Loading...
Minutes - 10/01/2013 - Zoning Board of Appeals MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 1, 2013 REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK APPROVED AS WRITTEN ON NOVEMBER 5, 2013 1. CALL TO ORDER: CALL TO ORDER The Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was called to order by Acting Chairman Alfred Savino in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Butler Government Center at 7:04 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: ROLL CALL Gail Polanek called the roll with the following persons PRESENT: Acting Chairman Alfred Savino, Members Jeffrey Bulin, Natalie Cappetta, Baker Nimry, Steven Young and Wayne Ziemer ABSENT: Chairman Champ Davis IN ATTENDANCE: Mark Moy, Trustee and Robert Kallien, Jr., Director of Community Development 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MINUTES Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Nimry to approve the minutes of the September 3, 2013 Regular Zoning Board of Appeals meeting as amended. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS UNFINISHED BUSINESS Unfinished Business was moved to after New Business on the agenda. 5. NEW BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. CBRE, INC. — 700 COMMERCE DR. — VARIATION — SIGN CBRE, INC. - 700 REGULATIONS SIGN REGSE DR - Acting Chairman Savino announced the public hearing and reviewed the request. All witnesses were sworn in. Cheryl Scott, CBRE, Inc. presented the request stating that they were seeking relief to Zoning Ordinance section 13-11-10E.3 that allows the maximum height for a monument sign to be 10 feet. They are seeking to install a new monument sign with a height of 17 feet. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 1 of 25 October 1, 2013 Their building is situated in an obscure location at the dead end of Commerce Drive and the only means to identify the building is the monument sign that faces Interstate 88 (1-88). They have received numerous complaints from their tenants that their vendors and clients have difficulty finding them because the current sign is not big enough and is not visible from the tollway. Due to the sign size and height along with existing tollway fencing and walls hinders the ability to effectively view it from the highway. When traveling either east or westbound on 1-88, the sign is not very visible to passing vehicles. The speed of traffic makes the point of visibility shorter and it is difficult to read the sign panels due to their size. In August of 2012, they removed 6 trees and trimmed the vegetation in the area of the sign and unfortunately it did not help. They continued to trim the vegetation but the situation remains the same. They believe that a sign height of 17 feet would not only remedy their situation, but the new proposed contemporary sign would also enhance the aesthetics of the property as well. The owner of the property is committed to continue to maintain the property with capital improvements such as this and they have also installed HVAC units as part of a 3-phase $600,000 project this year. They are also now doing some landscaping in front of the building and next year; there is parking lot improvements planned. The maintenance and improvement of the property speaks well of the community. Acting Chairman Savino noted that the height of the sign was the only relief being sought. He visited the sign on the property and questioned whether moving the sign further south might provide better visibility. Katie Conroy, representative of the Poblocki Sign Company responded that moving the sign south would not increase the visibility. Unfortunately, the vegetation still brings it up and the customer has tried to stay within the code and raising the candles up gives visibility to both sides of 1-88, which is what they are looking to do. The current sign cannot be seen at all when traveling east on 1-88. By raising the sign to 17-feet gives them visibility and what the tenants need to be seen from both sides. She noted that the sign is now located 5 feet from the property line and there is no way to move it to the south. Director of Community Development Kallien noted that at that point the right of way on 1-88 is in excess of 300 feet wide and the road has been widened over the years. It was originally two lanes in each direction and is now substantially VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 2 of 25 October 1, 2013 larger. The existing sign from the chain link fence is the boundary of the right of way, which is about 5 feet and any movement would necessitate another variation. Member Bulin noted that if the vegetation is in the right of way they would not be able to clear it since it is not on their property. Director of Community Development Kallien agreed and said that it is tollway property and there is also a ditch that provides drainage, The ability to clear it is entirely under the control of the tollway. Ms. Scott addressed the variation standards as follows: Variation Standards Mr. Riemer responded to the standards as follows: 1. a. The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations governing the district in which it is located. RESPONSE: They received complaints from the existing tenants that due to the size of the current signage, their clients have difficulty locating them. Furthermore, if the size is not increased, they would not be able to offer this amenity to perspective tenants as the current size can only accommodate certain existing tenants. 1. b. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances. RESPONSE: The location of the property is in an obscure area and the signage that faces the expressway is too small for adequate visibility. 1. c. The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. RESPONSE: The new signage would be placed in the same area as the existing signage and would essentially occupy that area with the exception of the height. 2. a. The particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific property involved would bring a particular hardship upon the owner as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulation were to be carried out. RESPONSE: Their building is situated in an obscure location at the dead end of Commerce Drive and the only means to identify the building is the monument sign that faces I-88. A larger sign would allow approaching visitors VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 3 of 25 October 1, 2013 to reasonably know what direction the building is in. Signage that is visible is essential for locating the property. 2. b. The condition upon which the petition for variation is based would not be applicable generally to the other property within the same zoning classification. RESPONSE: It is unique to this property as it faces I-88 and is located in an area with low visibility in an obscure area at the dead end of Commerce Drive. 2. c. The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. RESPONSE: The variance would only impact the property on which the signage is located and would not be visible to other buildings in the area. 2. d. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the danger of fire, or otherwise endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. RESPONSE: The new signage would be placed in the same area as the existing signage and would essentially occupy that area with the exception of the height. The proposed signage would not negatively impact any of the aforementioned items. 2. e. That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to make more money out of the property RESPONSE: The purpose of the new signage is to satisfy the existing occupants by providing signage that is visible to the public; enabling them to located the businesses. 2. f. That the alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. RESPONSE: The hardship is due to the location of the property and was not caused by anyone currently having an interest in the property. Member Young questioned if there was any plan with the applicant and the tollway to clean up the property. Ms. Scott responded that it had not been investigated at this time. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 4 of 25 October 1, 2013 No one from the audience spoke in support of or in opposition to the request. Director of Community Development Kallien said that there have been a number of requests for signage since the new Sign Code had been adopted. Many of those signs have been placed on walls and some have worked well and some have not. In this case, the proposed sign in terms of its structural design and appearance would be beneficial to the area. It is a good looking sign and is representative of what the Village was trying to achieve in its Sign Code. Acting Chairman Savino summarized the variation request that would allow a sign more than 10-feet in height. He noted that the conditions were spelled out on page 7.b of the case file. Motion by Member Young, seconded by Member Bulin that the applicant had satisfied the requirements for a variation to allow a 17-foot monument sign on the property as proposed and to recommend approval of the request subject to the following conditions: 1. The design and placement of the proposed monument sign shall be in substantial conformance with the plans as submitted and approved. 2. 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 VOTE Ayes: 6 — Members Bulin, Cappetta, Nimry, Young, Ziemer and Acting Chairman Savino Nays: 0 Absent: 1 — Chairman Davis. Motion carried. 5 B. OAK BROOK PARK DISTRICT — 1450 FOREST GATE ROAD — Os PARK DIST. 1450 'GATE VARIATION — AMEND ORDINANCE S-1361 TO EXTEND THE ORD. DATES OF OPERATION OF THE SYNTHETIC TURF SOCCER FIELD OPER - DATES of OPERATION Acting Chairman Savino announced the public hearing and reviewed the request. All witnesses were sworn in. Director of Community Development Kallien provided historical background for the record. Basically the Park District is seeking a change to allow the soccer field lights to be extended. Currently all of the ball field lights can be utilize the lights between April 1 and November 15. The lights on ball fields 2, 3 and 4 can be used until 10:30 p.m.; ball field 1 can be used until 9:00 p.m. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 5 of 25 October 1, 2013 and the soccer field until 10:30 p.m. There have been issues raised to the Village Board relative to the impact of the lights. The village has retained a consultant who has begun a lighting analysis of the lights and the goal will be to present a report to the Village Board, which recommends a series of steps to mitigate the impact of the lights. The initial lighting test took place on September 25, 2013 and a second test is planned after 30 days so that there would not be leaves on the trees, which should show the complete impact of the lights on the adjacent properties. Comments raised about the lighting test have been passed on to the lighting consultant. Before the Zoning Board of Appeals at this hearing is a request to extend the calendar dates of use for the soccer field lights. The request is before the Zoning Board of Appeals because the conditions were included as part of a variation, which encompassed all of the lighting use and activities on all of the ball fields. Ordinance S-1361 was approved by the Village Board on February 12, 2013 and contains all of the provisions to all of the previously approved ordinances. The purpose of the request is not to take away or add any use of any of the ball fields or to extend the time, it relates only to the soccer field dates of operation. Acting Chairman Savino questioned why it was a variation and who pays for the consultant. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that the original Park District request was for light standards that exceeded the 45 foot maximum height allowed in the CR District. All of the fields have lights that are 60-70 feet in height. The Village Board has retained the consultant and the village will pay all fees. Laure Kosey, Executive Director of the Oak Brook Park District reviewed the request. She stated that they were not seeking anything new since the last time she appeared before the Zoning Board on August 7, 2012. The synthetic field was put in to provide recreational opportunities with an extended season in mind. She reviewed significant dates as follows: • The Park District Board of Commission approved a Master Plan on November 14, 2011, with this approval the Park District proceeded to amend the use approved under Village Ordinance S-791. • Starting on February 20, 2012 with the Plan Commission meeting and continuing to March 6, 2012 with the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting and proceeding to the March 27, 2012 Village Board of Trustees meeting, with approval of the amended Ordinance S-791 taking place on April 10, 2012, by the Board of Trustees. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 6 of 25 October 1, 2013 Included in the Master Plan were the great improvements that have been made at the Park District, including the synthetic turf field. In the Master Plan submitted on page C-2, (provided to the ZBA), "the construction of the synthetic soccer field with field lights would increase recreational opportunities for both adults and children by lengthening the playing season and increasing the amount of teams that can utilize the field." This was approved on April 10, 2012. On August 7, 2012 she came before the Zoning Board requesting the soccer field light heights as well as times of operation. At the end of the process a new ordinance was cleaned up, consolidated, produced and approved by the Village Board of Trustees on February 12, 2013. The Park District was never asked to review the newly constructed ordinance of S-1361, which combined four other ordinances from 1994 — ball field lights, 2004 — ball field lights, 2010 — times of operation, 2012 — turf lights and times of operation. In addition to the ordinance that was approved without the Park District's knowledge, included the use of the turf field lights and dates of operation from April 1 to November 15. You cannot un-ring the bell. The Park District had several options. First to talk with the Village to correct the error, however the Village is not comfortable with this avenue, so they are choosing to go through this process again. The standards have not changed from August 7, 2012. The synthetic turf field would offer additional opportunities for recreational use of such field through extended seasonal use. For the record she stated the following: On November 19, 26, 28, December 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 17 and 19, all of 2012, a resident youth soccer club, The Eclipse used the synthetic turf field and lights without one complaint or knowledge of a violation of the Village ordinance. The local AYSO, which is the little league of soccer, also used the turf field on November 29, December 6 and 13 with lights again with no complaints. They continued to schedule the bookings pending weather in the spring with the Eclipse using the field on March 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 21, 26, 27, and 28 of 2013, at which time the complaints of an ordinance violation was received from the Village, which was the first time the Park District was aware of the dates of operation ordinance violation. Moreover, the Park District is committed to additional steps needed for the synthetic field including additional shielding, as well as tree plantings to screen the area. They were awaiting the recommendations from the Village's lighting consultant to proceed with the plantings and shields, as stated by Bob Kallien. As of the date of this meeting she had 109 emails, 5 meetings with Forest Gate board members or residents, 6 meetings with Village staff, and 3 meetings with Village Trustees regarding the lights at the Park District. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 7 of 25 October 1, 2013 They had sent out a survey to all 76 Forest Gate resident homes, with 25 responding to questions regarding their facilities at Central Park, which included the use of the synthetic turf field. Only one response out of 25 was unsatisfied with the athletic field. She noted that there are many supporters of the Park District. She said that on October 1, 2013 a petition went out to support the extension of the field use with 150 signatures of Oak Brook residents. She provided the results to the Zoning Board included in a packet from the Park District. She also submitted for the record a copy of the 25 surveys received from Forest Gate residents. She noted that there was a Forest Gate resident that would ask this matter be tabled and she implored the Zoning Board to support the Park District as previously done on August 7, 2012. She added that the lighting consultant recommendations has nothing to do with this request and the Park District is committed with shielding and plantings on Park District property where reasonably needed. Ms. Kosey cited the following: Active Living Research, a study of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation provided by the San Diego State University, that in addition to providing opportunities for physical activity, recreational areas and parks located in metropolitan areas provide economic benefits to residents, municipal governments, and private real estate developers. Parks tend to increase the value and sale price of homes and properties located nearby. She respectfully requested the approval of the extension of the dates of operation of the synthetic turf field. Acting Chairman Savino questioned what error Ms. Kosey referred to. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that the issue of Park District fields, lights, change of use, change of hours, etc. had gone through a number of different meetings and involved a number of different requests. They involved the different fields, adding and amending the use of field 1, dates of utilization a couple of years later and they added the splash pad and soccer field and then another variation to add lights to the new soccer field. When the first ordinance was approved, there were a number of conditions placed on the lights, which are in the record and related to minimizing the source of glare ensuring that there would be adequate plantings, to meet certain foot candles at the property line, including a series of conditions. When the soccer field lights were proposed, the requested included the 70-foot lights and the right to use them until 10:30 p.m. Motions were made including that all of the previously approved conditions were attached and would apply to the soccer field lights. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 8 of 25 October 1, 2013 Although that may not have been the intention of the Park District, the reality is that as it went through the process and codified in the ordinance and that is what is in place and codified by the Village. The only way to change that provision is to go through this process and find a way to move the issue forward. Acting Chairman Savino commented that in crafting the ordinance it was the Village's prerogative to include additional language and conditions. Director of Community Development Kallien agreed. The Village Board always has the authority to accept conditions as proposed or it can be modified as it has done that over the years on a variety of cases. The Village Board was alerted by the Park District that in their opinion there was an error in the language, but the Board chose to maintain the ordinance due to the residents relying on the timeframes. If a change is warranted, we need to open up the variation ordinance. When the ordinances were approved, the Park District was present. Some internal changes have now been made to ensure that when ordinances are prepared, the applicants receive the ordinance prior to the board acting on it, which was not the case in this particular matter. John O'Brien, President of the Park District Board of Commissioners and resident since 1977. The Park District is committed to taking the recommendations from the Village consultant and would make any necessary changes. They have also made changes within the last 45 days by adding some additional shields to the lights and are committed to making additional changes. They already have this in the budget and will plant $10,000 worth of trees in specific location in a coordinated cooperative manner with Bob Kallien and Laure Kosey. He was also committed over the next two years to recommend to the Park District Commissioners that they also continue with $10,000 worth of trees in 2014 and 2015. They will be looking at evergreens, etc., that do not shed leaves. Safety is their number one concern and if there are any adverse conditions on the field (snow/ice) they would not use it. The Park District has been in existence since November 5, 1962, having celebrated its 50 year anniversary last year. Their mission statement is to provide the very best in parks, recreational opportunities, facilities and open lands for our community. On behalf of the Oak Brook Park District Board of Commissioners he believed that they not only have met that mission, but have exceeded that mission by the number of awards they have been winning. Out of 6,000 applicants the Park District has been selected as one of four finalists in their category for outstanding park district facilities and service to the community. It is the gold medal award and a high achievement. It is a certain achievement that Dr. Kosey and her staff have brought to the organization, with guidance from the VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 9 of 25 October 1, 2013 Board of Commissioners. By allowing the Park District with year round access to the facilities, they will continue to serve the Oak Brook residents and corporate community for all the recreational and health and wellness needs. He thanked the board for its time and consideration. Dave Thomas, Director of Recreation at the Park District and also serves on the Residential Enhancement Committee, which was formed by the Village to attract new residents to Oak Brook. A committee on which a park district representative was requested in order to help new residents understand the benefits that parks and recreation has to offer. He referred to some surveys that had been sent to the residents and letters received that Laure mentioned which were submitted by the Park District at the hearing. He reviewed a few of the comments. "The Oak Brook turf field has been a tremendous help. Their top teams were trained and played out of Oak Brook this year due to the fact that it has lights and can train on it into December. It is imperative that they are able to have the 8-9:30 session each night. On average 75-100 players come through the field each night." It was submitted by Rory Dames, President of the Eclipse Select Soccer Club, 700 Oak Brook Road. From the Forest Gate surveys, someone wrote that they "enjoy hearing the cheering from fans at the games and the cracking of the bat. They were in favor of the soccer field and wish that more games were played there. They enjoy all aspects of the park district." From Linda and Ed Squire, 9 Forest Gate Circle. Lastly, "I am writing this letter to request that the lights not have a shorter season. I am one of the 10 Cox's that grew up in Oak Brook and chose Oak Brook for many reasons, one being the Park District and all that it has to offer. My kids are 10, 9 and 6 and I want the lights to stay on and the fields be used as much as possible. The kids have worked so hard these days in school and academically that they need to have time to run around. Also the surrounding communities use the field which is a great attribute to us. The new soccer field is amazing. I saw a game played there last night under the lights. It was great to see all of the activity." From Margaret Cox, 301 Ottawa Lane. Acting Chairman Savino noted that he was not familiar with the Master Plan and asked how far into the future did it extend. Mr. O'Brien responded that it was an ongoing plan that is out 10 years and they are in the process of revising it. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 10 of 25 October 1, 2013 Acting Chairman Savino asked if they had any additional plans for anymore synthetic fields or lights on the Park District property. Mr. O'Brien responded that right now there are not any plans for any additional synthetic fields or lights because if he did, they would have to go into a flood plain and a majority of the land is in the flood plain. They did construct detention pond. Acting Chairman Savino questioned the games that were played last year outside of the time permitted timeframe as to whether they were random or by a particular group. The plan would be to have the fields used more. Ms. Kosey responded that they were part of the Eclipse Soccer Club, which was mostly for practices. The Eclipse Soccer already requested use of the fields, weather permitting through December 19. Acting Chairman Savino noted that the soccer field is approximately 360 feet from Forest Gate and that with the grade change; the lights are more like 40 feet. Most of the evergreen trees cover the lights in many instances. Mr. O'Brien reiterated that they would be installing more trees. Member Young questioned who would pay for the maintenance of the new trees. Mr. O'Brien responded that all of the trees would be placed on Park District land and maintained by the Park District. Member Young asked why the Village is covering the expense for the lighting consultant. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that the Village Board felt that since there were lighting issues that lingered on, and there was a difference of opinion as to what was glare and what was not and the Village felt it needed to find answers for itself to rely on and to not only to address the lighting at the Park District now, but provide some future guidance for the ordinance so that the Village does not find itself in this situation again. Some day there may be fields with lights in other locations in Oak Brook. No one wants to go through the debate as to what is the source of light or glare, etc. The consultant will be doing a second test around the fourth week of October VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 11 of 25 October 1, 2013 (or when the leaves are off the trees) and then get the final report, which will be shared with both the Park District and the Forest Gate residents, but ultimately it has to be presented to the Village Board. If recommendations are made, the Board will need to officially enact them. Director of Community Development Kallien said that the consultant is gathering data regarding being able to measure the quantity of the lights, not only downward but also the light that is emitted outward. There may be options to modify the lights, if shielding is not either possible or adequate. Ms. Kosey noted that in March 2013 additional shielding was added, which significantly improved the shielding of light. Member Young asked how the shielding would be maintained, should it be blown off or damaged. Ms. Kosey responded that there will be an inventory and they will know the exact size of the shield on each light bulb. Director of Community Development Kallien said that with ball field 1, issues were raised and through the input provided by Forest Gate and reached a point where there was a satisfactory result. Over time that situation may have changed. The goal will be that the lights will be maintained so that the shields can be adjusted when needed. Mr. O'Brien noted that they are part of the green initiative and they will be placing an order within the next 30 days. The trees would need to be strategically placed. Acting Chairman Savino asked what has happened between the Park District and the residents, since at one time there was a resolution. Ms. Kosey responded that the satisfactory solution was in 2005 prior to the synthetic field, with the exception of field 1. She did not know whether shields had been moved since that time and was looking forward to the report identifying the locations of the shields. Member Cappetta asked what happened when the dates were discussed. Director of Community Development Kallien said that he believed the Board was being consistent with the dates of use for all of the fields as the same. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 12 of 25 October 1, 2013 Trustee Moy said that the dates were used for all the ball fields and when talking to the Village Attorney he said that it was just extended to the soccer field because there was never a discussion on that specific issue and he did not remember ever discussing that. It was passed on assuming that the soccer field would be under the same restrictions as the ball fields. Later he found out that was not the intention of the Park District that the reason they built it was to have a year round field. It was not an oversight, but it was not ever discussed by the Board. Member Cappetta questioned how many complaints have been received regarding the soccer field. Director of Community Development Kallien said that when the lights were operational last October, the Village started to receive complaints that the accumulative effect with the lights going to unintended areas. Member Young questioned the projected revenue to be generated. Ms. Kosey responded that they budgeted to make $30,000 for the first year and the full year January to December they are looking at bringing in about $100,000. The projection to use it outside the April 1 to November 15 is about $20,000. Ms. Kosey responded to the standards as follows: Variation Standards 1. a. The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations governing the district in which it is located. RESPONSE: The Oak Brook Park District adopted a master plan, which provides, in part that the installation of the synthetic turf field will offer additional opportunities for recreational use of such field through extended season use. Because a synthetic field is resistant to weather and allows for continuous play year-round, even during most inclement weather, such a field increases the ability of the District to provide use of the field to participants in athletic programs by 62 percent as compare to the use of a natural turf field. The District invested $765,000 in installing the synthetic turf field to enable the use of the field year-round, weather permitting. The District's patrons requested such a field because of its characteristics and its continuous VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 13 of 25 October 1, 2013 availability. Moreover, the return on the District's investment in the field is greatly reduced and the field cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted only to be used during the specified dates of operation as set forth in Section 3(H) of Ordinance 2013-ZO-V-EX-S-1361. 1. b. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances. RESPONSE: The plight of the District is due to unique circumstances in that: (a) the District's Master Plan provides that the installation of the synthetic turf field is intended to provide additional opportunities for recreational use of such field through extended season use; (ii) a synthetic turf field is resistant to weather and according to the National Recreation and Parks Association, such turf allows for continuous play even during inclement weather, except for thunder and lightning with a resulting 62 percent increase in the ability of the owner to provide use of the field to participants, as compared to a natural turf field; (iii) the additional recreational opportunities that can only be provided by a synthetic turf field create unique circumstances and unique opportunities to serve the community. The dates of operation, as provided in Ordinance 2013- ZO-V-EX-S-1361, significantly reduce the opportunities for the intended extended recreational play of athletic teams. 1. c. The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. RESPONSE: The synthetic turf field is located in Central Park and is owned and operated by the District. Central Park has many ball fields and other recreational facilities, as it is the primary property operated by the District, in accordance with its statutory authority, to offer recreational opportunities to the public. The synthetic turf field is located at least 356 feet from the property line of the nearest residentially zoned property. Use of the field year-round is consistent with the year-round use of Central Park and does not alter the essential character of the locality. Acting Chairman Savino swore in all those that would testify at this hearing. Walter Barber, 33 Forest Gate Circle, President of the Forest Gate Homeowners Association. He noted that the residents of Forest Gate are active users and supporters of the Park District. The issue is that of compliance with the lighting code. The current ordinance adopted by the village S-1361, 3.13 requires that the Park District eliminate any glare from the synthetic turf soccer field and ensure that the source of light is not visible from any adjacent single family dwelling. The lights at the soccer field do not meet these requirements and are visible from Forest Gate homes. Forest Gate was a supporter of the synthetic turf soccer field and agreed to the 10:30 p.m. cutoff, with the understanding that VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 14 of 25 October 1, 2013 the code be met. The Village has retained a professional lighting consultant to evaluate the situation to recommend corrective action. They are not in compliance. The study is in process and another field survey is required after the leaves are gone from the deciduous trees. Personally, he did not think it was appropriate to decide whether to extend the lighting period for the soccer field until the report is complete and the recommended corrective action has been implemented and confirmed. Right now they are out of compliance and the question before the ZBA is should the time be extended while they are out of compliance or should the problem be fixed first. Ernie Karras, 75 Forest Gate Circle, and is a member of the Forest Gate directors. About 9 months ago, they were before this board opposing the soccer field lights, and it was testified that they would be too low to be seen. Unfortunately Musco, the lighting contractor for the Park District was never made aware of the ordinance and the lights are very high over all structures and the brightness is misdirected and can be seen as far as 31St Street. They impact Forest Gate residents the most. In March, the Board of Trustees visited Forest Gate to witness the abusiveness of the lights and they conditionally permitted there use, providing that within 60 days the Park District seek a consultant and correct the lights. The Park District did nothing. In May they forced the Village to hire its own outside consultant to perform measurements and provide recommendations for mitigating the lights glare and abusiveness in accordance with ordinance 5-1361. Clearly the Zoning Board of Appeals intended the ordinance to only permit the 70 foot lights if surrounding residents were protected against any potential abusiveness of the lights and limit their exposure to only a couple of hours in the evening. They were in accordance with the ordinance in agreement to let the lights go up. Now the Park District is asking that these protections that were instituted in 5-1361 for the residents are ignored and the period they have to tolerate the nuisance of the lights be extended from 2 or 3 hours to 6 or 7 hours in the winter when the foliage that is hiding them disappears. In 2003, the Park District promised to plant vegetation to screen the lights from field 1, but it took the Park Districtl0 years to plant them. This is an injustice to Forest Gate. It will affect their property values and is a mockery to the Village ordinance system. He respectfully asked that the Zoning Board reject the Park District's request. Andrea Cygan, 12 Forest Gate Circle. She agreed with everything that was said by those before her. The term is extended use for the soccer lights, but the extended use does cover the entire year, if they got the bookings and weather permitted they would use the fields as much as possible. The surveys sent to Forest Gate did not ask specific questions, such as do the soccer lights bother you. In their opinion, the surveys, although a good gesture, they are not very VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 15 of 25 October 1, 2013 valid. Many of their residents are represented tonight and she had petitions for those that were not at this hearing, which clearly indicated that there may be a couple that the lights do not bother, do not construe that as most of the residents do not support this situation. Parks are an asset to property values. Regional sports centers are a different story. With the extension of the soccer field lights it would further improve that situation for renting the fields. They question how many people reserving the fields are actually Oak Brook residents. Deadlines missed, delays, they cannot rely on promises. Vegetation is not the answer. Even if the soccer lights were 50 feet in height, because of the topography, trees take many years to grow to 50 feet. Those size trees are not available. Getting trees 15-18 feet just is not the answer. The soccer lights are 70 feet, and with the topography making it 50 feet, makes it even more intrusive. She said that the board can see why promises are not good enough. They have had many delays, missed deadlines, lack of action and broken promises in the past. Once the variance is granted there is no taking it back. Before Forest Gate could support a light extension, the lights in question need to be fixed. She asked that the board not grant the variance and reschedule consideration for a time when the consultant's recommendation are made and acted upon. Member Young asked Ms. Cygan if the Park District, Village or both come back and provide tangible dates and milestones promising dates and time when things will be locked in stone with the shielding on the lighting and vegetation would that be something that Forest Gate would be interested in sharing and having input. Ms. Cygan responded that Forest Gate has compromised a lot and those compromises have gotten them to this slippery slope. They are not really ready to make promises for something they are not really sure would happen. Acting Chairman Savino noted that instead of limiting the dates of use, but to limit the use to a number of times that it could be used, such as 10 times. Member Young noted that after seeing other heavily populated areas where there are sport amphitheaters, he reached out to a lighting expert that does US Cellular Field. Although he did not get back all of the information that he needed, these were things that perhaps the Village Board could reach out to and Forest Gate appears to be looking for some accountability where at the end of the day their situation is mitigated and they have some input as being a good neighbor. Judy Lucas, 23 Hamilton Lane, said that she grew up in Oak Brook and she noted that the Park District has never looked better and she uses it 5 times a week. When she moved to Brook Forest there was the school and like it or not VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 16 of 25 October 1, 2013 there is heavy traffic twice a day and it is accepted because it was there before she was. The Park District has been here for 50 years. Times are going to change, looking at the high schools in DuPage County they are all putting in multipurpose fields. These fields can take the abuse and can be used by various sports and if they are not used, they are a waste of money. She strongly supported the extended lighting hours and she hoped the fields are used when the weather is good, how else would there be a return on the investment. Frank Trombetta, 36 Meadowood Drive and Park District Commissioner said that what they are here about is the Master Plan which covers over a ten year period of time and the improvements were to be made for the community. One of those items in the plan was to install a synthetic soccer field. They are talking about lights on a synthetic field and their intention was to use it as much as they could. Their business is recreation to provide recreational opportunities and he hoped the Board would support their request. George Huber, 17 Forest Gate Circle said that he was one of the people that responded to the survey and was not totally unhappy with the Park District. He did so because there is so much other good stuff it was hard to flunk them on everything because of the light issue. If he had known the survey would show up at the hearing he would not have done that. Although it was stated that the lights and field would help property values, it may help those in Ginger Creek because they have a nice park district, but it will not enhance any of the values in Forest Gate. He investigated trees and a blue spruce grows about a foot a year, it could take 60 years for a 10 foot tree to grow tall enough to get up to the 70 foot lights. There will also be additional traffic. The promises that were made, it took the Park District a year to turn a vending machine with red/white/blue light on it. The rest of the situation has been that way. The purpose of the Park District is to provide recreational facilities for the people of Oak Brook. Most of the soccer teams are not Oak Brook based. They are talking about using the fields 4-5 days a week, which is not a benefit to the people of Oak Brook, but it is to make money. If they want to make money they should put a McDonalds in there and they would be rolling in dough. Member Young noted that the Park District stated that they had invested $675,000 into the project for a $20,000 return, it seems like it is operating at a loss on its current investment. Ms. Kosey responded that the investment for the soccer field was $675,000. The earthwork including detention and the sledding hill came to start about $1.2 million. They were projecting in ten years to bring in $100,000 per year and it would be paid off in ten years. That is the potential and if the VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 17 of 25 October 1, 2013 weather is bad they would not make it, but they are trying to give every opportunity to use the field. Member Nimry said that the soccer field is being used now and there is a problem with the lights currently. The residents have every right to complain because their problems have not been resolved. There should be a condition that the extension is not approved until the problem is fixed. Ms. Kosey said that in March they did do some shielding and some of the problems have been fixed but not to everyone's satisfaction. They are now waiting for the lighting consultant and his final report. Member Nimry added that the Village should hold the Park District accountable in getting the lights fixed or the variance should be held back. Director of Community Development Kallien added that when the consultant's report is finalized and presented to the Village Board, it would be his expectation that the Village Board would approve all or a portion of the recommendations relative to how to mitigate the lights. It would become the law of the land as how to move forward. Staff would recommend that certain benchmarks be set that the Park District would adhere to. He cautioned that we know that a commitment has been made by the Park District to take corrective actions, but at this point we do not know what the consultant will specifically recommend. It is believed that the problems would be fixable, but we need to wait to see what those things are that need to be done. Some may involve certain expenditures that we do not know what they would be. It may involve more than a shield or two and he could not predict what that could be. The members discussed who should fund any of the corrective measures and whether that should be a condition attached to a recommendation. Member Cappetta noted that she did not believe that conditions could be added that would say provided they comply with the ordinance. That is an ordinance enforcement that is up to the Zoning Board. If this should be enforced then someone should be out there measuring the lights, then they must do it. Before the Zoning Board is do we want to extend their dates or not. The fact that there is a problem with the lighting is not before the Zoning Board. Correcting the lights is not within the control of the Zoning Board and it may not be appropriate to do that, unfortunately. Director of Community Development Kallien said that it would be appropriate for this body, and testimony has been presented and commitments being offered VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 18 of 25 October 1, 2013 that the lights are going to comply with some standard at some point. If there is a positive or negative recommendation it needs to be stated and understood that from this body's take on it, steps need to be taken. Bob Aprati, 67 Forest Gate Circle and owner of vacant lots at 61 and 68 Forest Gate Circle, 67 Forest Gate Circle is immediately behind the current Park District building and his lots are likely to be the most affected by the lights. He is an attorney by profession and was part of and represented the Forest Gate group in its discussions and negotiations with the Park District when the initial ordinance was passed regarding field 1. There has been a discussion on investments and return on the investment and every resident in Forest Gate has over $1 million invested in their homes and they would like a return on their investment and do not want the Park District's lighting to reduce the potential return on their personal investment. A lot of commitments were made today by the Park District. Mr. O'Brien talked about trees around the soccer field being 20-30 feet in height. The same representations were made in 2004 and it was also included in the ordinance and they were required to plant mature trees on the roadway between field 1 and Forest Gate, the trees were about 6 feet in height. The ordinance also provided that the lights are turned-off at 9:30 p.m. with an automatic shut off and that did not happen. With all due respect to the Park District, they cannot rely on their commitments. The offer to spend $10,000 worth of trees, including labor to install will satisfy Forest Gate and would diminish the glare from the 70-foot high lights is not going to happen. It will cost him $5 — 6,000 to plant 2 to 3 trees in his backyard. Without a requirement as to size and the breadth of the trees, they will have nothing. They agree the Park District is a great place, and they are not against any program, but they are anti lights. The Gold Standard was achieved before the soccer field. All the accolades were about the field, not the lights. The turf field can be used year round irrespective of the lights being used. They do not want the lights on all day every day regarding who is using it. Those that do not live in Forest Gate do not care, but they are not affected by the lights. When they put the field in there was not a commitment from the board that they would be able to use lights 365 (all year). He said that to suggest that now their investment is at risk is rhetoric. An ordinance was passed for field 1 a number of years ago and it currently is not in compliance, so why would the Village give them the right to extend the lighting on the soccer field without having the problems fixed on field 1 and no one knows what the consultant is going to come back with, the cost, or whether they have it within their budget. Will Forest Gate be forced to file a legal action against the Park District? He suggested that we wait to get the consultant's report. He questioned why we would give the Park District the latitude until we know what it is. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 19 of 25 October 1, 2013 Marcos Lopez, 23 Shelbourne Drive since 1972, said that he was at the consultant's lighting measurement. He referenced a neighbor that installed a bright light on his mailbox, he did not complain about it. He finds it hard to believe that the lights from 350 feet away would really be that annoying or how that would be the cause to bring down property values. The light fixtures by the neighbors garage doors casts a more significant shadow than the lights he saw coming from the Park District. He would hope that everyone would be civil to one another. Member Young said that if Mr. Lopez lived in Forest gate and the light shined in his home, what he would do. Mr. Lopez responded, put up some shades or use the window treatments that came with the house. Member Young asked if waiting would impact the Park District revenue. And if so, how significantly? Ms. Kosey responded that it would as of November 16; it was up to $20,000. Keith Carlson, 20 Windsor Drive noted that the ambient light from the street light in the front yard of his home, was probably 20 times brighter than the light at Forest Gate and as cars come by down the curve the lights shine into the house. He added window furnishings to mitigate the lights. Everyone is a big fan of the Park District. Hinsdale has similar type fields in Pierce Park and all fields have lights. He asked the Village officials the rules on the lights and he -said that they had to be off at 10 p.m. Burns Park is completely surrounded by $1 million homes and the lights are on until 11 p.m. Sometimes we need to put things into perspective and he understands the concerns from Forest Gate and if we are out of compliance they should be brought into compliance. He requested the board allow the Park District to use the lights. Lou Paskalides, 15 Lochinvar, said that the discussion should be on the extension of dates so that the kids on Eclipse and AYSO, which have Oak Brook kids on the teams, can benefit. The Village Board is working on the issue with the lights with Forest Gate and they have taken that on and hired a consultant. The issue of extending the dates is more of a community issue and the Park District has a field than can be used all year long, weather permitting. He is involved with the sports coaching. The decision to be made is to extend the time. The issue with the lights is already being addressed by the Village and Trustees. The issue of lights is being taken care of, but is that something that the ZBA has to worry about, or is that the Village Boards responsibility. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 20 of 25 October 1, 2013 The testimony by the audience was concluded. Acting Chairman Savino said that the ZBA should make a recommendation to the Village Board and not hold it up as suggested. When it gets to the Village Board if they want to hold it up in order to get the consultant's opinion then that is the place it should be done. He did not think it should be held and go over this again in the future after the consultant's report comes back. If the recommendation is favorable a number of conditions should be incorporated. Member Nimry said that there are about 75 days the lights are being used. There is probably only another 60 days that could be used. The Park District already has the right to use the field and to increase it to use it for another 60 active days would not impact it more than right now. Member Ziemer suggested that it be continued until the results are in. The only complaints from the residents have been about the glare. Director of Community Development Kallien said that consultant would not be performing the second text until the leaves are off the trees. The ZBA would not have the benefit of the results until after the next ZBA meeting. Therefore a recommendation to the Village Board would be after November 15. Once the Village Board receives the ZBA recommendation it takes time to act on it. Member Cappetta asked if there was a violation. Director of Community Development Kallien responded that the way the ordinance is written and the conditions that exist appear to be in conflict. However, based on our existing technology and the way the existing codes are drafted, it is not a measureable condition at this point. That is why the consultant had been retained because he can measure things the Village cannot. Member Cappetta noted that then the ordinance that cannot be enforced because we cannot measure it. There was a discussion between the members as to whether to continue the hearing in order to receive the consultant's report or move forward with a recommendation and conditions to the board or deny it. The Village Board will make the final decision. The consensus was to move it forward. Mr. O'Brien agreed to spend the initial $10,000 with a total of $30,000 over two years. Some people will donate trees to the Park District for a nominal fee. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 21 of 25 October 1, 2013 Regardless of the consultant's report the Park District would still commit to the landscaping along with a landscape plan presented and approved by the Village. The members discussed the dollar amount or whether the type of screening would make a difference. It could be the number and size of shields, direction of the lights to be modified. If the consultant did not have a recommendation, that would be possible. Also discussed was getting the report quickly so the Park District can act on it. Once the final report is received and shared with the adjacent parties it would be reasonable to expect some timeframe so that steps could be taken to enforce them. Mr. O'Brien said that bid preparation is 30 days and is advertised in the paper with bid specifications that are clear. He suggested that Bob and Laure make sure the recommendations given by the Village Board are included in the RFP. He did not know how much it would cost or the recommendation would be or how they would pay for it if it is over $20,000. If it is under $20,000 the Director can call their engineer Musco and get it fixed. The members discussed additional conditions. Ms. Kosey said that they have been working on this since March when they moved shields and were under the impression that they were going to be in compliance. Forest Gate was not happy with it on several lots and the Village received its approval for its consultant in June. The Park District was trying to get things done and they are embracing that because right now there are complaints of glare but no one can tell them where it is at or what they are not in compliance with or what rules they are breaking because no one has told them what to fix. Director of Community Development Kallien said that when the Village approved Ordinance 5-1361 a condition was contained as to when things were to be reconciled and the impression was that it would have been done by June 1. When the time came the Village Board took that into consideration and recommended that the consultant be retained, but they did not recommend that the Park District turn the lights off. They allowed them to stay on and to be used in compliance with other aspects of the ordinance knowing that there was going to be a report. Member Cappetta said that a condition could be once the lighting is in compliance with 5-1361 the board then recommends the extension be granted. Meeting paused for tape change. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 22 of 25 October 1, 2013 Member Nimry said that if the Zoning Board could go ahead with the approval on the premise that the Village Board and Village staff would get back to the Park District with what they need to do to be in compliance as soon as possible. If bidding were required, it would delay them 90 days before they could do anything. Member Cappetta noted that she would not like to see the lights on if they have been out of compliance for a year to add changes to their budgets. If there is a condition that would say that the lights do not go on until they would be in compliance, she would vote in favor to allow the lights to go on after 15tH Member Nimry noted that the results would hinge upon the Trustees. Trustee Moy said that it sounded as to whether or not they could do their job. There has to be some trust that they would try to do their job. Whatever the consultant tells them would need to be done; it would be the Trustees job to make sure that it gets done. The Park District has said that they would be anxiously waiting for those directions so they can get it done. There was no doubt in his mind that whatever the consultant recommends they would get it done and they would enforce it to ensure that it does get done. Part of the problem is how the board wrote the ordinance. It was written with very vague subjective words like glare and so what is glare and how is it measured? The Board had a dilemma where they did not know the Park District was in or not in compliance. The Village assumed they were in compliance. There was not an objective measure, which is why a consultant was hired to try to help out and be able to measure glare and provide industry standards and reasonable recommendations. There was a case with the Village of Wilmette vs. the Park District and the final ruling by the court was that the Village can impose rules, regulations and codes on park districts, but it has to have three conditions. It has to be reasonable, cannot be arbitrary, and non discriminatory. So the Village is looking for a reasonable interpretation of the ordinance. If they cannot, then the ordinance may need to be written objectively, instead of using subjective words. Assuming the consultant can provide an objective finding that determines what needs to be done, and then the Village can ensure that the Park District would do it and go from there. There has to be trust that this process will go forward. What happens when the lights go on November 16, when they were on November 15 starts to get a little bit arbitrary because what makes the 16th any different than the 15th. They have a synthetic field and the Board would like to hear whether or not it should be used year round or not. The lighting component is connected to that, but that is something the Village Board will work on. Everything would be contingent upon the consultant's findings, which the Village and the Park District will comply with. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 23 of 25 October 1, 2013 Acting Chairman Savino summarized that the Park District is looking to increase the utilization of the synthetic turf soccer field. They are seeking an amendment to Ordinance S-1361, Section 3, Paragraph H, Dates of Operation: to read as follows: The District shall only use the lights on Fields 1, 2, 3 and 4, between April 1St and November 15th of each year, provided however, that the District shall only use Field 1 for youth athletic teams (high school age and younger) between November 1St and November 15th of each year. The District may use the lights on the synthetic turf field year-round; and all other conditions of Ordinance S-1361 would remain in full force and effect. Motion by Member Nimry Young, seconded by Member Bulin that the applicant had satisfied the requirements for a variation to Ordinance S-1361, Section 3, Paragraph H, Dates of Operation: to read as follows: "The District shall only use the lights on Fields 1, 2, 3 and 4, between April 1St and November 15th of each year, provided however, that the District shall only use Field 1 for youth athletic teams (high school age and younger) between November 1St and November 15th of each year. The District may use the lights on the synthetic turf field year-round;" All other conditions of Ordinance S- 1361 would remain in full force and effect, approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The Park District agrees to spend $30,000 in landscaping over 2013 and 2014 and is to provide proper screening with a landscaping plan to be submitted to and approved by the Village Board and Village Staff. 2. The Village is to provide the results of the consultants final report to the Park District and the recommendations are to be implemented by the Park District and included in any bidding process should an the RFP be required. 3. A benchmark to be set for implementation. 4. 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 VOTE Ayes: 5 — Members Bulin, Cappetta, Nimry, Ziemer and Acting Chairman Savino Nays: 0 — Abstain: 1 —Member Young Absent: 1 — Chairman Davis. Motion carried. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 24 of 25 October 1, 2013 4 A. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK — TEXT AMENDMENT — FENCE VOB - TEXT AMENDMENT - REGULATIONS FENCE REGULATIONS Acting Chairman Savino noted with the late hour the hearing on this matter should be continued to the next regular meeting. Motion by Member Nimry, seconded by Member Young to continue the hearing on the amendment to the Fence Regulations to the next regular meeting. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried 6. OTHER BUSINESS OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business to discuss. 7. ADJOURNMENT: ADJOURNMENT Motion by Member Ziemer, seconded by Member Bulin to adjourn the meeting at 10:17 p.m. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried ATTEST: /s/Robert L. Kallien, Jr. Robert Kallien, Director of Community Development Secretary VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 25 of 25 October 1, 2013