Previous W-W Home Up Next  ZBA 7/9/08 Hearing

The following is the West-Win Homeowners' Association summary of the e 7/9/2008 Zoning Board of Appeals hearing.

DUPAGE COUNTY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 9, 2008 HEARING SUMMARY

The Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) met for over 2-hrs. on July 9th, 2008, regarding the application of the Church of the Resurrection for Special Use Religious in an unincorporated residential area between Roosevelt Rd. and Purnell Rd. where the zoning is estate residential.  The Church’s presentation to the ZBA was much like that given on June 9, 2008, to a group of residents from the area.  Although continuing to request that the main entrance to their multi-building complex be located on Purnell Rd., the Church has now added the possibility of an exit only onto Roosevelt Rd. that would be gated and opened only on Sundays and holidays after the busiest church services.  This exit would only accommodate those turning right (East) onto Roosevelt.  This is in response to residents in the area objecting to the use of Purnell Rd. rather than Roosevelt Rd. as the entrance/exit to the complex.  It would eliminate some but not the larger part of the traffic on Purnell Rd. and this reduction would be on Sundays only.

It was announced that the main sanctuary of the church would have a seating capacity of 1900 (up from 1500 at the June 9th meeting) and a kitchen suitable to feed 200 to 400 people (if present for a conference and having a lunch or dinner there).  There would be a separate building serving as a chapel and seating 300 persons.  Another building would serve as a residence with overnight accommodations to house up to 24 persons involved in church training programs or special workshops.  There would be a small kitchen in that building for the 24 people who would live there.  A fourth building would function as a meeting facility that would accommodate 300 to 400 people for lectures and would have breakout rooms and a kitchen and dining facility.  When the ZBA asked who would stay in the overnight facilities, the answer from a church spokesperson was “the church has a relationship with churches in Africa who might come.” The same church spokesperson said this property would allow the Church to “grow to the full master plan” that has been created.  (Note: At the June 9th meeting with neighbors, a church spokesperson said the overnight facility would be part of a “Sending Center where people from all over will come and be trained”.)  At this hearing, Father Stuart Ruch, the church’s rector, said that the Church of the Resurrection is part of a larger Anglican Church with over 80 million members around the world.

It was learned for the first time, at this hearing, that the proposed church sanctuary would have a main roof eve of 55 ft., a parapet 80 to 85 ft. tall and a 90 ft. tower with a cross on top of that.  There would be a central tower and towers at each end of the complex.  The church plans to have a bell in the tower that would be rung (Westminster Chimes) on the half hour and hour and the bell would also toll the hour, on the hour.  The various ringing and tolling would happen from 7AM to 9PM.  The bell would also toll for services on Sunday 10 to 15 minutes before each service and for special occasions such as holidays and funerals.  They also plan to have a Carillon that would broadcast hymns and seasonal tunes such as Christmas songs.  There are also plans for an outdoor amphitheater to seat 200 where they would hold various performances that could include instruments being played.  One church spokesperson indicated they may do acoustic music – not electrified – and no rock concerts.  The rector said, “We do have electric guitars as part of our band.  It is not necessarily loud but not simply "keyboard.”  There would be 12 to 16 ft. tall lights throughout the parking lots and they indicated there would be little or no light crossing property lines.

 The ZBA hearing was attended by approximately 170 people.  The Chair of the ZBA asked all those opposed to the development to stand and then all those in favor to stand.  It was apparent that the majority of people were opposed.  During the public comment section of the meeting it was clear that almost all of those commenting were strongly opposed to the church complex due to the increase in traffic, the noise and other pollutants, the devaluation of nearby properties, the question of sewer access and drainage problems on neighbors’ lands, the threat of annexation and the effect of this project on the semi-rural environment that we now enjoy.

Following is a representative sample of the few public comments from those in favor of the church complex in this area:

  1. “I believe the church will be a good neighbor and good citizen.”
  2. “Life goes on.  This is a church that truly does what God says.  Lights are a problem but the alternatives could be worse.”
  3. “This is the best chance of enhancing the beauty of the property rather than a subdivision.  The church wants to be part of the community.” 

Following is a representative sample of the many public comments from those opposed to the church complex in this area:

  1. “Our property values will decrease.”
  2. “We moved out here for peace and tranquility which is exactly what the church wants but won’t give us.”
  3. “What about the impact on our lives?  There will be a significant inflow of drivers on our tiny road (Purnell).” 
  4. (Regarding a Carillon)  “I don’t want music forced on me or bells waking me up when I need to sleep during the day.”
  5. “When we looked at this area it was all zoned 1 acre lots.  I like my evenings out on the deck where it is quiet and I can hear the birds.  This would destroy that.”
  6. “I’m not sure a church of this magnitude fits conditional use.”
  7. “I will demand a property tax decrease because my value will go down.”
  8. “I moved here because the zoning was what it was.”
  9. “This will diminish our property values.”
  10. “We looked for 1˝ yrs. for our home.  We hear crickets and birds – now we’ll hear cars and see lights.”
  11. “We moved here because it’s quiet.”
  12. “We moved out for the country life; horses, cornfield.  We camp in our backyard.  It’s quieter in our backyard than anywhere else.”
  13. “Purnell is a 2 lane road with no shoulders.  If there is an accident or a truck in the road, it’s blocked.”
  14. “Garys Mill across Roosevelt is very dangerous.  There will probably be a lot more deaths with this.”
  15. “At the June 9th community meeting we specifically asked about the overlook at the pond and were told people would just walk by there.  Tonight we hear there will be many people there at acoustic concerts.  What will it be in August?”
  16. “What comfort do we have that something like this will proceed? The church at Gary’s Mill and Rt. 59, Church of the Resurrection, has been abandoned.”
  17. “The sight lines (for traffic) on Purnell are horrible.  Traffic was not adequately addressed.”
  18. ”The traffic study has changed from 1 month ago.”
  19. “There will be cut-through traffic on Cantigny Dr.”
  20. “What is the nature of the contractual relationship?  I urge the board to get a copy of the contract so we know who the parties are – the officers and directors – and share it with us.”
  21. “The only way many of us can leave our streets (which are dead ends) is onto Purnell.  What if we have an emergency (and Purnell is blocked with church traffic)?”

In winding up the meeting, the chair of the ZBA requested the following items from the petitioners be provided in writing to the board before the continuation of the hearing on Aug. 21, 2008:

  1. The proposed development’s adherence to Special Use standards.
  2. Answer to whether this will be a phased development and, if so, when they expect to begin development and how long it will take to complete the full master plan.  The Church is to turn in a specific phased plan.
  3. The size of the buildings.
  4. A study of the number of homes that would be on the property if this was a subdivision rather than religious use.
  5. A proposed schedule of use of the facility.
  6. Correction of an administrative error in the publication in regard to the PUD (Planned Unit Development).
  7. A statement to the board that will be shared with the neighbors regarding the noise issue.
  8. Feasibility study.

Mr. Kartholl, Chairperson of the ZBA, indicated that the hearing will continue at 7:00PM on August 21, 2008, in the Cafeteria on the 2nd floor of the 421 Building at the DuPage County Government Complex.  Mr. Kartholl said written comments need to be submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals before the Aug. 21 hearing.  Send your comments in writing to:

Mr. Robert Kartholl, Chair
DuPage County Zoning Board of Appeals
421 N. County Farm Rd.
Wheaton, IL 60187-3978

Email letters may be addressed to Mr. Robert Kartholl as above and sent to the ZBA Board through DuPage County Zoning Administrator, Paul Hoss at: paul.hoss@dupageco.org. 

Mr. Kartholl said a short summary of the minutes of the July 9th hearing will be published online in about a week (around July 16th) and the full transcript of the hearing would be available for inspection in approximately 10 days (around July 19th).

Previous W-W Home Up Next

Updated 08/26/09 03:54 AM ET  Hit Counter