Village of Lombard Legistar System

PC 07-23: 1025 E. Madison

A. Approval of a conditional use for an existing religious institution and elementary

school on property located in the R2 Single Family Residence District;

B. Approval of a conditional use for a Planned Development with the following

variations:

1. Allow a variation from Section 155.406 (H) of the Village Code to allow a reduction

in the required open space and approval of a variation from Section 155.508 (C)( 7) to

allow for a reduction in the minimum open space requirements required for a planned

development. Section 155.508 (C)(7) requires that open space in a planned

development must be at least 25% more than is required in the underlying district;

2. Allow a variation from Section 155.602 (C) to deviate from the design and

dimension standards for parking lots;

3. Allow a variation from Section 155.706 (B)(1) & (2) to reduce the minimum interior

parking lot landscaping requirement;

4. Allow a variation from Section 155.706 (C)(1) & (2)(a) to reduce the perimeter

parking lot landscaping;

C. Approval of a development agreement for the subject property.

(DISTRICT #6)

on a property with an existing structure, building and use;

2. A variation from Section 153.226(F) to allow for an Off-Premise Sign within the

requisite front yard; and

3. A variation from Section 153.226(H) to allow for an Off-Premise Sign to be closer

than one-hundred feet (100') from any other freestanding sign. (This relief is not needed

and is removed from the petition) (DISTRICT #3)

William Heniff, Senior Planner, presented the IDRC report and submitted it to the public

record in its entirety. He noted that the petitioner, the Lombard Public Facilities

Corporation (LPFC) authorized him to present the petition on their behalf.

Mr. Heniff then discussed the petition. In 2005 and associated with the development of

the Lombard Westin Hotel/Conference Center, the LPFC and the property owner

entered into a license agreement that would provide for the installation of a free-standing

sign denoting the hotel and restaurant names on the Firestone site. As this property is

not owned by the business advertised on the sign, it would constitute an off-premises

sign. This petition is intended to grant the required relief from the Sign Ordinance

necessary to allow the sign to be erected on the Firestone site.

While it was included within the public hearing notice, the proposed sign will be placed

more than one-hundred feet from the existing Firestone sign on the premises.

Therefore, no relief is required from Section 153.226(H) of the Sign Ordinance.

Referencing the Inter-departmental Review Comments, Private Engineering Services

noted that the petitioner shall provide any supporting documentation showing that the

proposed sign will not conflict with any easements or public utilities.

The proposed sign is proposed to be located on a property that is developed with an

automotive service building constructed in the late 1960s. The proposed sign would

replace an existing shopping center sign already located on the premises. As the hotel

property does not abut any public rights of way, the ability to provide entry signage is

more limited. In order to provide proper direction to the hotel site, an identifier was

desired along Butterfield Road. He then showed two exhibits depicting the location of

the sign on the property.

Referencing the sign exhibit, the sign is intended to advertise the businesses located

within the hotel/convention center - Westin, Harry Caray's and Holy Mackerel. The

proposed sign is primarily intended for way-finding purposes more than for general

advertising purposes. The sign design is intended to blend with the existing and

proposed signage located throughout the Yorktown Mall property itself.

He concluded by noting that the 1965 approvals for Yorktown Mall did not specifically

address off-premises signage. While the 2000 planned development amendments

provide for approval of signage deviations by the Plan Commission, the Ordinance does

not allow for off-premise sign approval in this manner. Therefore, the Plan Commission

must make a recommendation to the Board of Trustees on this petition.

Chairperson Ryan then opened the meeting for public comment. No one spoke in favor

of or against the petition.

Chairperson Ryan then opened the meeting for comment from Plan Commission

members. Commissioner Sweetser asked for clarification regarding condition #2,

asking if the condition satisfactorily addresses Harry Caray's and Holy Mackerel's

signage needs. Mr. Heniff noted that the condition referenced the 70 Yorktown

Shopping Center property. As they are functionally sub-tenants to the hotel on the

property, the condition would meet their needs. The condition was written in a manner

to preclude other types of advertising on the sign.

It was moved by Commissioner Olbrysh, seconded by Commissioner Burke, that

this matter be recommended to the Corporate Authorities for approval subject to

conditions. The motion carried by the following vote:

Flint, Olbrysh, Sweetser and Burke

William Heniff, Senior Planner, presented the IDRC report and submitted it to the public

record in its entirety. He noted that the petitioner, the Long Pherson Associates LLC

authorized him to present the petition on their behalf.

The Yorktown Center has prepared a signage package, which includes the addition of

three Shopping Center Signs. Each of the proposed signs will be approximately 168

square feet and serve as identification to the Yorktown Center. He noted that the Sign

Ordinance caps the maximum area for Shopping Center Identification Signs which shall

not exceed one-hundred-fifty (150) square feet. Per a request of the Village, the petition

is proposing to add the text "Lombard, Illinois" to the base of the sign, below the

extended "Yorktown" letters. While the sign as originally designed would meet code, the

additional text would create a sign area variation.

He displayed the proposed sign package and denoted the design and location of the

signs. He noted that the three proposed signs would replace four of the existing

perimeter pylon signs. The existing pylon signs being removed once served the

purpose of identifying the Yorktown Center, but were in need of replacement for

aesthetic reasons. There are other signs identified within the signage package;

however, relief is not necessary as they are within the parameters of the Sign

Ordinance.

As part of the original planned development agreement for Yorktown Shopping Center;

freestanding signs were permitted at each entrance. He stated that the petition meets

the response to standards as noted in the IDRC report.

George Wagner, Village counsel, asked Mr. Heniff to address how the sign meets the

standards for the existing Yorktown Mall planned development. Mr. Heniff noted that the

1965 and 1968 planned development approvals did not address signage issues beyond

the allowable number of signs. The petitioner is following the provisions of the planned

development approval in this regard. With respect to the sign design, the intent is to

ensure compatibility of the new sign with the existing development within the mall itself.

The sign base will be of a masonry design, similar in nature to the Shops on Butterfield

addition to the mall and also ties in with the existing exterior appearance of Carson Pirie

Scott.

Chairperson Ryan then opened the meeting for public comment. No one spoke in favor

or against the petition. He then opened the meeting for comments among the

Commissioners.

Commissioner Olbrysh confirmed that the proposed signage would be up-lit and would

not be internally lit.

Commissioner Burke asked for clarification as to what they were approving. He noted

that other signs in the center are being changed and he wanted clarity as to what was

under their purview. Mr. Heniff noted that the relief only applies to the three new

lower-monument "Yorktown" signs. The other signs and their proposed changes can be

approved as a matter of right. Staff offered the additional information within the report