Crystal Lake Park

Home  |  Calendar  |  City Officials  |  Meeting Minutes  |  Municipal Codes  |  Planning & Zoning  |  Quarterly Newsletter

City of Crystal Lake Park

Planning & Zoning Commission and

Board of Adjustment

 Date:

Thursday, February 3, 2006

Bulding Commissioner Robb Lappe called  the meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission and Board of Adjustment to order and announced a quorum.

 ROLL CALL:

             Present:  Building Commissioner Robb Lappe, P&Z Chairperson David Evans, Commission Members Rita Brinkman, Paul Licavoli and Amy Cislo, and Mayor Matthew Balcer and Alderman Jim Gehringer, as well as Board of Adjustment Members Sue Glarner and Barry Larson, and City Clerk Karen Coon.

             Absent:  Board of Adjustment Members Mary Jane Cusumano and Mary Ann Stewart.

 REVIEW ITEMS:

             A.  345 Development, LLC (Exterior Finishes for 2168 Oak Drive and review of Glass Block Window)

             Building Commissioner (BC) Lappe opened the meeting with a discussion concerning the exterior finishes for 2168 Oak Drive and review of the the glass block window proposed to be constructed by developer 345 Development, LLC.

             345 Development, LLC asked the Commission to again review the glass block window material, following its rejection by the former Commission, and to reinstate the block window as originally proposed.  A discussion ensued and Alderman Gehringer asked why the glass block was originally rejected, and was informed that there was resistance to that type of material on a house facing Country Club Drive.  BC Lappe noted that there was currently no ordinance disallowing that type of material on homes in the City.  BoA member Glarner asked whether the vote should be referred to the Board of Alderman rather than the P&Z Commission.  City Clerk Coon noted that this Commission could petition the Board of Alderman to review the matter, which the Board could then decide whether to do so, or to refer it back to the P&Z Commission.  However, BC Lappe said that the review of any deviation from building plans should come before this Commission first rather than the Board of Alderman.

             Alderman Stefan Cooke and Stan Bursak, developer and contractor of the project, noted that they had researched the marketplace for alternative materials to glass block, but that those alternatives did not offer enough privacy to the prospective homeowners, without adding blinds or shades, which aesthetically would not be as pleasing as the glass block.  BC Lappe asked them to show the building plans to allow the Commission to view the height and width of the window, size of glass block, and the height from the ground at which the glass block would sit.  The developers showed the plans to those on the Commission and also provided a picture of the glass block which would be used in the construction.

             A discussion ensued and BC Lappe asked for a Motion to approve the acceptance of glass block (at a size of 4'6" x 4'0") per the contractor's plan at 2168 Oak Drive.  A Motion was made and, after a unanimous vote of the Commission in favor, the deviation of plans was approved allowing for the glass block.  BC Lappe then requested that the developers submit the sketch of the glass block (a copy of which is attached to these minutes) and also attach it to the building plans. 

             P&Z Commission member Licavoli then asked whether minor deviation reviews could be made more expediently and a discussion ensued.  BC Lappe suggested that P&Z Commission members could be contacted on short notice to meet at the specific site in question to review such minor deviations.  It was noted that a quorum of three members would be required to be present.  Alderman Gehringer then inquired as to what constituted major vs. minor changes to plans.  In response, P&Z member Amy Cislo suggested that the Commission could develop a list of what constitutes major vs. minor changes.  After discussion, it was agreed that the Commission would be able to make such determinations. 

             Next the Commission reviewed the exterior finishes at 2168 Oak Drive and all members were allowed to view the proposed finishes which included a rusty red brick with dark tile, grey siding and clay gray trim.  BC Lappe asked that the specifics of the finishes be added to the minutes:  Musket #505 for the window treatment and soffit, Belle Isle for the brick color, driftwood for the shingle, and natural clay #60 monogram style for the siding.  A discussion ensued, following which a Motion by BC Lappe was made to approve the finishes as submitted.  All commission members voted in favor of the Motion and it was therefore approved.

            B.  Review of Current City Ordinances

             BC Lappe opened the discussion by noting that all members of the Commision had previously been sent a checklist of items required by contractors, etc. to be reviewed.  He noted that the Commission needed to develop the list of items from the distributed checklist, as well as additional items submitted by members, in order to maintain the integrity of submittals of contractors and what is expected of them.  BC Lappe asked members to provide input and commemts to him at the next meeting.

             BC Lappe then suggested that there was a need to redraft the current P & Z ordinance since different indentures and codes exist for different sections of the City.  He showed a map of the various sections and noted that there was a request to combine all into one uniform ordinance, which would provide better continuity and guidance for the Commission.  He noted that Section B has different lot sizes than do Sections C and D.  He also noted that Section A represented the Willows, which has their own and separate set of indentures which should not be altered.

             P&Z Chairperson Evans asked if there should be a uniform code based on lot sizes.  BC Lappe noted, as an example, that currently in Section C (which includes Divot, Cleek and Putter) no two-story home construction was allowed.  Under Evans suggestion, they would be allowed because of the larger lots on those streets, but this could detrimentally alter the aesthetics of those streets.  BoA member Glarner asked whether aesthetics are subject solely to the opinions of Board members and inquired as to whether there should be more concise language concerning standards written in the ordinances.  BC Lappe noted that the P&Z Commission was established so that there would be some flexibility in review and also to allow for public meetings of residents to allow their input.    The Commission should be devoted to maintaining the aesthetics of the municipality as a whole, he said, as well as the aesthetics of individual sections and streets.

             Alderman Gallagher noted that currently there were so many variablesin different sections, that it would be difficult to make current city ordinances uniform.   It was agreed that there was further need by the Commission to continue discussions concerning the need to redraft the current P&Z ordinances in the future. 

            The discussion turned to the need for tighter restrictions on new home construction in the City.  A few examples of contractors and developers not adhering to the guidelines of construction were provided.  Mayor Balcer noted that he had spoken with the City of Frontenac to inquire as to their requirements for new home construction.  He was told that Frontenac had requirements in addition to those required by St. Louis County.  He noted that Frontenac employs an inspector whose sole job is to perform such inspections of property throughout construction.  Those included soil inspection, foundation inspection, pier inspection, and frame-in or rough-in inspection.  Mayor Balcer suggested the Commission ask Frontenac if they would allow our City to use their inspector to perform such inspections.  He noted that inspection fees charged to the developers are extremely reasonable, although Frontenac would probably add a slight surcharge to CLP developers to do so, to offset the fact that a city employee paid by taxpayer dollars, would be doing the inspections.  Members of the Commission approved the idea of pursuing further discussions with Frontenac on this issue.  Mayor Balcer volunteered to do so and report back to the Commission. 

            NEXT MEETING 

            BC Lappe proposed that a review of current ordinances by the members be done and suggested revisions provided to him, for discussion at the next meeting of the Commission. 

            VOTE TO CLOSE MEETING

             A vote to close the meeting ensued and was unanimously approved.  The meeting was adjourned at at 8:40 p.m. 

            MINUTES RECORDED BY:

            ______________________________________________

            Lois A. LaDriere

            ATTEST:

            ______________________________________________

            Building Commissioner, Robb Lappe