MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE PLAN COMMISSION AND ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
FOR THE CITY OF COUNTRYSIDE, IL
HELD IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6, 2011

Chairman Fullmer called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Secretary Lube called the Roll of Members physically present:

PRESENT: Chairman Richard Fullmer, Jr., Secretary Robert Lube, Mr. Jim Jasinski, Mr. Charles Stoub, Mr. Daniel Moss, Ms. Tina Grotzke, Mr. Crecencio Gonzalez IV, Mr. Mark Benson.

ABSENT: Mr. Richard Toth

ALSO PRESENT: Atty. Erik Peck, Ald. Pondelicek, CDP Swanson, Ald. Smetana

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

The first order of business was approval of the minutes of the March 2, 2011 meeting. Mr. Gonzalez moved to approve the minutes as presented, seconded by Mr. Jasinski and carried unanimously.

Chairman Fullmer stated the Rules of Proceeding for the hearing before the Plan Commission – Zoning Board of Appeals will follow a strict order of presentation. A sign-in sheet for interested persons is located at the podium. This hearing is being recorded. Please silence all cell phones and pagers.

Chairman Fullmer changed the order of procedure tonight and the Board will hear the 9640 W. 56^th St. matter first.

PUBLIC HEARING RE: 9640 WEST 56^TH STREET Chairman Fullmer read the Notice of Public Hearing published on March 17, 2011 in THE DOINGS NEWSPAPER as follows:

Consideration of a variance request to increase the maximum allowable floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.35 (35%) to permit construction of a pool enclosure which will be attached to the existing single family residential home in accordance with portions of the City of Countryside Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance):

Consideration of a variance to Section 10-5C-6: Structure Requirements A – maximum floor area ratio, Title 10, Chapter 5 of the municipal code to permit an increase to the maximum floor area ratio of 0.35 (35%)

The applicant is Mr. Louis Ayala, property owner, at the real estate commonly known as 9640 West 56^th Street, Countryside, IL 60525.

Mr. Gonzalez noted inconsistencies with addresses in this area – he asked to refer to the matter as 9640 – 56^th St. The comment was duly noted by Chairman Fullmer. Mr. Stoub moved to open the Public Hearing in this matter, seconded by Mr. Lube and carried unanimously. Mr. Robert Skik, contractor, represented Mr. Ayala. He was sworn in by Chairman Fullmer. Proofs of Notice were received by the Building Department.

Staff presentation made by CDP Swanson: He encouraged the audience to voice their opinions and ask questions at the appropriate time. The property owner in this matter wishes to enclose an in-ground pool and attach that enclosure to his home to make it a year-round pool at 9640 – 56^th St. Mr. Ayala is retired with many grandchildren and plans to fully utilize the pool. The current zoning is R-3 one family; estimated acreage is .34; Mr. Ayala seeks a variance to permit construction of the pool enclosure and attachment to the existing residential home. The aerial photo depicts the single-family home, a small accessory garage at the rear and the in-ground pool. There are single-family homes on three sides of the property; commercial on the north. The Plat of Survey shows the pool in the rear yard 10-15 feet from the home. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) on an R-3 lot is either 0.30 (30%) for a single-family structure with a detached garage or 0.35 (35%) for a single-family structure with an attached garage. The proposed site plan shows the pool building of 1,740 s.f. attached by two corridors to the single-family home, increasing the existing home from 4,744 s.f. to 6,484 s.f., or approximately 538. s.f. above the maximum allowable. The proposed FAR would be approximately 38%. The property is approximately 16,988 s.f.; the FAR cannot exceed 5,945 s.f. thus requiring a variance to section 10-5C-6. That concludes the staff presentation.

Mr. Skik stated that new blueprints have replaced the current site plan; they have decided to remove the outdoor fireplace. Mr. Skik brought the new blueprints to the desk and several members reviewed and discussed same. Mr. Sweeney, city electrical inspector, reviewed the underground electrical service which terminates in an enclosed panel in a basement closet. Mr. Lube stated if the pool ceases to exist the structure must be removed as well. Ms. Grotzke stated that this is not a hardship; she believes it is excessive. Mr. Gonzalez echoed the same sentiments; it is an extension of the house. Mr. Ayala is only cutting a 12 trench foundation, not adding anymore concrete.

Mr. Fullmer asked for comments from interested persons – suggestion made to take the existing garage down; that would bring the numbers down and make it work. None of the parties have seen the new drawings. Mr. Skik will bring in the final accurate drawings next month. Mr. Stoub moved to continue the Public Hearing to May 3, 2011, seconded by Mr. Gonzalez and carried unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARING RE: 5550 SOUTH BRAINARD AVENUE

Chairman Fullmer read the Notice of Public Hearing published on March 17, 2011 in THE DOINGS NEWSPAPER as follows:

Consideration of variances and a special use request to permit an existing electronic sign to portions of the City of Countryside, IL Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) as follows:

Consideration of a variance to Section 8-5-9 A-1 A; Area, Title 8, Chapter 5 in the Municipal Code of the City of Countryside to permit an existing electronic sign which exceeds the maximum twenty square feet.

Consideration of a variance to Section 8-5-9 A-1 C; maximum intervals, Title 8, chapter 5 in the municipal code to permit an existing electronic sign which changes more than six times per hour.

Consideration of a variance to Section 8-5-9 A-1 D; movement restriction, Title 8, chapter 5 in the municipal code to permit an existing electronic sign which utilizes flashing, scrolling and blinking characters.

Consideration of a special use to Section 8-5-9 A-1 K; permitted signs in business zoning districts; special use permit: Title 8, chapter 5 in the municipal Code to consider an existing electronic sign.

The applicant is Mr. Matthew Fuller, business and property owner, at the real estate commonly known as Fuller’s Car Wash, 5550 South Brainard Avenue, Countryside, IL

Ms. Grotzke moved to open the Public Hearing in this matter, seconded by Mr. Jasinski and carried unanimously. Proofs of Notice were received by the Building Department. The applicant, Mr. Matthew Fuller, was sworn in by Chairman Fullmer.

Staff presentation made by CDP Bryan Swanson. At the February 28, 2011 Infrastructure Committee meeting existing electronic signs constructed prior to the City adopting section 8-5-9 A were discussed. Two existing signs are Fuller’s Car Wash and Flagg Creek Golf Course; recommendation was made to have both businesses appear before the PC/ZBA to request variances to operate their existing signs.

The first sign is Fuller’s Car Wash at 5550 Brainard Avenue with B-2 zoning classification and a special use designation for the car wash business; property size is 1.38 acres. The requested consideration is a variance and special use to allow an existing electronic sign which does not meet the standards set forth in section 8-5-9A. The property is located at the NW corner of Plainfield and Brainard surrounded by commercial property. The existing electronic sign is at the SE corner of the property at Brainard and Plainfield. This sign was approved in June 2005; at that time electronic signage was not in the City Code; if something is not generally permitted in the Code, it is prohibited.

The variances requested are to Section 8-5-9 A-1 A an existing electronic sign which exceeds 20 s.f. Mr. Fuller’s sign is probably 30 s.f. per side. The second variance is to 8-5-9 A-1 C, to permit an existing sign which changes more than six times per hour. The present sign changes every 10 seconds. The third variance is movement restriction – the current code calls for no flashing, scrolling and blinking characters. Mr. Fuller’s sign does utilize those characteristics. The fourth is a special use to allow signs in the business zoning district. A photograph of the sign is posted for discussion. That concludes the staff presentation.

Mr. Fuller testified that the electronic sign was installed five years ago at a cost of $72,000, a huge investment; the electronic portion cost $42,000. If he cannot change the message every 5 seconds, he would never have purchased the sign; it does not flash. He plants flowers around the sign in the summer; if he is not able to advertise specials or promotions, the sign is worthless. He is asking to be grandfathered in.

Mr. Lube seeks conformity in signage. Mr. Swanson stated that Mr. Fuller is here pursuant to the Infrastructure Committee sending letters to all local businesses utilizing electronic signs advising them of the new ordinance and asking them to come into compliance.

Chairman Fullmer asked for questions from interested persons – Ms. Karen Quinilin, 1240 Brainard, stated that her car was totaled at that intersection 1 å_ years ago; she is not a big fan of the sign. She lives across the street from CITGO; her house is illuminated every day of the year until midnight. If the Board allows this sign, it sets a precedent for the Jewel or CITGO to get electronic signs. She is okay with Mr. Fuller’s sign as it is but doesn’t want any further increase in signage. She was advised that every business must come before the PC/ZBA for a hearing. Mr. Fuller turns the LED sign off when the business closes. Mr. Jasinski asked whether more information could be included in the sign so that it can remain on for ten minutes before changing. The sign is capable of various changes. It was suggested that the sign change should coincide with the traffic light. The sign is a distraction especially to traffic on Plainfield Road; it is a safety issue.

Chairman Fullmer stated that the City Council provided a range for electronic signs including frequency of change, color of lighting, etc; there is no reason to justify an exemption from the rules; all businesses should comply with the code. Mr. Fuller had no closing statement. There were no other comments from interested parties. Mr. Gonzalez moved to close the evidentiary portion of the public hearing, seconded by Mr. Lube and carried unanimously.

1. Mr. Lube moved to permit a variance to the existing electronic sign of 50 square feet which exceeds the maximum 20 square feet, seconded by Ms. Grotzke and carried by Roll Call vote – 8/0/1.

2. Ms. Grotzke moved to deny a variance to an electronic sign that changes every 5 seconds rather than six times per hour on the property commonly known as 5550 South Brainard Avenue, seconded by Mr. Lube and carried by Roll Call vote – 8/0/1.

3. Mr. Gonzalez moved to deny a variance to permit an existing electronic sign from utilizing its capabilities to flash, scroll and blink, seconded by Ms. Grotzke and carried by Roll Call vote – 8/0/1.

4. Mr. Lube moved to permit a special use to keep an existing electronic sign on the property commonly known as 5550 South Brainard Avenue, seconded by Mr. Moss and carried by Roll Call vote – 8/0/1.

This matter will come before the City Council at its Regular Meeting on 4-27-11.

PUBLIC HEARING RE: 6939 SOUTH WOLF ROAD

Chairman Fullmer read the Notice of Public Hearing published on March 17, 2011 in THE DOINGS NEWSPAPER as follows:

Consideration of variances and a special use request to permit an existing electronic sign to portions of the City of Countryside, IL Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) as follows:

Consideration of a variance to Section 8-5-9 A-1 A; Area, Title 8, Chapter 5 in the Municipal Code of the City of Countryside to permit an existing electronic sign which exceeds the maximum twenty square feet.

Consideration of a variance to Section 8-5-9 A-1 C; maximum intervals, Title 8, chapter 5 in the municipal code to permit an existing electronic sign which changes more than six times per hour.

Consideration of a variance to Section 8-5-9 A-1 D; movement restriction, Title 8, chapter 5 in the municipal code to permit an existing electronic sign which utilizes flashing, scrolling and blinking characters.

Consideration of a variance to Section 8-5-9 A-1 H; color of lights, Title 8, chapter 5 in the municipal code to permit an existing electronic sign which utilizes amber-colored lights instead of the required white, red or green.

Consideration of a variance to Section 8-5-9 A-1 I; hours of operation, Title 8, chapter 5 of the municipal code to permit an existing electronic sign which is operated beyond the hours of operation of the business.

Consideration of a special use to Section 8-5-9 A-1 K; permitted signs in business zoning districts; special use permit: Title 8, chapter 5 in the municipal Code to consider an existing electronic sign.

The applicant is Mr. William Rosinia, Manager of the Flagg Creek Golf Course, at the real estate commonly known as 6939 South Wolf Road, Countryside, IL 60525.

Mr. Gonzalez moved to open the Public Hearing, seconded by Ms. Grotzke and carried unanimously. Proofs of Notice were received by the Building Department. Applicant is Mr. William Rosinia, Manager Flagg Creek Golf Course, was sworn in by Chairman Fullmer.

Staff presentation made by CDP Bryan Swanson. The golf course is zoned P-1, public and semi-public, located at 6939 S. Wolf Road and is approximately 64 acres. They seek consideration to allow an existing electronic sign which does not meet the standards set forth in section 8-5-9 A. Residential properties are situated alongside the golf course. The sign is question is located on Wolf Road; it cannot be seen from Joliet Road, and does not face any residential properties. In 2007 the golf course received variances from the City Council to construct an electronic sign at the Wolf Road entrance. In 2007 electronic signs were strictly prohibited. In 2011 electronic signs are listed as permitted signs but require special use approval and must meet the standards set forth in section 8-5-9 A.

The first variance is similar to Mr. Fuller’s request; the size of the sign is roughly 25 s.f. per side. That exceeds the maximum size of 20 s.f. per side.

The second variance is the rate of change – no more than six times per hour. They need it to change more frequently to assist in promoting all the various activities and events at the golf course.

The third variance is to utilize the flashing, scrolling and blinking characters on the sign. They only use the scroll feature.

The fourth variance is to utilize amber colored lights instead of the required white, red or green on a black background. They state that amber lights last longer than white.

The fifth variance is to utilize the electronic sign beyond the hours of operation of the business. The golf course hosts evening banquets and the driving range is open till 10 p.m. They wish to keep the sign on after the driving range closes.

The final request is the special use permit to utilize the electronic sign. That concludes the staff presentation.

Mr. Rosinia, manager of Flagg Creek Golf Course, stated that in addition to advertising, they use the sign as a media center for their customers. They get many requests for birthdays, wedding anniversaries, etc. to announce special names and dates, which are sold to the customers, who then may take photos of the sign with their special message. Actually the sign is equally owned by the City and the golf course. The City could run messages for the community if necessary. The amber bulbs do not create as much glare in the evening as white lights. They are not in a residential area so there is less distraction from passing traffic. They request scrolling because bulbs burn out faster when lights remain on constantly. Mr. Sweeney, President of the Flagg Creek Golf Course Board, stated that the amber lights were approved in 2007; they are only visible from NB and SB Wolf Road.

Mr. Jasinski asked how often the sign has used by the City for emergency messages or weather alerts. The only occasions is advertising fireworks for the Fourth of July. They prefer that the message changes every 5 seconds. Ms. Susan Smith, Assistant manager of Flagg Creek Golf Course, stated that on certain occasions when announcing Congratulations, Mr. & Mrs. — cannot be completed without scrolling. After discussion among Board members, Chairman Fullmer stated there is no reason to have the lights flashing; Parking lot lights remain on all night for security. The sign is primarily a media center for customers. The sign provides the time and date that certain functions are held at the golf course. On weekends they advertise regular golf outings and fundraisers; the scrolling takes place in 1-2 minute segments and then repeats the scroll; they never use the flashing feature on the sign. They could time the sign for use during an outing and change it after the event. Chairman Fullmer is seeking uniformity in electronic signs. The Board may consider the emergency aspect of the sign when used for an amber alert or weather event.

Chairman Fullmer sought comments from interested parties. John Berg, 5717 Peck, noted that it is ESDA’s responsibility to warn residents about tornados and the like. ESDA has no control over warning signs. The petitioner made no closing statement. There were no other comments from interested parties. Ms. Grotzke moved to close the evidentiary portion of the hearing, seconded by Mr. Lube and carried unanimously.

1. Mr. Gonzalez moved to permit an existing electronic sign which exceeds the maximum size of 20 s.f. per side, seconded by Mr. Lube and carried by Roll Call vote – 8/0/1.

2. Ms. Grotzke moved to deny an existing electronic sign which changes more than six times per hour, seconded by Mr. Lube and carried by Roll Call vote – 8/0/1.

3. Mr. Gonzalez moved to deny an electronic sign which utilizes flashing, scrolling and blinking characters, seconded by Ms. Grotzke and carried by Roll Call vote – 8/0/1.

4. Mr. Jasinski moved to permit an existing electronic sign which utilizes amber colored lights instead of the required white, red or green, seconded by Mr. Lube and carried by Roll Call vote – 7/1/1.

5. Ms. Grotzke moved to deny an existing electronic sign which will operate beyond the hours of operation for the business, seconded by Mr. Moss and carried by Roll Call vote – 8/0/1.

6. Mr. Lube moved to permit a special use for an existing electronic sign at the property commonly known as 6939 South Wolf Road, seconded by Mr. Jasinski and carried by Roll Call vote – 8/0/1.

Chairman Fullmer stated that this recommendation will go before the City Council at its Regular Meeting on April 27, 2011. Mr. Swanson asked whether the request to permit amber lights should go to the Infrastructure Committee for a recommendation prior to a hearing before the PC/ZBA. Mr. Peck agreed.

OTHER BUSINESS

Chairman Fullmer noted that there is a Special Meeting of the PC/ZBA scheduled for Thursday, April 14, 2011 at 7:30 p.m. to consider a special use and variance requests for the relocation of Ettleson Hyundai to 6420 Joliet Road. Mr. Ettleson wants to move his existing signs to the property on a temporary basis (five years). The former tenants are moving to another location within the City.

Mr. Swanson stated that the property owner at 5530 Kensington is seeking permission for concrete patios, sidewalks, driveways and permitted obstructions in sideyard setbacks. After discussion, the PC/ZBA decided to keep the Code as is. The owners, Mr. & Mrs. Puskarz, wish to put new concrete down for the driveway, to the garage and around the side; part of that space is in the sideyard setback; that is not permitted at this time. According to the Code, they must seek a variance. There is no residence next door, only a business. The asphalt is already there; they wish to replace the asphalt with concrete. Mr. Jasinski has intimate knowledge of the premises, having lived there in the past, and stated that there is sufficient room for three cars on the existing footprint. That is not allowed per City ordinance, thus the need for a variance.

Mr. Swanson stated that the May meeting will involve fence variances and an adult day-car Center at 6502 Joliet Road. Mercy Senior Housing wishes to utilize a storage area under the stairwell – not looked upon favorably by the Fire District. Chairman Fullmer congratulated Jim Jasinski on becoming the new Alderman.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to discuss, Mr. Jasinski moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Ms. Grotzke and carried unanimously.

Chairman Fullmer declared the meeting adjourned at 9:28 p.m.

RICHARD FULLMER, JR., CHAIRMAN