Minutes - 08/07/2012 - Zoning Board of Appeals MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 7, 2012 RESCHEDULED
REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF
APPEALS OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
APPROVED AS WRITTEN OR AMENDED ON
SEPTEMBER 13,2012
1. 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 7:03 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,Balser Nimry,Alfred Savino and Wayne Ziemer.
ABSENT: Member Steven Young
IN ATTENDANCE: Robert Kallien, Jr., Director of Community Development
and Michael HuIlihan,Village Engineer
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MINUTES
There were no minutes approved.
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS UNFINISHED
BUSINESS
A. CANTORE — 2021 SWIFT DRIVE VARIATION — PARKING CANTORS - 2021
SWIFT DRIVE -
MUIREMENTS—FRONT YARD VARIATION -
PARKING
REQUIREMENTS
Chairman Davis swore in those that testified at this hearing.
Joseph Cantore, owner of the property located at 2021 Swift Drive reviewed the
requested variation to allow a redesigned plan to allow additional parking
spaces in the front yard. They took the advice of the Zoning Board and believe
the new site plan allows for more green space along with an evergreen type of
landscape screening. The proposed plan utilizes more open green space in the
front yard, which was a concern of the Board and one of their neighbors. The
parking setback has been revised from 10 feet to 41 feet creating a larger area
for berating and landscaping. The new design will also allow for a landscaped
berm on the north side of the property line and would have a minimum height
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page I of 44 August 7, 2012
of 5 feet and a minimum height of 4 feet for the front of the property. The
landscape vegetation would be a mature coniferous species so that it would
remain green in the winter. The front area would remain aesthetically pleasing
with the increased setback and would be in keeping with the rest of the
neighborhood. It will be a good addition and would help to rent the building.
The overall impervious parking lot area was reduced and they eliminated
parking spaces. The handicapped accessible parking was relocated to the rear
of the building within a close proximity to the handicapped ramp that was
installed there. With the handicap stall location reconfiguration, 2 parking
stalls in the existing parking lot in order to make the new accommodations
possible. After review of the engineering codes for compact car parking it was
determined that they would be unable to utilize such an option, because none
was available. They also investigated relocating the existing storm water
detention area and due to the associated costs to install parking there coupled
with the additional costs to relocate the existing detention to the front area
would be cost prohibitive. After going through many options they finally came
up with a plan that addresses the concerns of the Board and they formally
requested approval of the parking variation. He advised the Board of a couple
of items. They are no longer exercising lease negotiations with Genesis Lab,
since they are no longer interested in Ieasing the building. McDonald's was the
only prospective tenant that they have and their minimum-parking requirement
is 90 stalls. The revised plan would allow a total of 92 parking stalls. Over the
last 5 years they have really only had these 2 tenants who seriously considered
leasing the building, They would like to see McDonald's in the building and
expressed appreciation for the consideration of the revised parking and
landscape plan.
Chairman Davis questioned to what extent the original relief had been changed.
Mr. Person noted that the request is now for 39 stalls, which was reduced from
the 44 originally sought. The code only allows 6 parking stalls in the front
yard. The original request proposed a setback 10 feet from the property line;
the revised plan has increased the setback to 41 feet.
Director of Community Development Kallien noted that the required setback is
100 feet.
Mr. Cantore stated that the standards were reviewed in their testimony at the
last meeting.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 2 of 44 August 7, 2012
William Lindeman, resident commented that the character of the neighborhood
was raised at the last meeting and noted that all of the other properties in the
area are set back. He noted that the former Polaroid site was granted 6 parking
spaces years ago and it is very unsightly because the screening stands out like a
sore thumb. He noted that the plan was an improvement, but that underground
' detention facilities should be considered on the north side. He noted that it was
a financial burden but was a fact of life.
Chairman Davis questioned whether Mr. Cantore had spoken with any of the
neighbors.
Mr. Cantore responded that he had spoken with Mr. Krusinski, the neighbor to
the south and noted that an email had been provided in support of the revised
plan.
Chairman Davis questioned when construction on the parking lot would
commence, if the variation was approved and asked if the project would be
completed should the negotiations fall apart.
Mr. Cantore responded that it would be as soon as the lease negations with the
potential tenant are completed. He added that in any event they would need to
do the parking because the building is functionally obsolete. When the owner
of the property not only maintains, but also provides all the improvements on a
property it is difficult to do such things like the underground storage tank due to
the cost. The expense of trying to get a good tenant in building does not leave
much left.
Member Savino questioned what the cost might be to build the parking over the
detention.
Mr. Cantore responded that they would gain approximately 12 spaces at the
cost of$500,000,which is very expensive parking.
Member Cappetta noted that they presented a big improvement over the
original plan. It looks better, the neighbors like it and they did what the Board
asked him to do.
Chairman Davis agreed and thanked the applicant for revisiting the plan, since
the original plan did alter the character of the neighborhood. He noted that the
standards had been addressed at the last meeting and were submitted in writing
in the case file.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 3 of 44 August 7, 2012
Motion by Member Savino, seconded by Member Nimry to recommend
approval of the variation request as revised to allow 39 parking spaces to be
located 41 feet from Swift Drive, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the proposed parking and landscape be constructed in substantial
conformance to the approved revised plans.
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 VOTE:
Ayes: 6 — Members Bulin, Cappetta, Nimry, Savino, Ziemer and Chairman
Davis
Nays: 0—
Absent: 1 —Member Young. Motion Carried.
5. NEW BUSINESS NEw>3uslNESs
A. TK TEMPLETON WOODS LLC — MAP AMENDMENT — VACANT TKTEMPLETON
WOODS,LLC-MAP
PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF 35TH STREET AND EAST OF AMEND-VACANT
ROUTE 83 - TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 28 ACRES OF THE PROPERTY souni
OF 35 ST EAST OF
WESTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY FROM R-2 TO R-1 ROUTE 83-REZONE
APPROX 28 ACRES
FROM R-2'1'0 R-1
i
Chairman Davis swore in those that testified at this hearing. Member Cappetta
recused herself from this agenda item because she was associated with the law
firm that represented the petitioner.
Fred Cappetta, attorney for the applicant reviewed the history and request for a
map amendment. The entire parcel is approximately 57 acres located south of
35th Street and east of Route 83. Several years ago the property was
subdivided and platted as Brittwood Creek, The 57 acres was divided into two
portions, with 28 acres on one side, which was zoned R-2 and 24 acres
remained R-1. The property was platted into 30 lots of varying sizes from one
to three acres. The development failed and did not proceed, along with
attempts by others to develop the property, which did not succeed. The
property is now owned by TK Templeton Woods, LLC, which is Dennis Keller
and his sons. They are petitioning to vacate the Brittwood Creels plat and
establish a new subdivision to be known as Templeton Woods Plat. They are
seeking a map amendment to change the zoning so that the entire parcel would
then revert to its original zoning of R-1, which requires a minimum of 2 acres
per lot. A small portion called out lot Vin the original Brittwood Plat will
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 4 of 44 August 7, 2012
remain. It is a vacant area that acts as a buffer between the subdivision and the
adjacent property which is a farm. The new plat will take the 57 acres and
resubdivide it in order to create a total of 20 lots ranging from 2 acres to 4.1
acres. He noted that they will be adding a berm to create a buffer from the
noise from the roadway to the east.
Mr. Cappetta reviewed each of the factors for the text amendment (below)
which were addressed fully in writing and contained in the case file.
(a) The character of the neighborhood.
RESPONSE: Templeton Woods is located in Fullersburg Woods, a rustic
area of Oak Brook, There are heavily wooded lots,rolling hills and creeks.
Breakenridge Farm, the subdivisions adjacent to the subject property and
the property on 35"' St east of the subject property are zoned R-1.
(b) The extent to which property values are diminished by the particular
zoning restrictions;
RESPONSE: It is expected that the value of the property will be enhanced,
not diminished by the conversion of the R-2 to R-1.
(c) The extent to which the removal of the existing limitations would
depreciate the value of other property in the area;
RESPONSE: The removal of the R-2 zoning will not depreciate the value
of other property in the area. The removal of the R-2 zoning and
allowance of the larger R-1 size lots will increase the value of the property
and the surrounding area. The proposed zoning will be consistent with the
adjacent Breakenridge Farm subdivision lots which will make the area
more consistent and attractive to the current residents as well as potential
new residents.
(d) The suitability of the property for the zoned purposes.
RESPONSE: The property was originally zoned R-1 and part of it was
rezoned for the Brittwood Creels Subdivision. No houses were ever built
and the property is suitable to be returned to R-1.
(e) The existing uses and zoning of nearby property.
RESPONSE: Breakenridge Farm is the subdivision to the east and is
completely residential and zoned R-1. The west border is Route 83.
Across 35th Street to the north is a portion of the Hunter Trails Subdivision
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 5 of 44 August 7, 2012
and is zoned R-2. The property to the northeast is also zoned R-1.
(f) The length of time under the existing zoning that the property has
remained unimproved,considered in the context of land development;
RESPONSE: The property has always been unimproved and no homes
were ever built when it was the Brittwood Creek Subdivision.
(g) The relative gain to the public as compared to the hardship imposed on
the individual property owner;
RESPONSE: The hardship endured by the property owner is deemed
tolerable by ownership. The relative gain to the public if the property is
changed to the original R-1 is consistency with the adjacent R-1 zoning.
The larger lots would allow for more open space.
(h) The extent to which the proposal promotes the health, safety, morals or
general welfare of the public;
RESPONSE: The proposal promotes the general welfare of the area. The
owners of the adjacent property prefer that the property be zoned R-1. The
proposal would result in larger lots with much more open space and fewer
neighbors. Changing the zoning from R-2 to R-2 would create like lots
with more open space. Less density would also result in less traffic on the
adjacent two lane street.
(i) The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Plan;
RESPONSE: As previously stated the property was always zoned R-I
until platted as Brittwood Creek when a portion was changed to R-2. The
R-1 zoning had always existed and would be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
(j) The community need for the use proposed by the property owner.
RESPONSE: The Fullersburg Woods Community takes pride in their
beautiful rustic area of rolling hills and meandering creeks. The reversion
of the zoning to the original R-1 would greatly be appreciated by the
residents of Fullersburg, as a large number of those residents came together
and expressed resistance to the change from R-1 to R-2 at the time it was
changed.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 6 of 44 August 7, 2012
They think that it is in the best interest of the public.
The Plan Commission unanimously reconunended approval of the request.
There was a single concern raised regarding providing two entrances to the
property. Without being able to gain access to Route 83, the only other access
would be on 35"' Street about 30 feet from the main access and would create a
path through someone's lot. After meeting with the Fire Chief believed that
with the zoning changed, there would be 10 fewer homes and all of the new
homes to be built, are required to be fire sprinkled and thought it would be
prudent that since there are two separate lanes for entering and exiting it would
not be needed there. There were told to discuss it and that have. The bricks are
already in the ground. At the hearing a Breakendrige Farm resident appeared
and spoke about the advantage with having more security in having a single
entrance.
Teny O'Malley, President of Breakenridge Farm, that is the adjacent
subdivision said that the owners have always been a great family and neighbors.
The change in the zoning is going to greatly reduce the traffic on 35`x' Street.
The oak trees would be preserved. The berm will reduce noise and may add to
the value of the properties. Old Oak Brook has 22 Iots and also has only one
entrance. Breakenridge Farm has 18 lots and there is only one entrance there as
well. Their community wholly supports the requests.
Al Knuth,25 Croydon Lane, said that he is on the Plan Commission, in regards
to the entrance, there was a recommendation that there should be some sort of
an easement for safety purposes. There impression of the project was positive.
Mr. Cappetta said that he did not remember it being a formal recommendation
to install the emergency entrance, since that time they have had a meeting with
the Fire Chief. The emergency exit would also be onto 35"' Street. He did not
mean to give the impression that they ran away from the argument.
Director of Community Development Kallien in conjunction with the request to
rezone the property there was another request for the subdivision, which
normally goes from the Plan Commission to the Village Board. There were
continents made regarding the desire and staff will discuss that in its report to
the Village Board and would be addressed by the Village Board when the plat
is presented to them at their meeting
Director of Community Development Kallien said that the only road changes
seen would be the ring road that paralleled Route 83 and the addition of the dul
de sacs instead of a complete circle.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 7 of 44 August 7, 2012
Jon Green, Engineering Resource Associates, Warrenville, Illinois briefly
described that there would be 3 different detention ponds that would be
enlarged in size,including depth and width.
Michael Hullihan, Village Engineer said that Oak Brook has become a mature
community with over 25 ponds in the various subdivisions. The biggest
negative point for maintaining water quality is decreasing depths due to
sedimentation, which in his opinion was the biggest issue; it is largely a
maintenance issue. If a pond is allowed to get less than 8 feet in depth, then
you get frill sunlight penetration and algae blooms that take up oxygen over
night then there is a eutrophic reaction. It is primarily a maintenance issue once
you establish it. It is a good plan with water cascading from one pond downhill
to the next pond, so it is good stormwater management and biotic management.
The detail is 10-15-20 years down the line, if the ponds are maintained. The
biotics must be managed with the flora and fauna that is introduced there.
Member Nimry noted that the system he has in place for the ponds in Trinity
Lakes reduces silt buildups and decomposes organic material, so instead of
having the life expectancy of 20 years he is going after 30-35 years. He noted '
that it is a very simple system that agitates the bottom of the pond.
Chairman Davis noted that Mr. Cappetta had addressed the zoning amendment
standards at the hearing and in writing on page D of the case file.
Motion by Member Ziemer, seconded by Member Nimry to recommend
approval of the request for a map amendment to rezone the 28 acres as shown
on the plans submitted from R-2 to R-1. ROLL C ALL VOTE:
Ayes: 6 — Members Bolin, Cappetta, Nimry, Savino, Ziemer and Chairman
Davis
Nays: 0—
Absent: 1 —Member Young. Motion carried.
5. B. ARDEN REALTY INC. — 1111 22ND STREET— TEXT AMENDMENT ARDEN RFAI,TY.—
111122 ND ST--TA-
- TO INCLUDE NON RESIDENTIAL POST BACCALAUREATE INCLUDE POST
SCHOOL IN THE ORA-2 DISTRICT AS A SPECIAL USE AND BACCALAUREATE
SCHOOLS IN THE
SPECIAL USE — TO ALLOW LEWIS UNIVERSITY TO OPERATE A ORA-2DIST—SU — s
POST BACCALAUREATE SCHOOL AT 111122 NO STREET LLWIS UNIVERSITY
—TO OPERATE A
SCHOOL
Chairman Davis swore in those that testified at this hearing.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 8 of 44 August 7, 2012
Christopher Lowe, Senior Property Manager with Arden Realty, the
operating entity for Long Ridge Office Portfolio and General Electric Real
Estate, ownership of 1111 West 22"d Street, in the ORA-2 zoning district
of Oak Brook, formally requested a Text Amendment and Special Use
Permit that would allow Lewis University to operate an educational
institution at the building. He asked that "Article B, Section 13-1013-2:
Special Uses" be amended similar to the Special Use clause in the ORA-1
District to allow for the following: "Schools, non-residential, and post
baccalaureate schools."
Lewis has been offering educational courses and programs in Oak Brook
for 34 years, relocating three times within the Village to meet program
growth requirements. They currently occupy almost 15,000 square feet of
space at 21.22 York Road. Lewis has been an outstanding and active
member of the community being represented on the Oak Brook Area
Association for Commerce & Industry since 1981. Ever-increasing
demand for their MBA Program, a desire to relocate their MS in Nursing
Program to Oak Brook, coupled with the inability to expand adequately in
their current location and a need for better visibility, precipitated a
proposed move to 1111 West 22"d Street, almost doubling in size to
approximately 29,000 square feet.
Retaining such a key component of the Village is critically important from
an economic and marketing perspective. Lewis' contributions to the local
tax base cannot be understated. Retaining and growing this critical
component of the tax base simply makes excellent business sense. Further,
being able to offer evening, adult, higher education opportunities in such a
central location in the Village not only keeps employees in the area after
business hours but also draws others to the area that might not otherwise
come. This almost certainly adds to the business volume of other retail
outlets in the Village.
To ensure that Lewis' use of the building does not adversely impact
surrounding properties and that it protects the public's safety and welfare,
Arden Realty has taken the following steps:
• They contracted to increase manned security at the building by 15
hours per week. Currently, the building is manned by a uniformed
security officer from 6 am to 7 pm, Monday through Friday. In
order to accommodate Lewis' predominantly evening class
schedule, weekday security would be extended to 10 pm.
Additionally,the current Saturday schedule of 6 am to 2 pm will be
maintained.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 9 of 44 August 7, 2012
�ti
• They are also improving exterior lighting at the property. Three
weeks ago, Arden signed a contract with Rex Electric for $198,000
to replace all exterior lighting. This includes 86 new bollard lights
and 24 new pole lights. The new lights provide increased lighting
output while still being more energy-efficient than the lamps being
removed.
• They will be signing a contract to replace all existing garage
elevator vestibule doors. The existing doors are solid slabs with no
glass inserts creating a security concern. The replacement doors
would continue to be fire-rated; however, each will have a glass
insert allowing students, employees, and visitors to be aware if
anyone is in the elevator vestibule.
• They diligently researched parking and traffic flows to ensure that
the current parking garage and property traffic patterns can
accommodate Lewis' faculty, staff, and students as well as the
current vehicular traffic. The existing parking garage has
approximately 1,100 spaces. In April, they conducted on-site
studies of available parking spots at various intervals coinciding
with Lewis' course schedules. During multiple surveys, the lowest
number of parking spots available was 290, which occurred at 4:30
pm. Between the hours of 5:00 pm and 8:00 pm, when normal
building traffic has departed, the garage averaged well over 400
available spots. This would easily accommodate the maximum
concurrent number of Lewis students and faculty that would be on-
site at any on time approximately 200.
• Additionally, the building traffic pattern allows for more than 1
means of vehicle ingress and egress. Cars can enter the property
directly off of I-88 westbound without ever traveling onto 22"`r
Street. They can also enter the property via the lighted intersection
at McDonald's Drive and 22" Street. A majority of daytime
tenants would have departed by the time the Lewis University
students and faculty would be arriving for their evening courses.
They were fully confident that the garage, local streets, and
property traffic patterns could easily accommodate Lewis' faculty,
staff, and student vehicles, especially since they will be primarily
evening users.
Long Ridge Office Portfolio and GE Capital Real Estate own and operate
almost 800,000 square feet of office space in the ORA-2 zoning district.
Their tenant base includes TreeHouse Foods, Millennium Capital,
Portillo's Restaurant Group, Merrill Lynch, Thomson Reuters, the U.S.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 10 of 44 August 7, 2012
Census Bureau, and others. They were confident that Lewis University
would be an excellent addition to their tenant base and to the zoning
district in general. They have worked diligently and spent significant
funds to ensure the building can accommodate the needs of Lewis and that
their presence would have no adverse effects on the district itself. They
felt strongly that it is critical to retain Lewis University as an outstanding
member of the Village and that the high duality degree programs offered
by Lewis along with their skilled, professional student and faculty base
would be a positive addition to their building and to the ORA-2 district.
He said that they were grateful for the efforts and assistance in considering
and approving this text amendment and special use request.
Chairman Davis asked what had happened at the Plan Commission
meeting.
Mr. Lowe responded that they voted unanimously, 7 to 0, with no
questions, with the exception of signage, which would be addressed
separately later at this meeting.
Chairman Davis noted that at the Plan Commission meeting there was
some confusion over the words used in the text amendment. Schools, non-
residential,post baccalaureate. He questioned what they were seeking.
Mr. Lowe responded that they were seeking post baccalaureate for Lewis
University,
Member Nimry noted that in the Plan Commission minutes it was stated
that Director of Community Development Kallien would make the Village
Attorney aware so that it would be in the proper form, because it was no
ones intention to allow an elementary or junior high school to be located in
the office district. I Ie suggested that it be made a condition of the motion
as to the type of school.
Chairman Davis noted that the factors for the text amendment were
presented in detail in writing on page E and the special use factors were in
writing on page D of the case file.
Mr. Lowe briefly addressed the amendment standards as follows:
(k) The character of the neighborhood.
RESPONSE: The character of the neighborhood is primarily the
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 11 of 44 August 7, 2012
restaurants,business,retail, etc.
(1) The extent to which property values are diminished by the
particular zoning restrictions;
RESPONSE: This is particularly burdensome to commercial property
values in the current economic era of corporate layoffs and
downsizing. Being able to attract quality educational institutions
greatly contributes to the potential tenant base that can be drawn from
for property value.
(m) The extent to which the removal of the existing limitations would
depreciate the value of other property in the area;
RESPONSE: The approval should actually add to the value.
Students, faculty, and administrations are likely to utilize the
restaurants,retail outlets and hotels in the area.
(n) The suitability of the property for the zoned purposes.
RESPONSE: They have addressed the issues of security, lighting and
traffic patterns.
(o) The existing uses and zoning of nearby property.
RESPONSE: The closest zoning districts are ORA-2, ORA-1 and B-
2 and are in general the same with properties with offices, restaurants,
mall based tenants and hotels.
(p) The length of time under the existing zoning that the property has
remained unimproved, considered in the context of land development;
RESPONSE: The property was constructed in 1986, so it is currently
not unimproved.
(q) The relative gain to the public as compared to the hardship imposed
on the individual property owner;
RESPONSE: Allowing educations institution within the ORA-2
district would be a net positive for the community. This allowance
will allow those that live and work in this district and the region in
general to better take advantage of the increased educational
opportunities that will exist is a plus. Furthermore, having education
institutions in close proximity to nearby office buildings makes these
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 12 of 44 August 7, 2012
buildings more attractive to potential tenants and their employees.
(r) The extent to which the proposal promotes the health, safety, morals
or general welfare of the public;
RESPONSE: Lewis University operates true to its mission values of
Knowledge, faith, wisdom, justice and association. Their chief of
security came by to review the property and spoke with the Oak Brook
Police and have enacted all of the measures recommended, with
increased security and lighting and believe that they are well covered.
(s) The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Plan;
RESPONSE: Educational institutions fully comply with the
statement that Oak Brook Center is the largest commercial shopping
center within the community and the region surrounded by other retail
and office uses,which capitalize on its proximity to the Center.
(t) The community need for the use proposed by the property owner.
RESPONSE: In this era of increasing corporate layoffs and
downsizing, education is becoming increasingly important and Lewis
University would add to that.
Mr. Lowe addressed the special use standards as follows:
1. Is of the type described in subsection Al of this Section, is deemed
necessary for the public convenience at that location;
RESPONSE: The 34 year history of continued expansion at the Oak
Brook location which has serviced several thousand students, speaks
to the quality and convenience of the educational offerings of Lewis
University.
2. Is so designed, located and proposed to be operated that the public
health, safety and welfare will be protected;
RESPONSE: They do not recall any violations or citations by Arden
Realty or Lewis University of Village codes. They are responsible
citizens true to their missions. As part of their due diligence they did
have their director of security speak to the police department and did
enact numerous measures that were recommended.
3. Would not cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the
neighborhood in which it is located.
RESPONSE: At all of Lewis University's Oak Brook locations, all
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 13 of 44 August 7, 2012
landlords have requested Lewis to renew its lease. Continued program
expansion prompted each move to a larger facility. At all of their
locations, they were considered an amenity to the building by hosting
company meetings and training programs for building tenants and
others.
Member Savino asked for the history of Lewis in the Village and whether
Lewis University had a signed lease.
Mr. Lowe responded that there is a negotiated lease, but it has not been
fully executed.
Member Savino asked if there were conditions in the lease that might
jeopardize the lease.
Mr. Lowe responded that they were confident that they were willing to
supply all of the language in the lease.
Wayne Draudt,Executive Vice President at Lewis University said that they
were excited to entertain the possibility of the move. As far as the history,
Lewis started in 1932 and its main campus is in Romeoville, Illinois. They
have other campuses around Chicago, Hickory Hills, Shorewood, Tinley
Park and Albuquerque, New Mexico. Their main campus in Romeoville
on roughly 350 acres of property. The University has enjoyed being in
Oak Brook over the last 34 years. This would be their third move in Oak
Brook, each being due to the need of a larger facility.
In terms of the lease,they are almost there. One of the variables within the
lease is the signage variation that is also on the board agenda.
Mr. Draudt said that they started out in the basement of the Marriott hotel
and were there for about 10 years. They moved into the Butterfield office
Plaza,but outgrew it and moved into the John Buck building on York Road
and had been there for about 12 years. The lease at the 1111 22"`' building
is for an 11 year period.
Member Savino said that they have been in the Village for 34 years and
have grown nicely and are now considering this move and asked whether
other locations were considered.
Mr. Draudt responded that the John Buck building could no longer
accommodate everything that they want. This building provides basically
somewhat of a stretch, but the way that the University has been growing, it
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 14 of 44 August 7, 2012
should be a very comfortable fit going to the future.
As far as taxes they pay whatever they are supposed to, including utility
taxes. They are exempt from sales tax on certain things that they purchase.
Chairman Davis noted that the applicant had addressed the standards for
the text amendment and special use as requested.
Text Amendment
Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Nirnry to recommend
approval of the request for a text amendment to add "Nonresidential post
baccalaureate schools" as a special use in the ORA-2 district.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: 6 — Members Bulin, Cappetta, Nimry, Savino, Ziemer and
Chairman Davis
Nays: 0—
Absent: 1 —Member Young. Motion Carried,
Special Use
Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Nimry to recommend
approval of the request for a special use to permit Lewis University to
operate a"post baccalaureate school" at 111122 nd Street as a special use as
proposed.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: 6 Members Bulin, Cappetta, Nimry, Savino, Ziemer and
Chairman Davis
Nays: 0—
Absent: 1 —Member Young. Motion Carried.
5. C. LANDMARK SIGN GROUP — 1111 22ND STREET — VARIATIONS — LANDMARK SIGN
GROUP--111122xo
SIGN REGULATIONS ST—VARIATIONS-
SIGN REDS
Chairman Davis swore in those that testified at this hearing.
Shaun Ensign, Landmark Sign Group, 7424 Industrial Avenue -
Chesterton, Indiana reviewed the requested variations. They are seeking
the following variations in order to install a sign for Lewis University at
111122,d Street:
1. Section 13-11-1 OC.8 — to permit the wall sign to contains two (2)
lines of text;
2. Section 13-11-1OD2.c -- to permit the installation of a 177 square
foot wall sign on the east elevation (maximum now permitted is
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 15 of 44 August 7, 2012
140 square feet);
3. Section 13-11-10E.4 —to perrnit the sign to cover an architectural
feature(existing window/wall panel lines)
4. Section 13-11-10GA and 13-11-4A.7.d — to permit a raceway to
mount the sign letters (instead of individually mounted letters).
The architecture of the building mainly consists of glass (faux windows)
and mullions. There is a mechanical room behind the location where the
letters are proposed to be installed and is not accessible to the public. The
letters are mounted to a stringer system so that there will not be any
drilling into the glass. The letters are an acrylic faced channel letter
internally illuminated with LED's and mounted to a raceway. The main
purpose of the raceway is to house all of the electrical components and
power packs of the actual letters and the jumpers that have to go daisy
chain from letter to letter so that nothing is penetrated through the glass
and nothing on the backside of the letters. The raceway is then mounted to
the stringer system, which gets taken up to the top the building and over
where the connections are made.
Director of Community Development ls'-allien noted that in the sign
regulations there is a provision that allows signs to be placed on a parapet
wall as long as it is flush with the actual wall and this portion of the
building is one continuous wall unit.
Mr. Ensign said that the reason for the two lines of text is due to the Lewis
University branding. Given the length of the facade,which is 26 feet so to
have everything on one line would be very small given just the quantity of
letters in their name.
Chairman Davis noted that the sign is at this location due to the
mechanicals.
Mr. Ensign agreed and said that the top of the building provides maximum
visibility when traveling down the highway.
Mr. Ensign reviewed the variation standards as follows:
la. 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: Due to the architecture of the three-tower design,the signage
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 16 of 44 August 7, 2012
would be far too small to be legible as a single line and would lack
visibility resulting in lack of community awareness for Lewis University.
lb.The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances
RESPONSE: The unique circumstances stems from the building materials
and visually pleasing architectural features. They are limited to the sign
location, which happens to be over an "architectural detail" (in this case,
glass) and must ensure maximum exposure to ensure Lewis Universities
continued success in the community.
Ic. The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential charactef of the
locality
RESPONSE: Given the current zoning of the property and type of
commerce in this area, the proposed signage is comparable and similar to
many other signage installations in the immediate area and beyond.
2a. The particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the specific property involved would bring particular
hardship upon the owner as distinguished from a mere inconvenience
if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out
RESPONSE: The building architecture with its "three tower"
configuration prevents a single line sign layout sign that would be legible
due to the quantity of letters in the Lewis University name,
The signage must be placed in the location as proposed as the
building/signing area is made up of glass/windows. The signage/ glass
windows are in front of a mechanical room which is not accessible to the
public.
Due to the unique architectural layout and spacing of the existing window
mullions and the need for the "stringer support system" to rest on said
"stringers", when combined with sign visibility and readability, to be able
to read from I-88 while traveling the speed limit, the size of the signage
needs to be 177 square feet vs.the 140 square feet allowed without altering
the client's logo/branding.
Due to the unique architectural features of the building it is impossible to
mount these letters to the glass windows or drill through the glass thus
creating the need for the stringer and raceway mounting to house
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 17 of 44 August 7, 2012
letter/LED transformers and wire"jumpers"that go from letter to letter.
2b 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: Given the conditions of this building and the unique
circumstances involved (i.e. sign area width & fagade material) they are
limited to signage area and it is not applicable to other property in the
ORA-2 district.
2c The granting of this variance 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 proposed signage will be fabricated from quality
materials by skilled union craftsmen. The proposed signage will be
reviewed and approved by a State of Illinois licensed engineer to ensure a
safe and secure sign installation. Lastly,the area in which this sign is to be
located within is a commercial/retail area with similar signage installed.
2d. 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: Given the current commercial nature of the property no
negative impact would result in the approval of the signage variance. No
changes will be made to the building.
2e. That the purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a desire
to make more money out of the property.
RESPONSE: The request was based on providing ample and sufficient
exposure for Lewis University and its new location in Oakbrook and has
no monetary interest in the property. The building has a hardship due to
the architectural design.
2f. That the alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any
person presently having an interest in the property.
i
RESPONSE: Their hardship stems from the strict application of the
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 18 of 44 August 7, 2012
zoning ordinance and the unique circumstances this building offers not
from any sole entity or person with interest in this property. The building
was designed and constructed in 1983 prior to the sign regulations were
changed.
Chairman Davis noted that there was a staff comment in the case file that
said if a raceway was used, it needs be of a material and a location on the
building that aesthetically matches the building's architectural features. He
questioned if that had been covered.
Mr. Ensign responded that the raceway is made up of aluminum material
that is a 5-inch tali raceway and would be painted to match the window
mullions to the best of their ability and in a sense it would blend in with the
building. He noted that the same would go for the stringer system.
Member Ziemer questioned the 2x2 stringer that was identified as being
galvanized and questioned if it could be aluminum to match the facade.
Mr. Ensign responded that they need the overall ability to weld the frame
support system.
Member Ziemer responded that the material and finish as noted by staff
and the placement of the stringers do not seem to align with the mullions
on the building and it would want to in order to blend in so it would not
look like something just hung on a building and would be more
incorporated with the structure.
Mr. Ensign responded that they could definitely move them around
because they are not specifically set in the location shown. They are
necessary in order for the sign to be hung.
Member Ziemer said that the material, the finish and the placement of the
vertical stringers should align with the mullions.
William Lindeman, 11 Pembroke Lane said that this matter was a perfect
example that professional advice should be available to the board. He said
that a lot of money was spent to create a sign code that specifically
prohibits raceway-mounted signage, such as shadows when the sun passes
over the 5-inch space. He said that it was a tacky type of sign and that it
was cheap and ugly and that it was not an Oak Brook type of installation
and is not the goal going forward with redevelopment and modernization.
The value of the sign is probably$30,000 a month. His friend from Lamar
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 19 of 44 August 7, 2012
Adverting and the signage for Rasmussen is worth about $25,000 a month,
which would be the value that the tenant would p lace on it. Evidently the
lease is contingent on the approval of a tacky sign. There is no revenue to
the village from Lewis University at this location. They do benefit the
schools and Park District and other entities. They are moving from one
building to another and the village is squandering the value of the signage
created by the new ordinance. It has been squandered on Rasmussen
College, Olivet Nazarene and Lewis University, none of which contribute
sales tax, or generate taxes for the village. He said that there was no
reason for a sign that large because you do not need to be seen by a million
cars a day because if you want to find a building, people use a street
address. It is strictly for name recognition. The issue of signage was
taken away from the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Plan Commission
joint meeting by the Village Board to accommodate a sign ordinance to
permit Gibsons to order their sign and that type of behavior should be
history. If the board is going forward there should be an expert attending
all meetings or at least making recommendations on how to address issues
that go beyond the expertise available on the Zoning Board.
Chairman Davis swore in Mr. Lindeman in that he made factual statements
rather than just his opinion.
Mr. Ensign responded that he did not view the sign as being tacky by any
means. The sign provides name recognition for Lewis University that is
absolutely needed. A sign is a businesses most effective form of
advertising and if it is not done correctly or visible, it is basically pointless.
It is one of the most cost effective forms of advertising for a business. It is
needed and blends in well with the other signage in the area.
Member Ziemer questioned if it would be an issue for Lewis University if
the sign were 20 percent smaller and conformed to the 140 square foot
requirement.
Wayne Draudt, Executive Vice President at Lewis University said that
drawings were provided showing the sign with 140 square feet and noted
that there was a difference for a sign that is 100 feet in the air and from his
visual standpoint, it would look small, unless it is to the scale that it was
designed to be in proportion to the building itself.
Member Ziemer noted that there are regulations and everything else could
be provided except that it would be 20 percent smaller.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 20 of 44 August 7, 2012
Mr. Draudt responded that signage was very important to them; otherwise
they would not have requested the variance. The way that it has been
presented with the 177 square feet is what they are seeking.
Mr. Ensign provided copies of the sign showing it at 140 square feet that
was reviewed by the Zoning Board.
Member Savino said that the request was for four variation requests and
the one that he had a problem with was the size of the sign. He was
concerned with approving the size of the sign that could create a precedent
of the relatively new ordinance. He asked why two lines of text were not
allowed in the ordinance.
Director of Community Development Kallien responded that during the
review process they went through a consultant to provide a set of text. It
was their recommendation based on studies of other sign codes that the
majority of them limited wall signs to one line of text, so it seemed
reasonable. The caveat always was that if someone needed a different
arrangement that there was a variation process available. The consultant
was very clear in stressing to the board that it would be very difficult to
create a sign code that could deal with all situations and all buildings.
Because buildings are built at different times and some buildings in Oak
Brook can readily accommodate the signage allotted to them and others are
challenged architecturally to accommodate them, so they left that avenue
open so that if someone needed something that did not fit, then that was
when the variation process would be used.
Member Savino questioned how 140 square feet was determined.
Director of Community Development Kallien responded that a geometric
box is drawn around the letters. Under the old code it was extremely
restrictive and there were varying ways as to how the signage was
calculated. In some cases the size of the individual letters were calculated.
Now there is a signable area as defined by the code, which is determined
by a geographical square. The square footage was determined to be a
reasonable number by the consultant that applied to all of the buildings.
There are two exceptions; for buildings that are less than 5 stories are
limited to 100 square feet and for the four tallest office buildings that are
12-13 stories can have up to 300 square feet.
i
Member Nimry noted that on page La of the case file, in the code there is
as much as 250 square feet for 4 buildings on 22"d Street. In addition, if
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 21 of 44 August 7, 2012
there are 10 or more letters there is extra square footage allowed, The word
University has 10 letters. Even if it does not apply to this building, when
you start to cram 10 letters in a smaller square footage, it would become
harder to see.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that some sign changes
are going to be made in the coming months and will be going to the Plan
Commission and then to the Zoning Board. The recommendation would
be for some tweaking in order to level the playing field for some of the
buildings, because there seems to be a great differentiation between a 5-
story building and what a 6-story building can do as well as an 8-story
building versus a 13 story building. There will be a recommendation for
some modest tweaking to balance it out. There have been things brought
to the village's attention, such as some of these things can be
accommodated in a text amendment.
Member Savino questioned why the raceway request had not been
previously included.
Director of Community Development Kallien responded that the code does
not mention the word raceway; it mentions that each letter must be
individually affixed to the wall of the structure. In this case the applicant
is stating that with the support of the building, and the type of material it is
not possible. When the Rasmussen sign was initially installed, there was a
raceway, and Mr. Lindeman was correct that it did not look good. One
tended to focus in on the band underneath the letters. It was not approved
that way, and the village asked that the sign be modified to mask the
raceway and when they were unable to do so, they were taken down. In.
this case, we are not aware of a technology that exists to accomplish
putting letters on this particular building.
Member Savino said that he did not see the need for 177 square feet of
signage and he thought the 140 feet would be adequate, although he would
go along with the other three variation requests because there are hardships
with those requests. There was testimony that Lewis University started out
in the Marriott Hotel and the existing sign on York Road and 22°d is
smaller. The hardship being community awareness, although they have
been in the Village for 34 years without the visibility that they are now
seeking. They have grown and are doubling in size and he did not see the
hardship. The only visibility would be from the east. He would vote for
the three, but not the increase in size for the sign.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 22 of 44 August 7, 2012
Mr. Draudt in response said that the signage is a big deal to the University.
The Rasmussen sign is 230-240 square feet and then looking at the
proportionality of the two, what is proposed is a very professional looking
sign and it is not cheap.
Tracy Mulqueen, Greater Oak Brook Area Chamber of Commerce and
Economic Development Partnership, said that it was important to
emphasize and review that we have gone through an economic crisis in this
country and businesses are reevaluating what they need to do business and
where they put their business has everything to do with that. The Oak
Brook community has come up with a really great sign ordinance to work
with and it requires that there are aesthetics that are adhered to and the
board members are knowledgeable and keep a good eye on what happens.
Arden Realty and Lewis University are amazingly good at this and would
never want to put up anything that would not look good because they are
competing with other communities to attract people to their building. She
agreed with Mr. Draudt that proportionality is important because all
buildings are different and to allow them the request for the amount of
square footage they are seeking is in the best interest of this building, in the
economic development program, and the staff and landlords can be trusted
to do a good job on this, so she asked for reconsideration as to the feelings
regarding the size of the sign; and know that they are working together to
make this a beautiful sign in the community.
Chairman Davis said that Member Savino makes a good point that the Sign
ordinance is relatively and there is a request for 4 variations. A variation is
also the way to equalize some of the situations, which are not equal and
that includes building size and as was pointed out there are different square
footage signs that can be built in the same area, so he was not concerned
that they were seeking 177 square feet rather than 140 square feet. He felt
it was needed in this particular circumstance. In regards to Mr. Lindeman's
comment about the applicant not contributing to the taxes, etc. If Lewis
University was not locating in this space, then some other office or
business would be there that might be in the same situation, so the
comment was irrelevant.
Mr. Lindeman said that the tax issue was not relevant here, but he pointed
out there was a great difference in the height of the letters between Lewis
and University. To him that means that visibility is not a problem.
Obviously they felt that university could be read at the distance desired.
The size of the lettering on Lewis should be able to be reduced to come
within the 140 feet.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 23 of 44 August 7, 2012
Member Nimry said that suggestion would destroy the sign aesthetically, if
they were made the same size.
Mr. Draudt noted that the logo for the sign is the same as on the Lewis
University business cards, letterhead,etc.
Director of Community Development Kallien added that when the sign
code was developed, there was a great concern that it not allow for the
actual corporate identity, when it was first drafted. The consultant
proposed that all of the letters be white. After discussions with the
Chamber and business community, many of the corporate tenants'
trademark signage is in color. No one would expect to see a McDonald's
with white arches or a Starbucks that is not green, that is their trademark
colors. In the code it does have the ability to allow for their trademark
identity,which is what Mr. Draudt was trying to show.
Chairman Davis noted that the applicant had addressed the standards for
the variation as requested.
It was the preference of the board to group the variation requests into one
motion.
i
Motion by Member Nimry, seconded by Member Bulin to recommend
approval of the following requested variations for the property located at
111122 nd Street,
1. Section 13-11-10C.8 — to permit the wall sign to contains two (2)
lines of text;
2. Section 13-11-IOD2.c — to permit the installation of a 177 square
foot wall sign on the east elevation (maximum now permitted is
140 square feet);
3. Section 13-11-10E.4 — to permit the sign to cover an architectural
feature(existing window/wall panel lines); and
4. Section 13-11-100.4 and 13-11-4A.7.d — to permit a raceway to
mount the sign letters(instead of individually mounted letters).
The recommendation was subject to the following conditions:
1. The proposed sign shall be constructed in substantial conformance
to the approved plans.
2. If a raceway is used, it must be of a material and a location on the
building that aesthetically matches the building's architectural
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 24 of 44 August 7, 2012
features so that is not visible when installed.
3. Add the condition "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 Chairman Davis
Nays: 1 —Member Savino
Absent: 1 --Member Young. Motion carried.
Chairman Davis called for a break at 8:57 p.m. He resumed the meeting
resumed at 9:10 pan.
5. D. OAK BROOK PARK DISTRICT — 1450 FOREST GATE ROAD — OAK BROOK PARK
DIST-1450 FORL:ST
VARIATIONS — SECTION 13-3-8A STRUCTURE HEIGHT FOR THE GATE RD-
SOCCER FIELD LIGHT STANDARDS AND AMEND CONDITIONS vARIA'I'IONS-
SOCCER FIELD
OF ORDINANCE S-1084 AND S-1296 TO EXTEND THE USE OF THE LIGHTS
EXISTING BALL FIELD LIGHTS STRUCTURE HT-
AMLNDOIWS-1296
TO EXTEND USE OF
THE FIELD LIGHTS
Chairman Davis swore in those that testified at this hearing.
Laure Kosey, Executive Director, Oak Brook Park District reviewed the
requests. They were seeking relief to Zoning Ordinance Section 13-3-8A
to allow for the 70 foot light standards at the new athletic field. She
addressed the standards for the variation 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: In order to meet the recreational needs of the community as
stated in its mission statement, as well as addressing requests from its
constituency, the residents of Oak Brook, the Park District requested
similar amendment to the variation granted for the installation of the ball
field lights in Ordinance S-1084. The Park District's property is zoned for
recreational use. The proposed amendment to the variation will allow the
Park District to maximize the properties recreational potential and fulfill
the recreation needs of the users.
lb. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances
RESPONSE: Currently, the Park District is the only entity I in the
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 25 of 44 August 7, 2012
community that provides outdoor lighted baseball and synthetic turf soccer
fields.
lc. The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the
locality
RESPONSE: The request for permission to install light poles at the soccer
field would not change the essential character of the location. The lights
located on Field 1 have similar sized poles that have not disrupted the
aesthetic quality of the surrounding properties. The Illumination Summary
conducted by MUSO stated that no light from these proposed light poles
would escape the boundaries of the Park District.
2a. The particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the specific property involved would bring particular
hardship upon the owner as distinguished from a mere inconvenience
if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out
RESPONSE: The Park District's mission of providing the best in
recreational programs and facilities to the residents of Oak Brook would be
compromised because of verifiable needs not being met. Safety is the
primary concern of the District. The amendments would provide for the
proper amount of illumination for the safe use of the athletic fields.
2b 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: The Oak Brook Park District is the only organization in the
community that provides these types of facilities. Lighted baseball and
synthetic turf soccer fields are not maintained by any other governmental
entity or commercial establishment in the Village of Oak Brook.
2c The granting of this variance 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 District has reached out to the surrounding property
owners in the adjacent Forest Gate Subdivision to keep them well informed
about these requested amendments.
2d. 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
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 26 of 44 August 7, 2012
impair property values within the neighborhood.
RESPONSE: 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.
2e. That the purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a desire
to make more money out of the property.
RESPONSE: The proposed request is based on the requests of the
community members and are not motivated by profit. The proposed lights
for the synthetic turf soccer field are necessary for safe use after dark.
2f. That the alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any
person presently having an interest in the property.
RESPONSE: The residents of the Oak Brook have created the impetus for
the proposed variances in order to seek additional opportunities to utilize
the communities' existing recreational facilities.
They had met with the interested Forest Gate homeowners and the new
lights do not seem to be an issue. They have done an illumination
summary as well as invested in shields so that no light from the proposed
structures would escape the boundaries of the Park District. She identified
the location of the new synthetic soccer field, which is located in the center
of Central Park. There would be four, 70-foot high standards poles
Chairman Davis noted that the second variation related to the timing of the
lights and questioned that request would also apply to the soccer field
lights.
Ms. Kosey responded that it would.
Director of Community Development Kallien clarified that a variance is
need in order to install 70-foot poles. The reason they are seeking a
variation to the other existing ordinance is the other ordinance was
approval of a variance and the only way to modify the approved variation
is to open it as a new request for a variation.
Ms. Kosey said that the second variation request is to amend the automatic
shut off time for all of the field lights until 10:30 p.m. After they met with
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 27 of 44 August 7, 2012
a few of the Forest Gate residents on July27, 2012. Their concerns
stemmed from the lights on ball field 1 being on until 10:30, because that
field has the tallest lights and the highest elevation of all the fields. After
much discussion a compromise was reached to have automatic shut off by
10:30 p.m. for all fields, except field 1,which would shut off at 10:00 p.m.
Member Nimry questioned how far the new soccer field lights would be
from the Forest Gate Subdivision and whether the lights would have any
impact on the residents.
Ms. Kosey responded that she was not sure if they would have any impact
and noted that there is a lot of tall landscape in between and the
Illumination Summary indicated that it would not go to the end of the
parking lot. She noted that the elevation is lower by the soccer field.
Andrea Cygan, 12 Forest Gate Circle said that the subdivision is located
immediately across the street from the Park District and said that she
opposed the variation request as presented for the soccer field lights and
the extension of the light timing on the baseball fields. She noted that her
comments were based on her personal viewpoint, but noted that she was a
member of the board of directors of the Forest Gate Subdivision and has
had the opportunity to hear the opinions of some of the residents.
She noted that a petition was included in the case file that had been signed
by several residents in Forest Gate and agreed with her statements. She
said that Laure Kosey met with three representatives of the subdivision to
explain the variance details. However, there were still problems and
unanswered questions from a nuisance, safety and property value
perspective. The new soccer field was built for mostly teen and or adult.
soccer leagues. Most, if not all would come from outside the Oak Brook
area. In order to mitigate the effects they requested that the lights be
turned off earlier than requested and that the days of use be restricted. The
negative effects consist of the following points:
1. There is only one-way in or out of the area, which puts a great deal
of traffic and congestion on Forest Gate Drive.
2. The concern is not only the increased traffic but late night noise and
the attraction of strangers to Oak,Brook.
3. Participation by teens or adults means loud cheering, noise from
cars until around 11:00 p.m.
4. Alcohol related problems cannot be ruled out.
5. Degrading the property value of Forest Gate due to the nuisances
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 28 of 44 August 7, 2012
would not be in the best interest of the Village as a whole.
6. Turning off the lights at a reasonable time and restricting days of
use would help to abate those concerns.
7. They are attempting to ascertain the reason for the soccer field
development. Mostly park district are enriched for the residents
enjoyment, but that is not the reason in this case because the use of
the soccer field would be used primarily by non Oak Brook
residents. If the reason is revenue, the residents wonder if the end
justifies the means. If the goal is revenue would the next step be
grandstands attempting to attract minor league teams, even for
practice purposes; or building a concession stand for participants.
What good is it to raise money for the village while at the same
time devaluing neighboring properties and negatively affecting the
well being of the very residents that money is being raised for.
8. They would like the lights on the baseball fields kept to their
current time schedule, which is 10:00 p.m. for fields 2, 3, and 4
and 9:00 for field 1. When the residents meet with Laure they were
of the opinion that the time extension applied to little league only
for double headers in April, May and June. They fully support the
Oak Brook little league. After clarification it was determined that
any and all leagues would be able to use fields, 2, 3, and 4 to the
extended time of 10:30. Although, the little league was the only
one to ask for the extension. The ordinance indicates that the fields
can be in use until November 15 for youth leagues and October 31
for adult leagues.
All of the reasons cited regarding traffic, noise, and non Oak Brook
participants and attendees apply to these fields as well as the soccer field.
Additionally even though the effects of the tall baseball lights have been
reduced through buffers and directions, the lights from two of the fields
directly impact the nearby homes.
As word gets out that Oak Brook has lighted fields with a liberal policy
for hours, more leagues would become interested and want to contract.
More traffic would travel on the narrow Forest Gate Road and more
strangers would congregate. More noise and the other ramifications
already mentioned may occur turning their recreational oasis into a
commercial enterprise.
Chairman Davis asked for clarification that the objection was to the lights
on the soccer field.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 29 of 44 August 7, 2012
Ms. Cygan responded that they are not necessarily objecting to the lights.
It's been proven that the lumens have been taken into consideration and
there are going to be buffers and it is a lower elevation. They would prefer
that the lights not be 70 feet, which is the lights on field 1, which is very
intrusive into Forest Gate. It was more the ramifications of the extended
hours and the amount of time that the fields would be used was their
concerns.
Chairman Davis asked how many residents were in Forest Gate.
Ms.Cygan responded that there were about 78 homes.
Member Nimry noted that 6 homeowners signed the petition.
Russell McLaughlin, 3412 Adams Road, said that he had been playing
soccer for decades, and his kids play soccer and he knew ever field in the
area. He has coached, refereed, everything and he was so astounded by
what he had just heard that he wanted to give the board some reality. The
reality is that they do not have soccer hooligans in this area. IIe has never
seen alcohol at any adult or child soccer game. re are not although he was
there for another matter on the event. As far as crowd noise,he questioned
to be shown a soccer game that has a big crowd. He said that was just the
way it was around this area. It is a subtle sport with a couple of parents,
maybe two per child if you are really kicky. There are not many people
watching and although grandstands are a fantasy of his, they are not reality.
There is definitely a shortage of nighttime fields. As a coach he has tried
to find fields, but you cannot find them. There are lit fields, but they are
for the Hawk club and they cannot get access to them with the Oak Brook
Soccer Club. They usually play on the same fields as the park district until
it gets dark, usually past dark, and the kids are playing until it is almost
pitch black out and it is very difficult to get a game in and to get practices
in, and you just cannot do it. There is a set time for the parents to pick up
the kids, but towards the end of the season, at 8:00 it is pitch black. There
just not enough fields that are lit. By coincidence he played at the field
with the artificial turf today, up until the time for this meeting and for
lighted fields it did not look like it had half the lights that most lighted
fields have. There were only four light poles and for the three fields, that
seems to be a low number of lights compared to Vic park, which is where
he drives to in the winter, when it is dark early where his kids have their
soccer practice. He has to drive his kids to Hinsdale, sometimes into Cook
County at different times of the year in order to find a lit field, which is j
very difficult. The kids want to practice here,but they drive 30 miles away
i
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 30 of 44 August 7, 2012
sometimes and the distance is great. There is a need for these fields and
that particular field is so far away from the subdivision. Traffic might
impact it, if they had a lot of traffic, but they don't. It is a small sport. As
far as hooligans, alcohol, foreigners; he just didn't see it. There is a real
need for it for the residents of Oak Brook and there is a need for the lights
and the later hours.
Mr. Mullins, 32 Regent Drive said that he has been the president of the
Oak Brook league for the last 6 years. He said that they do not have too
many night games that would really affect the Forest Gate community. He
noted that his mother lives in Forest Gate. IIe explained that what happens
is that there is a limited season that runs from April to June in order to get
their playoffs done and to be ready for the district tournaments,which then
qualifies them for the state tournaments. They generally start at 6:15-6:30,
which prevents them from having double headers and do not schedule
them due to the age of the children. They cannot start games earlier
because some have after school programs, they need to eat and need to get
home to do their homework. The time when they need to plan for the extra
night games is in the event of years like last, when there is a lot of rain.
They have to reschedule them as quickly as possible and they try do have
them on Friday evenings, and that is when they would schedule a double
headers at 6:00 and 8:00. They usually play, Monday — Thursday and on
Saturday and Sunday. At least twice this year they had Friday night games
and in the midst of a pitch the lights went out and it's dangerous. They just
cannot compress two games to be done by 10:00 p.m. They have tried,but
it is very difficult. In regards to the other outside clubs using the fields,
they have pretty much the field opportunities on fields 2 and 3 are use
pretty much exclusively, so that takes two fields out of the equation.
William Lindeman, 11 Pembroke Lane said that his concerns are related to
the lighting and time of lighting. He has no problem with the little league
needing to extend the time of the lighting. He was concerned as to who
was going to use the soccer fields and where the groups are going to come
from. He tried to obtain that information from the Park District and only
left with the knowledge that the lighting is left on until 10:30. He
questioned parking, attendance, behavioral issues, etc. Northbrook has
synthetic soccer fields with a 10:00 p.m. shut off time. People have to have
confidence when they locate in Oak Brook; they need to have some
protections regarding their property values. Someone somewhere needs to
draw the line.
Chairman Davis questioned whether some of the concerns that were
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 31 of 44 August 7, 2012
expressed regarding traffic flow, noise, crowds, is something that the
village could address if it should become a problem.
Director of Community Development Kallien responded that the village
could address the issue of parking on the street with traffic control. If
problems arise with overcrowding, etc, the police department could
address it.
Member Nimry said that this is being made to sound like someone is going
to the Cubs game. He took both of his kids to little league and baseball
and he never went to a game with a cooler in his trunk and a six pack. He
did not think that parents of these youths are going to go in there with
alcohol. He has been to the Park District when the parking lot is frill.
Forest Gate moved next to the Park District, not the other way around, so
that road was busy from day one. His question was if there is going to be
210 days between April 1 and October 31 available, how many of those
days would the fields be used.
Ms. Kosey responded that the soccer field would have the availability to be
used all of those days. Where the new synthetic soccer field is now
located, used to be soccer fields. The only change is the addition of the
lights. They have had games in the evening and on the weekends.
Member Nimry said that then the traffic would not change,it would just be
there later.
Ms. Kosey responded that it could possibly be there later. She noted that
there is a park district supervisor at Central Park during the rentals. They
are in charge if something is not going right to either call the Police or try
to correct. Staff is also there if there is ever any injury or if something
happens on a field. Going from 10:00 to 10:30 p.m. is more about trying to
accommodate the request of the little league. She had not had any other
requests. The impression might be that the gates would flood open once
10:30 would be approved, but it is not something that they are looking to
extend the rental times. They still do 2 hour time slots for the fields from 6
to 8 and from 8 to 10 and the lights shut off at 10:00. She looked at
Hinsdale and Western Springs who both have their parks in residential
areas, Hinsdale shut off is at 10:30 p.m. and Western Springs shut off time
is at 11:00 p.m.
Ms. Cygan said that they are in objection to the request as presented. If
certain details were provided they could publicly become compliant. They
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 32 of 44 August 7, 2012
don't want to restrict anyone,but she was under the impression that a lot of
the leagues that are going to play soccer are teens and adults. In regards to
liquor teens and adults are a different story. They would like certain
guarantees that they do not need to worry about some issues across the
street. When Forest Gate was built the lights were 35 feet and things
change with variances, which is why they are mentioning it ahead of time
so the details can be covered so they are not put in a position of regretting
where they are living.
They love the little league and if they could be certain that the double
headers were for them that would be acceptable. The change opens it up to
a lot of other leagues.
Chairman Davis asked if a supervisor was on site at all times.
Ms. Kosey responded they are when the fields are in use. She noted that if
approved until 10:30 and a game ended at 10:00 the lights would
physically be shut off earlier. The park side supervisor is already
employed by the park district.
Walter Barber, Forest Gate said that he was in the group that met with Ms.
Kosey. They are not seeing the need or the demand. If the little league
needs the ability to have the lights on later, they should have that ability
between April through June that would be okay, but they do not see the
need to push the whole schedule back to 10:30. He walked through there
the other night at 7:00-7:30,there were ball games going on and he did not
see a single Oak Brook vehicle parked in that part of the lot, they were all
from other towns. They need people from other towns to support this
venue and it is a great park.district, but it needs to be managed. Keep the
current time schedule and figure out a way to adjust the time when the little
league needs the lights on later.
Chairman Davis asked Ms. Kosey to tell the board about the meetings with
the residents.
Ms. Kosey responded that they met with three residents on July 27, 2012
and she was under the impression that they had come to a compromise to
not have the field I lights on until 10:30. She thought that everyone left
happy. Then when Mr. Barber sent an email, she asked for a point of
clarification that the Park District common practice is that they will rent to
anyone, and they seemed like it was just going to be little league, so she
wanted to make that clarification. She again met with them on August 2 at
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 33 of 44 August 7, 2012
their homeowner's association meeting, which is held at the Park District.
She told them that it was common practice to let anyone request it. She
does not see anyone requesting it. She sees it for double headers, rain
delays,those kinds of things is where the Park district is coming from.
Chairman Davis asked if the lights are turned off if the fields are not in use.
Ms. Kosey responded that if they are not in use,the lights are not turned on
because it is an additional expense for the entity renting it.
Ernie Karras, 75 Forest Gate Circle, said that the light negations go way
back and how the effect their community. It was a good faith negotiation.
The previous approval, restricted youth activities to certain fields. They
did a good job to shield the lights from their community. Lights of this
nature loom all over the community. It is the glare from the lights
themselves that are blinding. This was negotiated with the Park District
and they shielded the lights. The new lights should not be installed until a
glare study is done to properly shield the lights. It was initially feared that
it would increase traffic congestion and children darting in and out of cars.
The parking lot is completely filled at night. More safety is needed, the
street has no streetlights and is very dark and the children cannot be
controlled. The parking needs to be rethought to think of safety. They are
increasing the hours for others not the little league; this is not the good
faith compromise that they had with the Park District. He is fully in favor
of the little league, but does not believe that Forest Gate should be
inconvenienced or exposed to greater nuisance and safety hazard to
increase night Park District revenue from greater field rentals for adults
outside of the community at the expense of Forest Gate.
Ms. Kosey responded that the light structures on the soccer fields will have
shields on them. The concerns that she hears from the residents she agrees
with. They do not want people drinking alcohol and creating noise, which
is why they have the park site supervisor. She understands, but the 30
minutes they are requesting is not something that is going to be every
single night. The differences in the heights of the light have to do with the
size of the fields. That is why they are asking for the lights on fields, 2, 3
and 4 until 10:30 because they are smaller so typically older people would
rent field 1 because it is a much larger field.
Member Ziemer asked about the light controls.
Ms. Kosey responded that it was programmable.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 34 of 44 August 7, 2012
Member Savino asked how the current times were established.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that it was a number
that was agreed upon by all the parties.
Member Nimry said that his concern was that the lights are on now until
10:00 adding a half an hour will not make a difference with alcohol, etc.
and asked if they were having a problem.now. He was confused as to what
the issue would be because it would not create new problems.
Ms. Kosey said that they do not and the lights are on until 10:00.
Tom Cygan, said that he sees an agenda here to move the facilities away
from the Park District Mission statement. Regarding opportunities for the
residents of Oak Brook. If there is going to be a business objective by
renting out the fields by everyone that wants to use them then it should be
turned into a business.
Member Cappetta commented that it appears to be all speculation as to
who would rent the fields and it would bring in people out of town. How
does anyone know that?
Ms. Kosey could not answer the question. They offer the opportunity for
anyone to rent any of the facilities.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that if they are granted
approval to put lights up at the soccer field,testing will be needed with the
lights on to make sure that there is not unanticipated light spillage.
Ms. Kosey said that they have invited Forest Gate to come to the testing.
The Standards were addressed in testimony and in writing in the case file.
VARIATION - SOCCER FIELD LIGHTS HEIGHT
Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Nimry to recommend
approval of the variation request to permit the soccer field lights to be
constructed to 70 feet in height, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the lights will be tested for glare after the installation with the
participation of staff and representatives of Forest Gate
Homeowner Association.
2. Notwithstanding the attached exhibits the applicant shall meet all
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 35 of 44 August 7, 2012
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, Savino, Ziemer and
Chairman Davis
Nays: 0—
Absent: 1 —Member Young. Motion Carried.
VARIATION—AMEND CONDITIONS OF ORDINANCE S-1296 and 5-
1084
Motion by Member Nimry Bulin, seconded by Chairman Davis to
recommend approval of the variation request to amend the conditions of 5-
1296 and S-1084 to allow the lights on the ball fields, including the soccer
field,subject to the following conditions:
1. That lights on the soccer field and baseball fields 2, 3 and 4 to be
extended to 10:30 p.m.
2. That the lights on baseball field 1 to be extended to 10:00 p.m.
3. All other conditions contained in Ordinances S-1296 and S-1084
will remain in full force and effect.
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 VOTE:
Ayes: 4—Members Cappetta,Nimry, Savino and Chairman Davis
Nays: 2—Members Bulin and Ziemer
Absent: 1 —Member Young. Motion Carried.
4. B. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK — TEXT AMENDMENT —AMEND THE vvoll D N'r TEXT
tv
ZONING REGULATIONS TO CLARIFY THE REGULATIONS FOR CLARIFY THE
RF,MA11ONS FOR
CEMETERIES CEMETERIES
Director of Community Development Kallien summarized the background of
this case and said that many hours have been spent on the review of cemeteries
including meetings at the Plan Commission, two meetings with the Village
Board and now the Zoning Board of Appeals is holding the official public
hearing. The Village Board gave staff very defined direction as to what they
were looking for in terms of the text amendment. Normally with text
amendments there are minimal notification requirements. In this particular case
the Village took extra steps so that interested parties could participate in the
hearing. Public hearing signs were placed at each cemetery, letters were sent to
all property owners that abut all four of the cemeteries, both of which resulted
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 36 of 44 August 7, 2012
in many phone calls being received by the department. At the last Zoning
Board of Appeals meeting the public hearing was initiated and started out with
a narrow approach to the public hearing. The new owners of Bronswood
identified some very long-term extensive plans for the property. As a result they
recently provided details at to what they were actually seeking, which was
included in the case file.
Member Nitnry said that he was not at the last meeting and spent the weekend
watching the video of the meeting and reviewed the materials in the case file.
At the end he was confused because there were headstones and artwork
included and asked what were we trying to do.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that the objective is to make
all of the cemeteries legal and then to make some prospective regulations going
forward so that if things were to occur, structure-wise in a cemetery there could
be an expectation of what the rules are.
Member Nimry asked if the Village would define a mausoleums shape, size and
height and whether an angel, etc., could be placed in a cemetery. In watching
the video, Mr. Troost made a lot of common sense comments because he knew
cemeteries. A comment was made that the maximum height of most
mausoleums is 22-24 feet, which makes sense, so it would make sense to
regulate mausoleums so that they do not exceed 24 feet. His concern would be
then to add a cross, which could possibly be another 10-12 feet. The other
thing that concerned him was for the people that live across from the cemetery,
so it should be shielded from them. In Trinity Lakes, 31"was shielded from the
homeowners by adding a berm and trees, by giving almost 30 feet in height,the
people would not see it. With something like that a mausoleum could be put on
the lot line and not be seen. The village should not tell them what kind of
bench or headstone could be used. Administrative and service buildings should
comply with the building codes. The village should not be involved in
headstones and the like it should be kept simple not made complicated. Let the
cemetery regulate them. It's really only about one cemetery the others are very
small.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that he did not think the
village should be involved in regulating normal headstones.
Chairman Davis added that a lot of what was presented at the meeting was
educational for the board.
Director of Community Development Kallien noted that new details were
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 37 of 44 August 7, 2012
added to the case files and the village attorney has been in discussions with
Bronswood's attorney and people were in attendance to give their opinion or
provide details. Taking action at this meeting would be premature because
things may be mentioned that may be considered.
Tent' O'Malley, President of Breakenridge Farm Subdivision, said that
Bronswood is a beautiful property. Cemeteries are rare and beautiful
commodities. He agreed with Member Nimry that out of sight is out of mind
build a berm, but they cannot be built because there are fences there with
gravestones right next to them. There was an issue and some residents were
concerned because the mausoleum is on the edge of the road and a berm could
not be built. It was an oversight and upset people. There are some issues that
need to be addressed. Build a berm. He questioned if there would oversight on
water retention, and development could have an impact on some properties in
the area. There are a lot of residents in the community with plots in the
cemetery and have their own view. The new plan suggests varying setbacks
with structure height and thought the 100 foot setback should be kept going
forward. Bronswood previously had talked about only adding 3 or 4 additional
mausoleum sites left, the new plan has a lot more going on in it than originally
discussed. Seeing the cemetery there did not inconvenience him, but seeing a
lot of structures and a 70-foot spire, that would change the character of the
neighborhood. To keep the character going forward they need to listen to the
residents. There are people that would like Bronswood to be their final resting
place and want to have a relationship with the people in the community so that
they are not at odds with each other.
Anthony Pasquinelli, Breakenridge Farm resident, said that he received the
packet of information about the cemetery plans. He did not believe that a
cemetery should be an ostentatious way for someone to display their wealth.
He did not know who benefits from that, but it is not the resiedents that live
nearby. He referred to it as a cemetery city of almost high rises and did know
where it came from or why it came about and there is no benefit to the Village
of Oak Brook or those that live in the neighborhood. He was completely
against it.
Cart Kremer, 3712 Adams Road and live directly across from the largest
mausoleum in the cemetery. There is no berm or room for a berm. The
cemetery master plan, shows a lot more mausoleums and located less than 30
feet from the road. They did not move there to look across the street at a sea of
mausoleums and crypts. The cemetery proposal spoils the nature and beauty of
Oak Brook. Adding a berm, if possible, would not shield all of the surrounding
neighbors. Allowing,25-40 foot structures and a spire does not only negatively
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 38 of 44 August 7, 2012
impact Adams Road, but also those on Madison. It's a city of mausoleums and
crypt, it is not why they moved here and she was opposed to the proposal.
They have already done what they want and there is a very large mausoleum
right off Adams Road that has not been addressed and now there is more to be
built. She asked that the Zoning Board weight it very carefully and could not
imagine who would want to move next to a sea of mausoleums.
Russell McLaughlin, 3412 Adams Road, said that he was shocked when the
mausoleum was built and noted that he had to apply for a permit for a little
shed. Berms are not attractive and you don't want them across from your
house, or a mausoleum. He didn't think that the dead people in there care
whether they were located further from the road or that the people that paid for
and come visit once every rate moment should take precedence over the people
that live right there. People are trying to make the most ornate thing they can
think of in order to get the spot noticed. On Adams Road there are no
sidewalks or the ability to have sidewalks and there is constant foot traffic that
walks in the street. They cannot be safe being located right off the road.
There are trees off to the other side, but they bend a little. The whole thing is
shocking to him. Cemeteries can be quaint, and this was, but mausoleums are
not quaint,they add a whole other dimension.
Diane Drabkin, 3600 Adams Road said that at the last meeting the people at
Bronswood said that they were interested in getting a variation to buy smaller
parcels of land; instead of 25 acres they were interested in less than 5 acres.
This concerns her; because where they would intend to expand it would have an
impact on their property values and traffic. She would like to stop it. She does
not]snow many cemeteries that are right in the middle of residences. They all
love their homes and pay taxes and she said that the Zoning Board should think
about protecting their assets.
Member Nimry clarified on what he had said earlier, regarding the mausoleum
maximum height 20-24 feet and anything about that include spires was not
included. He said to isolate the cemetery from the residents and that includes if
they have to dig at the lot line and plant trees that are thirty feet high, then that
is what he was asking for.
Tony DiCanio, Madison Street, President of the Fullersburg Woods Area
Association, said that he lives less than a quarter mile from the main entrance to
Bronswood and he also is a licensed funeral director, for over 40 years. He
noted that the board is responsible to the residents of Oak Brook. Corporately
owned cemeteries have no interest in the character of the community or the
residences surrounding the cemeteries. They have a single purpose to build for
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 39 of 44 August 7, 2012
a profit. Business is business, except that this is a unique cemetery. It was very
well kept, and the new owners would do the same, however the expansions that
they are suggesting are grand plans that would significantly change the
character of the cemetery itself, the general community. Fullersburg Woods is
a unique heavily wood community and Bronswood the way it stands right now
fits properly into the community and what they are proposing would make it out
of character for the area. The Zoning Board, as residents of the community owe
the residents the protection they deserve to keep the community what it is.
Oliver Drabkin, 3600 Adams Road said that government by the people for the
people. The Village is letting them off the hook because this mausoleum that
was built was a visible structure. Multiple Village employees must have driven
by there, because he sees Oak Brook trucks 5-10 times per day. The structure
was built right on the road and there is no question that the cemetery was a
commercial enterprise and the commercial zoning of 100 feet should have been
applicable. He heard from the Village that it was never enforced with the
cemetery. Just because it was never done before really doesn't mean that they
should not have been vigilant. He holds the Village responsible because the
government is for the people to protect its property and that is what the Village
is there for. What went on is a detriment to all of the people that live nearby.
The Village did not address the problem to begin with. It has not been
adequately explained and the board should see that nothing like this would ever
happen again.
Bob Lindgren, 1020 Birchwood Road, said that he agrees with his neighbors
and said that the zoning cart is before the horse. When the monstrosity was
built on Adams Road the process began at the Plan Commission and what role
we wanted cemeteries to play in the Village and how to go about guiding that
process. Now there is another master plan impacting the Fullersburg Woods
area. If we are not careful, it would color the process, where we are reacting
inappropriately to specific proposals from one property owner. It is appropriate
that setbacks are regulated as well as height and density. The density proposed
in the plan surprised him. Potential expansion is important and he is
uncomfortable with allowing planning decision to be driven by one proposal.
Director of Community Development Kallien offered to the residents if there
was anything additional they would like to provide regarding this matter to stop
by or contact the department or him by email or phone. The proposal was
structure a very defined and limited text amendment. Bronswood has offered
what they would like seen.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 40 of 44 August 7, 2012
Cari Kremer, 3712 Adams Road noted that the Bronswood plan identifies many
mausoleums that are less than 100 feet from Adams Road and asked how the
cemetery would be prevented from selling or installing any additional
mausoleums in that area. She requested a possible injunction.
Director of Community Development Kaliien responded that StoneMor had
indicated that they did not want to create problems and said that there would be
discussion with them. The Village Board would need to make the decision and
take that step.
Jeff Rathj en, StoneMor Senior Vice President of Operations, 2622 Red Fox
Lane, Manitowoc, Wisconsin said that in relationship to the master plan, it is
the first attempt to determine what they could do within the current code, which
includes the setback. The plan that was out there took into consideration the
setback and what would be in compliance with the 100-foot setback. The
facilities and structures dimensions were being misinterpreted, because it has
been located outside the 100 foot requirement. They were trying to be
community friendly by creating community awareness so that there could be
conversations about what they were trying to do so that they are not disrupting
the community. They are there to be partners not enemies and their future life
depends on the community not on anything other than what they have going on
in the community of Oak Brook. Their intentions are to be there and would
have a town meeting to go over the full master plan to get the residents
opinions. There is nothing that they have in the plan that they are trying to hide
or impose upon the residents,that is not their intentions. Their intentions are to
make everyone aware in the community of what they are looking at doing for
Bronswood. They are trying to look at Bronswood as a major part of the Oak
Brook community. He has attended 2 different meetings and has taken a lot of
driving through Oak Brook trying to get a better understanding of what the
expectations are in the community so that the development they are creating
would align with the current environment, the themes that they are working
with. They are not trying to create this monstrosity within the facility and the
misunderstanding of not clearly understanding what they are trying to create
with the packet that was put together, and the information was more a learning
tool so that people would have an understanding of what they were trying to
create so that when there were questions they could address them and have a
better understanding of the things that would be disruptive to the community
and things that wouldn't be disruptive and at that point in time could address
those things one at a time. They were there to say that they will not be doing
things that would be done outside the code. Their expectation, just like with
every community they do business in, is an obligation to abide by the codes of
the community.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 41 of 44 August 7, 2012
Norm Chimenti, Attorney for StoneMor and Bronswood, said that he had most
of the discussion on behalf of StoneMor and Bronswsood. The text amendment
was proposed by the Village. The Village invited and received comments from
Bronswood to the proposed amendment. Mr. Kallien asked if StoneMor had a
plan and if they would share it. They were happy to do that and had nothing to
hide because they thought it would give an understanding to their comments on
the amendments. They also provided a narrative for consideration. The hope
was to have it out sooner that it was distributed, but due to scheduling conflicts
they were unable to get together,which is why it was sent to the Village so late
and there was not enough time to review it with the residents. Judging from the
comments made by the residents at this meeting, there may now be a
misconception with respect to what Bronswood's intentions are, which is
understandable, because looking at drawings that are difficult to follow without
some discussion and explanation. Bronswood has no intention of endeavoring
to put anything out there that does not comply with the current state of the
Village Code. StoneMor did not build the Feldman mausoleum and was not the
owner at the time. The mausoleum could not have been built under any of the
circumstances with the code or in the terms of the master plan. These were
things that they had hoped to discuss all the plans with the residents and staff
prior to this hearing. They need to know what the resident's thoughts are and
how they feel about the plan and what suggestions they may have. At the next
meeting they would like to be able to speak knowledgeably to the real issues.
Cari Kremer asked for confirmation that Stonemor would comply with the
current 100 foot setback.
Chairman Davis noted that they had made that representation.
Mr. Pasquinelli said that he is not sure who is presenting the case and felt that
the people representing the cemetery would hope that it would just slide
through.
Chairman Davis said that was not the case and Mr. Kallien had said at the onset
of the meeting that the Village would like to study the plan received from
StoneMor in further detail and would be brought up at the next month's
meeting. The proposal is by the Village to consider what regulations are to be
imposed upon cemeteries. The Zoning Board of Appeals would do its best in
doing the right thing for the residents of Oak Brook and consider the matter,
Mr.Pasquinelli said that the matter should have been deferred.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 42 of 44 August 7, 2012
Chairman Davis responded that it was being deferred to the next meeting.
What was not deferred was the comments made by those that sat through this
meeting and allowed the opportunity for those comments to be made.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that all of the materials that
the residents have is what StoneMor put together, none of it is what the Village
has proposed. At the last meeting StoneMor did speak for a long time. Their
ideas are different from what the Village has proposed.
Diane Drabkin asked that this matter be heard at the beginning of the meeting.
She would like to hear what the Village would do and she understands that the
Village does not want to go into the business of policing the cemetery. She
would like to know what the laws are.
Director of Community Development Kallien said that he would try to have the
Village Attorney present at the next meeting.
Doug Kremer, 3712 Adams Road said that he was concerned and worried that a
mausoleum was put up that did not follow the requirements of the 100 foot
setback and the Village Attorney had stated that it was not enforced before and
the Village did not need to now and could decide if we would enforce it or not.
The new owners of the cemetery have said that they would abide by the setback
requirements, and he appreciates that. Quite honestly, the Village has said in
the past they have not done that and there was not a mandate requiring that the
cemetery would have to do that now. Apparently they will and would honor
that, but the Village did not. He asked what assurances they would have that
nothing else would be built. Their new proposal has and additional 25 to 30
mausoleums and some appear to be closer than the 100 foot requirement. He
questioned what would or would not be enforced and would like to know how
the Village Board would protect its residents.
Motion by Chairman Davis, seconded by Member Bulin to continue the public
hearing on this matter to the next meeting. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried
6. OTHER BUSINESS OTHER BUsnvESs
There was no other business to discuss
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Page 43 of 44 August 7, 2012
7. ADJOURNMENT: ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Member Bulin, seconded by Member Savino to adjourn the meeting
at 11:17 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 44 of 44 August 7, 2012