Village Hall |
255 East Wilson Ave. |
Lombard, IL 60148 |
villageoflombard.org |
Donald F. Ryan, Chairperson |
Commissioners: Martin Burke, |
Stephen Flint, Ronald Olbrysh, |
Ruth Sweetser, Rocco Melarkey |
and Sondra Zorn, Staff Liaison: William Heniff |
Absent member was Daniel Broderick. |
Staff included: William Heniff, Senior Planner; Margaret Gibbs, Planner I; and Janet |
Petsche, Legal counsel to the Village. |
Chairperson Donald F. Ryan, Commissioner Stephen Flint, Commissioner |
Ronald Olbrysh, Commissioner Ruth Sweetser, Commissioner Sondra Zorn and |
Commissioner Martin Burke |
Chairperson Ryan called the order of the agenda. |
Mr. Heniff read the Rules of Procedure as weritten in the Plan Commission By-Laws. |
Vince Fontana, Kurtz 701 Lee St., Des. here to represent BP. He showed presentation |
boards. He refeered to their commercials and senstive to theenvironment. introduced |
(BP beyond petroleum). explaination of their canopy. He described the canopy |
consistihng of solar collectors to collect electricty to service pumps and lighting. The |
surfaces on building and canopy car wash has light relecting services which allows |
lower levels of lighting in evening. Kurtz works for other fueld ocmpany the lighting |
provided by BP is 1/2 provided than other stations. The dispensers attached to columns |
which allow a less cluttered look and state of art with internet access. He referred to the |
site boardand explained how they incorporated 3 lots, 61,500 sq. fet. have generous |
landscaping and he hsowed the landscaping presentaiton board. He described the |
landscaping, the detention pond the retaining wall and will provide a fence around the |
site. The canopy is described as a starter gate with the dispenser attached to the |
column. A slight variation of the plan. the undergrouhd strage tanks to the east side |
instead of west side. this allows the movement of the canopy on the convenience store. |
this allows the cashier to have better viewing of the pumps should they need to stop the |
fueling in case of an accident. He showed the fire truck plan and showed the circulation |
and 17ft. clearnace to allow for the height. Tank delivery wouuld be from Roosevelt |
exiting onto Highland. He pulled back an area to allow a wider turn for the tanker trucks. |
The conveience store is 4,200 sq. ft. and he shoed another presentation board with |
interior photos. He desscribed the interior of the store and where things would be |
situated. He mentioned a sopyhiscated look to avoid the look of clutter. The parking |
provided for 32 cars, 3 additional cars shows on the plan once the canopy is moved |
toward the east. Stacking for car washis parallel to Roosevelt Road, stacking for 8 |
cars. The building designed within the code of lombard, providing sprinklers in store |
and car wash. Their signage, more presentation boards, proposing 3 signs on conve. |
store and he described each and what they identify. The only sign on car wash is "car |
wash" with diectional signs for entrance and exit. The signage on canopy is 2 logos |
each 7 sq. ft. He called attention to page 7 of staff report that states there is a non |
illumiated strip that goes taround the facia.....using a neon which uses al lot less than |
neon and will appear on 3 sides. He described their ID sign at the corner and gave the |
dimensttions which is smaller than allowed by code. the material board shows th3e |
building materials and described the materials, colors and where each would be used. |
He concluded that they are happy to provide and feel they have an atrractive building |
and used site very well. |
Jan Fiola, high level understanding of BP and market. BP has a great capital coming |
into the market. the new facilities being very well received. look to site rebuilt within the |
end of the year. |
No one prsent to speak for or aingst. |
Heniff gave staff report. A number of action petierioner looking for and noted in staff |
report. They submitted preoimary plans and have been refined via staff and gov. |
entitites. He gave location of property and the current businesses. he gave the request |
and stated they would be razed and described the new site. He mentioned the Sharkos |
site to be annexed to be reviewed by the BOT> He mentioned the IDRC comments and |
will be worked out if project approved. |
Planning - Comp Plan - consistent with the Comp Plan. Gave the surrounding land uses |
and consistent with uses along Roosevelt Road. Tio the south is a strip center and 3 |
residential buildings which are zoned commercial, so trans. setback not required. He |
mentioned the variation that has since been withdraw and does wmeet the setback req. |
of the B3. He gave the history outlining the annexations of the different sites and the |
zoning of each. Conditional uses: gasoline sales - 16 fueling locations, 24 hour, 7 day |
facility. Car wash - vehicles queue on north side and exit on south. site accommodates |
the vehciles. Two princial buildings - the car wash and conv. store. Outdoor storage - |
seasonal products and the storage location. Many stations use these areas for storage |
so it is acceptable and the conditiona of leaving 4' of space. PD with Signage |
Deviations - staff feels the proposal is consistent . THhe LED trim is okay per code and |
does not constutute additionaal signage. The overall petitioner, he mentioned the |
village's traffic analysis which would decrease. ri/ro be mainted to site. He mentioned |
the high island on Highland Avenue which would not be altered to have a left turn lane. |
He mentioned the elevational drawings - similar to new BP stations. He mentioned the |
car wash and the relief of landscaping to break up the solid wall. Staff recommends |
approval with conditions. |
Commissioenrs: |
RS - Car wash exits on west side and it should be corrected. The cross access |
easement - the design will allow for that? BH - they will get agreement of adjacent |
property owner and may lokk at that. RS - the site deisgn will allow for that. Also the |
letter that was attached for the remediation of the site and the release of gasoline in |
1991. What does that entail? BH - did receive that correspondecen and the rep. have |
researched and can respond. Ja n Fiola, refererd to amoco not doing anyting to spaiol.. |
they documented and when they removed all the storage tanks, clean up the soil, and |
put in the new tanks. They arewell aware of it. What extent? They have a corrective |
aciton plan with the state and they come out to the site and they are part of the |
correceitve action plan. Once you meet that than the pw and everyting would be fine? |
Jan - they will continue to monitor. Rayn - subject to the state's approval. Jan - yes. RS |
- monitoring off site what role does village play? BH all controlledc by state. SF - would |
they say the property is clean Jan - yes. |
RO - compliment the new proposal great improvement. He questionwed the circulation |
of how they would access the car wash if they entered going in off of Roosevelt, and |
how they would exit and then go back east on Roosevelt. Jan - they could exit highland |
and then turn right on Roosevelt. RO - could be dangerous. She explained how she |
thought the traffic circulation would go and thats why they had the canopy betwen the |
parking and dispensers to allow more space. RO - underground vaul in addition to |
detention pond. Fontana - all detention wll have oversized underground storm sewers to |
allow for additional water to be collected and released and not overtax the sewer |
system. |
RS - the arrangement can traffic enter fro either side. Jan - they can enter from either |
side. |
It was moved by Commissioner Sweetser, seconded by Commissioner Flint, that |
this matter be recommended to the Corporate Authorities for approval subject to |
conditions. The motion carried by the following vote: |
Enactment No: Ordinances 5121-5125 |
Developer anda rchitect of proposed project. Two drawings of landscape pland/site plan |
and the rendering. He refered to site plna for 2 guilding to replace one building. he |
explained what was currently on site. Will be razed and 2 strucutes a covenience store |
and a car ash. Fuel dispensing canopy paralledl with 22n dstreet. r/i , r/o nothing to be |
changed. 15 parking spaces to provided. detention pond serving the condos across the |
street and the rental housing norht. providing underground detneiton storage. the |
building shows the canopy, car wash. the building masonry, bricks nad block with |
different textures and coclors and pointed to example. he expalined where the materials |
would be situtatyed on the buildings. |
No one to speak for or against. |
Heniff gave staff report. the peroperty at n/e corern of 22nd nad fineley. pevi9us gas |
station use. he gave the petiterion's request. IDRC comments. he called to attention |
that the engineering will work on site. Planning - compa plan identifies neighborhood |
commercial use and the proposed use is more consistent. the surrounding land uses - |
he described the last use and its history - this is less intesen and be better use for site. |
Zoning history - union 76 which was a permitted use. the auto service remained on |
premises. # of cu with this petition. Gasoline sales - provides for smoother flow - most |
traffic entering from 22nd street. petiitioner states not a 24 hr. facility nor will outdoor |
sales will not be conducted. Car Wash - conveyor type of ststem, sufficent queing, but |
the fence ont he north side should it ever be removed a condition that it would be |
replaced. Staff supports this use as it is consistent with modern stations. Tran. yard |
setback variation - to accommodate car wash circulation and an escape lane. the |
variations provide signifacnt buffer from the adjacent properties and additional green |
space. Requested sign ordinance deviations for canopy and wall singage on petitioners |
plans. no text or symbols on nort5h side due to properties to the north. All citgo signs |
total less than permitted by code. |
Other items - village traffic consulstant - 75 additional trips - ther/i, r/o is one way to |
address any addiitional trips. includes pass by trips. |
Landscape plans - acces on east to cove plaza. staff recommends additional plantings |
o the north side of the property for visual relief. |
Elevational drawings - described the materials - |
staff approval with conditions. |
SF - on the elevations show concrete block is any paint or stain BH - not painting it. |
RS - terms of back elevations is plain and that is the north elevation. concerned about |
the line of sight for the folks to the north there should be something comperable as well. |
BH - staff looked at the 6 ' solid wall, the concern or a trade off RS - maybe break it up |
woith another color . Also, the some electricty available of the highway vehciles does |
the company giave any???????? |
RO - based on illustration a great improvement - a concern is the 6' fence. I've seen |
better looking fences. LIke the positionin of the car wash so there wont be |
lines of traffice |
MB - Questioned the recommendation for landscaping and whether that should be a |
comdition BH - will be provided by code. |
It was moved by Commissioner Olbrysh, seconded by Commissioner Zorn, that |
this matter be recommended to the Corporate Authorities for approval subject to |
conditions. The motion carried by the following vote: |
Enactment No: Ordinance 5134 444 W |
Laura Swicki, Equiva Services, Schaumburg, on behalf of Shell Oil. We were requested |
thru village to volunatrity proeprty at R & M. have worked with staff and have agreedd to |
voluntiraily annex and agree to conditions in staff report and look forward to working with |
village. |
No on e to speak for |
Nancy Marrick, Schhol street, speaking on behalf of her mother. Was cocnfused by the |
drawing that was drawn and wondering if that wwas all there was to it. want to make |
sure no other changes or expansion and jhust annexation and water. 20 homes have |
no water, serwes and would like to be annexed with the shell station everyone else has |
and we are excluded. |
Laura rebutted that the only thing they were prosing to address annexation and water |
and have no other plans or changes or expansion. |
Margaret gave staff. she gave location and one of several proposed annexation along |
the corridor. property contingous via church located to the east. the property developed |
as shell with car wash and conveient mart. she gave th locations of each and no site |
imrpvoments associatied with this petition. She gave IDRC comments. Planning - CC |
and complies. Surrounding land uses - includes wide variety of uses and complies. |
Zoning Ordinance - She gave the request and gave a history of the county approval in |
1984. staff belives the request are appropriateand the site is well mainteed, |
logicaldesign and 2 lots are acceptable. Signage - she descirbed all the signs are the |
location and stated they are appropriate with gas stations in the past. Freestanding sign |
in clear line of site - she gave dimenstions - a portion of property taken for right of way |
improvements. sign is now partially located on row. it does not cause a clear line of site |
due to its location on a hill. Staff recomends a administrative plat of ocndolidation |
cvombining the site into one. |
staff recommends approval of request with conditions. |
No comments. |
It was moved by Commissioner Sweetser, seconded by Commissioner Olbrysh, |
that this matter be recommended to the Corporate Authorities for approval |
subject to conditions. The motion carried by the following vote: |
Enactment No: Ordinances 5117-512 |
Natalie Grindell representing Sign Company. Petitieron request sign code to sllow |
electrinic sign board. want to hhave an attracctive sign will get rid of existing sign and |
will improve and enhance sign. No requesting anything allowed by code and the |
proposed sign is much less than code. Can havemanual message but no electronic |
message board. the manual boards fall into disrepar more often, the lED is more slkeek |
, self contained, and have a better appearance. the manual letter usually are gone, |
subjec to vandalism. this is aesthice and provides more than manual boards. you can |
communication more town things that themanual boards cannot do. think that the lED |
look nicer than the manual ones do. |
Owner of facility, enjoyed being memeber of community, and have rehabbed building |
and this is the next step in improving the building. |
No one for or against. Margaret gave the request. She gave the dimensations and |
deceibed the sign that is being proposed. She gave what is allowable by code. |
Theproperty has width of 67'. No ocmments. Planning - comp plan the use complies - |
Surrounding land uses - 4 manual change copy signs along Rooseelt Road located on |
north side. Heritage has a sign allowed by code. Staff believes that the proposed ign is |
not compitable with surrounding alnd uses. Compatibility with Zoning and Sign |
Ordinance - Read from staff report. Landscaping Requirements - should the petitioner |
received approval of their request signage landscaping will be required. She responded |
to the p[etitioner's responses and offered staff's responses. Read from the staff report. |
Staff believes that a hardship is proved and they can meet code by instaling alternative |
signage that is consistent with code. |
2. Read off report. The petiitieorn's property is typical of the B4 properties along |
Roosevelt and most do not meet min. lot width and requirements. |
3. ordinance has not caused the hardship as the signage requirement is applied |
consistently. |
?Alternative to changable copy isng would be to construct a freestanding sign or a |
chnageable coy sign that compli9es with code. Staff finds that sign built to code would |
provide adequate visiability and staff ofered the recommendations that comply with sign |
ordinance.. They can construct a larger freestanding sign, increase the height of the |
sign, stagger the location of sign, |
4, grantin gthis request will be determental to the public welfare and injurous to other |
property . |
5. |
Staff recommends denial. |
Commissioners: RS - The intne to ordinacne is to "limit the sign to larger commercial |
developmenets and want to udnerstand whay that is the case. the requirements is so |
that the sign and its potention for changing and moving wouldn't be too distracting? |
Gibbs yes to limit to larger developments, if the small lots could have it would be |
distracting factor. RS - there is a variety of ways started to agtee with reocmmendation |
but could have a sign that reads the same but what do the |
Margaret 2 seconde intervals without changing messages. code has limit to turnover |
and clutter. RS - could be limited further if there wwss a variation. BH - it oculd be done |
one of the larger issues does change the nature of the corridor. we look at if it was |
allowed p-er code and you see a series of illuminating signs and creates an additional |
glow and illimuniation and does detract from overall effective ness of the corridor. |
Ryan - if small lots starting putting them up concerned about traffic injuries and |
conditions is trying to read. |
RO - cased some concern - the rational with smaller properties is limited and will have a |
circus atmosphere along the corridor compared to the larger lots size. they are on a |
very small lot and could set a precedence. |
SZ could be very overwhelming and could be distracted. SF - agreee creatinga |
precedence. MB - cocncur wtih RO settting precedence and also with aesthics. |
It was moved by Commissioner Olbrysh, seconded by Commissioner Flint, that |
this matter be recommended to the Corporate Authorities for denial. The motion |
carried by the following vote: |
Enactment No: 234 W. Roosevelt Ro |
Rich Reichert, Menardsof Lombard, here to request 2 cond. uses at the Rohlwing road |
location for propert zoning for a licensened motor vehcile seller. the stateo fo illinois |
requires licensed trailers to be approved by village. the second use is to retail sales and |
storage in front of store . the display would include switnsets, snow throwers, lawn |
mowers and willl behcanaged on seasonability. store is large but most menards have |
display outside. one time a year they erequest a separate license for christmas tree |
sales. will comply with 4' walk. The trailers will be displayed and will have only 6. None |
of products will be in \parking lot and all displays will be covered. |
No one to speak for or aginst. |
Heniff gave staff report. Mendards 2 cond. uses. defined the motor vehcile in the |
ordinance. He also gave the second request. named the items that will be stored |
outside near stores entrance. Compat. with comp plan - already on premises and is |
cmopitable. Surrounding land uses - compitable. Zoning ordinacne - outdorr sales |
through a temporary use permit. since the ability to display products outdoors |
throughout the year, a conditional use permit is being sought. No passenger vehciles |
thsese vehicles are similair to what are sold at other stores and other menards. they are |
plated and regulated by state and they look to localmun to sign off on it which brought |
this to the forefront. These trailsers are 5x5 and pulled by tractors or by motorized |
vehicles. staff is supportive provieded that the conditional use ofr motor vehicles sales |
is limited to the sale of assembled trailers. Staff recommends approval subjec to |
conditions. |
RO - the the 4th point in staff report - 4 of walkway shall lbe provieded - is that a code |
requirements or is a policy? BH - ADA requiresments even though this is private |
property we need to to allow for this. RO - will be the 4 feet togheter ? BH is has to be |
allowed. RO - assume the outside yard it curbside because it can't be in parking lot. BH |
yes. it will not be within the parking lot. |
It was moved by Commissioner Flint, 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: |
Enactment No: Ordinance 5131 1000- |
Two items for refernce: 1. memo future text amendements. will be going into new |
fiscal year and identifietyin items by BOT or by staff of what you may see in the future |
for workshop or petitions. Also the topics in addition to those a proposed amendment to |
fences for corner lots. If you have any other you would like to see other please let us |
know. |
2. E- mial addresses - would like to do if they want to provide an e-mail you can send |
an e-mail intead of phone calls as well as if things we want to share concepts it would |
make it easeri. staff would encourgage that means. |
RS - Code talker mailing could be e-mailed to them instead of postage. |
First Church of Lombard - Site improvements located at Main and Maple. proposal |
subject to pc meeting somethime later in 2002. would like to get thoughts. He gave the |
current site improvements on the lots, as well as the historic significance. A new church |
was constructed on the south end of the site that is now the functional church. the |
changes involve constructiing anew addition that would connect the church with the old. |
the parking lot would be expanded by demolsihing the single family homes . To facilitate |
the developement he mentione dthe reequired actions. STaff's preliminary thoughts |
were: See page 2. First it must be architecturally compitable . the building addiitonal |
should be set back an approproiate distance. |
cross access betwen parking lots . |
Staff is seeking input from the PC on this issue. to share with petitioner |
RO - his thought is that if they receive a petition, he would like to see a letter that this |
additiona to the original church will not jeoparide a historical landmark. Will be against if |
it would jeoparize its historical status. |
RS - streetsacpe should remain consistent. any thought as to what kind of materials |
and how that could work. or will you wait till they show you something and then react? |
BH - it will be an arch challenge. one option is deolition and pulling it out that way. we |
are going to closely work with thjem and meet theg oal that is compitable whether the |
way you look at it. |
Ryan - trouble with visualizing where the additional will be ? BH where the playgorund |
areas is they would bring it out to the north. Off of Maple. Would be against bringing it |
closer to Main Street. |
RS - more space ffor the drive off ofmain street. BH right. RS - if that stays the same |
there is only one laneand one point for traffic exit onto Ash and when they increase the |
parking I don't think that would be safe. SF - need cross access with historical society. |
might want to mandate cross access. |