Village of Lombard Legistar System

space other than the proposed space.

He stated that they wish to occupy the old school across the street from the new school

building at St. John's. He stated that Creative Day approached St. John's looking for

space rather than the other way around. A friend of theirs had mentioned that there was

empty space in the old school. They had discussions with St. John's and afterward it

was decided that they could take two rooms on the first floor. He stated that state

agencies such as DCFS, the Health Department, and state Fire Marshal had inspected

the areas they proposed to occupy. The state agencies were considerate of time

constraints involved and after going through the school, it was determined they could

occupy the first floor with some modifications. State regulations mandate that as of

October 1st they have to conform to strict standards for kitchens similar to restaurants -

it has to be a fully commercial kitchen and the heat and smoke detectors and strobes

must run throughout the building. Creative Day plans to do this.

Mr. Dennis stated that Creative Day only plans to have 40 students. He mentioned

concerns about bathrooms and sprinkling and stated that they could never expand to

the third floor as it would require sprinkling and Creative Day couldn't absorb that cost.

After talking to state agencies, they were told that if they stayed on the first floor, there

would be adequate windows for egress.

They were informed about applying for the conditional use after coming to the Village.

They had initial meetings with all the departments and staff told them what they needed

to do. David Hulseberg and other heads of departments asked questions and they were

answered. The answers seemed to be adequate. Recently, they were informed it was

strictly a zoning issue of putting a for-profit business in a residentially zoned area. In

order to address that issue, you have to look at that area and the property to understand

that the area is not predominately residential in nature. He mentioned churches, the

library, parking lots, condominiums and homes. He stated that he had received the

letter of complaint sent by Ms. Ness. He stated that they were informed about the

contentions concerning the new school so they walked the area on Ash Street and

talked to residents including Mrs. Ness. Other than Mrs. Ness and one of her neighbors

who had concerns about St. John's in general, no one had any concerns in the

immediate area about the proposal. A few were actually glad.

Mr. Dennis asked how this could be a precedent. They found out about the decision to

recommend denial earlier this week. He believes there are private day center centers in

churches elsewhere in Lombard and mentioned The Growing Place on Madison. He

stated that there are many large home day care facilities and mentioned websites that

take groups within that area in homes. He also mentioned other facilities in other

communities that have this situation.

Regarding the tax situation at the church, he stated that would be handled easily. The

church will have an income from this which would be no different then them renting out

their hall. From previous experience with churches, the church understands they have

to pay tax on that and that has not been an issue. He stated that the request will not set

an undue hardship or precedent for this community. This use is compatible with the

area and what is across the street. He again stressed that Creative Day approached

the church looking for space. This area has the green space that they require for the

day care. He stated that they were asked to cap at forty children and are agreeable to

that as Mrs. Holtz wants to keep it small. She likes to have a personal relationship with

the kids and their parents. She is not an absentee director -she is always there. He

mentioned that the church may have inadequacies but stated that he could not speak for

the church.

Mr. Dennis then referred to an architect stamped building plan which shows the

improvements they will be making. He indicated that the architect put the basement as

the first floor. The kitchen will have a commercial grade triple sink, prep sink,

convection oven,and freezer and refrigerator. The remainder of the kitchen would be

used by St. John's. The lunchroom would be shared with other uses by the church. He

stated that they do not need to have upgraded toilets right in the room which satisfies

the state agencies. He referred to the removal of walls on the second floor and the

doorways that would have to be cut to make way to the bathroom. The concern about

going through load-bearing walls is non-existent. Creative Day will use classroom

number one and over time would move into the second classroom as enrollment

became bigger.

He stated that with regard to fire equipment there are pull stations and emergency

lighting. Smoke detectors and strobes will be put in the gym and down each hallway.

There will be one in each stairwell, one in each classroom, and one in bathroom. The

windows are of sufficient diameter should they need egress. Air conditioning would also

be put in each classroom.

Mr. Dennis indicated that a schedule could be worked out to use the playground in the

back of the building. CDC has an active curriculum as mandated by DCFS and the

state. There is a library across the street which could be used. Mrs. Holtz also likes to

take field trips on the train and would utilize some things in the area like the pool at

Moran Water Park. He stated that the amenities in the area are conducive to her

business. He mentioned Lilacia Park. He emphasized again the area is very conducive

to the type of drop off and pick up they will be conducting. He mentioned the traffic

study which came back favorably. St. John's has a very structured drop off and pick up

and he explained the procedure. He mentioned their major drop off time would be from

7 a.m. to 8:15 a.m. with pick up time being after 4:00 p.m. resulting in minimal overlap.

He mentioned that the eight spaces on Lincoln Avenue can't be counted toward parking

but they can be used. He stated that there are more than enough spaces to

accommodate both the school and the day care. He stated that staff has said there

should be four spots reserved for Creative Day in the parking lot. He stated that the

parish administrator said there would be no problem with this.

Mr. Dennis discussed the variation for parking. He stated that the church does not have

uses that overlap with the day care times. There may be a rare funeral which might

overlap. The parking spaces are not being used at the same time.

Creative Day will use two classrooms and will have four teachers. He mentioned the

things they have already done to improve the space. They painted one of the rooms

and kitchen at a cost of about $4,000. They have received estimates from Fox Valley

for fire equipment. He had contacted a carpenter and plumber for the kitchen and wall

break outs. They have had the locks changed on doors. They have paid for a traffic

study and the application. He estimated they have spent $10,000 to get to this point of

preparing to occupy the space. He stated that he hopes the Commissioners look at all

the issues and the nature of the immediate neighborhood. He felt that this use would

not adversely affect the residential neighborhood as this proposal will not set a

precedent as The Growing Place has been there for 30 years. He stated that several

home day cares are within the vicinity. Unless staff has done research, there are these

types of small businesses in homes or in churches that have the same impact on the

community.

Chairperson Ryan then opened the meeting for public comment.

Tracy Bingham declined to speak.

Kenneth Bohl, 213 W. Ash St., stated that he lives three homes west of Lincoln on Ash.

He stated that as a neighbor, his impression of Creative Day is that it is a fine

organization. He has met and was very impressed with William and Cheryl and wishes

them the best. He indicated that he takes exception that this is the place for their

business and had three concerns.

Mr. Bohl believes the old building to be inadequate. He believes the proposal is lacking

handicap accessibility and does not see it addressed in the proposal. This is the law.

This is a new use proposed for the building and therefore, should be brought up to

compliance. There are also issues with fire escape. It was stated two years ago that

this was inadequate. Escaping from the window would mean taking a flying leap out of

the windows and he felt that should not be part of the plan. He asked if St. John's tax

advantages as a religious institution had been addressed as this represents an unfair

competitive advantage over day cares in private facilities. He stated that if they are to

have forty children there is an overlap with the school regarding parking. He stated that

he has seen the review group report that some study has been done and that the

parking is adequate. He indicated that as a neighbor, he has tried to get out in time of

traffic congestion and has been totally frustrated. The reality is that people are stopped

waiting blocking the street.

Chairperson Ryan asked if anyone would speak in favor of the petition.

Janet Imbrogno, 14 Lincoln Court, stated that she had come in support of the petition

and that she would like to read a letter of support from another woman that could not

attend. The letter was from Alice Glennon, 331 W. Brookfield Street. She stated that

she has lived in Lombard for thirteen years and is raising three children. She has known

the petitioners for ten years, they have lived in Lombard for twenty-one years, and have

been on many committees. She understands the concerns about the proposal but

asked how many other businesses are in that area? Creative Day is unique and gives a

personal touch. It gives the young children a home away from home feeling with a great

environment. Mrs. Holtz's business will bring in more revenue while they will use other

community facilities. It will be a great asset. The letter stated that she had witnessed

the owners and their relationships with kids who used to go there.

Ms. Imbrogno stated that she has knows both of the petitioners and that they were

looking for a place in Lombard. She said she was trying to help and it was her idea that

they approach St. John's. She stated that Cheryl is Lutheran and a thoughtful person

and she knows how thoughtful St. John's has been in Lombard. She stated that she

thought it was the perfect fit, and she hopes that it can be worked out.

Karen Ness, 219 W. Ash St., stated that she had submitted a letter with complete

objections. She stated that this is a for-profit business wanting to operate in a non-profit,

non-commercial area. She asked if a request like this one was ever approved before.

She asked should the action be approved could any owner be allowed to operate a

commercial business on their property. She mentioned the parking plan that St. John's

has and stated that she wished they would use it. She mentioned how she used to live

in a residential area before St. John's decided to expand. She stated that property

values continue to drop because of St. John's intrusion.

Mr. Dennis offered to respond to the comments made. With regard to the ADA, the

petitioners had not heard back from them. However, they had talked to state agencies

and it was not deemed necessary to be handicap accessible to operate in that building.

With regard to the windows, the egress is for firemen to get to the children and get them

out. If they had to one could hold a child's arm and lower them to the ground. With

regard to parking overlap, there will be four spaces taken all day. The rest is used for

drop off and pick up. All forty kids will not be dropped off or picked up at one time. Part

of the problem with Ash Street is that the parking on Ash is from the condos across the

street who also park in St. John's. With regard to tax advantages, he stated that

Creative Day will pay rent just like anywhere else and that St. John's is looking into

property taxes. There is no competitive advantage; it's just that this space is open and

there are no other sufficient green spaces in Lombard. Creative Day will have four

dedicated parking spaces with signs within the parking lot of St. John's. With regard to

this being a residential area, he stated that while Creative Day is a business, it is also a

school. The Village of Lombard chooses to zone churches as residential and this is like

a campus. There are more parking spaces than there are buildings on that block. He

stated that to say this is a purely residential zoned area is a misnomer.

Chairperson Ryan then requested the staff report.

Stuart Moynihan, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Staff has prepared a

report and is submitting it to the public record in its entirety. Additionally, staff has

received from the petitioner: a letter from the petitioner, five letters of support, and an

interior plan to be submitted to the record.

The petitioner, Creative Day Learning Center, is proposing a private, commercial day

care center at the former site of the St. John's Lutheran School, 215 S. Lincoln Avenue.

The petitioner wishes to occupy two classrooms and an office within the “old school”

building on the east side of Lincoln Avenue. The petitioner will also use the kitchen,

gymnasium, and outdoor play areas at the old school building. The petitioner states that

the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services has reviewed Creative Day

Learning Center's proposal to accommodate forty (40) children with four (4) employees.

Pursuant to Ordinance 5665, which established the planned development, a conditional

use amendment, use exception and parking variation are required.

Both public and private schools are listed as conditional uses within all residential zoning

districts in the Village. Day care centers have not be established by the Zoning

Ordinance as appropriate uses within residential zoning districts as they are listed

neither as permitted uses nor conditional uses. Day care centers, being commercial

enterprises are listed only as conditional uses, only within commercial zoning districts.

In 2005, the Board of Trustees approved Ordinance 5665 granting a conditional use for

a planned development along with a parking variation to allow the construction of a new

private elementary school at 220 S. Lincoln Street, located directly west of the subject

property. During the public hearing process, the property owner indicated that the old

school building was outdated and generally an inadequate learning facility for children.

Due to this testimony, one of the conditions of Ordinance 5665 required that any

proposed day care facilities, pre-school activities, or elementary school activities within

the old school building proceed as an amendment to the conditional use for a planned

development. Therefore, the Village would have the opportunity to review proposals for

any such uses. In addition, since day care centers are not listed as a permitted or

conditional use within the underlying R2 Single-Family Residence District zoning on the

subject property, a use exception is necessary as well.

Creative Day Learning Center plans to lease space from St. John's Lutheran Church

within the old school building. Staff has concerns that these facilities remain outdated

and inadequate for educational uses as was represented during the previous public

hearing.

Staff notes that during a comprehensive review of the property, an item of concern has

arisen. According to the property owner, a second church has been meeting within the

old school gymnasium. The parish administrator has indicated that this church meets

on Sunday from 2:00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m. The church, Rehoboth Empowerment

Christian Church, is not affiliated with St. John's Lutheran but is allowed to use the

gymnasium space for free. As this use is not consistent with the conditions of approval

of Ordinance 5665, the property owner has been informed that a conditional use

amendment would be necessary to allow the church to continue its current operation

within the old school building. In the alternative, the second church could move its

worship service into the church building without the need for zoning relief.

Ordinance 5665 also granted a variation from the required number of parking spaces on

the subject property. As the proposed day care center would be a new use not

providing any new parking spaces on the property, a further parking variation is

necessary.

The Zoning Ordinance considers each use within the overall development as a separate

and distinct use for which parking would need to be provided. Although the existing

parking lot serves both the church and school, primary parking demand on weekdays is

generated from the school activities and not the church.

The Zoning Ordinance requires that a day care center provide two (2) spaces per one

thousand (1000) square feet of floor area. As the two classrooms and office proposed

to be occupied by Creative Days total 2011 square feet in area, the petitioner would

need to provide four (4) additional parking spaces.

The Village's traffic consultant KLOA has conducted a review and has indicated that a

day care center of this size would have a peak parking demand of seven (7) spaces

including a constant demand of four (4) parking spaces for employees. KLOA finds that

these spaces could be accommodated within the parking area in the adjacent

right-of-way or the southern parking lot.

Staff has reviewed the operations of the proposed day care center for compatibility with

surrounding land uses. As part of this review, staff has considered that the area

surrounding St. John's Lutheran Church/School site is particularly sensitive to intensified

uses as many of the properties are residential.

The petitioner has stated that the proposed use would operate in a manner similar to the

school which previously occupied the building but on a smaller scale. It is staff's opinion

that although a private day care facility may operate in a similar manner, the use is

inherently different as a commercial entity. It is the goal of most commercial businesses

to grow into larger, more profitable businesses. Staff believes that the St. John's

campus has reached its usage capacity and that an introduction of new uses may

adversely affect the neighborhood.

KLOA reviewed the proposed development and visited the site to determine the impacts

of the proposed use.

The petitioner proposes to conduct drop-off and pickup activities within eight public

parking spaces on the eastern side Lincoln Avenue. During drop-off and pickup

activities, parents will enter the old school building to bring their children to or retrieve

them from the classrooms. According to the petitioner, the primary times for drop-off will

be between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m. and for pickup between 4:00 and 5:30 p.m.

KLOA finds that the existing drop-off and pickup procedures currently utilized by St.

John's work well, causing little conflict on adjacent rights-of-way.

KLOA has recommended that some spaces within the southern parking lot be allocated

for Creative Day drop-off and pickup as an alternative to the public spaces located

Lincoln Avenue should those spaces be occupied.

The proposed use is contrary to the objectives of the current Comprehensive Plan. As

previously stated, the Comprehensive Plan identifies the property for public and

institutional uses. The introduction of a commercial entity onto a property which is

intended to be used for public and institutional uses sets a precedent not only for that

property but other such properties as well. It is staff's concern that the old school

building will eventually begin to serve a truly commercial function through the proposed

day care use, its future growth, or the introduction of other business entities.

Staff is not supportive the conditional use amendment to the planned development and

use exception as the request does not meets the following standards as required by the

Zoning Ordinance:

A. Standards for Conditional Uses

2. That the conditional use will not be injurious to the uses and enjoyment of other

property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, not substantially

diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood in which it is to be located.

As the subject property is located in a primarily residential area, the establishment of

additional entities, commercial or otherwise, does have the potential to be injurious to

the enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and to diminish property

values. Staff believes that as the subject property, which currently supports multiple

uses, nears its operational capacity, this potential becomes greater.

6. That the proposed conditional use in not contrary to the objectives of the current

Comprehensive Plan for the Village of Lombard.

The Comprehensive Plan identifies the property for public and institutional uses. Staff

finds that, from a land use perspective, a commercial day care center as proposed

would be not compatible with the religious/institutional uses on the property.

B. Standards for Planned Developments

General Standards

4. That the proposed planned development is in the public interest and is consistent

with the purposes of this Zoning Ordinance.

Staff finds that the petitioner's proposal is not within the public interest as the potential

for incompatibility with surrounding land uses outweighs the potential public benefit.

Standards for Planned Developments with Use Exceptions

1. The proposed use exceptions enhance the quality of the planned development and

are compatible with the primary uses.

Staff finds that the proposed use may diminish the overall quality of the planned

development as the proposed use has the potential to interfere with the operations of

the existing uses. The addition of the proposed use is not expected to benefit the

existing uses (other than financially).

2. Proposed use exceptions are not of a nature, nor are located, so as to create a

detrimental influence in the surrounding properties.

For the reasons stated above, staff finds that the use will potentially have a detrimental

influence to the surrounding properties.

Staff does not believe that the Standards for Planned Developments and Standards for

Conditional Uses have been met. However, in the event that the Plan Commission finds

that the standards required by the Zoning Ordinance have been met and that the

proposed use will enhance the planned development, it is staff's opinion that a

recommendation for any favorable action should include the five conditions in the staff

report.

Chairperson Ryan then opened the meeting for comments among the Commissioners.

Commissioner Sweetser stated that the staff report and testimony equate "private" with

"for profit" which is inaccurate and hampers an accurate analysis of this petition. Some

of the daycare centers referred to in the staff report may be commercial enterprises,

such as KinderCare, but other are 501(c)(3)s. We should look at the kind of operation,

regardless of how it may be classified. This petition, being capped at 40 by mutual

agreement, is not growing, so it is not truly commercial as the staff report states.

Commissioner Olbrysh stated that the petitioner had addressed a lot of his concerns.

The history of this site goes back several years. He recalled that when he questioned

the petitioner a few years ago as to what was wrong with the old building, St. John's

replied that it would be better than trying to correct an old, old building. He stated that

one of his concerns, as set forth in staff report, is about code enforcement and life safety

issues in the old building. He stated that he must go back to the church and why they

couldn't use the old existing building. He indicated that he does not think they should

force anything new on the neighborhood. He has driven down that block in the

afternoon and the traffic is a disaster. He mentioned all the amenities and they are

private uses. He has major concerns about it being a commercial endeavor as well as

the life safety issues.

Commissioner Cooper stated that she was not part of the new school discussion and

what the future intention for the old school was.

Chairperson Ryan answered that one of the things discussed at great lengths at that

time was that the old building could only be used for storage and meeting rooms and

that it would not be used for anything for kids. He asked staff to look at the previous

discussions.

Mr. Moynihan read condition #2 of Ordinance 5665:

That upon the opening of the new school, the existing school building shall be used

exclusively for capital plant, storage purposes, offices and/or meeting space. Should

the petitioner or any subsequent property owners seek to operate uses such as, but not

limited to, day care facilities, pre-school activities or elementary school activities within

the old school building, a conditional use amendment will be required.

Commissioner Flint stated that his initial thought was that this use would be similar to

First Church where there is a day care and nursery co-op. One of his concerns is the

life safety issue which needs to be dealt with. ADA compliance is also an issue and that

should be brought up to code.

Commissioner Sweetser stated they should give credence to the state agencies. She

asked if that was something that the Plan Commissioners should accept or if it was their

responsibility to question them and find out additional information.

Mr. Heniff stated that a building permit and a Certificate of Occupancy would be

necessary. This would force the petitioner to bring these issues up to code. The

applicability of ADA requirements would be determined.

Commissioner Sweetser stated that there should be no question one way or another.

She asked if they would have to meet these requirements and if they should condition it

or not. Mr. Heniff stated that this was accurate.

Commissioner Sweetser said the ordinance speaks about St. John's intention to have a

day care center. She asked if that was the case. Mr. Moynihan stated that St. John's

has stated that they have no plans to start their own day care center.

Mr. Heniff stated that the request is for a conditional use amendment to the planned

development. The provision applies to the property and that is why the term “St. John's

or any subsequent property owner” was included.

Chairperson Ryan asked if that could be why ADA doesn't have to be brought up to

code. Commissioner Sweetser stated that we can't assume that. She stated whatever

needs to be done, needs to be done.

Chairperson Ryan indicated that if the ownership still reflects St. John's that could be the

reason why the ADA requirements would be grandfathered.

Mr. Heniff stated that if it is determined they need to meet ADA requirements then they

will have to.

George Wagner stated that it could be added as a condition of approval.

Commissioner Flint stated that they could condition accessible toilets, getting to the

classrooms, etc.

Mr. Wagner stated that the ADA applies where there is new construction or repairs over

a certain amount. He stated he doesn't think it is related to the owner.

Chairperson Ryan stated that he believed that the number is over fifty percent of the

cost of the building. That is why it becomes an important point. It says it's fifty percent

of the cost of the value of the building. The petitioner is talking about two classrooms;

their remodeling could be waived if correct. He asked staff if that was their

understanding.

Mr. Heniff stated that he did not know the full provisions. If they are obligated to make

those changes through the IAC and ADA requirements for new businesses, then they

will complete the improvement prior to occupancy.

Chairperson Ryan stated that using the fifty percent rule they will never be required to

1. The petitioner shall occupy only two classrooms and one office on the first floor the

St. John's Lutheran old school building, making periodic use of the kitchen and

gymnasium in that building.

2. Should the petitioner seek to make a substantial change the proposed use such as,

but not limited to, expanding the proposed day care center by occupying other rooms on

the subject property or increasing the number of children accommodated at the facility

beyond forty (40), a conditional use amendment will be required.

3. Any portions of the existing school building not indicated in condition one (1) shall be

used exclusively for capital plant, storage purposes, offices and/or meeting space.

Should any additional use be proposed beyond these uses, a conditional use

amendment will be required.

4. The petitioner and property owner shall agree upon a location within the southern

parking lot to designate four (4) parking spaces for Creative Day drop-off/pickup, subject

to the review by the Director of Community Development. Signage shall be installed at

these parking spaces indicating that parking is reserved for Creative Day drop-off

between 7:00 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. and pickup between 4:00 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. on

Monday through Friday.

5. Previous to occupying the old school building, the petitioner shall meet all requisite

code compliance and life safety issues. Also, the petitioner shall apply for and receive a

building permit for any interior building improvements.

6. The petitioner shall bring any portion of the subject building, which is to be occupied

by or ancillary to the subject day care facility, into full compliance with the requirements

set forth by the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Illinois Accessibility Code.

the IDRC report and appreciates the efforts of the report, but one assumption being

made is that granting the license will make J. Riley's become a tavern or cocktail lounge.

Ms. Wasserman added that J. Riley's is a restaurant and the business plan is based on

that. She stated that she knows the importance of creating a business plan and sticking

to it, which is what they are doing with J. Riley's. Their menu, décor and floor plan

support that proposition. Ms. Wasserman stated that their desire for the conditional use

is to provide home-style meals with entertainment as people are looking for affordable

ways to entertain themselves. She mentioned that their lunch business is the biggest

profit generator and provides for the most growth potential. Ms. Wasserman added that

J. Riley's sustained financial hardship since opening their doors. She added that they

are a restaurant (not a tavern) and they are not altering the building. Quoting a

sentence from the IDRC report, Ms. Wasserman read "the integration of live music into

the existing establishment would intensify the existing restaurant use which could be

construed as a change of use to a more appropriately labeled "tavern & cocktail lounge"

use, which is neither permitted nor conditional in the B4A District." and indicated that it

was an inaccurate statement. They are not asking for a capital drain on the Village

budget, but just a way to add patrons. She finished by stating that nobody wants

another empty storefront.

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

of the petition.

Doris Dorberger, 19W020 13th Street, indicated she lives in the "backyard" of this

restaurant and spoke against the petition. She stated that she appreciates the staff

report and she referred to the letter her neighbor issued, which is included in IDRC

report. Ms. Dorberger stated that she shares those concerns. She mentioned that the

music would start late at night and based on other operations that have occurred there,

there are already problems that occur in that parking lot late at night. She added that

there are also problems sometimes during the day. Ms. Dorberger stated that there

have been car accidents back there and she is also very concerned about people being

outside talking and fighting. She stated that she appreciates this restaurant making a go

of it, but has concerns being able to sleep in her house uninterrupted.

James Allman, 801 E. Roosevelt, responded to the concerns about music and stated

that it will stay the same as the current jukebox levels and the bands that perform won't

be different than before this time. He mentioned that he has been in bands before, so

when he hires his bands, he knows to keep the music at a level so talking can be heard.

Mr. Allman added that he would personally monitor the music levels.

Chairperson Ryan then requested the staff report.

Michael Toth, Planner I, presented the staff report. The petitioner currently operates a

restaurant (J. Riley's American Café) in the B4A zoning district, which is a permitted

use. The petitioner wishes to integrate live entertainment into the establishment.

Pursuant to the B4A zoning district, restaurants, which include entertainment, dancing,

and/or amusement devices, require conditional use approval.

The petitioner is proposing to designate forty-eight (48) square feet of floor area along

the western wall of the interior of the building for live entertainment. The petitioner has

indicated that there would be no new construction to the interior or exterior of the

building. The petitioner has also indicated that live entertainment will occur only on

Saturday nights with an occasional Friday performance. Any performances would take

place from approximately 10:30 pm to 1:00 am.

Restaurants, not including entertainment and dancing are listed as a permitted use in

the B4A zoning district; however, restaurants which include entertainment, dancing,

and/or amusement devices are listed as a conditional use. Although the entertainment

(i.e. live music) is intended to be a subordinate activity to the principal use (restaurant),

as a conditional use they merit a more critical review.

When the petitioner applied for their business and liquor license in 2007, staff worked

closely with them to ensure that the proposed use operates as a sit down restaurant (a

permitted use) versus a tavern or bar, which is no longer listed as a conditional use (or

permitted) in the B4A District. As a result, the petitioner made certain improvements to

the menu offering "home cooked" meals and provided a partition wall between the dining

area and the bar. Staff feels that the integration of live music into the existing

establishment would intensify the existing restaurant use which could be construed as a

change of use to a more appropriately labeled "tavern & cocktail lounge" use, which is

neither permitted nor conditional in the B4A District.

Compatibility with adjacent residential properties was also identified as a primary

concern within the recently adopted Roosevelt Road Corridor Report, adopted in 2007

as a supplement to the Comprehensive Plan. The Roosevelt Road Corridor Report

ranked 143 different land uses from "highly desirable" to "highly undesirable". As

previously mentioned, the integration of live music into the existing establishment could

constitute a change of use more appropriately labeled as a "tavern & cocktail lounge"

use. According to the Roosevelt Road Corridor Report a "tavern & cocktail lounge" is a

less-desirable use within the Roosevelt Road Corridor. The Report lists taverns and

cocktail lounges as 109th out of 143 uses.

Referring to the public health, safety and morals portion of the standards for conditional

uses, the implications imposed by a change of use could place more of a burden on the

health, safety, and general welfare than the previous restaurant use. Enjoyment of other

property in the vicinity could also be affected by the intensification of the existing use

through the integration of live music and could adversely affect those residential

properties in a negative manner by increasing noise and traffic volumes. Objectives of

the current Comprehensive Plan are not satisfied as compatibility with adjacent

residential properties was also identified as a primary concern within the recently

adopted Roosevelt Road Corridor Report. The Roosevelt Road Corridor Report lists

taverns and cocktail lounges as 109th out of 143 uses.

Staff has reviewed the petition and finds that petition does not meet the standards set

forth in the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, staff is recommending denial of PC 08-31.

Chairperson Ryan then opened the meeting for questions and comment among the

Commissioners.

Commissioner Cooper asked if the hours of the restaurant will change and asked the

owner if they still serve food until 1 a.m.

Jim Allman replied by stating that all hours will stay the same.

Chairperson Ryan indicated other establishments in Lombard that have music and

exampled Casey's and Brio in Yorktown. He asked what makes them any different.

William Heniff replied that Brio is part of the Yorktown Planned Development, which

through the 1965 Yorktown Planned Development provides for entertainment there. Mr.

Heniff stated that he does not have a ready answer for Casey's and is not sure whether

it was granting as a conditional use or if it is a non-conforming activity.

Jim Allman stated that the live entertainment would not be every day - just a couple

times a month. Mr. Allman added that during the summer, they will not have a use for it.

Commissioner Olbrysh asked what types of local bands and type of music will be

playing.

Jim Allman stated that most of the bands will be local and some of those bands will have

members old enough to bring grandkids or other the way around. He added that these

will not be touring bands.

Commissioner Sweetser was curious as far as what an occasional Friday means.

Jim Allman stated that there may be one Friday a month.

Commissioner Sweetser stated that she understands it's approximate.

Jim Allman stated that it's just to generate more attention to the place other than lunch.

Commissioner Sweetser stated that there have more comments from neighbors and

residents and that the current activity without music has been a disturbance for them.

Chairperson Ryan asked Ms. Dorberger if the issues have been in the past or over the

recent past.

Ms. Dorberger stated that she has not personally had any recent issues, but her

neighbor has.

Chairperson Ryan asked if the issues have occurred since J. Riley's came in.

Ms. Dorberger stated that prior to J. Riley's coming in and as well as now, there are

periodic issues. She added that the noise from people out there is inappropriate and

people are racing cars in the parking lot. She stated that when you have music it can

invite different kinds of people. She added that when people drink late, they are noisier.

Commissioner Flint asked if it was this establishment or is it just the whole complex in

general.

Ms. Dorberger stated that she has concerns about what has happened in the past and

this makes it more of a nuisance.

Commissioner Olbrysh stated that he recalls another restaurant being at that location.

He added that this issue is the parking lot and not the business. He mentioned that it is

an enclosed parking lot.

Commissioner Sweetser asked if it possible to condition the live entertainment for a

certain time period. She mentioned that if they want music, we could allow a trial period

of six months, that way to see how it works out. She added that it would be a pilot

situation.

William Heniff stated that his only concern is that when time expires, the question then is

what standards are looked at as an approval or denial for the future. He mentioned one

suggestion to the Plan Commission would be to reference the site plan itself or the

parking lot in front and rear. Mr. Heniff stated that staff cautions this approach because

relief runs with the land.

Commissioner Olbrysh stated that the parking lot in front doesn't meet the required

number of spaces so you need the one in back.

Michael Toth stated that the front provides 48, but you have a situation where those

adjacent businesses are closed (with the exception of the Mexican restaurant). He

added that you could block off the back lot and share the front lot with the Mexican

restaurant.

Jim Allman stated that he doesn't know how much parking they'll need, but he thinks

they will need some of the additional spaces in the back.

William Heniff mentioned that managing the site better might alleviate some of the

issues.

Jim Allman stated that he will monitor the parking lot and if something does happen and

he finds out who it is, they will be banned.

Commissioner Sweetser added that managing the parking lot is a good preventive

measure.

Chairperson Ryan asked the petitioner if he is locked into the proposed hours or if it

Adam Stokes of Nicholson Porter & List, 1300 W. Higgins Road, #104, Park Ridge,

presented the petition. He indicated that they manage Woodlake Corporate Park and

are the owner of 7 parcels within the Center. Their request is straight forward in that

they are asking for relief from the Sign Ordinance. He described the site indicating that

it is approximately 25 acres and each of the 7 buildings in the park have signage which

are approximately 6 square feet. They are requesting that the existing signs remain at

7.5 square feet and also wish to construct 2 additional signs to be installed at driveways

that currently don't have any signage with the same square footage. He mentioned how

their tenancy has changed in the 4 years they have managed the Park. While the

number of tenants has grown, the size of each tenant's space has become smaller.

Buildings having 4 tenants have now expanded to having 7-10 tenants with the square

footage of each tenant space around 3,000-4,000 square feet. Trying to fit all the

names and addresses of the businesses on 6 square feet of signage is not possible.

Lastly, he stated they have visited with Fire Prevention and the Planning Department for

guidance to address these issues and to make a request that was compatible.

Chairperson Ryan then opened the meeting for public comment. There were no

comments in favor or in opposition to the proposal. Chairperson Ryan then requested

the staff report.

Stuart Moynihan, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Staff has prepared a

report and is submitting it to the public record in its entirety. The subject properties are

located just west of Illinois Route 53 and are developed as the Woodlands of Lombard

Planned Development, also known as the Woodlake Corporate Center. The planned

development consists primarily of office uses in both single and multi-tenant buildings.

The petitioner, owner of seven parcels within the Woodlake Corporate Center, is

seeking to construct two (2) new informational signs. The site currently has six (6)

similar informational signs located throughout the development. The proposed signs and

existing signs are seven and one half (7.5) square feet in size. The Zoning Ordinance

allows a maximum of six (6) square feet, therefore the petitioner is requesting zoning

relief for all signs (proposed and existing) for the seven parcels.

The signs will consist of monuments approximately three and one half (3.5) feet in

height. At the top of each sign, a number range will be displayed to identify which tenant

spaces are accessible from the drive aisle nearest to the sign. Additional cabinets

below the number range will be used to display the names and/or logos of tenant

businesses. The signs as currently proposed are not illuminated. The proposed signs

will meet all other provisions of the Sign Ordinance including placement outside of clear

line of site areas.

Mr. Moynihan then reviewed the Interdepartmental Review Committee's comments.

Private Engineering Services stated that all free-standing signs shall be located a

minimum of 15' from any Village owned utility. Fire Prevention stated they would be

supportive of the deviation as the additional sign space should enhance the ability for

emergency responders to see address ranges per entrance from the street.

Planning comments included compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan as the

proposed signage is intended to serve an informational and directional function by

assisting people in finding the appropriate driveway entrance to a particular tenant

space.

Staff does not anticipate any negative effects on surrounding land uses as the

proposed signage is intended to assist in wayfinding for individuals already on Parkview

Boulevard rather than for advertising outside of the planned development. Further, the

signs are not proposed to be illuminated.

Section 155.504(C) of the Zoning Ordinance states that minor changes to a planned

development which would require a deviation in the number, size, type, or location of

signage shall require approval through the Site Plan Approval process. The petitioner is

utilizing this process to increase the allowable square footage of informational signs

within the planned development.

The proposed new informational signs are being requested because the petitioner has

recently increased the number of tenant spaces within 901-939 and 941-955 S.

Parkview Boulevard and no longer have sufficient signage space for the new business

names and addresses. However, it should be noted that one of the existing signs at

901-939 S. Parkview Boulevard was recently increased in size and height without a

permit being issued. The petitioner has agreed to reduce this sign to its original

dimensions to match the other existing informational signs.

Staff believes that the proposed signs will be effective by directing traffic into the

appropriate driveway for each tenant space. This is especially important because wall

signs are not displayed within the planned development by preference of the property

owner.

The Woodlands of Lombard Planned Development does not speak to the issue of

signage. However, a uniform set of informational signage has been established

throughout the planned development. Staff finds that it is desirable to maintain this

consistency in signage.

Staff is supportive of this deviation. The wayfinding function of these informational signs

is important not only for normal traffic but also for emergency services as indicated by

the statement given by the Fire Department. In the event of an emergency, these signs

could assist emergency services in reaching the appropriate tenant spaces as quickly

as possible.

Concluding he stated that staff recommends approval subject to the conditions noted in

the staff report.

Chairperson Ryan then opened the meeting for comments among the Commissioners.

There were no comments or questions from the Commissioners.