTENDANCE: Trustee John Baar, Director Tony Budzikowski, Planner
Rebecca Von Drasek, and Planning Technician Gail Polanek
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MINUTES
REGULAR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF AUGUST 1, 2017 AUGUST 1, 2017
Motion by Member Ziemer, seconded by Member Bulin to approve the minutes of
the August 1, 2017 Regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting as written. VOICE
VOTE: Motion carried.
SPECIAL ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF AUGUST 29.2017 AUGUST 29, 2017
Motion by Member Savino, seconded by Member Bulin to approve the minutes of
the August 29, 2017 Special Zoning Board of Appeals meeting as written. VOICE
VOTE: Motion carried.
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS UNFINISHED
BUSINESS
There was no unfinished business.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page I of 19 October 3, 2017
_6
5. NEW BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
A. FRANKLIN 1900 SPRING ROAD. LLC — TEXT AMENDMENT — ZONING FRANKLIN 1900
SPRING LLC -
ORDINANCE SECTION 13 -713-3A — B -2 DISTRICT — FLOOR AREA TEXT AMEND -
RATIO B2 DISTRICT -
FAR
Chairman Davis announced the public hearing and reviewed the requests. All
witnesses providing testimony were sworn in.
Scott Day, Day, Robert and Morrison, P.C., Naperville, Illinois, attorneys for
Franklin 1900 Spring Road, LLC, 55 Shuman Blvd., Suite 365, Naperville, Illinois
the applicant and owner of the property located at 1900 Spring Road, noted that
there were two application requests filed. The application that was related to the
subdivision was recommended for denial by the Plan Commission at its meeting.
The text amendment is the only matter before the Zoning Board of Appeals.
The property is located within the B -2 District which consists of 3 properties, the
property at 1900 Spring, the Oakbrook Center and 1400 16a' Street. The text
amendment relates to the B -2 regulations, Section 13 -713-3 FAR (Floor Area Ratio).
The B -2 District currently has a blended FAR measurement related to a limit on the
percentage of office use on the property. He reviewed the history including the
previous subdivision and variation approval for parking at 1900 Spring Road.
Chairman Davis requested an explanation of the absence of a height restriction in the
B -2 District.
Mr. Day responded that because FAR is the square footage of the building in
relationship to the site, if the Zoning Board does for this district what has been done
for the other business and commercial districts, the comparison would be eliminated
to determine how much bulk can go on the property. The concern at the Plan
Commission over eliminating the FAR entirely was that in this district there is not a
height limitation. If you could go up 100 stories, there would no longer be a way to
compare whether or not the mass of the structure is appropriate for the size of the
particular site. The other districts where the FAR is being eliminated have height
restrictions. It was the Plan Commission opinion that by eliminating the FAR for
the B -2 District would eliminate all of the scale associated with judging mass, so
they recommended the proposed second alternative, which was to increase the FAR.
They recognized that the current FAR was not appropriate for today's use, so the
restrictions were doubled. He also reviewed the subdivision requests that went
before the Plan Commission.
Chairman Davis noted that the subdivision request was not before the Zoning Board.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 2 of 19 October 3, 2017
Mr. Day agreed and added that the Code today allows multiple additional buildings
on the parcel. Whether the site is subdivided or not, the owner has the right to build
additional structures. There are limitations set by the FAR, which is why they are
asking that they be lifted.
Ray Warner, Principal at Franklin Partners, LLC, 55 Shuman Blvd, Naperville,
Illinois, owner of 1900 Spring Road noted that he and his partner Donald Shoemaker
were the owners and operators of commercial real estate investment firm with
offices located in Naperville, Chicago and Grand Rapids, Michigan. Since 1995,
their firm has been active in nearly 15 million square feet of commercial real estate
developments throughout the Midwest. In the last five years they purchased and or
actively developed over 3 million square feet of property in the Midwest.
They purchased 1900 Spring Road in September 2016 from American Realty
Advisors, due to its close proximity to the mall. They believed that office properties
located in close proximity to the mall office market had performed much better than
other submarket properties located in the east/west corridor. Their goal for the
property is to create a boutique office environment for their tenants inside and out.
For the last year they have worked on a redevelopment plan with their team
identifying improvements to be made inside and out. Improvements are being made
to the interior of the building including a new fitness center. Their intent is to
modify the main drive to improve the traffic circulation through the site as well
defining pedestrian pathways. They have engaged a landscape firm to develop a
plan to add additional landscaping and outdoor seating areas for the tenants. To the
south of the property there is additional value by developing two retail pads. From
the beginning their intent was to develop a well - thought out plan that would provide
an opportunity for further development on the site in a manner that would
complement the current office property. A long -term ground lease was signed with
a New York based national restaurant group, Shake Shack with restaurants
nationally as well as internationally. Construction is anticipated early next year.
They are looking for an additional tenant for the other available pad site. In regards
to Lot 4, they believe there is a better use for the site and ultimately believe it should
be improved. They are under contract with another Chicago developer, Jupiter
Realty who intends to improve the site contingent specifically upon administrative
action related to the floodplain and floodway. Because of that process, they felt that
the phased subdivision approach was the best approach contingent upon that plan.
Roger Heerema, Principal, Wright Heerema Architects, 140 South Dearborn, Suite
200, Chicago, Illinois, reviewed some of the attributes of the site. The gross floor
area is approximately 110,587 square feet and the actual area devoted to office use is
approximately 93,827 square feet of the building. Other areas of the building
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 3 of 19 October 3, 2017
Trll
devoted to financial /commercial use are approximately 16, 760 square feet for a total
of 110,587 square feet. He reviewed the FAR requirements of the site along with the
limitations. The site is not built to capacity. He reviewed the parking analysis
including the proposed retail developments and the proposed lots for the site and
plans to accommodate a better traffic flow and parking.
Mr. Day noted that in 1959 the B -2 District was first created with an FAR of .3. In
1988 the FAR was adjusted to .5; however, the calculation was added regarding
office. A property owner must calculate the existing uses each time they intend to
sign a lease. There is an ocean of asphalt in the parking lot. The existing FAR for
the B -2 District is as follows:
"Floor Area Ratio: Not to exceed 0.5; provided, however, that with regard to any
increase of floor area over 0.3, not more than twelve and one -half percent (12 '' /z %)
of permissible floor area in excess of 0.3 shall be devoted to office use as permitted
under section 13 -713-1 of this article."
The Plan Commission recommendation was to amend the FAR text, as follows
(strikethrough deleted text, bolded, underlined proposed text:
"Floor Area Ratio: Not to exceed 8:3 1_0; provided, however, that with
regard to any increase of floor area over 0.3 0_5, not more than twelve and
one -half percent (12 'h %) of permissible floor area in excess of 03 0_5
shall be devoted to office use as permitted under section 13 -713-1 of this
article."
Mr. Day reviewed the B2 District FAR language and the FAR was a
comparison of the floor area in comparison to the size of the site. The ratio is
the square footage of the building as compared to the size of the site gross. The
existing commercial zoning districts surrounding the site are ORA -1 and ORA-
2. The recent amendments proposed as prepared by the Village consultant
propose an elimination of the FAR restrictions from the current FAR as
follows: B -1 from .5; B -3 from 1.2; B -4 from .6; ORA -1 from .48 and ORA -2
from 1.2 for Office and Financial and .8 for all other uses.
He reviewed relevant sections of the Village's Commercial Areas Revitalization
Plan that was adopted in February of 2008 in regards to the commercial
development to this specific area calling it the economic engine of the community,
which noted that there was limited growth and reinvestment while areas outside the
village in other communities to the west had seen considerable office and retail
growth. It was also stated that the plan is needed to provide strategies and vision to
accommodate the revitalization of the area.
One of the goals and objectives was to update the Zoning Ordinance. The plan
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 4 of 19 October 3, 2017
_r1)
found that the Zoning Ordinance was outdated in 2007 and was restricting the
commercial revitalization of the community. He noted that the reason the FAR was
being eliminated in the other districts complied with the Revitalization Plan.
He reviewed further in the plan noting that there was a whole section in regards to
Class A & B Office and the report found that "...Oak Brook has been unable to
accommodate high- profile companies seeking to locate or relocate their corporate
headquarters within the region." "...Oak Brook provides a prime location for office
users large and small. However, the lack of available land and the prevalence of
older functionally obsolete office buildings significantly limit the Village's ability to
attract businesses to the community, particularly those seeking large Class A office
space." Also noted was that "...substantial Class A space is desirable for the Village
in terms of prestige and ability to compete with other communities."
In the Commercial Areas Revitalization Plan Land Use Plan projected this specific
site as a Mixed Use (Commercial/Multi- Family). The Oakbrook Center is called out
in the Sub -Area Plan and the plan specifically state "The opportunity for Oakbrook
Center to expand and contribute to the reinvestment and redevelopment within the
Village's commercial areas lies within its surface parking lots"
The Revitalization Plan when adopted stated that it "should become the Village's
official policy guide for improvement and development within the commercial areas.
It was to be used on a regular basis by the commission to review and evaluate all
proposals for improvement and development within the community."
Other guidelines within the plan notes that "... other definitions, such as `floor area'
for determining off - street parking loading requirements should be reexamined to
determine if the ordinance definitions are adequately accommodating contemporary
development practices and may not be delivering the level of control needed to
obtain more desirable development."
"Existing Floor Area Ratio, Setbacks, and Height... Currently, floor area ratios
(FAR) standards area lower than most similarly zoned uses in other communities."
The future development of the site is dependent upon the change to the FAR, just as
the Plan calls for.
Franklin Properties has purchased and invested greatly in the community. The
Shake Shack restaurant is being brought to this property by the developer. They are
prepared to upgrade and modify the existing structure and continue development of
the site. Per the Comprehensive Plan, this site was recommended for mixed -use
commercial and multi - family, which is exactly what the Plan calls for at this
location. This property is recognized as part of the mall. There will be
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 5 of 19 October 3, 2017
10
redevelopment of the surface parking areas, which is needed in the adopted Plan.
The investor of this site is perilously close to the FAR and they need the flexibility
of the FAR space in order to accommodate their vision of the property. Adjusting
the text would accommodate not only the plans of this investor, but also what the
Village is attempting to do in its Plan to attract commercial development at this
critical time in the history of community.
Mr. Day noted that the Standards were addressed in writing and were contained fully
within the case file.
Member Savino noted that there has been some major development within the
Village including Hub Group, Rush and Chamberlin have built big buildings under
the current zoning.
Mr. Day responded that the recent text amendment approved for the Oakbrook
Center was what they need in order to make the Center work and is temporary since
the Village is going through its comprehensive update to all of the land use
classifications in the Zoning Ordinance. It was his understanding the Village was
also in the process of updating the 2008 Commercial Areas Revitalization in order to
bring it up to date, but it is not yet available, so they can only work with what exists
and has been adopted by the Village.
Chairman Davis noted that the standards for the text amendment were addressed in
writing in the case file starting at page C of the case file and noted that they were
also addressed within the presentation.
Chairman Davis asked what affect this would have on the other properties.
Mr. Day responded that the entire package was submitted to GGP and those that
they spoke to were supportive of the change. He also spoke with the owner of the
1400 16a` Street and he did not have a problem with the proposed change. These are
the only other properties located within the B -2 District.
Member Savino questioned how much building area would be lost if the subdivision
was not approved.
Mr. Day responded that they could still build on the entire site and go through the
flood permitting process as well. Without the subdivision it complicates the
ownership or conveyance of the property for ground leases.
Member Savino questioned the percentage formula in the FAR.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Pa
I e 6 of 19 October 3, 2017
Director Budzikowski responded that part of the intent was to limit the amount of
office on any given property. Staff was not supportive of the elimination of the FAR,
but the alternate proposal is a good compromise. In the future, there will be
discussion during the Zoning Ordinance update on whether it should be eliminated.
There are other controls such as bulk requirements, setbacks, parking restrictions
and stormwater requirements which limits the ability to build structures on a lot.
Member Young questioned the risk with rental or client attractions and vacancies,
such as Tellabs and also questioned the proposed plan should the FAR be increased.
Mr. Day responded that there are other districts that accommodate that. In the B -2
District there has been an increase in the commercial uses in the mall over the years.
The concept for this site is to create two out lots along Harger, which is where Shake
Shack and a second retail building would be constructed. The north side of the lot,
proposed Lot 4, is impacted by regulatory flood plain and flood way. The engineer
is working on the modifications on the property in order to construct on the site,
which would be a condominium development, which would fulfill the Commercial
Revitalization Plan elements for mixed use that is encouraged by the Plan.
Member Ziemer questioned whether there would be structured parking on the site to
accommodate the additional construction with the increase in FAR.
Mr. Day responded that for Shake Shack and the additional retail, the parking can be
accommodated on the site; the condominium would require structured parking. If
there is a change in the mixture of tenants with the existing building or should the
building be expanded, structured parking may be required someday.
Trustee Baar noted that even with the increase in FAR, the proposed residential
development would be required to go through a process. He questioned the
possibility of a drive -thru restaurant.
Planner VonDrasek noted that a drive -thru would require a special use.
Mr. Day acknowledged that the mixed use with residential would be required to go
through the Planned Development public hearing process. He added that a drive -thru
was not planned for the restaurant. He added that it would require a special use for
outdoor dining.
Chairman Davis noted for the record that he lives on Harger Road, but due to the
distance did not receive a notice, but that it would not impact his vote.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 7 of 19 October 3, 2017
46
Member Savino said that in a planned development request they are not required to
meet the Village Code.
Chairman Davis agreed, but noted that they would need to identify and request
waivers and variations to those items that would not be Code compliant for a
particular development.
Member Savino noted that would be an additional hurdle they would need to go
through before any redevelopment would occur.
Director Budzikowski said that the timing of such a development, if successful with
the floodway flood plain issues, could take 2 years. The Zoning Ordinance update
should be completed sometime in 2018 and there may be additional requirements as
it goes through the process, which could be the height requirement in the B -2
District. With the Planned Development process, the petitioner is required to reach
out to the surrounding property owners for separate homeowner association
meetings to discuss the development, which is in addition to the required public
hearing that requires noticing within 500 feet of the property. A larger population is
notified in the process. There is flexibility for the developer with more transparency
to the public to become more involved.
Member Savino noted that he would support the increase in the FAR as proposed.
Chairman Davis said that the request was before the Plan Commission and by a vote
of 6 to 0; they recommended approval of the second option in the request. The
standards were fully addressed at this hearing and were included in writing in the
case file. Substantial detail was provided in regards to compliance with the
Commercial Aras Revitalization Plan. Staff did not have an objection to the second
requested option. No one in the audience spoke in opposition to or in support of the
request.
Motion by Member Nimry, seconded by Member Young to recommend approval of
the proposed text amendment to option two as follows: (strikethrough deleted text,
bolded, underlined proposed text:
"Floor Area Ratio: Not to exceed " 1_0; provided, however, that with
regard to any increase of floor area over 04 0_5, not more than twelve and
one -half percent (12 '' /� %) of permissible floor area in excess of 04 0_5
shall be devoted to office use as permitted under section 13 -713-1 of this
article."
ROLL CALL:
Ayes: 6 — Members Bulin, Nimry, Savino, Young, Ziemer and
Chairman Davis
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 8 of 19 October 3, 2017
�L
Nays: 0 —
Recused: 1 — Member Cappetta. Motion Carried.
5. B. CLEARWATER DEVELOPMENT — SENIOR LIFESTYLE DEVELOPMENT CLEARWATER DEV
— AMEND SPECIAL USE ORDINANCE S -1183 — TO ALLOW LIFESTYLE DEV-
CONSTRUCTION OF "THE SHERIDAN AT OAK BROOK — LUXURY AMEND SU S-1 183
SENIORS HOUSING COMMUNITY LUXURY sENloxs
HOUSING
5. C. SENIOR LIFESTYLE DEVELOPMENT. LLC — YORK ROAD SENIOR LIFESTYLE
DEV - YORK ROAD
ASSOCIATES, LLC — 2055 CLEARWATER DRIVE — SEVERAL ASSOCLATES - 2055
VARIATIONS REQUESTED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SENIOR CLEARWATER DR -
LIFESTYLE CENTER VARIATIONS. FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF
SENIOR LIFESTYLE
CENTER
Chairman Davis announced the public hearing, identified the applicant and owner of
the property, and provided an overview of the requests. He noted that the subject
property was part of a special use approved in 2007, which the applicant is seeking
to amend in addition to a second request for variations to allow the construction of
the proposed structure. All witnesses providing testimony were sworn in.
Bridget O'Keefe, Daspin & Aument, 300 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 2200, Chicago,
Illinois, attorney for the applicant/contractor purchaser, Senior Lifestyle
Development who is seeking to obtain the necessary approvals to develop Lot 6 of
the Clearwater Development. The applicant is seeking to amend Special Use
Ordinance S -1183 to allow the construction of a 200 -unit senior housing
development. They are also seeking approval of five variations.
• The relief sought to Section 13- 3 -17B.2 is to allow an eight -foot fence
around the memory care garden area of the proposed development rather
than the permitted height of 42 inches.
• The side yard setback in Section 13- 10E -3C.2 of the 0-4 District standards is
30 feet, the request is to allow a zero side -yard setback for the loading berth
and a reduced setback for the generator.
• Section 13- 12 -7G.2 requires four loading berths for non -office uses in the O-
4 District; the request is to provide only one loading berth.
• The maximum height of screening required by Section 13- 12 -7A.1 for
loading berths is eight feet, the applicant is requesting to increase the height
of the screening for the one loading berth to 12 feet.
• Section 13 -124C details the required parking lot landscaping specifying an
interior tree for every 15 parking spaces. The applicant is requesting to
consolidate the landscaping within the parking lot.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Pa e 9 of 19 October 3, 2017
Robert Gawronski, Senior Vice President Development, Senior Lifestyle
Development Company, 303 E. Wacker Drive, Suite 2400, Chicago, IL, provided an
overview of the company noting that they were a Chicago based company and have
been in business for 31 years. They are the 6' largest operator of senior housing in
the country with locations in 180 different communities in 30 states. They provide
independent living, assisted living and memory care with the focus on hospitality
services for senior living. The plan for Oak Brook is not a tax credit financed senior
apartment. It will be a high end luxury lifestyle development for seniors.
The positive impact on the Oak Brook would include a retirement community that
does not exist in Oak Brook. Oak Brook's population is only about 8,000 people
and the Chamber estimates that more than 100,000 people work or visit Oak Brook
each day. Within 5 miles of the Clearwater site there are more than 10,000
households over the age of 75 earning more than $75,000 per year. There are more
than 24,000 adult children (45 -64) earning more than $100,000 per year. The market
study by Health Trust confirms the unmet demand in the primary market area.
The project will be at least a $77 million investment. They will create a luxury
housing option for Oak Brook seniors who want to stay in their community. This
will complete the final phase of the Clearwater Development with a compatible, but
less intense use than the hotel and condominiums envisioned for the site prior to the
recession and will have the least amount of parking or will impact the area traffic. It
will bring the seniors closer to the retail shopping, dining and entertainment. hi
addition to the residents, there will be approximately 100 employees plus the visitors
that come to the site. Once stabilized, there will be $540,000 in property tax that will
help the school districts without having an impact on the schools.
Staff was consulted early in the process regarding the impact on services. Based on
their senior communities across the country, it was estimated that there would be
approximately I 1 ambulance calls per month. The Fire Chief was consulted on what
he would envision for the emergency vehicles; he in turn called the Fire Chief in
North Brook regarding their experience over the last several years. He was told that
they had approximately 10 calls per month, which he did not see as a concern that
would impact services for Oak Brook. Since there is not a local municipal tax on
operations, there is a service charge billed for those that use the services in Oak
Brook, ranging $550 -800 plus mileage and is usually paid by insurance.
Nonresidents are charged a higher rate. A properly run senior facility with
experienced staff on site limits calls to 911 because issues can be handled on site.
The plan is for 200 luxury apartments for seniors, allocating approximately 119
independent units, 66 licensed assisted living units, and 15 licensed memory care
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 10 of 19 October 3, 2017
I1
units. There will be 185 parking spaces for the senior housing within the building
and will preserve the 179 retail spaces that exist on the site. A state of the art
security system, including an emergency call system and real time tracking. Staff is
present 24 hours a day. They embrace the dignity of the residents and their family.
There are many different types of age restricted housing. Active adult communities
in single family homes, townhomes, etc. Part of what they propose to do is an
independent living community, which is age restricted rental properties with central
dining facilities that provide residents, as part of their fee, access to meals and other
services such as housekeeping, linen service, transportation, social and recreational
activities. They do not provide, in a majority of the units, any assistance with daily
living activities, supervision of medication, bathing, dressing, etc. There are no
licensed skilled nursing beds on the property and a state license is not required.
Assisted living residences is independent living plus the care necessary along with
assistance with activities for daily living and are licensed by the state. Memory Care
is a specialized area of need where they can live a fulfilling life in an area of the
facility that is a very safe place. They have a full range of services provided by
licenses caregivers 24/7. They are not a nursing home. There is some skilled nursing
in their portfolio around the country. They made the distinction that they are a
hospitality company. The health care piece is a necessary component to help
maintain their independence longer. They do not want to be licensed to provide IV's
and wound care. They are a straight rental community. All units have design
features aimed at improving daily living with an emergency call system and real
time tracking, with technology to track residents and staff. A physician must assess
the appropriateness of the resident for assisted living and memory care. They will
provide a quality development that is targeting the highest end of the market place.
George Halik, Project Architect, Booth Hansen, 333 South Desplaines Street, Suite
100, Chicago, IL 60661 noted that the shape of the 6 -story building follows the
street line. The site is entered through a private drive on Clearwater. The conceptual
site plan, views of the fagade and layout of the building were reviewed. They
wanted the building fagade to blend in with the surrounding office building.
There are 185 parking spaces within the building. The access to the parking from
Clearwater is through a ramp to below grade parking. The ground level has an
additional 35 spaces by entering the property from the south into another parking
area within the building. All visitors, staff and employee parking is located within
the building.
Landscaping is important to the project and as visitors come to the site, it is the first
thing that they see. There will be lush landscape around the perimeter of the
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Pa gp l l of 19 October 3, 2017
building when the site is entered. A variation is being sought to consolidate the
parking landscape from the interior of the parking lot toward the area on the east
side of the building. They would provide an equivalent amount of landscape are and
will concentrate it rather than disperse it around the parking lot.
He reviewed each level and the exterior fagade. The memory care will be on the
ground floor and have its own secured entrance along with a higher fence to provide
additional security. The building is a conceptual design. There is one loading dock
proposed, they did not need four, which is located within the required setback and
right next to the existing dock to the retail services loading dock. A pedestrian path
surrounds the building with access to the existing retail.
Bradley McCauley, Site Design Group Ltd., 888 S. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1000,
Chicago, IL 60605 reviewed the landscape plan along with screening and esthetics.
The landscape surrounds the exterior perimeter of the building. The landscape at the
entrance brings the landscape close to the building residents and provides additional
soil volume for the tree, which will allow them to grow and increase longevity.
They are about 3,000 square feet over the landscape requirement. He also reviewed
the tree and plant species anticipated to be used around and in the parking lot.
Mr. Halik reviewed another variance for the loading dock and to provide a higher
fence around the dock and to screen the generator with a 12 -foot high fence.
Ms. O'Keefe noted that the Code does not address residential in the O District, so
the number of loading docks is retail driven and not residential.
Mr. Halik noted that the memory care fence is proposed to prevent residents from
climbing over the fence. The Code allows 42- inches and they are requesting an 8-
foot fence placed on top of a retaining wall due to the grade changes.
Tim Doron, Senior Transportation Consultant Planner, Principal with Sam Schwartz
Engineering, 303 W. Erie Street, Suite 600, Chicago, IL reviewed access to and from
the site and traffic signals. The use is a very low traffic generator because most of
the residents do not drive. He summarized all of the traffic access and the low trip
generation. Their staff shifts are outside of the primary rush hour trips, starting at 7
am and ending at 3 pm. Existing traffic is heavy during peak traffic time. He
reviewed the traffic generation study.
The existing 179 spaces in the parking lot will remain, but will be reconfigured. The
parking analysis reviewed the supply of parking and demand times. The residents,
staff or visitors would use none of the retail spaces located in the parking lot they
will be using the 185 spaces provided in the building garage to ensure that the
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 12 of 19 October 3, 2017
parking lot spaces would not be used. He also supplied information based on the
timing of parking usage and should those spaces be occupied, there would still be
sufficient parking on site. The single loading berth is plentiful because the garbage
pickup is three times per week. There are some daily deliveries for food, etc., but
those items can be scheduled. It reduces the sight of berths and additional curb cuts.
Brent McQueen, Registered Civil Engineer, Mackie Consultants, LLC, 9575 W.
Higgins Road, Suite 500, Rosemont, IL reviewed the existing and proposed
conditions. There are no wetlands and Salt Creek is located approximately 500 feet
away, outside the property limits. The DuPage County Stormwater Management has
been reviewing and created draft FIRM maps and studies. The draft study results
show that instead of the 100 -year flood plain being completely off the property; it
would be approximately 5 -10 feet along the west property line. They have a 30 -foot
building setback all along the property line so it will not impact any of the
development. Most of the utilities are already located on the site.
Trustee Baar noted that additional trees were anticipated to be in the ROW along
York Road as well as the new landscape plan for the approved parking for the Great
Lakes Dredge and Dock Building.
Patrick Russo, Lincoln Properties, responded that they have already added
approximately $160,000 of landscaping on the site as promised.
Ms. O'Keefe provided a letter for the record from the American Senior Housing
Association to the Senate Select Committee on Aging on the Hearing on Disaster
Preparedness and Response dated September 29, 2017. She noted that Senior
Lifestyle was one of five senior housing centers that were named in regards to the 20
communities that were impacted by Hurricane Harvey and Irma and the results on
how they handled the residents in their facilities during that time. Senior Lifestyle
has 5 locations in the Houston area, 1 in George and 14 in Florida. She read the
letter into the record citing the communities were home to a total of 2121 residents,
405 independent living, 1263 assisted living, and 453 memory care residents. She
noted that it spoke to the management of their facilities where the residents were
kept safe and sound; and speaks to the experience and management of Senior
Lifestyles facilities in extreme circumstances.
Gail Lal, resident, 2809 Meyers Road, noted that she was a registered nurse with a
lot of experience with senior living facilities. She was concerned that although they
would be making a lot of money, they would be putting a burden on the EMT
services. There is a senior facility in Tinley Park and they have calls every day.
When someone falls they do not pick them up instead they call an ambulance
because the CNA's do not have the experience to handle the residents. There are no
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 13 of 19 October 3, 2017
RN's on site only LPN's. She was concerned that the facility would place a high
burden on the Village and all the tax revenue promised would be going to the
Elmhurst school districts not Oak Brook schools.
Mort Westman, 8 Ivy Lane, requested that the time allotted to him be given to Dr.
Lal.
Dr. Lal resident, 2809 Meyers Road, represented himself as a citizen of Oak Brook.
The comments were based on his experience as a vascular surgeon and familiarity
with the care for patients in hospitals and its staff. He noted there was no feasibility
study presented by the applicant. He discussed all of the available existing senior
facilities in the surrounding suburbs. In Oak Brook there is Oak Brook Club, Forest
Gate and Briarwood Lakes. He suggested there was not a need in Oak Brook. He
said that someone making $75,000 could not afford this facility. He was skeptical of
the stated number of emergency calls projected. The majority of employees would
be low wage earners, will have tedious tasks, and would not use the retail and
restaurants as indicated. The recession had an impact on the senior housing
industry. Fewer seniors had the money to move and relocate. These facilities are
trying to attract potential residents. 85% of the taxes will go to a school district
outside of Oak Brook. His was concerned that the facility is mainly for profit,
owned by publicly traded companies. Assisted living and Memory Care is controlled
by state laws. The State only visits a facility every 24 months. He questioned if the
facility was in keeping of the character of Oak Brook. The potential liabilities to
Oak Brook are Police and EMT services. The facilities are nice, but humans provide
the care for the old and frail, which in turn depends on the care of others.
Mr. Gawronski responded that the comment from Mrs. Lal regarding a Tinley Park
facility is not a Senior Lifestyle community. He noted that there are multiple
management companies all over the country and the quality does vary. There are
different operating policies and procedures, but asked that their track record stand on
its own. There would be sufficient staff to handle the care needed. He added that
the Illinois Department of Public Health monitors the facility to ensure they have the
appropriate staffing. In the State of Illinois there are all RN's in their communities
because an RN does the care plans after receiving the personal physician's initial
assessment, which are done every 6 months, unless there is a noticeable change to
someone's condition. Dedicated CNA's and LPN's will be on staff and it takes a
special person to provide these services. School District 205 is the taxing body for
this property and they will benefit. The character is in the keeping with Oak Brook
and there is a need for housing for seniors of this type. They would not invest over
$77 million dollars if there was not a clear demand. Anyone can build a beautiful
building but the best ones are the ones that have the best people working on site.
They pride themselves as being at the top of the class of operators. Some of the
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Pie 14 of 19 October 3, 2017
part-time help may start at $12 per hour, but there will also be those that will be
making $200,000 per year and everyone in between with $3 million for salaries.
They are targeting a specific group of seniors.
Mrs. Lal said that there was no type of promise that they would not over burden the
EMT systems. The resident would not be independent or they would be living in
their own home. She asked who would be doing the evaluations.
Mr. Gawronski responded that they addressed the likely burden as well as staff's
response. Their calculations are based on their operations.
Member Nimry commented that when Gibson's was approved to build a restaurant
the owners were not questioned if their food was better than Capital Grill. He would
not ask them if they were doing their job because that is not the Zoning Boards job.
Chairman Davis agreed that was a fair point and that the Illinois Department of
Public Health monitors the facilities.
Member Young said that there were plenty of regulations that will need to be met
along with a compliance officer, etc., on site. The questions are operational
questions and not what is regulated at the zoning level.
Chairman Davis noted that the standards for the special use and the variations were
responded to in detail and contained in each case file at Tab 4.
Member Cappetta asked if the independent living had full sized kitchens.
Mr. Gawronski responded that the independent living units have full kitchens with
dishwashers and washer and dryers. Assisted Living units have a microwave and
refrigerator. The memory care has a refrigerator due to safety concerns.
Member Cappetta questioned how many parking spaces were needed.
Ms. O'Keefe responded that there was not a parking requirement listed in the Code
for the use and they provided one space per unit in the independent living.
Mr. Doron noted that based on national standards they have sufficient parking.
Member Young questioned that there was enough space for the emergency vehicles
to access the site.
Ms. O'Keefe responded that the turning radius was provided to the Fire Department
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 15 of 19 October 3, 2017
✓I�7
and approved.
Member Bulin questioned the loading dock and noted it was significantly far from
the back of house including deliveries or moving, with concerns with guest parking
and deliveries having a conflict.
Mr. Halik responded that they would traverse the parking area and there will be
assigned parking spaces located below grade.
Mr. Gawronski responded that the key is that the maintenance people will handle
things off hours.
Member Bulin commented that the parking lot only shows 10 shade trees that are
below the requirement of 12. He also asked about additional screening around the
loading dock. Plant materials will also be provided to staff for approval.
Mr. McCauley responded they could add two shade trees to the plan. He noted that
they could shift plants to cover the grade and the plan would be presented to staff at
time of permit.
Member Savino would also like to see trees in the parking lot.
Ms. O'Keefe responded that their contract requires that they need to maintain the
existing parking spaces due to the existing usage. By adding parking landscape
islands, they would lose parking spaces. By adding the residential use, the thought
was to add a buffer to separate the uses. The proposal preserves the existing
parking, creates a better chance for the landscaping to live, be lusher and provide a
better esthetic for the residents. The hardship was trying to blend them and no one
likes to look at little landscape islands.
Member Savino questioned when the parking lot was repaved, whether they had
considered using permeable pavers.
Mr. Gawronski responded that their site team hates the pavers for the senior living
due to the gaps creating a trip hazard for the seniors.
Member Savino questioned the parking garage design.
Mr. Halik noted that the garage will be masonry walls and they would be made
attractive along with landscaping in front of the walls. It is mechanically ventilated
and they will have it conform to the rest of the building.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 11,6 of 19 October 3, 2017
Member Cappetta questioned whether the Fire Dept provided a number for calls.
Planner VonDrasek noted a memo in the file from the Fire Chief and he indicated
there would not be a problem.
Member Cappetta noted the comment from Mrs. Lal that the tax money would not
go to Oak Brook schools but rather to Elmhurst.
Member Young noted that there are several School Districts for Oak Brook as his
taxes go to the Downers Grove school district.
Trustee Baar noted that Oak Brook has reciprocal agreements with Oakbrook
Terrace and York Center fire districts in response to the calls. He also noted that
Forest Glen and Woodside Estates are all Elmhurst Schools. Only 60 percent go to
schools in Oak Brook.
Director Budzikowski added that there are no children generated from this
development so there is no added impact on the schools.
Mr. Gawronski said that the age restriction is for 62 and over and in reality the
average age in the community will be around 84 -85 years old because of all the
amenities they are offering.
Ms. O'Keefe stated for the record that the standards for the special use were
addressed in writing and contained in the case file.
SPECIAL USE
Motion by Member Nimry, seconded by Member Young to recommend to
recommend approval of the special use to construct the Sheridan at Oak Brook
senior housing community as proposed, subject to the following conditions:
1. That all previously approved special uses and variations granted to this
property not in conflict with this request will remain in full force and effect;
2. Obtaining final approval of the proposed variations required to construct the
200 -unit senior housing development.
3. Notwithstanding the attached exhibits, the applicant shall meet all Village
Ordinance requirements at the time of building permit application except as
specifically vaned or waived.
ROLL CALL:
Ayes: 7 — Members Bulin, Cappetta, Nimry, Savino, Young, Ziemer and
Chairman Davis
Nays: 0 — Motion Carried.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Pa{ge�,17 of 19 October 3, 2017
VARIATIONS
Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Ziemer to recommend approval of
the requested variations subject to substantial conformance with the materials and
plans as approved, as follows:
• Section 13- 3 -17B.2 — To allow an eight -foot high fence around the memory
care garden area of the proposed development in excess of the maximum
permitted height of 42 inches.
• Section 13- 10E -3C.2 —To allow a reduction of the 30 -foot side yard setback
to a zero side -yard setback for the loading berth and a reduced setback as
proposed on the approved plan for the generator.
• Section 13- 12 -7G.2 — To allow only one loading berth instead of the
requirement of four loading berths in the 0-4 District.
• Section 13- 12 -7A.1 — To allow the maximum height of the screening for the
one loading berth to be increased from eight feet to twelve feet.
• Section 13 -124C — To allow the consolidation of the landscaping within the
parking lot as proposed on the landscape plan with two additional shade
trees. The parking lot requirement is to provide an interior tree for every 15
parking spaces.
• Obtaining final approval of the proposed special use to amend Ordinance S-
1183 to allow for the construction of the senior housing community.
• 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: 7 — Members Bulin, Cappetta, Ninny, Savino, Young, Ziemer and
Chairman Davis
Nays: 0 — Motion Carried.
6. OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business to discuss.
PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no additional comments from the public.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 18 of 19 October 3, 2017
,6
OTHER BUSINESS
PUBLIC COMMENT
8. ADJOURNMENT:
Motion by Member Young, seconded by Member Nimry to adjourn the meeting at
11:00 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried.
ATTEST:
/s/ Tony Budzikowski
Tony Budzikowski
Director, Development Services
Secretary
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes
Page 19 of 19
IP
October 3, 2017
ADJOURNMENT