Minutes - 05/07/2019 - Zoning Board of AppealsVILLAGE OF
OAK B' �
CALL TO ORDER:
MINUTES OF THE MAY 7, 2019
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
APPROVED AS WRITTEN JULY 2, 2019
The Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was called to order by Chairman
Wayne Ziemer in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Butler Government Center
at 6:59 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL: ROLL CALL
Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons:
PRESENT: Chairman Wayne Ziemer, Members Jeffrey Bulin, Natalie Cappetta,
Baker Nimry and Alfred Savino
ABSENT: Members James Pontrelli and Steven Young
IN ATTENDANCE: Trustee John Baar, Development Services Director Tony
Budzikowski, Planner Rebecca Von Drasek and Planning Technician
Gail Polanek
APPROVAL OF MINUTES MINUTES
REGULAR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING OF APRIL 2.2019 APRIL 2, 2019
Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Nimry to approve the minutes of the
April 2, 2019 Regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting as written. VOICE VOTE:
Motion carried.
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS UNFINISHED
BUSINESS
A. 900 COMMERCE LLC. — 900 COMMERCE DRIVE — VARIATION — 900 COMMERCE DR
VAR -PARKING
PARKING REGULATIONS — TO ALLOW MORE THAN 6 PARKING ALLOW MORE
SPACES TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK THAN 6 SPACES IN
THE FRONT YARD
Chairman Ziemer announced that this was the continuance of the public hearing from
the meeting of January 15, 2019. All witnesses were sworn in.
William L. Smith Jr., owner of 900 Commerce Drive stated that during the last public
hearing there were concerns regarding the landscape and lighting plans provided.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page+ 1 of 12 May 7, 2019
I�
Greg Sagen from Signature Design Group created a more detailed landscape plan.
Additionally, Randy Bus the consulting engineer with Cemcon, Ltd created a detailed
lighting plan. He confirmed that all landscaping would take place in phase one of the
project.
Randy Bus, CEO of Cemcon, Ltd. 2280 White Oak Circle, Aurora, IL, presented a
PowerPoint and described the updated landscape plans in response to the comments
from the January meeting. Although the plan showed the landscape plans in phases,
they believed there would be enough spoil out of the excavation to complete the
entire landscape plan in one phase. He believed all past comments and concerns
raised by the Zoning Board had been addressed.
Member Cappetta thanked the applicant for addressing all of their concerns.
Mr. Smith stated that the variation standards were in the case file and asked that they
be accepted and included as part of the findings.
Chairman Ziemer accepted the variation standards as written.
Motioned by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Nimry to recommend approval of
the variation to permit the construction of 65 parking spaces within the required front
yard subject to the following conditions:
1. The proposed development including the proposed parking lot addition and
landscaping shall be constructed in substantial conformance to the approved
plans as submitted.
2. The landscaping and lighting plans are subject to village staff final review and
approval prior to building permit issuance.
3. The phased work shall include all of the required landscape and grading
elements prior to the installation of any parking spaces.
4. 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: 5 — Members Bulin, Cappetta, Nimry, Savino and Chairman Ziemer
Nays: 0 —
Absent 2 - Members Pontrelli and Young. Motion carried.
Chairman Ziemer announced that the public hearing was concluded for this matter.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 2 of 12
May 7, 2019
5. NEW BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
A. 800 JORIE BLVD — INDEPENDENCE PLUS AND SF CH2. LLC — TO 900 JORIE BLVD -
ALLOW THE CONSTRUCION OF AN ADDITIONAL WALL SIGN ON THE PLUS AND sF CH2,
PROPERTY LLC- WALL SIGN
Chairman Ziemer announced the public hearing and all witnesses were sworn in.
Lisa Stazak, Parvin-Clauss Sign Company, 165 Tubeway Drive, Carol Stream, IL,
representative for the tenant, Independence Plus stated that the applicant would like
to install an additional wall sign on the building at their new location. Independence
Plus has been a tenant in Oak Brook for over 12 years and they recently moved to
800 Jorie Blvd. Currently, they do not have a sign that is visible from any main
street, including I-88. The requested variation is to allow for the proposed internally
LED illuminated wall sign with channel letters. The sign would be located on the
west elevation of the building.
The first variation is to allow a second wall sign as there is an existing PLS sign on
the same elevation. The PowerPoint presentation showed the proposed elevation was
the best location for the sign in order to provide visibility to I-88 due to the unique
shape and position of the building. Also shown were the site plan details as well as
day/night concept photos. The sign will be illuminated the same as the PLS sign.
The second variation limits the size of the sign to 100 square feet and they requested
a total of 184 square feet.
The third variation is to allow the logo to exceed the size of the sign letters The
variation to exceed the size of the sign letters was due to the applicant's logo
branding and uniformity.
Member Cappetta commented that she drove to the site and noted how difficult it was
to find and get behind the building. Although they were seeking the variation to
allow a second name on the building, the signs could not be seen from anyplace else
except for I-88. She did not believe adding a second sign would have an effect or
harm on anyone else. She also found the height of the logo to be appropriate.
Chairman Ziemer noted that there were 17 characters in their corporate name as well
as the logo, he was comfortable with the size of the sign and the requested relief.
Member Bulin questioned if the ITT sign had been on the building before the PLS
sign.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 3 of 12
lb
May 7, 2019
Planner Von Drasek responded that the two signs were on the building at the same
time but were on different faces of the building and the sign has been removed. It
would be possible that a fixture tenant may come in for a sign variation on another
face of the building.
Member Cappetta questioned if granting the variation to allow this second sign
would prevent a tenant from adding a third sign to another face of the building.
Planner Von Drasek replied that would depend on the size of the sign. There is a
maximum number of signs allowed on the building.
Member Nimry did not see a problem with this proposed sign or should another sign
be requested as they would not be very visible due to the building shape and location.
Ms. Stazak requested that the variation standards included in the case file be accepted
and included as part of the findings.
Chairman Ziemer accepted the variation standards as written.
Motioned by Member Cappetta, seconded by Member Bulin to recommend approval
of the following variations requested as follows:
1. Section 13-11-IOC. 8 — to allow a second sign on the west elevation of the
building, which has an existing PLS sign.
2. Section 13-11-1OD.2.c — to allow a total of 184 square foot sign, which
exceeds the 100 square foot limitation on buildings under 50 feet in height.
The corporate name on the sign will have 17 characters.
3. Section 13-11-10GA — to allow the logo that is situated in between two words
in the name Independence Plus and is designed to exceed the height of the
other letters.
Subject to the following conditions:
1. The design and placement of the proposed sign shall be in substantial
conformance with the plans as submitted and approved.
2. 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: 5 — Members Bulin, Cappetta, Nimry, Savino and Chairman Ziemer
Nays: 0 —
Absent 2 - Members Pontrelli and Young. Motion carried.
Chairman Ziemer announced that the public hearing was concluded for this matter.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 4 of 12 May 7, 2019
16
B. 711 JORIE BLVD — EXETER 711 JORIE. LLC — VARIATIONS ::-TO
ALLOW ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES TO BE LOCATED IN THE
ROUIRED YARDS AND ZERO LOT LINE FOR PARKING SPACES
Chairman Ziemer announced the public hearing and all witnesses were sworn in.
Max Kling, Liston & Tsantilis P.C. 33 N. LaSalle Street, 28"' Floor, Chicago,
attorney for the applicant introduced the team that would be providing testimony
during the meeting.
Tim Pudwell, Senior Project Manager, Exeter Property Group, 3020 Woodcreek
Drive, Suite K, Downers Grove stated that Exeter was one of the largest real estate
investment managers in the world. The building at 711 Jorie Blvd. was acquired in
October 2017 and is currently about 35% occupied. They are in the process of
completing approximately $11 million in improvements in the building and property.
Mr. Kling specified the reasons for the variation requests. He mentioned there was
inadequate parking if the building were to be 100% occupied. They would like to:
• Add 137 parking spaces to increase the existing number from 615 to 752
parking spaces.
• Add curb cut and right-in/right-out access point along 22nd Street.
The requested variations are to:
• Reduce the required 10 -foot setback to a zero lot -line for both parcels.
• Allow more than 6 parking spaces within the required yard along 22nd Street
and Jorie Blvd. for both parcels.
He reviewed a PowerPoint showing the site plan and outlined the specific areas in
question.
Michael Werthmann, Principal, Kenig, Lindgren, O'Hara, Aboona, Inc, 9575 West
Higgins Road, Suite 400, Rosemont conducted the traffic/parking studies and
reviewed their findings. He gave a PowerPoint presentation that showed the location
of the proposed access drive on 22nd Street. Currently, the only access to the building
is located on Jorie Blvd. The access will be right-in/right-out only. Its purpose is to
provide direct access to the office building for traffic traveling to and from eastbound
22nd Street.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 5 of 12 May 7, 2019
711 JORIE BLVD -
EXETER 711 JORIE -
VAR - FRONT YARD
PARKING AND
ZERO LOT LINE FOR
PARKING SPACES
He believed the access drive will reduce the volume of office -generated traffic on
Jorie Blvd and its intersections with 221d Street. The location and design of the
access drive has been approved by the Illinois Department of Transportation which
has jurisdiction over 22nd Street. It should have limited, if any, impact on the
operation of 22nd Street.
The parking study was conducted in April of 2018 when the building was
approximately 80% occupied. On that particular day, there was a peak parking
demand of 536 vehicles which represented 87% of the parking spaces. He mentioned
that an office building typically wants to have extra spaces and not have 100% of its
parking spaces used.
Currently there are 615 parking spaces. Projected peak parking demand at full
occupancy would be approximately 670 vehicles. If the peak parking demand
reached full occupancy there would be a deficit of 55 spaces. With the approval of
an additional 137 parking spaces, there would be a surplus of 82 spaces.
John Ryan, President, Ives/Ryan Group, hic, 324 Eisenhower Lane, Lombard
reviewed the parking lot landscaping proposal. He mentioned that much of the
landscaping surrounding the property was in decline and would be replaced during
the property's renovation. They are proposing to remove approximately 30 declining
trees and replace them with approximately 61 trees. Overall, they will be installing
approximately 550 new plants.
He presented several slides that detailed the proposed parking lot screening. In order
to increase the parking spaces, they plan to cut into existing 5 -8 -foot berms (on the
west side and a portion of the north side) with a 2.5 -foot retaining wall. Landscape
screening is proposed on the east side of the parking lot where there is no existing
berm. In that area, 5 -foot screening that would mature to 8 -10 -feet would be
installed. They are open to any further landscape requirements and/or suggestions.
Member Savino commented that there were several parking lot islands that were
missing landscaping.
Mr. Ryan stated that the intent is to replace all missing landscaping and that there
will no longer be any empty islands. They will meet all requirements.
Planner Von Drasek asked if there were plans to remove and replace the soil in the
existing islands that lack landscaping.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 6 of 12 May 7, 2019
16
Mr. Ryan replied that they would like to improve the soil as well as provide proper
drainage. They will slightly "crown" the islands for drainage purposes.
Member Bulin asked if there were any other landscaping materials in the islands
other than canopy trees.
Mr. Ryan stated that the existing parking lot consists of trees and mulch and the
intent is to maintain that design.
Member Bulin suggested adding some ground cover and/or small shrub material to
the islands to break up the parking lot. He also suggested adding a berm to the east
area using the soils from the berm that is being removed to create the access drive.
Mr. Pudwell stated they would discuss the addition of a berm on the east side with
their civil engineer.
Member Savino agreed with Member Bulin's comments.
Director Budzikowski mentioned there was some concern with creating a berm in the
east area due to the floodplain.
Member Bulin asked if there was ever bicycle parking on the property.
Mr. Pudwell believed they intend to provide bicycle storage and if not they would
look into it.
Many Members stated they did not see bicycle storage in the plans, but thought it
should be added.
Chairman Ziemer questioned the use of the Nicor property and asked if there were
any concerns.
Planner Von Drasek replied that staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that
Nicor signed a letter of approval for use of their property. Nicor was concerned
about the depth of their gas line and therefore, their engineering plans included a
hand dig surrounding the location of the main.
Member Cappetta recognized that the variations requested included two properties.
She believed a representative from Nicor should be in attendance since they are the
owner of the second parcel. Nicor's letter stated they would allow parking on their
property, but they would not be bound by any conditions required by the Village of
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 7 of 12 May 7, 2019
Oak Brook in granting the variations. She was concerned with this language and
asked how they would ensure that specific conditions were followed if there were
future disruptions or repairs to the parking lot on Nicor's property. "What if Nicor
did not like the berm that was added and wanted it removed?"
Director Budzikowski mentioned there were several similar variations in many
communities on Nicor property. Nicor is very specific about what you can and
cannot do. If they need to get into their gas line, the property owner would be
responsible for the replacement of anything that was disturbed at that time. He was
not concerned.
Mr. Kling referred to the Grant of Easement from 1960 stating it allows for the
development, maintenance and re -development of parking lots and sidewalks.
Planner Von Drasek reviewed Nicor's letter of approval and referenced the paragraph
that stated "the minimum recommended cover for this type of line is 36 inches." Her
impression was that Nicor preferred a greater depth rather than a lesser depth. The
board's obligation through the variation process would be to hold the applicant
responsible for replacing the berm if Nicor were to do a repair on that particular line.
There was a discussion about the use of Nicor's property.
Member Cappetta questioned the Phase 2 exhibits regarding soil erosion stating the
document referred to `Franklin Park' as opposed to Oak Brook.
Chairman Ziemer questioned the handicap parking referenced in Phase 1 as
temporary. The same handicap parking exists on the Phase 2 plan, but was not
marked as temporary.
Mr. Kling stated that the main entrance is closed during current construction of the
lobby. Therefore, the handicap parking was temporarily relocated. There was an
error on the Phase 2 plan as the temporary handicap parking spaces should be
converted back to their regular location. They will meet code.
Member Cappetta was concerned about the location of the bus stop being so close to
the right -out access drive. She worried cars would try to turn right and go around the
bus into the center lanes.
Planner Von Drasek had similar concerns and mentioned a stopped bus would
actually block the right -out exit.
Mr. Werthmann explained they tried to balance the location of the bus stop while
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 8 of 12 May 7, 2019
__�b
moving the access drive as far as possible. He did not believe the bus stop location
would cause an increase in traffic accidents due to the fact there is a traffic light in
the vicinity.
Member Cappetta asked if a photometric study had been done. She wanted to see a
lighting plan that included the type of lighting, the height, the glare, etc. Since there
was no plan provided, she did not believe she could say this plan does not change the
character of the neighborhood which is a standard that must be met. It is her belief
that this petition is not fully vetted nor is it ready to go before the Village Board.
Mr. Kling informed the board that there was a plan to have a photometric study
conducted and they would ensure it would be within village code. He thought the
photometric plan was meant as a condition.
Planner Von Drasek cited that a photometric plan is required as part of the building
permit application and that there could be a condition to ensure it is within the case
file prior to the petition going before the Village Board.
There was discussion about what lighting exhibits should be provided by the
applicant during the variation process.
Chairman Ziemer suggested adding a condition that the lighting and photometric plan
be approved by staff prior to going before the Village Board.
Mr. Kling accepted the suggested condition.
Member Bulin asked if there have been past favorable recommendations when there
were outstanding revisions. He believed most cases were complete prior to passing
them along to the Village Board.
Chairman Ziemer believed the applicant submitted documents focusing on their
specific variations.
Member Cappetta asked if Trustee Baar had any comments.
Trustee Baar explained that the board encourages very specific lighting standards and
that the use of smart lights is preferred.
Mr. Pudwell mentioned that all existing lighting will be replaced with new LED
lighting at the current height. They will create a photometric plan.
Chairman Ziemer asked if the applicant would be in agreement with BUG standard
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 9 of 12 May 7, 2019
-13
lighting.
Mr. Pudwell replied that he was not familiar with BUG standard lighting, but would
look into it.
Chairman Ziemer polled the board to see if who may want a continuance.
Mr. Kling noted the Standards were in the case file and asked that they be accepted as
written.
Motioned by Member Cappetta, seconded by Member Savino to continue the matter
to the next Zoning Board of Appeals meeting.
Discussion by the Members:
Chairman Ziemer and Member Bulin asked the applicant if there was a specific
construction timeframe and whether a delay to the next meeting would cause
undue hardship.
Mr. Pudwell responded that delaying the process could cause concerns due to the
construction timing and weather.
Member Bulin asked if they had conditional IDOT and engineering approval.
Mr. Kling responded that they had addressed all IDOTs concerns were awaiting
the final approval. However, he believed it was imminent.
Patrick Swiszcz, SPACECO, Inc., 9575 W. Higgins Road, Suite 700, Rosemont
stated that they had received IDOT approval and were waiting for final comments
and noted that the Village would also sign off municipal approval as well.
Planning Technician Polanek referenced the time line of Zoning Board and
Village Board meetings if the matter were continued. If continued, the earliest
the final ordinance could be approved would be July 23, 2019.
Mr. Pudwell stated those delayed dates would put a constraint on the construction
schedule because they would not be starting until the end of summer. He
requested the board recommend specific conditions and provide all of the
additional information versus continuing the hearing, which would create a
hardship.
Chairman Ziemer recapped the conditions that would be included in a motion as
discussed by the Board.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 10 of 12 May 7, 2019
Gi
7
With the motion on floor to continue the hearing to the next meeting:
ROLL CALL:
Ayes: 2 — Members Cappetta and Savino
Nays: 3 — Members Bulin, Nimry and Chairman Ziemer
Absent 2 - Members Pontrelli and Young. Motion failed.
Motioned by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Nimry to recommend to approve
the requested variations subject to the following conditions:
1. The proposed parking lot addition shall be constructed in substantial
conformance to the plans as revised and approved.
2. Applicant shall provide a firm commitment for the installation/replacement
and maintenance of all landscaping improvements.
3. Applicant will provide the IDOT review and approval of the curb cut at time
building permit application.
4. Work with village staff to enhance the berm without impacting the floodplain.
5. Correction to change the typo in the reference from Franklin Park to Oak
Brook.
6. Lighting and photometric in accordance with BUG standards be submitted to
staff for approval prior to submittal to the Village Board.
7. Revise landscape plans to include the required landscape islands and include
additional trees prior to the submittal to the Village Board.
8. Check with the Village Attorney regarding the Nicor issue.
9. 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: 4 — Members Bulin, Ninny, Savino and Chairman Ziemer
Nays: 1 — Member Cappetta
Absent 2 - Members Pontrelli and Young. Motion carried.
Chairman Ziemer announced that the public hearing was concluded.
OTHER
BUSINESS
There was no other business to discuss.
PUBLIC COMMENT PUBLIC
COMMENT
There were no additional comments from the public.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Regular Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 11 of 12
i6
May 7, 2019
8. ADJOURNMENT:
Motion by Member Cappetta, seconded by Member Bulin to adjourn the meeting at
8:23 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 12 of 12
May 7, 2019
ADJOURNMENT