Loading...
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes 2009 01-07-09 Page 1 of APPROVED 8/5/09 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 7pm City Hall Conference Room Board Members in Attendance: Jeff Baker, Chairman Dean Bromann Chris Funkhouser Sam Clementz Mike Skinner Ryan Woods (arr. 7:08pm) Absent: Ben Moe Other City Officials In Attendance: Anna Kurtzman Guests: Susan Kritzberg Randy Burggraf, Pearle Vision Art Prochaska Maria Fisher Verne Henne Andrew Kolb, Bazos, Freeman, Kramer, Schuster, Vanek, & Kolb Meeting Called to Order: At 7:00pm the meeting was called to order by Chairman Jeff Baker. Roll Call: Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. Previous Meeting Minutes: December 3, 2008 The minutes were approved as read on a motion and second by Bromann and Skinner respectively. Unanimous voice vote. Public Hearings: 1. ZBA 2008-09 Randall Burggraf,filed a petition with the City requesting relief from Municipal Code, Sections 8-11-09, Items A-2 a&b, to allow business signs on the rear side of a business. The address of the property is 620 and 624 W. Veterans Parkway. The Hearing was opened on a motion by Skinner and second by Bromann. Unanimous voice vote. Page 2 of 4 Chairman Baker swore in those who would speak at the Hearings. Randy Burggraf of Pearle Vision was present and gave information for the petition. He asked for signs on the east side of the building and said his business depended on drive- by traffic. He stated that customers tell him they cannot find Pearle Vision and the business has suffered as a result. Mr. Burggraf said other Yorkville businesses have signs that are visible from major roads and the sides of the building. The Pearle Vision property is located on an unnamed access road, he said. The wall that faces the right-of-way is all glass and not appropriate for a sign. Free-standing signs are not allowed due to an existing sign for other businesses located farther down the road. He said he has not found any other businesses with these unique circumstances. During questioning, it was noted that Burggraf wants an illuminated sign on the east wall, however, the exact size was unknown. When Pearle Vision began renting their offices, Mr. Burggraf said he spoke with the building owner, Jim Ratos, who stated signs could be placed on the front and back of the building. Since that time, Mr. Ratos told Mr. Burggraf no more signs could be erected on the property, but suggested perhaps one could be installed to the east near some existing pine trees. However, the trees are not on Mr. Rates' property. Chairman Baker said he did not think a sign to the east would be appropriate or helpful as traffic would not see it. Skinner added that the sun could actually prevent drivers from seeing the sign and drivers would have to look far back off the road creating a dangerous situation. Susan Kritzberg, resident to the east at 1217 Game Farm Road, read a statement opposing any further signage. Her property is bordered on the west by the property being discussed. The area consists of 4 acres with natural wooded and wetland areas, fishing ponds and Blackberry Creek. It is registered as a wildlife habitat. As a property owner and Comprehensive Plan Committee member, she is concerned with the negative impact on the view and effect of the bright lights. She said the developers were aware of the signage rules and the existing sign is very visible. To grant this variance would be setting a precedent, she said. She stated later that she is totally opposed to illumination and east wall signs, especially in view of the valuable green space. Resident Verne Henne then spoke and presented a handout of photos and a written objection (both to become part of minutes). In his photos, he pointed out that some of the signs may be actually placed incorrectly on another piece of property. He said the building is turned with its end facing Rte. 34 to be able to call it a side yard. He said Brenart Eye Clinic and Club 47 are set this way also for maximum usage of land. He also cited the new ordinance that does not allow signs to be illuminated after 11 pm and said some of the signs being discussed are lit after that time. Burggraf will speak with Ratos about turning off the lights Mr. Henne also pointed out another Pearle Vision sign he said was clearly visible, however, Dr. Burggraf said it was obscured by trees. He said Jim Ratos had been talking Page 3 of 4 with the tree property owner about trimming the trees, moving them or possibly planting others. Resident Art Prochaska said this is the second time this petition has been presented and the signage hardship was already present when the building was leased. He also objected to the illumination of the east illuminated sign which is inside the building in a light-box. Mr. Burggraf said this sign was placed inside as a stop-loss measure and was placed prior to the revised ordinance. He stated he did not know this would become such an issue. Maria Fisher, the owner of the property with the trees, said she and other neighbors objected to further illumination. She has had some discussions with Ratos and offered to talk with Burggraf also to try and reach a solution. Chairman Baker said the Zoning Board is a recommending body only and that would allow time for Ms. Fisher and Dr. Burggraf to talk with one another prior to the Council meeting. He added that the issue of illumination is not in the petition; it is a request for a sign. The Public Hearing was then closed on a motion by Skinner and second by Bromann. Motion approved by a unanimous voice vote. Ms. Kurtzman reviewed the Finding of Fact and Sign Code Provisions with the Board. Discussion: The general consensus of the Board members was that the signage was adequate for Pearle Vision and that safety was a concern if an east sign were to be allowed. Also brought up was the fact that the Pearle Vision sign is the largest and that this matter is a self-imposed hardship. In addition, Pearle Vision is the only business asking for an additional sign. A motion was then made by Woods to approve ZBA 2008-09 and Funkhouser seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Woods-nay; Bromann-nay; Skinner-nay; Clementz-nay; Funkhouser-nay; Baker-nay. Motion failed unanimously. This matter will move forward to the City Council meeting January 27th at 7pm. Old Business: (Continued from December 7, 2008 meeting) 1. ZBA 2008-06 Petitioner(CVS Pharmacy)filed a petition requesting relief from several sections of the Sign Code. The property is located at the southeast corner of Rt. 34 and Eldamain Road. Attorney Andrew Kolb stated that the petitioner has withdrawn the last three variance requests. He also stated that the developer will not be moving ahead with the CVS Page 4 of 4 Pharmacy project at this time, however, he will proceed to City Council on the requests already recommended by ZBA. Until necessary fees are paid to the City, Mr. Kolb said the City will not put this petition on the Council agenda. Additional Business: Ms. Kurtzman pointed out that her report regarding Pearle Vision was only 2 pages, however, the information in the packet appeared lengthier. She said the additional pages were a City Council amendment to the code regarding wind feathers. Wind feathers were previously discussed and some of the requirements were noted by Ms. Kurtzman. Since the Board members had additional questions, she will report back to the committee. There was some concern about the newly passed sign ordinance due to the Zoning Board not being asked for input or recommendations regarding wind feathers. Motion Woods and Funkhouser made a joint motion to advise the City Council that ZBA is reviewing the revised sign ordinance due to reservations and concerns regarding the language pertaining to wind feathers, specifically: setback and height requirements, color, size, quantity allowed. These concerns are pending a report from Ms. Kurtzman. Bromann seconded this motion. Roll call vote: Bromann-aye; Skinner-aye; Clementz-aye; Funkhouser-aye; Woods-aye; Baker-aye. Unanimous approval. In another matter, Skinner asked for City Council results of matters that have come before ZBA and said he would like to track all petitions. Ms. Kurtzman recapped the most recent cases. There was no further business and a motion was made and seconded by Woods and Skinner respectively, to adjourn the meeting. Adjourned at 8:34pm. Minutes respectfully submitted by Marlys Young, Minute Taker From: Dr. Randy Burggraf Page 1 of 8 +t..- a tl (Prntl [Close] From: "Dr. Randy Burggraf" <DrBurggraf@pvfeyecare.com> To: <randyburg @att.net> Subject: Variance for slgnage at 620 Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2009 4:15:51 PM Variance for signage at 620-624 W. Veterans Pkwy. Thank you for the opportunity of addressing the Zoning Board of Appeals. N yS iJ ( ) rec��P�in9 Fru ct� r�f� 1 /s u7 dri 7X tata�`ht� We are requesting a variance to allow business identification signs on the east side of our buildings at 620 and 624 W. Veterans Pkwy. All of our businesses depend on drive-by traffic. People need to know who we are and where we are located. But we receive reports all the time from people telling us that they couldn't find us or didn't even know we were in town, even though they drive httn://webmaii.att.net/wme/en-i 1S/v/wm/4965337B000DOBI A000070D222243429029BOA... 1/7/2009 From: Dr. Randy Burggraf Page 2 of 8 past our businesses regularly. Our businesses have suffered greatly as a result of people being unable to locate us or know that we're here to do business in Yorkville. We all understand that it is imperative that businesses are readily visible to the public. In fact, one of the 3 principles of the Yorkville Sign Ordinance states that: The provisions of this article recognize that: "The reasonable display of signs is NECESSARY as a public service and NECESSARY to the conduct of competitive commerce and industry." The ordinance also states that: the regulation of signs by this Article is intended to promote the public health, safety and welfare by enhancing the economic condition of the City by promoting reasonable, orderly and effective use and display of signs. We understand that any Sign Ordinance cannot take all possible situations into consideration, and I trust that we will provide you with valid reasons for allowing us a variation that is reasonable and consistent with the guidelines for allowing a variance, is consistent with the current signage already allowed to other businesses in Yorkville, AND is consistent with the spirit of the Sign Ordinance. The item in the code that precludes us from automatically being granted permits for our business identification signs is essentially http://webmail.att.net/wmc/en-US/v/wm/4965337BOOODOElA000070D222243429029BOA... 1/7/2009 From: Dr. Randy Burggraf Page 3 of 8 the following: If you want an identification sign on a wall of your business, that wall needs to have a public entrance. But we have some rather unique conditions that relate to the frontages of our buildings, and the layout of the buildings upon the property, and I will address these as we go through the: SPECIFIC ITEMS UNDER THE STANDARDS FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE- First, under Sectionl0-14-5(Zoning Code), item 1): It states (relative to the granting of a variance): "Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, a particular hardship to the owner (or tenants in our case) would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulation was carried out." IN RESPONSE TO THIS POINT- Business on Bridge street and Veterans Pkwy, our major thoroughfares through town, have signs on the front of their buildings, as their entrances face the road. Many of them also have signs on the walls that lie perpendicular to the public right- http://webmail.att.net/wmc/en-US/v/wm/4965337BOOODOEl A000070D222243429029BOA... 1/7/2009 From: Dr. Randy Burggraf Page 4 of 8 of-way. (I've brought along pictures of a dozen examples.) But OUR businesses, whose addresses are 600 and 624 Veterans Pkwy, don't FACE Veterans Pkwy but face a street or access road with no name! As it is laid out, our property runs deep rather than wide as it extends south from Veterans Pkwy, and this depth does not allow for any degree of front entrance visibility except for Legends, the business that occupies the north end of the building along Veterans Pkwy. And unlike most all other businesses on these major roads, we can't in any reasonable or effective way, put a sign for our businesses on the wall facing the right-of-way for a number of reasons: First, that particular wall is almost all glass, and there is no room to put up a building directory sign. And as only one tenant occupies that whole side of the building facing Veterans Pkwy, the other businesses in the building can't have entrances on that wall and therefore are prohibited from placing signage on Veterans Pkwy. Even if that requirement were waived for this wall, putting up our individual business signs there across the top of Legend's windows would only be confusing to the public and distracting to their business. The required landscaping trees that are there also block any significant viewr mere is another factor that has created a real hardship. We were not allowed to put up a free-standing business sign at the front corner of the property by the turn-in to our businesses because there is an existing one already there for other businesses that are located down the access road to our west. So we were forced to put our directory sign farther down the hill, away from the turn-in to our businesses. And, unfortunately, the City required so much setback to its location that it is stuck behind large pine trees and has been rendered totally ineffective. http://webmail.att.net/wme/en-US/V/wm/4965337BOOODOE 1 A000070D222243429029BOA... 1/7/2009 From: Dr. Randy Burggraf Page 5 of 8 All these factors have combined to have a disastrous effect on our businesses' exposure to the public. Yet the primary hardship is that we cannot have our business identification signs located on the wall of our building that faces Veterans Pkwy, and that's the street address of our businesses. For these reasons, we ask you to waive the public entrance requirement and allow us to place our identification signs on our east walls perpendicular to the right-of-way. This is consistent with existing business all across Yorkville, who have signs perpendicular to the�roadway and do not ye public entrances on their walls either. ` "allow our businesses to get reasonable exposure and VW substitute for our inability to put building mounted identification signage on the right-of way. (The rest of our responses will be short!) Item 2) The conditions upon which the petition for a variance is based are unique to the property for which the variation is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. RESPONSE- I have driven around town numerous times looking at businesses and their utilization of signs. I have NOT found any other property in Yorkville with our unique layout and circumstances. httn://webmaii.att.net/wmc/en-iJS/v/wm/4965337B000DORI AO0007OD222243429029BOA... 1/7/2009 From: Dr. Randy Burggraf Page 6 of 8 The remaining items (3,4, and 5) appear to not require a specific response. (Item 3 was not created by Jim Ratos, our Landlord: the CITY approved the design, layout and construction of the property AND specified the address of the property on Veterans Pkwy.) In addressing Section 8-11-13 of the Variance process: Item: 1) We are happy to comply with all the other terms of the sign code in getting sign permits. 2) Regarding unique physical characteristics of the property: I have already addressed the key issues. 3) Regarding limited available locations for signage on the property: The east side of our buildings is the only appropriate place for our signage. 4) The cost to the applicant in complying with the Sign Ordinance requirements- We can't physically make the changes necessary to put public entrances on the east side of the buildings. I have spoken to Mr. Dettmer about httn://webmail.att.net/wme/en-iJS/v/wm/4965337B000DOF.1 A000070D222243429029BOA... 1/7/2009 From: Dr. Randy Burggraf Page 7 of 8 this, and he said that our current entrances on the east side cannot qualify as public entrances. 5) Not applicable, as the speed limit is 35mph at our location, not 40 or higher. 6) Not applicable, as the traffic count is 17,700, or just under 20,000 vehicle trips per day. 7) Regarding required landscaping : We do not believe that our proposal for signage on the east side of our buildings will be impaired by required landscaping . 8) Our request does not include a sign that faces the right-of-way because it is unfeasible. In its place, we request the use of signage at the most feasible location on our property. Use only if needed - (((((There are a dozen or more businesses in Yorkville that do not meet the criteria of the sign code and yet enjoy signage on their buildings in a manner similar or almost identical to our request. PICTURES AND NAMES)))) http://webmail.aft.net/wmc/en-US/v/wm/4965337B000DOEIA00007OD222243429029BOA... 1/7/2009 From: Dr. Randy Burggraf Page 8 of 8 CONCLUSION- We believe that our request for a variation to allow signage on the east side of our buildings is consistent with the spirit of the sign ordinance and with usages already afforded many other businesses in Yorkville. We believe it to be a reasonable allowance due to all the factors stated today, and we respectfully call for your favorable decision to our request. 9) The costs that we have incurred relate to our inability to have adequate exposure of our businesses to the public with identification signage. In 2008, our businesses suffered tremendous financial hardship, with a lack of visibility of our businesses as a key factor as a result of the entrance requirement of the Sign Ordinance that we are asking relief from. ((Note: I went through this process over a year ago, trying to get the relief that we desperately needed. )) http://webmail.att.net/wmc/en-US/v/wm/4965337B000DOElA000070D222243429029BOA... 1/7/2009 United City of Yorkville City Clerk City Hall ZBA 2008-09 800 Game Farm Road Yorkville, IL 60560 PETITIONERS: Randall Burggraf Jeri Antoinette Dick Johnston John Pappas Kim Karras LEGAL OBJECTION This is a written notice of protest against the proposed sign variance seeking identification signs on the rear of a building. According to the Public Notice, the real property is located at 620 and 624 West Veterans Parkway, Yorkville, IL 60560. The undersigned states that according to the Illinois Compiled Statutes, he is the member/manager of Esmer Capital Management Enterprises, LLC, Harvest Property Management, LLC and Pepperblend Property Management, LLC, which constitutes more than 20% of the frontage and is requesting that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the United City of Yorkville deny the variance. —Ci Verne L. Henric, Mcmber/Manager for Esmer Capital Mgmt. Enterprises, LLC Harvest Property Management, LLC Pepperblend Property Management, LLC Mailing Address: PO Box 51 Yorkville, IL 60560 /' a�rE4riav Fri VI r > -_ _ nuue ems. ••� . , �i�niCi�mou�re It } C�Pt�'piVr><ALI, PRflPE551O G2.� P1•A`LA �'FSI. n laa.l � OFFICE SPACE 630-269.8385 } wsrak uw�,ewc�wm Allstate. LffflC�l/S� ' op ki +crn•voy��.; fi301553-iZ00 Yark►�ikei)E1T.11, AiShling DBlGYN ® ;1�roll[ijsil 1'ml;!its Spn -+ TQ � 1 '57 0 �- b � pAtg_aouapuadepu a \ J nC �'Ca C CWT,C ] C° I\ .N' � CN iS-uyo 00 mrhA m > m D IIr T T -� A A °Tt 11 + �Lc�i f I r Ir n � n 0 'p +� +� AArnO1 � rn rn D o � A A A 1 � � am -n m v � 111 7 � N United City of Yorkville City Clerk City Hall ZBA 2008-09 800 Game Farm Road Yorkville, IL 60560 PETITIONERS: RandallBurggrof Jeri Antoinette Dick Johnston John Pappas Kim Karras LEGAL OBJECTION This is a written notice of protest against the proposed sign variance seeking identification signs on the rear of a building. According to the Public Notice, the real property is located at 620 and 624 West Veterans Parkway, Yorkville, IL 60560. The undersigned states that according to the Illinois Compiled Statutes, he is the member/mana`tcr of Esorer Capital Management Iaiterprises, LLC, Harvest Properly Management, LLC and Pepperblend Property Management, LLC, which constitutes more than 20% of the frontage and is requesting that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the United Ci(y of Yorkville deny the variance. Verne L. Ilenne, Member/Mana`rer for Esmer Capital Mgmt. Enterprises, LLC Harvest Property Management I,L,C Pepperblend Property 1♦Ianagement, LLC Mailijw Address: PO Box 51 Yorkville, IL 60560