HomeMy Public PortalAbout2006-06-27 ZBA MinutesVillage of Plainfield Zoning Board of Appeals Record of Minutes Date: June 2 7 , 2006 Location: Village Hall Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting to order at 7:00pm. Roll Call Present: Commissioners Henry, O’Rourke, Kachel, Renzi McKay, Sobkoviak Abs ent: Commissioners Murawski New Business CASE: 1248 -050906.V WALGREEN’S Request: Variance (Public Hearing) Location: Southwest corner of Route 59 and Route 126 Applicant: George Markopoulos (Praedium Development) Jim Donahue announced that this was a public hearing being held in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations of the Village of Plainfield and the State of Illinois. He read the staff report. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in John Argoudelis on behalf of the petitioner. Kimberly Yarbo ugh was also present representing Walgreen’s . He added that the sign would show a future tenant space – which is one of the reasons for the request. The property to the south was proposed to be a strip center, and the concept was to advertise for the maj or tenant in that center. He said that there were two monument signs at LaSalle Bank and the strip center on the other corner. Mr. Argoudelis also said that Staff’s points were arguable, and he felt that this variance made sense. Kimberly Yarbough addre ssed the commission and said that she felt that the addition of the sign and electronic reader -board would assist the future tenants and the community. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if Walgreen’s owned or controlled the property to the south, and Mr. Argoudel is said that the developer owned both Walgreen’s and the southern property. There was some discussion regarding this. Chairman Sobkoviak asked what assurance the Village would have that the tenants to the south would not request for additional signage. Mr. Argoudelis said that this would come across at that time, and Chairman Sobkoviak felt that the tenants might have a good case for individual signage. There was some discussion regarding signage not coming through at the time of Site Plan Review.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES JUNE 27, 2006 PAGE 2 Co mmissioner Renzi said that a monument sign would probably not be desired by the future tenant since it neglected traffic coming from the south. Mr. Argoudelis said that the property to the south would only have one major tenant and a couple smaller tenant s, and the sign was designed to accommodate that. Commissioner Henry said that he was having trouble with the justification for the extra five feet. There was some elaboration on the placement of this sign and landscaping. Commissioner Kachel said tha t this could be subdivided at a later date, and a sign could be desired at that point. Mr. Argoudelis said that another process would be in place for cross access easement and other agreements where this could be addressed. There was some discussion rega rding a reasonable request for additional signage on the property to the south. Mr. Donahue said that there is a provision in the sign ordinance for shared signage. Commissioner Renzi asked how square footage was calculated, and Mr. Donahue said that thi s only included the sign face. There was some discussion regarding the maximum total height versus the maximum square footage. Chairman Sobkoviak said that it was not reasonable to consider the sign requirements for future sites in this case; it was only reasonable to consider signage for this site. Commissioner O’Rourke asked Ms. Yarbough about the importance to Walgreen’s to have the additional tenants on the monument sign. Ms. Yarbough said that it was important as Walgreen’s would have to do busin ess with these tenants. Commissioner O’Rourke asked about giving up the reader board, and Ms. Yarbough felt that the reader board would be more important than the monument sign proposed. Chairman Sobkoviak opened up the floor for public comment. There w as no response. Commissioner McKay said that this project had gone through a great deal of review due to its placement in the historic downtown. She agreed that the signage and variance was inappropriate as changes could be made. Chairman Sobkoviak aske d that the four findings of fact be reviewed, and the specifics of the commission’s agreement or disagreement of these findings would need to be forwarded to the Village Board. Commissioner O’Rourke agreed with Staff’s conclusion. Commissioner Renzi did not feel that there was a strong case for a variance. Chairman Sobkoviak said that there did not appear to be a hardship or a unique site. He said that the normal process could address a possible multi -tenant sign in the future. Commissioner O’Rourke mo ved to accept the Findings of Fact as outlined in the staff report and deny the requested variance to allow an approximately fourteen and one half (14.5) foot tall, seventy one (71) square foot in area monument sign for the Walgreen’s site located at 14902 S. Route 59. 2
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES JUNE 27, 2006 PAGE 3 Commissioner Henry seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Henry, Renzi, McKay, Kachel, O’Rourke, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0:0. This would probably go forward to the Village Board on July 10. Commissioner Renzi made a motion to adjourn at approximately 7:30 p.m. Seconded by Commissioner Henry. Motion Carried unanimously. __________________ Respectfully submitted, Laura Griffith Recording Secretary Karick & Associates, Inc. 3