S-586 - 06/24/1986 - SPECIAL USE - Ordinances ORDINANCE NO. S- 586
AN ORDINANCE G ANT NG A SPECIAI� USE PERMIT TO &LOWCONSTRUCTION
`., OF A STRUCTURE IN A FLOOD PLAIN PURSUANT TO SECTION 10- 4 OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK_ BROOK_,_ ILLINOIS
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described herein have
petitioned the corporate authorities of the Village of Oak Brook, Du Page and Cook
Counties, Illinois, for a Special Use Permit under Section 10-34 of the Code of
Ordinances of the Village of Oak Brook, relating to flood plain and wetland
regulations; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing on such petition has been conducted by the
Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village on Mpy 6, 1986, pursuant to due and
appropriate legal notice; and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 1986, the Plan Commission of the Village of Oak
Brook submitted its recommendation to the President and Board of Trustees; and
WHEREAS, the proposed use is consistent with the best use of the flood
plain, provided that the conditions set forth below are satisfied; and
WHEREAS, the proposed use satisfies the requirements of and is
consistent with each of the factors set forth in Section 10-34(c) of the Code of
Ordinances of the Village of Oak Brook; and
WHEREAS, the corporate authorities of the Village of Oak Brook deem the
passage of this Ordinance to be in the best interest and in furtherance of the
general welfare of the Village of Oak Brook;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, DU PAGE AND COOK COUNTIES, ILLINOIS as follows:
Section 1: That the provisions of the preamble hereinabove set forth
are hereby adopted as though fully set forth herein.
Section 2: Pursuant to Section 10-34 of the Code of Ordinances of the
Village of Oak Brook, Illinois, a Special Use Permit is hereby granted to allow
construction of a house on the property commonly known as 45 Royal Vale Drive,
Oak Brook, Illinois, and legally described as follows:
Lot 175 in Ginger Creek, a Subdivision of parts of Section
Twenty-Seven and Twenty-Eight, Township Thirty-Nine North,
Range Eleven East of the Third Principal Meridian, according
to the Plat thereof recorded December 30, 1960 as Document
No. 992057 in Du Page County, Illinos.
Permanent Parcel #06-28-304-004
Section- J-: That the Special Use Permit herein granted in Section 2 of
this Ordinance is expressly subject to the following conditions:
1. That all land modifications and construction on the
Subject Property be done in substantial conformity with
the Proposed Site Grading Plan-Lot 175 drawn by Donald G.
Eddy Company, as last revised June 4, 1986, a copy of
which is attached hereto, labelled Exhibit A and made a
part hereof.
2. That the compensatory storage requirement is waived.
Section 4: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from
and after it passage and approval as provided by law.
Section 5: All ordinances, rules and regulations of the Village of Oak
Brook which are in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby
repealed to the extent of such conflict but only as they apply to the property
hereinbefore described.
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
)SS.
COUNTIES OF COOK & DU PAGE)
I , Marianne Lakosil do hereby certify that I
am the duly qualified and acting Village Clerk of the Village of
Oak Brook, DuPage and Cook Counties , Illinois .
I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that the annexed document is a
-true and correct copy of ORDINANCE NO. 5-586 AN ORDINANCE
GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A
STRUCTURE IN A FLOOD PLAIN PURSUANT TO SECTION 10-34 OF THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS (45 Royal
Vale Drive)
I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that the original document, of
which the annexed copy is a true copy, is entrusted to my care for c�
safekeeping and I am the keeper of the same. CON
C=
I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that I am the keeper of the re-
cords , Journals , entries , resolutions , ordinances, and documents
of the said Village of Oak Brook, DuPage and Cook Counties, Illinois .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and
affixed the corporate seal of the Village of Oak Brook this 25th
day of June 19 86
i `age Clerk o l t e i 'age o
Oak Brook, DuPage $ Cook Counties ,
Illinois .
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
June 24, 1986
X -
MEETING CALL
The Regular Meeting of the Board of Trustees was called to order by President
Cerne in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Village Commons at 7:30 P.M.
I. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: President Wence F. Cerne
Trustees Karen M. Bushy
Walter C. Imrie
Ronald P. Maher
Arthur W. Philip
Joseph H. Rush
H. Richard Winters
ABSENT: None
- II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Trustee Philip moved, seconded by Trustee Winters...
That the Minutes of the Committee-of-the-Whole Meeting of June 9, 1986 be
approved as corrected and waive reading of same.
VOICE VOTE: All present, in favor. So ordered.
Trustee Philip moved, seconded by Trustee Winters...
That the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 10, 1986 be approved as
submitted and waive reading of same.
VOICE VOTE: All present, in favor. So ordered.
III. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
._ ORDINANCE NO 5-586 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A STRUCTURE IN A FLOOD PLAIN PURSUANT TO SECTION
10- 4 OF DINANCES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK ILLINOIS
1 e • ve
Discussed and direction given at the Regular Meeting of June 10, 1986.
Trustee Philip moved, seconded by Trustee Imrie...
To pass and approve'Ordinance No. 5-586 as presented and waive reading
of same.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Philip, Winters
and President Cerne.
Nays: Trustee Rush
Absent: None So ordered.
B. ORDINANCE NO. 5-587 AN ORDINANCE ASCERTAINING THE PREVAILING RATE OF
WAGES FOR LABORERS, WORKMEN AND MECHANICS EMPLOYED ON PUBLIC WORKS IN
THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, DU PAGE AND COOK COUNTIES, ILLINOIS:
Trustee Rush moved, seconded by Trustee Winters...
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes -1- June 24, 1986
ORDINANCE NO. S- 586
le
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION
OF A STRUCTURE IN A FLOOD PLAIN PURSUANT TO SECTION 10-34 OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK,_ILLINOIS
(45Royal Vale Drive)
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described herein have
petitioned the corporate authorities of the Village of Oak Brook, Du Page and Cook
Counties, Illinois, for a Special Use Permit under Section 10-34 of the Code of
Ordinances of the Village of Oak Brook, relating to flood plain and wetland
regulations; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing on such petition has been conducted by the (DO
Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village on MRy 6, 1986, pursuant to due and .7 C7)
appropriate legal notice; and >n
WHEREAS, on March 17, 1986, the Plan Commission of the Village of Oak fl
Brook submitted its recommendation to the President and Board of Trustees; and C) CT)
C=- C7)
WHEREAS, the proposed use is consistent with the best use of the flood -.rte C�
plain, provided that the conditions set forth below are satisfied; and c.0
WHEREAS, the proposed use satisfies the requirements of and is 'V
OR consistent with each of the factors set forth in Section 10-34(c) of the Code of
H $ Ordinances of the Village of Oak Brook; and
aD
N 0 " WHEREAS, the corporate authorities of the Village of Oak Brook deem the
� passage of this Ordinance to be in the best interest and in furtherance of the
CO general welfare of the Village of Oak Brook;
,4 GD, _ p
0 A � NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
C W OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, DU PAGE AND COOK COUNTIES, ILLINOIS as follows: c
rl rl A
ble hereinabove set forth
+,,I Cd Section 1: That the provisions of the pream N
A4 are hereby adopted as though fully set forth herein.
m m O tia
PSection 2: Pursuant to Section 10-34 of the Code of Ordinances of the p'
b ;4 Village of Oak Brook, Illinois, a Special Use Permit is hereby granted to allow
construction of a house on the property commonly known as 45 Royal Vale Drive,
(D Oak Brook, Illinois, and legally described as follows: t~
ed 0 Lrl
Lot 175 in Ginger Creek, a Subdivision of parts of Section
Twenty-Seven and Twenty-Eight, Township Thirty-Nine North,
Range Eleven East of the Third Principal Meridian, according
to the Plat thereof recorded December 30, 1960 as Document
No. 992057 in Du Page County, Illinos.
-Permanent Parcel 006-28-304-004
Section 3: That the Special Use Permit herein granted in Section 2 of
this Ordinance is expressly subject to the following conditions:
1. That all land modifications and construction on the
Subject Property be done in substantial conformity with
the Proposed Site Grading Plan-Lot 175 drawn by Donald G.
Eddy Company, as last revised June 4, 1986, a copy of
which is attached hereto, labelled Exhibit A and made a
part hereof.
2. That the compensatory storage requirement is waived.
Section 4: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from
and after it passage and approval as provided by law.
Section 5: All ordinances, rules and regulations of the Village of Oak
Brook which are in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby
1 n repealed to the extent of such conflict but only as they apply to the property
UX hereinbefore described.
1 _
,r ^w Ordinance No. 86
Granting a SpeAW Use Permit
to Allow Construction of a
Structure in a Flood Plain
Pursuant to Section 10-34
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
Page two
Section 6: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of
this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such determination shall not
affect the validity of any remaining portion of this Ordinance.
PASSED THIS 24th DAY OF June , 1986.
Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Philip and Winters
Nays: Trustee Rush
Absent: - None
APPROVED THIS 24th DAY OF June , 1986.
Vil a e id en
C�
ATTEST: C37
1
' Cif
CTS
W-
Villhge Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Village Attorney
/ZOO O� �•�v/��n��//-���
6 Z Published
` Date Paper
Not Published XX
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
)SS.
COUNTIES OF COOK DU PAGE)
I , Marianne Lakosil do hereby certify that I
am the duly qualified and acting Village Clerk of the Village of
Oak Brook, DuPage and Cook Counties , Illinois .
I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that the annexed document is a
-true and correct copy of • ORDINANCE NO. 5-586 AN ORDINANCE
_GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A
STRUCTURE IN A FLOOD PLAIN PURSUANT TO SECTION 10-34 OF THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS (45 Royal
_Vale Drive)
00
I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that the original document , of 1
which the annexed copy is a true copy, is entrusted to my care for
safekeeping and I 'am the keeper of the same. r.
cam;
I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that I am the keeper of the re-
cords , Journals , entries , resolutions , ordinances , and documents
of the said Village of Oak Brook, DuPage and Cook Counties , Illinois .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and
affixed the corporate seal of the Village of Oak Brook this 25th
day of June 19 86
VilFagie erk o the Village o
Oak Brook, DuPage $ Cook Counties ,
Illinois .
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
June 24, 1986
MEETING CALL
The-Regular Meeting of the Board of Trustees was called to order by President
Cerne in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Village Commons at 7:30 P.M.
I. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: President Wence F. Cerne
Trustees Karen M. Bushy
Walter C. Imrie
Ronald P. Maher
Arthur W. Philip
Joseph H. Rush
H. Richard Winters
ABSENT: None
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Trustee Philip moved, seconded by Trustee Winters...
That the Minutes of the Committee-of-the=dhole Meeting of June 9, 1986 be
approved as corrected and waive reading of same.
VOICE VOTE: All present, in favor. So ordered.
Trustee Philip moved, seconded by Trustee Winters...
That the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 10, 1986 be approved as
submitted and waive reading of same.
VOICE VOTE: All present, in favor. So ordered.
III. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
ORDINANCE NO S-586 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A STRUCTURE IN A FLOOD PLAIN PURSUANT TO SECTION
10-34 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
05 Rov_„al Vale Drive):
Discussed and direction given at the Regular Meeting of June 10, 1986.
Trustee Philip moved, seconded by Trustee Imrie...
To pass and approve Ordinance No. S-586 as presented and waive reading
of same.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, lmrie, Maher, Philip, Winters
and President Cerne.
Nays: Trustee Rush
Absent: None So ordered.
B. ORDINANCE NO. S-587 AN ORDINANCE ASCERTAINING THE PREVAILING RATE OF
WAGES FOR LABORERS, WORKMEN AND MECHANICS EMPLOYED ON PUBLIC WORKS IN
THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, DU PAGE AND COOK COUNTIES, ILLINOIS:
Trustee Rush moved, seconded by Trustee Winters...
I
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes -1- June 24, 1986
C
VILLAAOOF OAK BROOK Minutes -2- • June 10, 1986
B. AARDroval of Bills:
Warrant Register By Fund dated June 5, 1986 presented to reflect
payment from the following funds:
General Fund $263,653.45
Water Fund 63,993.62
Sports Core Fund 94,418.78
Trustee Imrie moved, seconded by Trustee Rush...
To approve payment of Warrant Register By Fund in the total amount of
$422,065.85 and authorize the Village President to affix his signature
thereon.
President Cerne abstained from voting on the bill from Pepsi Cola due
to corporate ownership by his employer of Pepsi Cola General Bottlers,
Inc.
Trustee Winters abstained from voting on the bills from Illinois Bell
due to employment by same.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Philip, and Rush.
Nays: None
Absent: None
Abstain: Trustee Winters and President Cerne. So ordered.
V. OLD BUSINESS:
Smith - Flood Plain Special Use and Flood Plain Variation (45 Ro al
Vale Drive):
Continued at the Regular Meeting of May 13, 1986.
Trustee Philip moved, seconded by Trustee Winters...
To approve the Flood Plain Special Use for the subject property,
waiving the requirement to provide compensatory storage, and direct
the Village Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance with the
document identified as the Proposed Site Grading Plan-Lot 175 drawn by
Donald G. Eddy Company, as last revised June 4, 1986, to be attached;
and concur with the request of the petitioner, Beverlie Smith, that
the application for the basement in the floodplain be withdrawn.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Philip, Rush, Winters
and President Cerne.
Nays: None
Absent: None So ordered.
B. Enngineeerina Department
Tabled at the Regular Meeting of May 27, 1986.
Trustee Rush moved, seconded by Trustee Maher...
To reject the single bid received on May 20, 1986 and accept the
proposal of Borg Pontiac-GMC in the amount of $9,528.42 for a 1986
Sable Black Safari Cargo Van, or as an alternate accept the proposal
of Team Chevrolet for a Silver mini van in the amount of $9,492.00,
and waive competitive bidding due to insufficient proposals meeting
bid specifications.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustee Rush and President Cerne.
Nays: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Philip and Winters.
Absent: None Motion failed.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes -2- June 10, 1986
t •
DONALD G. EDDY CO.
16 N. Lincoln St.
HINSDALE, IL 60521 LETTER
(312) 986-0909 Date MAy 8, 1986
To MY. Bruce Kapff _ subject Basanent in Flood Plain
Administrative Assistant Question
Village of Oak Brook lot 175, Ginger Creek
1200 Oak Brook Road
- -Oak Brook, Illinois
Dear 11x. Kapff;
This is a request for the Village Board. of Trustees to continue its hearing on
the request by Beverly Smith for certain waivers and variations from its regular
meeting on May 20, 1986 to June 8, 1986. Prior to the June meeting, it is our
intent to have available additional clarification of the impact of the Federal
_ Flood Insurance program for the Board's consideration. Thank you.
D
MAY 0 9 1986
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, IL.
ADMINISTRATION _
SIGNED D. Eddy
❑ Please reply ❑ No reply necessary �►—
• PGoOF 04k •
9
p ; w
FCOUNt'�'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
May 8, 1986
Village President and Board of Trustees
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
RE: Smith - Flood Plain Special Use and Flood Plain Variation
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
Dear President and Board of Trustees:
The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its regular meeting of May 6, 1986, considered
the application of Beverlie Smith for certain flood plain relief to permit the
construction of a house within the Ginger Creek Floodplain as well as permit the
construction of a basement below the required elevation of 3 feet above the high-
water level.
The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends to the President and Board of Trustees
approval of the requested Flood Plain Special Use Permit which would permit con-
struction of a house on this property based on the proposed regrading of the
property which would place the structure 3 feet above the high-water level based
on evidence provided by the applicant meeting the eleven factors contained in
the Village's Flood Plain Regulations (page 635) .
This recommendation is made on the condition that the Village Board waive any
requirement to provide compensatory storage as a result of the regrading activities.
This recommendation was made on a motion by Member O'Brien, seconded by Member Crouch
and approved on a Roll Call Vote of six (6) ayes: Members Crouch, Martinello, O'Brien,
Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino; zero (0) nays; one (1) absent: Member Bartecki.
The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends denial of the second half of the application
which is a Variation from the Flood Plain Regulations to permit construction of a
basement below the required elevation of 3 feet above the Ginger Creek high-water
level. This regulation requires the construction of all habitable floors of a
residence a minimum of 3 feet above the high-water level, which in this case would
require the basement to be no lower than elevation 703. The applicant's proposal
would construct the basement at an elevation of 695.
This recommendation to deny is based on the following findings of fact:
404�
RE: Smith - Flood Plain Special Use and Flood Plain Variat n
May 8,1986
Page 2
1) Granting of the Variation could potentially damage other properties within the
Village of Oak Brook, since it would jeopardize the Village's standing within
the Federal Flood Insurance Program.
2) By denying the Variation, the Village would be minimizing any potential flood
damage were the basement constructed on this property.
3) The applicant failed to indicate significant hardship created by the Village's
regulations other than the fact that the property value would be lowered as a
result of the Village's regulations.
4) Granting of the Variation would set a precedent,. since no other flood plain
variations for the construction of a basement have been granted by the Village
since the start of the Federal Flood Insurance Program.
This recommendation was made on a motion by Member Weber, seconded by Member O'Brien
and approved on a Roll Call.Vote of six (6) ayes: Members Crouch, Martinello, O'Brien,
Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino; zero (0) nay; one (1) absent: Member Bartecki.
Sincerely,
Alfred P. Savino, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
BFK/APS/jr
r
• O6 OF OAk 6 •
.� -,
G x
4 20
eCOUN-O
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
May 7, 1986
654-2220
MEMO TO: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
FROM: Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , P.E.
SUBJECT: Smith - Flood Plain Special Use
45 Royal Vale Drive
Lot 175 - Ginger Creek
At the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting of Tuesday, May 6, 1986, the Zoning Board
recommended approval of a flood plain special use for the above stated property.
In reviewing the file and the site plan submitted on April 28, 1986, I note the
following issues as being outstanding:
1. The plan proposes a retaining wall within the easement and over the existing
storm sewer in the northerly part of the lot. The wall over the storm sewer
is of particular concern because it would inhibit maintenance activities
which might become necessary on the storm sewer. It appears that the wall
around the northerly portion of the home could be eliminated if the garage
floor were dropped approximately two (2') feet which would then place the
driveway and the adjacent grades much closer to the existing lot line
elevations. The wall could then be kept between the proposed home and the
Ginger Creek Lake.
2. The date needs to be added to the plan to state when the water level was
determined for the existing Ginger Creek Lake.
3. The north arrow needs to be placed on the drawing.
Should the Village Board grant the flood plain special use, I recommend that the
drawing be revised regarding the above issues since it will become an exhibit attached
to the special use.
Resp tfu11y Pmitted,
Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , P.E. ,
Village Engineer
DLD/etg
4zo
• •
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -3- May 6, 1986
V SMITH -FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION (45 Royal Vale
Drive)
Emmett Galvin, attorney; Don Eddy, engineer; and Beverlie and Charles Smith,
owners; and Prim Segal, realtor; were present representing this application.
The Secretary noted that the required Legal Notice was published in the Oak Brook
DOINGS on March 13, 1986 and that surrounding property owners were notified of this
hearing on March 6, 1986.
Under questioning by Mr. Galvin, Mrs. Smith noted that her father originally
purchased the property in 1967 for $25,600.00 with property taxes that year in the
amount of $355.00. Her father passed away in 1978, at which time she and her
brother inherited the property. In 1982 they began their attempt to sell the
property and received numerous offers in the range of $150,000.00 but all of the
prospective buyers lost interest since they were told, due to the Village's flood
plain regulations, a basement could not be constructed. She noted that in 1978 the
property was appraised at $125,000.00 and that in 1985 property taxes were in the
amount of $1,560.00. She noted that with respect to prospective flood insurance
rates, she contacted Allstate Insurance Company and had been advised that the
annual premium would be $422.00 for a $500,000.00 house constructed with a
basement.
Prim Segal, a realtor with First United Realtors, made the following comments:
She has been a broker for 10-1/2 years, selling properties in Oak Brook for the
past 9 years. Her most recent sale in Ginger Creek was for $210,000.00 for a
property on Baybrook and $180,000.00, 2-1/2 years ago for the property at 62
.Baybrook. She noted that the value of lots with houses constructed have been
running in the range of $500,000.00-$600,000.00, all of which have basements.
In response to Mr. Galvin as to the affect on the value of the property in the
event a basement were not permitted, Ms. Segal noted that she has yet to sell a
house wit, hout a basement for a price greater than $110,000.00, including areas
outside of Oak Brook. She stated that she was unable to find anyone willing to
purchase this lot unless a basement were permitted and, therefore, the property has
little value for the Smiths.
In response to Member Weber, Ms. Segal stated that she is not a certified
appraiser, although the values she has stated are based on the sale of comparable
properties in the area.
In response to Member Shumate, Ms. Segal is unaware of any houses in the Ginger
Creek area that do not contain a basement.
Under questioning by Mr. Galvin, Donald Eddy noted that the proposed design shows
the top-of-foundation at 703, 3 feet above the Ginger Creek high water level, in
conformance with Village regulations. He then made reference to
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -3- May 6, 1986
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes —4— May 6, 1986
V SMITH — FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION (45 Royal Vale
Drive)(Continued)
information contained in his April 28 letter to the Village noting that there will
be little erosion hazard created by the proposed construction, since the property
is primarily in the flood fringe. He also noted that there would be no hazard to
other properties, and due to the proposed provision of compensatory storage, the
flood elevations would not increase. He did note, however, their request for the
waiver of compensatory storage and, if so approved by the Village, he has estimated
that the high water level of Ginger Creek would only increase by 1/8 inch.
In response to Member Crouch, Mr. Eddy stated that State flood plain regulations
permit up to 1/10 of a foot increase in the flood elevation and that the proposed
development would meet those standards even if compensatory storage were waived.
Member Weber pointed out the March 25th letter from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) and that in the first paragraph of that letter, FEMA
stated their unwillingness to condone the Village's granting of a variance to
permit a basement on this property.
Mr. Eddy stated that FEMA's primary concern is with the setting of precedent in the
event the Village chose to grant variances throughout the Village.
Member Weber stated his concern that the Village not set a precedent in granting
variances which might jeopardize the Village's participation in the National Flood
Insurance Program.
In response to Member Weber, Mr. Eddy stated that flood water velocities across
this property would be insufficient to pick up sediment.
Member O'Brien inquired as to the effect of FEMA's regulation Section 60.6. Mr.
Eddy explained that FEMA's concern is that variances permitted on larger lots would
tend to have a greater effect on the flood plain, although in this particular case,
the applicant is proposing the provision of compensatory storage, which is not
considered in the formulation of Section 60.6. Mr. Eddy further noted that Federal
regulations would permit construction of a basement on this property if the
existing buildable area were above the Ginger Creek high water level, and that only
because the existing ground level is slightly below the high water level, the
applicant is prohibitted from such construction despite the fact that the ground
level will be built up to above the high water level.
In response to Member O'Brien, Staff noted that in the event the Village approves
revised grading showing a 702.5 elevation, that would become the new natural ground
level from which the structure's height would be measured.
In response to Member Crouch, Mr. Eddy stated that there would be no uplift
hydrostatic problems with the proposed construction, since the water would not
directly touch the foundation, assuming adequate sump pumps were provided.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes —4— May 6, 1986
•
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes —5— May 6, 1986
V SMITH — FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION (45 Royal Vale
Drive)(Continued)
In response to Mr. Galvin, Mr. Charles Smith submitted various pictures of the
property taken on May 1, 1986. In summation, Mr. Galvin stated that the Village
should not be intimidated by the Federal government, which does not understand Oak
Brook and the ability of its residents to pay for required flood insurance as well
as provide a high—quality construction.
In response to the Chairman, the Secretary noted that with respect to the proposed
structure, the Federal government would charge a premium of approximately $522.00
for $100,000.00 of structure coverage which includes the basement structure itself
as well as the furnace and water heater. Additional coverage for contents within
the basement would only cover a washer, dryer, freezer and air conditioning
equipment.
Member Weber noted that other properties within the Village of Oak Brook, including
along Merry Lane, have been able to develop without variations from the flood plain
regulations. He also was concerned that granting a variance in this case would put
the Village in jeopardy with respect to flood insurance, which is presently
provided for 46 other properties within the Village.
In response to Member O'Brien, Dale Durfey stated that he was unaware of any other
flood plain variation ever granted by the Village for construction of basements.
In response to Member Shumate, Dale stated that they could perhaps build at an
elevation of 703 without a basement and not need flood insurance, although they
would still need to regrade the lot as proposed.
Member Crouch stated a certain difficulty for the Zoning Board of Appeals to grant
a variance which would increase the flood height by 1/8 inch, since technically the
Zoning Board is required pursuant to Section 10-35(E)(3) of the Flood Plain
Regulations on page 638 to deny a variance which would increase flood heights.
The Chairman noted that there were no members of the audience expressing support
for or opposition to the proposed applications.
A motion was made by Member O'Brien, seconded by Member Crouch to recommend to the
President and Board of Trustees approval of the Flood Plain Special Use Permit
based on findings of fact that the applicant has met the eleven factors contained
within the Village's flood plain regulations (page 635) . This recommendation is
made subject to the condition that the Village waive the requirement to provide
compensatory storage.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (6)
Members Crouch, Martinello, O'Brien,
Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino
Nays: (0)
Absent: (1)
Member Bartecki
MOTION CARRIED. ..
I
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes —5— May 6, 1986
o3 7
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -6- May 6, 1986
V SMITH— FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION (45 Royal Vale
Drive)(Continued)
A motion was made by Member Weber, seconded by Member O'Brien to recommend to the
President and Board of Trustees denial of the requested Flood Plain Variation which
would permit construction of a basement below elevation 703 based on the following
findings of fact:
1) Granting of the Variation has the potential to injure other properties in the
Village by jeopardizing the Village's flood insurance program.
2) By denying the Variation, the Village would be minimizing potential damage to a
basement if it were installed.
3) The applicant has not submitted evidence of significant hardship aside from the
fact that the property value is lowered as a result of the flood plain
regulations.
4) Granting of the variance would set a precedent, since no other variances of
this type have yet to be granted by the Village.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (6)
Members Crouch, Martinello, O'Brien,
Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino
Nays: (0)
Absent: (1)
Member Bartecki
MOTION CARRIED. ..
I
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -6- May 6, 1986
• �6�pF o4\e'4 •
could
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
June 6, 1986 654-2220
MEMO TO: John H. Brechin, Village Manager
FROM: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to the Village Manager
SUBJECT: Brinson Rear Yard Variation (78 Baybrook Lane)
The Zoning Board of Appeals at its June 3rd meeting, recommended approval of
a rear yard variation which would permit construction of an enclosed pool and
recreation room addition which would encroach 10 ft. into the 60 ft. required
rear yard.
In the event the Village Board chooses to approve the requested variation, it
would be appropriate to direct the Village Attorney to prepare the necessary
Ordinance approving same.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to the Village Manager
BFK/mf
z
• �Of O4k •
PG '.
v
O
O,f
4PCOUNt'�'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
June 6, 1986
Village President and Board of Trustees
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
RE: Brinson Rear Yard Variation
(78 Baybrook Lane)
Dear President and Board of Trustees:
The Zoning Board of Appeals at its regular meeting of June 3, 1986, considered
the application of Dr. & Mrs. Clarence Brinson for a rear yard variation which
would permit construction of an enclosed pool and recreation room to the rear
of their existing house. The requested variation is for a 10 ft. encroachment
into the 60 ft. required rear yard.
The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends to the President and Board of Trustees
approval of this requested variation based on the following findings of fact:
1) The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances based on
the position of the existing building on the property.
2) The particular physical surroundings, including topography of the
site, makes the granting of a variation necessary.
3) The condition upon which the petition for variation is based
would not be applicable generally to other properties within this
zoning classification.
4) The granting of the variation would not be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other properties or improvements in
the neighborhood.
5) The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light
and air to adjacent properties.
6) The purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire
to make more money out of the property.
Page 2
RE: Brinson Rear Yard Variation
(78 Baybrook Lane)
June 6, 1986
7) The hardship .noted by the applicant was not created by any
person presently having an interest in the property.
This recommendation was made on a motion by Member Weber, seconded by Member
Shumate and approved on a roll call vote of four (4) ayes, Members Crouch,
Martinello, Shumate, Weber, one (1) nay, Chairman Savino, two (2) absent,
Members Bartecki and O'Brien.
Sincerely,
Alfred P. Savino
Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
APS/mf
•
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -2- June 3, 1986
IV BRINSON REAR YARD VARIATION (78 Baybrook Lane)
The Secretary noted that the required Legal Notice was published in the Oak Brook
Doings and surrounding property owners were notified of this hearing on April 17,
1986. Dr. and Mrs. Clarence Brinson were present representing this application.
Dr. Brinson stated that the proposed addition will include a recreation room and
indoor swimming pool. He noted that the original house was constructed 102 ft. back
from the road, although only a 40 ft. setback was required, which has created the
hardship in constructing the addition. He stated that they had looked at
constructing the addition to the front of the house but could not due to existing
topography. He also noted that the variation of 915" into the rear yard was the
minimum they would require for such construction, and that due to existing
landscaping around the rear of their property, surrounding property owners would
not see the addition.
Chairman Savino inquired as to the specific hardship.
Dr. Brinson stated their hardship as being unable to construct the requested
addition due to the improper siting of the original home too near the rear yard
line.
Member Martinello inquired as to whether the open space between the addition and
existing house could be utilized for the addition.
Dr. Brinson stated that the open area is adjacent to an existing living room window
and therefore could not be blocked by the new addition.
Mrs. Brinson stated that the pool is to be enclosed for safety purposes.
Member Crouch noted that the house directly north is also set far back from the
street and if the Brinson variation were granted, this northerly property would
have a very good case for also receiving a rear yard variation.
In response to Member Weber, it was noted that the Brinson property was not within
the Ginger Creek Flood Plain.
Member Crouch stated that he was unable to see the unique hardship.
Dr. Brinson stated his hardship as being unable to build an addition to meet his
family's needs.
Member Martinello inquired as to whether the addition could be either reduced by 9'
in depth or shifted to another location.
Dr. Brinson stated that they had previously investigated locating the pool in front
of the building, which could not be done because of topography, and elsewhere to
the rear of the house, which was unfeasible due to an existing patio.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -2- June 3, 1986
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -3- June 3, 1986
IV BRINSON REAR YARD VARIATION (78 Saybrook Lane) (continued)
In response to Member Martinello, it was noted on an aerial that the two properties
to the west behind the Brinson property both have outdoor pools.
In response to Dr. Brinson, Village Attorney Martens noted the standards required
by the Zoning Ordinance in the review of variation requests.
The Chairman noted no members of the audience expressing support for or opposition
to the variation.
A motion was made by Member Weber, seconded by Member Shumate to recommend to the
President and Board of Trustees approval of the variation request based on the
following findings of fact:
1) The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances based on the position of
. ..
the existing building on the property.
2) The particular physical surroundings, including topography of the site, makes
the granting of a variation necessary.
3) The condition upon which the petition for variation is based would not be
applicable generally to other properties within this zoning classification.
4) The granting of the variation would not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to other properties or improvements in the neighborhood.
5) The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent properties.
6) The purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to make
more money out of the property. '
7) The hardship noted by the applicant was not created by any person presently
having an interest in the property.
In response to Member Shumate, Dr. Brinson stated that there is perhaps an 8-10'
difference in elevation between the front of the house and the street.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (4)
Members Crouch, Martinello,
Shumate, Weber
Nays: (1 )
Chairman Savino
Absent: (2)
Members Bartecki, O'Brien
MOTION CARRIED. . .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -3- June 3, 1986
i
s�
June 3 , 1986
Clarence D. Brinson
78 Baybrook Lane
Oakbrook , . IL 60521
Dear Zoning Committee :
My wife and I hope that you will find it within your, heart to
grant us this variation so that we may begin construction right
away. The house in which we are living was originally built too
far back in the lot thereby creating excessive space in the front
yard. Since the front portion of the house sits on .,top of a slope ,
we find it unfeasible to utilize that space or build and attachment
to that portion . Also since our back yard is totally surrounded by
beautiful trees and lovely shrubbery , we feel that this variation
request will not interfere with the existing topography, landscaping ,
architectual beauty, or traditional designs of other neighboring
properties . Since this house was built too far away from the front
yard line thereby being unique in the sense that it creates un-
necessary hardships upon my familv and myself if we wish to extend
our living quarter or increase our recreational . living space to
accomodate our growing needs . As a matter fact , our back yard is
so enclosed that no one will be able to detect or see the architectual
attachment (enclosed swimming pool and recreation room) .
We hope that you don ' t find it unreasonable to grant us this 10 feet
rear yard variation request .
Sincerely ,
arence D. Brinson
o
�y n
JUN
VILLAGE OF c,-,, 3,3C .K ►.
ADMINISTRA ?CN
,
..
•
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOM
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
Gs4-2220
June 4, 1986
MEMO TO: John H. Brechin, Village Manager
FROM: Bruce Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
SUBJECT: Smith - Flood Plain Special Use and Flood Plain Variation
45 Royal Vale Drive
The Village Board, at its May 13, 1986 meeting, at the applicant's request, tabled
this subject to its June 10 meeting.
The original application made by Beverly Smith was for two types of flood plain
relief as follows:
1) Flood Plain Special Use permit for construction of a house, and
associated regrading within the Ginger Creek Flood Plain.
2) Flood Plain Variation which would permit construction of the
basement floor approximately five feet below the 100 year flood
level of Ginger Creek. Village regulations require the lowest
floor (including the basement) to be constructed a minimum
of three feet above the 100 year flood elevation.
Both the Plan Commission and the Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval
of the Flood Plain Special Use permit with specific conditions. The Plan Commission
conditioned their approval on the following:
1) Approval of all engineering-related items by the Village Engineer.
2) Redesign of the proposal in order to remove the proposed retaining
wall at the front of the property.
The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended its approval based on the condition
that the Village Board waive any requirement to provide compensatory storage.
With respect to the Flood Plain Variation, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommended
denial of that part of the application.
i
G�O F OqK A
p N
G - O
9CA `y 2
COUN-0'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
May 1, 1986
MEMO TO: Zoning Board of Appeals
FROM: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
SUBJECT: Smith - Flood Plain Special Use and Flood Plain Variation
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
I refer you to my memos of March 13 and March 25 concerning the specifics of this
application.
The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its April 1st hearing, tabled this subject in order
to have time to adequately review the March 25th letter from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency which essentially recommended against the Village's granting a
variation to permit a basement below base flood elevation. That letter specifically
states that the Federal government is concerned that villages.not establish a pattern
of granting variances which are inconsistent with the objectives of the Flood Plain
Management program. Their letter also notes that the National Flood Insurance Program
does not recognize floodpro6fed residential basements and further states a potential
for high insurance premium rates. In that regard, the applicant has submitted
evidence from Allstate noting that flood plain insurance coverage would only add
approximately $422.00. in annual premium to their standard homeowners insurance policy
premium of $545.00 covering a $500,000.00 house.
With respect to the potential for the Village to grant similar variations in the future,
I have reviewed both the Village's building files as well as the flood plain map for
the Ginger Creek Subdivision and would note that there are approximately nine vacant
parcels in the Ginger Creek area which have a major portion of their buildable area
within the 100-year floodplain of Ginger Creek.
Therefore based on the above information, it would appear that the Zoning Board must
decide whether the facts of this application are unique and cause a significant hard-
ship on the property owners in the event the property owner is made to comply with
all flood plain regulations.
Respectfully submitted,
15�� 4zz--
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BFK/j r
10) ,
r
DONALD G.
[5
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
534 CHESTNUT ST.,HINSDALE,IL60521 - (312)986-0909
April 28, 1986
Mr. Bruce Kapff
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Read D ���� .
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
O
Re: Lot 175, Ginger Creek Subdivision APR 2 8 1986
Flood Plain Question
Zoning Board Hearing VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, IL.
ADMINISTRATION
Dear Mr. Kapff;
This submission, including 18 copies of these documents, is a collection of the
information and evidence that is to be presented to the Village's Zonign. Board
at its meeting on May 6, 1986 that is to support the land owner's position that
a permit for home constzuction should be granted by the Village for this property.
As you areaware, there are several items to be considered at the upcomning
hearing. The letter from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, with its
conditions, as well as those set forth in the Federal Register and those set forth
in the Village's Flood Plain Ordinance. Some of the conditions in each are the
same. Basically, the following items are to be addressed:
1. We must show a good and sufficient cause,
2. That a failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship to
the applicant,
3. That the granting of the variance will not cause a hardship on the other lands
fronting on the same flood plain, increase public safety threats, create a
extraordinary public expense because of this construction, cause fraud on or
vistimize the public, or cause a conflict with existing local laws or ordin-
ances.
To assist the Village in its considerations on this matter, we have addressed the
various items within the Village's Ordinances and Federal Register in the following
manner. We will show that:
1. The costs of insurance for the home, including flood plain insu once.covering
the baserent, if permitted, would not be an excessive cost. Please refer-to
the statement from Allstate Insurance Company where the total cost is estim ed
to be $971.00 per year.
CONSULTING ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT, PROJECT
MANAGEMENT, MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING,GRAPHIC PRESENTATION,SCALE MODEL CONSTRUCTION
page two
Letter to Mr. Ka F ff
Flood Plain Question
Lot 175, Ginger Greek Subdivision
April 28, 1986
2. The property is not close to or located within a floodway and will not
generate an erosion and sedimentation problem for other lands.
3. That the property is more than the 1/2 acre size, as set forth in both the
Village's Ordinance and the Federal Register, but that was the size of the
lot at the time of its platting in the 1960's. The lot size is some 0.86 acres.
A variance may be issued under the following instances and conditions:
1. That the variance will not cause an increased height of the flood waters.
By the proposed preliminary site plans accompanying this letter, we have
shown that the same volume of storm water presently stored on the site can be
so stored after the home has been constructed, thereby not causing an increase
in the flood heights.
2. The lot size is more than 1/2 acre, and could only be reduced by selling off
a portion of the lot to the abutting land owners. Since this type of action
would then reduce the lot size to the point where it w old be in conflict
with the Village's Zoning Ordinance, this action has not been taken.
3. The variance request is the mininnxn necessary for this property. The state-
ment stands an its own feet.
4. The owner recognizes that flood insurance is a factor in this type of const-
ruction, but offers the rate statement from the Allstate Insurance Company
as an indication that this cost is not major.
5. The Village must maintain a record of all variance actions and report those
annually to the Federal Emergency Managenent Agency. We do not know that
this is being done at this time, but would feel that such an action is under
the Village's more normal requirements.
The Village will also require several items of proof for the hearing. They are
as follows:
a. Proposed preliminary site plans, slowing dimensions and elevations of the
lot, the proposed earth excavation and filling as well as flood-proffing
measures and the locatim of the existing pond. All of the above criteria
is shown on the site plan, except for the matter of flood proofing of the
proposed building. This one item is not shown since the home has not been
designed at this time. At such time as the home is designed, this item,will
be demonstrated to the Village Staff..
b. Typical cross section of the excavation and fill, as well as the home, are
shaven an the proposed preliminary site plan.
33
•
page three
Letter to Mr. Kapff
Flood Plain Question
Lot 175, Ginger Creek Subdivision
April 28, 1986
c. Since the home has not been designed at this time, no plans can be shown
other than the suggested foot print of the possible home. We have shaven
the location of the home as well as the location of the public sanitary
sewer and public water main. Please note that we have addressed the question
of the sewer by not excavating the ground over that facility.
d. We are providing photographs of the site as it exists today as well_ as same
photos of the adjoining lots. These phots are to be presented at the public
bearing.
e. The specifications for the project have been added to the proposed prelim-
inary site plan, as they relate to the site work shown. The specifications
for the home would be noted once those plans were generated, and after the
zoning question had been answered.
The following items, or factors, are to be considered by the Zoning Board in
making their decision, along with other factors that may come to mind:
1. That the danger of materials being swept onto other lands to the injury of
others is not present. Since this land is not within a floodway, materials
could only float away. It is the intent of this proposal to prohibit the
depositing of such materials at locations where they could so float away.
the materials would only be in the front yard area, which would trap them
and keep them in that yard.
2. That danger to life and property are not increased by this project. Since
other homes exist in this area at lower levels than proposed for this home,
it is our opinion that no increase in danger to life will be created.
3. That the proposed home will not be susceptible to flood damage. Since the
proposed hone is to be set at a level 3 feet above the anticipated flood
level, it is our opinion that the home will not be subjected to flood damage.
4. That the proposed home will not increase the damage or cantarmnation of
public water supplies or the sanitary sewer system. Since both of these
facilities exist, and since no alteration of these systems is proposed, and
since the borne is to be 3 feet above flood levels, it is our opinion that
no such increase in danger will occur.
5. That the proposed home will be of importance to the commmity. It is our
opinion that the home will be of importance to the subdivision in that the
area will have a more complete appearance and that the lot, itself, will
provide a well maintained appearance by the construction of the home, thereby
increasing the valve of the area as well as of this property.
6. The requirements of the water front location to the facility. There is no
proposed alterations to the water front being proposed, however, the granting
of this request would provide the means for the lot owner to more readily
maintain this frontage in a neat and orderly fashion.
3oR
page four
letter to Nor. Kapff
Flood Plain Question
Lot 175, Ginger Creek Subdivision
April 28, 1986
7. Compatability of use with adjoining properties. The land use on either side
of this site is also single family, and therfore would be compatible.
8. The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and the flood
mamgment ordinance of the area. The proposed use does match the uses as
set forth in the comprehensive plan, and does meet the requirements of flood
storage set forth in the flood management plans of the Village.
9. The safety of entrance into the site during times of flood. The site plans
provide for such safety of entrance into the site by the proposed elevations
of the driveway meeting both the existing roadway grades as well as the
elevations at the garage.
10. The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport
of the floodwaters expected at the site. The height of flood waters is shown
on the plans. The rate of rise duration and sediment transport will be
controlled by the specific rainfall event. These factors are controlled by
the existing outfall from Ginger Creek as well as the urbanization of the
lands upstream. The sedimentation factor from this site is to be controlled
by the practices set forth in the Village's ordinances. Any sedimentation
that may take place from other lands would be that which would take place
whether this site is developed or not.
As a part of this submission, please note the accompanying dialogue from the land
owner in which she sets forth the secquence of events that has placed her in this
present situation. We have also included, or may be presented at the time of the
hearing, a statement from a realitor of long experience in residential sales in
this area that sets forth the possible losses that the present owner may reasonably
expect to encounter, should the request for variance be denied.
The last item of discussion is the request for waiver of the requirement of the
providing of compensatory storage on the site. The site plans call for the
existing storage of waters to be same 74,330 cubic feet, at the one hundred year
storm event. The owner would request that the Zoning Board consider the waiving
of the compensatory storage requirement for the following reasons:
1. The waiver of this requirement would cause this lot to store some 45,000 cubic
feet of storm water, a reduction in storage of some 29,000 cubic feet of
water. It is estimated that the granting of the waiver could cause the flood
height in the Ginger Creek pond to rise approximately 1/8 inch. Accompanying
this letter is the approximation calculations.
2. The granting of this waiver request would permit the front and rear yard to
more closely match the grading of the adjoining lots and thus providing a
mare uniform appearance to the area.
3. TLe granting of this waiver request would allow the home to provide a more uniform
appearance from the street and not accentuate the appearance of height over
the adjoining lots.
3f
page five
Letter to Per. Kapff
Flood Plain Question
Lot 175, Ginger Creek Subdivision
April 28, 1986
We would trust that this informtion, together with that to be additionally
presented at the hearing, is in sufficient quality for this Board to make a
favorable recotmvnda.tion to the Village Board. In the event that there may be
other questions to be addressed, we would appreciate learning of them as soon as
is possible. We wish to thank you for your assistance in this matter.
eDoinald ely,
G. Eddy, P.E.
,�v
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY — ;� v
PROPERTY INSURANCE QUOTATION
April 22 , 1 9 6 6
ESPECIALLY PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY:
ILLUSTRATION - Bike Nilkes
PURPOSES ONLY Senior Rccount Rgent
CALL TO APPLY 2612 W. louhy
FOR COVERAGES 506 9600 Chicago IL 60615
312 500-4600
ILLINOIS
DELUXE PLUS HOMEOWNERS
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss your, Property insurance
needs. I look., forward to offering you the service and value that
the standard of Al.l.state. Insurance . I am sr.arc you will see that
this quote can affordably enhance your- insurance: pr,.3gram.
Policy Coverage z-,: Amount Premium
11 $500000. 1,545- .00
H-rmt; Replacement Cost Guararntee
'her ctructur esG?!l li.
p",rsonal Property 7 1500LI!
Replacement Cost on Cont+enis
`-aRlll`✓ Liability leach occur"rence ) :`.E-2) ''�0C 4.00
t st N,edica.I ( each person ) I l='Ou.
Deductibles Applicable:
E-0 0
Di". auni Applied:
Protective Device Discount
1Jew/Renovated House Discount
Total Annual Premium $ 549.00
This quo t ee is riot a contract , car binder, of coverarg-e. All coverages
=ubject to the term;:, and conditions contained in the policy and
endor•se.merits . The premium", shown ar'e for, a 1 .'. month p:_,licy periof .
). G ` ,)t-A have any quest: ions , r.:Ilfease corn"tacl me c9"t number listed above.
PFV
����
APR 2 8 1986
�'/ i NS' VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, IL.
-_ ADMINISTRATION
BASIS FOR THE REQUEST Q FOR WAIVER OF THE VIIIaAC,'E S REQUIRMM FOR COMPENSATORY
STORAGE OF SURFACE WATERS FOR LOT 175, GINGER CREEK SUBDIVISION.
The subject lot lies along the westerly shore of the existing pond, called
Giner Greek Pond, and provides the means of surface water drainage for the
total subdivision, as well as lands lying upstream of the subject subdivision.
The pond has a water surface area of approximately 24 acres, as estimated from
an aerial photograph, and has an approximate area of flooding lands, at the
100 year level, of some 36 acres at such time as the pond is at the 100 year
flood stage. This latter area is approximated from the USGS maps of the area.
This waiver of condition is requesting that this lot not be required to provide
compensatory storage, but rather have a front and rear yard slope that is more
compatible with the existing yards of the homes to the north and south of this
property.
The following is the estimated amount of the storage that would be available in
the event that the Village granted the requested waiver of compensatory storage.
ANTICIPATED VOLUMES, WITH GRANT OF WAIVER
elevation area volume accum. volume
695 0 0 0
696 3256 1628 1628
697 6304 4780 6408
698 9928 8116 14524
699 14178 12053 26577
700 17712 15945 42522 cubic feet
This volume, when taken away from the present ccm pen.satory storage volume, would
leave some 31, 000 cubic feet of detnetion that would be added to the existing
pond volume. We have estimated that the total pond storage volume is some
6,950,000 cubic feet. The additional 31,000 cubic feet added to this volume
would constitute some 0.4 percent of the total. Above, we have indicated that
the pond, in height at flood stage, would cover some 36 acres in area, the add-
itional water would add approximately 1/8 inch to the flood height.
0
APR 2 8 1986
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, IL.
ADMINISTRATION
a�
MrLl `Mrs-Charles H.Smith,;Jr. '
r 19W063 Avenue Barbizon APR 24 10$
Oak Brook, Illinots 60521
VILLAGE OF OAl4 8$ EL:
ADMINIaT " TQ14
Apri 1 24 , 1986
L yeti ,
Mr. Richard A: ` Martens
Vi I Inge Attorney }'rw ;:
ViIIage bfsa0ak 6 ook
,1200�O6 Brook Road
Oak Brook; Illinois 60521
Reference : Smith
Flood plain special
use and variation'
45 Royal Vale` Drive
Dearr:Mr:rMartens �
In 1967; my �fat�er: Ernest Puchi , purchased from the 0ak Brook.
x � �
_Development C-+—any, the homesite on Ginger Creek located at : ..
� Y
45 Royal Vale D vex„
At tha timett�re were four other lots located on the
Creek art "
h
g° o e third the price of ours because those
four ots had. "r`oblems . ryY
r r t' na n a � � ,� n
My fathei c o: a 45" Royal Vale Drive lot, be the ,
d+ f
other to s ere p, se un-buildable. Rti
Sinde aha e dose -four lots have been built uporll . , k
k st
homeb H �n asements
..i r �e x ♦ .: ,",%�'�a ��f�"s mod. J� �� {
1
In
.1978 mT`5'r 1�� passed away and m brother and I
' Y Y rnher, ted
the homesite: { yiinheritance tax purposes , the lot ;was rx
ly
appraised at $125,000 , 0.0.
Real estateaxeStthe time the lot was purchased w p ed in I9.67y.
we $355.001
re
estate taxes for 1.984, were $1 5450F
AS you Can `, sEl a dot` has increased substantially �.ii ,va"lue ° k
r ,
over the yearg w r
� } 2 � H .{C Wit•''c
Continued ,page 2 Uzi A
��a'r," ,g- 7,r1 ,Ge,"1.• ;.J.c �i M. .:- r s'Ye -, iPS? ;7•#i`
1'.• h FTI k+tt y4 LhY L t.•
'A M,;
ArK
Mr. Richard A�u fi ,,
, Martens Page 2 4
Smith-Flood Taro°-s-special use M x,
P ti P Apr
and variatib 4"'.45 ?Royal Vale Dr . �
In 1982, my brother ', and I decided to sell the homesite. IEI
Res onse from ,i:nterested
p parties was immediate and we actual,ly° r
lost track has ao t*he� "number of inquiries after the first ,�.week`:: .
Many of, the people who were actually interested , decided against
purchasing the lot when they learned they could not build a
basement's ,;•�_ i
Two contra signed , but both were voided , when 'the
people ;decided that the type of home befitting the homesite
in GingerrCree�c, Would require a basement.
Based on thaand other information presented to the Board,
we:.ask ''that , oVa of our request be granted. k
Respectfully silbmitted , F
Beverl:ie d Smitht; �
.1 0
h P
cc : Emmett :G61'9 nM , M t
Donald
y @r y, i
Board `Member . '
a w ae •* a.t t `•
3 2 i
R,
5'r'�'i9i¢`1�@ a... -.�^�'.�,�Sx"9?4etsK#*i rr`•e.,',.
GOOF OAAr •
vP '900
O �
G p
�CF `vim
COUNt'4'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
April 4, 1986
Mr. Donald G. Eddy
16 North Lincoln Street
Hinsdale, Illinois 60521
RE: w with - Flood Plain Special Use and Variation
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
Dear Mr. Eddy:
The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its regular meeting of April 1, 1986, tabled
the above application per your request. Any revised information must be in
this office no later than noon, Monday, April 28, 1986 in order to be considered
at the Zoning Board meeting of May 6, 1986.
Sincerely,
K
Richard A. Martens
Village Attorney
RAM/j r
cc: Beverlie J. Smith
�I
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes —5— April 1, 1986
IV SMITH — FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND VARIATION (45 Royal Vale Drive)
The Acting Secretary noted that the required Legal Notice was published in the Oak
Brook DOINGS on March 13, 1986 and that surrounding property owners were notified
of this hearing on March 6, 1986.
Mr. Donald Eddy, civil engineer, and Mr. Emmett Galvin, attorney, represented the
applicant.
Chairman Savino noted that the Zoning Board of Appeals received a copy of a letter
from the Federal Emergency Management Agency on the night of this hearing and had
not had a chance to read and digest the content of the letter. Attorney Galvin
stated that the applicant had receive a copy of the letter just prior to the
beginning of the Zoning Board's meeting.
After some discussion between Mr. Eddy and the Chairman, Mr. Eddy asked the Zoning
Board of Appeals to continue this matter to its next Regular Meeting on May 6,
1986.
A motion was made by Member Crouch, seconded by Member Bartecki to continue this
application to the next Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of May 6,
1986.
VOICE VOTE: All in favor. MOTION CARRIED. . .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -5- April 1, 1986
a�
i
w Federal Emergency Management Agency
Region V 300 South Wacker, 24th Floor, Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 353-1500
March 25, 1986
Mr. Dale L. Durfey, Jr., P.E.
Oak Brook Village Engineer
Oak Brook Village Hall / \V MAR 3 Z 12j6D
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook, Illinois �C,i 6• VU AGE OF OAK BROOK IL
V`i � �• L ,7 # !� 1 T• �
Dear Mr. Durfey:
We recently received your letter requesting our review and comment on a pro-
posed variance to the Village's floodplain management regulations to allow
the construction of a new residential basement below the base flood elevation.
We cannot condone the Village's granting a variance in this situation. This
letter will attempt to explain why.
The Village of Oak Brook voluntarily joined the National Flood Insurance Pro-
gram (NFIP) . Presumably, Village officials took this action to make flood
insurance available to the owners and occupants of structures located within
the corporate limits of your community. As you know, prior to the enactment
of the NFIP flood insurance was not available on the commercial insurance
market.
In order to join the NFIP, the Village Officials adopted and agreed to enforce
the minimum floodplain management regulations standards that are required for
participation. These regulations prescribe the standards for new "development"
that is to be located within areas of known flood hazard. The intent of the
regulations is to prevent any "development" that would increase or aggravate the
situation of flooding within the community and to protect any new structures to
be built within flood hazard areas from the affects of expected flooding.
The specific floodplain management standards that are required of the Village
of Oak Brook are contained in Section 60.3(d) of the attached Rules and Reg-
ulations.
Although FEMA does not require communities participating in the NFIP to adopt
specific or absolute criteria for granting varinaces, Section 60.6(a) of the
Rules and Regulations outlines acceptable procedures for the review and granting
of variances by a community. (We have highlighted pertinent portions of Section
60.6(a) that may apply to this particular situation.) From time to time, our
Regional Office staff conducts meetings with local government officials to de-
termine if that community is properly enforcing the floodplain management reg-
ulations adopted to establish eligibility in the NFIP. We review findings that
may justify the granting of variances, "and if that review indicates a pattern
inconsistent with the objectives of sound flood plain management" we may take
appropriate action. If we determine that a community has not enforced their
adopted flood plain management regulations and has established a pattern of
granting variances that is inconsistent with the objectives of sound flood
plain management, we may place that community on "probation" and may even-
tually be required to suspend the community from participation in the NFIP.
�3
i
If the applicant requesting the variance can satisfy the procedures contained in
Section 60.6(a) , and if the Village can document the "findings justifying the
granting" of the variance in the file, there should be no problem for the Village
of Oak Brook to maintain NFIP eligibility in good standing. However, it may not
be easy for the applicant to prove "good and sufficient cause" and "exceptional
hardship". An example of "good and sufficient cause" could be a small lot sur-
rounded by existing structures built below the base flood elevation and where the
placement of fill would cause a run-off problem for the surrounding structures.
An example of "exceptional hardship" could be the renovation of an existing old
home with a basement. If there is a structural reason why this building could
not be elevated, or if because of the existing heating system the basement could
not be filled with pea gravel, then being required to elevate or fill the base-
ment might be considered an exceptional hardship.
However, the granting of a variance will not modify any flood insurance premiums.
Premium rates are established by statute according to actuarial risk. Since
flood insurance is required whenever a federally regulated lending institutions
loans money secured by a structure located within a special flood hazard area,
and since the insurance premium rates for residential structures are based upon
the relationship of the lowest floor elevation compared to the elevation of the
base flood, these requir_c; lood insurance premiums may be quite high. The NFIP
does not recognize floodproofed residential basements. Even if the first owner
of the structure does not purchase a flood insurance policy (for instance, if
they do not receive a loan from a federally regulated lending institution) , the
next owner most likely will need a loan to purchase the structure and will have
to pay the high flood insurance premium rates. Needless to say, the insurance
premium rates could make the structure difficult to sell.
Finally, we are concerned that granting a variance for this structure will estab-
lish a precedence for allowing structures to be built without the proper protection
required by your floodplain management ordinance. Granting a variance to the flood-
plain management regulations sanctions building in non-compliance with the minimum
standards required for participation in the NFIP. The Village must report the
number of variances to the floodplain regulations that have been granted on the
Biennial Report. We will carefully review all future variance findings of fact to
determine if they consistent with the objectives of sound floodplain management.
You may be interested to know that as of January, 1986 there were a total of 46
flood insurance policies on structures located within the corporate limits of
the Village of Oak Brook providing a total of $3,491,900 in flood insurance
coverage.
We hope that this has helped to answer your questions. If we can provide further
assistance, please contact Terry Reuss-Birman at (312) 886-5481.
Sincerely,
k Stuart A. Rifki ef
Natural Hazards Branch
Natural & Technological Hazards Division
Chapter I—Federal Emergency Management Agency §60.6
improvements are adequately designed and hazard,as it is known to the community; improvements to be erected on a lot of
protected against mudslide (i.e., mudflow) (2) Require review of each permit appli- one-half acre or less in size contiguous to
damages, (iii) the proposed grading,excava- cation to determine whether the proposed and surrounded by lots with existing struc-
tions, new construction and substantial im- site alterations and improvements will be tures constructed below the base flood level,
provements do not aggravate the existing reasonably safe from flood-related erosion in conformance with the procedures of
hazard by creating either on-site or off-site and will not cause flood-related erasion paragraphs (a) (3), (4), (5) and (6) of this
disturbances, and (iv) drainage, planting, hazards or otherwise aggravate the existing section;
watering, and maintenance be such as not to flood-related erosion hazard;and (3) Variances shall only be issued by a
endanger slope stability. (3) If a proposed improvement is found community upon (i) a showing of good and
(b) When Administrator has delineated to be in the path of flood-related erosion or sufficient cause, (ii) a determination that
Zone M on the community's FIRM, the to increase the erosion hazard, require the ,failure to grant the variance would result in
community shall: improvement to be relocated or adequate exceptional hardship to the applicant, and
(1) Meet the requirements of paragraph protective measures to be taken which will (iii) a determination that'the granting of a
(a)of this section;and not aggravate the existing erosion hazard. variance will not result in increased flood
(2) Adopt and enforce a grading ordi- (b) When the Administrator has deli- heights, additional threats to public safety,
nance or regulation in accordance with data neated Zone E on the community's FIRM, extraordinary public expense, create nui-
supplied by the Administrator which (i) the community shall: sances, cause fraud on or victimization of
regulates the location of foundation systems (1) Meet the requirements of paragraph the public, or conflict with existing local
and utility systems of new construction and (a)of this section;and laws or ordinances;
substantial improvements, (ii) regulates the (2) Require a setback for all new devel- (4) Variances shall only be issued upon a
location, drainage and maintenance of all opment from the ocean,lake,bay,riverfront determination that the variance is the mini-
excavations,cuts and fills and planted slopes, or other body of water, to create a safety mum necessary, considering the flood
(iii)provides special requirements for protec- buffer consisting of a natural vegetative or hazard,to afford relief;
tive measures including but not necessarily contour strip. This buffer will be designated (5) A community shall notify the appli-
limited to retaining walls, buttress fills, by the Administrator according to the flood- cant in writing over the signature of a
subdrains, diverter terraces, benchings, etc., related erosion hazard and erosion rate, in community official that(i)the issuance of a
and (iv) requires engineering drawings and conjunction with the anticipated "useful variance to construct a structure below the
specifications to be submitted for all correc- life" of structures, and depending upon the base flood level will result in increased
tive measures, accompanied by supporting geologic, hydrologic, topographic and cli- premium rates for flood insurance up to
soils engineering and geology reports. Guid- matic characteristics of the community's amounts as high as $25 for $100 of insur-
ance may be obtained from the provisions of land. The buffer may be used for suitable ance coverage and (ii) such construction
the 1973 edition and any subsequent edition open space purposes,such as for agricultural, below the base flood level increases risks to
of the Uniform Building Code,sections 7001 forestry, outdoor recreation and wildlife life and property. Such notification shall be
through 7006, and 7008 through 7015.The habitat areas, and for other activities using maintained with a record of all variance
Uniform Building Code is published by the temporary and portable structures only. actions as required in paragraph (a)(6) of
International Conference of Building Of- this section;and
ficials, 50 South Los Robles, Pasadena, §60.6 Variances and exceptions. (6) A community shall (i) maintain a
California 91101. record of all variance actions, including
(a) The Administrator does not set forth justification for their issuance, and (ii) re-
§60.5 Flood plain management criteria for absolute criteria for granting variances from port such variances issued in its annual
flood-related erosion-prone areas, the criteria set forth in §§60.3, 60.4, and report submitted to the Administrator.
60.5. The issuance of a variance is for flood (bX1) The requirement that each flood-
The Administrator will provide the data plain management purposes only. Insurance prone, mudslide (i.e., mudflow)-prone, and
upon which flood plain management regula- preminum rates are determined by statute flood-related erosion prone community must
tions for flood-related erosion-prone areas according to actuarial risk and will not be adopt and submit adequate flood plain
shall be based. If the Administrator has not modified by the granting of a variance.The management regulations as a condition of
provided sufficient data to furnish a basis for community, after examining the applicant's initial and continued flood insurance eligi-
these regulations in a particular community, hardships, shall approve or disapprove a bility is statutory and cannot be waived,and
the community shall obtain, review, and request. While the granting of variances such regulations shall be adopted by a
reasonably utilize data available from other generally is limited to a lot size less than community within the time periods specified
Federal, State or other sources, pending one-half acre(as set forth in paragraph(aX2) in §§60.3, 60.4 or §60.5.However,certain
receipt of data from the Administrator. of this section), deviations from that limits- exceptions from the standards contained in
However, when special flood-related erosion tion may occur. However, as the lot size this subpart may be permitted where the
hazard area designations have been furnished increases beyond one-half acre,the technical Administrator recognizes that, because of
by the Administrator they shall•apply.The justification required for issuing a variance extraordinary circumstances, local condi-
symbols defining such special flood-related increases. The Administrator may review a lions may render the application of certain
erosion hazard designations are set forth in community's findings justifying the granting standards the cause for severe hardship and
§64.3 of this subchapter. In all cases the of variances, and if that review indicates a gross inequity for a particular community.
minimum requirements governing the ade- pattern inconsistent with the objectives of Consequently, a community proposing the
quacy of the flood plain management regula- sound flood plain management,the Adminis- adoption of flood plain management regula-
lions for flood-related erosion-prone areas trator may take appropriate action under lions which vary from the standards set
adopted by a particular community depend §59.24(b)of this subchapter.Variances may forth in §§60.3, 60.4, or §60.5, shall
on the amount of technical data provided to be issued by a community for the recon- explain in writing to the Administrator the
the community by the Administrator. Mini- struction, rehabilitation or restoration of nature and extent of and the reasons for the
mum standards for communities are as fol- structures listed on the National Register of exception request and shall include suffi-
lows: Historic Places or a State Inventory of cient supporting economic, environmental,
(a) When the Administrator has not yet Historic Places, without regard to the pro- topographic, hydrologic, and other scientific
identified any area within the community as cedures set forth in this section. Procedures and technical data,and data with respect to
having special flood-related erosion hazards, for the granting of variances by a com- the impact on public safety and the environ-
but the community has indicated the pres- munity are as follows: ment.
ence of such hazards by submitting an (1) Variances shall not be issued by a (2) The Administrator shall prepare a
application to participate in the Program, community within any designated regulatory Special Environmental Clearance to deter-
the community shall: floodway if any increase in flood levels mine whether the proposal for an exception
(1) Require the issuance of a permit for during the base flood discharge would result; under paragraph (b)(1) of this section will
all proposed construction,or other develop- (2) Variances may be issued by a com- have significant impact on the human en-
ment in the area of flood-related erosion munity for new construction and substantial vironment. The decision whether an (i)
u
t ORDINANCE NO. S- 586
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION
Of A STRUCTURE IN A FLOOD PLAIN PURSUANT TO SECTION 10-34 OF THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
(45 991+a_l vale Drive)
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described herein have
petitioned the corporate authorities of the Village of Oak Brook, Du Page and Cook
Counties, Illinois, for a Special Use Permit under Section 10-34 of the Code of
Ordinances of the Village of Oak Brook, relating to flood plain and wetland
regulations; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing on such petition has been conducted by the
Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village on May 6, 1986, pursuant to due and
appropriate legal notice; and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 1986, the Plan Commission of the Village of Oak
Brook submitted its recommendation to the President and Board of Trustees; and
WHEREAS, the proposed use is consistent with the best use of the flood
plain, provided that the conditions set forth below are satisfied; and
WHEREAS, the proposed use satisfies the requirements of and is
consistent with each of the factors set forth in Section 10-34(c) of the Code of
Ordinances of the Village of Oak Brook; and
WHEREAS, the corporate authorities of the Village of Oak Brook deem the
passage of this Ordinance to be in the best interest and in furtherance of the
general welfare of the Village of Oak Brook;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, DU PAGE AND COOK COUNTIES, ILLINOIS as follows:
Section 1: That the provisions of the preamble hereinabove set forth
are hereby adopted as though fully set forth herein.
Section 2: Pursuant to Section 10-34 of the Code of Ordinances of the
Village of Oak Brook, Illinois, a Special Use Permit is hereby granted to allow
construction of a house on the property commonly known as 45 Royal Vale Drive,
Oak Brook, Illinois, and legally described as follows:
Lot 175 in Ginger Creek, a Subdivision of parts of Section
Twenty-Seven and Twenty-Eight, Township Thirty-Nine North,
Range Eleven East of the Third Principal Meridian, according
to the Plat thereof recorded December 30, 1960 as Document
No. 992057 in Du Page County, lllincs.
Permanent Parcel 006-28-304-004
Section 3: That the Special Use Permit herein granted in Section 2 of
this Ordinance is expressly subject to the following conditions:
1. That all land modifications and construction on the
Subject Property be done in substantial conformity with
the Proposed Site Grading Plan-Lot 175 drawn by Donald G.
Eddy Company, as last revised June 4, 1986, a copy of
which is attached hereto, labelled Exhibit A and made a
part hereof.
2. That the compensatory storage requirement is waived.
Section 4: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from
and after it passage and approval as provided by law.
Section 5: All ordinances, rules and regulations of the Village of Oak
Brook which are in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby
repealed to the extent of such conflict but only as they apply to the property
hereinbefore described.
1
• Ordinance No* 586
Granting a Special Use Permit
to Allow Construction of a
Structure in a Flood Plain
Pursuant to Section 10-34
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
Page two
Section 6: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of
this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such determination shall not
affect the validity of any remaining portion of this Ordinance.
PASSED THIS 24th DAY OF June , 1986.
Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Philip and Winters
Nays: Trustee Rush
Absent: None
APPROVED THIS 24th DAY OF June , 1986.
,1
Village id en
ATTEST:
Villdge Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Village Attorney
Published
Date Paper
Not Published XX
• -2- •
Since the hearings, Mrs. Smith has entered into a contract to sell the property
based on the following conditions:
1) Approval of the Flood Plain Special Use permit for construction
of the house.
2) The Village waive compensatory storage requirements (as recommended
by the Zoning Board of Appeals).
3) The Village Board deny the previously requested Flood Plain
Variation for construction of the basement.
Dale's last review of engineering plans was contained in his May 7 memo and
noted a difficulty with a proposed retaining wall overlying an existing Village
storm sewer along the north edge of the property. Dale advises me that the
current plans, revised June 4, 1986, have adequately addressed that problem and
therefore, only minor engineering details remain to be accomplished.
In the event the Village Board chooses to grant the requested Flood Plain Special
Use permit, it would be appropriate to direct the Village Attorney to prepare
the necessary Ordinance approving same.
With respect'to the Flood Plain Variation, it would be appropriate for the Village
Board to take some action with respect to that portion of the application. Based
on the. condition noted by the prospective purchaser that the basement Variation
is not required, the Board might choose to deny the requested Flood Plain Variation.
Respectfully submitted,
G
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BK/mr
DONALD G.
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS u� 'p^^
Jul •� wOU
534 CHESTNUT ST.,HINSDALE.IL 60521 - (312)986-0909
VILLAGE OF OAK BRUK, IL
june 4, 1986
i'!r. Dale Durfey
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Cai: Brook, Illinois 60521
Re: Mrs. Beverly Smith Property
Revuest For Variation of Compensatory Storage
Lnt 175, Ginger Creek Subdivision
Dear ''!r. Dxfey ;
n,�panying this letter, please find 18 copies of the revised site p showing
the proposed retaining wall stopping short of the Village's public utility
east. To accc>mQli.sh this, we have lowered the proposed garage floor from
the previous elevation of 702.5 to 701.5. This change will now allow the drive-
T,W to have a reasonable slope as well as meeting the existing gzound line along
the north lire of the property.
Ile would note to you that the house foot print shown is very prel iTmnary and
will be subject to change, once the home has been designed. This plan only
damnstrates that the home can be constructed on the lot and also sets forth the
various rarameters that would have to be add3essed. In the event that the Village
Board concurs with the recommendations of the Plan Ccamission and the Zoning
Board, in the matter of coa>pensatory storage, the grading plan will require some
significant changes wbi.ch would take place at the time of application for the
building peraeit.
I would trust that this information is sufficient for you -purposes at this time.
Should you have questions or ccnments to be ad cressed prior to ,Tour leaving on
vacation, we would appreciate a phone call so that we might respor_d immdiately.
JS*r e ely, �. +�
�rald G. Eddy, P.E.
VILL. ..
CONSULTING ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT, PROJECT
MANAGEMENT, MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING,GRAPHIC PRESENTATION,SCALE MODEL CONSTRUCTION
,
~ ������N��� �� ��
m���m�m��m� G.
°
LC�ON;JS'ULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
534 CHESTNUT GT..*|w8DALE.|LOV521 - (312)986-0909
~=. /
June 2, 1986
V/�_``.�
Mr. Bruce Kapff �� �� `'. `�|�=-?^7.2\71ZZN
Administrative Assistan�
Vi1lage of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook , Illinois 60521
'
Re: Request for Variance
Lot 175, Ginger Creek Subdivision
Mrs. Bever Applicant
Dear �r. Kapff ;
Since the time we r�qu.ested a continuance of consideration of
vaF iance for roperty for the purpose of mee��n� with
the Federal Em (FEMA) , the owners of
the property a contract offer to buy the lot �ub-
j�ct to the recommerdatiuns adopted by the Village's �onin� �oard.
This �ffer to purchase came just 24 hours prior to the scheduIed
meeting with the but too late for a request
p1acsd on the agenda of the Village Board for its meetirg of
May 27, 1986.
The conditions to purchase of this property are
as fol �ows:
1 . That the �ot + presently almost entirely MA
fIocd ��ain , be allowed to have construc�ed a hame whose
lowest ha�i �able �Ioor is 3 feet above t:e a�ti�� �ated
flood plair ela"ation , and in accordance
Ordina�ces.
2 That ^�� re�ui rement �f the Village for c'�moensa��r`/
st�ra�s oF J �aters be waived for this
3. That ��� �-co�est for constructi on of the
lage
CONSULTING ENG|NEER|NG, LAND PLANN|NG, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT, PROJECT
MANAGEMENT, MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING. GRAPHIC PRESENTATION,SCALE MODEL CONSTRUCTICN
Page twu
Letter to Mr. Kapff
Request fur Variance
June 2, 1986
We would request favor: ��e cons1deratio� of these variations, and
as recommended by the Village 's Zoning BoarQ , for this site at the
Board 's meeting to be held on J�ne 9, 1986.
/Si rel y, p
Oonald G. Eddy-, P. E. 7
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
-
�,
vP 90
o ' w
G �
ON
4 `t1
9CF `��OF 04Ar
�ouNZ�'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
May 14, 1986
,Mr. Donald G. Eddy
16 North Lincoln Street
Hinsdale, Illinois 60521
RE: Smith - Flood Plain Special Use and Flood Plain Variation
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
Dear Mr. Eddy:
The Village Board, at their Board meeting of Tuesday, -May 13, 1986, granted your
requested continuance of the above application to its June 10, 1986 meeting in
order to allow the applicant time to have available additional clarification of
the impact of the Federal Flood Insurance program.
Since
r
J T n H. Brec in
Vage Manager
JHB/jr
VILLAGE, OF OAK BROOK Minutes -5- • May 13, 1986
License Request - Lion's Club of Downers Grove: j
D. Liquor i a -
Trustee Bushy moved, seconded by Trustee Winters. .. !
To concur with the recommendation of Liquor Control Commissioner Cerne
and authorize the issuance of a Class D, one-day liquor license to the
Lion's Club of Downers Grove for their 60th Anniversary Reception/
Dinner to be held at The Lodge, 2815 Jorie Boulevard on September 14,
1986.
VOICE VOTE: All in favor except Trustee Philip. So ordered.
E. Smith Flood Plain -Special Use and Flood Plain Variation (45 Royal
-- Vale Drive):
Both the Plan Commission, on March 17, 1986, and the Zoning Board of
Appeals, on May 6, 1986, recommended approval of the Flood Plain
Special Use Permit that would allow construction of a house within the
Ginger Creek floodplain; the Zoning Board of Appeals then recommended
denial of a Variation that would permit the basement to be at an
elevation of 695 instead of 703.
Trustee Philip moved, seconded by Trustee Rush... .•
�= To concur with the request of the petitioner and continue this matter
to the Regul ar.Meeting of June 10, 1986.
YVOICE VOTE: All present, in favor. `; 1 So ordered.
F.• McDonald's - Flood Plain Special Use = Phase 1-B Stockpile (2915
Ronald Lane):J =
,.: .
Both -the Plan Commission, on'March 17, 1986, and the Zoning Board of
Appeals, on May- 6, 1986, recommended approval of the Flood Plain
Special Use that would allow for the dirt excavated for construction
of office buiilding to be stockpiled on a temporary basis within the
Salt Creek floodplain.
Trustee Philip moved, seconded by Trustee Rush...
To concur with the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals and
direct the Village Attorney to prepare the necessary document for a
Flood Plain Special Use Permit to Mc Donald's Corporation incorporating
the four (4) conditions outlined in letter from Chairman Savino dated
May 8; 1986. Y
VOICE VOTE: All present, in favor. So ordered.
G. Stone Container - Parking Variation (2021 Swift Drive):
On May 6, 1986 the Zoning Board of App I eals recommended approval of a
Variation to allow for all parking spaces of a joint use office/non-
office type building to be built to the "office use" standards of 8-
1/2 x 17-1/2 with a 24-foot aisle.
Trustee Philip moved, seconded by Trustee Bushy...
To concur with the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals and
direct the Village Attorney to prepare the necessary document.
VOICE VOTE: All present, in favor. So ordered.
H. Stone Container - Loading Berth Text Amendment (2021 Swift Drive):
Both the Plan Commission, on April 21, 1986, and the Zoning Board of
Appeals, on May 6, 1986, recommended approval of a Text Amendment to
reduce the number of required loading berths from 2 to 1 for office
buildings containing less than 25,000 square feet.
Trustee Philip moved, seconded by Trustee Rush...
To concur with the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals and
direct the Village Attorney to prepare the necessary document.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes -5- May 13, 1986
Y-N�
O�OF 041('9
� f
G H
C OU N'Tv'
VI LLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
May 13, 1986 654-2220
MEMO TO: Planning & Zoning Staff
FROM: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to the Village Manager
SUBJECT: Smith. �, Basement Flood Plain 'Variation
Attached is a listing and map of all properties in Oak Brook which have
received a flood plain variation for construction of a basement below
an elevation of 3 feet above the 100 year flood. These properties are in
the Merry Lane and Steeplechase subdivisions.
The table notes the chronology of flood plain regulations and variations
granted. As indicated, all such variations permitting basements were
granted rp for to Ordinance G-217, 9-27-77, which crzated revised flood
plain regulations as required by the Federal Goverment.
This information indicates that the Village had, in the past, been willing
to grant Variations from its Flood Plain regulations permitting basements,
but has since been reluctant to do so, based on Federai regulations sknde 1 9J7,
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce F. Kapft
Assistant to the 'Village Manager
I
BFK/mf
_ I
1
i
4:07 -
/ i
I
. i
7 I
o - _-a---.�- •s sz h z
i
I
-� 4 1 Z-,,t9 LG -LZ-�
11 7- Z LA'S; LG-47
f.7-y
V i
i
i
1 �o
8
3�5 27 j s - ��z °y zo •
I'> -
°
3
UIE
' 717 96�
..?A ,zar z ?� (12
70 377 ?
404 43.5
v
%,
440 ♦t ;r '
q,g 9os 90� 8� 8 �,6 ��y
54' ' q 8�9 - s� �
U
Lj
//i4 RIi4T/Oti5 /`f LLOCVi.�G� T7,45�i'1F•v'TS
M /=LOoa LAll
CGEIi.
CALL �'�i v lz TD I�RD. 6-2'1 9—z7-
l7 lfif}S �.455,Ep /4-r DIREcT/oN
�rZ/cR 'Ta / 7-771 j11c4. GISE D
-7Z lam-Z 3- 571 1 j=-4u !RED
14 �LoORS�-Zi�LLUVl v6 -5i9SEM E�TS� Tv F3�
?j �=T. J4 pjDVE )=LpOa 'E1-Etii4T-/Oti>
At G�Of OgK`AeAOO�
O } y
G O
4 �
9C ', fir♦
�COUNS4'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
G54-2220
March 25, 1986
MEMO TO: Zoning Board of Appeals
FROM: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
SUBJECT: Smith - Flood Plain Special Use and Variation
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
I refer you to my memo of March 13 to the Plan Commission (page 12 of the
folder) regarding specific details of this application. In addition to reviewing
the Special Use Permit, the Zoning Board of Appeals will be reviewing the Variation
request which would permit construction of the basement lower than the base flood
elevation plus 3 feet. In that regard, I have attached Section 10-35 of the Village
Code which notes the specific standards to be utilized by the ZBA in reviewing this
request. In the event the Zoning Board of Appeals chooses to recommend approval
of these two requests, the Village Code permits the recommendation of specific
conditions or restrictions on the proposed construction.
The Plan Commission, at its March 17th meeting, recommended approval of the
special use portion of the application as noted in the Chairman's letter. At that
meeting, Donald Eddy submitted their proposed topography for the construction
which had yet to be reviewed by Engineering staff. I refer you to Dale's current
memo in this regard.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BFK/j r
PLANNING AND ZONING § 10-35
tion, "Flood-Proofing Regulations," June, 1972, GPO:
1973 0-505-026 edition, or any subsequent edition
thereof. (Ord. No. G-217, § 2, 9-27-77; Ord. No. G-364, § 2,
9-10-85)
Sec. 10-35. Variations.
(a) [President and Board of Trustees May Grant:]
Variations to the provisions of this article may be granted
by the president and board of trustees upon recommendation
by the zoning board of appeals.
(b) Authority: The board of trustees shall decide all applica-
tions for variations of the provisions of this division after a public
hearing held before the zoning board of appeals on such notice as
shall be required by the Illinois Statutes for zoning variations.
The zoning board of appeals shall hold public hearing upon all
applications for variations and shall report its recommendations
to the board of trustees as to whether a requested variation
would be in harmony with its general purpose and intent, and
shall recommend a variation only where it shall have made a
finding of fact specifying the reason or reasons for recommending
the variation. Such findings shall be based upon the standards
prescribed in subsection(e)below. No variation shall be granted
by the board of trustees without such findings of fact. The con-
curring vote of four (4) members of the zoning board of appeals
shall be necessary to recommend in favor of the requested varia-
tion. In the case of a variation where the zoning board of appeals
fails to recommend the variation, it can only be adopted by an
ordinance with the favorable vote of two-thirds of the trustees.
(c) Initiation: An application for a variation shall be in
triplicate and may be made by any governmental office,
department, board, bureau or commission, or by any person,
firm or corporation having a freehold interest, a possessory
interest entitled to exclusive possession, a contractual
interest which may become a freehold interest, or any
exclusive possessory interest applicable to the land or land
and improvements described in the application for a
variation.
(d) Processing. An application for a variation shall be
filed with the village clerk who shall forward one copy of
Supp. No.30 637
§ 10-35 OAK BROOK CODE �.
such application to the zoning board of appeals for
processing in accordance with applicable statutes of the
State of Illinois and one copy to the board of trustees.
(e) Standards: The recommendation of the zoning board
of appeals and the decision of the president and board of
trustees on an application for a variation to the provisions
of this article shall be based on the following standards, the
burden of showing to be borne by the applicant:
(1) A showing of good and sufficient cause;
(2) A determination that failure to grant the variation
would result in exceptional hardship to the applicant;
and
(3) A determination that the variation will not result in
increased flood heights, additional threats to public
safety, extraordinary public expense, create nui-
sances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public,
conflict with other existing ordinances, or conflict with
the intent of this article.
(f) [Conditions and Restrictions:] The zoning board of
appeals may recommend and the board of trustees may
require such conditions and restrictions upon the premises
benefited by a variation as may be necessary to comply with
the standards set forth in this section to reduce or minimize
the injurious effect of such variation upon other property in
the neighborhood, and to implement the general purpose
and intent of this article.
(g) [Insurance rates:] The village shall inform applicants
for variations that should a variation be granted to build a
structure with its lowest floor below the base flood
elevation, it could result in flood insurance premiums as
high as twenty-five dollars ($25.00) per one hundred dollars
($100.00) of insurance coverage. (Ord. No. G-217, § 2,
9-27-77;Ord.No. G-277, § 7, 1-27-81;Ord.No. G-364, §'3,9-10-85)
Secs. 10-36-10-45. Reserved.
Supp. No.30
638
r
e • OF 041, •
9
�► vP � CO
p 5 N
G a C
FCOUNt-'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
March 27, 1986
MEMO TO: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
FROM: Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , Village Engineer
SUBJECT: Smith - Flood Plain Special Use
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
Lot 175 - Ginger Creek
I have reviewed the Engineering Drawing which I received on March 14, 1986 and
offer the following comments:
1) The engineer's calculations state 74,330 cubic feet of existing floodplain
storage and 74,338 cubic feet of proposed floodplain storage; therefore,
the proposed plan does provide for compensatory storage.
2) The proposed plan would construct a small pond between the proposed home
and the existing Ginger Creek Lake. The Village should consider the
appropriateness of the proposed pond or, in the alternative, waive some
or all of the compensatory storage and eliminate the proposed pond.
3) The plan should include the elevation of the first floor and basement.
4) The plan proposes a retaining wall within the easement and over the existing
storm sewer in the northerly part of the lot. The wall over the storm sewer
is of particular concern because it would inhibit maintenance activities
which might become necessary on the storm sewer. It appears that the wall
around the northerly portion of the home could be eliminated if the garage
floor were dropped approximately 2 feet which would then place the driveway
and the adjacent grades much closer to the existing lot line elevations.
The wall could then be kept between the proposed home and the existing Ginger
Creek Lake.
5) An inlet may be required in the area where the storm sewer is to be connected
to the culvert under the driveway of the home to the North. Also, the plan
calls for an existing drainage structure to be replaced with a catch basin.
The new catch basin should be repositioned so as to be several feet away
from the existing watermain.
n
RE: Smith - Flood Plain Special Use
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
Lot 175 - Ginger Creek
March 27, 1986
Page 2
6) The date needs to be added to the plan to state when the water level was
determined for the existing Ginger Creek Lake.
7) Regarding the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) position on the
request of placing a basement within the floodplain, I spoke with Terry
Reuss-Berman on March 25, 1986, concerning my letter to David Schein of
March 14, 1986. Mrs. Reuss-Berman will be forwarding a letter to the Village
describing our conversation which concluded that, should the Village grant
this Variation, this particular site would not. hurt the Village's participation
in the National Flood Insurance Program. However, one item which they do -
review is the potential for precedence and any trends which may be set.
Should the Village grant similar variations in the future because a precedent
is set on this property would probably have an adverse effect on our floodplain
insurance participation, which might include probation or suspension from the
Flood Insurance Program.
8) As per Village regulation, the Village must inform applicants for variations
that, should a variation be granted to build .a structure with its lowest floor
below the base flood elevation, it could result in flood insurance premiums
as high as $25.00 per $100.00 of insurance coverage. Mrs. Reuss-Berman also
stated that flood insurance would be required for this property whenever
someone borrows money from a lending institution. Therefore, the potential
of extremely high insurance rates would be a significant cloud on any title
held.
9) Should the Village wish to grant this Variation, consideration should be given
to including specific conditions regarding floodproofing items similar to past
ordinances (e.g. , homesites within Merry Lane) .
Res ec sully ubmitted,
Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , P.E.
Village Engineer
DLD/jr
I
II
G�OF OAk 0
G
4 `�O
COUN-0
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
March 24, 1986 654-2220
Village President and Board of Trustees
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
RE: Smith Flood Plain Special
Use - 45 Royal Vale Drive
Dear President and Board of Trustees:
The Plan Commission, at its regular meeting of March 17, 1986, considered the
Application of Mrs. Beverlie Smith ,for a Flood Plain Special Use Permit for
construction of a house within the Ginger Creek Flood Plain.
The Plan Commission recommends to the President and Board of Trustees approval
of this request subject to the following conditions:
1) Approval of all engineering related items by the Village Engineer.
2) Redesign of the proposal in order to remove the proposed retaining
wall at the front of the property.
This recommendation was made on a motion by Member Antoniou, seconded by Member
Haglund and approved on a roll call vote of six (6) ayes, Members Antoniou,
Beard, Doyle, Haglund, Stachniak, Chairman Marcy, zero (0) nays, one (1) absent,
Member Sandstedt.
Sincerely,
Henry 0. Marcy
Chairman, Plan Commission
HOM/BFK/mf
Ab
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes -2- March 17, 1986
IV SMITH -- FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE 15 Royal Vale Drive)
Mrs. Beverlie Smith, property owner, Emmett Galvin, attorney, and Donald Eddy,
engineer, were present representing this application.
The Chairman noted the possibility that this item would be tabled since the Village
Engineer had not had an opportunity to review the Engineering Plans.
Donald Eddy made the following comments concerning the proposal:
1) The property is almost entirely within the Ginger Creek floodplain, with a
small portion in the floodway.
2) Earlier plans called for enlarging Ginger Creek in order to provide the
required compensatory storage, although such proved unfeasible due to an
existing sanitary sewer running along the back of the property.
3) The proposed detention area volume slightly exceeds the existing and,
therefore, conforms with Village requirements.
4) Based on the high water level of 700.0, the first floor elevation is proposed
to be at 703, with a basement approximately 9 feet below that level.
In response to Member Stachniak, Mr. Eddy stated that the proposed Pond would be
directly connected with Ginger Creek and would flow at the same level. He also
noted that there would be no problem with construction of a basement below the high
water level, since there will be no direct connection between Ginger Creek and the
house's foundation.
Member Antoniou inquired as to whether the house's first floor elevation could be
constructed lower than 703, noting his preference to have it closer to 700, similar
to surrounding properties.
Don Eddy stated that without doing a detailed flood analysis of the property, he
would be willing to lower the first floor elevation to no less than 702.
In response to Member Antoniou, Mr. Eddy stated that the proposed retaining wall in
the front of the property could be removed, however this would place the high water
level closer to the house.
Mr. Eddy also noted that the existing sanitary sewer could not be relocated around
an enlarged Ginger Creek due to inadequate pipe slopes.
In response to Chairman Marcy, Mr. Eddy responded to the eleven factors contained
in Section 10-34 of the Village's Floodplain Ordinance indicating that there would
be no negative impact created by the proposed development.
In response to Member Doyle, Mr. Eddy agreed that the proposed pond will, over
time, fill with sediment. However, it was necessary to create this additional pond
in order to meet the compensatory storage requirements.
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes -2- March 17, 1986
eJ �
J
V OF OAK BROOK".
DU PAGE AND COOK COUN IE8,WNUS
NOTICE OF PUBW HEARING
NOTICE is Y OMEN Mat a pubic hserft before to Zon.
j do Beard of; cf tin VOW of Oak Brook,DuPepa and Ccok
Counties.Brodg eA be ha10 O'1pi°''1986 Road, nob,tar t to the PUBLISHER'S CERTIFICATE
ppomopa ►w.1200 Oak eook RoaO.Iew,ola.r«M.pun.:.
1Yorr es podded wxbr.r application d 10.3 a6 a�e
Code of the VOape of Oak Bra*IMgb,as wriendad.
r folowYq types of Vale}have been rsaresad:*1)'A Flood
Plates Special llis Penn"for Iha oonatructlon of a house within the
,c"b ore°'`itoorpkln,and an l Fbod Plain V 11 that b pencil TM IS TO CERTIFY That the notice, a true copy of which is attached to this
v�nernsy�Bat� On 3 fast.T e°pro.; certificate, was published in THE DOINGS once each week ,for
;� ;and tt�described es 45 Royal vds Drive,Oak
r Iapd description le w f liras:l ot_175 Ip
hl?ar Crook a SubdHMbn of prta of Sectlon Twv*,%vsn nW one
Tr»"Tn4a dpTdOW1M1�T'�Ir'''NY'°North,Range Eleven East a weeks sucessively; that the date
Daaen�ar 4 .aoconikV 10 tiro Plat ttrreof recalled
tiYnola.
a Doaanrrt No aa2os>ti county. of the first publication was the........................ th.................day f
Atipere+nir~r' PWn1VWdPa1 t4o.06-29.804.004,�'�!" "- Y
o a a beard h support at or In oPPoaftn to the
c,txapoeed
Flood Plain variation end Fleas Pon specw use a airy March A.D., 19 8 6.., and that the date of the last publication was
pavlalon Hereof.wIM be afforded an arpgporbniy to do so and may,
�edatto °derma Orin
nonce" dtl��V�e and.v ce thereof the............................. day of. A.D., 19.
,publication not 1*811 tpcb,�y armunced at He herft or.Is given by newspaper"
Urn flue(5)d�or,y*�prior,a Me data of the
�7r;2k hirfs'relslcoep AND IT IS FURTHER CERTIFIED That THE DOINGS is a secular newspaper of
f�blehsd a{die'dtreetbrr of uieca�;;b'�`, n.o;;�,° ti,e�` , general circulation, published weekly in the Villages of Hinsdale, Clarendon Hills,
ca B-d npe"DD"b. dth*VftQsaf Oak DDUP1 !andC1,k Oak Brook,Burr Ridge,Willowbrook and City of Darien and circulated generally in
RiDMe1 d„TM°uokw.Mara.is lase k w. the Villages of Hinsdale, Clarendon Hills,Oak Brook,Burr Ridge,Willowbrook and
City of Darien and adjacent unincorporated and incorporated areas,and in DuPage
and Cook Counties, Illinois, and in other areas; that said THE DOINGS is a
"newspaper" as defined by the Illinois Statutes made and provided for such situa-
tions,to wit;by Section 5 of"An Act to revise the law in relation to notices,"1874,Feb.
13,R.S.1874,p.723,§5,as amended 1959,July 17,Laws 1959,p.1494,§1;and is also a
"newspaper"as defined by Section 1 of"An Act concerning the publication of legal
notices,"1909,June 8,Laws 1909,p.288,§1,as amended 1927,June 29,Laws 1927,p.
603,§1,and as further amended 1945,April 12,Laws 1945,p. 1089,§1,and as further
amended in 1957,July 9,Laws 1957,p.2270,§1,and as further amended 1959,July 17,
Laws 1959,p.1496,§1;and that said THE DOINGS has been continuously published at
regular intervals of at least once each week with a minimum of 50 issues per year for
over one year prior to the first publication of the attached notice.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, one of the co-publishers of said
THE DOINGS has affixed his hand and seal this
...................14th.... day of ..........March......... A.D. 1986...
Publishers Charge . 3 0.9 6._..
Publisher
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes —2— March 17, 1986
IV SMITH — FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE 45 Royal Vale Drive)
Mrs. Beverlie Smith, property owner, Emmett Galvin, attorney, and Donald Eddy,
engineer, were present representing this application.
The Chairman noted the possibility that this item would be tabled since the Village
Engineer had not had an opportunity to review the Engineering Plans.
Donald Eddy made the following comments concerning the proposal:
1) The property is almost entirely within the Ginger Creek floodplain, with a
small portion in the floodway.
2) Earlier plans called for enlarging Ginger Creek in order to provide the
required compensatory storage, although such proved unfeasible due to an
existing sanitary sewer running along the back of the property.
3) The proposed detention area volume slightly exceeds the existing and,
therefore, conforms with Village requirements.
4) Based on the high water level of 700.0, the first floor elevation is proposed
to be at 703, with a basement approximately 9 feet below that level.
In response to Member Stachniak, Mr. Eddy stated that the proposed pond would be
directly connected with Ginger Creek and would flow at the same level. He also
noted that there would be no problem with construction of a basement below the high
water level, since there will be no direct connection between Ginger Creek and the
house's foundation.
Member Antoniou inquired as to whether the house's first floor elevation could be
constructed lower than 703, noting his preference to have it closer to 700, similar
to surrounding properties.
Don Eddy stated that without doing a detailed flood analysis of the property, he
would be willing to lower the first floor elevation to no less than 702.
In response to Member Antoniou, Mr. Eddy stated that the proposed retaining wall in
the front of the property could be removed, however this would place the high water
level closer to the house.
Mr. Eddy also noted that the existing sanitary sewer could not be relocated around
an enlarged Ginger Creek due to inadequate pipe slopes.
In response to Chairman Marcy, Mr. Eddy responded to the eleven factors contained
in Section 10-34 of the Village's Floodplain Ordinance indicating that there would
be no negative impact created by the proposed development.
In response to Member Doyle, Mr. Eddy agreed that the proposed pond will, over
time, fill with sediment. However, it was necessary to create this additional pond
in order to meet the compensatory storage requirements.
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes —2— March 17, 1986
I
• 0
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes —3— March 17, 1986
IV SMITH — FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE 45 Royal Vale Drive)(Continued)
Other than the applicant, the Chairman noted that there were no members of the
audience expressing support for or opposition to the proposed application.
A motion was made by Member Antoniou, seconded by Member Haglund to recommend to
the President and Board of Trustees approval of the requested Flood Plain Special
Use Permit subject to the following conditions:
1) Approval of all engineering related items by the Village Engineer.
2) Redesign of the proposal removing the retaining wall at the front of the
property.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (6)
Members Antoniou, Beard, Doyle,
Haglund, Stachniak, Chairman Marcy
Nays: (0)
Absent: (1)
Member Sandstedt
MOTION CARRIED. ..
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes —3— March 17, 1986
x. i • G�OFO4K •
P .
p d!
OUNS
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
March 13, 1986
MEMO TO: Plan Commission
FROM: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
SUBJECT: Smith - Flood Plain Special Use
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
Beverlie Smith, as owner of the property, has made application to permit construction
of a house on the above property as shown on the enclosed Site Plan. As noted on the
attached Flood Boundary Map, the majority of the Smith property is located within the
flood fringe with a portion also located in the floodway of Ginger Creek.
Mrs. Smith has made application for the following types of relief:
1) Flood Plain Special Use Permit for construction of the house within the Ginger
Creek Floodplain (reviewed by both the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals) .
2) Flood Plain Variation which would permit construction of a basement at an elevation
less than that allowed by Ordinance, namely the base flood elevation plus 3 feet.
(Reviewed only by the Zoning Board of Appeals)
Although the application also indicates their desire to have the compensatory storage
requirements waived, I have been advised by Donald Eddy, their engineer, that they are
in the process of locating the required compensatory storage.
Therefore, the only question before the Plan Commission is whether or not the property
owner should be permitted to construct a residence within this portion of the Ginger
Creek Floodplain. In that regard, I have attached pertinent portions of Section 10-34
of the Village Code which notes the particular standards to be met by the applicant
in requesting such permission. I would once again note that their specific request to
construct the house at an elevation less than 703.0 feet (3 feet above the base flood
elevation) is not before the Plan Commission and will only be reviewed by the Zoning
Board of Appeals as required by Ordinance.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BFK/j r
Attachment
Qo�P� o0
r �
( 56
O \ �
OP
Dc MA /"Ll7or7 BOleA,,vARv
AND F4000WAY ILIA PI �
AlWL
FOX IANNA�
COURT
o ;
OALE
Sly IVE
W-U;
'Qq
i
P�
v
�LD�y vI
I,-A N
SiN/rN PRo Pettey ,. '
FRMol4
IC i
I?' 1�
0
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes -3- March 17, 1986
IV SMITH - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE 45 Royal Vale Drive)(Continued)
Other than the applicant, the Chairman noted that there were no members of the
audience expressing support for or opposition to the proposed application.
A motion was made by Member Antoniou, seconded by Member Haglund to recommend to
the President and Board of Trustees approval of the requested Flood Plain Special
Use Permit subject to the following conditions:
1) Approval of all engineering related items by the Village Engineer.
2) Redesign of the proposal removing the retaining wall at the front of the
property.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (6)
Members Antoniou, Beard, Doyle,
Haglund, Stachniak, Chairman Marcy
Nays: (0)
Absent: (1)
Member Sandstedt
MOTION CARRIED. ..
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes -3- March 17, 1986
professional engineer or land surveyor, registered as
such in the State of Illinois, as is deemed necessary by
Supp.No. 3 633
g 10.34 OAK BROOK CODE
the plan commission for determining the suitability of
the particular site for the proposed use: ;
i
(i) Plans drawn to a readable scale showing location,
nature, dimensions and elevation of the lot,
existing or proposed structures, fill, storage of
materials, floodproofing measures, and the rela-
tionship of the above to the location of the
channel, floodway and the flood protection eleva-
tion.
(ii) Typical valley cross-section(s) drawn to a scale of
one (1) inch to one hundred (100) feet and a
vertical scale of one (1) inch to ten (10) feet
showing the channel of the stream, elevation of
land areas adjoining each side of the channel,
cross-sectional areas to be occupied by the
proposed development, and high water elevation. '
Cross-section intervals shall not exceed one °
t
hundred (100) feet.
(iii) Plans (surface view) showing elevations or con-
tours of the ground; pertinent structure, fill or
storage elevations; size, location and spatial
arrangement of all proposed and existing struc-
tures on the site; location and elevations of
streets, water supply, sanitary facilities; soil
types; and other pertinent information. Contours
shall be shown at one-foot intervals.
(iv) Photographs showing existing land uses and
vegetation upstream and downstream.
(v) A profile showing the slope of the bottom of the
channel or the flow line of the stream.
(vi) Specifications for filling, grading, dredging, chan-
nel improvements, storage of materials, water
supply and sanitary facilities.
(2) Transmit one copy of the information described in
subsection (b)(1) to the village engineer for technical
assistance, where necessary, in evaluating the pro-
posed project in relation to flood heights and
Supp. No.3 634
PLANNING AND ZONING § 10-34
velocities; the seriousness of flood damage to the use;
the adequacy of the plans for protection; and other
technical matters.
(3) Based upon the technical evaluation of the village
engineer, determine the specific flood hazard at the
site and evaluate the suitability of the proposed use in
relation to the flood hazard.
(c) Factors Upon Which the Recommendations of the
Zoning Board of Appeals and the Plan Commission Shall
Be Based: In making recommendations upon applications
for special use permits, the zoning board of appeals and the
plan commission shall consider all relevant factors specified
in other sections of this article, including but not limited to
the following: }
(1) The danger to life and property due to increased flood
heights or velocities caused by encroachments;
(2) The danger that materials may be swept onto other ;
lands, or cross-stream, upstream or downstream to the
injury of others;
(3) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems
and the ability of these systems to prevent disease,
contamination and unsanitary conditions;
(4) The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its
contents to flood damage and the effect of such
damage on the individual owners;
(5) The importance of the services provided by the
proposed facility to the community.
(6) The requirements of the facility for a waterfront
location;
(7) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing
development and development anticipated in the
foreseeable future;
(8) The relationship of the proposed use to the compre-
hensive plan and floodplain management program for
the area;
Supp. No.3 635
10-34 OAK BROOK CODE
i
(9) The safety of access to the property in times of flood
for ordinary and emergency vehicles;
(10) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise
and sediment transport of the floodwaters expected at
the site; and
(11) Such other factors which are relevant to the purposes
of this article.
,�..��. (d) Conditions Attached to Special Use Permits: Upon
consideration of the zoning board of appeals and the plan
commission recommendations, the factors listed above, and
- the purpose of this article, the president and board of
trustees may by ordinance grant, deny or attach such
conditions to the granting of special use permits as they
deem necessary to further the purposes of this article.
Among such conditions, without limitation because of
specific enumeration, may be included:
(1) Modification of waste disposal and water-supply 3
facilities; ?
(2) Limitations on periods of use and operation;
(3) Imposition on operational controls, deposit of surety
bonds and deed restrictions;
(4) Requirements for construction of channel modifica-
tions, dikes, levees and other protective measures; and
(5) Floodproofing measures designed to be consistent with
the flood protection elevation for the particular area,
flood velocities, durations, rate of rise, hydrostatic and
hydrodynamic forces, and other factors associated
with the 100-year flood. In this event, the president
and board of trustees shall require that the applicant
submit a plan or document certified by a registered
structural engineer that the floodproofing measures
are consistent with the flood protection elevation and
associated flood factors for the particular area and
shall be provided in accordance with the standards for
completely floodproofed structures contained within
the United States Army Corps of Engineers publica-
Supp. No.3 636
tion, "Flood-Proofing Regulations," June, 1972, GPO:
1973 0-505-026 edition, or any subsequent edition
thereof. (Ord. No. G-217, § 2, 9-27-77; Ord. No. G-364, § 2,
9-10-85)
• GOOF 04k
O �
G p
�COUNt,('
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
March 13, 1986
G54-2220
MEMO TO: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
FROM: Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , P.E.
SUBJECT: Smith-Flood Plain Special Use
45 Royal Vale Drive
Lot 175 - Ginger Creek
I have reviewed the previously submitted documents and offer the following
comments:
1. The only drawing submitted to date is a topographic map showing
existing contour lines and the outline of a proposed building on
Lot 175. Proposed improvements should be submitted which state
top-of-foundation elevation, first floor elevation, basement
elevation, proposed contours, and compensatory storage.
2. The 100 year high-water level for this site is 700.0; as such, the
existing topo places the entire lot within the flood plain.
3. I will be contacting the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
to ascertain their comments on any consequences should the Village
of Oak Brook grant a variation and permit a basement for this
property.
Res ct 11 submitted,
Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , P.E. ,
Village Engineer
DLD/etg
THE DOINGS .
118 West First Street ,
Hinsdale, Illinois 60521
Gentlemen:
Please publish the following legal notice for publication on March 13 1986.
LEGAL NOTICE
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
DU PAGE AND COOK COUNTIES, ILLINOIS
NOTTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY V14EN k1latc a public hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals
of tt*n Village rof fOak By aok„ TUIDne Cook Counties, Illinois, will be held on
A r i I 1 1986; At :_30 .T-M.. -in the Oak Brook Village Hall, 1200 Oak Brook Road,
Illinois, for- ttfte �pvr7pose of =nsibering the application of Beverlie J. Smith
for a Flood Thin \Marta#tiiem arnd flood Plainn §Recial Use Permit as provided
under Sections.. ?1044 mcd 11;-35 z)ff the Village Code of the Village of Oak
Brook, Illincoi.sa„ .sn armndied9_
The following, ttylpm olf relief h.�e been requested: 1) A Flood Plain S ecial Use
Permit for the ccaratr=tion of a house within the Gin er Creek flood lain and
2) A Flood Plaiin Vairiation to 2eirmit construction of a Basement at an elevation
less than that a111owed by ordinawce namely the Base Flood Elevation Plus 3 feet.
The property maW bDe generally described as 45 Royal Vale Drive Oak Brook,
Illinois, and: the: legal description is as follows: Lot 175 in Ginger Creek a
Subdivision off 1jartts of Section Twent: -Seven and Twenty-Eight, Townshi Thirty-
Nine North R e Dl.even East of the Third Princi al Meridian according to the
Plat thereof rmxaxrdkEd December 30 1960 as Document No. 992057 in Du Pa a Count
Illinois.
Permanent ParcmU. �3(04-M
All persons dt tirrmtrt$ to bre heard in support of or in opposition to the proposed
Flood Plain Varmaltlon amt 'Flood Plain §eecial Use or any provision thereof,
will be affordked mn -opportunity un:i'ty ?try do so and may submit their statements orally
or im writing �rw bot .. Ttue beari.ng may be recessed to another date if notice of
time and place tffiu- cd is gabikely anAowieed at the hearing or is given by
newspaper publicaftlan mot less than five (5) days prior to the date of the
recesaed hearing.
Marianne Lakosil,
Village Clerk
Published at the direction of the Corporate Authorities and the Zoning Board of
Appeals of the Village of Oak Brook, DuPage and Cook Counties, Illinois.
5"o
• AGENDA
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 1986 7:30 P.M. (immediately
following 7:15 P.M.
Executive Session)
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER:
Roll Call
11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Board of Trustees Meeting of 2/25/86
III. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, VARIATIONS, PLATS, ETC.:
A. An Ordinance Amending Form of Owner's Certificate as set forth in
Appendix A of Appendix B (Subdivision Regulations) of the Code of
Ordinances of the Village of Oak Brook.............................................................
IV. FINANCIAL:
A. Payouts - IRMA - Fourth Assessment for 1982 Claim Year.................................
B. Approval of Bill s...............................................................................................
V. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Sports Core Asphalt Tennis Court Conversion - Review of Bids..........................
B. Report of Activities -
Finance do Library: Trustee Imrie
Personnel: Trustee Winters
Public Safety: Trustee Bushy
Public Works do Traffic: Trustee Rush
Sports Core: Trustee Maher
Zoning & Planning: Trustee Philip
VI. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Appointment - Zoning Board of Appeals.............................................................
B. Request for Authorization to Bid - Police Department Communications
CenterImprovements........................................................................................
C. Proposed Ordinance Restricting Left Turns at Hunt Club Drive and
OakBrook Road................................................................................................
D. Recommendation: Sign Variation - Sports Core................................................
E. Janitorial Service - Golf Clubhouse.................................................................
F. Request for Authorization to Bid - Sports Core Paving....................................
G. Ventilation System for the Proposed Police Department Firing Range...............
H. Irrigation Well for McDonald's Corporation.....................................................
I. >1- Refer Referrals
mith - Flood Plain Special Use and Variation (45 Royal Vale Drive)
to Plan Commission Meeting of 3/17/86 and Zoning Board of
Appeals Meeting of 4/1/86
2. McDonald's - Flood Plain Special Use - Phase I-B Stockpile
Refer to Plan Commission Meeting of 3/17/86 and Zoning Board of
Appeals Meeting of 4/1/86
3. Kramer - Rear Yard Variation (6 Robin Hood Ranch)
Refer to Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of 4/1/86
4. Oak Brook Tech Center - Parking Variation (2000 York Road)
Refer to Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of 4/1/86
5. Christ Church Resubdivision - Final Plat 1
Refer to Plan Commission Meeting of 3/17/86
V11 . ADJOURNMENT:
(OF{O 4k
9C�COUNt
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
March 6, 1986
Dear Resident,
The Oak Brook Plan Commission and/or Zoning Board of.Appeals, and the Village
Board will be considering a:.
X Variation Flood Plain
' Preliminary Plat R Special Use Flood Plain
Final Plat Zoning Amendment _.
at the meetings as scheduled on the reverse side of this notice.
The application has been filed by Beverlie J. Smith
Name of applicant
19 W 063 Barbizon, Oak Brook, IL
Address
Relationship of .applicant
to property Owner
N/A
Name of Subdivision (if applicable)
The property in question is situated at: 45 Royal Vale Drive
We have attached a map of the area to assist you in determining your relation-
ship to the property in question. ' The request which has been made is as follows:
1) A Flood Plain Special Use Permit for construction of a house within the
Ginger Creek floodplain, and
2) A Flood Plain Variation to Permit f a RACP7T1Pnr at �n
elevation less than that allowed by ordinance, namely the Base Flood
Elevation 1
If you desire more detailed information, we would suggest that you contact
Mr. Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to the Village Manager, at the Village Hall
to review the file on this application. We will be looking forward to your
attendance at the public meetings.
Respectfully yours,
John H. Brechin
Village Manager
JHB/ms
i
All meetings are held in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Oak Brook
Village Hall, on Oak Brook Road (31st Street) and Spring Road, Oak Brook,
Illinois
Plan Commission Meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7:30 P.M. Monday. March 17 ioQ�
,
Zoning Board of Appeals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7:30 P.M. Tuesday April 1, 1986
Board of Trustees Meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7:30 P.M. Tuesday April 8, 1986
MAP OF AREA
31 Z9 L�
-1 c
37
t6 39 r
13 ' s 8 .
a 2 41 �.
> , & so
43
• 1Z
45
c 47 j t
3 72 c [G 2
49 �• ` o t
2813 7$ �3 7 f G�
28tj 2 �
.< 7S Go
8� 82 �7 U
8I►VSAOOK �� _ Z90c
PROPERTIES ABUTTING 45 Royal Vale Drive (Lot 175)
06-28-304-002 Serafin Ilagan - 41 Royal Vale Drive, Oak Brook
-003 Vipal Arora - 43 Royal Vale Drive, Oak Brook
-005 Eileen Sexton - 47 Royal Vale Drive, Oak Brook
-006 First National Bank of Skokie, Trust 51980T - 8001 Lincoln Avenue
Skokie 60077
-303-011 W. Deeley - 16 Olympia Court, Oak Brook
-012 Owen Bekkum - 46 Royal Vale Drive, Oak Brook
-013 Mohammed Yuscif - Schaumburg State Bank, 320 West Higgins, Schaumburg
60195
-014 Eleanor Micaletti - 74 Baybrook Lane, Oak Brook
-302-006 William Reichardt - 4 Olympia Court, Oak Brook
-007 Vinod Sahgal - 42 Royal Vale Drive, Oak Brook
-210-001 Ginger Creek Community Association - 12 Foxiana Court, Oak Brook
-400-007 First State Bank of Park Ridge Trust 636 - 607 West Devon, Park Ridge
60068
-008 Morad Rafael - 14 Lochinvar, Oak Brook
-009 Ronald Materick - 16 Lochinvar, Oak Brook
-010 DuPage Trust Company, Trust 41550 - 466 Main Street, Glen Ellyn 60137
-011 Sukhsit Gill - 62 Baybrook Lane,``OAk''Brook
-012 J. Levitt - 64 Baybrook Lane, Oak Brook
OF OgKe
40
O ' H
G O
OPCOUNI
VI LLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
February 17, 1986
MEMO TO: Planning and Zoning Staff /
FROM: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager v
SUBJECT: Smith - Flood Plain Special Use and Variation
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
The above application will be discussed at our Planning and Zoning Staff meeting
on Wednesday, February 26, 1986 at 10:00 A.M.
NOTE:
ADD TO APPLICATION:
Zoning - R-2
Ordinance Section - 10-35 - Variations to Special Use Permits. Delete (Zoning).
1) Village Engineer to determine suitability of the proposed use in relation to flood
hazard.
2) Elevation of lowest floor (including basement) ; Not less than that of base flood
elevation plus three (3) feet, unless adequately flood proofed.
3) Applicant to be advised of Supplementary Application for Building or Structure
in Flood Hazard Area to accompany application for Building Permit.
`x \ v
Marianne Lakosil
Assistant to Building Commissioner
ML/sc
VILL GE OF OAK BR&K
1212 OAK BROOK ROAD OAK BROOK,ILLINOIS 60521 654-2220
Supplementary BUILDING OR STRUCTURE IN FLOOD HAZARD AREA
Application (To Accompany Application for Building Permit)
City or Town County
Location
Value Of Improvement >i
Intended Use
No. of Stories
Type of Construction
Owner Address
Exist.Ground Elev._J1SL; Fin.Ground Elev. MSL; Reg.Flood Datum Elev.st Site MSL; RFD Velocity Ft/Sec
Floor Elev. MSL,. Proposed Use ; Floor Elev. MSL: Proposed Use
Floor Elev. MSL: Proposed Use ; Floor Elev. MSL; Proposed Use
Maximum Loading on walls: Hydrostatip (Uplift) Pressure on Floor Slabs(Maximum) PSF
Non flood load PSF Foundation Type(s)
PSF lowest Footer Elev. (Bottom) MSL
Hydrostatic Load
Hydrodynamic Load PSF Sewage Dlsposal:_Septic Tank,_Pub.Syat.,_.Other(Explain)
Impact Load PSF Potable Water:,—Individual fell,_Pub.Syst.,_Other(Explain)
Total Flood Load _PSF
Exterior wall Construction Typ@(s); Floor Construction Type(s)•
Above Floor Floor
Floor
Above Floor Floor
Above Floor Floor
Above Floor
Types of waterproofing
of Joints: walla Floors - •� wateratope/Ssels(Typee)c walls Floo
r
Sump Location Sump Type
Are
Are Not Anchored To Prevent Flotation
All Tanks and/or Bouyant Equipment
Is.Not Provided For Emergency Operation Of Sump Pump
Alternate Power Source Is
Sanitary, Drainage L water Supply Facilities Are Are Not Protected From Contamination ProtectFlowb. inlood cter
Retaining Wall(s) Are Are Not
Intentional Flooding Is Is Not Planned For This Building/Structure
Is Not _ Planned For This Building/Structure
Temporary And/Or Emergency Flood Proofing le - Protected Against Erosion By Flood Flows
Building Structure Is le Not
Is Not Protected Against Erosion By flood Flows
Site Is
Classification Of Building/Structure: FP •Primary Secondary —Flood Hazard Area.
SPACES: List below all spaces of the building or structure below the Regulatory Flood Datum including their name, room num-
ber, and proposed flood-proofing classification (I.e. WI, 12 etc.). List all contents of each space (see Chapter 10 of the
Flood-proofing Regulations). Mark all Items which are to be either protected contingently or removed to safe refuge upon
receipt of a flood warning with an asterisk (•); all such Items must be mentioned In the Owner's Contingency Plan. Attach
additional sheets If necessary.
The applicant hereby certifies that the above Information is correct and that the plans submitted herewith conform to
those, submitted for Codepandyall otherplawsaandn ordinances laffecting the tconstpruction ands ccupancynofo this e O
proposedbuild-
nance, the Building
Ing. Address
Signature Of Architect/Engineer
The undersigned will supervise the construction of the work
above.
Signaturs
SEAL Title
Date Address
(Signature)
APPROVED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH BUILDING CODE
Clark Data
E 4 r ' `�n,M•3r•4 6 '�"A� K Y i M iF uI X"IN44'.P
01WINl1\Li, ` 1:1;fJU!) 1'I.,'1f�ti'
. ��. A� �` r�� k �.�il`ts�iy Y�i'r�`*4,•��YT 44t'� �� .
0", APPEAL `
1200`OAK, 1)ROOK j VAR T AT IO'N
OAK�'BROOK II7.1NOIS''60 $100.
654 . 2220` RF x � f
VARIATION SPECIAL US`
:r
M ,
300 41 ,4. ,��$675
° <trr(i A.L
APPLICIITIONFUR' PUBLx till '`'. +.'� �•'r'
r+��,fi: �.. AMENDMENT '
TO BE FI1.1;•D 19ITf l VILLAGE CLCRK $6
50
SPECIAL USE
400
(Section 2-225, 8/11/8:
Y r.a+er: + .. � }l<'"a.; '?., - _ s.i• :�rr 'a. "D.r iwr ,:v — — —� --- --- --
�. �
"a a, .:t i ,; � � , h rr,✓ar.+- , y� : ,d � rori#} ;j � 5
^ � �
'4s eK'7x4. $ +a tc^ ,. �d�r{ 'a:. a �` y r+ � ii. �'t"t i' $` � • •�'
ALL AP�GAT QN. i11S1 E AOCOr' IED Y P1t01'1 R FEE, PLA'1 OF SU D OF:A SCALE
,
' ERfiINE r APPLI .ABLE INFORMATION "3 e:�,
PROPERTY LINES,`,EXISTING SUILDI\GS.
DRAW 5I10tJIN ALL
LOCATION F 1�ROEUSED�dCONSTRUCTION ANVBUIY.DINGS ON ADJACENT PROP�}}ERT�Y,'W`ItTHINA 1003 FEET.,OF SUBJEC
rROr LR a r,Y ti4a K:t„ r rr„y;': y,fit, d> .'Ri14° ' •7 �RS{f6 aid' frP+:3'ifi '�r`:+ ,
yricrrr itrw+wiYiwia�.�Y.....r..rrw�.�.w+.rrr I:.•.rr..ir.r...r.r....rr+ ,�” ,.rrr r r. wrar ..rr r.. �..� r... ���. i
�.r. - ����a .:s ��C ^, Rey,i�eLy.�''�Y 2K,�x ' o �.:�ig ' 4.,.r.. {•�'. d�. �$,
DO =tMITE IN THIS SPAC>r - FOR OFFICE FUSE ONLY,
{w
Re .)'n_ 3�//�g
bate' Fileds° trustees
€erral
pay - (T�
'� ty tz e� ...:a i ,`•.; = •' o ri .f., ''w °; ,�,( Yi: i., ,r�i"r,#" ¢4.. Y'l °w�k �k
.: � , . � pry '��r •r°^ ��.�.
�No�ice Y P,u �rished f ;ng� � ep'ape : y/ti, � °1
v , Ya r r` -.A i ,,:d` fs y_, " �+„ �'f l +` `' �°("!' <�d r r f.
Mate d� Gent' d x� , 0v3n� dtii£fed , -s taf Aeferral: 2
.y, �� �''' K s� t �� :� �$ '' �< ar �•� �� .3�•f;a �ka,,��( .e'ry!/'I{�`f .`j'.'�$ f'#q .A a{,4 .
" Y #
>Publi.c ris' Dafe :4 =Plan Commson !P �'oi !$ Bctax d
Mof l�ppeals 'y / S 6
�SF•� 1 •� i rTpL.`y+, p 4/Gvi ��itl i �4.AA� � �• �!5�
Boar 'of-Trustees.
(Approva ofOrdinanc'
Eg Nc aQ� � Rezeivedl p '' X$
,
IfJ0511,
1�
'rii,br.,wAr,.r...r`�i`►ra�arira.iw..rw�i„.1�.}r+rw
6� _ �?
mm
APP ICArrr�kTO cam TE A: r F
f �S �_' V ` t MWi• r. $, A ,i., P'+'T"'C+IM ; A s/,�
f
LOCATION, OP SUBJECVPROPE d b ° 3i:"y }r PERHA1 f N PARCR NUMtiRR
RTX:
Np
4
•C�XO .S
y� �. Lai •�, ;,} ��� '.•r A,k .+m:�,e .�. �t1r .Prr� ,
r* 1
.r�.iy r b'!4!Y-0✓ 4 R Y .�' ,�,. r �:G( �` t W �w 6' Pu4�• ' 3'r'.'''. Ir {y }
iJ�.,,, IFCn 'S^ �� 3-^s.x. 't;�:`�' K�,',7 .�w�`.��'i. �'�} dR•� � `� aJ. '� F..,r � VP.-. "Fi5 d ..A �..AE,. 4-... ,.Jr. ... .,er ;:..„ca..�:..+w:.»p»^»
wr �,�r,_'tb x�p.F,.*��ra." 9I��}'.• !',,,.n: fit` t�- '�l # � tw "5 ' �' ' a, a :£�jJb°r^PtCd'j w. ' ';:. � '�;�” ' .: �'•', •.; � ' ;�.,.,!'
�w� ,. . ,k ,yKbb �' F APPLS; 4 a�, DOWNER = ON'CRACT�+:PURCHASER� AGENTS s y :
R x +G.
R •
p q i �;:. ,�,�;�:�� �:�� ���,� �� '`�•-x -� ° .L- .Y,PHONE NUMBERTe' �
04 ER
F� RPGORDr�.vae �Y\�Q»=� .
~• p-.i ,.p, c a �,; '<.'y� r „,-i'c'�ji, ,fie s # r iyw �.2i 4�,�,u'�,F+
• ".v: r" °`i> , , rr. MIR s t °��r`�d r•,� P�" •# +n;'•, elk L'+ "fir, „` .•1 .,,. ^`
Sc ""»' ',C3` '-� 'P�a,,4Le b' io+^ems a�i K' H .w ZIP_ �o
t, E,,s6
a44"k', 'fir�56k•'^��,'�Y^�N`��"lr• .�>a t t�� +f��@K*tt v ; t"�yr}W#y �^#!,�� ��L'sc�,}r"" �R�.4�W' � "35s YY+,i�'. 'r '�' •
BENEFICIARY(IES) OF TRUST: HONE,NUMBER
t
� }� ,l'�,�,.� �. �7�x' .k�'v'x' r > ,�,�' � � '' # a *.,i' �i yP Yr 1�•�trfA �r*,'tZtia ;" k .
'ADDRESS ss ? r `N , ZIl'.,„ .�;�
'`",;r''r,�a ° r�- T`�r �z,•' i;'sa^ w` ,'K �i 2'�'sit, + 7`
-NAME OF,. APPLICANT PHONE.NUMBER- O\ � -
i
a r
,,ADDRESS _.r.�
1'(we) certify 1lhat ,as 1 of,;_the ,ebove.statements and the statements' r:antained in any:papers
w
,or'plags. submitted berewith are true to tile::best of my (our) knowledge and belief.
} ]�' TO APPLICANTS "
'.ing S ule
VARIATION: Wgr BE RECEIVED PRIOR TO 'ME FIRST OF THE hiONT1I FOR PUBLI
HEARING OW THE THE FIRST TUESDAY OF TIfE FOLLOIVING WNTH. C
ANfFM4E.NT OR
SPECIAL USE: WST BE RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE 15T11 OF ME NIONTIi FOR PLAN
(AIMSSION NEARING ON THE THIRD WNDAY OF THE. FOLLOWING
MONTH, WITH ZONING BOARD PUBLIC NEARING TO FOLLOW.
A Variation is a zoning adjustment Which permits minor changes of district re
ments udiere individual properties are both. harshly and uniquely bulre-
strict a rdened by epplication of the law. The power to vary is restricted anal the degree of
Variation is limited to the minimum change necessary to overcome the inequality
inherent in the property.
1. A Variation recognizes that the same district requirements do not affect- all
properties equaJ.l.y; it was i.nv-n0_-ed to permit minor. . rllannes to allow hardship prop-
erties to enjoy equal ol}PortuRities with properties similarly zoned. You must
prove that your land is affectc(l by speciai ci.rcunstances or unl_sual. conditions.
These nn_Lst resiLLt in uTIcommon. hardship and imcqual. treatment under. *the strict ap-
plication of the Zoning Ordinance. Ifhere hardship conditions extend -to other prop- -
erti.es a Variation cannot be granted. The remedy for general hardship is a change
Of the nkip or the text: of the Zoning; Ordinance.
2. YOU must prove that the combination of tiro Zoning Ordinance and the i.mcommon.
ccnditi.ons of. }four property prevents you from making any reasonable use of your
land as permitt0d by your present zoning; district. Since zoning zcgul.ates land and
not people, tJle followinn conditions cannot be considered pertinent to th.e applica-
tion for a Variation: (1) Proof that a Variation would increase tile financial re-
tuln from the paid., (2) Personal hardship, (3) Self-imposed hardship. In the Last
case, the recognition of conditions created after tile enactment of the Zoni1ig Ordi-
nance wou.l.d e�rcourage and condone violation of the law.
3. No Variation may be granted which would adversely affect or the general neighborhood. All Variations must be in harmony rwi with property
puiposes of the Zoning Ordinance.
Names of Surrounding Property Owners
Foli.owing are the names and addresses of surrounding property owners from the
Property in question for a distance of 250 feet in all directions and the number
Of feet occupi-ed by all puhTic rc,, t streets, alleys, and public ways have been
excluded in co;muting the 7.50-foot requirement. Said names are as recorded in the
office of the County Recorder of Deeds (or the Registrar of Titles of the County)
and as .7ppear from the authentic tax records of this County.
Name Address
'� b
4
The Mid-City National Bank 17812
ERNEST PUCHI, INC. of Chicago
DBA A Mk!-Ciwo Bank Fri
NORTHWEST TOOL SALES & SERVICE CHICAGO.ILL OM07
457 W. FULLERTON 2-173/710
ELMHURST, ILL. 60126 2-14-86 19
9 7 5 - 00
DOLLARS $
PAY
r
TO Village of Oak Brook
THE ORDER 1200 Oak Brook Rd . ERNEST P INC.
OF Oak Brook , Illinois 60521 DBA
NORTHWEST TOOL SALES & SERVICE
®1:07 10017371: 11003 X6199116
o,.U.,
�7
IBANK RECEIPT DESCRIPTION RECEIVED
T RANSLT S CHECKS $ CASH NUMBER ATE NAME BY:
NO.
A INVALID
VILLAGE O F OAK BROOK WITHOUT
SIGNATURE
• 1200 OAK BROOK ROAD 54070
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
C U
0 E PHONE: (312) 654-2220
RETAIN THIS RECEIPT
FOR YOUR RECORDS
SAFEGUARO BUSINESS SYSTEMS
FORM CR-OTC
Ordinance No. S- 586
Granting a Special Use Permit
to Allow Construction of a
Structure in a Flood Plain
Pursuant to Section 10-34
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
Page two
Sect 6: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of
this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such determination shall not
affect the validity of any remaining portion of this Ordinance.
PASSED THIS 24th DAY OF June , 1986.
Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Philip and Winters
Nays: Trustee Rush
Absent: None
APPROVED THIS 24th DAY OF June , 1986.
Villa 4eidint-
ATTEST:
Villige Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Village Attorney
Published
Date Paper
Not Published XX