S-590 - 06/24/1986 - SPECIAL USE - Ordinances ORDINANCE NO. S- 590
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 i�OAK BROOK.- ILLINOIS
r - r ■ r i r r .
(28822, York Road)
WHEREAS, the owner of certain property described herein has 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 peitition has been conducted by the
Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village on June 3, 1986 pursuant to due and
appropriate legal notice; and
WHEREAS, on May 19, 1986, the Plan Commission of the Village of Oak
Brook submitted its report 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 Ordinances 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 nonresidential addition to the existing structure located on
the property commonly known as 3823 York Road, Oak Brook, Illinois, and legally
described as follows:
Lot 4 in Gr.aue's Assessment Plat No. 2 of part of the West
half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 39
North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian, in York
Township, according to the Plat thereof recorded March 19,
1947 as Document No. 517568, in Du Page County, Illinois.
Permanent Parcel No. 06-36-405-003.
Section 3: That the Special Use Permit herein granted in Section 2 of
this Ordinance is expressly subject to the condition:
That all land modifications and construction on the Subject
Property be done in substantial conformity with 1) the Site
Plan Layout drawn by Norman A. White and Associates, Inc., as
last revised June 18, 1986, a copy of which is attached
hereto, labelled Exhibit A and made a part hereof; 2) the
Elevations drawn by the same firm as last revised May 12,
1986, a copy of which is attached hereto, labelled Exhibit B
and made a part hereof; and 3) the Site Improvement Plan drawn
by Donald G. Eddy Company, as last revised May 16, 1986, a
copy of which is attached hereto, labelled Exhibit C and made
a part hereof.
Section 4: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from
and after its passage and approval as provided by law.
Ordinance No. S- 590
Granting A Special Use Permit
to Allow Construction in a
Flood Plain
(3823 York Road)
Page two
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.
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 8th day of Jule', 1986.
Ayes: Trustees Bush X, Imrie, Maher Rush and Winters
Nays: None
Absent: Trustee Phili
APPROVED THIS 8th day of July , 1986.
.9- wv-
Village Presid nt
ATTEST:
Vill ge Clerk
Approved as to Form:
AtA'i'z
Village Attorney
Published
Date Paper
Not Publishea XX
ORDINANCE NO. S- 591
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION
OF A STRUCTURE IN A FLOOD PLAIN PURSUANT TO�SECTION-10- 5 OF THE
CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE VILLAGE--OF,OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
(382 , York, Road)
WHEREAS, the owner of certain property described herein has petitioned
the corporate authorities of the Village of Oak Brook, Du Page and Cook Counties,
Illinois, for a Variation under Section 10-35 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 June 3, 1986, pursuant to due and
appropriate legal notice; and
WHEREAS, the proposed variation is consistent with the best
use of the flood plain, provided that the conditions .set forth below are
satisfied; and
WHEREAS, the proposed structure satisfies the requirements of and is
consistent with each of the standards set forth in Section 10-35(e) 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 10-35 of the Code of Ordinances of the
Village of Oak Brook, Illinois, a Variation is hereby granted to permit
construction of a nonresidential building addition on the property commonly known
as 3823 York Road, Oak Brook, Illinois, and legally described as
Lot 4 in Graue's Assessment Plat No. 2 of part of the West
half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 39
North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian, in York
Township, according to the Plat thereof recorded March 19,
1947 as Document No. 517568, in DuPage County, Illinois.
Permanent Parcel No. 06-36-405-003.
for which the top-of-foundation elevation is less than three (3) feet above the
predicted 100-year flood elevation, and is not floodproofed to that height.
Section 3: That the Variation herein granted in Section 2 of this
Ordinance is expressly subject to the condition:
That all construction on the Subject Property be done in
substantial conformity with 1) the Site Plan Layout drawn by
Norman A. White and Associates, Inc. , as last revised June 18,
1986, a copy of which is attached hereto, labelled Exhibit A
and made a part hereof; 2) the Elevations drawn by the same
firm as last revised May 12, 1986, a copy of which is attached
hereto, labelled Exhibit B and made a part hereof; and 3) the
Site Improvement Plan drawn by Donald G. Eddy Company, as last
revised May 16, 1986, a copy of which is attached hereto,
labelled Exhibit C and made a part hereof.
Section 4: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from
ano after its passage and approval as provided by law.
Ordinance No. S— 591
Granting A Variation to Allow
Construction of a Structure in a
Flood Plain
(3823 York Road)
Page two
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
hereinabove described.
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 8th day of July . 1986.
Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher , Rush and Winters
Nays: None
Absent: Trustee Philip
APPROVED THIS 8th day of July , 1986.
Village Presideht
ATTEST:
c
Village ,Clerk
Approved as to Form:
a
Village Attorney
Published
Date Paper
Not Publishea XX
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes -2- July 8, 1986
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Rush, Winters
and President Cerne.
Nays: None
Absent: Trustee Philip So ordered.
C. ORDINANCE NO. S-590 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW CONSTRUCTION U SECTION
10-34 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, 1111NOIS
York a
As directed at the Regular Meeting of June 24, 1986.
Trustee Bushy moved, seconded by Trustee Rush...
To pass and approve Ordinance No. 5-590 as presented and waive reading
of sane.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Rush, Winters
and President Cerne.
Nays: None
Absent: Trustee Philip So ordered.
J D.► ORDINANCE NO. S-591 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION TO ALLOW
�J N
CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, IMINOIS
York a
As directed at the Regular Meeting of June 24, 1986.
Trustee Bushy moved, seconded by Trustee Rush...
To pass and approve Ordinance No. 5-591 as presented and waive reading
of sane.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Rush, Winters
and President Cerne.
Nays: None
Absent: Trustee Philip So ordered.
E. ORDINANCE NO. 5-592 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING GATEWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND ISSUING MRTIFICATE OF AFFRUPRIATENESS (3823 or a
As directed at the Regular Meeting of June 24, 1986.
Trustee Bushy moved, seconded by Trustee Maher..:
To pass and approve Ordinance No. S-592 as corrected and waive reading
of same.
- ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Rush, Winters
and President Cerne.
Nays: None
Absent: Trustee Philip So ordered.
F. ORDINANCE NO. G-382 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1 THE TRAFFIC
S
FOR ACCIDENT REPORTS.
As directed at the Regular Meeting of June 24, 1986.
Trustee Bushy moved, seconded by Trustee Imrie...
To pass and approve Ordinance No. G-382'as corrected and waive reading
of sane.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes -2- July 8, 1986
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes -2- July 8, 1986
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Enrie, Maher, Rush, 'Minters
and President Cerne.
Nays: None
Absent: Trustee Philip So ordered.
ORDINANCE NO. 5-590 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW CONSTR ION OF A STRUCTURE IN A FLOOD PLAIN PURSUANT TO SECTION
10-34 OF THE XDE OF ORDINANCES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, ILTINOIS
Yorka
As directed at the Regular Meeting of June 24, 1986.
Trustee Bushy moved, seconded by Trustee Rush...
To pass and approve Ordinance No. 5-590 as presented and waive reading
of sane.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Rush, Winters
and President Cerne.
Nays: None
Absent: Trustee Philip So ordered.
D. ORDINANCE NO. 5-591 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION TO ALLOW
N
10-35 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, IEEINOIS
York a
As directed at the Regular Meeting of June 24, 1986.
Trustee Bushy moved, seconded by Trustee Rush...
To pass and approve Ordinance No. 5-591 as presented and waive reading
of sane.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Rush, Winters
and President Cerne.
Nays: None
Absent: Trustee Philip So ordered.
E. ORDINANCE NO. S-592 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING GATEWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND ISSUING URTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (1823 York oa
As directed at the Regular Meeting of June 24, 1986.
Trustee Bushy moved, seconded by Trustee Maher..:
To pass and approve Ordinance No. S-592 as corrected and waive reading
of sane.
- ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Trustees Bushy, Imrie, Maher, Rush, Winters
and President Cerne.
Nays: None
Absent: Trustee Philip So ordered.
F. ORDINANCE NO. G-382 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1 THE TRAFFIC
S
As directed at the Regular Meeting of June 24, 1986.
Trustee Bushy moved, seconded by Trustee Imrie...
To pass and approve Ordinance No. G-382 as corrected and waive reading
of sane.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes -2- July 8, 1986
r. • P6�OF OAjr •
9
L
G 0
ILICOUPJ-14,
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
June 19, 1986
MEMO TO: John H. Brechin, Village Manager
FROM: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
SUBJECT: Malloy (Sav-Way Liquors) - 3823 York Road -
1) Flood Plain Special Use
2) Flood Plain Variation
3) Zoning Variations
4) Graue Certificate of Appropriateness
Emmett Malloy, as owner of the above property has made various applications to
construct a building addition as well as additional parking area modifications
to the Sav-Way Liquor store. The construction activity requires Village approval
of the following applications:
1) Flood Plain Special Use Permit for construction within the Salt Creek floodplain.
Since the entire property is located within the Salt Creek floodplain which has
• high water elevation of 645.0, any construction activity requires approval of
• Flood Plain Special Use Permit. The Plan Commission, at its May 19, 1986
meeting, was unable to make a recommendation due to only four members being
present (the vote was three in favor and one against the proposed application) .
Village regulations require "the concurring vote of four members of the Plan
Commission and/or the Zoning Board of Appeals" to recommend in favor of a
flood plain application.
The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its June 3, 1986 meeting, recommended approval
of the Flood Plain Special Use Permit.
2) Flood Plain Variation for construction of a non-residential building addition
for which the top-of-foundation elevation is less than three feet above the
predicted 100-year flood elevation, and is not floodproofed to that height.
The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its June 3rd hearing, recommended approval of
this Flood Plain Variation.
3) Zoning Variations
a) Entrance driveway width - Section XI(E) (4) (a) (2) (iii) of the Zoning
Ordinance permits a 30-foot maximum driveway width. The existing width
at the southerly driveway entrance is approximately 60 feet. The Zoning
Board of Appeals, at its June 3rd hearing, recommended approval of a
variation permitting a driveway 55 feet in width.
�+ �>a
,RE:, Malloy (Sav-Way Liquop - 3828 York Road
June 19, 1986
Page 2
b) Reduction in number of parking spaces to 60 spaces - Section XI(E) (a)
requires 80 parking spaces for this mixed-use building containing
office and retail uses. The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its June 3rd
hearing, recommended approval of this Variation subject to the condition
that the Village have the right to require the full number of required
parking spaces if deemed necessary at some time in the future. The
June 19th Site Plan shows, in the southeast corner of the property, the
location of future parking to meet the Village's standards if so required
in the future.
c) Building setback - Section VIII(E) (4) requires a 100-foot building setback
adjacent to York Road. At the time this building was constructed in 1969,
the Village's Building Department evidently approved the location of the
existing building which lies approximately .91 feet. at its closest point to
York Road. The requested Variation would place the addition at the same
91-foot setback for the sake of consistency with the existing setback.
The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its June 3rd hearing, recommended approval
of this Variation.
4) Graue Gateway Certificate of Appropriateness -- Section VIII-A(E) requires
issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness prior to the issuance of any
building permit for construction within the Historic Graue Mill Gateway area.
The Plan Commission, at its May 19th meeting, recommended approval of the
requested Certificate based on the following conditions:
a) Landscape plan be modified to include additional landscape material as well
as to spend not less than 5 percent of the total project construction cost
on landscape items as required by the Graue Ordinance.
b) Provision of additional landscaped islands in the front parking lot and
expansion of the landscaped area adjacent to York Road.
c) Modification of the existing building sign to incorporate the Gateway logo
as required by Ordinance.
i
Mr. White's letter and Site Plan of June 19 note various modifications to the
Site Plan in order to address the Plan Commission's concerns.
In the event the Village Board chooses to approve the above applications, it would be
appropriate to direct the Village Attorney to prepare the necessary documents.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BFK/j r
} �pF 04K
-�rz a ra
z
Fcou -T '
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
June 6, 1986 654-2220
President and Board of Trustees
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
RE: Malloy Parking Variations
(3823 York Road)
Dear President and Board of Trustees:
The Zoning Board of Appeals at its June 3, 1986 hearing, considered the appli-
cation of Emmett Malloy for the following three variations in conjunction with
his proposed addition and parking lot modifications at Sav-Way Liquors:
1) A Variation to permit construction of a driveway' 55 ft. in width
which exceeds the 30 ft. maximum permitted. The Zoning Board of
Appeals recommends approval of this Variation based on the following
findings of fact:
a) The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if it
is permitted to be used only under the regulations as required.
b) The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances based on
the angle of York Road adjacent to this property creating a hard-
ship with respect to truck traffic entering the property.
c) The Variation if granted, will not alter the essential character
of the locality.
This recommendation was made on a motion by Member Weber, seconded by Member
Martinello and approved on a roll call vote of four (4) ayes, Members Martinello,
Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino, one (1) nay, Member Crouch, two (2) absent,
Members Bartecki and O'Brien.
2) A Variation to permit a reduction in the required number of parking spaces
for this mixed-use development from 80 to 60 parking spaces. The Zoning
Board of Appeals recommends approval of this Variation based on the
following conditions:
a) In the event the building's use changes at some time in the future,
the Village would have the ability to increase the number of park-
ing spaces on the property up to the required number as stated in
Page
RE: Malloy Parking Variations (3823 York Road)
June 6, 1986
the Zoning Ordinance.
b) Assuming the property continues under the present use, the Village
retains the right to require additional parking spaces if at some
time in the future the Village determines the need for additional
parking.
This Variation is recommended based on the following findings of fact:
a) The plight of the owner is due to the unique retail use of the
property which, based on historical data, has not. required the
amount of parking as required by the Zoning Ordinance.
b) The Variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character
of the locality.
This recommendation was made on a motion by Member Martinello, seconded by Member
Crouch and approved on a roll call vote of five (5) ayes, Members Crouch, Martin-
e11o, Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino, zero (0) nays, two (2) absent, Members
Bartecki and O'Bxien.
3) A Variation to permit construction of the addition utilizing a 91 ft.
Setback from York Road which is less than the 100 ft. required. The
Zoning Board of Appeals recommends to the President and Board of Trustees
approval of this Setback Variation based on the following findings of fact:
a) The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted
to be used only under the conditions required by the Zoning Ordinance.
b) The plight of the owner is due to the unique location of this property,
which is surrounded by Hinsdale properties which only require a 15 ft.
Setback from York Road, and also due to the fact that the original
building was permitted to be constructed at the 91 ft. Setback.
c) The Variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of
the locality.
This recommendation was made on a motion by Member Shumate, seconded by Member
Crouch and approved on a roll call vote of five (5) ayes, Members Crouch, Martinello,
Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino, zero (0.) nays, two (2) absent, Members Bartecki
and O'Brien.
Sincerely,
lfred Savin
Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
APS/mf
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -4- June 3, 1986
V MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION
PARKING VARIATION (1823 York Road)
The Secretary noted that the required Legal Notice was published in the Suburban
Life Graphic April 19, 1986 and the surrounding property owners were notified of
this hearing April 15, 1986. David Gooder, attorney; Norm White, Architect; Don
Eddy, Engineer; and Emmett Malloy, owner; were present representing this
application.
Mr. Gooder noted on an aerial the subject property being surrounded by the Village
of Hinsdale. He also noted that the property is within the Salt Creek Flood Plain,
the difficulty in seeing the property when driving on York Road, the existing 91
ft. setback and the proposed addition containing retail and office space.
Norm White noted that the building was originally constructed approximately 91 ft.
from the York Road right-of-way as directed by the Village's Building Department in
1969. He stated that the proposed addition will maintain that 91 ft. setback for
architectural purposes. He stated that with respect to the Flood Plain Variation,
it would be inappropriate to raise the addition's top of foundation elevation up to
3 ft. above the high water level since that would create almost a 3 ft. difference
between the existing and new floors. He stated that although the Village's parking
regulations require 80 parking spaces, they have proposed 32 parking spaces in
front of the building, 28 along the side and rear for a total of 60 spaces. He
also pointed out a location in the southeast corner of the property which could in
the future provide the additional 20 parking spaces if so required by the Village.
In response to Member Martinello, Mr. White stated that they intend to comply with
the landscape parking requirements as recommended by the Plan Commission in their
review of the Graue Gateway Regulations.
In response to Member Weber, it was noted that the various aesthetic concerns of
the Graue Gateway Ordinance are only reviewed by the Village's Plan Commission and
not by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Malloy stated that the proposed addition will add needed floor space to the
operation in order to keep pace with the recent increase in the property's value.
He stated that the present retail operation, at a peak time, only utilizes 10-12
spaces in front of the building and the existing office area utilizes 5 parking
spaces along side of the building. It is for this reason they have requested a
reduction in the number of parking spaces.
Member Weber noted that in the event the property were not used as a liquor store,
additional parking spaces might be required.
Mr. Malloy stated that he would be willing to have the Village attach a condition
to the variation stating that it would be limited to the specific uses presently in
the building.
In response to Member Weber, Mr. Gooder stated that the Zoning Ordinance requires
off-street loading berths and not loading docks and therefore the two planned
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -4- June 3, 1986
33
• ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -5- June 3, 1986
V MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION
PARKING VARIATION (3823 York Road) (continued)
berths meet the requirements as interpreted by the Village's Building Department.
In response to Chairman Savino, Mr. Malloy stated that the proposed retail use
might be a computer sales operation.
Donald Eddy described the proposed engineering plans, noting that they fully comply
with the Village's detention requirements, although, the existing property was not
required to provide any detention. He noted that the proposed addition top of
foundation will be 1 ft. above the high water level as required by State Flood
Plain Regulations.
In response to Mr. Gooder, Mr. Eddy reviewed the 11 factors contained in the
Village's Flood Plain Regulations. Such response is also contained within Mr.
Eddy's May 12, 1986 letter to the Village.
Chairman Savino inquired as to why they had chosen to reduce the driveway width
from 60 ft. to 45 ft.. Mr. White explained that the Village's requirement is for a
30 ft. maximum driveway width.
Mr. Malloy stated that at this southerly entrance, they at least a 45 ft.
width in order to accommodate trucks entering the property while cars are leaving.
Zoning Board Members noted that the two entrances to the property presently have
signs indicating one as an entrance and one as an exit and therefore, if those
entrances were utilized as such, there would be less need for a 45 ft. wide
driveway.
Mr. Gooder restated their variation request as follows:
1 ) 55 ft. driveway width.
2) Reduction in the number of required parking spaces from 80 to 60 with a
covenant to provide additional parking spaces in the event the use of the
building changes.
3) 91 ft. setback variation.
Mr. Gooder noted that the loading berth variation was hereby being withdrawn since
it is no longer needed due to a recent Text Amendment approved by the Village.
The Chairman noted that no members of the audience expressed support for or
opposition to the requested variations.
A motion was made by Member Crouch, seconded by Member Weber to recommend approval
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -5- June 3, 1986
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -6- June 3, 1986
V MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION
PARKING VARIATION (3823 York Road)(continued)
of the requested Flood Plain Special Use Permit for construction within the Salt
Creek Flood Plain and the Flood Plain Variation for construction of a first floor
elevation lower than 3 ft. above the 100 Year Flood Level based on the following
findings of fact:
1) Satisfactory testimony presented by the applicant indicating compliance with
the eleven factors contained in the Village's Flood Plain Regulations noting no
detrimental impact on the Salt Creek Flood Plain caused by the proposed
construction.
2) Compliance with the three standards contained in Section 10-35 of the Flood
Plain Regulations which would warrant approval of the requested Flood Plain
Variation.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (5)
Members Crouch, Martinello,
Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino
Nays: (0)
Absent: (2)
Member Bartecki, O'Brien
MOTION CARRIED. ..
A motion was made by Member Weber, seconded by Member Martinello to recommend to
the President and Board of Trustees approval of the requested driveway width
variation to permit a driveway 55 ft. in width instead of the 30 ft. width required
based on the following findings of fact:
1) The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if it is permitted
to be used only under the regulations as required.
2) The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances based on the angle
of York Road adjacent to this property creating a hardship with respect to
truck traffic entering the property.
3) The Variation if granted will not alter the essential character of the
locality.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes (4)
Members Martinello, Shumate,
Weber, Chairman Savino
Nays: (1 )
Member Crouch
Absent: (2)
Members Bartecki, O'Brien
MOTION CARRIED. . .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -6- June 3, 1986
� 1
0
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -7- June 3, 1986
V MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION
PARKING VARIATION (383+2 York Ro_ad)(Continued)
A motion was made by Member Martinello, seconded by Member Crouch, to recommend to
the President and Board of Trustees approval of the requested variation which would
permit reduction of the required number of parking spaces from 80 to 60 based on
the following conditions:
1) In the event the building use changes at some time in the future, the Village
would have the ability to increase the number of parking spaces on the property
up to the required number as stated in the Zoning Ordinance.
2) Assuming the property continues under the present use, the Village retains the
right to require additional parking spaces if at some time in the future the
Village determines the need for additional parking.
This variation is recommended based on the following findings of fact:
1) The plight of the owner is due to the unique retail use of the property which,
based on historical data, has not required the amount of parking as required by
the Zoning Ordinance.
2) The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the
locality
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (5)
Members Crouch, Martinello,
Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino
Nays: (0)
Absent: (2)
Members Bartecki, O'Brien
MOTION CARRIED. ..
A motion was made by Member Shumate, seconded by Member Crouch to recommend to the
President and Board of Trustees approval of the requested setback variation which
would permit construction of the addition at the same 91 ft. setback from York Road
consistent with the original building. This variation is recommended based on the
following findings of fact:
1) The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be
used only under the conditions required by the Zoning Ordinance.
2) The plight of the owner is due to the unique location of this property, which
is surrounded by Hinsdale properties which only require a 15 ft. setback from
York Road, and also due to the fact that the original building was permitted to
be constructed at the 91 ft. setback.
3) The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the
locality.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -7- June 3, 1986
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -8- June 3, 1986
V MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION
PARKING VARIATION (3823 York Road) (Continued)
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (5)
Members Crouch, Martinello, Shumate,
Weber, Chairman Savino
Nays: (0)
Absent: (2)
Members Bartecki, O'Brien
MOTION CARRIED. ..
VI ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made by Member Weber, seconded by Member Martinello to adjourn this
regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
VOICE VOTE: All in favor. MOTION CARRIED. ..
The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 9:29 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
V
V,
Bruce F. Kapff, Secretary
Zoning Board of Appeals
Approved
•
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -8- June 3, 1986
SavWay Liquors 3821 South YOR Road, Oak Brook, Illinois 60521 12) 986-0500
ju
May 30, 1986
Mr. Bruce Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook, IL 60521
Dear Mr. Kapff:
Please be advised that I would like to have our scheduled ap-
pearance before the Village Board of Trustees changed from the
meeting of June 10th, to subsequent meeting of June 24th. As I
indicated to you I have a conflict on. June 10 with a previously
scheduled meeting with the Oak Brook Teachers Association.
Sincerely,
Emmett P. Malloy, Jr.
President
EPM:llb
JUN 0 21986
VILLAGE Of OAK BROOK, IL
ADMINISTRATION
'Re
STORE LOCATIONS: Oak Brook, III., Glen Ellyn, III., St. Charles, Ill., Geneva, III., Joliet, III., Carol Stream, Ill., Naperville, Ill.
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK NOTEt ndicates Cancelled
1200 Oak Brook Road ** Indicates Added to Agenda
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521 *** Indicates Deletion
Revision Date :
N O T I C E
June, 1986
TUESDAY, REGULAR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING 7 : 30 P .M.
June 3, 1986 Village Commons - Samuel E . Dean Board Room
AGENDA
1 . Roll Call
2 . Approval of Minutes
3. Polo Barns - Trailer Variation
(Sports Core)
4 . Brinson - Rear Yard Variation
(78 Baybrook Lane)
5 . Malloy - Parking Variation
(3823 York Road)
Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use and Flood Plain
Variation
(3823 York Road)
MONDAY, COMMITTEE-OF-THE-WHOLE MEETING 7 : 30 P .M.
June 9, 1986 Village Commons - Samuel E. Dean Board Room
TUESDAY, REGULAR BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING 7 : 30 P .M.
June 10, 1986 Village Commons - Samuel E. Dean Board Room
A
MONDAY, * REGULAR PLAN COMMISSION MEETING ARMED 7 : 30 P .M.
June 16 , 1986 Village Commons - Samuel E . Dean B
TUESDAY, REGULAR BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING 7 : 30 P .M.
June 24 , 1986 Village Commons - Samuel E. Dean Board Room
Item #3 on the Zoning Board - of Appeals agenda was published in the Oak Brook
DOINGS on August 15, 1985
Item #4 on the Zoning Board of Appeals agenda was published in the Oak Brook
DOINGS on April 17 , 1986
Item #5 on the Zoning Board of. Appeals agenda was published in the Suburban
Life GRAPHIC on April 19 , 1986
Item #6 on the Zoning Board of Appeals agenda was published in the Suburban
Life GRAPHIC on April 19 , 1986
• 6�OF Oqk 9 •
G O
`couNt4
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
June 19, 1986
MEMO TO: John H. Brechin, Village Manager
FROM: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
SUBJECT: Malloy (Sav-Way Liquors) - 3823 York Road -
`- 1) Flood Plain Special Use
2) Flood Plain Variation
3) Zoning Variations
4) Graue Certificate of Appropriateness
Emmett Malloy, as owner of the above .property has made various applications to
construct a building addition as well as additional parking area modifications
to the Sav-Way Liquor store. The construction activity requires Village approval
of the following applications:
1) Flood Plain Special Use Permit for construction within the Salt Creek floodplain.
Since the entire property is located within the Salt Creek floodplain which has
• high water elevation of 645.0, any construction activity requires approval of
• Flood Plain Special Use Permit. The Plan Commission, at its May 19, 1986
meeting, was unable to make a recommendation due to only four members being
present (the vote was three in favor and one against the proposed application) .
Village regulations require "the concurring vote of four members of the Plan
Commission and/or the Zoning Board of Appeals" to recommend in favor of a
flood plain application.
The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its June 3, 1986 meeting, recommended approval
of the Flood Plain Special Use Permit.
2) Flood Plain Variation for construction of a non-residential building addition
for which the top-of-foundation elevation is less than three feet above the
predicted 100-year flood elevation, and is 'not floodproofed to that height.
The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its June 3rd hearing, recommended approval of
this Flood Plain Variation. `
3) Zoning Variations
a) Entrance driveway width - Section XI(E) (4) (a) (2) (iii) of the Zoning
Ordinance permits a 30-foot maximum driveway width. The existing width
.at the southerly driveway entrance is approximately 60 feet. The Zoning
Board of Appeals, at its June 3rd hearing, recommended approval of a
variation permitting a driveway 55 feet in width.
s.. „{
v� �
1 9
RE.: Malloy (Sav-Way Liquoio - 3828 York Road •
June 19, 1986
Page 2
b) Reduction in number of parking spaces to 60 spaces - Section XI(E) (a)
requires 80 parking spaces for this mixed-use building containing
office and retail uses. The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its June 3rd
hearing, recommended approval of this Variation subject to the condition
that the Village have the right to require the full number of required
parking spaces if deemed necessary at some time in the future. The
June 19th Site Plan shows, in the southeast corner of the property, the
location of future parking to meet the Village's standards if so required
in the future.
c) Building setback - Section VIII(E) (4) requires a 100-foot building setback
adjacent to York Road. At the time this building was constructed in 1969,
the Village's Building Department evidently approved the location of the
existing building which lies approximately 91 feet at its closest point to
York Road. The requested Variation would place the addition at the same
91-foot setback for the sake of consistency with the existing setback.
The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its June 3rd hearing, recommended approval
of this Variation.
. 4) Graue Gateway Certificate of Appropriateness = Section VIII-A(E) requires
issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness prior to the issuance of any
building permit for construction within the Historic Graue Mill Gateway area.
The Plan Commission, at its May 19th meeting, recommended approval of the
requested Certificate based on the following conditions:
a) Landscape plan be modified to include additional landscape material as well
as to spend not less than S percent of the total project construction cost
on landscape items as required by the Graue Ordinance.
b) Provision of additional landscaped islands in the front parking lot and
expansion of the landscaped area adjacent to York Road.
c) Modification of the existing building sign to incorporate the Gateway logo
as required by Ordinance.
Mr. White's letter and Site Plan of June 19 note various modifications to the
Site Plan in order to address the Plan Commission's concerns.
In the event the Village Board chooses to approve the above applications, it would be
appropriate to direct the Village Attorney to prepare the necessary documents.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BFK/jr
T
Y
• ,`v�p�OF OqK 6 Opf •
9
G
O
O�COUNt�'
VI LLAG E OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
June 6, 1986
President and Board of Trustees
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
RE: Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use
and Flood Plain Variation (3823
York Road)
Dear President and Board of Trustees:
The Zoning Board of Appeals at its June 3, 1986 hearing, considered the application
of Emmett Malloy for two specific items of Flood Plain relief in conjunction with
his proposed addition and parking lot modifications at the Sav-Way Liquor Store ,.
as follows:
1) Flood Plain Special Use Permit for construction of the addition and
regrading activities within the Salt Creek Flood Plain.
2) Flood Plain Variation to permit construction of the first floor of the
addition at an elevation of less than 3 ft. above the high water level,
such addition not being flood-proofed up to such height.
The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends to the President and Board of Trustees approval
of both the Flood Plain Special Use Permit and Flood Plain Variation based on the
following findings of fact:
1) Satisfactory testimony presented by the applicant indicating compliance
with the eleven factors contained in the Village's Flood Plain Regulations
noting no detrimental impact on the Salt Creek Flood Plain caused by the
proposed construction.
2) Compliance with the three standards contained in Section 10-35 of the Flood
Plain Regulations which would warrant approval of the requested Flood Plain
Variation.
This recommendation was made on a motion by Member Crouch, seconded by Member Weber
and approved on a roll call vote of five (5) ayes, Members Crouch, Martinello,
i •
Page 2
RE: Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use and Flood Plain
Variation (3823 York Road)
June 6, 1986
Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino, zero (0) nays, two (2) absent, Members Bartecki,
and O'Brien.
Since y,
Alfred P.. Savino
Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
AFS/mf
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -4- June 3, 1986
V MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION
PARKING VARIATION (3823 York Road)
The Secretary noted that the required Legal Notice was published in the Suburban
Life Graphic April 19, 1986 and the surrounding property owners were notified of
this hearing April 15, 1986. David Gooder, attorney; Norm White, Architect; Don
Eddy, Engineer; and Emmett Malloy, owner; were present representing this
application.
Mr. Gooder noted on an aerial the subject property being surrounded by the Village
of Hinsdale. He also noted that the property is within the Salt Creek Flood Plain,
the difficulty in seeing the property when driving on York Road, the existing 91
ft. setback and the proposed addition containing retail and office space.
Norm White noted that the building was originally constructed approximately 91 ft.
from the York Road right-of-way as directed by the Village's Building Department in
1969. He stated that the proposed addition will maintain that 91 ft. setback for
architectural purposes. He stated that with respect to the Flood Plain Variation,
it would be inappropriate to raise the addition's top of foundation elevation up to
3 ft. above the high water level since that would create almost a 3 ft. difference
between the existing and new floors. He stated that although the Village's parking
regulations require 80 parking spaces, they have proposed 32 parking spaces in
front of the building, 28 along the side and rear for a total of 60 spaces. He
also pointed out a location in the southeast corner of the property which could in
the future provide the additional 20 parking spaces if so required by the Village.
In response to Member Martinello, Mr. White stated that they intend to comply with
the landscape parking requirements as recommended by the Plan Commission in their
review of the Graue Gateway Regulations.
In response to Member Weber, it was noted that the various aesthetic concerns of
the Graue Gateway Ordinance are only reviewed by the Village's Plan Commission and
not by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Malloy stated that the proposed addition will add needed floor space to the
operation in order to keep pace with the recent increase in the property's value.
He stated that the present retail operation, at a peak time, only utilizes 10-12
spaces in front of the building and the existing office area utilizes 5 parking
spaces along side of the building. It is for this reason they have requested a
reduction in the number of parking spaces.
Member Weber noted that in the event the property were not used as a liquor store,
additional parking spaces might be required.
Mr. Malloy stated that he would be willing to have the Village attach a condition
to the variation stating that it would be limited to the specific uses presently in
the building.
In response to Member Weber, Mr. Gooder stated that the Zoning Ordinance requires
off-street loading berths and not loading docks and therefore the two planned
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -4- June 3, 1986
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -5- June 3, 1986
V MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION
PARKING VARIATION (3823 York Road) (continued)
berths meet the requirements as interpreted by the Village's Building Department.
In response to Chairman Savino, Mr. Malloy stated that the proposed retail use
might be a computer sales operation.
Donald Eddy described the proposed engineering plans, noting that they fully comply
with the Village's detention requirements, although, the existing property was not
required to provide any detention. He noted that the proposed addition top of
foundation will be 1 ft. above the high water level as required by State Flood
Plain Regulations.
In response to Mr. Gooder, Mr. Eddy reviewed the 11 factors contained in the
Village's Flood Plain Regulations. Such response is also contained within Mr.
Eddy's May 12, 1986 letter to the Village.
Chairman Savino inquired as to why they had chosen to reduce the driveway width
from 60 ft. to 45 ft. . Mr. White explained that the Village's requirement is for a
30 ft. maximum driveway width.
Mr. Malloy stated that at this southerly entrance, they require at least a 45 ft.
width in order to accommodate trucks entering the property while cars are leaving.
Zoning Board Members noted that the two entrances to the property presently have
signs indicating one as an entrance and one as an exit and therefore, if those
entrances were utilized as such, there would be less need for a 45 ft. wide
driveway.
Mr. Gooder restated their variation request as follows:
1) 55 ft. driveway width.
2) Reduction in the number of required parking spaces from 80 to 60 with a
covenant to provide additional parking spaces in the event the use of the
building changes.
3) 91 ft. setback variation.
Mr. Gooder noted that the loading berth variation was hereby being withdrawn since
it is no longer needed due to a recent Text Amendment approved by the Village.
The Chairman noted that no members of the audience expressed support for or
opposition to the requested variations.
A motion was made by Member Crouch, seconded by Member Weber to recommend approval
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -5- June 3, 1986
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -6- June 3, 1986
V MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION
PARKING VARIATION (3823 York Road)(continued)
of the requested Flood Plain Special Use Permit for construction within the Salt
Creek Flood Plain and the Flood Plain Variation for construction of a first floor
elevation lower than 3 ft. above the 100 Year Flood Level based on the following
findings of fact:
1) Satisfactory testimony presented by the applicant indicating compliance with
the eleven factors contained in the Village's Flood Plain Regulations noting no
detrimental impact on the Salt Creek Flood Plain caused by the proposed
construction.
2) Compliance with the three standards contained in Section 10-35 of the Flood
Plain Regulations which would warrant approval of the requested Flood Plain
Variation.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (5)
Members Crouch, Martinello,
Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino
Nays: (0)
Absent: (2)
Member Bartecki, O'Brien
MOTION CARRIED. ..
A motion was made by Member Weber, seconded by Member Martinello to recommend to
the President and Board of Trustees approval of the requested driveway width
variation to permit a driveway 55 ft. in width instead of the 30 ft. width required
based on the following findings of fact:
1) The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if it is permitted
to be used only under the regulations as required.
2) The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances based on the angle
of York Road adjacent to this property creating a hardship with respect to
truck traffic entering the property.
3) The Variation if granted will not alter the essential character of the
locality.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes (4)
Members Martinello, Shumate,
Weber, Chairman Savino
Nays: (1 )
Member Crouch
Absent: (2)
Members Bartecki , O'Brien
MOTION CARRIED. . .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -6- June 3, 1986
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -7- June 3, 1986
V MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION
PARKING VARIATION (3812 York_ Road)(Continued)
r
A motion was made by Member Martinello, seconded by Member Crouch, to recommend to
the President and Board of Trustees approval of the requested variation which would
permit reduction of the required number of parking spaces from 80 to 60 based on
the following conditions:
1) In the event the building use changes at some time in the future, the Village
would have the ability to increase the number of parking spaces on the property
up to the required number as stated in the Zoning Ordinance.
2) Assuming the property continues under the present use, the Village retains the
right to require additional parking spaces if at some time in the future the
Village determines the need for additional parking.
This variation is recommended based on the following findings of fact:
1) The plight of the owner is due to the unique retail use of the property which,
based on historical data, has not required the amount of parking as required by
the Zoning Ordinance.
2) The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the
locality
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (5)
Members Crouch, Martinello,
Shumate, Weber, Chairman Savino
Nays: (0)
Absent: (2)
Members Bartecki, O'Brien
MOTION CARRIED. ..
A motion was made by Member Shumate, seconded by Member Crouch to recommend to the
President and Board of Trustees approval of the requested setback variation which
would permit construction of the addition at the same 91 ft. setback from York Road
consistent with the original building. This variation is recommended based on the
following findings of fact:
1 ) The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be
used only under the conditions required by the Zoning Ordinance.
2) The plight of the owner is due to the unique location of this property, which
is surrounded by Hinsdale properties which only require a 15 ft. setback from
York Road, and also due to the fact that the original building was permitted to
be constructed at the 91 ft. setback.
3) The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the
locality.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -7- June 3, 1986
f
i
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -8- June 3, 1986
V MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN VARIATION
PARKING VARIATION (3823 York Road) (Continued)
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (5)
Members Crouch, Martinello, Shumate,
Weber, Chairman Savino
Nays: (0)
Absent: (2)
Members Bartecki, O'Brien
MOTION CARRIED. ..
VI ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made by Member Weber, seconded by Member Martinello to adjourn this
regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
VOICE VOTE: All in favor. MOTION CARRIED. ..
The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 9:29 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce F. Kapff, Secretary
Zoning Board of Appeals
Approved
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -8- June 3, 1986
SavWay Liquors 3821 South YJ*Road, Oak Brook, Illinois 60524 02) 986-0500
jjU
May 30, 1986
Mr. Bruce Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook, IL 60521
Dear Mr. Kapff:
Please be advised that I would like to have our scheduled ap-
pearance before the Village Board of Trustees changed from the
meeting of June 10th, to subsequent meeting of June 24th. As I
indicated to you I have a conflict on. June 10 with a previously
scheduled meeting with the Oak Brook Teachers Association.
Sincerely,
Emmett P. Malloy, Jr.
President
EP M:llb
JUN 0 2 1986
VILLAGE OF OAK BRON, IL
ADMINISTRATION
STORE LOCATIONS: Oak Brook, III., Glen Ellyn, Ill., St. Charles, III., Geneva, Ill., Joliet, III., Carol Stream, III., Naperville, Ill.
• Ca�OF Ogke •
9
OUNO
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
May 29, 1986
MEMO TO: Zoning Board of Appeals
FROM: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
SUBJECT: Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use and Flood Plain Variation
(3823 York Road)
Mr. Emmett Malloy, as owner of the above property,* has made application to construct
an addition to the existing Sav-Way liquor building as well as various parking area
improvements. Since the entire property is located within the Salt Creek floodplain
which has a high water elevation of 645.0, the proposed construction requires the
following floodplain relief: .
1) A Flood Plain Special Use Permit to permit construction within the Salt Creek
floodplain. Attached are pages 635 and 636 of the Village's flood plain
regulations noting the eleven factors which must be met in relation to flood
plain construction. Donald Eddy, in his May 12th letter beginning on page
30 of the file, deals with both the flood plain special use and flood plain
variation requirements of the Village Code.
2) A Flood Plain Variation to permit construction of a non-residential building
addition for which the top-of-foundation elevation is less than 3 feet above
the predicted 100-year flood elevation and is not floodproofed to that height.
As noted on page 640 of the attached flood plain regulations, non-residential
structures permit the utilization of floodproofing techniques up to the level
of 3 feet above the base flood elevation. However, the proposed addition will
not be floodproofed up to that height and, therefore, the requested variation.
You should also note on page 638 of the flood plain regulations the particular
standards utilized by the Zoning Board in reviewing flood plain varations.
The Plan Commission, at its meeting of May 19, 1986, considered the flood plain
special use question but was unable to make a recommendation due to only four
members being present (the vote was 3 in favor and 1 against the proposed
application) . Village regulations require "the concurring vote of four members
of the Plan Commission and/or the Zoning Board of Appeals" to recommend in favor
of an application for either a Flood Plain Special Use Permit or Flood Plain
Variation.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
7 7
BFK/j r
PLANNING AND ZONING §10-34
velocities; the seriousness of flood damage to the use; i
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 commissions all 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 I
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
9 10-34 OAK BROOK CODE
(9) The safety of access to the property in times of flood i
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. i
(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
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
•
PLANNING AND ZONING §105
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, I
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
g 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.
F(e) Standards: The recommendation of the zoning board
appeals and the decision of the president and board of
ustees on an application for a variation to the provisions
this article shall be based on the following standards, the
rden 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.
i
I
Supp. No.30
638
§ 10-49 OAK BROOK CODE
shall extend beyond the outside walls for a distance of at
least five (5) feet. The finished grade or surface of the area
beyond the aforesaid five-foot distance shall be graded and
surfaced so as to drain away from the walls to the natural
ground level over a distance of not .less than five (5)
additional feet nor more than ten (10) additional feet. (Ord.
No. G-217, § 2, 9-27-77)
Sec. 10-50. Design criteria.
The following general design criteria shall apply to all
structures which may be authorized in floodplains:
(a) Structures:
(1) Residential:
AINUMit, must be at an elevation of not less than
that of the AMMjjngW elevatio
(2) Nonresidential: The lowest floor, including the
basement, must be at an elevation of not less than
that of the base flood elevation plus three (3) feet,
unless adequately floodproofed.
(b) Walls: The walls, floors, " foundations and other
features which may be authorized for construction or
installation at or below the base flood elevation plus
three (3) feet must be designed to resist appropriate
hydrostatic pressures, including flotation.
(c) Anchoring. All authorized structures, including under-
ground tanks, shall be firmly anchored to prevent
flotation. Anchoring materials shall be rust resistant.
(d) Service facilities: To the maximum extent feasible, all
service facilities, such as electrical and heating
equipment, will be installed, constructed or otherwise
protected so as to remain operational should flood-
waters reach the base flood elevation plus five (5) feet.
Water supply and waste treatment systems shall be
designed and constructed so as to prevent the
entrance of floodwaters.
(e) Floodproofing: Where the lowest floor elevation
(including basement) is below the base flood elevation
Supp. No. 14
640
• fa�OF Ogke
FCOUNS�
VI LLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
GSA-2220
May 29, 1986
MEMO TO: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
FROM: Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , Village Engineer
SUBJECT: Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use/Variation
(3823 York Road)
I have reviewed the documents submitted on Wednesday, May 28, 1986 and offer
the following comments:
1) The .applicant's engineers detention calculations and site plan detention
volume have been revised and are now acceptable.
2) Several minor drafting revisions remain to be made to the drawing.
3) Because the storm water detention volume is larger than the compensatory
storage requirement, the compensatory storage is being adequately provided
on the site.
4) The flood plain variation request concerns the applicant's proposed top of
floor elevation for the addition at 646.0, one foot above the 100-year high
water level. 'Our Ordinance states that the lowest floor, or floodproofing,
should be at 3 feet above the 100-year high water level. I understand that
the applicant is requesting this so that the proposed building addition is
symmetrical to the existing building configuration.
I note that FEMA criteria require that the lowest floor of a non-residential
structure be either elevated or floodproofed to or above the 100-year high
water level. By making the lowest floor of the addition one-foot above the
high water level, the applicant is matching FEMA requirements.
Resp ctf lily bmitted,
Dale L. Durfe Y, Jr. , P.E.
Village Engineer
DLD/jr 39
• of°ak
O �rj� lO
FcouNt�`
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
May 22, 1986
Mr. Donald G. Eddy
534 Chestnut Street
Hinsdale, Illinois 60521
RE: Alalloy - Flood Plain Special Use Application
Dear Don:
The Plan Commission, at its May 19, 1986 meeting, had some difficulty in
reviewing your part of the above application in that it had not received the
most recent Engineering Plan.
In the future, it would be appreciated if adequate copies of all revised
information be forwarded to this office at least one week before a hearing-..-:
date in order that they may be adequately reviewed by Village Staff and
forwarded to the commission for its review.
With reference to the above application, please finalize your Engineering
Plans with Dale and forward 18 copies of the revised Plan no later than
Tuesday, May 27, in order that such might also be reviewed by the Zoning
Board of Appeals at their June 3rd hearing.
Sincerely,
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BFK/j r
cc: Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , Village Engineer
37
• �Gfc OF OAk O •
9
4a
G �
O
c OUN r•
t
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
May 21, 1986
I
Village President & Board of Trustees
Village of Oak Brook
1200 Oak Brook Road
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
RE: Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use (3823 York Road)
Dear President and Board of Trustees:
The Plan Commission, at its Regular Meeting of May 19, 1986, considered the
application of Emmett Malloy for a Flood Plain Special Use Permit which would
permit construction of a building addition as well as parking modifications
within the Salt Creek floodplain.
The Plan Commission was unable to make a specific recommendation on this
application. This is based on the requirement of Section 10-34(A) (1) (ii)
of the Village's flood plain regulations which requires the concurring vote
of four (4) members of the Plan Commission to recommend in favor of an
application. During the course of the meeting, a motion was made by Member
Beard, seconded by Member Haglund to recommend approval of this Flood Plain
Special Use Permit subject to approval of final engineering by the Village
Engineer. However, based on the above regulations, the motion failed based
on a vote of three (3) ayes: Members Beard, Haglund, Acting Chairman Sandstedt;
one (1) nay: Member Stachniak; three (3) absent: Members Antoniou, Doyle,
Chairman Marcy.
Si ly, \
/Dona d A. Sandstedt
Acting Chairman
Plan Commission
BFK/DAS/jr
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes -3- May 19, 1986
V MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE (382 York Road)
David Gooder, attorney; Emmett Malloy, owner; Donald Eddy, engineer; and Norm
White, architect, were present representing this application.
Mr. Gooder stated that the subject property is surrounded on the North, East and
South by properties within the Village of Hinsdale which carry the F zoning
category allowing as little as a 15 foot setback from York Road. He noted that the
Sav-Way liquor property as well as the gas station across the street are located
within the Oak Brook B-3 District as well as the Graue Gateway Historic District.
Mr. White stated that Mr. Malloy is proposing construction of a 6400 square foot
addition, the first floor containing retail with parking in the front, and the
second floor containing office areas with parking to the rear of the building
utilizing "office use" dimensions. ` Mr. White reviewed the submitted elevations of
the proposed structure noting the attempt to tie in architecturally the existing
arches as well as matching the.brick from the existing structure.
Mr. Eddy stated that the Engineering Plans had been revised based on Dale's
previous comments including a revised Plan submitted on the day of the hearing to
Dale. He pointed out that the parking lot will, at its deepest, contain 9 inches
of flood waters which meets Village requirements. He also stated that whereas the
present property does not detain flood waters, the proposed reconfiguration will
provide detention for 1.61 acres out of the 1.77 acre site. The only area which
cannot be detained is located at the northwest corner of the property in the
existing parking lot which presently drains toward York Road.
In response to Acting Chairman Sandstedt, Village Engineer Durfey stated that the
primary concern of detention had been taken care of, and that other items in his
most recent review memo are minor in nature.
Member Stachniak stated his concern for the proposed redevelopment, since the
existing area along York Road periodically floods.
In response to Member Haglund, Mr. Eddy stated that the two strip detention areas
along the South and East borders of the development will contain an underground
french drain, in order to avoid future maintenance problems.
In response to the Acting Chairman, Mr. Eddy and Mr. Gooder responded
satisfactorily to the eleven factors contained in Section 10-34 of the Village Code
dealing with the potential impact of the development on the Salt Creek floodplain.
It was noted that Mr. Eddy had previously submitted a May 12th letter which
responds to the eleven factors.
The Acting Chairman noted that there were no members of the audience expressing
support for or opposition to the proposed Flood Plain Special Use Permit.
A motion was made by Member Beard, seconded by Member Haglund to recommend to the
President and Board of Trustees approval of the requested Flood Plain Special Use
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes -3- May 19, 1986
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes —4— May 19, 1986
V MALLOY — FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE (182 York Road)(Continued)
Permit which would permit construction of the addition as well as revised parking
areas within the Salt Creek floodplain subject to the Village Engineer's final
approval of all necessary engineering and detention plans.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (3)
Members Beard, Haglund, Acting
Chairman Sandstedt
Nays: (1)
Member Stachniak
Absent: (3)
Members Antoniou,` Doyle, Chairman
Marcy
MOTION FAILED. ..
The Secretary noted that although the vote met the requirements of aVsimple
majority, the motion failed based on the requirements of Section 10-34(A)(1) (ii)
which require the concurring vote of four members of the Plan Commission to
recommend in favor of an application. The Acting Chairman noted.that, as such,
this application would proceed to the Zoning Board of Appeals with the lack of a
specific recommendation by the Plan Commission.
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes —4— May 19, 1986
34
COUNI�'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
May 15, 1986
MEMO TO: Plan Commission
FROM: Bruce P. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
SUBJECT: Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use
(2823 York Road)
The Plan Commission, at its meeting of April 21, 1986, tabled this subject
in order that the applicant could finalize its plans concerning its Graue
Certificate of Appropriateness application. Mr. Eddy has also submitted
revised Engineering Plans received May 12, 1986 in response to Dale's
concerns. I would also refer you to Dale's memo of May 13th concerning
these revised plans.
In reviewing this subject, I would remind the Plan Commission that although
this application includes a Flood Plain Variation request, the only item
before the Plan Commission is the Flood Plain Special Use Permit for
construction of the proposed addition and regrading work within the Salt
Creek Floodplain. The Flood Plain Variation, which will permit construction
of the top-of-foundation at an elevation less than 3 feet above the 100-year
flood elevation, will only be heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BFK/j r
SUBURBAN LIFE GRAPHIC
Certificate of Pubstion .
STATE OF ILLINOIS)
COUNTY OF DU PAGE) SS.
�'�+'��•'*.,.:LEGAL NOTICE
Kubik K
Jack R. u "-"
This affiant, J ,being +p�., ,•VtLLAdE OF OAK BROOK '
first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is DU PAGE AND COOK COUNTIES, ,
President " ILLINOIS
the duly elected and acting of Life NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Printing & Publishing Co., Inc., a corporation NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a
organized and existing under the laws of the State of public hearing before the Zoning Board
Illinois, that the said Life Printing&Publishing Co. of Appeals of the Village of Oak Brook
Inc., is publisher of a twice weekly secular DuPage and Cook Counties,Illinois,will
newspaper published in the Village of be held on May e, lag H ll, 00 in
g the Oak Brook Village Ball, 1200 Oak
Oak Brook County of DuPage, Brook Road, Illinois for the purpose of
and State of Illinois, on Wednesday, and on Satur- considering the application
Malloy for a Flood Plain Spp Emmett
Use
day of each week, and having a general circulation Permit, Flood Plain Variation, and
within the Village of Oak Brook Zoning Variations as provided under
Count of DuPage, and State of Illinois that this af- Section Village of the Zoning Ordinance
County q , bf the Village of Oak Brook, Illinois,
fiant is duly authorized, in behalf of said corpora- bons 1nce and' as 35 0(the;Viand eec-
tion, to make this affidavit, and states that a notice, Oak Brook Code,as amended.
of which the annexed is a true copy, was published
in the said Suburban Life Graphic 1 times, The following relief has been requested:
f aturday 1) Flood Plain Special Use permit con-
on struclion of a building addition within
the 19th day of AD ril ,A.D., the Salt Creek floodplain.
19_86 ,on xxx ,the xxx day of 2) Flood Plain Variation to permit con-
struction of a nonresidential building i
XXX _A.D., 19 xx . addition for which %he top of founda-
Affiant further states that the said Suburban Life tlon elevation is less than three (3)
Graphic was a twice weekly newspaper ublished feet above the predicted 100-year
Y P flood elevation, and is not floodp-
in the Village of Oak Brook and roofed to that height.
Sec-
having ciculation in the Village of 3) Variation from the provisions of g a general tionXl(E)(4)(a)(2)(iii)toperm(tthe
Oak Brook at and during the continuance of an entrance driveway
time said annexed notice was published in said approximately 55 feet in width,which
exceeds the 30-toot maximum width
newspaper, said Life Printing & Publishing Co., permitted. -
Inc., publisher of said newspaper, was a corpora- 4)• i Variation from tt reduce provisions of S ed.
tion duly organized and existing under and by vir- number of parking spaces by having
tue of the laws of the State of Illinois, and that the the office and retail uses share the
said Suburban Life Graphic has been regularly parking area by providing 8o spaces
.for store and office uses rather than
published more than one (1) year prior to the first the 80 as required by Ordinance.
publication of the annexed notice. 5) Variation from the provisions of Sec-
The Suburban Life Graphic is a newspaper as Sec-
tion of a build to permit cwith n
tion of a building addition with an
defined in Ac ter 10 Sections 1 and 5, Ii- approximate 89-foot Setback from
linois revised Statutes.' York Road, which is less than the
Variation Required Setback
6) Variation from the provisions of Sec-
tion XI(D)(7) to reduce the required
JP.Ck R. Kubik President,�DkXMrAiilem number of off-street loading berths
from 3 to 2.
Subscribed and sworn to before me 164
22nd Avr it The property may be generally de-
22nd scribed as 3823 York Road, Oak Brook,
A.D.19 86 Illinois, and the legal description is as
follows: Lot 4 In Graue's Assessment
Plat No.2 of part of the West half of the
Notary Public Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Town-
bbip 39 North, Range 11 East of the
My Commission expires � Third Principal Meridian, in York
Township, according to the Plat thereof
jecorded March 19, 1947 as Document
.No. 517588, in DuPage County, Illinois.
Permanent Parcel No.06-38405-003
-All persons desiring to be heard in
support of or in opposition to the pro-
posed Flood Plain Special Use, Flood
Plain Variation and Zoning Variations
or any provision thereof, will be af-
forded an opportunity to do so and may
submit their statements orally or in
writing or both.-The hearing may be
recessed to another date if notice of
time and place.thereof is publicly an-
nounced at the hearing or is given by
newspaper publication not less than five
(5)days prior to the date of the recessed
hearing.
Marianne Lakosil,
Village Clerk
Published at the directioh of the Cor-
porate Authorities and the Zoning Board
of Appeals of the Village of Oak Brook,
DuPage and Cook Counties,Illinois.
i G-823
• OF OA •
Ay :h
G
r ,
@COUNty
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
May 13, 1986
654-2220
MEMO TO: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
FROM: Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , P.E.
SUBJECT: Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use
3823 York Road
I have reviewed the documents submitted on Monday, May 12, 1986, and offer the
following comments:
1. The site improvement plan now states the flood plain high-water elevation
to be 645.0 which is in keeping with the FEMA maps.
2. The proposed top-of-foundation of the building addition is at elevation
646.0, up .25 feet from the previous submittal. The Flood Plain Ordinance
requires that structures located in the flood plain are to be floodproofed
for at least three (3') feet above the base flood elevation; therefore,
the proposed plan does not apply. Also, the top-of-foundation of 646.0
on the site improvement plan is inconsistent with the document submitted
by Emmett Malloy in which he states that the proposed floor should be the
same as the existing floor.
3. Don Eddy, the applicant's engineer, has submitted detention and compensatory
storage information; however, some of it is unclear. I will be contacting
Mr. Eddy to arrange a meeting to review these items with him.
4. The proposed swale along the south lot line has been revised to be only
three (3") inches below the edge of pavement. It appears that the distance
of 5.8 feet from the south lot line to the edge of the proposed underdrain
would provide sufficient space for the planting of screening landscaping
material.
Section A-A, however, is somewhat misleading in that the elevation of the
lot line at this section is shown incorrectly. Also, at points east of
Section A-A, the lot line is actually below the 644.0 elevation of the
proposed underdrain.
5. The proposed swale along the easterly side of the parking area has been
expanded from a width of ten (10') feet to - twenty-five (25') feet. It
appears that this area will no longer be the long thin detention strip
previously anticipated. The proposed configuration must be reviewed
MEMO TO: Bruce F. Kapff
May 13, 1986
Page 2
with the detention and compensatory requirements discussed above.
6. Several drafting revisions remain to be made to the drawing.
7. The present plan has removed paving areas depicted as complete reconstruc-
tion or resurfacing; I suggest that these detailed items not be made part
of this application but be concluded with the building permit application.
Respe tfu ly su itted,
Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , P.E. ,
Village Engineer
DLD/etg
DONALD N�� -
w���w�m��m� G.
1 711 CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
un*CHESTNUT aT,*|m8oALE.|L6o521 - <312V986-0809
May 12, 1986 MAY 121986
VILLAGE OF OAK BRO�K, IL'
SlORM WATER STORAGE CALCULATIONS
ADMINISTRATION
SAVWAY LIQUOR STORE
3823 YORK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
VOLUMES OF COMPENSATORY STORAGE REQUIRED, WHERE FIRM HIGH WATER
ELEVATION PROJECTION IS FOR 645, EVEN THOUGH THAT HIGH WATER
ELEVATION IS DEPICTED ON TO DIFFERENT LOCATiONS ON SALT CREEK.
SINCE THE FRONT PARKING LOT IS NOT BEING ADJUSTED, THAT VOLUME
PRESENTLY POSSIBLE FOR STORAGE WOULD NOT CHANGE.
AREA UNDER THE PROPOSED ADDITION FOR THE BUILDING.
'
1-11verage depth of possible storm water within the area of the pro-
posed addition equals 0. 46 feet , from the present ground line to
elevation 645. 0.
The building pad area = 90 feet by 45 feet. Therefore the volume
of detention lost through the building of the addition = 1 ,863
cubic feet.
Since the parking lot , and existing grass area is to be adjusted ,
both to the south of the addition as well as to the east , compen-
satory storage would also be required for this change. The average
depth of existing detention , using the 645 high water elevation , is
0. 49 feet. The area being changed is 83 feet by 76 feet. The
volume of compensatory storage would then of 3,091 cubic feet. Note
that the remainder of the parking lot being disturbed would be
lowered below the present existing elevation. The total volume of
compensatory storage = 4,954 cubic feet.
Storage volume required for this site in addition to the compensatory
storage. Area of site = 0. 79 acres (that area being adjusted by this
building addition) . Using the factor of 4 inches of storm water over
the affected site, then some 11 ,459 cubic feet of additional detention
will be required. Adding the compensatory storage brings the total
storage of 16,413 cubic feet.
�
CONSULTING ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT, PROJECT
� MANAGBNENTN0NICIPALEN8|NEERN8.GRAPH|C PRESENTATION,SCALE MODEL CONSTRUCTION
Property storage south of addition in parking lot �
22 ' x 130 ' x 0. 37 ' = 1 ,058 cubiic foot �
Property storage south of parkway �
200 ' x 8. 24 sq. ft. = 1 ,648 cubic foot �
�
Property storage east of building
190 ' x 50 ' x 0. 37 ' = 3,562 cubic foot
Property storage in east detention basin
56. 4 sq. ft. x 180 ' = 10, 158 cubic foot
Total detention provided = 16,426 cubic foot
Orifice Sizing Calculation
0. 123 cfs x 144 = 0. 61 x 0. 785 x »2 \J2 X G X 8. 24
D = 1 . 26 inch
use 1 1/4 inch orifice
'
'
�
1
' DONALD ��
��=~~m`��mm"�� G.
\TGO
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
su4 CHESTNUT GT..M|w3DALE.|L6B521 - (312)988-0909
May 12, 1986
Mr. Bruce Kapff
Village of Oak Brook-
Oak. Brook Road YK
Oak Brook , Illinois 60521
&��� � �� ����
Re: Emmett Malloy Petition `^^ ^' ~ ^~ ^�°=
3823 York Road
Oak Brook , Illinois
1���� ��� �F ��� ���[��, ��
ADMINISTRATION
Dear Mr. Kapff ;
This submission, including 18 copies of these docum en s t , is a col-
lection of the information and evidence that is to be presented to
the Village 's Planning Commission and Zoning Board at their meetings
t o his month. This material is to support the land owner 's position
that a permit for the building addition should be granted by the
Village for this property.
As you are aware, there are several items to be considered at this
upcoming hearing. These items include not only the aspect for storm
water flooding within the Salt Creek area, established by the F I R M
study and adopted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, known^ ^ ^F. I . R. M.
as FEMA, and also the question of the building finish floor being l
'than the Village 's required 3 feet above flood plain and lastly, the
, y he
impact of the Gateway Ordinance of the Village. ' In this l ----^ , ' I `will
attempt to discuss all but the Gateway Ordinance � - - --`^'
ce por zons of the hear-
ings. Some of the conditions set forth in both the Village 's Ordi-
nances as well as the FEMA regulations are as follows:
1 . We must show a good and sufficient cause.
2. That the failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional
hardship to the applicant.
3. That the granting of the variance will t
no cause a hardship on the
other lands fronting on the same flood plain , increase public �
safety hazards, create an extraordinary public expense because �
of this construction, cause fraud or victimize the public, or cause
a conflict with existing local laws or ordinances.
CONSULTING ENG|NEER|NG, LAND PLANN|NG, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT, PROJECT
MANAGEMENT, MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING,GRAPHIC PRESENTATION,SCALE MODEL CONSTRUCTION
Page two
Letter to Mr. Kapff
Emmett Malloy Petition
May 12, 1986
To assist the Village in its consideration on this matter , we
have addressed the various items within the Village 's Ordinances
and in the Federal Register in the following manner. We will show
that:
1 . While the proposed building addition does lie across lands
whose elevations are below the depicted 100 year flood elevation , �
that the previous levels of flooding , beginning in 1972, did �
not impact upon the land owner 's property. This will be done
through the land owner 's testimony. Since this building ad-
dition is to have no basement , that concern is not an issue.
2. The property is not close to or within a floodway and will not
generate an erosion and sedimentation problem for their lands.
The property is not now within the floodway because of land
elevation adjustments, within the Village of Hinsdale, that have
taken place over the past few years. '
'
3. That the property is more than 1/2 acre in size, contrary to the
condition set forth in the Federal Register and the Village 's
Ordinances. The total lot size is 1 . 77 acres in area and the
affected lot area, where the improvements are to take place,
is 0. 79 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 site plans accompanying this letter , we
have shown that the volume of flood storage, both compensatory as
well as for the additional hard surface area, will adequately
address this concern and not cause the flood heights to raise.
2. The lot area is more than 1/2 a0es in area. There is no way to
dismiss this question. The land is zoned for commercial useage And
the land area is used for that purpose at this time.
3. The variance request is the minimum necessary for this property.
The proposed land useage is that which will reasonably cause the
owner to realize a reasonable Peturn on his investment for both the
existing building as well as for the proposed building addition.
The amount of additional parking is that which is set forth by
the Village in its ordinances.
4. The owner recognizes that flood insurance is a factor in this
type of construction , but notes that , to date, he has not had
cause to require collection of those benefits from flood damage,
1
��� _
Page three
Letter to Mr. Kapff
Emmett Malloy Petition
May 12, 1986
even though the existing building , constructed prior to the
flood insurance program, has a basement.
5. The Village must maintain a record of all variance actions �
and report those annually to the FEMA.
The Village will also require several additional items of proof for �
the hearing. They are as follows:
�
a. Proposed site plan , showing dimensions and elevations for the �
proposed improvement4 the proposed excavation and filling as
well as flood-proofing measures and the location of the proposed
detention basins.
b. Typical cross section of the excavation and fill improvement , as
it applies to the prposed parking lot improvements.
C. Plans for the proposed building addition , submitted by Norman
White and Associates, depict the proposed building addition and
the views of the sides of the building.
d. Photographs of the site will be provided at the time of the
public hearings which show both this site as well as the lands
around the site.
e. Specifications for the various aspects of the construction are
shown on the site plan.
The following items, or factors, are to be considered by the Zoning
Board and the Plan Commission in making their decision , along with
other factors that may come to mind.
1 . The the danger of materials being swept onto other lands to the
injury of others is not present. This land does not lie within
the present floodway of Salt Creek. The presence of materials
being swept away then does not exist. It would be possible,
during the 100 year flood event , for materials, during the
time of construction , to float away. To prevent that type of
action , it would be the intent of the owner to store his con-
struction materials only at points which would cause that mater-
ials to be trapped within his lot and so that it could not float
away onto _other people 's lands.
1
Page four �
Letter to Mr. Kapff �
Emmett Malloy Petition
�
May 12, 1986
�
�2, That the danger of life and property are not increased by this
project. The addition of the building , as well as the required �
additional storm water detention , would not cause the flood
water heights to increase. Therefore, there should be no in-
creased danger to life or property by this project.
3. That the building will not be susceptible to flood damage. The
existing building finished floor is set at 646. 0. The potential
100 year flood level is as 645. 0 The FEMA sets forth that the
minimum height avove flood level that is acceptable to them is
one foot. We are proposing that the building additions be set
at the one foot above flood level elevation. While this is in
conflict with Village 's Ordinances, the architect will show that
to raise the finished flood to meet that Village 's Ordiances
would create a hardship for the building.
4. That the proposed addition will not increase the danger of con-
tamination of the public water supplies or the sanitary sewer
system. This building addition will continue to use the existing
facilities now serving the existing building. There is one ad-
dition called for on the site plans, and that is to install 'a
sealed cover on the sanitary manhole within the property so that
the surface water cannot enter into the sewer system, as it can
at present during flood stages.
5. That the proposed building addition will be of importance to the
community. This question will be addressed by the owner.
6. The requirements of the water front location to the facility.
There are no water front locations for this total property.
7. Compatibility of use with the adjoining properties. The land use
is compatible with the existing land uses on all sides of this
land. The photographs will demonstrate this fact.
8. The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan
and the flood management ordinance of the area. The proposed
building addition is in conformance with the Village 's Zoning
Ordinances. By permitting this addition , storm water management
will now be provided, in accordance with the Village 's require-
ments as well as those of the Hinsdale Sanitary District , which
do not exist today.
� 9. The safety of entrance into the site during times of flooding.
�
The site now has an entrance onto the site which lies at or
slightly above the 100 year flood level . This entrance, whose
1
�
�
yK, 3 "d ' ApP3 "S MXUW��
V5
III
' A l
a .t'
"Aa ;42W s " ' A " I Mur4sisse woA jof noA jupq��.
04 qsTm am BJq! ssOd on ino , -7 -Vn4 +0 BuTwjeal a4eTnawddw pj"n
am ' Passaippe aq DI SUOMMunh Avq�o aq Aew aAaqq qeqq quaAa
M"OU absT110 aM to USTIYPUIMOM � n :qWAOAef e apeW 04 spleoe mv:
joy AqTiFnb quaiwffps u ! sT ,h,
aq c4 quq, q4TM
Aaqq se sujanuoD aso,,
qywaqqu pinom am
aqq OuTina -piece buluc;., sqq in UOTSS!WWOD UpId aqq 04 ujp:�e
-UOM +0 aq Aew quq4 aInTqje sTq, ; n "OdAnd aqq 04 qUUA0lav
qMTqm sJo4ne" jaq4o 10 OWUMT 40C T�p BM aWT4 SM W "RIDTIA�
s Tqq +0 asodind Dqq 04 4UVAS !pn aAr qnTqm sjc4muf Aaqqo
"Sueld aqjs aqq uO UMOqs
n Uolqequa"Pas Pue UOTSOAa 10 COMM14SUT aqq Aq pallooluo:�-j
aq NO 4uaw!Pas +0 qjodsuujq sqj "SUTTip MTS STW qDTqm OM
Ya"D WeS +0 SlaAal jaqeM aqq OT dOwP +0 a4ei aqq Aq PSUMAC5
aq 11Tm 1..!OTI1..!84ap "WIT SM UO SaTUNDef UOT �
-UaqaP Pasodoid aqq fo saqej aspa,,,
STQAaJ aqq Aq q4oq PaTTOAWOD aq pTn-m asTj +0 aqej
aqq Pue WOOD WeS aq4 Pswm4wq ale PSUTH +0 aWITA aq ,-
+0 SUM M4 I , L, avoid ua!Fq aorp 4eqq SUOT4unTfTpow PURI +�,:
asnemaq 'Aempooly aqq aan pue Q ::
ST" "" UT "Un "TUBTSUT aQ Pin"qO AMOM Pool+ fo QTnolav aq ;
-SaTpnqs VWYJ Jad me uTewaA [ ITM SLUIN Oqq UO UMOqs jaqem ponl+ p�
qqBTaq au "aqTs " fe Pa4"XO S"Wm POOlf aqq fo qjodsuEm
""PaS PUe aSTj §0 aqej " UOTWiMP " 0710jaA 's4qbTaq paqnadxa ayj
'SUOTqeAala qUaSaid aSEqq qp ' PaT+Tpow aq oq sT wjw ,�7�
9SW ' IT
UOT414aa AolleW j4aww,,:,�
ffdeN jw 04 wannp :
aAT+ a6n_
• 5/12/86
SAVWAY LIQUORS — EMMETT MALLOY
1tiISTORY
The subject property was purchased in January of 1969. It
contained a green frame, poorly maintained, two story house: the
first floor of which housed both a small package section and a
bar/lounge area. The second floor served as a residence for the
owner. The business entity was known as "Sam's Tavern."
Upon purchase by the present owner/operator the bar/lounge
function was discontinued and the package operation conducted by
SavWay until the new building was completed in July of 1970.
BUILDING DESIGN
The existing building design was developed from an office building
in Lincolnwood. It was felt that this particular design presented a
dignified commercial structure with its arches, window design, and
aggregate overhand conveying a soft "wine cellar" feeling. This
store was intended to be the main operation and headquarters of
the SavWay chain and with four "Malloy" families living in Oak
Brook, every effort was made to insure that it would be an
outstanding facility.
In reviewing our plans, the Village of Oak Brook requested that the
building be built on a East-West parallel line that that it be a
rectangular structure as opposed to having the front of the building
parallel York Road. The required set back of 100 feet was
determined by the Village as that distance from the Southwest
corner of the proposed structure on a line parallel to the North
property line to York Road.
As a result of the above Village direction, the Northwest corner has
a setback of approximately 126 feet. Because of the angle of York
Road to the property, Northbound traffic has difficulty identifying
the retail business. Hindsight would dictate that the building
parallel York Road.
P1117011YED
MAY 12 1986
VILLAGE OF OAK BR00-(, IL.
ADMINISTRAT113N
UNIQUE PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS
A.) This property is surrounded on three sides by the Vilage of
Hinsdale. Hinsdale has only a 15 foot setback requirement.
The Office Park does have existing preliminary plans for a
commercial building on our North side at the 15 foot
setback. As evidenced by the Office Park parking lot at the
rear of this property, no parking screening was required.
B.) Not considering the service station across the street this is
the only retail facility on the South end of Oak Brook.
OAK BROOK TAX REVENUE INFORMATION
SALES TAX:
A.) The SavWay operation generates a considerable sales tax
benefit to the Village of Oak Brook.
REAL ESTATE TAX:
B.) Since this property is in the Hinsdale 181 School Taxing
District, the Oak Brook School District does not receive
revenue from this store.
PROPERTY SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS
FRONT PARKWAY LANDSCAPING
Persons driving out the North exit of the parking lot must
look across the parkway to see oncoming traffic from the
South because of the angle of York Road from the subject
property. Previous hedge plantings in the parkway had to be
removed in order to provide visibility and relieve a dan-
gerous situation.
No tall bushes or hedge screening can be installed on the
front parkway without serious traffic safety concerns.
SOUTH ENTRANCE
Beverage vendors generally approach the site from Ogden
Avenue. As such vehicles travel North on York Road, they
are traveling at an angle away from the entrance to subject
property. Hense, they must make a significantly greater
than 900 turn into the SavWay lot. Many such vehicles pull
a lenthly trailer. To prevent a wider swing out towards the
center or beyond York it is prudent to allow retention of the
opening as it exists. Our experience of observing this
situation for many years should give credibility to our
judgement as to the existing situation and need.
SAVWAY OBJECTIVES
The purpose of the proposed addition is as follows:
1.) Provide an additional source of economic return on the
property value so as to be able to continue indefinely the
present operation.
2.) Provide additional retail space in the area so as to attract
potential customers for SavWay.
3.) Avoid construction on the property that would adversely
affect the day to day operation of the existing SavWay
business.
4.) Accept only that tenant which will compliment the SavWay
operation and will not interfere with existing or future
SavWay parking needs.
RETAIL CONSIDERATIONS
1.) PARKING
Customer reacts directly to convenience of parking and to
parking activity.
They must be able to see the convenient availability
of parking from a point beyond the actual parking
area.
An empty or invisible parking area tends to deter
customer shopping.
Thus, it is important not to acreen out available parking or
cars in a lot from the customer's view from the street.
2.) FLOOR LEVELS:
Different floor levels resulting in stairs or ramps do not
provide easy shopping or customer comfort. A direct
opening between the addition's retail space and the SavWay
store would be unfeasible with different floor levels.
The exterior appearance of design continuity would also be
impossible with different floor levels.
If the floor level of the addition were raised to the 100 year
required flood level, only 9.3% of the total building area
would be protected against the flood danger.
In the two 100 year flood storm of 1972 not a drop of water
entered the basement of the existing structure.
'•
3.) GATEWAY ORDINANCE
A.) Because of existing conditions, the property has limited
opportunities for extensive landscaping. In addition, since it
is a retail facility it is necessary to merchandise its
presence as opposed to other uses such as office.
B.) The most recent retail development in the area is the
Gateway Shopping Center which was also subject to the
same ordinance language. This development has only a 15
foot setback and is not screened from York Road. Its
parking area is also clearly visible to traffic on York Road.
As a totally new project, the Gateway Center had more
opportunity to develop the Gateway goals. Yet, we believe
our landscape proposal will result in a presentation that will
conform more directly with the objectives of the Gateway
ordinance.
ECONOMIC HARDSHIP
1.) Retail package sales in the past few years have declined
dramatically. This experience corresponds to the 13+%
national decrease in consumption. We wholeheartedly
support ongoing programs concerning substance abuse and
health considerations, and expect a continued decline in
consumption and retail sales.
It would not be reasonable to build an addition which would
constitute only 18.6% of the total building area, if we were
required to make changes to the existing structure or
parking lot that would either interfere with our present
operation or bear significant incremental costs.
2.) We have agreed to meet the fire code and sprinkle our
entire existing building which in itself presents a substantial
cost.
3.) The SavWay store is a large volume operation by industry
standards. However, the return from this retail business has
not been able to keep pace with the increased property
values.
Ownership is constantly approached by parties interested in
using the property for other purposes. The opportunities
presented would allow an immediate multiple return on
existing values as compared to the present situation. We
prefer to continue our business and presence in Oak Brook,
providing that we can improve the return to an acceptable
level that recognizes today's property values.
CONCLUSION
The construction of this small addition (6400 Sq. Ft.) will enable us
to achieve our objectives and remain a contributing part of Oak
Brook and its business community.
We are again attempting to improve our property with an
attractive and quality addition that will reflect the values and
standards of our community. The variations requested are made
only because of code changes since 1970.
We believe that the upgrades on the existing property to code and
compliances on the addition provide benefits to us and the Village
that justify the variances.
Respectfully submitted,
Emmett P. Malloy, Jr. �'
• . 5/12/86
SAVWAY LIQUORS -- EMMETT MALLOY
HISTORY
The subject property was purchased in January of 1969. It
contained a green frame, poorly maintained, two story house: the
first floor of which housed both a small package section and a
bar/lounge area. The second floor served as a residence for the
owner. The business entity was known as "Sam's Tavern."
Upon purchase by the present owner/operator the bar/lounge
function was discontinued and the package operation conducted by
SavWay until the new building was completed in July of 1970.
BUILDING DESIGN
The existing building design was developed from an office building
in Lincolnwood. It was felt that this particular design presented a
dignified commercial structure with its arches, window design, and
aggregate overhand conveying a soft "wine cellar" feeling. This
store was intended to be the main operation and headquarters of
the SavWay chain and with four "Malloy" families living in Oak
Brook, every effort was made to insure that it would be an
outstanding facility.
In reviewing our plans, the Village of Oak Brook requested that the
building be built on a East-West parallel line that that it be a
rectangular structure as opposed to having the front of the building
parallel York Road. The required set back of 100 feet was
determined by the Village as that distance from the Southwest
corner of the proposed structure on a line parallel to the North
property line to York Road.
As a result of the above Village direction, the Northwest corner has
a setback of approximately 126 feet. Because of the angle of York
Road to the property, Northbound traffic has difficulty identifying
the retail business. Hindsight would dictate that the building
parallel York Road.
PICSIVED,
MAY 12 1986
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK, IL.
A D M I Pi 115T,TiAT 10 N 23
UNIQUE PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS
A.) This property is surrounded on three sides by the Vilage of
Hinsdale. Hinsdale has only a 15 foot setback requirement.
The Office Park does have existing preliminary plans for a
commercial building on our North side at the 15 foot
setback. As evidenced by the Office Park parking lot at the
rear of this property, no parking screening was required.
B.) Not considering the service station across the street this is
the only retail facility on the South end of Oak Brook.
OAK BROOK TAX REVENUE INFORMATION
SALES TAX:
A.) The SavWay operation generates a considerable sales tax
benefit to the Village of Oak Brook.
REAL ESTATE TAX:
B.) Since this property is in the Hinsdale 181 School Taxing
District, the Oak Brook School District does not receive
revenue from this store.
PROPERTY SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS
FRONT PARKWAY LANDSCAPING
Persons driving out the North exit of the parking lot must
look across the parkway to see oncoming traffic from the
South because of the angle of York Road from the subject
property. Previous hedge plantings in the parkway had to be
removed in order to provide visibility and relieve a dan-
gerous situation.
No tall bushes or hedge screening can be installed on the
front parkway without serious traffic safety concerns.
SOUTH ENTRANCE
Beverage vendors generally approach the site from Ogden
Avenue. As such vehicles travel North on York Road, they
are traveling at an angle away from the entrance to subject
property. Hense, they must make a significantly greater
than 900 turn into the SavWay lot. Many such vehicles pull
a lenthly trailer. To prevent a wider swing out towards the
center or beyond York it is prudent to allow retention of the
opening as it exists. Our experience of observing this
situation for many years should give credibility to our
judgement as to the existing situation and need.
SAVWAY OBJECTIVES
The purpose of the proposed addition is as follows:
1.) Provide an additional source of economic return on the
property value so as to be able to continue indefinely the
present operation.
2.) Provide additional retail_ space in the area so as to attract
potential customers for SavWay.
3.) Avoid construction on the property that would adversely
affect the day to day operation of the existing SavWay
business.
4.) Accept only that tenant which will compliment the SavWay
operation and will not interfere with existing or future
SavWay parking,needs.
RETAIL CONSIDERATIONS
1.) PARKING
Customer reacts directly to convenience of parking and to
parking activity.
They must be able to see the convenient availability
' of parking from a point beyond the actual parking
area.
An empty or invisible parking area tends to deter
customer shopping.
Thus, it is important not to screen out available parking or
cars in a lot from the customer's view from the street.
2.) FLOOR LEVELS:
Different floor levels resulting in stairs or ramps do not
provide easy shopping or customer comfort. A direct
opening between the addition's retail space and the SavWay
store would be unfeasible with different floor levels.
The exterior appearance of design continuity would also be
impossible with different floor levels.
If the floor level of the addition were raised to the 100 year
required flood level, only 9.3% of the total building area
would be protected against the flood danger.
In the two 100 year flood storm of 1972 not a drop of water
entered the basement' of the existing structure.
3.) GATEWAY ORDINANCE
A.) Because of existing conditions, the property has limited
opportunities for extensive landscaping. In addition, since it
is a retail facility it is necessary to merchandise its
presence as opposed to other uses such as office.
B.) The most recent retail development in the area is the
Gateway Shopping Center which was also subject to the
same ordinance language. This development has only a 15
foot setback and is not screened from York Road. Its
parking area is also clearly visible to traffic on York Road.
As a totally new project, the Gateway Center had more
opportunity to develop the Gateway goals. Yet, we believe
our landscape proposal will result in a presentation that will
conform more directly with the objectives of the Gateway
ordinance.
ECONOMIC HARDSHIP
1.) Retail package sales in the past few years have declined
dramatically. This experience corresponds to the 13+%
national decrease in consumption. We wholeheartedly
support ongoing programs concerning substance abuse and
health considerations, and expect a continued decline in
consumption and retail sales.
It would not be reasonable to build an addition which would
constitute only 18.6% of the total building area, if we were
required to make changes to the existing structure or
parking lot that would either interfere with our present
operation or bear significant incremental costs.
2.) We have agreed to meet the fire code and sprinkle our
entire existing building which in itself presents a substantial
cost.
3.) The SavWay store is a large volume operation by industry
standards. However, the return from this retail business has
not been able to keep pace with the increased property
values.
Ownership is constantly approached by parties interested in
using the property for other purposes. The opportunities
presented would allow an immediate multiple return on
existing values as compared to the present situation. We
prefer to continue our business and presence in Oak Brook,
providing that we can improve the return to an acceptable
level that recognizes today's property values.
!
f'
CONCLUSION
The construction of this small addition (6400 Sq. Ft.) will enable us
to achieve our objectives and remain a contributing part of Oak
Brook and its business community.
We are again attempting to improve our property with an
attractive and quality addition that will reflect the values and
standards of our community. The variations requested are
y q made
only because of code changes since 1970.
We believe that the upgrades on the existing property to code and
compliances on the addition provide benefits to us and the Village
that justify the variances.
Respectfully submitted,
Emmett P. Malloy, Jr.
/q
yPG�OF 0AA( •
_rM1
o 2
F'OUNti'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLIN0I5
65d-2220
May 8, 1986
Mr. Emmett P. Malloy, Jr.
3821 York Road
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
RE: Malloy - Parking Variation and lood Plain Special Use and Variation
(3823 York Road)
Dear Mr. Malloy:
The Zoning Board of Appeals, at its regular meeting of May 6, 1986, granted
your request and tabled consideration of the above applications until its
next regular meeting of June 3, 1986.
Sincerely, _
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BFK/3 r
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -2- May 6, 1986
IV MALLOY - PARKING VARIATION and FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE AND FLOOD PLAIN
VARIATION (3823 York Road).
The Chairman noted that since the flood plain items had yet to receive a
recommendation from the Plan Commission, it would be appropriate for the Zoning
Board of Appeals to table these applications as requested by the applicant.
A motion was made by Member O'Brien, seconded by Member Crouch to table these
applications to the Zoning Board's June 3rd hearing.
VOICE VOTE: All in favor. MOTION CARRIED. ..
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes -2- May 6, 1986
VILLAGE OF OAK, BROOK NOTE : * Odicates Cancelled
1200 Oak Brook Road 0 ** dicates Added to Agenda
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521 *** Indicates Deletion
Revision Date : May 5, 1986
N 0 T I C E
May , 1986
TUESDAY , REGULAR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING 7 : 30 P .M.
May 6 , 1986 Village Commons - Samuel E. Dean Board Room
AGENDA
1 . Roll Call
2 . Approval of Minutes
3. Smith - Flood Plain Special Use and Flood Plain Variation
(45 Royal Vale Drive)
4 . McDonald ' s - Flood Plain Special Use
Phase I-B Stockpile
5 . Brinson - Rear Yard Variation
(78 Baybrook Lane)
6 . Malloy - Parking Variation
(3823 York Road)
7 . Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use and Flood Plain Variation
(3823 York Road) .
8 . Stone Container - Parking Variation
(2021 Swift Drive)
9 . Stone Container - Loading Berth Text Amendment
(2021 Swift Drive)
MONDAY COMMITTEE-OF-THE-WHOLE MEETING 7 : 30 P .M.
May 12,, 1986 Village Commons - Samuel E. Dean Board Room
TUESDAY , REGULAR BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING 7 : 30 P .M.
May 13, 1986 Village Commons - Samuel E. Dean Board Room
MONDAY , REGULAR PLAN COMMISSION MEETING 7 : 30 P .M.
May 19 , '1986 Village Commons - Samuel E . Dean Board Room
AGENDA
1 . Roll Call
2 . Approval of Minutes
Perino-Boone Resubdivision - Final Plat
Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use
(3823 York Road)
5 . Malloy - Graue Certificate of Appropriateness
(3823 York Road)
6 . Jorge ' s Subdivision - Final Plat
(3304 Roslyn Road)
** 7. Timber Trails Property Owners Association - Entrance
Guardhouse and Variation
TUESDAY , REGULAR BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING 7 : 30 P .M .
May 27 , 1986 Village Commons - Samuel E. Dean Board Room
Items #3 and #4 on the Zoning Board Mof Appeals agenda were published in the
Oak Brook DOINGS on
Items #5 and #8 on the Zoning Board of Appeals agenda were published in the
Oak Brook DOINGS on April 17 , 1986
Item #6 on the Zoning Board of Appeals agenda was published in the Suburban
Life GRAPHIC on April 19 , 1986
Item #1 on the Zoning Board of Appeals agenda was published in the Oak Brook
DOINGS on Ap r
Item #9 on the Zoning Board of Appeals agenda was published in the Oak Brook
DOINGS on April 14 , 1986
Item #4 on the Plan Commission agenda was published in the Oak Brook DOINGS
on April 10 , 1986
Item #5 on the Plan Commission agenda was published in the Oak Brook DOINGS
on May 1 , 1986
Item #7 on the .Plan Commission agenda was published in the Suburban Life
GRAPHIC on May 3 ,
G�pF OqK B
O M
F�ouNT�
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
April 30, 1986
MEMO TO: . Zoning Board of Appeals
FROM: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
SUBJECT: Malloy - Parking Variation
- Flood Plain Special Use & Flood Plain Variation
(3823 York Road)
The Plan Commission, at its April 21st hearing, tabled the Flood Plain Special
Use application pending receipt of more detailed information concerning the
development. In that regard, Mr. Malloy has requested that both of the above
items be tabled to the Zoning Board's June 3rd hearing in order that the entire
application could be heard by the Zoning Board at the same hearing.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BFK/jr
A/a
OF Oqk e9C
O W
G O
o 1?
'44
COUNI ,yy
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
April 24, 1986
Mr. Emmett P. Malloy, Jr.
3821 York Road .
Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
RE: rMalloy - Flood Plain Special Use
(3823 York Road)
Dear Mr. Malloy:
The Plan Commission, at its regular meeting of April 21, 1986, tabled consideration
of the above mentioned application to allow adequate time for submission of
additional information as discussed by Commission members at that meeting, copy'
of draft minutes enclosed.
In order to be heard by the Plan Commission at its May 19, 1986 meeting, all
revised materials must be in this office no later than noon, Monday, May 12, 1986.
Sincerely,
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BFK/j r ,
Enclosure
cc: Norm White, Architect
Donald Eddy, Engineer
l�
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes -2- April 21, 1986
IV MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE (3823 York Road)
- r • wri.r w.�.
Mr. Emmett Malloy, owner; Norm White, architect; and Donald Eddy, engineer; were
present representing this application.
Mr. Eddy stated that, with respect to the Village's flood plain regulations, they
have made application for two items; the first being a Flood Plain Special Use
Permit to allow construction of the addition within the Salt Creek floodplain, and
the second a Flood Plain Variation which would permit construction of the first
floor at an elevation lower than required by Ordinance.
In response to Member Beard, Mr. Malloy stated that the addition would be utilized
for both office and retail purposes.
In response to Chairman Marcy, Mr. White stated that the first floor elevation
could not be raised in order to meet the Village's standards, since that would put
the new retail space approximately three feet above the elevation of the existing
retail floor.
In response to Chairman Marcy, Village Engineer Dale Durfey stated that the use of
ditch areas along the South and East sides of the parking areas for detention
purposes could flood required plantings in those areas. Mr. Eddy stated that the
two ditches would not be so deep as to cause a problem for plants, with the
southerly ditch being only eight inches deep. Don further noted that the required
landscaping along the eastern edge of the parking area could be placed anywhere
within the 100-feet of open space adjoining the parking lot.
Mr. Malloy stated no present plans to increase the number of plantings to screen
parking either along the East or the South edges of the parking lot.
Member Beard stated his potential difficulty with certain portions of the entire
project, although the Plan Commission at this meeting was only reviewing the flood
plain items.
In response to Member Haglund, Mr. Eddy stated that the detention plan presently
designed for the property provides detention for two-thirds of the site, whereas
there is no detention provided with the current development.
Commission members indicated a consensus that additional information should be
forwarded prior to the Plan Commission making any recommendations concerning this
project. Such information is to include a .Site Plan showing the proposed parking
and addition, a landscaping plan, and perhaps a rendering of the new addition and
site modifications which will be part of this project.
Mr. Malloy stated that his property is unique since it borders on the Village of
Hinsdale to the North, South and East, which properties would permit only a 15-foot
setback from York Road. He noted that the size of the proposed addition would not
pay for any massive changes to the parking lot, drainage or landscaped areas.
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes -2- April 21, 1986
1�
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes -3- April 21, 1986
IV MALLOY - FLOOD PLAIN SPECIAL USE (3823 York Road)(Continued)
A motion was made by Member Beard, seconded by Member Stachniak to table
consideration of the subject to the May Plan Commission meeting in order to allow
adequate time for the applicant to submit both the information discussed at this
meeting as well as additional information required pursuant to the Graue Mill
Gateway regulations.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: (5)
Members Beard, Haglund, Sandstedt,
Stachniak, Chairman Marcy
Nays: (0)
Absent: (2)
Members Antoniou, Doyle
MOTION CARRIED. ..
PLAN COMMISSION Minutes -3- April 21, 1986
13 '
G�O�OgkC
vp AO
�COUNS4'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
654-2220
April 17, 1996
MEMO TO: Plan Commission
FROM: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
SUBJECT: Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use
(3823 York Road)
Emmett Malloy, as owner of the Sav-Way Liquor Store at 3823 York Road, has proposed
construction of an addition to the south side of the existing structure. Application
has been made for approval of both a Flood Plain Special Use Permit and a Flood Plain
Variation, since the entire property is located within the 100-year floodplain of
Salt Creek.
The specific item before the Plan Commission is the question as to whether the proposed
construction meets the standards of the Village's Flood Plain Ordinance as contained
in Section 10-34 of the Village Code. As Dale notes in his April 16th memo, certain
items of the proposed plans fail to comply with other Village. ordinances and, therefore,
might require a continuance of this matter until the plans have been corrected. I
would note that with respect to item 2 of Dale's memo, Mr. Malloy has already applied
for a flood plain variation concerning the top-of-foundation elevation which is
scheduled to be heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce F. Kapff
Assistant to Village Manager
BFK/j r
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
(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
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
OF 04K�o
9
G �
4 Y t1
FCOUNt*4'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
April 16, 1986
654-2220
MEMO TO: Bruce F. Kapff, Assistant to Village Manager
FROM: Dale L. Durfey, Jr. , P.E.
SUBJECT: Malloy - Flood Plain Special Use
3823 York Road
I have reviewed the site improvement plan, received March 19, 1986, and offer the
following comments:
1. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood plain map depicts the
high-water elevation of Salt Creek at this location to be 645.0. The site
plan states two (2) high-water levels as 644.5 and 644.75. The subject
property falls within the Salt Creek flood plain fringe.
2. The proposed top-of-foundation of the building addition is at elevation
A¢- 645.75. The flood plain ordinance requires that structures located in a
2 6A flood plain are to be floodproof for at least three (3') feet above the
base flood elevation; therefore, the proposed plan does not comply.
3. Compensatory storage calculations have not been submitted.
4. The proposed ditch along the south lot line and the easterly side of the parking
area is in conflict with the landscape screening requirement within the zoning
ordinance. Also, the proposed southerly edge of parking area is proposed to
be located 6.5 feet from the south lot line which also is in conflict with
the zoning ordinance.
5. The plan proposes the use of precast concrete wheel stops in lieu of curbing
which is in violation of our zoning ordinance.
6. Several drafting revisions remain to be made to the drawing.
7. If the Village should grant a special use for this building addition, the
finalized site plan should comply in all respects to the Building Codes
and Zoning Ordinance. The presently submitted site plan contains several
deficiencies, some of which have been discussed above.
Respe tf lly s bmitted,
f
Dal 'L. Durfey, Jr. , P.E. ,
Village Engineer
DLD/etg
744 Suburban Life GRAPHIC
239 Ogden Avenue
Downers Grove, Illinois 60515
Gentlemen:
Please publish the following legal notice for publication on Aril 19 1286.
LEGAL NOTICE
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
DU PAGE AND COOK COUNTIES, ILLINOIS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals
of the Village of Oak Brook, DuPage and Cook Counties, Illinois, will be held on
Mar 6, 1986 , at 7:30 P.M. in the Oak Brook Village Hall, 1200 Oak Brook Road,
Illinois, for the purpose of considering the application of Emmett Malloy for
a Flood Plain S ecial Use Permit Flood Plain Variation and Zoning Variations
as provided under Section XIII(G) of the Zoning Ordinance of the Village of Oak
Brook, Illinois, Ordinance G-60, as amended, and Sections 10-34 and 10-35 of the
Village of Oak Brook Code, as amended.
The following relief has been requested:
1) Flood Plain S ecial Use Remit to permit construction of a buildina addition
thin the Salt Creek flood lain.
2) flood Plain Variation to j2ermit construction of a nonresidential building
addition for which the top of foundation elevation is less than three (3)
feet above the predicted 100-year flood elevation and is not flood roofed to
that height.
3) Variation from the Rrovisions of Section XI(E)(4) (a) (2)(iii) to 2ermit the
continuance of an entrance drivewaX approximatell 55 feet in width which
exceeds the 30-foot maximum width 2emitted.
4) Variation from the provisions of Section XI (E)(8) to reduce the required
number of earking s aces U having the office and retail uses share the
Rarkin& area bj providing 60 s aces for store and office uses rather than the
80 as required bj Ordinance.
5) Variation from the provisions of Section VIII(E)(4) to permit construction of
a building addition with an approximate 89-foot Setback from York Road which
is less than the 100-foot Required Setback.
6) Variation from the Rrovisions of Section XI (D)(7) to reduce the required
number of off-street loading berths from 3 to 2.
The property may be generally described as 3823 York Road,_ Oak Brook,
Illinois, and the legal description is as follows: Lot 4 in Grape's Assessment
Plat No. 2 of 2art of the West half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36,
Page two
TownshiR 39 North Range 11 East of the Third Princi al Meridian in York
Townshi accordin to the Plat thereof recorded March 12, 1947 as Document No.
517568 in DuPa a County, Illinois.
Permanent Parcel No. 06-36-405-003
All persons desiring to be heard in support of or in opposition to the proposed
Flood Plain S ecial Use Flood Plain Variation and Zoning Variations or any
provision thereof, will be afforded an opportunity to do so and may submit their
statements orally or in writing or both. The hearing may be recessed to another
date if notice of time and place thereof is publicly announced at the hearing or
is given by newspaper publication not less than five (5) days prior to the date
of the recessed 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.
O�OF Oqk B
4
�COUNO'
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD
OAK BROOK, ILLIN015
654-2220
April 15, 1986
Dear Resident,
The Oak Brook Plan Commission arts/or Zoning Board of Appeals,".and the Village
Board will be considering a:
X Graue Gateway Certificate f X Variations
Preliminary Plat °nfo X _Special Use Flood Plain.
Final Plat Zoning Amendment
X Flood Plain Variation
at ,the- meetings as schedeiled on the reverse side of this notice.
The application has been filed by Emmett Malloy
Name of applicant
3823 York Road, Oak Brook
Address
Relationship of applicant Owner
to property
N/A
Name of Subdivision (if applicable)
The. property in question is situated at: 3823 York Road
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:
SEE ATTACHED SHEET
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.
—R-esspectfully yours,
John H. Brechin .�
Village Manager
JHB/ms -
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 April 21, 1986
Zoning Board of Appeals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7:30 P.M. Tuesday May 6, 1986
Plan Commission Meeting (Grlue �ateya� Cert- 7.30 P.M. Monday May 19, 1986
Board of Trustees Meetin i ica e o on. orm c
g. , . . . . . . . . . .} 50 P.M. Tuesday May 27, 1986
MAP OF AREA
D� _W _ _J
1 9 27 = 3420 345
11 25 1 '
n�■n i -- -
... ss«�_ 35
'2w
14. 5soa
--
2D t2' ---
- 3�iz b515
316
00^ _ _ 9603
Uo I3�b _ 3514
_ — - - — 36
1!I 4t 3 Scot
- 36i0
-5407
1-
-_ i:2 506 �r,•� -- •_- ./
3b�a
M'tNNt� 3b2Z
2S S1� � `J � •
: e 37
..�;... is
I 38
Hi 1 39
W •
40
— HISTORIC CRAUE MILL GATEWAY AREA
1
—� 41
1) Flood Plain Special Use permit to permit construction of a building addition
within the Salt Creek floodplain.
2) Flood Plain Variation to permit construction of a nonresidential building
addition for which the top of foundation elevation is less than three (3)
feet above the predicted 100—year flood elevation, and is not floodproofed to
that height. --
3) Variation from the provisions of Section XL(E)(4)(a) (2) (iii) to permit the
continuance of an entrance driveway approximately 55 feet in width, which
exceeds the 30—foot maximum width permitted.
4) Variation from the provisions of Section XI(E)(8) to reduce the required
number of parking spaces by having the office and retail uses share the
parking area bx, providing 60 spaces for store and office uses rather than the
80 as required by Ordinance.
5) Variation from the provisions of Section VIII(E)(4) to permit construction_of
a building addition with an approximate 89—foot Setback from York Road, which
is less than the 100—foot Required Setback.
6) Variation from the provisions of Section XI (D)(7) to reduce the required
number of off—street loading berths frcm 3 to 2.
7) Certificate of Appropriateness for proposed construction within the Historic
Graue Mill Gateway Area, as required by Section VIII—A of the Zoning
Ordinance.
f
�;ce I �
BANK RECEIPT _ RECEIVED
RANSIT S CHECKS S CASH NUMBER DATE NAME DESCRIPTION BY:
NO.
V I L LAG E O F OAK BROOK SIINVALID
WITHOUT
00t p GNATURE
1200 OAK BROOK RO A D
OAK BROOK,
ILLINOIS 54465
PHONE: (312) 654-2220
RETAIN THIS RECEIPT /"
FOR YOUR RECORDS
AFEGUARO BUSINESS SYSTEMS
ORM CR-OTC
_ - 70.2382
719
'4ter rhi Jnc.' NORTHERN e�� TRUST/
13404
Liquor Stores Division OAK BROOK
OAK BROOK. ILLINOIS
GLEN ELLYN-CAROL STREAM
GENEVA-ST. CHARLES
JOLIET-OAK BROOK CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT
NAPERVILLE, ILLINOIS 13404 4/14/86 $ 300.00
r ,
PAY VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
TO THE 1200 Oak Brook Road -
v
ORDER Oak Brook, IL 60521
OF
1180 13 40 4116 1:07 L9 238 281: LOO 790Ile
REMITTANCE ADVICE ATTACHED IS OUR CHECK IN FULL SETTLEMENT OF ITEMS SHOWN HEREON.
AMOUNT
D E S C R I P T I O N DATE INVOICE NO. OF INVOICE DISCOUNT NET
SavWay Liquors - Variance 4/14/86 $ 300.00 $ 300.00
DETACH BEFORE DEPOSITING -.13
AGENDA
VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK
TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 1986 7:30 P.M.
I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER:
Roll Call
II. APPROV ., OF MINUTES: Regular Board of Trustees Meeting of 3/25/86
III. ORDINAWES, RESOLUTIONS, VARIATIONS, PLATS, ETC.:
A. An Ordinance Ratifying and Confirming Execution of Agreement for
Enforcement of Certain Traffic Regulations for Motor Vehicles in the
Briarvrood Lakes Subdivision in the Village of Oak Brook...................................
B. A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of Subdivision Known as Old Mill
Subdivision........................................................................................................
IV. FINANCIAL:
A. Approval of Bill s...............................................................................................
V. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Recommendation - Oak Brook Sports Core - Sign Variation (2606 York
Roadand 800 Oak Brook Road).........................................................................
B. Janitorial Services - Golf Clubhouse (2606 York Road)......................................
C. Fire Station Consol idation................................................................................
D. Report of Activities -
Finance do Library: Trustee Imrie
Personnel: Trustee Winters
Public Safety: Trustee Bushy
Public Works & Traffic: Trustee Rush
Sports Core: Trustee Maher
Zoning do Planning: Trustee Philip
VI. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Proposed Contract - Golf Course Grounds Maintenance Consultant.....................
B. Request for Purchase Order - Ball Machine for Range Number 2.......................
C. 1986 Paving Project - Timber Trails Area.........................................................
D. Liquor License Request - Oak Brook Polo Company.........................................
E. Recommendation: Kramer - Rear Yard Variation
(6 Robin Hood Ranch).........................................................
F. Recommendation: Oak Brook Tech Center - Parking Variation
(2000 York Road)................................................................
G. Recommendation: Christ Church - Yard Variation, Special Use, and Final
Plat (501 Oak Brook Road and 3202 York Road).....................
H. Referrals:
1. My - Flood Plain Special Use (3823 York Road)
Reler to Plan Commission Meeting of 4/21/86 and
Zorfirig Board of Appeals Meeting of May 6, 1986
2. Malloy - Parking Variation (3823 York Road)
Refer to Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of 5/6/86
3. Brinson - Rear Yard Variation (78 Baybrook Lane)
Refer to Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of 5/6/86
4. Stone Container Corporation - Parking Variation (2021 Swift Drive)
Refer to Zoning oar f
g d o Appeals Meeting of 5/6/86
5. Stone Container Corporation - Text Amendment (2021 Swift Drive)
Refer to Plan Commission Meeting of 4/21/86
VII. ADJOURNMENT
V I L LAGO OF ZONING NANCE. FLOOD PLAIN
. t
OAK BROOK
1200 OAK BROOK ROAD t= APPEAL Q VARIATION
OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS 60521 $100 $300
654-2220
VARIATION SPECIAL USE
�J $300 $675
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING
AMENDMENT
TO BE FILED WITH VILLAGE CLERK $650
SPECIAL USE
$400
(Section 2-225, 8/11/81)
----------------------------------------------------------------•----------------------------
ALL APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY PROPER FEE, PLAT OF SURVEY, AND (18) COPIES OF A SCALE
DRAWING, SHOWING ALL PERTINENT APPLICABLE INFORMATION, i.e. , PROPERTY LINES, EXISTING BUILDINGS,
LOCATION OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, ANY BUILDINGS ON ADJACENT PROPERTY WITHIN 100 FEET OF SUBJECT
PROPERTY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE -- FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Date Filed: d Board of Trustees Referral
Notice Published: y'l " $d Newspaper: To/NHS
Date Adjacent Property Owners Notified: y l0• 6 Staff Referral: 3'l g- gE'
Public Hearing Dates: Plan Commission y- Z/ - g6 Zoning Board of Appeals 5'6 - 6z'
Board of Trus tees �- ✓� 'g Board of Trus tees S-Z/- $ 6
(Approval of Ordinance)
FEE PAID: $ 6 75r Receipt No. : ':5'yZ 6 z Received By:
Village Cler
------------------------------------------------------------------
APPLICANT TO COMPLETE
LOCATION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: PERMANENT PARCEL NUMBER 06-36-405-003
LOT N0. SUBDIVISION Graues ADDRESS 3821 S. York Rd.
ZONING . ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION .....
ACTION REQUESTED 1 Variation for construction of building addition whose top foundation is less than
3 feet above the predicted 100 ve ar flood elevation. 2. Permission for construction within a flood
lain.
PROPERTY INTEREST OF APPLICANT: OWNERS S-Kt CONTRACT PURCHASER AGENT t .
OWNER(S) OF RECORD E M Enterprises, Inc. PHONE NUMBER 986-0500
ADDRESS 3821 S. York Rd., Oak Brook ZIP 60521
BENEFICIARY(IES) OF TRUST: PHONE NUMBER
ADDRESS ZIP
NAME OF APPLICANT Emmett P Malloy, Jr. PHONE NUMBER 986-0500
ADDRESS 3821 S. York Road, Oak Brook IL ZIP 60521
I (we) certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any papers
or subm herewith are true to the best of my (our) knowledge and belief.
gnature Applicant Da a signature) Applicant Date
s
NOTICE TO APPLICANTS
Filing Schedule
VARIATION: I'_UST BE RECEIVED APPROXD ATELY SIX (6) WEEKS PRIOR TO THE
PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON THE FIRST TUESDAY OF-EACH MONTH.
AMENDMENT OR
SPECIAL USE: MUST BE RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE 15TH OF THE MONTH FOR PLAN
COMMISSION HEARING ON THE THIRD MONDAY OF THE FOLLOWING
MONTH, WITH ZONING BOARD PUBLIC HEARING TO FOLLOW.
A Variation is a zoning adjustment which permits minor changes of district require-
ments where individual properties are both harshly and uniquely burdened by the
strict application of the law. The power to vary is restricted and 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 equally; it was invented to permit minor changes to allow hardship prop-
erties to enjoy equal opportunities with properties similarly zoned. You must
prove that your land is affected by special circumstances or unusual conditions.
These must result in uncommon hardship and unequal treatment under the strict ap-
plication of the Zoning Ordinance. Where hardship conditions extend to other prop-
erties a Variation cannot be granted. The remedy for general hardship is a change
of the map or the text of the Zoning Ordinance.
2. You must prove that the combination of the Zoning Ordinance and the uncommon
conditions of your property prevents you from making any reasonable use of your
land as permitted by your present zoning district. Since zoning regulates land and
not people, the following conditions cannot be considered pertinent to the applica-
tion for a Variation: (1) Proof that a Variation would increase the financial re-
turn from the land, (2) Personal hardship, (3) Self-imposed hardship. In the last
case, the recognition of conditions created after the enactment of the Zoning Ordi-
nance would encourage and condone violation of the law.
3. No Variation may be granted which would adversely affect surrounding property
or the general neighborhood. All Variations must be in harmony with the intent and
purposes of the Zoning Ordinance.
Names of Surrounding Property Owners
Following 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 occupied by all public roads, streets, alleys, and public ways have been
excluded in computing the 250-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 appear from the authentic tax records of this County.
Name Address
Names of Surrounding Property Owners
Following a're the names •1 addresses of surrounding pro y owners from the
property in question for a distance of 250 feet in all di ctions, and the nLmIber
of feet occupied by all public roads, streets, alleys, and public ways have been
excluded in computing the 250-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 appear from the authentic tax records of this County.
Name Address
Forest p reseryP nistriet 881 W St Charles Rd Lombard IL 60148
Hinsdale Sanitarium - Hospital 120 N. Oak Street, Hinsdale, IL 60521
Office Park of Hinsdale P.O. Box 361, Hinsdale, IL 60521
Charles F. Bluma 3810 Spring Road, Oak Brook, IL 60521
Mildred Phillips Estate, c/o James Morgan LTD 907 N Elm St. 2nd Floor, Hinsdale, IL 60521
Ralph Greco 960 Spring Road, Hinsdale, IL 60521
1st National Bank of La Grange - 1090 620 W. Burlington Avenue, La Grange, IL 60525
Philip Kay 3800 York Road, Oak Brook, IL 60521
Mark M. Anderson ESQ 20 N. Wacker Dr. #2900, Chicago, IL 60606
N F Holdings 950 N. York Road, #201, Hinsdale, IL 60521
NAME ADDRESS
Pioneer Bank do Trust Co #23973 4000W. North Ave., Chicago, IL 60639
Heritage Standard Bank Trust #10033 2400 W. 95th St. Evergreen Pk, IL 60642
Richard F. Bulger, MD SC 211 Chicago Avenue, Hinsdale, IL 60521
Dean F. & Nancy J. Skuble 410 Oak Brook Rd, Oak Brook, IL 60521
Pioneer Bank & Trust #23177 4000 W. North Ave., Chicago, IL 60639
Pioneer Bank & Trust #24286 4000 W. North Ave., Chicago, IL 60639
Jerry A. Goldstone 121 S. County Line Rd, Hinsdale, IL 60521
Kenneth Hayden 950 York Road, Unit 204, Hinsdale, IL 60521
McDonalds Corp P.O. Box 66207 AMF O'Hare, Chicago, IL 60666
Harris Trust & Savings Trust #43292 111 W. Monroe St. Chicago, IL 60603
FNBH L-954 950 N York Road, Hinsdale, IL 60521
Martin Kraus 950 N. York Road Ste. 107, Hinsdale, IL 60521
Paul Naffah 6161 County Line Road, Hinsdale, IL 60521
1 y N
. <:
A
•w(�-. '`. ��, �.:
,�^ �r `Si ��6csrf _1. • t ,..,
�• � t �nter e_ s� ', 3 A A
•• /ZC " �r. hT�", ORTHERN T
+4 J �}1�'ft 'k i 1 spts`rStr� Y df ++ ♦I k $ 13281:
*irk`=f r✓,' t .,;r. n. •y 1
"��`"'kLfQpOI S AS v 'dam" " �G�,: q y� OAK BROOK
r c."y sir.
` c� 4 OAK BROOK IL LINOIS _
. a '•'G �Q'�
^"
EWE xki d` r }i mac,. •,n! �wA!' ." lF':'�i. k��•
GEfVE�S, CHAR[ES �t 2" a> ss } rn sj<+pe�ti�Nry.. � �.
h9MVA1.•L T. .i
i y .IOLIE7•i UPJ%'B� CHECK NO ,'y 'ii" ,DATE.;"5,.f ut `+AMOUNT,}
�t�' •� >Ni4FERVIELE�LL11V01S �� .S ' y '. . �"`�� �. "' tc �';q•" 4m'...-;z?�-';�.,"x� ,}� y
Ar
u'u - ;
_�i•. '�t:'_yyy+ .}F S r ^�3 a»r� �.. Ste` y� *.r�l'i:� Y Srr �� ;�a` 5 I` '�"c.
..S �r 1 ,i �?.�C ,l� L �j.,.ti �J .a�T M^h .� b ttM�'Ml�'�•i `�l P
1�. :,'�,•{rte � ,4' +ky, :r .� `ia �� R .t},f. �y R w�v.��� r�_7?+ �K��',�A t,°l n+r"t�,y,*•'r � �I'�' ti�tr �y�,st��,•
@70 THE y*'.` �:. `! "-�4 •. �L 'qs ra. •� t'F= + ��y��f...�-' .,t`�,��6F=':F" e'a"�,1� �+ � :...°�
� �
r. a OF '^F�`.v n �� ��+g/y. �!i�1- � �� i`i�,a9 p il�� r+' +'fit �}� '�.';�Y�r>.`'••'.'
.40
-
..i
II'0 L 3 28 Lil' x:0719 23B '8,�o�3UR1�?90��'
i
• I,
i
1 I
RECEIVED
BANK RECEIPT DATE NAME DESCRIPTION BY:
ANSIT S CHECKS S CASH NUMBER
NO.
INVALID
VILLAGE O F OAK BROOK WITHOUT
SIGNATURE
♦ 1200 OAK BROOK ROAD 54262
= OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS
C u PHONE: (312) 654-2220
RETAIN THIS RECEIPT
FOR YOUR RECORDS
SAFEGUARD BUSINESS SYSTEMS
FORM CR•OTC