Loading...
Plan Commission Minutes 2012 04-11-12 APPROVED 6/13/12 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PLAN COMMISSION City Council Chambers Wednesday,April 11, 2012 7:00pm Commission Members in Attendance: Chairman Tom Lindblom Sandra Adams Jane Winninger Jeff Baker Art Prochaska James Weaver Charles Kraupner Absent: Jack Jones, Michael Crouch Other City Staff City Administrator Bart Olson Alderman Larry Kot Alderman George Gilson Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Chris Funkhouser, Alderman Other Guests — George Frost Ray Wolson Barb Wolson Tom Gilmour Judy Gilmour Paula Gawlik Tom Corredato Sue Corredato Nick Hettinger Art Williams Kathy Theis Steve Theis Lynn Neal Tim Neal Don Hirsch Fred DuSell David Schultz Pam Robinson Sharon Rose Chris Galbraith Mark Johnson Matt Schury,Kendall County Record Angie Phipps, Court Reporter Jillian Duchnowski, Yorkville Patch Meeting Called to Order Chairman Tom Lindblom called the meeting to order at 7pm. Roll Call Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. Previous Meeting Minutes -March 14, 2012 The minutes were approved as presented on a motion by Baker and second by Prochaska. Voice vote approval. 1 Citizen's Comments Joe Phillips of Brandon Road Properties made a statement to become part of the public record. This was in regards to 2 reports included in FOIA requests made in January 2012. He said the reports were in the hands of Yorkville City officials and included drainage and traffic studies at the intersection of Pavilion Rd. and Fox Rd. He said this information was available to the City when the Council voted and would have answered many questions at the previous Plan Commission hearing. He said the info was not turned over to his company, making the City in violation of the FOIA's. Public Hearings 1. 2012-01 United City of Yorkville is proposing to amend Title 10, Chapter 13: Planned Unit Development of the Municipal Zoning Ordinance to comprehensively revise the method and procedure in which Planned Unit Development(PUD) applications are considered for approval. A motion was made and seconded by Prochaska and Adams, respectively to open the Hearing. Voice vote approval. The hearing opened at 7:07pm and closed at 7:08pm on a motion by Winninger and second by Prochaska. Voice vote approval. There was no discussion or public comment. (See Court Reporter's Transcript) Old Business 1. PC 2012-02 D. Construction Management, Petitioner, on behalf of Brandon Road Properties, LLC, Owner,is requesting authorization within the R-2 One-Family District to temporarily fill low areas and grade portions of a site located at the northeast and southeast corners of Fox Road and Pavilion Road (Evergreen Farm Estates)with uncontaminated soil from roadway projects of the State of Illinois and return to agricultural uses as allowed by Special Use Permit in Section 10-6C-2 and Section 10-613-2 of the United City of Yorkville City Code. Chairman Lindblom said there are 6 standards to determine if criteria are met in order to recommend Special Use to the Council. He also noted the vote 0-5 against the motion at the March Plan Commission meeting. The City Council will make the final decision. Chairman Lindblom said each point would be read and then discussed. Standards are paraphrased as follows: 1. Establishment of Special Use will not be unreasonably detrimental to the public health, safety etc. Commissioner Prochaska said he was concerned about the task at hand. At the last meeting, it was determined it was permissible as a Special Use, however, not permissible for that zoning. He said he was quoted in the minutes just approved, that there was not enough information to approve. He said the Commission's decision was based on the information they had at the time. The grading plan information was also not available at 2 the time. Baker stated it would not be detrimental to the general welfare, however, Prochaska said it could not be determined if this would or wouldn't be an issue with the information on that night. Mr. Baker countered that the State has very strict policies concerning water runoff Mr. Prochaska said if the Special Use was approved as part of a development, the petitioner would need a preliminary plat with detention provisions. Because this is a special use, there is no plat required. It was suggested the reports Mr. Phillips referred to should be given to the City Council. The rest of the Commissioners said they did not know if the special use would be detrimental, based on the information at the last meeting. 2. Special use will not be injurious to use of other property, nor substantially diminish property values.... Due to the lack of information on the storage method of the dirt, the Commissioners agreed the dirt could be injurious. 3. Establishment of the special use will not impede normal development and improvement of surrounding property... The Commissioners said they did not feel this would be an issue. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage or other facilities being provided... All agreed there was no documentation for this. 5. Adequate measures taken to provide ingress/egress to minimize traffic congestion.. Commissioner Weaver said this would be affected by the County who would issue the permits. A staff recommendation was made to align the entrances of the northern and southern parcels off Fox. Chairman Lindblom said there could be an effect on traffic congestion. 6. Special use shall conform to the applicable regulations of the district except as any regulations being modified by the City recommended by the Plan Commission.... None of the Commissioners were aware of any issues. New Business (Description same as 41 under Public Hearings) Ms. Barksdale-Noble said staff has been working with the Zoning Commission to update the zoning code. The PUD ordinance was also considered and research was done on State codes. In order to encourage development, more info will be provided upfront to spur construction. The entire ordinance and code were modified. It was suggested to have Plan Commission and Park Board meet in joint meetings, however, the Park Board was concerned they would not have a vote. 3 Ms. Barksdale-Noble presented a chart showing the proposed steps for a review process for building: 1. Application 2. Concept PUD or preliminary/final PUD plat 3. Go before City Council for feedback Action Item i. Text Amendment Motion: A motion was then made by Adams and seconded by Kraupner to approve this amendment. Discussion: Mr. Prochaska said a mixed use might be better and an overlay district was suggested by Ms. Barksdale-Noble. Roll call: Adams-yes, Winninger-yes, Baker-yes, Prochaska-yes, Weaver-yes, Kraupner- yes, Lindblom-yes. Passed 7-0. Additional Business Ms. Barksdale-Noble said that Evergreen Farms will be on the agenda at the next City Council meeting on April 24. Adiournment Prochaska moved and Kraupner seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting. Voice vote approval and the meeting was adjourned at 7:33pm. Respectfully submitted by Marlys Young, Minute Taker 4 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS PLAN COMMISSION MEETING PUBLIC HEARING 800 Game Farm Road Yorkville, Illinois Wednesday, April 11 , 2012 7 : 00 p . m. D-967112 11'11'1101 01 reporting service 1300 Iroquois Avenue,Suite 145 Naperville,IL 60563 630-983-0030• Fax:630-778-4824 Email: depocourt@depocourt.com •www.depocourt.com 2 1 PRESENT : 2 Mr . Tom Lindblom, Chairman, 3 Mr . Charles Kraupner, 4 Ms . Sandra Adams , 5 Ms . Jane Winninger, 6 Mr . Jeff Baker, 7 Mr . Art Prochaska, 8 Mr . James Weaver . 9 10 ALSO PRESENT : 11 Ms . Krysti Noble, Community Development 12 Director; 13 Ms . Marlys Young, Minute Taker . 14 - - - 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 3 1 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : I would like to 2 formally call the meeting to order . Could we have 3 the roll call , please . 4 MS . YOUNG : Kraupner? 5 MR. KRAUPNER: Yes . 6 MS . YOUNG : Adams ? 7 MS . ADAMS : Here . 8 MS . YOUNG : Winninger? 9 MS . WINNINGER: Here . 10 MS . YOUNG : Jones is absent . Baker? 11 MR. BAKER: Here . 12 MS . YOUNG : Prochaska? 13 MR . PROCHASKA: Here . 14 MS . YOUNG : Weaver? 15 MR. WEAVER: Here . 16 MS . YOUNG : Crouch is absent . 17 Lindblom? 18 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Present . We do have 19 a quorum. 20 You should have received the minutes 21 from the previous meeting . Are there any 22 additions or corrections? 23 (No response . ) 24 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Hearing none, Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 4 1 entertain a motion to approve the minutes . 2 MR . BAKER: So moved. 3 MR . WEAVER: Second. 4 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Moved and seconded . 5 Any further discussions? 6 (No response . ) 7 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Hearing none, those 8 in favor signify by saying aye . 9 (A chorus of ayes . ) 10 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Opposed? 11 (No response . ) 12 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Motion passes . 13 At this point I would welcome any 14 citizens ' comments , as I asked before . 15 (No response . ) 16 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Hearing none, then I 17 would like to move forward -- 18 THE WITNESS : I have one . I want to 19 submit for the record and let you know or make 20 part of the public record that there was two 21 reports that were part of a FOIA request made in 22 January of 2012 that were in the hands of the City 23 of Yorkville; and they dealt with the drainage 24 study and a traffic study that was done at the Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 5 1 intersections for Fox Road and Pavilion Road . 2 I understand you don ' t want to 3 discuss Evergreen Farms at all . That ' s fine . But 4 this information was here, available to the City . 5 That would have answered a lot of questions for 6 the Council when you made your vote . It was not 7 turned over in the FOIA request to us , so the City 8 is in violation of FOIA. But this information was 9 there . 10 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : That ' s been read 11 into the record . I ' m not sure that that ' s for us 12 to do anything about , but you can take that to the 13 Council . 14 MR. PHILLIPS : I ' m Joe Phillips with 15 Brandon Road Properties . 16 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Okay . First on the 17 agenda is the Public Hearings PC 2012-01 . United 18 City of Yorkville is proposing to amend Title 10 , 19 Chapter 13 , Planned Unit Development of Municipal 20 Zoning Ordinance to comprehensively revise the 21 method and procedure in which Planned Unit 22 Development, PUD, applications are considered for 23 approval . 24 Could I have a motion then to go Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 6 1 into public hearing . 2 MR. KRAUPNER: Moved . 3 MR . WEAVER: Second . 4 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Moved and seconded 5 to go to public hearing . Any discussion on the 6 motion? 7 (No response . ) 8 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Hearing none, those 9 in favor signify by saying aye . 10 (A chorus of ayes . ) 11 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Opposed? 12 (No response . ) 13 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Motion passes . 14 At this time, if there is anybody 15 present that wishes to speak to the Commission on 16 this public hearing, I would ask for you to stand 17 and raise your hand and take the oath . 18 (No response . ) 19 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Don ' t all stand at 20 once . Let the record show there was nobody that 21 wished to speak in the public hearing on this 22 issue . With that said, I would move that the 23 public hearing be closed . 24 MR . WEAVER: So moved . Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 7 1 MR . PROCHASKA: Second. 2 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Moved and seconded . 3 Discussion on the motion . 4 (No response . ) 5 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Hearing none, those 6 in favor signify by saying aye . 7 (A chorus of ayes . ) 8 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Opposed? 9 (No response . ) 10 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Motion passes . 11 Under old business , we have PC 12 2012-02 , D . Construction Management, Petitioner, 13 on behalf of Brandon Road Properties , LLC, Owner, 14 is requesting authorization within the R2 15 One-Family District to temporarily fill low areas 16 and grade portions of a site located at the 17 northeast and southeast corners of Fox Road and 18 Pavilion Road, Evergreen Farm Estates , with 19 uncontaminated soil from roadway projects in the 20 state of Illinois and return to agricultural uses 21 as allowed by special use permit in Section 22 10-6C-2 and Section 10-6B-2 of the United City of 23 Yorkville ' s City Code . 24 As I mentioned, there were six Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 8 1 points . We need to see if they meet the criteria 2 of the six points in order to recommend special 3 use to the Council . 4 Again, just for the record, for some 5 of you that may not have been here, our vote at 6 the last meeting was 5-0 against the motion that 7 was made to forward this in the affirmative sense . 8 It was only a recommendation . It goes to the 9 Council . Then they will consider and make a final 10 determination . 11 What I plan to do is to read each of 12 these items so the audience has a chance to hear 13 what it is we ' re discussing, and then we can 14 discuss that issue and move forward from there . 15 Okay . Item No . 1 , the 16 establishment , maintenance, or operation of the 17 special use will not be unreasonably detrimental 18 to or endanger the public health, safety, morals , 19 comfort , or general welfare . Are there some 20 comments then for the record on that point? 21 MR . PROCHASKA: Mr . Chairman . 22 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Go ahead. 23 MR. PROCHASKA: I am a little bit 24 concerned about what our task is here because, Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 9 1 again, what we stated at the last meeting, it is 2 permissible as a special use . It is not a 3 permissible use for that zoning . 4 As such, just above that first 5 statement , it says no special use shall be 6 recommended by the Plan Commission unless said 7 Commission shall find that, and then we go through 8 the six statements there . 9 My interpretation of that is that 10 the default goes to not approve unless there ' s 11 enough information provided to this group to 12 determine that none of these situations exist , as 13 opposed to a permissible use in a zoning where the 14 proof would have to be that there ' s something 15 wrong . 16 And this is kind of stated in the 17 opposite . 18 If that ' s in conflict with what the 19 State requires, I would suggest the City needs to 20 look at the ordinance, because I think we did 21 state -- in fact , in the minutes we just approved, 22 I ' m quoted as saying that there was not enough 23 information to determine some of these things and 24 that one of the things that we felt that there -- Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 10 1 or I felt , was there could be an instance of a 2 public health issue ; could be safety . 3 Is there for sure? Can I say 4 specifically there is? No . But I can also not 5 say specifically there was not because, again, we 6 didn ' t have all the facts . 7 This gentleman here said some of 8 those reports were with the City. They were not 9 here . 10 We did not have access to them. We 11 didn ' t know that stuff . 12 We have to make the decision based 13 on the information that was presented that night 14 and not recollect or try to take something else 15 that comes along later . It ' s the public hearing . 16 Whatever information is presented, we take that 17 into consideration and make a recommendation . 18 Now, for whatever reason that wasn ' t 19 there, that is fine . 20 I believe the other issue was that 21 there was not a grading plan done yet at this 22 point in time . There was nothing that showed the 23 actual flow of the water, how it would be 24 retained, the amount of retention . There was Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 11 1 nothing that showed us the outfall, where it was 2 going to go, the rate of outfall, which was all 3 dealt with questions of people and about how the 4 water would affect their property and whether that 5 would be an issue for them, standing water, or 6 that they would flood or anything like that . 7 Again, there was nothing that said 8 it was going to happen, but there was nothing 9 there that said it wasn ' t going to happen . That 10 information was not here . 11 When I go down through all of these, 12 to me, that ' s the answer, is that the ones that -- 13 the specific issue that I had were the 1 , 2 , and 14 4 ; but , again, it was because there was not enough 15 information here to determine that these 16 conditions did not exist . 17 I believe I said -- and if I didn ' t, 18 I ' ll say it now . It may be fine . It may work . 19 But we did not have the information 20 to determine that . 21 My vote was a vote not to approve it 22 as opposed to a vote to deny, if that makes sense . 23 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Krysti, you were at 24 the economic -- Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 12 1 MS . NOBLE : Sure . I just want to 2 clarify . It ' s something the staff brought up 3 initially . Each standard has to be addressed 4 individually, not in a generalized statement and 5 not just restated. 6 The way the ordinance is set up, 7 it ' s correct . It ' s in the affirmative . You have 8 to go through each statement , saying, "No, they 9 did not meet the standard because, " or, "No, they 10 didn ' t provide enough information to lead me to a 11 finding of affirmative . " 12 So everything is in the ordinance 13 set up for you to address each statement 14 individually . You just addressed about three of 15 them in one comment . So we can go through each, 16 and you can explain why. 17 MR . PROCHASKA: Thank you . 18 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Okay . With the 19 first one we ' re dealing with, something being 20 unreasonably detrimental to or endanger the public 21 health, safety, morals , comfort, or general 22 welfare . And the answer to that would be? 23 MR. BAKER: No . 24 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Any reason for that . Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 13 1 MR . BAKER: Well , I ' m answering the 2 question given to us on the paper . My answer is 3 to the question is , no, it is not detrimental . 4 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Your answer is it is 5 not detrimental . 6 MR . BAKER: It is not , no . It is not 7 unreasonably -- unreasonably -- detrimental . 8 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Any other comments 9 on that . 10 MR. PROCHASKA: I don ' t know how that -- 11 MR . BAKER: The question relates to 12 operating a specific use of the special use . I 13 think it ' s a very simple question . Yes or no . 14 MR . PROCHASKA: And the answer is that 15 it does not -- we cannot find that those issues do 16 not exist . We were not -- I was not able to find 17 that . 18 Again, had there been in my own 19 mind -- and everybody else can have their own 20 opinions . Had there been a grading plan that 21 showed how the water was to be -- how the ground 22 was to be graded, what the elevations were going 23 to be set at , how the water would flow, what the 24 detention was based on water that now sits and Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 14 1 that now you ' re going to fill it up . Those were 2 all questions and issues people had because , if 3 the water doesn ' t sit on that property, it has to 4 go somewhere else . 5 Where does it go? At what rate does 6 it go? How does it affect the neighbors? Is it 7 going to be standing water which could create a 8 public health issue? Is it something that ' s going 9 to run across the road which could create a safety 10 issue? Maybe -- 11 MR . BAKER: Certainly, you ' re well aware 12 of the facts in your -- 13 MR. PROCHASKA: I ' m still speaking, 14 Mr . Chairman . I have the floor . 15 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Go ahead . 16 MR . PROCHASKA: Again, that answer -- 17 the question I have is that , no, we could not 18 determine that that was going to be an issue . But 19 with the lack of having the information before us , 20 we cannot determine that it wouldn ' t be . 21 The way it says , no special use 22 shall be recommended unless the Commission shall 23 find that , which means you have to know that these 24 things are not going to happen; and that was my Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 15 1 statement . My statement was that there just 2 wasn ' t enough information to make that a clear 3 choice . 4 MR . BAKER: Mr . Chairman? 5 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Go ahead . 6 MR. BAKER : I believe the State of 7 Illinois has very strict policies and laws on 8 water runoff; and I believe it is that there ' s 9 nothing going to happen unless this goes through 10 the State and they sign off on it . 11 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : I don ' t know that to 12 be a fact . 13 MR . BAKER : The laws are very specific 14 on water runoff, and you know that because we ' ve 15 sat through many of these . 16 MR. PROCHASKA: Mr . Chairman, if I may . 17 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Go ahead . 18 MR . PROCHASKA: If this was done as part 19 of the development , which then it would be a 20 permissible use as part of developing the 21 property, we -- to come before this group, before 22 they could ever do anything with dirt , they would 23 have to present a preliminary plat . Is that 24 correct or not? Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 16 1 MS . NOBLE : Correct . 2 MR . PROCHASKA: And in that preliminary 3 plat , they would locate where the detention was . 4 There would have to be calculations done for how 5 much the detention was going to hold, where it was 6 going to flow, what the off-flow would be, what 7 direction it would be, how the water coming onto 8 the property would be handled, how it would be 9 handled going out . That would all be part of the 10 preliminary plat , if it was done as a permissible . 11 Because this is a special use, there 12 is no plat required . But in order to determine 13 that this is not going to be a safety issue or a 14 public health issue, we would need to know, see 15 that , and it would be a very simple thing . 16 If we present it and say, yeah, we 17 figured out how we ' re going to do this , it would 18 be done . 19 Even as a permissible use, we would 20 still require that plat before the Commission 21 would make approval , which would then allow them 22 to move the dirt . 23 MR . BAKER: I would certainly think the 24 City Council would have that information in front Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 17 1 of them before this takes place . Now you know we 2 are a step in the process . 3 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : We ' re advised to 4 present -- what this gentleman talked about 5 tonight in his report, to present that to the 6 Council and ask for their vote . 7 MR. BAKER: Right . 8 MR. PROCHASKA: Absolutely . I think 9 that ' s the -- if that information now exists , then 10 fine . Present it to the Council . 11 If they have that and they ' re 12 comfortable, it could move on . It just wasn ' t 13 here that night . Again, I ' m not saying -- 14 MR. BAKER: Well, we usually start with 15 a concept plan before . 16 MR . PROCHASKA: Or some kind of plan . 17 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Any other comments 18 on this point . 19 (No response . ) 20 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : I have been asked to 21 have each Commissioner respond whether either they 22 agree or disagree that it will not be unreasonably 23 detrimental . 24 Now, I think it ' s going to be hard Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 18 1 for a couple of you to answer that because you 2 weren ' t here, but there were four of us that were . 3 Charlie, how do you feel? 4 MR . KRAUPNER: Based on the information 5 we didn ' t have at the time, I ' m going to have to 6 disagree . Based on the information we have, I 7 don ' t know it won ' t be detrimental to the public 8 safety and welfare . 9 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Jim. 10 MR . WEAVER: I would have to agree . Lack 11 of information in order to determine . 12 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: I would agree with 13 that . So that ' s the four that are here . 14 Item 2 . The special use will not be 15 injurious to the use and enjoyment of other 16 property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose 17 already permitted, which would be residential, not 18 substantially diminish and impair property values 19 within the neighborhood. 20 I don ' t have a feel for, if this 21 were permitted, what it would do to property 22 values . 23 MR . PROCHASKA: Property values was not 24 what I was looking at with this because, again, Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 19 1 same way, I don ' t know that that ' s the issue . 2 I was looking at more the question 3 of whether it would be injurious to the use and 4 enjoyment of other properties . Again, because we 5 did not know how the water was to be collected, 6 how it was to be stored, how it was to be let go, 7 there ' s -- and there was no way to determine that 8 that would not happen . That ' s why . 9 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : I assume, Jim, by 10 nodding your head, you agree . 11 MR . WEAVER: I agree . It all stems kind 12 of from No . 4 that we ' re going to be coming up and 13 discussing . 14 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Charles . 15 MR . KRAUPNER: If I ' m reading No . 2 16 here, special use will not be injurious to the 17 use, I ' m going to have to disagree with that . I 18 think it will be injurious to the use . 19 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : That ' s my feeling, 20 also . It could be injurious to the use . 21 Item 3 , the establishment of a 22 special use will not impede the normal and 23 ordinary development and improvement of 24 surrounding property for uses permitted in the Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 20 1 district . 2 MR. PROCHASKA: I have no problem with 3 that one . 4 MR . WEAVER: I don ' t think that would be 5 an issue to impede any development . 6 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Should not be an 7 issue? Charlie , do you agree . 8 MR . KRAUPNER : I agree . 9 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Item 4 , adequate 10 utilities , access roads , drainage , and other 11 necessary facilities have been or are being 12 provided. There ' s no documentation to show that ; 13 correct? 14 MR . PROCHASKA: Again, basis of -- 15 MR . WEAVER: Agree . 16 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Agree . 17 MR . KRAUPNER : Yes . 18 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: No . 5 , adequate 19 measures have been or will be taken to provide 20 ingress or egress so designed as to minimize 21 traffic congestion in the public streets . 22 MR. WEAVER: Affected by the county . The 23 county, if I ' m not mistaken, has control of that, 24 of the egress and -- Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 21 1 MS . NOBLE : Correct . They would issue 2 permits . 3 MR . BAKER : They have issued two egress 4 and ingress points , right? 5 MS . NOBLE : No . 6 MR . BAKER : They have not yet? 7 MS . NOBLE : No . 8 MR . KRAUPNER: Did they not discuss 9 aligning something -- 10 MS . NOBLE : There was a recommendation 11 from Staff to align the entry for the northern 12 parcel and the southern parcel off of Fox . I 13 believe the Petitioner will be providing 14 application to the county for those temporary 15 access points . 16 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : I guess I ' m not so 17 sure it ' s not going to have an effect on traffic 18 congestion . We talked about the ingress and 19 egress . I haven ' t said this before, but I live on 20 Fox Road, as most of you know, and I know what the 21 traffic is on that right now . 22 At 1 : 00 this afternoon, I had 23 trouble getting on Route 47 and back up past Main 24 Street . So I would think this truck traffic, Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 22 1 however many trucks it is , that ' s in the -- it ' s 2 certainly going to contribute to it . 3 MR. WEAVER: You ' re going to have 4 construction going up and down 47 , and now you ' re 5 going to be adding that in that vicinity, more 6 truck traffic, whatever it may be . 7 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Any comment . 8 MR. KRAUPNER: I don ' t know if that ' s -- 9 I don ' t know if the truck traffic -- what ' s going 10 on is adding any more to what ' s already happening . 11 This No . 5 here -- or No . 4 here -- 12 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : No . 5 . 13 MR . KRAUPNER : No . 5 . I ' m going to have 14 to say yes on this one . I think they have 15 addressed it . 16 MR . PROCHASKA: I was going to say, 17 again, what was provided to us the night of the 18 meeting did show the offset drives , shows them 19 being offset . 20 However, I believe it ' s stated by 21 City Staff that they already made the 22 recommendation they be lined up . So to the letter 23 of what this says, that the ingress and egress 24 would be designed to minimize traffic, yes, I Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 23 1 think they did that . 2 The question of traffic congestion, 3 traffic control , further down the road is still an 4 issue, but that probably falls more under one of 5 the others . 6 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Okay . Item No . 6 . 7 The special use shall in all other respects 8 conform to the applicable regulations of the 9 district in which it is located except as such 10 regulations may in each instance be modified by 11 the City Council pursuant to the recommendations 12 of the Plan Commission . 13 I ' m not aware of any issues there . 14 Anybody else? 15 MR . KRAUPNER : No . 16 MR. BAKER : No . 17 MR. WEAVER: No . 18 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : That ' s the six 19 items . Is there something else we should be 20 doing? 21 MS . NOBLE : No . 22 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Okay . That is it on 23 this item. 24 Moving on to new business then . PC Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 24 1 2012-01 , I read that prior to the public hearing . 2 Krysti , would you give us a review 3 on that . 4 MS . NOBLE : Sure . Over the past 5 year-and-a-half, Staff has worked with our zoning 6 commission, which some of the plan commissioners 7 are a part of, to update our zoning code . 8 Part of that process , we looked at 9 our PUD ordinance and provided in-depth research 10 into what the State codes are as well as what 11 other communities are doing as well as how well 12 the ordinance has worked for the community . 13 We came up with some modifications 14 to the process , to encourage development by 15 spurring the process along, having more 16 information provided upfront to us so that we 17 could get building to happen faster and the 18 process to not be a cumbersome process . 19 With that , we modified the entire 20 ordinance and the code . If you see in your 21 packet, there are some areas where we made a few 22 more modifications from our last meeting because 23 of conversations with other staff members . 24 We did have our City Engineer at the Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 25 1 time as well as our engineering consultant review 2 some of the processes that we implemented . 3 We tried to address some issues with 4 stagnant developments which were not readily 5 addressed in the previous PUD ordinance . And I 6 can call out a section in here where it talks 7 about construction schedules to be maintained and 8 any processes that slow that construction period 9 down, which is three years, we ' re recommending . 10 If the development hadn ' t occurred 11 in that time in a timely manner, they would have 12 to come back and ask for an extension of their 13 construction agreement . That way, we ' re not left 14 with subdivisions half-finished after five or six, 15 seven, eight , ten years . 16 The process , if you notice, did not 17 apply a few things . Right now, residential PUDs 18 go through the Park Board in whole . Right now, 19 there ' s about six or seven steps an individual or 20 developer would have to take to get approval . 21 This process would shorten the 22 criteria but not the quantity of what information 23 is being provided . 24 We combined the Plan Commission with Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 26 1 a representative from the Park Board to sit at the 2 public hearing so that we ' re not having two 3 separate meetings . 4 This was presented to the Park Board 5 at their last meeting . They did express some 6 concern, but they did understand that we ' re trying 7 to expedite the process a bit, and things they 8 review are actually reviewed by Staff, as well , 9 and that they will have a say and a vote of the 10 hearing process . So they were open to that . 11 There was a suggestion of having a 12 combined or joint meeting with the Plan Commission 13 and the Park Board . Strategically, that probably 14 would work out as well . The Park Board, they make 15 recommendations , but the Plan Commission 16 recommendation would have more of a weight . So 1.7 part of the Planning Commission voting body, they 18 would have more of a say . 19 If you look at the process, there 20 are four steps . I provided a chart of what the 21 process would look like . 22 As opposed to four to five, right 23 now we ' re looking at three to four month review 24 and approval process . You have the Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 27 1 pre-application, which is required that happens 2 with Staff . Then they can jump to a concept 3 community plan review, which is optional . At that 4 point they would go before City Council , which is 5 the body that would ultimately be approving or 6 denying the application to get feedback . 7 If they choose not to do that 8 concept PUD, then they go straight to the 9 preliminary PUD plat and the final PUD plat , which 10 can be combined . 11 If you have any questions on any of 12 the specifics , I will be happy to go through them 13 with you . 14 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Are there any 15 questions for Krysti . 16 MR. KRAUPNER : I have none . 17 MR . PROCHASKA: This is the only 18 question I have . Now, this planned unit 19 development is going back to be a special use? 20 MS . NOBLE : Yes . 21 MR . PROCHASKA: On the zoning type? 22 MS . NOBLE : Correct . Two things about 23 that . In the State statutes , under the Division 24 13 , under the authority of special use, that ' s Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 28 1 where cities or municipalities are given their 2 authorization; and I think I put that as a quote 3 in your packet . 4 It says in this section that a 5 special use may be permitted in one or more zoning 6 districts ; and a special use shall be permitted 7 only after a public hearing, before some 8 commissioner or committee . This is from the State 9 statute . 10 Special use may include but are not 11 limited to public and quasi-public uses affected 12 with the public interest , and they can include 13 PUDs , planned unit developments . And that ' s where 14 we get the police power to do it . So it ' s under 15 special use . So, if a PUD falls under special 16 use . 17 If you do it as a zoning, you can ' t 18 take zoning back . Once you rezone a property, 19 unless you rezone it again in public hearing, 20 that ' s something that runs with the land . 21 As a PUD, you can, if they violate 22 the PUD ordinance or agreement, they ' re in 23 default, and they can never continue to move 24 forward with in that plan unless they come into Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 29 1 compliance . 2 Once you rezone something, that 3 person has a vested right in that , and that ' s 4 where we want to separate that distinction . 5 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Other questions or 6 concerns . 7 (No response . ) 8 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Hearing none, I 9 would entertain a motion that we recommend Council 10 approve this . 11 MS . ADAMS : So moved . 12 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Is there a second. 13 MR. KRAUPNER: Second . 14 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Moved and seconded . 15 Any further discussion . 16 MR . PROCHASKA: I just would like to say 17 that, if this goes back to be a special use, which 18 is fine -- I don ' t really have an issue with that . 19 It makes sense what you ' re saying . But I know -- 20 and again, going back to the experts we had at the 21 time we put this together, was the idea that it 22 was a zoning and a -- maybe it would be better off 23 to call it a mixed use zoning or something like 24 that . Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 30 1 MS . NOBLE : Yes . 2 MR. PROCHASKA: Because the purpose of 3 this was to allow for mixed use zoning at one 4 time, that would necessarily mean you were 5 getting -- that you weren ' t necessarily going 6 outside what was normally required for each of the 7 zoning areas . But it was being zoned at one time . 8 So the City could better put 9 together a program where things would be developed 10 succinctly, and it wouldn ' t end up with odd -- 11 something odd because you zone something 12 residential and then the piece next to it was 13 commercial or something else . 14 While we do have things to address 15 some of that , one thing we don ' t address by doing 16 that is an overall look or an overall plan for the 17 area . 18 To me, the best example of that is 19 just driving right down the street here, where 20 it ' s all retention . We have a commercial building 21 at the corner; and behind that , we have an office 22 building that has green and yellow metal siding . 23 It meets all codes . It was built to 24 everything, but everything else in this area has Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 31 1 brick fronts and everything else . Really, there ' s 2 really nothing you could do about it because it 3 was correct . 4 Whereas , again, if something was 5 designed as a multiuse, whatever that proper 6 terminology would be . So I mean, it would be my 7 thought that maybe the City Council could look at 8 somehow resurrecting this as something else . 9 MS . NOBLE : I understand where he is 10 coming from. He ' s saying that , with the special 11 use, you typically have an underlying zoning 12 district . So if we have an R4 PUD, the underlying 13 zoning is PUD that we grant variations from, and 14 we don ' t want to have a B2 and a PUD all in one 15 site . We want a comprehensive zoning district . 16 A way to address that, inclusive of 17 how we ' re doing this PUD, is to establish an 18 overlay district on our zoning ordinance or in our 19 zoning codes , or we could do a mixed use . 20 So when a property comes in for a 21 PUD, it will have the PUD as a special use ; and 22 designated on our zoning map, it would say PUD 23 overlay, or it could say mixed-use zoning . 24 MR. PROCHASKA: However that ' s going to Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 32 1 work out . But one of the ways to tie that , all 2 the development , because I think that was the 3 purpose why this was created, to do it without the 4 expectation that there would be deviations from 5 what was in the actual zoning, which PUD kind of 6 gets at . 7 MS . NOBLE : Correct . 8 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Okay . We have a 9 motion and a second . Any further discussion from 10 anybody? 11 (No response . ) 12 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Hearing none, could 13 we have the roll call , please . 14 MS . YOUNG : Adams? 15 MS . ADAMS : Yes . 16 MS . YOUNG : Winninger? 17 MS . WINNINGER: Yes . 18 MS . YOUNG : Baker? 19 MR . BAKER : Yes . 20 MS . YOUNG : Prochaska? 21 MR . PROCHASKA: Yes . 22 MS . YOUNG : Weaver? 23 MR. WEAVER: Yes . 24 MS . YOUNG : Kraupner? Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 33 1 MR. KRAUPNER: Yes . 2 MS . YOUNG : Lindblom? 3 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Yes . Motion passes . 4 That is it for our agenda . Do you 5 have anything else for us . 6 MS . NOBLE : I do not . For anybody who ' s 7 left in the public, the Evergreen Farm Estates 8 will be on the next City Council agenda . 9 I think it ' s on the 24th; as well as 10 the PUD will be on the 24th . 11 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Do we hear a motion 12 to adjourn . 13 MR . PROCHASKA: So moved . 14 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Second? 15 MR. KRAUPNER : Second . 16 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Those in favor . 17 (A chorus of ayes . ) 18 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM : Thank you . 19 (Which were all the 20 proceedings had . ) 21 - - - 22 23 24 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 34 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS . 2 COUNTY OF KENDALL ) 3 I , Angela Phipps , a Certified Shorthand 4 Reporter for the State of Illinois , do hereby 5 certify that I reported in shorthand the 6 proceedings had at the hearing of the 7 above-entitled cause and that the foregoing Report 8 of Proceedings, Pages 1 through 33 , inclusive, is 9 a true; correct, and complete transcript of my 10 shorthand notes so taken at the time and place 11 aforesaid . 12 I further certify that I am neither 13 counsel for nor related to counsel for any of the 14 parties to these proceedings , nor am I in any way 15 related to any of the parties to these 16 proceedings , nor am I in any way interested in the 17 outcome thereof . 18 I further certify that my 19 certificate annexed hereto applies to the original 20 transcript and copies thereof, signed and 21 certified under my hand only . I assume no 22 responsibility for the accuracy of any reproduced 23 copies not made under my control or direction . 24 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 35 1 hereunto set my hand this 11th day of May 2012 . 2 3 - . < � ------ ---------- T` 4 ANGELA PHIPPS, CSR CSR No . 084-003506 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 36 0 A 15:17 aye[31-4:8,6:9, Certified[1 1- 24:20 align[1]-21:11 7:6 34:3 Code[i]-7:23 084-003506[1]- able[1]-13:16 aligning[1]-21:9 ayes[4]-4:9, certify[3]-34:5, codes[31-24:10, 35:4 above-entitled I.,i I allow[21-16:21, 6:10,7:7,33:17 34:12,34:18 30:23,31:19 -34:7 30:3 Chairman[5]- collected[1]- absent[2]-3:10, allowed[i]-7:21 B 2:2,8:21, 14:14, 19:5 3:16 ALSO[1]-2:10 15:4, 15:16 combined[3]- 1[31-8:15, 11:13, Absolutely[1]- amend[1]-5:18 B2[i]-31:14 CHAIRMAN[59]- 25:24,26:12, 34:8 17:8 Baker[3]-2:6, 10[1]-5:18 amount[�]- 3:1,3:18,3:24, 27:10 access[3]- 10:24 3:10,32:18 4:4,4:7,4:10, comfort[21-8:19, 10-66-2[1]-7:22 10:10,20:10, Angela[1l-34:3 BAKER[171- 4:12,4:16,5:10, 12:21 10-6C-2[i]-7:22 21:15 ANGELA - 3:11,4:2, 12:23, 5:16,6:4,6:8, comfortable[1]- 11[1]-1:17 accuracy[1]- 35:4 13:1, 13:6, 6:11,6:13,6:19, 17:12 11th[11-35:1 34:22 annexed[i]- 13:11, 14:11, 7:2,7:5,7:8, coming[31-16:7, 13[2]-5:19, actual[2]-10:23, 34:19 15:4,15:6, 7:10,8:22, 19:12,31:10 27:24 32:5 15:13, 16:23, 11:23, 12:18, answer[7]- comment(z)- 1:00[1]-21:22 Adams[3]-2:4, 11:12, 12:22, 17:7, 17:14, 12:24, 13:4, 12:15,22:7 3:6,32:14 13:2, 13:4, 21:3,21:6, 13:8,14:15, comments[41- 2 ADAMS[31-3:7, 13:14, 14:16, 23:16,32:19 15:5, 15:11, 4:14,8:20, 13:8, 29:11,32:15 18:1 based[2]-10:12, 15:17, 17:3, 17:17 2[3]-11:13, 13:24 18:14, 19:15 adding[2]-22:5, answered[1]- 17:17, 17:20, commercial[z]- 22:10 Based(2]-18:4, 18:9, 18:12, 2012[31-1:17, 5:5 30:13,30:20 18:6 19:9,19:14, additions[11- answering[1]- Commission[co] 4:22,35:1 3:22 basis[i]-20:14 19:19,20:6, 2012-01[2]-5:17, 13:1 -6:15,9:6,9:7, ] behalf[1]-7:13 20:9,20:16, address[5]- applicable[� - 14:22, 16:20, 24:1 behind[1]-30:21 20:18,21:16, 12:13,25:3, 23:8 23:12,25:24, 2012-02[11-7:12 30:14,30:15, best[11-30:18 22:7,22:12, 24th[z]-33:9, application[31- 26:12,26:15, 31:16 21:14,27:1, better[21-29:22, 23:6,23:18, 26:17 33:10 addressed a 30:8 23:22,27: 4, addressed[4)- 27:6 1 commission[1]- 3 12:3, 12:14, bit(2]-8:23,26:7 29:5,29:8, applications[�]- 24:6 22:15,25:5 5;22 Board[51-25:18, 29:12,29:14, COMMISSION[l] 3[1]-19:21 adequate 121- applies(1]-34:19 26:1,26:4, 32:8,32:12, -1:7 33[1]-34:8 20:9,20:18 apply[i]-25:17 26:13,26:14 33:3,33:11, commissioner[l] adjourn[1]- approval[41- body 12]-26:17, 33:14,33:16, -28:8 4 33:12 5:23, 16:21, 27:5 33:18 Commissioner advised[1l-17:3 25:20,26:24 Brandon[2]- chance[1]-8:12 [1]-17:21 4[41-11:14, affect[2]-11:4, approve[a]-4:1, 5:15,7:13 Chapter[1]-5:19 commissioners 19:12,20:9, 14:6 9:10, 11:21, brick 11]-31:1 Charles[2]-2:3, [1]-24:6 22:11 affected[1]- 29;10 brought p]-12:2 19:14 committee[1]- 47(2]-21:23, 28:11 approved[1]- building[3]- Charlie(2]-18:3, 28:8 22:4 Affected[1]- 9;21 24:17,30:20, 20:7 communities p]- 20:22 approving[1]- 30:22 chart[1]-26:20 24:11 5 aforesaid[i]- 27:5 built[1]-30:23 choice[1]-15:3 Community[1]- 34:11 April(1)-1:17 business[21- choose[1]-27:7 2:11 5[4]-20:18, afternoon(1]- area[2]-30:17, 7:11,23:24 chorus(a]-4:9, community[2]- 22:11,22:12, 21:22 30:24 6:10,7:7,33:17 24:12,27:3 22:13 agenda(3]-5:17, areas(3]-7:15, C cities[1]-28:1 complete[1]- 5-0[1l-8:6 33:4,33:8 24:21,30:7 citizens'[11-4:14 34:9 agree[7]-17:22, calculations[i]- CITY[1]-1:4 9 Art[�l-2:7 compliance[1]- 6 18:10, 18:12, 16:4 City[�6]-4:22, assume[2]-19:9, 29:1 19:10 cannot 2 - 5:4,5:7,5:18,, 19:11, 6[i]-23:6 x'21 13:15,[ 1 14:20 comprehensive 20:7,20:8 audience[1]- 7:22,7:23,9:19, [1]-31:15 Agree[21-20:15, certainly[21- 10:8, 16:24, 9 8:12 comprehensive) 7 20:16 16:23,22:2 22:21,23:11, authority[�]- Certainly[�]- 24:24,27:4, Y[1l-5:20 agreement[z]- 27;24 concept[3]- 7:00[�]-1:18 14:11 p 25:13,28:22 authorization[z] 30:8,31:7,33:8 17:15,27:2, agricultural[1]- -7:14,28:2 certificate[1]- clarify[i]-12:2 27:8 34:19 7;20 clear[]-15:2 available[�1-5:4 concern[1]-26:6 800[1]-1:12 ahead[4]-8:22, aware[2]-14:11, certified[il- closed[1]-6:23 concerned(1]- 14:15, 15:5, 34:21 code[2]-24:7, 23:13 8:24 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 37 concerns m- 25:22 diminish[1]- 8:18, 12:20 fill[21-7:15, 14:1 34:21,35:1 29:6 Crouch p]-3:16 18:18 Engineer[1 1- final[2]-8:9,27:9 handled[2]- conditions[1]- CSR[21-35:4, direction[2]- 24:24 fine[,,]-5:3, 16:8, 16:9 11:16 35:4 16:7,34:23 engineering[1]- 10:19, 11:18, hands[1]-4:22 conflict[1]-9:18 cumbersome[t1- Director[]-2:12 25:1 17:10,29:18 happy[1]-27:12 conform[11-23:8 24:18 dirt[2]-15:22, enjoyment[21- finished[1]- hard[11-17:24 congestion[31- 16:22 18:15, 19:4 25:14 head[11-19:10 20:21,21:18, p disagree[3]- entertain[21-4:1, First[1]-5:16 health[5]-8:18, 23:2 17:22, 18:6, 29:9 first[2]-9:4, 10:2, 12:21, consider[11-8:9 D-967112[1]- 19:17 entire[1 1-24:19 12:19 14:8, 16:14 consideration p] 1:24 discuss[3]-5:3, entitled[1]-34:7 five[2]-25:14, hear[2]-8:12, -10:17 dealing[i1- 8:14,21:8 entry[i]-21:11 26:22 33:11 considered[1]- 12:19 discussing 121- establish[1]- flood[i]-11:6 hearing[121-6:1, 5:22 dealt[21-4:23, 8:13, 19:13 31:17 floor[]-14:14 6:5,6:16,6:21, construction[4]- 11:3 discussion[31- establishment[2] flow[41-10:23, 6:23, 10:15, 22:4,25:7,25:8, decision[1]- 6:5,29:15,32:9 -8:16, 19:21 13:23, 16:6 24:1,26:2, 25:13 10:12 Discussion[1]- Estates[2]-7:18, FOIA[31-4:21, 26:10,28:7, Construction[1]- default[21-9:10, 7:3 33:7 5:7,5:8 28:19,34:6 7:12 28:23 discussions p]- Evergreen[31- foregoing[1]- Hearing[71-3:24, consultant[1]- deny[1]-11:22 4:5 5:3,7:18,33:7 34:7 4:7,4:16,6:8, 25:1 denying[1]-27:6 distinction[1]- example[11- formally[t]-3:2 7:5,29:8,32:12 continue[1]- depth[1]-24:9 29:4 30:18 forward[4]-4:17, HEARING[1]- 28:23 designated[1]- District[i]-7:15 except[11-23:9 8:7,8:14,28:24 1:8 contribute[11- 31:22 district[51-20:1, exist[3]-9:12, four[51-18:2, Hearings p]- 22:2 designed[31- 23:9,31:12, 11:16, 13:16 18:13,26:20, 5:17 control[31- 20:20,22:24, 31:15,31:18 exists[1]-17:9 26:22,26:23 hereby[1]-34:4 20:23,23:31 31:5 districts[1]-28:6 expectation[i]- Fox[41-5:1,7:17, hereto[11-34:19 34:23 detention[31- Division[t]- 32:4 21:12,21:20 hereunto[i]- conversations[1] 13:24, 16:3, 27:23 expedite[11- front[i]-16:24 35:1 -24:23 16:5 documentation 26:7 fronts[1]-31:1 hold[1]-16:5 1 copies[21-34:20, determination[ 1 p [1]-20:12 experts[1]- 34:23 -8:10 done[6]-4:24, 29:20 G corner[i]-30:21 determine[9]- 10:21, 15:18, explain[1]-12:16 corners[i]-7:17 9:12,9:23, 16:4,16:10, express[1]-26:5 Game[i]-1:12 idea[11-29:21 Correct[41-16:1, 11:15, 11:20, 16:18 extension[1]- genera[[21-8:19, ILLINOIS[2]-1:5, 21:1,27:22, 14:18, 14:20, down[5]-11:11, 25:12 12:21 34:1 32:7 16:12, 18:11, 22:4,23:3,25:9, generalized[1]- Illinois[41-1:13, correct[51-12:71 19:7 30:19 F 12:4 7:20, 15:7,34:4 15:24,20:13, detrimental[7]- drainage[2]- gentleman[2]- immediate[1]- 31:3,34:9 8:17,12:20, 4:23,20:10 facilities[1]- 10:7,17:4 18:16 corrections[1]- 13:3,13:5, 13:7, drives[1]-22:18 20:11 given[21-13:2, impair[1]-18:18 3:22 17:23, 18:7 driving[11-30:19 fact[2]-9:21, 28:1 impede[21- Council[121-5:6, developed[1]- 15:12 grade[1 1-7:16 19:22,20:5 5:13,8:3, 8:9, 30.9 E facts[2]-10:6, graded[1]-13:22 implemented[i1- 16:24, 17:6, developer[i]- 14:12 grading[2]- 25:2 17:10,23:11, 25:20 economic[1 1- falls[2]-23:4, 10:21, 13:20 improvement[l] 27:4,29:9„31:7, developing[1]- 11:24 28:15 grant[1]-31:13 -19:23 33:8 15:20 effect[11-21:17 Family[1]-7:15 green[11-30:22 IN p)-34:24 counsel[2]- Development[31 egress[5]- Farm[31-1:12, ground[1]-13:21 in-depth 11]-24:9 34:13 -2:11,5:19, 20:20,20:24, 7:18,33:7 group[2]-9:11, include[2]- county[3]- 5:22 21:3,21:19, Farms[q-5:3 15:21 28:10,28:12 20:22,20:23, development[71- 22:23 faster[ ]-24:17 guess[1]-21:16 inclusive[2]- 21:14 15:19, 19:23, eight[t]-25:15 favor[41-4:8, 31:16,34:8 COUNTY[1]- 20:5,24:14, either[1]-17:21 6:9,7:6,33:16 H individual[i]- 34:2 25:10,27:19, elevations[1]- feedback[1]- 25:19 couple[1]-18:1 32:2 13:22 27:6 half[2]-24:5, individually[21- create[2]-14:7, developments[21 encourage[1]- felt[21-9:24, 10:1 25:14 12:4, 12:14 14:9 -25:4,28:13 24:14 few[2]-24:21, half-finished[1]- information[19)- created[1]-32:3 deviations[1]- end[1]-30:10 25:17 25:14 5:4,5:8,9:11, criteria(2)-8:1, 32:4 endanger(2]- figured[1]-16:17 hand[3]-6:17, 9:23, 10:13, Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 38 10:16, 11:10, 34:2 33:14,33:16, 30:3,31:19, 32:23,33:1, northern[iI- 11:15, 11:19, kind[4]-9:16, 33:18 31:23 33:13,33:15 21:11 12:10, 14:19, 17:16, 19:11, lined[1]-22:22 mixed-use[1]- MS[331-3:4,3:6, notes[1] 34:10 15:2, 16:24, 32:5 live[i]-21:19 31:23 3:7,3:8,3:9, nothing[6]- 17:9, 18:4, 18:6, Kraupner[3]- LLC[1]-7:13 modifications[2) 3:10,3:12,3:14, 10:22, 11:1, 18:11,24:16, 2:3,3:4,32:24 locate[1]-16:3 -24:13,24:22 3:16, 12:1, 16:1, 11:7, 11:8, 15:9, 2522 KRAUPNER[14]- located[2]-7:16, modified[2)- 21:1,21:5,21:7, 31:2 ingress[4]- 3:5,6:2, 18:4, 23:9 23:10,24:19 21:10,23:21, notice[1]-25:16 20:20,21:4, 19:15,20:8, look[5]-9:20, month p)-26:23 24:4,27:20, 21:18,22:23 20:17,21:8, 26:19,26:21, morals[2]-8:18, 27:22,29:11, 0 injurious[5]- 22:8,22:13, 30:16,31:7 12:21 30:1,31:9,32:7, 18:15, 19:3, 23:15,27:16, looked[1]-24:8 most[1]-21:20 32:14,32:15, oath[1]-6:17 19:16, 19:18, 29:13,33:1, looking[3)- motion[e]-4:1, 32:16,32:17, occurred[1]- 19:20 33:15 18:24, 19:2, 5:24,6:6,7:3, 32:18,32:20, 25:10 instance[2]- Krysti[4]-2:11, 26:23 8:6,29:9,32:9, 32:22,32:24, odd[2]-30:10, 10:1,23:10 11:23,24:2, low[1]-7:15 33:11 33:2,33:6 30:11 interest[1]- 27:15 Motion[4]-4:12, multiuse[1]- OF[3]-1:4,34:1, 28:12 M 6:13,7:10,33:3 31:5 34:2 interested[1]- L move[6]-4:17, Municipal[1)- off-flow[1]-16:6 34:16 Main p -21:23 6:22,8:14, 5:19 office[il-30:21 interpretation[1] Lack[1]-18:10 maintained[1]- 16:22, 17:12, municipalities[1] offset[2]-22:18, -9:9 lack[i]-14:19 25:7 28:23 -28:1 22:19 intersections[1]- land[i)-28:20 maintenance[1]- moved[4]-4:2, old[1]-7:11 5:1 last[4]-8:6,9:1, 6:16 6:24,29:11, N Once[2]-28:18, issue[17]-6:22, 24:22,26:5 Management[1]- 33:13 29:2 8:14, 10:2, laws[2]-15:7, 7:12 Moved[5]-4:4, necessarily[2]- once[1]-6:20 10:20, 11:5 15:13 manner[i]- 6:2,6:4,7:2, 30:4,30:5 One[i)-7:15 11:13, 14:8, lead[1]-12:10 25:11 29:14 necessary[1)- one[13]-4:18, 14:10, 14:18, left[2)-25:13, map[1]-31:22 Moving[i]- 20:11 9:24, 12:15, 16:13, 16:14, 33:7 Marlys[1)-2:13 23:24 need[2]-8:1, 12:19,20:3, 19:1,20:5,20:7. letter[i]-22:22 mean[2]-30:4, MR[691-3:5, 16:14 22:14,23:4, 21:1,23:4, limited[1]-28:11 31:6 3:11,3:13,3:15, needs[1]-9:19 28:5,30:3,30:7, 29:18 Lindblom[3]- means[1]-14:23 4:2,4:3,5:14, neighborhood[1] 30:15,31:14, issued[1]-21:3 2:2,3:17,33:2 measures[1]- 6:2,6:3,6:24, -18:19 32:1 issues[41-13:15, LINDBLOM[59]- 20:19 7:1,8:21,8:23, neighbors[1]- One-Family[1]- 14:2,23:13, 3:1,3:18,3:24, meet[2]-8:1, 12:17, 12:23, 14:6 7:15 25:3 4:4,4:7,4:10, 12:9 13:1, 13:6, never[1]-28:23 ones[1]-11:12 Item[5]-8:15, 4:12,4:16,5:10, MEETING[il-1:7 13:10, 13:11, new p]-23:24 open[i]-26:10 18:14, 19:21, 5:16,6:4,6:8, meeting[8]-3:2, 13:14, 14:11, next[2]-30:12, operating[i]- 20:9,23:6 6:11,6:13,6:19, 3:21,8:6,9:1, 14:13, 14:16 33:8 13:12 item[1]-23:23 7:2,7:5,7:8, 22:18,24:22, 15:4, 15:6, night[3]-10:13, operation[1]- items[2]-8:12, 7:10,8:22, 26:5,26:12 15:13, 15:16, 17:13,22:17 8:16 23:19 11:23, 12:18, meetings[1)- 15:18, 16:2, Noble[1]-2:11 opinions[1]- 12:24, 13:4, 26:3 16:23, 17:7, NOBLE[14]- 13:20 J 13:8, 14:15, meets[1]-30:23 17:8, 17:14, 12:1, 16:1,21:1, opposed[3]- 15:5, 15:11, members[1]- 17:16, 18:4, 21:5,21:7. 9:13, 11:22, James[1]-2:8 15:17, 17:3, 24:23 18:10, 18:23, 21:10,23:21, 26:22 Jane[11-2:5 17:17, 17:20, mentioned[1]- 19:11, 19:15, 24:4,27:20, Opposed[3]- January[1]-4:22 18:9, 18:12, 7:24 20:2,20:4,20:8, 27:22,30:1, 4:10,6:11,7:8 Jeff[i]-2:6 19:9, 19:14, metal[1]-30:22 20:14,20:15, 31:9,32:7,33:6 opposite[1]- Jim[2]-18:9, 19:19,20:6, method[1]-5:21 20:17,20:22, nobody[1]-6:20 9:17 19:9 20:9,20:16, mind(1)-13:19 21:3,21:6,21:8, none[9)-3:24, optional[1]-27:3 Joe[1]-5:14 20:18,21:16, minimize[2]- 22:3,22:8, 4:7,4:16,6:8, order[4]-3:2, joint[1]-26:12 22:7,22:12, 20:20,22:24 22:13,22:16, 7:5,9:12,27:16, 8:2, 16:12, Jones[1]-3:10 23:6,23:18, Minute[1]-2:13 23:15,23:16, 29:8,32:12 18:11 jump[i1-27:2 23:22,27:14, minutes[3]- 23:17,27:16, normal[1]-19:22 Ordinance[1]- 29:5,29:8, 3:20,4:1,9:21 27:17,27:21, normally[1]- 5:20 K 29:12,29:14, 29:13,29:16, 30:6 mistaken[�]- ordinance[s)- 32:8,32:12, 20:23 30:2,31:24, northeast[1 9:20, 12:6, KENDALL[11- 33:3,33:11, ,32:19 32:21, 7:17 mixed[a]-29:23, 12:12,24:9, Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 39 24:12,24:20, 7:12,21:13 34:14,34:16 6:21,6:23,8:18, 10:14 restated[1]-12:5 25:5,28:22, PHILLIPS[1]- Proceedings p)- 10:2, 10:15, recommend[21- resurrecting ill- 31:18 5:14 34:8 12:20, 14:8, 8:2,29:9 31:8 ordinary[l]- Phillips[1]-5:14 process[131- 16:14, 18:7, recommendatio retained[1]- 19:23 PHIPPS[1]-35:4 17:2,24:8, 20:21,24:1, n[5]-8:8, 10:24 original Ill- Phipps[1]-34:3 24:14,24:15, 26:2,28:7, 10:17,21:10, retention[2]- 34:19 piece ill-30:12 24:18,25:16, 28:11,28:12, 22:22,26:16 10:24,30:20 outcome[1]- place[z]-17:1, 25:21,26:7, 28:19,33:7 recommendatio return[1]-7:20 34:17 34:10 26:10,26:19, PUD[l a]-5:22, ns[2]-23:11, review[5]-24:2, outfal1(2)-11:1, PLAN]l]-1:7 26:21,26:24 24:9,25:5,27:8, 26:15 25:1,26:8, 11:2 plan[9]-8:11, processes[21- 27:9,28:15, recommended[2] 26:23,27:3 outside[l]-30:6 10:21, 13:20, 25:2,25:8 28:21,28:22, -9:6,14:22 reviewed[1]- overall[2)-30:16 17:15, 17:16, Prochaska[31- 31:12,31:13, recommending 26:8 overlay[2]- 24:6,27:3, 2:7,3:12,32:20 31:14,31:17, [1]-25:9 revise p -5:20 31:18,31:23 28:24,30:16 PROCHASKA[251 31:21,31:22, record[s]-4:19, rezone[31- own[2]-13:18, Plan[5]-9:6, -3:13,7:1, 32:5,33:10 4:20,5:11,6:20, 28:18,28:19, 13:19 23:12,25:24, 8:21,8:23, PUDs[2]-25:17, 8:4,8:20 29:2 Owner ill-7:13 26:12,26:15 12:17, 13:10, 28:13 regulations[2]- road[z]-14:9, Planned[2]- 13:14, 14:13, purpose[3]- 23:8,23:10 23:3 P 5:19,5:21 14:16, 15:16, 18:16,30:2, related[2]- Road[8]-1:12, planned[21- 15:18, 16:2, 32:3 34:13,34:15 5:1,5:15,7:13, P.M[1]-1:18 27:18,28:13 17:8, 17:16, pursuant[i]- relates[l1-13:11 7:17,7:18, packet[2]-24:21, Planning[1]- 18:23,20:2, 23:11 report[1]-17:5 21:20 28:3 26:17 20:14,22:16, put[3l-28:2, Report[l]-34:7 roads[11-20:10 Pages[1]-34:8 plat y]-15:23, 27:17,27:21, 29:21,30:8 reported[1]- roadway[11- paper[l]-13:2 16:3, 16:10, 29:16,30:2, 34:5 7:19 parcel[2]-21:12 16:12, 16:20, 31:24,32:21, Q Reporter[l1- roll[2]-3:3, Park[5]-25:18, 27:9 33:13 26:1,26:4, program - quantity[l1- 34'4 32:13 point[s]-4:13, P 9 Ill reports[z]-4:21, Route[1]-21:23 26:13,26:14 8:20, 10:22, 30:9 25:22 Part[1]-24:8 projects -7:19 q [ ]-28:11 10:8 run[f]-14:9 17:18,27:4 P 1 [] quasi � representative[1] runoff[2]-15:8, part[7]-4:20, P oints[a]-8:1, proof[l]-9:14 quasi-public[1]- -26:1 15:14 4:21, 15:18, 8:2,21:4,21:15 proper[l1-31:5 28:11 reproduced[1]- runs[1]-28:20 15:20, 16:9, police[l]-28:14 Properties[2]- questions[s]- 34.22 24:7,26:17 5:15,7:13 5:5, 11:3, 14:2, policies[i]-15:7 request[2]-4:21, S parties[2]- portions[11-7:16 Properties[1]- 27:11,27:15, 5:7 34:14,34:15 power[ 29.5 requesting[l]- ]-28:14 19:4 safety[s]-8:18, passes[a]-4:12, pre[l]-27:1 Property[lo]- quorum[1]-3:19 7:14 10:2, 12:21, 6:13,7:10,33:3 11:4, 14:3, quote Vin]-28:2 14:9, 16:13, pre-application require[�]-16:20 past[z]-21:23, 15:21, 16:8, quoted[l1-9:22 18:8 [�]-27:1 required[3]- 24:4 preliminary[a]- 18:16, 18:18, 16:12,27:1, Sandra pal-2:4 Pavilion[2]-5:1, 15:23, 16:2, 18:21, 19:24, R 30:6 sat[il-15:15 7:18 16:10,27:9 28:18,31:20 requires -9:19 schedules ill- PC[3]-5:17, Property - R2[11-31:1 s [] 25:7 present[s]-6:15, P �[ 1 R4[�]-31:12 research[�]- 7:11,23:24 15:23, 16:16, 18:23 24:9 second[2]- re ]raise[� -6:17 people[21-11:3, 17:4, 17:5 proposing[l]- residential[31- 29:12,32:9 rate 5 -11:2, Seconds 4:3, 14:2 Present[z]-3:18, 5:18 18:17,25:17, [1- 14:5 period I q-25:8 17:10 provide 12]- read[3]-5:10, 30:12 6:3,7:1,29:13, permissible[s]- PRESENT(2)- 12:10,20:19 8:11,24:1 respects[l]- 33:14,33:15 9:2,9:3,9:13, 2:1,2:10 provided[7]- 1 23:7 seconded[a]- readily[� -25:4 15:20, 16:10, presented[3]- 9:11,20:12, respond[�]- 4:4,6:4,7:2, 16:19 22:17,24:9, reading ill- 29:14 10:13, 10:16, permit[ 19:15 17:21 ]-7:21 26;4 24:16,25:23, section[2]-25:6, really[2)-29:18, response[1�1- permits[�]-21:2 previous z - 26:20 28:4 P [ ] 31:2 3:23,4:6,4:11, permitted[51- 3:21,25:5 providing[1]- 4:15 6:7 6:12 Section[2]-7:21, 18:17, 18:21, problem[l]-20:2 , , ,21:13 Really[1]-31:1 7:22 6:18,7:4,7:9, 19:24,28:5, PUBLIC 1:8 reason[21- procedure[�]- [ ]- 17:19,29:7, see[31-8:1, 10:18, 12:24 28:6 5:21 Public[l1-5:17 32:11 16:14,24:20 received[1]-3:20 person[1]-29:3 proceedings[4]- Public[22]-4:20, responsibility[1] sense[31-8:7, Petitioner[z]- 6:1,6:5,6:16, recollect[�]- 11:22,29:19 33:20,34:6, -34:22 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 40 separate[21- specific(3)- succinctly[1]- U 11:4,11:5, Z 26:3,29:4 11:13, 13:12, 30:10 13:21, 13:23, set[4]-12:6, 15:13 suggest[1]-9:19 ultimately[11- 13:24, 14:3, zone p]-30:11 12:13, 13:23, specifically[2]- suggestion[i]- 27:5 14:7,15:8, zoned[1]-30:7 35:1 10:4, 10:5 26:11 uncontaminated 15:14, 16:7, zoning[20]-9:3, seven[2]-25:15, specifics[1]- surrounding[1]- (1]-7:19 19:5 9:13,24:5,24:7, 25:19 27:12 19:24 Under[1]-7:11 ways[1]-32:1 27:21,28:5, shall[s]-9:5,9:7, spurring[1]- under p]-23:4, Weaver[3]-2:8, 28:17,28:18, 14:22,23:7, 24:15 T 27:23,27:24, 3:14,32:22 29:22,29:23, 28:6 SS[t]-34:1 28:14,28:15, WEAVER(12]- 30:3,30:7, shorten p)- staff[2]-12:2, Taker(1]-2:13 34:21,34:23 3:15,4:3,6:3, 31:11,31:13, 25:21 24:23 talks[1]-25:6 underlying(2]- 6:24,18:10, 31:15,31:18, Shorthand[11- Staff[5]-21:11, task[1]-8:24 31:11,31:12 19:11,20:4, 31:19,31:22, 34:3 22:21,24:5, temporarily[1]- unit[2]-27:18, 20:15,20:22, 31:23,32:5 shorthand[2]- 26:8,27:2 7:15 28:13 22:3,23:17, Zoning[1]-5:20 34:5,34:10 stagnant(i1- temporary[1]- Unit[2]-5:19, 32:23 show[31-6:20, 25:4 21:14 5:21 Wednesday(1]- 20:12,22:18 stand[2]-6:16, ten[1]-25:15 UNITED[1]-1:4 1:17 showed(3]- 6:19 terminology[1]- United[2]-5:17, weight[i]-26:16 10:22, 11:1, standard(2]- 31:6 7:22 welcome(1)- 13:21 12:3, 12:9 TESTIMONY p]- unless[6]-9:6, 4:13 shows[1]-22:18 standing[2]- 34:24 9:10, 14:22, welfare[3]-8:19, siding[i]-30:22 11:5, 14:7 THE[i]-4:18 15:9,28:19, 12:22, 18:8 sign[i]-15:10 start[i]-17:14 thereof[2]- 28:24 Whereas[1]- signed p]-34:20 state[2]-7:20, 34:17,34:20 unreasonably[5] 31:4 signify[3]-4:8, 9:21 three[3]-12:14, -8:17, 12:20, WHEREOF[1]- 6:9,7:6 STATE[1]-34:1 25:9,26:23 13:7, 17:22 34:24 simple[2]-13:13, State[71-9:19, tie p� -32:1 up[1o]-12:2, whole p]-25:18 16:15 15:6, 15:10, timely[i]-25:11 12:6, 12:13, Winninger[3]- sit[2]-14:3,26:1 24:10,27:23, Title[1]-5:18 14:1, 19:12, 2:5,3:8,32:16 site[2]-7:16, 28:8,34:4 together[2]- 21:23,22:4, WINNINGER(2]- 31:15 statement[6]- 29:21,30:9 22:22,24:13, 3:9,32:17 sits[i]-13:24 9:5, 12:4, 12:8, Tom[1]-2:2 30:10 wished[i]-6:21 situations[11- 12:13, 15:1 tonight[1]-17:5 update[1]-24:7 wishes[1]-6:15 9:12 statements[1]- traffic[lo]-4:24, upfront[1]- WITNESS[1]- six(6]-7:24,8:2, 9:8 20:21,21:17, 24:16 4:18 9:8,23:18, statute[1]-28:9 21:21,21:24, uses[3]-7:20, 25:14,25:19 statutes p]- 22:6,22:9, 19:24,28:11 y slow[1]-25:8 27:23 22:24,23:2, utilities[1]- soil[1]-7:19 stems[1]-19:11 23:3 20:10 year(1]-24:5 somewhere[1]- step[1]-17:2 transcript[2]- yearand-a-half 14:4 steps[2]-25:19, 34:9,34:20 V [1l-24:5 southeast(1]- 26:20 tried 111-25:3 years[2]-25:9, 7:17 still(3]-14:13, trouble[1]-21:23 values[3]-18:18, 25:15 southern[1]- 16:20,23:3 truck[3]-21:24, 18:22, 18:23 yellow[1]-30:22 21:12 stored[1]-19:6 22:6 22:9 variations[1]- YORKVILLE[2]- speaking[1]- straight p]-27:8 trucks p1]-22:1 31:13 1:4,1:5 14:13 Strategically[1]- true[1]-34:9 vested[1]-29:3 Yorkville(3]vicinity[2]- 1:13,4:23,5:18- Special[�]- 26:13 try[1]-10:14 v18:16,22:5 Yorkville's[�]- 28:10 Street[1]-21:24 trying[1]-26:6 violate[2]-28:21 ork special[21]- street[1]-30:19 turned[1]-5:7 violation[�]- :21 Young 2:13 7:21,8:2,8:17, streets[i1-20:21 Two[1]-27:22 g[ ]- 9:2,9:5, 13:12, strict[1]-15:7 two[3]-4:20, vote[7l-5:6,8:5, YOUNG[14]-3:4, 14:21, 16:11, study[2]-4:24 21:3,26:2 11:21, 11:22, 3:6,3:8,3:10, 18:14, 19:16, stuff[1]-10:11 type[1]-27:21 17:6,26:9 3:12,3:14,3:16, 19:22,23:7, subdivisions[1]- typically icall p]- voting p]-26:17 32:14,32:16, 27:19,27:24, 25:14 31:11 32:18,32:20, 28:5,28:6, submit[i] 4:19 W 32:22,32:24, - 28:15,29:17, substantially[11- water[12]-10:23, 33:2 31:10,31:21 18:18 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030