The URL can be used to link to this page

Economic Development Packet 2012 01-03-12 '(�0 C/Ty o United City of Yorkville J 800 Game Fann Road EST �,' ',- - 1836 Yorkville, Illinois 60560 Y W Telephone: 630-553-4350 Fax: 630-553-7575 '<kE AGENDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Tuesday, January 3, 2012 7:00 p.m. City Hall Conference Room Citizen Comments: Minutes for Correction/Approval: November 1, 2011 New Business: 1. EDC 2012-01 Building Permit Report for October, November & December 2011 2. EDC 2012-02 Building Inspection Report Summary for October, November & December 2011 3. EDC 2012-03 Land Cash Recommendation from Park Board 4. PC 2011-10 & ZBA 2011-02 312 Walter Street (Claesson) —Request for Rezoning & Variances to the R-21) District 5. EDC 2012-04 Residential Building Permit Fees —Discussion 6. EDC 2012-05 Ordinance Renaming Wheaton Avenue to Boombah Boulevard Old Business: Additional Business: UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE WORKSHEET ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Tuesday, January 3, 2012 7:00 PM CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CITIZEN COMMENTS: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MINUTES FOR APPROVAL: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. November 1, 2011 ❑ Approved ❑ As presented ❑ As amended --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NEW BUSINESS: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. EDC 2012-01 Building Permit Report for October, November & December 2011 ❑ Moved forward to CC consent agenda? Y N ❑ Approved by Committee ❑ Bring back to Committee ❑ Informational Item ❑ Notes --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. EDC 2012-02 Building Inspection Report Summary for October, November&December 2011 ❑ Moved forward to CC consent agenda? Y N ❑ Approved by Committee ❑ Bring back to Committee ❑ Informational Item ❑ Notes --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. EDC 2012-03 Land Cash Recommendation from Park Board ❑ Moved forward to CC consent agenda? Y N ❑ Approved by Committee ❑ Bring back to Committee ❑ Informational Item ❑ Notes --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. PC 2011-10 &ZBA 2011-02 312 Walter Street (Claesson) —Request for Rezoning &Variance to the R-21) District ❑ Moved forward to CC consent agenda? Y N ❑ Approved by Committee ❑ Bring back to Committee ❑ Informational Item ❑ Notes --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. EDC 2012-04 Residential Building Permit Fees—Discussion ❑ Moved forward to CC consent agenda? Y N ❑ Approved by Committee ❑ Bring back to Committee ❑ Informational It em ❑ Notes --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. EDC 2012-05 Ordinance Renaming Wheaton Avenue to Boombah Boulevard ❑ Moved forward to CC consent agenda? Y N ❑ Approved by Committee ❑ Bring back to Committee ❑ Informational Item ❑ Notes --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- �,c,SD C/Tr Reviewed By: Agenda Item Number #. O J 0 Legal ❑ Minutes Finance El EST. isas Engineer El � &0 City Administrator El T Tracking Number O �i�. �1 Public Works ❑ �� KniweI COUMy L®<�e ❑ Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Minutes of the Economic Development Committee—November 1, 2011 Meeting and Date: EDC—January 3, 2012 Synopsis: Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Majority Council Action Requested: Committee Approval Submitted by: Minute Taker Clerk's Office Name Department Agenda Item Notes: RAFT UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Tuesday, November 1, 2011, 6:30pm City Conference Room In Attendance: Committee Members Chairman Marty Munns Alderman Chris Funkhouser Alderman Jackie Milschewski Alderman Diane Teeling Other City Officials City Administrator Bart Olson Community Development Director Krysti Barksdale-Noble Code Official Mark Hardin Other Guests Lynn Dubajic, YEDC Tony Scott,Kendall County Record The meeting was called to order by Chairman Marty Munns at 6:30pm. Citizen Comments: None Minutes for Correction/Approval October 4, 2011 The minutes were approved as read. New Business 1. EDC 2011-41 Building Permit Report for September 2011 Ms. Barksdale-Noble said currently there are 35 single-family building permits for the year with 2 pending in Autumn Creek. Mr. Hardin commented that a contractor said he had 2 or 3 more in Heartland. 2. EDC 2011-42 Building Inspection Report Summary for September 2011 All of these inspections are now in-house, except for a few of the plumbing inspections. No further action. 3. EDC 2011-43 Comprehensive Impact Fee Revision This discussion was begun at the last meeting and is regarding the adjustment of the impact fees relating to the current economy. Many fees were reviewed,but land cash came to the forefront. Staff requested EDC input on reducing this fee. Krysti Barksdale-Noble explained the following. There are 2 options. Option 1: is a development-based approach where each developer would approach the City to have their annexation agreements reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The current land value would be considered and the agreement could be adjusted accordingly. There are benefits and drawbacks. The developer would take the lead on such a request and the 1 City would not incur any upfront funding. There would not be any comparables,just what the developer presents. The original land cash ordinance says if there are any conflicts as to the fair market value, the developer could present their own evidence for consideration. The drawback is that there are varying land cash values from various developers and tracking this administratively could be a challenge. Option 2: the City would complete a comprehensive evaluation and reduce the fair market value of an acre limiting it to a certain time period. As development increases, the value would be incrementally raised. The drawback would be front-funding this appraisal. It could cost $5,000 to $10,000 and would includes sites outside the City. The last option is no change at all. Surrounding cities have not reduced their land cash values possibly prolonging the development slowdown. Administor Olson also weighed in on these options. Land cash fees are authorized under ordinance, however, not all fees are the same. Some subdivisions have no land cash requirements since they were developed prior to the ordinance. If a study is done, it will not necessarily change the existing agreements unless it was retroactively applied. This could help bring a developer to the negotiating table. Ms. Barksdale-Noble said many of the developers have fee locks while other developers would benefit from a reduction. She commented that the land cash fee of$101,000 has been in place since 2006. Alderman Funkhouser stated that he prefers to reduce the amount of negotiation and make land cash equal. He would like to set limits on the amount for a certain number of years. He also favors doing the study and said that"no change" is not an option. Other towns' land cash values were questioned by Alderman Teeling. Most are higher than Yorkville and no one has reduced their fees according to Ms. Barksdale-Noble. Commenting about the impact a fee reduction would have, Ms. Dubajic said it would help tremendously. She said it is one of the first issues raised by developers. Chris Funkhouser added that no construction will impact the parks budget also because no parks are needed if there are no people to use them. Alderman Milschewski asked how Yorkville land cash values compared to other towns. Oswego is $110,000, Sugar Grove is $80,000, Plainfield is $139,000 and Plano is $96,000, all per acre. Yorkville is low to middle in the annexation agreements already in place according to Mr. Olson. He further stated that many of the subdivisions have low fees of$10,000 due to land donation, pre-paid impact fees and other factors. He commented there is disparity between old and new developments in terms of fees. There was a brief discussion of how the smaller developer can be helped in terms of fees. It was noted that the ordinance was last revised 5 years ago. Ms. Milschewski asked how the study might affect the City in terms of administrative costs. There would be adequate fees charged to offset such costs according to Mr. Olson. Alderman Funkhouser noted that Sugar Grove had taken similar measures to temporarily reduce certain fees and and it did not have the desired effect,but he says the proposed reductions should have long-term benefits. 2 Alderman Milschewski said she would like to see the unfinished subdivisions completed before starting new ones. This would alleviate weed problems and force the completion of roads. Many fee locks are expiring soon and this reduction should be welcomed by developers according to Krysti Barksdale-Noble. In summary, the committee decided to move ahead with recommendation of the study. 4. EDC 2011-44 Release of ComEd Information at Account Change Mr. Hardin said any new commercial building occupancies should not receive electrical service until a certificate of occupancy is issued by the City. This would allow the City to inspect the business, determine if the zoning is proper, etc. ComEd would not provide electrical service until this was done. This was in place until a year ago, according to Mr. Olson,but this would now be administered under ordinance. This item will move to the consent agenda. 5. EDC 2011-45 EDC Meeting Schedule for 2012 After discussion, it was decided to keep this meeting on Tuesdays,but the start time will be 7pm beginning in December. Old Business—None Additional Business There was no further business and the meeting adjourned at 7:03pm. Minutes respectfully submitted by Marlys Young 3 t�D C/py Reviewed By: Agenda Item Number O J � Legal ❑ NB #1 EST 1836 Finance ❑ '--- Engineer ❑ �-- Tracking Number City Administrator El 31i O Cou°mSa' O. Consultant El 11C-q �� EDC 2012-01 7 4 C E `�!• ❑ Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Building Permit Activity Report (October, November&December 2011) Meeting and Date: EDC-January 3, 2012 Synopsis: All permits issued in the months of October,November&December 2011 Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: N/A Action Taken: N/A Item Number: N/A Type of Vote Required: Informational Council Action Requested: None Submitted by: Mark A. Hardin , CBO, MCP Building Inspection Name Department Agenda Item Notes: O UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE BUILDING PERMIT REPORT October 2011 Nuinber of SFD SFA Multi-Family Commercial Industrial Misc. Construction Permit Permits Siv:gle Family Single Family Aparernems Inelmle;r all Pe•nut.s Issued fir r Cost Fees Issued Divtilling Attached Cnndonriniums CornmurrialOv October 2011 41 2 0 0 17 0 22 1,204,344.00 27,083.89 Calendar Year 509 42 0 0 108 0 359 13,573,170.00 454,309.81 2011 Fiscal Year 2011 380 36 0 0 83 0 261 12,127,252.00 379.702.13 October 2010 57 9 0 0 15 0 33 2,790,762.00 84,504.19 Calendar Year 556 42 6 0 101 0 407 22,470,819.00 507,614.99 2010 Fiscal Year 2010 379 26 6 0 69 0 278 9,960,502.00 353,005.99 October 2009 46 11 0 0 16 0 19 3,584,420.00 104,122.31 Calendar Year 517 53 8 0 140 0 316 28,509,693.00 775,582.43 2009 Fiscal Year 2009 359 43 8 0 79 0 229 22,217,796.00 596,137.21 October 2008 84 16 16 0 21 0 29 7,074,089.00 393,692.12 Calendar Year 798 95 52 0 257 0 394 72,599,002.00 1,869,077.07 2008 Fiscal Year 2008 518 64 38 0 140 0 276 54,294,439.00 1,284,126.60 Prepared by D Weinert `,�Ea clry s 0�' UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE SM.�. — ,836 BUILDING PERMIT REPORT November 2011 <CE Number of SFD SFA Multi- Family Commercial Industrial Misc. Construction Permit f eMliQ5 $isrgle Family Single FaIWIr Apar7+news Includes till Ynrnrils.I.ssned for Cost Fees Issued Avelling A(Toched Condominiums Commercial Uve November 2011 36 2 0 0 12 0 22 1,544,090.00 24,616.74 Calendar Year 546 43 0 0 112 0 391 15,031,240.00 468,028.75 2011 Fiscal Year 2011 418 38 0 0 97 0 283 13,673,842.00 404,568.87 November 2010 38 0 0 0 9 0 29 304,350.00 14,498.01 Calendar Year 594 42 6 0 110 0 436 22,775,169.00 522,863.09 2010 Fiscal Year 2010 417 26 6 0 78 0 307 10,264,852.00 368,204.09 November 2009 34 3 0 0 13 0 18 1,468,988.00 38,816.27 Calendar Year 551 56 8 0 153 0 334 29,978,681.00 814,398.70 2009 Fiscal Year 2009 393 46 8 0 92 0 247 23,686,784.00 634,953.48 November 2008 30 8 0 0 10 0 12 3,416,066.00 113,868.67 Calendar Year 828 103 52 0 267 0 406 76,015,068.00 1,976,627.96 2008 Fiscal Year 2008 548 72 38 0 150 0 287 57,710,505.00 1,391,676.79 Prepared by D Weinert UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE 18 BUILDING PERMIT REPORT 0 ��' �o December 2011 <CE - Number of SFD SFA Multi- Famil y Commercial Industrial Misc. Construction Permit Permit.,; Singh,Fami& Single l"amily Aparimenls Includes all Permits Issued for Cost Fees Issued Di ellrng Aitae-heel Condominiums Commercial Lase December 2011 12 0 0 0 7 0 5 127,876.00 2,605.85 Calendar Year 559 43 0 0 129 0 387 15,164,116.00 471,534.60 2011 Fiscal Year 2010 430 38 0 0 104 0 288 13,801,718.00 408,024.72 December 2010 20 1 0 0 9 0 10 368,795.00 19,386.67 Calendar Year 614 42 6 0 119 0 447 22,878,564.00 526,797.39 2010 Fiscal Year 2010 437 26 6 0 87 0 318 10,368,247.00 372,138.39 December 2009 23 0 0 0 8 0 15 925,114.00 22,318.00 Calendar Year 575 56 8 0 161 0 350 80,903,795.00 836,716.70 2009 Fiscal Year 2009 417 46 8 0 100 0 263 24,611,898.00 657,271.48 December 2008 19 2 0 0 10 0 7 453,834.00 26,705.07 Calendar Year 843 153 6 0 277 0 407 76,468,902.00 2,003,333.03 2008 Fiscal Year 2008 559 108 4 0 160 0 283 58,164,339.00 1,418,381.86 Prepared by:D Weinert Co- Reviewed By: O Agenda Item Number J R Z Legal ❑ ff j Finance ❑ NB #2 EST. `� 1836 Engineer ❑ 0 Li a� City Administrator ❑ Tracking Number ® Consultant ❑ �LCEcw,ty � ❑ EDC 2012-02 Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Building Inspection Report Summary(October,November&December 2011) Meeting and Date: EDC—January 3, 2012 Synopsis: All inspections performed in the month of October, November&December 2011 Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Council Action Requested: Submitted by: Mark A. Hardin, CBO, MCP Building Inspection Name Department Agenda Item Notes: DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE PWK _ 037-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL :NSPE 20100223 1346 SPRING ST 175 10/18/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECTION BF 016-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 20100514 2337 EMERALD LN 103 10/17/2011 MH 017-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 10/14/2011 H2O 018-OSR WATER METER READER 10/17/2011 PWK 019-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 10/17/2011 MH PM 028-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110015 1122 W VETERANS PKWY 10/12/2011 MH 029-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 10/12/2011 MH 030-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 10/12/2011 BF PM 031-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 10/12/2011 PR _ PM 032-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 10/19/2011 Commentsl: ABOVE CEILING MH 002-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110029 1100 W VETERANS PKWY 1 10/03/2011 MH 003-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 10/03/2011 MH 004-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 10/04/2011 BF 005-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 10/03/2011 MH 09:00 002-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 20110035 1102 CLEARWATER DR 30 10/20/2011 MH 003-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 10/20/2011 MH 016-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110041 345 BERTRAM DR 1106 10/17/2011 BF 017-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 10/14/2011 H2O 018-OSR WATER METER READER 10/17/2011 PWK 019-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 10/14/2011 MH 004-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 20110046 911 HAYDEN DR 127 10/05/2011 MH 005-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 10/05/2011 MH 09:00 006-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110062 225 W. WHEATON AVENUE 16 10/19/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 2 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 003-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110072 3099 LEHMAN CROSSING 10/19/2011 MH AM 005-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110146 421 FAIRHAVEN DR 32 10/25/2011 MH 003-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110247 1849 ASTER DR 96 10/26/2011 Commentsl: DECK MH 015-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110250 1302 CLEARWATER DR 251 10/04/2011 BF 016-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 10/04/2011 PWK 017-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 10/04/2011 MH 017-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 20110278 1262 TAUS CIR 120 10/04/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110310 307 E WASHINGTON ST 10/03/2011 I, MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110311 307 E WASHINGTON ST 10/03/2011 Commentsl: WINDOWS H2O 012-OSR WATER METER READER 20110322 2363 LAVENDER WAY 88 10/17/2011 PWK 013-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 10/18/2011 MH 014-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 10/18/2011 BF 015-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 10/18/2011 MH 016-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 10/19/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECTION H2O 011-OSR WATER METER READER 20110323 4606 PLYMOUTH AVE 996 10/17/2011 MH 005-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110330 202 WHEATON AVE 3 10/13/2011 Commentsl: ABOVE CEILING MH 006-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 10/13/2011 Commentsl: ABOVE CEILING BF 14:00 007-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 10/13/2011 BF pm 002-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 20110360 131 E HYDRAULIC ST 10/14/2011 Commentsl: MH 003-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 10/14/2011 MH 004-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 10/14/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 3 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID. PT4AOOOO.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 011-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 20110365 2567 EMERALD LN 130 10/04/2011 Commentsl: RE INSPECT FRAME AND MECHANICAL MH 012-INS INSULATION 10/04/2011 PWK AM 013-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/21/2011 MH 015-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 20110366 4484 SARASOTA DR 1039 10/04/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECT MH 016-INS INSULATION 10/04/2011 PWK 017-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/21/2011 PWK AM 016-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 20110368 1648 SIENNA DR 55 10/21/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110380 106 W WASHINGTON ST 10/11/2011 Commentsl: SHED BF 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 20110388 1261 CLEARWATER DR 208 10/04/2011 BF 006-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 10/04/2011 MH 007-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 10/04/2011 MH 008-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 10/04/2011 MH 009-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 10/04/2011 MH 010-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/05/2011 JS 011-INS INSULATION 10/05/2011 MH 012-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/13/2011 PWK AM 013-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/17/2011 PWK 014-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/17/2011 MH 002-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110418 2001 S BRIDGE ST 10/11/2011 BF 003-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 10/11/2011 MH 003-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110426 303 STATE ST 10/25/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110430 418 ELM ST 10/05/2011 Commentsl: WINDOWS DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 4 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110431 573 POPLAR DR 165 10/13/2011 Commentsl: WINDOWS MH 007-STP STOOP 20110437 2269 EMERALD LN 50 10/17/2011 MH 008-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/17/2011 MH 009-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/17/2011 PWK PM 010-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/26/2011 MH 011-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 10/27/2011 MH 012-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 10/27/2011 MH 013-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 10/27/2011 RE 014-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 10/27/2011 MH 015-REI REINSPECTION 10/31/2011 Commentsl: FRAMING MH 016-INS INSULATION 10/31/2011 PWK PM 011-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 20110438 2427 EMERALD LN 112 10/26/2011 MH 09:00 001-PHD POST HOLE - DECK 20110452 1262 TAUS CIR 120 10/05/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110453 1466 CORNERSTONE DR 15 10/21/2011 Commentsl: FENCE BF 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 20110455 1587 SIENNA DR 84 10/03/2011 MH 006-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/05/2011 MH 007-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/05/2011 MH 008-STP STOOP 10/05/2011 PWK PM 009-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/24/2011 BF 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 20110456 2266 LAVENDER WAY 59 10/03/2011 MH 006-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/04/2011 MH 007-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/04/2011 MH 008-STP STOOP 10/04/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 5 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE PWK 009-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/24/2011 BF 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 20110457 2568 EMERALD LN 2 10/04/2011 MH 006-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/05/2011 MH 007-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/05/2011 MH 008-STP STOOP 10/05/2011 PWK AM 009-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/27/2011 BF 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 20110458 2341 EMERALD LN 104 10/04/2011 MH 006-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/04/2011 MH 007-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/04/2011 MH 008-STP STOOP 10/04/2011 PWK PM 009-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/26/2011 MH 001-FTG FOOTING 20110461 2362 EMERALD LN 31 10/12/2011 i MH 14:30 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 10/14/2011 MH 003-BKF BACKFILL 10/19/2011 PWK AM 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/24/2011 PWK 08:30 005-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/26/2011 RE 006-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 10/27/2011 MH 007-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/27/2011 MH 008-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/27/2011 MH 009-STP STOOP 10/27/2011 PWK AM 010-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/31/2011 MH 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 20110462 4626 PLYMOUTH AVE 993 10/03/2011 MH PM 003-BKF BACKFILL 10/05/2011 PWK 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/10/2011 F_ DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 6 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE BF 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 10/13/2011 MH 006-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/17/2011 MH 007-STP STOOP 10/17/2011 MH 008-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/17/2011 PWK PM 009-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/27/2011 MH 003-BKF BACKFILL 20110463 372 BERTRAM DR 1036 10/04/2011 PWK 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/10/2011 MH 005-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/12/2011 MH 006-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/12/2011 MH 007-STP STOOP 10/12/2011 BF 008-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 10/13/2011 PWK PM 009-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/27/2011 MH 12:00 001-FTG FOOTING 20110464 4478 SARASOTA AVE 1040 10/03/2011 MH 12:00 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 10/04/2011 JS 003-BKF BACKFILL 10/10/2011 PWK 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/10/2011 PWK _ 005-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/11/2011 Commentsl: SUMP BF 006-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 10/14/2011 MH 007-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/17/2011 MH 008-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/17/2011 MH 009-STP STOOP 10/17/2011 PWK PM 010-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/27/2011 MH 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 20110470 2358 EMERALD LN 32 10/05/2011 JS 003-BKF BACKFILL 10/07/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 7 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE PWK 12:00 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/13/2011 BF 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 10/17/2011 MH 006-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/21/2011 MH 007-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/21/2011 MH 008-STP STOOP 10/21/2011 PWK AM 009-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/31/2011 MH 003-BKF BACKFILL 20110471 2332 EMERALD LN 37 10/05/2011 PWK 12:00 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/13/2011 BF 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 1.0/17/2011 MH 006-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/18/2011 MH 007-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/18/2011 MH 008-STP STOOP 10/18/2011 MH 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 20110472 2275 EMERALD LN 51 10/03/2011 MH 003-BKF BACKFILL 10/03/2011 PWK 12:00 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/13/2011 BF _ 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 10/17/2011 PWK _ AM 006-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/31/2011 MH 001-FTG FOOTING 20110474 608 WHITE OAK WAY 66 10/05/2011 JS _ 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 10/06/2011 MH 003-BKF BACKFILL 10/11/2011 MH 13:30 001-FTG FOOTING 20110478 109 W VETERANS PKWY 11/24/2011 JS 003-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 20110480 1101 KATE DR 36 10/06/2011 MH 004-BKF BACKFILL 10/14/2011 MH 001-FTG FOOTING 20110481 2507 EMERALD LN 121 10/12/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 8 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 10/17/2011 MH 003-BKF BACKFILL 10/19/2011 PWK AM 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/24/2011 RE 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 10/27/2011 MH AM 006-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/28/2011 MH AM 007-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/28/2011 MH AM 008-STP STOOP 10/28/2011 MH PM 003-BKF BACKFILL 20110482 376 BERTRAM DR 1035 10/05/2011 PWK 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/10/2011 MH 005-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/12/2011 MH 006-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/12/2011 MH 007-STP STOOP 10/12/2011 BF 008-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 10/13/2011 PWK PM 009-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/27/2011 MH 11:30 004-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110484 1591 SYCAMORE RD 10/03/2011 BF AM 005-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 10/03/2011 MH AM 006-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 10/04/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECTION MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110486 408 JACKSON ST 10/05/2011 Commentsl: FINAL ROOF MH 001-FTG FOOTING 20110487 4474 SARASOTA AVE 1041 10/03/2011 MH 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 10/05/2011 JS 003-BKF BACKFILL 10/10/2011 PWK 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/10/2011 PWK _ 005-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/11/2011 Commentsl: SUMP DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 9 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ BF 006-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 10/17/2011 MH 007-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/17/2011 MH _ 008-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/17/2011 MH 009-STP STOOP 10/17/2011 PWK PM 010-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 10/27/2011 MH 001-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 20110488 781 ARROWHEAD DR 104 10/06/2011 MH 001-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110493 1002 S BRIDGE ST 10/14/2011 BF 11:00 002-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 10/14/2011 Commentsl: JIM SMILEY MH 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 20110501 394 BERTRAM DR 1030 10/03/2011 MH PM 003-BKF BACKFILL 10/05/2011 PWK 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/10/2011 BF 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 10/13/2011 MH 006-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 10/17/2011 MH 007-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 10/17/2011 MH 006-STP STOOP 10/17/2011 MH 015-TRU ENGINEERED TRUSS DRAWINGS 10/19/2011 MH 001-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 20110502 2066 INGEMUNSON LN 144 10/25/2011 MH AM 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110503 510 W KENDALL DR 10/31/2011 Commentsl: WINDOWS i MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110504 662 OMAHA DR 54 10/13/2011 Commentsl: FENCE MH 001-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 20110506 2293 HOBBS LN 156 10/04/2011 MH 001-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 20110510 1569 WALSH DR 8 10/06/2011 MH 002-INS INSULATION 10/06/2011 MH 001-FTG FOOTING 20110511 101 W VAN EMMON ST 10/13/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 10 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 10/14/2011 MH PM 003-PHD POST HOLE - DECK 10/26/2011 MH 001-FTG FOOTING 20110512 1103 REDWOOD DR 48 10/11/2011 PWK 002-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/10/2011 MH 10:30 003-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 10/17/2011 MH AM 004-BKF BACKFILL 10/26/2011 JS 001-MIS MISCELLANEOUS 20110513 407 W KENDALL DR 10/11/2011 Commentsl: SIDEWALK JS 002-MIS MISCELLANEOUS 10/17/2011 Commentsl: SIDEWALK MH 003-MIS MISCELLANEOUS 10/19/2011 Commentsl: SIDEWALK MH AM 001-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 20110515 112 CLAREMONT CT 35 10/04/2011 JS 002-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 10/06/2011 MIS 003-FIB FIBER MESH TICKET FOR CON 10/07/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110516 425 FAIRHAVEN DR 34 10/28/2011 Commentsl: WINDOWS MH _ AM 002-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 20110522 401 BRUELL ST 10/27/2011 Commentsl: SIDEWALK MH 001-FTG FOOTING 20110525 2286 LAVENDER WAY 57 10/25/2011 MH PM 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 10/26/2011 MH 003-BKF BACKFILL 10/28/2011 PWK 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 10/31/2011 MH 11:30 001-FTG FOOTING 20110526 1102 CORNELL LN 10/28/2011 MH 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 10/31/2011 MH 001-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 20110527 718 N BRIDGE ST A A 10/27/2011 MH 002-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 10/27/2011 r — - DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 11 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110531 362 BERTRAM DR 1038 10/31/2011 Commentsl: FENCE MH AM 001-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 20110536 4561 GARDINER AVE 111 10/21/2011 MH 11:30 001-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 20110541 307 A MILL ST 10/25/2011 MH 001-FTG FOOTING 20110544 311 CHURCH ST 1 10/19/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110545 1985 MARKETVIEW DR 10/28/2011 Commentsl: TEMPORARY TENT MH _ 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110550 623 WHITE OAK WAY 10/31/2011 Commentsl: ROOF MH 001-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 20110551 305 E KENDALL DR 24 10/24/2011 MIS 002-FIB FIBER MESH TICKET FOR CON 10/24/2011 PWK 003-EDA ENGINEERING - DRIVEWAY AP 10/27/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110554 2848 MCLELLAN BLVD 455 10/31/2011 MH PM 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110560 129 COMMERCIAL DR #6 10/28/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 12 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ PERMIT TYPE SUMMARY: ADD ADDITION 6 ANT ANTENNA / TOWER 2 BDO COMMERCIAL BUILD-OUT 6 BSM BASEMENT REMODEL 4 COM COMMERCIAL BUILDING 5 CRM COMMERCIAL REMODEL 13 DCK DECK 3 DRV DRIVEWAY 4 ESN ELECTRIC SIGN 1 FNC FENCE 3 GAR GARAGE 1 PTO PATIO / PAVERS 8 REM REMODEL 5 ROF ROOFING 3 SDW SIDEWALK 3 SFD SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED 164 SGN SIGN 1 SHD SHED 1 SWK PRIVATE SIDEWALK 1 TNT TEMPORARY TENT 1 WIN WINDOW REPLACEMENT 5 INSPECTION SUMMARY: BKF BACKFILL 15 BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 16 EDA ENGINEERING - DRIVEWAY APRON 1 EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPECTION 5 EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 18 ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WATER 17 FIB FIBER MESH TICKET FOR CONCRETE 2 FIN FINAL INSPECTION 28 FTG FOOTING 11 GAR GARAGE FLOOR 16 INS INSULATION 5 MIS MISCELLANEOUS 3 OSR WATER METER READER 4 PHD POST HOLE - DECK 2 PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 6 PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 8 PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 16 PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 10 PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 14 REI REINSPECTION 1 REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 10 RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11 RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 5 STP STOOP 15 TRU ENGINEERED TRUSS DRAWINGS 1 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 13 TIME: 15:00:13 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4AOOOO.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 10/01/2011 TO 10/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE INSPECTOR SUMMARY: BF B&F TECHNICAL CODE SERVICE 26 H2O WATER DEPT 4 JS JEFF SEVERSON 9 i MH MARK HARDIN 154 MIS MISCELLANEOUS 2 PR PETER RATOS 1 i PWK PUBLIC WORKS 41 RE RANDY ERICKSON 3 STATUS SUMMARY: A MH 1 C BF 8 C H2O 3 C JS 1 C MH 35 C MIS 1 C PWK 9 I BF 17 I H2O 1 I JS 8 I MH 108 I MIS 1 I PR 1 I PWK 28 I RE 2 T BF 1 T MH 10 T PWK 4 T RE 1 REPORT SUMMARY: 240 I I DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 1 TIME: 15:05:01 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 11/01/2011 TO 11/30/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE RE 001-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 20100600 308 WALNUT ST 1 11/18/2011 MH 002-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 11/18/2011 MH 003-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11/18/2011 MH 004-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 11/18/2011 RE 005-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 11/21/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECTION MH 006-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11/21/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECTION ROUGHS MH 007-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 11/21/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECTION MH 002-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20100644 221 W ELIZABETH ST 18 11/04/2011 MH PM 004-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110012 4524 MARQUETTE ST 1220 11/04/2011 Commentsl: BASEMENT FINISH MH 033-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110015 1122 W VETERANS PKWY 11/16/2011 MH 034-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 11/16/2011 Commentsl: ABOVE CEILING RE 035-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 11/16/2011 Commentsl: ABOVE CEILING MH AM 036-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11/28/2011 Commentsl: E CANOPY MH AM 037-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 11/28/2011 Commentsl: E CANOPY MH PM 006-INS INSULATION 20110046 911 HAYDEN DR 127 11/02/2011 MH 002-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110253 467 E BARBERRY CIR 148 11/07/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110283 105 CENTER PKWY 11/04/2011 Commentsl: DEMOLITION MH 008-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110330 202 WHEATON AVE 3 11/18/2011 MH AM 005-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110360 131 E HYDRAULIC ST 11/03/2011 Commentsl: I DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 2 TIME: 15:05:01 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW I INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 11/01/2011 TO 11/30/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME -------- ---TYPE OF INSPECTION ------PERMIT---ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE ------------------ ----- PR 006-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 11/03/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110362 611 GREENFIELD TURN 75 11/10/2011 Commentsl: WINDOWS PWK PM 014-SUM SUMP 20110365 2567 EMERALD LN 130 11/18/2011 PWK 018-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 20110366 4484 SARASOTA DR 1039 11/15/2011 Commentsl: B-BOX NOTVISIBLE MH 014-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110367 4532 HARRISON ST 1120 11/10/2011 RE 015-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 11/09/2011 MH 017-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110368 1648 SIENNA DR 55 11/07/2011 RE 018-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 11/07/2011 PWK 019-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 11/15/2011 MH 020-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 11/08/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECTION MH 015-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110388 1261 CLEARWATER DR 208 11/15/2011 RE 016-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 11/15/2011 PWK 017-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 11/15/2011 MH 018-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 11/16/2011 MH 11:30 001-FTG FOOTING 20110404 1102 CORNELL LN 11/23/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110414 904 ADRIAN ST 11/15/2011 Commentsl: WINDOWS MH 017-TRU ENGINEERED TRUSS DRAWINGS 20110437 2269 EMERALD LN 50 11/02/2011 PWK PM 018-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 11/18/2011 MH 012-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110438 2427 EMERALD LN 112 11/07/2011 MH 013-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11/07/2011 MH 014-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 11/07/2011 RE 0151-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGI 11/07/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 3 TIME: 15:05:01 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 11/01/2011 TO 11/30/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 016-INS INSULATION 11/09/2011 i MH 017-TRU ENGINEERED TRUSS DRAWINGS 11/14/2011 MH 018-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 11/18/2011 Commentsl: SUMP PWK 010-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 20110455 1587 SIENNA DR 84 11/22/2011 PWK 010-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 20110456 2266 LAVENDER WAY 59 11/22/2011 PWK 010-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 20110457 2568 EMERALD LN 2 11/22/2011 PWK 010-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 20110458 2341 EMERALD LN 104 11/22/2011 PWK 011-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 20110461 2362 EMERALD LN 31 11/22/2011 PWK 010-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 20110470 2358 EMERALD LN 32 11/22/2011 PWK 009-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 20110471 2332 EMERALD LN 37 11/01/2011 MH 010-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11/17/2011 MH 011-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 11/17/2011 MH 012-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 11/17/2011 RE 013-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 11/17/2011 PWK 014-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 11/22/2011 MH 015-INS INSULATION 11/22/2011 MH 007-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110472 2275 EMERALD LN 51 11/08/2011 i MH 008-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11/08/2011 MH 009-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 11/08/2011 MH 010-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 11/08/2011 MH 011-INS INSULATION 11/10/2011 PWK PM 012-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 11/18/2011 MH AM 004-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 20110474 608 WHITE OAK WAY 66 11/01/2011 MH AM 005-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 11/01/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 4 TIME: 15:05:01 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 11/01/2011 TO 11/30/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 006-TRU ENGINEERED TRUSS DRAWINGS 11/02/2011 MH 007-INS INSULATION 11/09/2011 RE 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 20110480 1101 KATE DR 36 11/15/2011 MH 006-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 11/18/2011 PWK 009-EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 20110481 2507 EMERALD LN 121 11/01/2011 PWK 010-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 11/22/2011 MH 003-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110493 1002 S BRIDGE ST 11/16/2011 RE 004-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 11/16/2011 MH 005-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 11/17/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECTION MH 001-PHD POST HOLE - DECK 20110494 2274 CRYDER CT 438 11/01/2011 MH _ 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110495 308 TIMBALIER ST 1011 11/23/2011 Commentsl: SHED MH 010-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110501 394 BERTRAM DR 1030 11/22/2011 MH 011-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11/22/2011 MH 012-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 11/22/2011 RE 013-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 11/22/2011 MH 014-INS INSULATION 11/28/2011 MH 002-FIB FIBER MESH TICKET FOR CON 20110502 2066 INGEMUNSON LN 144 11/02/2011 MH 003-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 11/01/2011 MH 004-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110511 101 W VAN EMMON ST 11/21/2011 MH 005-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11/21/2011 RE 006-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 11/21/2011 MH 007-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 11/21/2011 RE AM 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 20110512 1103 REDWOOD DR 48 11/16/2011 I DATE: 12/29/201? UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 5 TIME: 15:05:01 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 11/01/2011 TO 11/30/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ MH AM 006-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 11/18/2011 MH AM 001-FTG FOOTING 20110514 606 E VETERANS PKWY 1 11/02/2011 MH PM 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 11/04/2011 MH 003-TRU ENGINEERED TRUSS DRAWINGS 11/17/2011 MH 004-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 11/29/2011 Commentsl: PARTIAL MH 005-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11/29/2011 Commentsl: PARTIAL MH 002-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110516 425 FAIRHAVEN DR 34 11/02/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECT WINDOWS MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110519 991 CANYON TRAIL CT 39 11/07/2011 Commentsl: FENCE MH AM 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110521 203 E MAIN ST 11/07/2011 Commentsl: ROOF OVER DECK MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110523 300 BLAINE ST 11/14/2011 Commentsl: WINDOWS RE 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 20110525 2286 LAVENDER WAY 57 11/02/2011 MH 006-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 11/04/2011 MH 007-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 11/04/2011 MH 008-STP STOOP 11/04/2011 PWK 009-ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 11/22/2011 MH AM 003-BKF BACKFILL 20110526 1102 CORNELL LN 11/02/2011 PR 004-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 11/11/2011 MH 005-UGE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 11/15/2011 MH 006-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11/15/2011 MH 007-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 11/18/2011 MH 008-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 11/29/2011 I DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 6 TIME: 15:05:01 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 11/01/2011 TO 11/30/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 003-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110527 718 N BRIDGE ST A A 11/14/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110535 401 E PARK ST 11/14/2011 Commentsl: WINDOWS MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110539 1411 CANNONBALL TR 11/16/2011 MH 001-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110542 202 WHEATON AVE 3 11/18/2011 MH 002-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 11/22/2011 MH 003-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11/22/2011 RE 001-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 20110547 101 W VAN EMMON ST 11/07/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110548 181 COMMERCIAL DR C 21 11/09/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110557 2001 S BRIDGE ST 11/17/2011 Commentsl: SIGNS WITH ELECTRIC MH 001-PHD POST HOLE - DECK 20110562 2764 HOBBS CT 150 11/04/2011 MH 001-PHD POST HOLE - DECK 20110564 1261 CLEARWATER DR 208 11/02/2011 MH 001-FTG FOOTING 20110567 1332 CLEARWATER DR 252 11/15/2011 MH 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 11/21/2011 MH 003-BKF BACKFILL 11/28/2011 MH PM 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110568 498 SUNFLOWER CT 5 11/03/2011 Commentsl: SHED i MH AM 001-FTG FOOTING 20110570 2348 EMERALD LN 34 11/14/2011 MH PM 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 11/15/2011 MH AM 003-BKF BACKFILL 11/18/2011 PWK PM 004-ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WAT 11/18/2011 Commentsl: AND SUMP RE 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 11/28/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110571 1407 WHITE PINE CT 100 11/10/2011 Commentsl: SHED MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110577 129 COMMERCIAL DR #7 11/08/2011 Commentsl: FOR OCCUPANCY J DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 7 TIME: 15:05:01 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT9AOOOO.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 11/01/2011 TO 11/30/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH AM 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110581 1155 N BRIDGE ST 11/18/2011 Commentsl: OCCUPANCY I I I I I DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 8 TIME: 15.05 01 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4AOOOO WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 11/01/2011 TO 11/30/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME --TYPE-OF-INSPECTION---------------PERMIT-- ADDRESS-----------------------LOT-----------DATE DATE ------------------ ----- PERMIT TYPE SUMMARY: ADD ADDITION 15 BDO COMMERCIAL BUILD-OUT 4 BSM BASEMENT REMODEL 2 CCO COMMERCIAL OCCUPANCY PERMIT 4 COM COMMERCIAL BUILDING 5 CRM COMMERCIAL REMODEL 8 DCK DECK 3 DML DEMOLITION 1 ELE ELECTRICAL UPGRADE 1 ESN ELECTRIC SIGN 1 FNC FENCE 2 PTO PATIO / PAVERS 2 REM REMODEL 11 ROF ROOFING 1 SFD SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED 64 SHD SHED 3 WIN WINDOW REPLACEMENT 5 I INSPECTION SUMMARY: BKF BACKFILL 3 BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 3 EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPECTION 3 EPW ENGINEERING- PUBLIC WALK 2 ESS ENGINEERING - STORM 12 ESW ENGINEERING - SEWER / WATER 1 FIB FIBER MESH TICKET FOR CONCRETE 1 FIN FINAL INSPECTION 27 FTG FOOTING 4 GAR GARAGE FLOOR 1 INS INSULATION 6 PHD POST HOLE - DECK 3 PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 5 PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 8 PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 6 PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 3 PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 3 REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 14 RFR ROUGH FRAMING 12 RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 8 STP STOOP 1 SUM SUMP 1 TRU ENGINEERED TRUSS DRAWINGS 4 UGE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 1 INSPECTOR SUMMARY: MH MARK HARDIN 96 PR PETER RATOS 2 PWK PUBLIC WORKS 18 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 9 TIME: 15:05:01 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 11/01/2011 TO 11/30/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE RE RANDY ERICKSON 16 i I STATUS SUMMARY. A MH 2 C MH 16 C PWK 3 C RE 4 I MH 66 I PR 2 I PWK 13 I RE 11 T MH 12 T PWK 2 T RE 1 I REPORT SUMMARY: 132 I I I DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 1 TIME: 15:50:32 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 12/01/2011 TO 12/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 008-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 20100600 308 WALNUT ST 1 12/06/2011 MH 005-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110012 4524 MARQUETTE ST 1220 12/29/2011 Commentsl: BASEMENT RE _ 038-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110015 1122 W VETERANS PKWY 12/15/2011 Commentsl: ABOVE CEILING RE 039-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 12/15/2011 Commentsl: ABOVE CEILING MH 006-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110029 1100 W VETERANS PKWY 1 12/22/2011 RE 007-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 12/21/2011 MH 004-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110035 1102 CLEARWATER DR 30 12/20/2011 Commentsl: BASEMENT REMODEL MH PM 001-FTG FOOTING 20110241 1102 CORNELL LN 12/16/2011 MH 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 12/16/2011 MH AM 004-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110247 1849 ASTER DR 96 12/02/2011 Commentsl: RE INSPECTION FOR DECK PWK _ 012-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 20110323 4606 PLYMOUTH AVE 996 12/08/2011 Commentsl: PROPERTY CORNERS RE 009-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 20110330 202 WHEATON AVE 3 12/05/2011 MH AM 010-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 12/06/2011 MH 019-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110366 4484 SARASOTA DR 1039 12/09/2011 RE 020-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 12/09/2011 Commentsl: NO HOT WATER RE 021-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 12/12/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECTION PWK 022-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 12/19/2011 Commentsl: RE INSPECTION BBOX MH AM 002-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 20110404 1102 CORNELL LN 12/05/2011 MH 004-BKF BACKFILL 12/15/2011 RE ___ 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 12/29/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 2 TIME: 15:50:32 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 12/01/2011 TO 12/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 006-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 12/29/2011 MH 019-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110437 2269 EMERALD LN 50 12/12/2011 RE 020-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 12/12/2011 PWK 021-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 12/08/2011 Commentsl: PUBLIC WALK, PROPERTY CORNERS H2O 022-OSR WATER METER READER 12/09/2011 MH 023-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 12/13/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECTION PWK 019-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 20110438 2427 EMERALD LN 112 12/08/2011 Commentsl: PKWY TREE, GRADING,BBOX, PROPERTY CORNER Comments2: S, STORM STRUCTURES, DRAINING H2O 020-OSR WATER METER READER 12/09/2011 MH 021-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 12/20/2011 RE 022-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 12/20/2011 PWK 023-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 12/21/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECTION-B BOX PWK 013-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 20110472 2275 EMERALD LN 51 12/08/2011 Commentsl: STORM, WATER & SANITARY STRUCTURES, PUBL Comments2: IC WALK, PROPERTY CORNERS, BBOX H2O 014-OSR WATER METER READER 12/09/2011 MH 015-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 12/20/2011 RE 016-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 12/20/2011 PWK 017-EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPE 12/21/2011 Commentsl: RE INSPECTION - B BOX RE 008-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 20110474 608 WHITE OAK WAY 66 12/06/2011 MH 009-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 12/06/2011 MH 010-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 12/06/2011 MH 011-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 12/06/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 3 TIME: 15:50:32 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 12/01/2011 TO 12/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. I TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 007-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110480-1101-KATE-DR 36 12/07/2011 MH 008-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 12/07/2011 MH 009-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 12/07/2011 RE 010-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 12/07/2011 MH AM 011-INS INSULATION 12/14/2011 MH AM 012-GAR GARAGE FLOOR 12/21/2011 MH 013-STP STOOP 12/29/2011 MH AM 003-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110510 1569 WALSH DR 8 12/01/2011 MH 007-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110512 1103 REDWOOD DR 48 12/20/2011 MH 008-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 12/20/2011 MH 009-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 12/20/2011 RE 010-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 12/20/2011 MH AM 011-INS INSULATION 12/27/2011 MH 006-UGE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 20110514 608 E VETERANS PKWY 1 12/06/2011 RE 007-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 12/05/2011 MH 008-PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 12/07/2011 MH _ AM 009-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 12/13/2011 Commentsl: EXT WALL PRIOR TO INSULATION PR PM 001-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 20110518 735 ERICA LN STE 1B 12/02/2011 MH 002-PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 12/05/2011 MH 003-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 12/12/2011 MH 004-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 12/12/2011 PR 005-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 12/12/2011 MH 006-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 12/19/2011 MH 007-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 12/19/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 4 TIME: 15:50:32 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 12/01/2011 TO 12/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE MH 008-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 12/19/2011 MH AM 036-INS INSULATION 12/22/2011 MH 010-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110525 2286 LAVENDER WAY 57 12/13/2011 I MH 011-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 12/13/2011 MH 012-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 12/13/2011 RE 013-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 12/13/2011 RE 014-INS INSULATION 12/15/2011 MH 009-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110526 1102 CORNELL LN 12/01/2011 PR 010-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 11/30/2011 RE 004-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 20110542 202 WHEATON AVE 3 12/13/2011 RE 005-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 12/13/2011 MH 006-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 12/12/2011 Commentsl: OFFICE PORTION MH _ 007-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 12/13/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECT ELEC & HVAC MH 008-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 12/19/2011 Commentsl: REINSPECT ELECTRICAL RE 002-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 20110547 101 W VAN EMMON ST 12/02/2011 MH 003-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 12/02/2011 MH 004-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 12/02/2011 MH 005-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 12/02/2011 MH 001-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110553 217-219 S BRIDGE ST 12/09/2011 MH 002-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 12/09/2011 MH 003-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 12/09/2011 RE 004-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 12/09/2011 RE 005-PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 12/27/2011 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 5 TIME: 15 50:32 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4AOOOO.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 12/01/2011 TO 12/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE -------- --------------- --- ----------------------- ------ MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110565 2848 MCLELLAN BLVD 455 12/16/2011 Commentsl: GARAGE RE AM 004-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 20110567 1332 CLEARWATER DR 252 12/08/2011 DW 005-SPO SPOT SURVEY 12/12/2011 RE 006-PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 12/13/2011 MH AM 007-BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 12/14/2011 MH 001-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110569 2003 PRAIRIE ROSE LN 93 12/12/2011 MH 002-RFR ROUGH FRAMING 12/12/2011 MH 003-RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 12/12/2011 RE 004-PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 12/12/2011 MH PM 005-INS INSULATION 12/14/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110579 1155 N BRIDGE ST 12/01/2011 Commentsl: SIGN MH 001-REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 20110585 202 WHEATON AVE 3 12/08/2011 MH 002-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 12/12/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110587 2404 SUMAC DR 55 12/09/2011 Commentsl: FENCE MH 001-BKF BACKFILL 20110594 712-714 N BRIDGE ST 12/08/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110598 1261 CLEARWATER DR 208 12/29/2011 Commentsl: FENCE MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110601 206 B HILLCREST AVE 10 12/13/2011 MH 001-FIN FINAL INSPECTION 20110602 402 HEUSTIS ST 12/30/2011 Commentsl: ROOF I DATE: 12/29/201 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 6 TIME: 15:50-32 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A0000 WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 12/01/2011 TO 12/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ PERMIT TYPE SUMMARY: ADD ADDITION 6 BDO COMMERCIAL BUILD-OUT 16 BSM BASEMENT REMODEL 7 COM COMMERCIAL BUILDING 2 CRM COMMERCIAL REMODEL 17 DCK DECK 1 FNC FENCE 3 GAR GARAGE 1 0TH OTHER 2 PLG PLUMBING 1 REM REMODEL 6 ROF ROOFING 1 SFD SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED 41 TPS TEMPORARY SIGN 1 INSPECTION SUMMARY: BKF BACKFILL 2 BSM BASEMENT FLOOR 1 EFL ENGINEERING - FINAL INSPECTION 7 FIN FINAL INSPECTION 21 FTG FOOTING 1 GAR GARAGE FLOOR 1 INS INSULATION 5 OSR WATER METER READER 3 PLF PLUMBING - FINAL 6 PLR PLUMBING - ROUGH 10 PLU PLUMBING - UNDERSLAB 6 PPS PRE-POUR, SLAB ON GRADE 1 PPW PRE-POUR, WALL STEEL 3 REL ROUGH ELECTRICAL 13 RFR ROUGH FRAMING 11 RMC ROUGH MECHANICAL 9 SPO SPOT SURVEY 1 STP STOOP 1 UGE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC 1 INSPECTOR SUMMARY: DW D WEINERT 1 H2O WATER DEPT 3 MH MARK HARDIN 67 PR PETER RATOS 3 PWK PUBLIC WORKS 7 RE RANDY ERICKSON 24 STATUS SUMMARY: C MH 9 C PWK 1 C RE 2 DATE: 12/29/2011 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PAGE: 7 TIME: 15:50:32 CALLS FOR INSPECTION REPORT ID: PT4A000O.WOW INSPECTIONS SCHEDULED FROM 12/01/2011 TO 12/31/2011 INSPECTOR SCHED. COMP. TIME TYPE OF INSPECTION PERMIT ADDRESS LOT DATE DATE I DW 1 I MH 54 I PR 3 I PWK 1 I RE 19 T H2O 3 T MH 4 T PWK 5 T RE 3 REPORT SUMMARY: 105 I I C/�.y Reviewed By: Agenda Item Number J� 4 Z 0'� Legal ❑ NB #3 1836 EST Finance ❑ Engineer ❑ Tracking Number III�} C? City Administrator F-1`l'° �°` O Consultant ❑ �.� KcwellCounry �0� ❑ EDC 2012-03 LC E �i. Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Land Cash Recommendation from Park Board Meeting and Date: EDC—January 3, 2012 Synopsis: See attached memo. Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Council Action Requested: Submitted by: Laura Schraw Parks & Recreation Name Department Agenda Item Notes: Memorandum w o EST. 1838 To: Economic Development Committee Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director O ��;�;� From: Laura Schraw, Interim Director of Parks and Recreation CC: Tim Evans, Superintendent of Recreation ♦<LE v� Scott Sleezer, Superintendent of Parks Bart Olson, City Administrator Date: November 30, 2011 Subject: Land Cash Recommendation from Park Board The Park Board, at their November 17th meeting, discussed EDC's direction to Staff to hire an appraiser to re-evaluate land cash. Park Board is requesting that the City does not re-evaluate land cash at this time. Due to the poor economy and previous developer obligations, lowering land cash has the potential to affect development agreements in existence where park sites are obligated and residents in those developments believe the City is going to develop a park with amenities. If the City still chooses to re-evaluate the land cash value and adopt a lower value, the Park Board requests that the City inform all developers that there will be no guarantee of any built improvements other than turf grass (developer's obligation) to any park within the City due to the continued increase in costs to build amenities on a park site. Note that this would not meet the Park Development Standards which outline the type of park i.e. community, neighborhood, etc., and type of development for that park, i.e. fields,playgrounds, etc. The Park Development Standards also require that residential areas are met by a park within V2 mile not blocked by pedestrian barriers which include roads, railroad tracks, rivers, etc. If EDC does proceed with hiring an appraiser and it results in a reduction of the land cash value, the Park Board is requesting an increase in the land cash value annually for 5 years until the current value of$101,000 is reached. If EDC does not want to incrementally increase land cash, Park Board is requesting an annual evaluation of land cash by an appraiser, and that this not be paid for out of the Parks &Recreation budget. The most detrimental effect of lowering land cash would be that the City has outstanding obligations to develop parks. Lowering the land cash would allow all developers to adopt the lower value (even ones currently building) which would either result in not meeting our own development standards through lack of funds or requiring a larger transfer from the General Fund to meet the park standards. The Park Development Standards state that"The United City of Yorkville has determined that acquisition and development of land meeting the recreational and environmental requirements of its residents is its role in the fabric of the community." The Park Board requests that you do not revise the land cash amount so that we can continue to meet the recreational needs of our community. O'o C/,.� Memorandum 2 S O L � �Si 't` To: Yorkville Park Board EST. Z � � isss From: Laura Schraw, Interim Director of Parks and Recreation __,� CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator O1 111.1 Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Al rows.s O Tim Evans, Superintendent of Recreation Scott Sleezer, Superintendent of Parks Date: November 10, 2011 Subject: Land-Cash Evaluation The first Land-Cash ordinance was adopted in 1977 ($15,000/acre), and was revised in 1990 ($25,000/acre), 1996 ($45,000/acre), 2003 ($58,000/acre), 2004 ($73,500/acre), 2005 ($80,000/acre) and 2006 ($101,000/acre). The "fair market value" for each of these ordinances was determined by an appraiser, and the Economic Development Committee (EDC) directed staff to hire an appraiser at their November I"meeting to re-evaluate our Land Cash value to lower fees in hopes to spur development. Our current Land Cash value is $101,000/acre. Based on calculations by bedroom(1, 2, 3, etc.) and house type(single family,multi family, duplex, townhome)per every 1,000 residents to the City the developer is required to donate 10 acres of land and/or$101,000. EDC was informed that the developer has the right to contest the Land Cash value as per the ordinance language below. They were concerned that each developer would submit a different Land Cash amount and there would be no consistency which is why they directed the Staff to hire an appraiser to do a Land Cash study. (The City Council does not have to adopt the developer's submitted value.) "....unless the developer shall submit an appraisal showing the "fair market value" of such improved land in the area of his development or other evidence thereof and final determination of said"fair market value"per acre of such improved land shall be made by the City Council based upon such information submitted by the subdivider or developer and from other sources which may be submitted to the City Council by the School District or others." Further evaluation of the Land Cash Donation for developments that have approved annexation agreements provided the following results: • 12 developments have annexation agreements in place and have an expired fee lock(land cash would be affected), but have not yet started any part of development of the property • 3 developments that have increased to the current land cash value only have 18 lots remaining (between all 3 developments) • 4 developments have begun development(road, stormwater management, mass grading in place,homes) and their land cash value would increase because their fee lock has expired,Note: One of these donated 100% land and 100% cash and would not be affected by the increase in land cash value, one of these developments has no homes at all) • 7 developments have fee locks and would not be affected by any change in land cash Any development whose fee lock is not expired could amend their annexation agreement to adopt the new Land Cash value. Staff contacted several other Park Districts to find out if they have caught wind of anyone reducing their land cash fees. No one has begun this process at this time. At this time, the cost to develop a park has not decreased, and the cost of steel continually increases every year. If our Land Cash amount is reduced and we are obligated to develop parks as per the existing Annexation Agreements, the money would come from the General Fund. Jam` Memorandum EST. 7 1836 To: Economic Development Committee From: Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director p CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator �-L ��M� �•� Date: October 28, 2011 ♦ALE X Subject: Comprehensive Impact Fee Revision Over the past several meetings in as many months, City staff has presented various aspects of consideration for review and potential revision to the impact fees for development within the community. The impetus of this discussion stemmed from economic hardships experienced by the building community and in an effort by the City to spur development. Previous memorandums from Staff examined the Building Permit Fees, City and Non-City Impact or Transition Fees, and Land-Cash Donations. While Building Permit Fees affect all construction within the city, Impact or Transition Fees and Land-Cash Donations potentially affect only new home development. At the direction of the EDC, staff will propose reducing the municipal building from $5,509 per unit to $1,759 per unit; and also recommend not reducing building permit fees or utility connection fees as the City's cost of service has not decreased nor do we believe will these strategies will significantly stimulate housing development. Based upon this, and the final direction of the EDC, staff has continued to evaluate the current Land-Cash Donation policy as a means to comprehensively address the impact fee reduction debate which affects all proposed and under construction residential development within the City. Land-Cash Donations As detailed previously, the City's land-cash ordinance establishes the fair-market value for any parcel of residential land as a means of determining the per acre fee for cash-in-lieu of park land donations. Currently, Yorkville's land-cash value is $101,000 per acre for a residential development. The land-cash value has not been re-evaluated since its most recent amendment in 2006—during the height of the housing boom. Yorkville's land-cash value is comparable to other local municipalities which range between $80,000/acre on the low end and upwards to nearly $140,000/acre. Although other communities, such as Plainfield and Oswego, have preliminarily discussed revising their Land- Cash Donation requirements, however no community has formally revised or reduced its acre- valuation in response to stimulate development. Options for Land-Cash Donation Revision Should the EDC want to explore revisions to the current Land-Cash Donation Ordinance, staff has considered the following options for discussion: 1. Development Based Approach — this option proposes that each development is considered on a case-by-case basis for a consideration in reduction of Land-Cash Donation whereby the developer provides their own study of the land value based upon comparable sales and other physical attributes of similarly undeveloped/developed land (location, current infrastructure, topography, size). This approach is also consistent with 1 the language of the original Land-Cash Ordinance adopted in 1977 (Ord. ) which states in Section 1, paragraph C subsection 1 "In the event of any such objection the developer shall submit an appraisal showing the `fair market value" of such improved land in the area of his development or other evidence thereof and final determination of said `fair market value"per acre of such improved land shall be made by the City Council based upon such information submitted by the subdivider or developer and from other sources which may be submitted to the City Council by the School District or others. " (Refer to attached). • Pros — This option would allow require the developer to undertake the upfront cost of funding the land value study and provide specific data to consider when evaluating the requested Land-Cash Donation reduction. • Cons - This will require each development to amend their annexation and/or development agreements individually and potentially have a great disparity in land-cash valuations for various developments throughout the City. 2. Time Limited Reduction with Incremental Increase — this option would require the City to conduct the initial land appraisal study to determine the current "Fair Market Value" for and acre of land within Yorkville. If the findings result in a decrease from the present $101,000/acre, and ordinance could be passed reducing the valuation for a set period of time (e.g., 2 years) for Land-Cash Donation at which time the Fair Market Value would incrementally increase a certain percentage a year (i.e., 25% per year for 4 years) until it fully restores to the current$101,000/acre. • Pros — This would not require the City to permanently reduce its Land-Cash Donation to a level that far below other surround communities, thereby jeopardizing future funding for park developments. This option would also require only one(1)land appraisal over at least a five(5) year duration. • Cons - This option requires the front funding of an appraisal by the City which could cost upwards of tens of thousands of dollars. This option may prove difficult to administer as it would require the yearly review and calibration of the land-cash valuation with the potential for the same development to have multiple Land-Cash contribution valuations at any given time during its construction. 3. No change — this option proposes to keep the "Fair Market Value" at its present $101,000/acre amount. • Pros—This option requires no recalculation to Land-Cash Donations of current or future developments, or amendments to already approved annexation agreements. • Cons —May potentially prolong the stall in development entitled property within the City. Staff is seeking input for the committee to see if there is enough interest to pursue any of the options mentioned-above. I will be available at Tuesday night's meeting to discuss the information provided in this memo in greater detail. 2 0 C/r� Reviewed By: Agenda Item Number r p J r '� Legal ❑ NB #4 EST. 1836 Finance ❑ Engineer ❑ Agenda Item Tracking Number 0 IN! �l (0 City Administrator " tea' O County Consultant El PC 2011-10 &ZBA 2011-02 KonUall <4L.E `�d ❑ City Council Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: 312 Walter Street (Claesson)—Request for Rezoning &Variances to the R-2D District Meeting and Date: EDC/January 3, 2012 Synopsis: Requested rezoning from R-2 District to R-21) District and variance approval for minimum lot size, minimum lot width and maximum density in the R-2D District. Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: N/A Action Taken: N/A Item Number: N/A Type of Vote Required: Super Majority (2/3rds) Council Action Requested: Vote Submitted by: Krysti Barksdale-Noble, AICP Community Development Name Department Agenda Item Notes: See attached staff memorandum and supporting documents. ° Cfr� Memorandum 0 J t wE�1'av To: Economic Development Committee ES7 1636 From: Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director �- — CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator p; Ilf'ti.�M�y� �� Date: November 30, 2011 Subject: 312 Walter Street(Claesson) Request for Rezoning to R-2D Duplex District&Variances Petitioner's Request& Background: The petitioner, Robert Claesson, is requesting rezoning of an approximately 0.21-acre residential parcel located at 312 Walter Street from R-2 One Family Residence District to R-21) Duplex Two Family District. The property currently has an existing single-family residential dwelling proposed for interior renovation after a mid-summer fire, with ultimate conversion into two (2) rental units. Although the properties within the immediate area surrounding the subject parcel are zoned R-2 One Family Residence District, several of these residential structures are duplex dwellings including the property located immediately to the west of the subject parcel. The following chart provides details of those land uses: Existing Zoning Existing Land Use Comments Residential properties.Two-family duplex North R-2 One Family Residence Residential/Duplex dwellings located at 311 Walter Street and 313 Water Street. South R-2 One Family Residence Residential Single-family dwellings. East R-2 One Family Residence Residential T Single-family dwelling. West R-2 One Family Residence Residential/Duplex Residential property.Two-family duplex dwelling located at 310 Walter Street. Additionally, the petitioner is seeking relief from the following bulk regulations of the proposed new R-21)Duplex Two Family District zoning. • Section 10-6D-3-B to permit a lot size less than 15,000 square feet; property currently has approx. 9,150 sq. feet. • Section 10-6D-3-B to permit a lot width at the building line less than 100 feet. • Section 10-613-3-B to permit a density greater than 4.8 dwelling units per each acre. Although the existing parcel does not comply with the minimum lot size, width and density of requirements of the proposed R-21)zoning district, the property and most of the other surrounding lots are also not compliant with their current R-2 zoning bulk regulations as indicated below: Current R-2 Zoning Proposed R-2D Requested %Difference Between Requirements Requirements Variance Proposed R-2D and Re uested Variance Minimum Lot Size 12,000 sq.ft. 15,000 sq.ft. f 9,147.6 sq.ft. -5,852.4 sq.ft.(-60%) Minimum Lot Width' 80 ft. 100 ft. t 70 ft. -30 ft.(-30%) Max Density 3.3 d.u./acre 4.8 d.u./acre2 9.6 d.u./acre +4.8 d.u./acre(+200%) Lot width is measured at the building line. Density is calculated as the number of dwelling units(d.u.)per acre.In this instance,4.8 d.u.per acre is equivalent to 4.8/43,560=0.0001101d.u.per sq.ft.and 2 d.u.per 9,147.6 sq.ft.is equivalent to 2/9147.6=.0002186 d.u.per sq.ft. Plan Commission Action: The Plan Commission reviewed the requested rezoning at a public hearing held on October 12, 2011 and made the following action: Motion to recommend approval of the rezoning for 312 Walter Street from R-2 One Family Residence District to R-21)Duplex Two Family Residence District. Action Item• Lindblom-aye; Crouch-nay; Weaver-abstain; Jones-aye; Baker-nay;Prochaska-aye; Winninger-aye; Kraupner-aye 5 ayes; 2 nays; 1 abstention Zoning Board of Anneals Action: The Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed the requested variances at a public hearing held on November 2, 2011 and made the following action: Motion to recommend approval of variances from the R-21) Duplex Two Family Residence District regarding minimum lot size,minimum lot width and maximum density. Action Item: Baker,nay; Skinner,nay; Hirsch, nay; Walker,nay; Johnson,nay 0 ayes; 5 nays Staff Comments As stated above, the Plan Commission did render a favorable recommendation for approval of the rezoning request from R-2 One-Family Residence District to R-21) Duplex Two Family Residence District. However, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommended denial of the requested variances needed for the property to comply with the bulk regulations of the R-2D Duplex Two Family Residence District. Therefore, the City Council will need a concurring vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the elected members should they decide to reverse the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Staff has attached copies of the memorandums and minutes from both the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals meetings regarding this request for your reference. The petitioner will be present at Tuesday night's meeting to answer any questions of the Economic Development Committee members. Clry Memorandum J O -%A To: Plan Commission 1. � From: Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director EST. 1836 CC: Bart Olson City Administrator � ;�j;; �- Date: October 4, 2011 a9 Subject: PC 2011-10—312 Walter Street(Claesson) Request for Rezoning from R-2 One Family to R-2D Duplex Petitioner's Request & Background: The petitioner, Robert Claesson, is requesting rezoning of an approximately 0.21-acre residential parcel located at 312 Walter Street from R-2 One Family Residence District to R-2D Duplex Two Family District. The property currently has an existing single-family residential dwelling proposed for interior renovation after a mid-summer fire, with ultimate conversion into two (2)rental units. Staff has analyzed the existing land uses and zoning surrounding the subject property in consideration of the proposed rezoning from a single-family dwelling land use to a two-family semidetached dwelling land use. The following chart provides details of those land uses: Existing Zoning Existing Land Use Comments Residential properties.Two-family North R-2 One Family Residence Residential/Duplex duplex dwellings located at 311 Walter Street and 313 Water Street, South R-2 One Family Residence Residential Single-family dwellings. East R-2 One Family Residence Residential Single-family dwelling. West R-2 One Family Residence Residential/Duplex Residential property. Two-family duplex dwelling located at 310 Walter Street. As indicated in the chart above and illustrated on the attached map, the properties within the immediate area surrounding the subject parcel are zoned R-2 One Family Residence District. However, several residential structures within this area are duplex dwellings, including the property located immediately to the west of the subject parcel, as these uses likely predated the zoning code amendment for R-21) designation adopted by the city in the 1990's making these properties legally non-conforming. Bulk Requirements Since the proposed rezoning request has an existing structure on the property, a detailed review of the R-21) Duplex Two Family District bulk regulations was conducted to analyze compliance. The following R-21)bulk regulations will also apply: • Minimum lot size requirement of 15,000 square feet; Does not coinply • Minimum lot width requirement of 100 feet; Does not comply • Maximum density requirement 4.8 dwelling units per acre; Does not comply • Maximum lot coverage of 30%; Complies • Maximum building height of thirty feet (30') and no more than 2.5 stories, whichever is less; Complies • Minimum required front yard setback of thirty feet(30'); Complies • Minimum required side yard setback of ten feet (10') or ten percent (10%), whichever is greater; Complies • Minimum rear yard setback of thirty feet (30') feet. Complies Although the existing parcel does not comply with the minimum lot size, width and density of requirements of the proposed R-21) zoning district, the property and most of the other surrounding lots are also not compliant with their current R-2 zoning bulk regulations. Should the Plan Commission favorably recommend approval of the rezoning request; the petitioner will proceed with submitting a variance application to the Zoning Board of Appeals for relief of the above-referenced bulk requirements. Other Code/Ordinance Considerations: • Comprehensive Plan - The property is located within an area designated as "Traditional Neighborhood" within the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. The character for the Traditional Neighborhood designation is residential with anticipated infill development. Staff Recommendations: Based upon the existing surrounding land use and the recent trend in land use of duplex dwelling uses within the area, staff recommends approval of the request subject to variance approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals for the bulk regulations related to lot size, lot width and density. Findings of Fact: In considering rezoning requests, the Zoning Ordinance requires the Plan Commission to make findings based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case with respect to the following matters: a. Existing uses of property within the general area of the property in question. b. The zoning classification of property within the general area of the property in question. c. The suitability of the property in question to the uses permitted under the existing zoning classification. d. The trend of development, if any, in the general area of the property in question, including changes, if any, which have taken place since the day the property in question was placed in its present zoning classification. e. The impact that such reclassification and/or annexation will have upon traffic and traffic conditions on said routes; the effect, if any, such reclassification and/or annexation would have upon existing accesses to said routes; and the impact of additional accesses as requested by the petitioner upon traffic and traffic conditions and flow on said routes. (Ord. 1976-43, 11-4-1976) Additional factors to be considered for an amendment to a zoning ordinance as determined by the `LaSalle' case should also be considered. These factors are as follows: 1) The existing uses and zoning of nearby property; 2) The extent to which property values are diminished by the particular zoning restrictions; 3) The extent to which the destruction of property values of plaintiff promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the public; 4) The relative gain to the public as compared to the hardship imposed upon the individual property owner; 5) The suitability of the subject property for the zoned purposes; 6) The length of time the property has been vacant as zoned considered in the context of land development in the area in the vicinity of the subject property; 7) The community need for the proposed use; and, 8) The care with which the community has undertaken to plan its land use development. RAFT UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PLAN COMMISSION Library Historic Room Wednesday, October 12, 2011 7:00pm Commission Members in Attendance: Chairman Tom Lindblom Jane Winninger Jack Jones (arr. 7:03pm) Jeff Baker Art Prochaska James Weaver Mike Crouch Charles Kraupner Absent: Sandra Adams Other City Staff Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Other Guests Robert Claesson Peter Gabor Christine Vitosh, Depo Court reporter Chairman Tom Lindblom called the meeting to order at 7:00pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. He introduced and welcomed new Commissioner James Weaver. Mr. Weaver briefly told about his background. Previous Meeting Minutes - July 13, 2011 The minutes were approved as read on a motion by Prochaska and second by Baker. Unanimous voice vote approval. Citizen's Comments None Chairman Lindblom commented on the order of the meeting agenda: 1. The first Public Hearing will be opened and continued to next month and the petitioner is aware of this. 2. The Public Hearing will be held on the second item concerning property at 312 Walter Street. 3. Then the discussion will turn back to item #1 New Business for preliminary plan and final plat. This portion does not need a Public Hearing. 4. Then the 312 Walter St. property will be discussed. 1 Public Hearings 1. PC 2011-06 Verne Henne and Steven and Dawn Friel,petitioners, have filed an application with the City requesting rezoning of three parcels on Worsley Street (Lots 4, 5 and 6) from R-1 One Family Residence District to R-2 One Family Residence District. The real property consists of a total of approximately 0.73 acres and is located south of E. Main Street and east of Worsley Road in Yorkville, Illinois A motion was made by Kraupner and seconded by Prochaska to open the Public Hearing. Voice vote approval. A motion was then also made to continue this Hearing to November. This was on a motion by Crouch and second by Jones. Voice vote approval. 2. PC 2011-10 Robert Claesson, petitioner, has filed an application with the City requesting to rezone a parcel located at 312 Walter Street from R-2 One Family Residence District to R-2D Duplex Two Family District. The real property consists of approximately 0.21 acres and is located immediately south of Walter Street and east of Mill Street in Yorkville. Chairman Lindblom swore in the 2 guests who would offer testimony in this Hearing. Mr. Robert Claesson, owner of the property at 312 Walter St. said he wishes to convert his home to a multi-family dwelling by building an addition to make a 3-bedroom apartment on either side of the dwelling. He said fire had gutted the structure and it needed repairs. The property owner at 316 Walter St, Mr. Peter Gabor, voiced opposition to the plan. He said he has lived in this area since 1997 and the block-long Walter Street has 5 duplexes. Nearby Illinois Dr. & Olson have none. He said Walter Dr. is run down due to so many residents. He felt that Yorkville wants to plan its urban development and this is not the proper way. He said renters do not pay taxes and property owners must pay for the school children. Many of the Walter St. duplexes have only gravel driveways and there is not adequate parking. He feels this diminishes the property values and he is totally against the plan. Mr. Gabor said the Plan Commission should have rules for appearance. According to Mr. Gabor he thought none of the homes in this area were meant to be duplexes. He believes it is difficult to control the actions of renters and how they might affect the property value. Mr. Claesson said he will have a 2-car garage plus off-street parking for additional cars. There will also be a fenced back yard and all this will increase the value of his property. He added that Mr. Gabor's house is in the back and does not think his property will affect Mr. Gabor's. In 2000 when he purchased the property, it was already divided for duplexes and it now has many upgrades. Mr. Claesson said he is very strict about his renters and he plans to live in his home. He added that there are single-family homes in the area that are in foreclosure and they have become run down with long grass. 2 As there was no further testimony, Jones moved to close the Public Hearing and Crouch seconded the motion. Unanimous voice vote approval. New Business 1. PC 2011-07 Verne Henne and Steven and Dawn Friel,petitioners have filed an application with the United City of Yorkville requesting preliminary plan and final plat approval of the re-subdivision of three (3)parcels on Worsley Street (Lots 4, 5, and 6) into two (2) parcels. The real property consists of a total of approximately 0.73 acres and is located south of E. Main St and east of Worsley Rd. in Yorkville. Chairman Lindblom said the Commission is looking for recommendation of preliminary plan and final plat. Krysti Barksdale-Noble said this item would be tabled. A motion was then made and seconded by Commissioners Prochaska and Weaver, respectively, to table this item until the next meeting. Discussion: A point of order was raised and it was questioned why there were 2 numbers on the same issue. Ms. Barksdale-Noble replied that#6 is a Public Hearing to rezone and #7 is for preliminary plat. She said they are 2 separate items with 2 separate ordinances that apply. It is the opinion of the City Attorney that this is the best way to track and record this administratively. The motion was tabled until the November meeting on a unanimous voice vote. Turning back to Public Hearing PC2011-10, Chairman Lindblom said the Board would now discuss the Claesson rezoning issue. Ms. Barksdale-Noble said the trend of the area on Walter St. is duplexes and there is no history as to how this occurred. The Chairman added that many of the structures on this street were originally built as duplexes and not as single-family units. The R-21) designation originated in the 1990's. Ms. Barksdale-Noble said the only issue with rezoning is that the property would become non-conforming with the R-2D designation. If the Commission approves the request, she said the case would be moved to the Zoning Board of Appeals in November. The rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. City staff is recommending that if the Commission approves, that the area continue as a residential use. She noted the lot size is .21 acres. Action Item: Motion: Baker moved and Jones seconded to recommend approval of the rezoning of this parcel to R-21) Duplex. Discussion: Mr. Claesson said 50 other properties within 500 feet were notified of this request. Ms. Winninger commented that Mr. Gabor's issues were a generalization about renters in duplexes diminishing the property value and that it could happen with renters living in single-family homes. Crouch commented that he thought Ms. Gabor took issue with having a duplex in a single-family neighborhood. He said that is the question that should be considered and that the Commission's purpose is to determine what is best for 3 the neighborhood. There was a brief discussion of duplexes on other streets and the general condition. Mr. Prochaska said Mr. Claesson is not changing the character of the neighborhood by his intended actions. He asked if the other lots in the neighborhood meet the requirements for R-2D. They only meet them for R-2. Ms. Barksdale-Noble said none of the homes on Walter St. meet the 12,000 square feet requirement. Baker noted that the homes were built prior to the zoning code. Kraupner said he had issue with the size of the lots and asked if there is enough space for 6 cars. Claesson detailed how he would accommodate 3 cars per side of the duplex. Roll call vote: Winninger-yes, Jones-yes, Baker-no, Prochaska-yes,Weaver-abstain, Crouch-no, Kraupner-yes, Lindblom-yes. Motions passed 5-2 with one abstention. This matter now moves to the Zoning Board of Appeals in November 2. Plan Commission Meeting Schedule for 2012 The Commission will continue to meet on the second Wednesday of the month, however, the meetings will be held in the City Hall. Adiournment There was no further business and the meeting was adjourned on a motion by Baker and second by Crouch. Meeting adjourned at 7:45pm. Respectfully submitted by Marlys Young, Minute Taker 4 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS PLAN COMMISSION MEETING PUBLIC HEARING 902 Game Farm Road Yorkville, Illinois Wednesday, October 12 , 2011 7 : 00 p .m. D-951911 i i Cr, reporting service 1300 Iroquois Avenue,Suite 205 Naperville,160563 630-983-0030 • Fax: 630-778-4824 e-mail:depocourt@depocourt.com - www.depocourt.com 2 1 PRESENT : 21 Mr . Tom Lindblom, Chairman, 3 Mr. Jeff Baker, 4 Mr. Michael Crouch, 5 Mr . Jack Jones, 6 Mr. Charles Kraupner, 7 Mr . Art Prochaska, 8 Mr. James Weaver, 9 Ms . Jane Winninger. 10 11 ALSO PRESENT : 12 Ms . Krysti Noble, Community Development 13 Director; 14 Ms . Marlys Young, Minute Taker . 15 - - - - - 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 3 1 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: The first item then 2 is to go to public hearing, so is there a motion 3 to that effect, please? 4 MR. KRAUPNER: So moved. 07:03PM 5 MR. PROCHASKA: Second. 6 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Any discussion on 7 the motion? 8 (No response . ) 9 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Those in favor 07:04PM 10 signify by saying aye . 11 (A chorus of ayes . ) 12 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Opposed? 13 (No response. ) 14 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Motion passes . 07:04PM 15 We are now in public hearing for 16 PC 2011-06, Verne Henne and Steven and Dawn Friel, 17 petitioners, have filed an application with the 18 United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, 19 Illinois, requesting rezoning of three parcels on 07:04PM 20 Worsley Street, Lots 4 , 5 and 6, from R-1 One 21 Family Residence District to R-2 One Family 22 Residence District . 23 The real property consists of a 24 total of approximately 0 . 73 acres and is located Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 4 1 south of East Main Street and east of Worsley Road 2 in Yorkville, Illinois . 3 So with that being said, do we have 4 a motion then to continue this meeting then until 07:04PM 5 the November meeting? 6 MR. CROUCH: So moved. 7 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Is there a second? 8 MR. JONES : Second. 9 MR. WEAVER: Second. 07:04PM 10 THE COURT : I 'm sorry, okay . Moved and 11 seconded. Any discussion on the motion? 12 (No response . ) 13 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Hearing none, those 14 in favor signify by saying aye . 07:05PM 15 (A chorus of ayes . ) 16 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Opposed? 17 (No response. ) 18 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Motion passes . That 19 will be continued then to the next meeting. 07:05PM 20 The next item then on our public 21 hearing is PC 2011-10, Robert Claesson, is that 22 pronounced -- Claesson, petitioner, has filed an 23 application with the United City of Yorkville, 24 Kendall County, Illinois, requesting rezoning of a Depo-Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 5 1 parcel located at 312 Walter Street from R-2 One 2 Family Residence District to R-2D Duplex Two 3 Family District . 4 The real property consists of 07:05PM 5 approximately 0 . 21 acres and is located 6 immediately south of Walter Street and east of 7 Mill Street in Yorkville, Illinois . 8 With that being said, could I have 9 anybody that wishes to speak before the Commission 07:05PM 10 at this time stand and repeat the oath -- repeat 11 after me? 12 (Witnesses thereupon duly 13 sworn. ) 14 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Thank you. Okay. I 07:06PM 15 guess, Mr . Claesson, are you going to speak on 16 your behalf? 17 MR. CLAESSON: Yes . 18 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Okay. The floor is 19 yours . 07:06PM 20 MR. CLAESSON: Well, I am looking to 21 change my single family home into a multi family 22 dwelling. This is the plot of it, and as you see, 23 I have many, one, two, three, four other ones 24 similar to what I want to do on the other side and Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 6 1 one directly next to me . 2 I just want to put an addition onto 3 one side of my house, put the roof on it and make 4 a three-bedroom apartment on one side and a 07:06PM 5 three-bedroom apartment on the other side, so . . . 6 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Just as a matter of 7 clarification, the house was gutted a while ago by 8 fire? 9 MR. CLAESSON: I 'm in the -- Yes . 07:06PM 10 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: And so remodeling 11 would have to take place? 12 MR. CLAESSON: The remodeling is going 13 to happen . I am either going back to the way it 14 was or I am doing this . I am definitely doing 07:07PM 15 something . I am just hoping that the Board will 16 let me do the plans I want to do. 17 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Okay. Any other 18 comments from -- Sir, any comments on the public 19 hearing? 07:07PM 20 MR. GABOR: Yes . I live at 316 Walter 21 Street, right here (indicating) , and I have lived 22 1 in Yorkville for -- at this address -- 23 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: I 'm sorry, can we 24 get your name for the record? Depo-Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 7 1 MR. GABOR: Peter Gabor, G-A-B-O-R. 21 I ' ve been there since 1997 . Walter 3 Street, as you can see, is only one block long, 4 just like the other streets . It has five 07:07PM 5 duplexes . Illini Drive has none, Olson has none . 6 If you take the time before you make 7 your decision and take a drive, you will see the 8 condition that Walter Street is in with all the 9 duplexes and the renters who come and go month by 07:08PM 10 month, year by year. This street is pretty run 11 down. 12 I personally have no understanding 13 why Walter Street has to have another duplex, 14 which would make it six, and then you look at 07:08PM 15 Illini Drive, which is a beautiful single family 16 street, Olson, the same thing. 17 My understanding is that Yorkville 18 wants to plan its urban development, and this is 19 not the way. 07:08PM 20 First of all, the people who rent 21 these duplexes don' t pay taxes . I pay taxes . I 22 have to pay for those children who live there to 23 go to school right on Mill Street or the high 24 school, it really doesn' t matter, but I think Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 8 1 there should be a limit as far as the planning for 21 Yorkville how many duplexes are we going to allow 3 on each street . Is it going to become duplex 4 city? 07:09PM 5 Walter Street looks like a dump . 6 Many of these duplexes have no driveways, just 7 gravel, you see motorcycles out there, cars are 8 parked up all night on the street because there 9 are so many people in these apartments, there ' s 07:09PM 10 not enough room in the driveway. 11 It brings my property value down, 12 and I take care of my property, it brings the 13 other property values down, especially in this 14 economy when they are already down, so there 07:09PM 15 should be some limitation. 16 If someone is going to have a 17 duplex, it should be taken care of . Maybe there 18 should be a duplex association like there ' s a 19 condominium association, a townhome association, 07:1OPM 20 where there ' s a responsibility for taking care of 21 the property. 22 This house right here (indicating) I 23 believe has been up for new rental at least a half 24 a dozen times since I have lived there. The Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 9 1 owners let their dogs run on my property, mess all 2 over my property. I clean it up. 3 So I just -- I am totally against 4 it . I would -- I would prefer that the owner fix 07:IOPM 5 up his house, make it such that it increases its 6 value, his value, it makes Yorkville ' s urban 7 development progressive, instead of just anything 8 goes, which to me is what ' s been -- what ' s been 9 happening as far as Walter Street . 07:11PM 10 You take a drive down Illini Drive, 11 which curves into -- this is still Illini Drive, 12 and Walter Street ends with my driveway, this 13 house burned down, was -- is owned by a former 14 councilman, put up a beautiful new home, okay? 07:1IPM 15 That was -- you know, if -- I mean, 16 the only explanation I can have for -- My house is 17 not big. If I divide it into a duplex, it would 18 be for only one thing, to pay the mortgage, and 19 it ' s not going to bring the values up, and if the 07:12PM 20 duplex is going to go through, your commission 21 should have some requirement as far as appearance, 22 whatever other villages do to maintain their 23 property. 24 That gentleman is a fireman in Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 10 1 Woodridge-Lisle? I have a business in Downers 2 Grove, right next to Woodridge . The Village of 3 Downers Grove is strict . When I wanted to expand 4 my business, they had code enforcement, who -- you 07:12PM 5 can ' t have one building unless it ' s attached to 6 the other building to make sure it ' s not -- you ' re 7 not going to do an in-law-type of a setup with 8 in-laws moving in next door . 9 You had to take out the kitchen 07:13PM 10 facility and I had to prove to them that I am 11 making this old house into a garage and it ' s being 12 attached to the new house . 13 And Downers Grove, it ' s just like 14 Naperville, you know. It ' s a beautiful community. 07:13PM 15 Yorkville is a beautiful community until you get 16 to Walter Street . 17 Please take a look at it and I think 18 you will vote no . 19 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Okay . Thank you. 07:13PM 20 Is there any other public comments? 21 MR. CLAESSON : I ' d like to comment on 22 what he said. 23 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Certainly. 24 MR. CLAESSON: You' re making comment on Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 11 1 houses around my house not having a driveway, but 2 my house does have a driveway. It ' s going to have 3 a two-car garage, so I would have in the car 4 garage parking, plus off street parking for two 07:14PM 5 additional cars, three cars for each unit off of 6 the street on the driveway. 7 The duplexes that he' s referring to 8 that ' s connecting to his with the dog, I have a 9 fenced-in back yard and the back for any pets to 07:14PM 10 be restrained. 11 I believe that what I want to do is 12 going to bring the value of my property up and 13 make the other properties around them better 14 because it ' s going to be much nicer, much more 07.14PM 15 modern, it ' s going to look right in place with the 16 rest of the street, and I don' t believe that it ' s 17 going to bring the property values around -- 18 directly adjacent down. 19 This gentleman ' s house is placed 07:14PM 20 way, way, way in the back, back against this creek 21 where every property touching this property is a 22 single family home . 23 My property is nowhere near his 24 property, there ' s other properties in between our Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 12 1 properties, and with his being set back so far, I 2 don ' t really see how my property is going to 3 affect his . 4 If you were to go look at his 07:15PM 5 property, you can' t even see my house from his 6 house . You' d have to come all the way out to the 7 street at the very edge just to see the corner of 8 my house . 9 So with that being said, you could 07:15PM 10 also see directly adjacent one, two, three, four, 11 five, six, seven, already on that street . 12 Going to be honest, when I bought 13 this property back in 2000, these were my original 14 plans, hoping to do this . It was all part of my 07:15PM 15 plan when I bought the house . 16 It had already been divided, there 17 was already a kitchen downstairs when I bought it, 18 so it had already been divided as such, it just 19 was -- the zoning, I believe that house is meant 07:15PM 20 to be a duplex, just the zoning for some reason on 21 this -- on all these streets was not as such. 22 So, you know, in comparison to the 23 other ones, he says if you were to drive down and 24 you see these people ' s houses, my house really Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 13 1 doesn' t compare to them. I have the driveway, 2 it ' s set back, it ' s a different build, it doesn' t 3 look like those houses at all . 4 My house is going to be a 07:16PM 5 cedar-sided house with a brick front, well kept, 6 definitely -- will definitely not be looking run 7 down because it will be brand new, all new siding, 8 new kitchens, modern, and it will definitely raise 9 the property value of my house . 07:16PM 10 My property value will go up, there 11 is no doubt, because I 'm going to making it much 12 nicer, more modern, and I definitely think it will 13 be by far, if you allow it to go through, the 14 nicest rental property on the block. 07:16PM 15 I 'm very stringent about who I rent 16 to . I 'm not going to just rent to anybody . 17 References, the whole nine yards . 18 So, you know, just with that in 19 mind, if you' re going to compare my house to the 07:16PM 20 other rental properties, I just wish you would 21 look at that option, you know, that it will be 22 nicer than the other ones and I think it will make 23 the property values on that street go up, not 24 down. Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 14 1 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Okay. Thank you . 2 Any other comments from the public? Yes, sir . 3 MR. GABOR: First of all, I don' t 4 believe any of these homes were meant to be 07:17PM 5 duplexes . When the zoning changed from 6 agricultural in Yorkville to single family, that ' s 7 what it meant . Not duplex. 8 Single family is single family, and 9 a person who converts a home into a duplex can 07:17PM 10 have the greatest intentions in the world, but you 11 have no control over what the renters do in your 12 house . If they go -- disappear overnight, a 13 deposit for security is not going to take care of 14 the damage they' ve done . 07:11PM 15 I 'm sure every one of those duplexes 16 when they were first converted were beautiful . 17 Look at them now . 18 And how many duplexes does one tiny 19 street need? It ' s one block long. It ' s going to 07:18PM 20 have six duplexes . 21 If the economy ever changes and we 22 get out of this recession, what ' s going to happen 23 is the same thing that ' s happened in LaGrange, 24 LaGrange Park, Downers Grove, people are going to Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 15 1 buy these little lots, demolish what they have and 2 build beautiful homes on them, and I personally 3 plan to stay in Yorkville . 4 And, again, do I want to see six 07:IBM 5 cars in one driveway? No . Do I want to see cars 6 parked on the street wondering is this person 7 staying here or is this person planning to rob 8 this house? I mean, that street is never empty. 9 And it may initially help the value 07:19PM 10 of the home, but that alone can ' t guarantee that 11 it ' s going to stay that way after . I mean, if you 12 look at Walter Street right now, there are signs 13 for rent, duplexes for rent, duplexes for sale, 14 single family homes for sale . I mean, it looks 07:19PM 15 like a flea market for homes . 16 And there ' s got -- there should be 17 an end to this as far as the Planning Commission 18 because the future of Yorkville -- it doesn' t 19 depend on Walter Street, but if that can happen to 07:19PM 20 Walter Street, why not somebody else? 21 I mean, there should be a limit as 22 to how many duplexes you have on one block, just . 23 like where you put your townhomes and things like 24 that . Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 16 1 And the last thing that I mentioned 2 first I want to say is that the people who rent 3 don' t pay taxes, and they are all young people . 4 My children are grown, they don ' t 07:20PM 5 live with me, there are two people in this 6 household where I live, yet I ' ve got to pay taxes 7 for the schooling of those children? It ' s not 8 right . 9 Duplexes of maybe -- you know, I 07:20PM 10 mean, the tax structure, the real homeowners 11 should not be stuck with -- you know, my taxes are 12 $8, 000 a year, and I ' ve got to pay that because 13 I ' ve got six duplexes with 50 people and a dozen 14 children whose education I definitely support, but 07:21PM 15 do I have to be paying for it? 16 And basically there ' s got to be a 17 limit for how many -- how many duplexes on each -- 18 on this -- you know, ten, 12 homes, there ' s six 19 duplexes, and it ' s like 60/40, or 50/50 . 07:21PM 20 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: I don ' t mean to cut 21 you off, but is there -- I think you are repeating 22 yourself now. Is there something new you wish to 23 add? I would certainly welcome that . 24 MR. GABOR: No . Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 17 1 MR. CLAESSON : One other thing I plan 2 on -- And I have been living in this house myself 3 since 2000 . I pay my taxes . He doesn' t pay my 4 taxes . 07:21PM 5 I pay my taxes and I have a child 6 and, you know, she walks to school every day when 7 we lived there and, you know, I 'm paying my 8 obligation for taxes also and, you know, the 9 area is -- 07:21PM 10 MR. GABOR: And you are paying for the 11 renters, too . 12 MR. CLAESSON : The area is already full 13 of renters . Across the street, even on 126, it ' s 14 all rental property. 07:22PM 15 You know, repeating myself, I just 16 wanted to add that I 'm not going to just rent it 17 out to anybody, I 'm living there. I 'm renting out 18 a portion of it and I 'm living there. 19 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Is it your intent to 07:22PM 20 continue living there? 21 MR. CLAESSON : It is absolutely my 22 intent to continue living there . 23 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Just rent out the 24 other half? Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 18 1 MR. CLAESSON : Rent out the other half. 21 And, with the recession and everything else, to 3 try to avoid yet another empty house that ' s not 4 getting paid for, the supplemental rental income 07:22PM 5 is going to stop that from happening in this case, 6 okay, because, I mean, let ' s face it, property 7 values have dropped down. It ' s not going to sell . 8 The other single family homes have already been 9 foreclosed on in this house, the 308 and another 07:22PM 10 one across the street . 11 The houses that he is referring to 12 are single family homes that have been abandoned 13 because the homeowners can' t afford them. The 14 grass is getting long. That' s not the renters . 07:23PM 15 The renters are the ones that have the grasses 16 cut . 17 The abandoned single family homes 18 that are driving property values down that the 19 gentleman is speaking of are the single family 07:23PM 20 homes that the people can ' t afford. 21 And, you know, I 'm doing what I can 22 to make sure my house isn' t one of those . I have 23 lived there for ten years . I 'm in construction; 24 my income has been affected as much or more than Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 19 1 anybody' s, trust me, and this is a plan to make my 2 house continue looking good, keep it under my 3 belt, not to lose what I have invested in, and, 4 you know, it ' s my home . It ' s where me and my 07:23PM 5 daughter have grown up, and I would definitely 6 like to be able to raise her there and keep her 7 going to that school where all her friends are and 8 everything else, and this is the way it ' s going to 9 have to happen. 07:23PM 10 Otherwise it ' s going to get fixed 11 the old way, get put up on the market, and lord 12 only knows how long it will sit there, and then it 13 will become what this gentleman is afraid of, tall 14 grass with a house sitting there that -- you know, 07:24PM 15 that doesn ' t get its taxes paid, and we don ' t need 16 another foreclosure in town, that ' s for sure . 17 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Okay. Is there 18 anybody else that has any more comments? 19 MR. GABOR: One more comment, sir, if I 07:24PM 20 may add. 21 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: As long as you are 22 not repeating yourself . 23 MR. GABOR: If the solution to the 24 problem of these single family homes that are Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 20 1 being abandoned is to make them into duplexes , 2 then let ' s all make them into duplexes . That ' s 3 not the solution . 4 And if Yorkville and the village and 07:24PM 5 the planners and you folks have any foresight, you 6 will plan with progressive thoughts . 7 And foreclosures are everywhere and 8 I don' t believe jumping to duplexes is the answer, 9 especially if Yorkville wants to grow the right 07:25PM 10 way. 11 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Okay. I hear nobody 12 else in the audience. Could we have a motion then 13 to close the public hearing? 14 MR. JONES : So moved. 07:25PM 15 MR. CROUCH: Second. 16 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Moved and seconded. 17 Any discussion on the motion? 18 (No response . ) 19 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Hearing none, those 07:25PM 20 in favor signify by saying aye . 21 (A chorus of ayes . ) 22 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: Opposed? 23 (No response . ) 24 CHAIRMAN LINDBLOM: This part of the Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 21 1 meeting, the public hearing portion, is now 2 closed. 3 (Which were all the 4 proceedings had in the 5 public hearing portion 6 of the meeting . ) 7 ---oOo--- 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 22 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS . 2 COUNTY OF LA SALLE ) 3 I, Christine M. Vitosh, a Certified 4 Shorthand Reporter, do hereby certify that I 5 reported in shorthand the proceedings had at the 6 hearing of the above-entitled cause and that the 7 foregoing Report of Proceedings, Pages 1 through 8 23, inclusive, is a true, correct, and complete 9 transcript of my shorthand notes so taken at the 10 time and place aforesaid. 11 I further certify that I am neither 12 counsel for nor related to counsel for any of the 13 parties to this suit, nor am I in any way related 14 to any of the parties to this suit, nor am I in 15 any way interested in the outcome thereof. 16 I further certify that my 17 certificate annexed hereto applies to the original 18 transcript and copies thereof, signed and 19 certified under my hand only. I assume no 20 responsibility for the accuracy of any reproduced 21 copies not made under my control or direction . 22 23 24 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 23 1 In testimony whereof, I have 2 hereunto set my hand this 2nd day of November, 3 A. D. , 2011 . 4 Oxmt-A 6W, 5 6 Christine M. Vitosh, CSR 7 CSR No. 084-002883 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 _ 24 19:13 1 4:15,20:21 20:15 --- - --I -- - - - bedroom izl-6:4,6:5 Christine(21-22:3, CSR[21-23:6,23:7 ! ! behalf Ill-5:16 23:6 curves[1l-9:11 �.�[+ -16:12 ; A.D(11-23:3 belt Ill-19:3 city[+1-8:4 cut 121-16:20,18:16 -_ abandoned pl- better(11-11:13 C 121-3:18,4:23 Q I 18:12,18:17,20:1 � between 11l-11,24 I CITY Ill-1:2 p 1 - -- able[+l-19:6 big[11-9:17 I Clawson p1-4:21, ---- 1 above-entitled Ill" block[41-7:3,13:14, 4:22,5:15 I 0.2111]-5:5 i 22:6 D-951911[11-1:19 I 0.73 Ill-3:24 14:19,15:22 I CLAESSON(iol- 1 absolutely Ill-17:21 Board Ill-6:15 j 5:17,5:20.6:9,6:12, damage(t1°14:14 084002883(1 i-23:7 1 accuracy I+1-22:20 bought pl-12:12, j 10:21,10:24,17:1, daughter Ill-19:5 ---1 -- acres M-3:24,5:5 12:15,12:17 I 17:12,17:21,18:1 Dawn(1l-3:16 add 131-16:23,17:16, brand 111-13:7 I clarification(+1-6:7 decision(11-7:7 -- - - - 19:20 brick 11]-13:5 dean[+1-9:2 definitely m-6:14, 1 1 111,22:7 I addition I1)-6:2 bring rA-9:19.11:12, I dose 111-20:13 13:6,13:8,13:12, 12(21-1:14,16:18 additional[1]-11:5 16:14,19:5 I 11:17 dosed(1]-21:2 i 126 111-1 7:13 address ill-6:22 ( demolish Ill-15:1 brings R]-8:11,8:12 code lt)-10:4 � deposit[U-14:13 1997 Ill-7:2 adjacent rA-11:18, build[21-13:2,15:2 commentl31-10:21, d 12:10 building[21-10:5, 10:24,19:19 Development 111- affect 11]-12:3 2:12 2 10:6 I comments ls1-6:18, affected[1l-18:24 burned(1]-9:13 10:20,14:2,19:18 development[21- afford[2l-18:13, business(21-10:1, j COMMISSION lil- 7:18,9:7 2000[2]-12:13,17:3 18:20 10:4 1:5 different 111-13:2 2011(2] 1:14,23:3 aforesaid I1]-22:10 direction[11-22:21 X11-06 111-3:16 buy[11-15:1 � commission[11-9:20 afraid I+]-19:13 1 Commission rA-5:9, directly(31-6:1, 201140[11-4:21 ago Ill-6:7 C 15:17 11:18,12:10 [11-22:8 ' agricultural Ill-14:6 community(2]- Director[q-2:13 2nd Ill-23:2 + allow[2l-8:2,1313 10:14,1015 disappear[11-14:12 ------- - alone(11-15:10 car 121-11:3 discussion 3:6, Community 111-2:12 131- 3 ALSO I1)-2:11 GBfe I4]-8:12,8:17, compare Ill-13:1, 4:11,20:17 --- --- - -- 8:20 14.13 ! DistrictKI-3:21, annexed[11-22:17 � i 13:19 � care Is]-8:7,11:5, 1 3:22 5:2,5:3 " 308 I1]-18:9 answer(q-20:8 , comparison I+1- 1 15:5 divide[t)-9:17 312 Ill-5:1 I apartment[21-6:4, I 12:22 6:5 case[+1-18:5 I complete 11l-22:8 divided[21-12:16, i 318 l+l-6:20 1 apartments ill Ill-13:5 9 12:18 [11-8:9 condition[ -7:8 appearance(1l-921 cedar-sided I1]-13:5 condominium I1]- dog 111-11:8 -_-----.-__ application 12)-3:17, certainly 12l-10:23, 8:19 j dogs[+l-9:1 ! 4:23 16:23 done 11]-14:14 connecting 111-11:8 4[1l-3:20 I applies(11-22:17 certificate[11-22:17 consists 121-3:23, doorlll-10:8 121 a -17:9,17:12 certified Ill-22:19 rea 5:4 doubt[1l-13:11 1 rJ f Art Ill-2:7 Certified 1:11-22:3 construction 11]- down 1121-7:11,8:11, assodation pl-8:18, codify p1-22:4, 18:23 8:13,8:14,9:10, 8:19 22:11,22:16 1 continue 14)-4:4, 9:13,11,18,12:23, 5111-3:20 assume 111-22:19 Chairman[1l-22 17:20,17:22,19:2 13:7,13:24,18:7, I 50(11-16:13 I attached R]-10:5, CHAIRMAN(eel-3:1, continued[11-4:19 18:18 50150[1l-16:19 3:6,3:9,3:12,3:14, Downers N1-10:1, I 10:12 control121-14:11, audience 111-20:12 4:7,4:13,4:16,4:18, 22:21 10.3,10:13,14:24 j s I 5:14 5:18,6:6,6:10, 1 downstairs(1l-12:17 avoid[11-18:3 converted 111-14:16 6:17,6:23,10:19, dozen 121-8:24,16:13 Iff! 1 aye 131-3:10,4:14, converts[1l-14:9 81+1-3:20 i 20:20 10:23,14:1.16:20, copies M-22:18, Drive I4]-7:5,7:15, 19,17:23,19:17, 60140(1l-16:19 ; ayes p1-3:11,4:15, 17:19,17:23,19:17, I 9:10,9:11 , 20:21 19:21,20:11,20,16, corner ill-12:7 drive[3l-7:7,9:10, - ----- 20:19,20:22,20:24 1 ill-22:8 7 2:23 1 B change 111-5:21 councilman ill-9:14 driveway m-8:10, I - changed Ill-14:5 counsel121-22:12 9:12,11:1 11:2, 7:00 Ill-1:15 changes[11-14:21 11:6,13:1,15:5 County[21-3:16,4:24 Bakertil-2:3 Charles lil-2:6 driveways Ill-8:6 -- ------J COUNTY 11l-22:2 9 I beautiful le]-7:15, child Ill-17:5 COURT[11-4:10 driving[11-18:18 ---- 9:14,10:14, CROUCH 10:15, children(41-7:22, creek ill-11:20 dropped Ill-18:7 14:16,15,2 16:4,16:7,16:14 duly 111-5:12 1 90211]-1:10 become 121-8:3, I chorus pl-3:11, Crouch -2:4 I rA-4:6, dump[11-8:5 Depo-Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 25 Duplex(11-5:2 fixed Ill-19:10 hereto ill-22:17 JONES[21-4:8,20:14 duplex(e) 7:13,8:3. flea[1)-15:15 I hereunto 11l-23:2 Jones[11-2:5 ---- 8:17,8:18,9:17, floor[11-5:18 I high Ili-7:23 Jumping Ill-20:8 9:20,12:20,14:7, folks 111-20:5 home pi-5:21,9:14, Main 111-4:1 14:9 foreclosed 111-18:9 11,22,14:9,15:10, maintain Ill-9:22 duplexes pq-7:5, foreclosure 111-19:16 19:4 F--- -- market r4-15:15, 7:9,7:21 8:2,8:6, foreclosures(11-20:7 homeowners[21- I 19:11 1„:7,14:5,14:15, foregoing[1l-22:7 I 16:10,18:13 keep lz)-19:2,19:6 Marlys Ili-2:14 14:18.14:20,15:13, 1 foresight 11)-20:5 I homes 110)-14:4, Kendall(2l-3:18, matter[2l-6:6,7:24 15:22,16:9,16:13, former[1l_9:13 15:2.15;14,15:15, 4:24 mean M-9:15,15:8, 16:17,16:19,20:1, four lz1-5:23,12:10 16:18,18:8,18:12, kept 111-13:5 15:11,15:14,15:21, dwelling 20:8 Friel Ill-3:16 18:17,18:20,19:24 kitchen p!-10:9, 16'.10,16:20,18:6 dwelling[1l-5:22 friends Ill-19:7 honest Ill-12:12 12:17 te meant pl-12:19, front[11-13:5 hoping 121-6:15, kitchens[11-13:8 14:4,14:7 I E full Ill-17:12 12:14 knows 111-19:12 MEETING[1)-1:5 future Ill-15:18 house Imo)-6:3,6:71 Kraupner(11-2:6 meeting(sl-4:4,4:51 East Ill-4:1 8:22,9:5,9A3,9:16, KRAUPNER Ill-3:4 4:19,21:1.21:6 east m-4:1,5:6 F G 10:11,10:12,11:1, Krystl Ill-2:12 mentioned[11-16:1 economy l2l-8:14, 11:2,11:19,12:5, - mess Ill-9:1 14:21 12:6.12:8,12:15, I L Michael Ill-2:4 edge[11-12:7 G A-B-O-R Ill-7:1 I 12:19,12:24,13:4, Mill[z)-5:7,7:23 LA Ill-22:2 education[1)-16:14 GABOR M-6:20,7:1, 13:5,13:9,13:19, mind 111-13:19 14:3,16:24,17:10, 14:12,15:8,17:2, ~111-3:3 LaGrange Minute[11.2:14 -14:23, eltlrerlll-6;13 19:19,19:23 18:3,18:9,18:22, modern 131-11:15,14:24 13:8,13:12 Gabor 111-7:1 19:2,19:14 e empty Ill[2]5:17 18:3 Game ill-1:10 household Ill-16:6 last Ill-16:1 month M_7:9,7:10 end l-15:17 garage pl-10:11, houses[41-11:1, law 111-100: mortgage Ill-9:18 ends(1)-9:12 laws Ill-10:8 motion 11:3,11:4 12:24,13:3,18:11 enforcement I1)-10:4 gentleman 131-9:24, least(11-823 lei-3:2,3:7, ' entitled Ill-22:6 Ilmit 3:14,4:4,4:11,4:18, 18:19,19:13 131-8:1,15:21, especially(2)-8:13, 11:19 16:17 20:12,20:17 gentleman's 20:9 Ill- limitation(1l-8:15 motorcycles ill-8:7 11:19 everywhere I1)-20:7 Illinl 141-7:5,7:15, Lindblom moved[s)-3:4,4:6, grass[2l-18:14, UI-2:2 expand Ill-10:3 19:14 9:10,911 LINDBLOM I2m-3:1, 4:10,20:14,20:16 explanation 111-9,16 I ILLINOIS M-1:3, 3:6,3:9,3:12,3:14, moving[11-10:8 grasses I1)-18:15 gravel hl-8:7 22:1 4:7,4:13,4:16,4:18, MR P41-3:4,3:5.4:6, F greatest 11l-14:10 Illinois pl-1:11,3:19, 5:14,5:18,61,610 4:8.4-.9,"7,520, - Grove 14l-10:2,10:3, 4:2,4:24,6:7 6:17,8:23,10:19, 6:9,6:12,6:20,7:1, (ace[11-18:6 10:13,14:24 Immedietelll[1l-5:6 10:23.10,16:20, 10:21,10:24,14:3, 9 111-20:9 In-law-type ill-10:7 17:19,17:23,19:17, facility(1l-10:10 19:21,20:11,20-16 1723,19:17, 17:12,17:21,18:1, grown Ill-16:4,19:5 in-laws Ill-10:8 , family 11 -5:21, inclusive Ill-22:8 20:19,20:22,20:24 19:19,19:23,20:14, 7:15,11:22,14:6. guarantee[1]-15:10 20:15 14:8.15:14,18:8, guess pl-5:15 Income M-18:4, Lisle 111-10:1 multi Ill-5:21 18:12,18:17,18:19, gutted[tl-8:7 18:24 live 141-6:20,7:22, Increases Ill-9:5 16:5,16:6 Family N 19:24 mlt' H indicating[2l-6:21, I[ved 141-6:21,8:24, [41-3:21,5:2, 822 17:7,18:23 5:3 Instead[1l-9:7 living(sl-172,17:17, name ill-6:24 far p)-8:1,9:9,9:21, half 131-8:23.17:24, Intent M-17:19, 17:18,17:20,17:22 Naperville 111-10:14 12A,13:13,15:17 18:1 17:22 located pl-3:24,5:1, near Ill-11:23 Farm 111-1:10 hand 121-22:19,23:2 Intentions Ill-14:10 5:5 need 121-14:19,19:15 favor p)-3:9,4:14, hear(1l-20:11 Interested Ill-22:15 look[61-7:14,10:17, never(11-15:8 20:20 HEARING[11-1:6 Invested Ill-19:3 11:15,12-.4,13:3, now l�l_8:23,9:14, fenced i -l-1 Hearing 111-20:19 Item M-3:1,4:20 1321,14:17,15:12 10:12.13:7,13:8, fenced-in[11-11:9 hearing M-3:2,3:15, looking pi-5:20, 16:22 filed(21-3:17,4:22 4:13,4:21,6:19, 13:6,19-2 J next(57-4:19,4:20, fire Ill-6:8 20:13,21:1.21:5, looks M-8:5,15:14 6:1,10:2.10.8 fireman Ill-9:24 22;6 I lord Ill-19:11 nicern-11:14, I first ls)-3:1,7:20, help 111-15:9 Jack Ili-2:5 lose Ili_19:3 13:12,13:22 ' 14:3,14:16,16:2 Henne Ill-3:16 Jam Ill-2:8 nicest[11 ' five(2l-7:4,12:11 hereby Ill-22:4 Jane Ill-2:9 fix ill-9:4 Jeff I1)-2:3 night ill-8:8 nine 11]-13:17 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 26 i ' Noble Ill-2:12 14:24,16:2,16:3, R I 13:6 street[rs]-7:10,7:16, nobody[l1-20:11 16:5,16:13,18:20 - 8:3,8:8,11:4,11:6, none[41-4:13,7:5, I People's 111-12:24 I .S 11:16,12:7,12:11, 20:19 R-1 ill-3:20 __ i person131-14:9, 1 - 13:23,14:19,15:6, notes ill-22:9 15:6,15:7 1 R-2[21-3:21,5:1 15:8,17:13,18:10 November(21-4:5, personally[21-7:12, I R-20 ill-5:2 sale rA-15:13,15:14 Street[i7]-3:20,4:1, i 23:2 15:2 I raise 121-13:8,19:6 SALLE[i]-222 5:1,5:6.5:7.6:21, nowhere ill-11:23 Peter jq-7:1 real(3l-3:23,5:4, school R-7:23, 7:3,7:8,7:13,7:23, -_.. petitioner[9l-4:22 16:10 7:24,17:6,19:7 8:619:919:12,10:16, Q I petitioners ill-3:17 really 131-7:24,12:2, schooling ill-16:7 1512,15:19,15:20 --- pets Ill-11:9 12:24 second 151-3:5,4:7, streets[21-7:4,12:21 place 131-6:11,11:15, mason[+1-12:20 4:8,4:9,20:15 strict ill-10:3 j oath[1]-5:10 seconded[21-4:11, 22:10 recession 12)-14:22, stringent(i)-13:15 obligation ill-17:8 18:2 20:18 Placed(q-11:19 structure[71-16:10 October ill-1:14 PLAN Ill-1:5 record ill-624 security Ill-14:13 stuck ill-16:11 OF[31-1:2,22:1,22:2 plan I61-7:18,12:15, references[il-13:17 See b+1-5:22,7:3, suit[21-22:13,22:14 old[xl-10:11,19:11 15:3,17:1,19:1, referring[21-11:7, 7:7,8:7,12:2.12:5, supplemental[11- Olson[xl-7:5,716 12:7,12:10,12:24, 20:6 18:11 18:4 One(31-3:20,3:21, planners[+l-20:5 related 121-22:12, 15.4,15:5 5:1 22:13 sell h1-18:7 auPport[�1-16:14 one lr�l-5:23,6:1, Planning[1)-15:17 [�_12:1,13:2, sworn hl-5:13 j planning(Y1-8:1, remodeling(21-6:10, 6:3,6:4,7:3,9:18, 15:7 6:12 23:2 T 10:5,12:10,14:15, plans[2l-6:16,12:14 ReM Hl-18:1 setup(il-10:7 14A8,14:19,15:5, plot Ill-5:22 rent pq-7:20,13:15, seven(il-12:11 15:22,17:1,18:10, 1 I ,plus(il-11:4 15:13,16:2, Shorthand(11-22:4 Taker[i]-2:14 18:22,19:19 1 portion[31-17:18, 17:16,17:23 shorthand(21-22:5, tell[tl-19:13 ones 141-5:23,12:23, 22:9 tax t -16:10 21:1,21:5 rental[s1-8:23, Ill 13:22,1815 I 13:14,13:20,17:14, side[41-5:24,6:3, taxes[rol-7:21,16:3, opposed[3l-3:12, ; kr ill-9:4 I PRESENT lx]-2:1, 18:4 6:4,6:5 16:6,16:11,17:3, 416,2 :22 2:11 renters(sl-7:9, sided Ill-13:5 17:4,17:5,17:8, option ill-13:21 14:11,17:11,17:13, siding ill-13:7 19:15 original(2l-12:13, pretty[�]-7:10 g 18:14,18:15 signed[i]-22:18 ten[2]-16:18,18:23 22:17 problem[t)-19;24 Proceedings[2)- renting[11-17:17 signify[31-3:10, testimony ill-23:1 otherwise ill-19:10 21:4,22:5 repeatpl-6:10 4.14,20:20 THE ill-4:10 outcome ill-22:15 Proceedings(il- repeating[31-16:21, signs ill-15:12 thereof rA-22:15, overnight ill-14:12 22:7 17:15,19:22 similar[il-5:24 22:18 owned(il-9:13 Prochaska ill-2:7 Report Ill-22:7 single 1121-5:21, thereupon ill-5:12 owner(r]-9:4 PROCHASKA 111-3:5 reported ill-22:5 7:15,11:22,14:6, they've[11-14:14 owners Hl-9:1 Reporter ill-22;4 14:8,15:14,18:8, thoughts ill-20:6 20:6 progressive[21-9:7, reproduced 11)- 18:12,18:17,18:19, three pl-3:19,5:23, `�--- I P x;20 19:24 6:4,6:5,il:5.12:10 r _ pronounced ill-4:22 ---i Properties[41-11:13, requesting rA-3:19, skill-19:12 three-bedroom 121- ( P.M ill-1.15 11:24,12:1,13:20 4:24 sitting ill-19:14 6:4,6:5 I i requirement N l-9:21 six pl-7:14,12:11, tiny[l1-14:18 Pages(�)-22:T property f251-323, I paid pl-18:4,19:15 5:4,8:11,8:12,8:13, Resldence[3l-3:21, 14:20,15:4,16:13, Tom 11]-2:2 parcel i9-5:1 8:21,9:1,9:2.9:23, 3:22,5:2 16:18 total ill-3:24 j Parcels[1l-3:19 11:12,11:17,11:21, response Is]-3:8, so..[il-6:5 totally m-9:3 solution(2l-19:23,Park I11-14:24 11:23,11:24,12:2, 3:13,4:12,4:17, I touching ill-11:21 parked(4]-8:8,15:6 12:5,1213,13:9, 20:18,20:23 20:3 town Ill-19:16 j 13:10,13:14,13:23, responsibility(2)- someone(i)-8:16 townhome ill-8:19 partp] l2]-11:4 8:20,22:20 sorry(2]-4.10,623 townhomes Ill- part(21-12:14,20:24 17:14,18:8,18:18 [ parties[2l-22:13, Prove[rl-10:10 rent(l1-11:16 i south[x]-4:1,5:6 15:23 22:14 PUBLIC ill-1:6 restrained Ill-11:10 1 speaking hl-18:19 transcript[zl-22:9, passes M-3:14,4:18 j Public(91-3:2,3:15, rezoning ixl-3:19, ; ill-22:1 22:18 Pay[rel-7:21,7:22, 4.20,6:18,10:20, 4:24 stand i1)-5:10 true(il-22:8 9:18,16:3,16:6, 14:2.20:13,21:1, Road pl-1:10,4.1 STATE[11-22:1 trust[il-19:1 16:12.17:3,17:5 j 21:5 rob(rl-15:7 stay(21-15:3,15:11 try ill-18:3 Paying[31-16:15, Pnt[sl-6:2,6:3,9:14, Robert Nl-4:21 i staying[rl-15:7 Two BI-5:2 17:7,17:10 15:23,19:11 roof ill-6:3 Steven[il-3:16 two[sl-5:23,11:3, PC(21-3:16,4:21 room(i1-810 still(11-9:11 11:4,12:10,16:5 people[m-r20,8:9, f run 131-7:10,9:1, stop[11-18:5 two-car ill-11:3 Depo•Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 .. 27 type ill-10:7 Y I --- yard ill-11:9 yards Ill-13:17 22:19,22: under,22:2:2, year 131-7:10,16:12 , years Ill-18:23 unit[r-11:5 5 i YORKVILLE[21-1:2, I United 121-31814-23 I 1:3 UNITED Ill-1:2 f Yorkville p41-1:11, unless Ill-10:5 I 3:18,4:2,4:23,5:7, up[ill-8:8,8:23,9:2, 6:22,7:17,8:2, i 9:5,9:14,9:19, 1 10:15,14:6,15:3, 11.12,13:10,13:23, 15:18,20:4,20:9 I 19:5,19:11 YorkvIIWs[l1-9:6 urban M-7:18,9:6 young Ill-16:3 V Young ill-2:14 I yourself[21-16:22, 19:22 value[71-8:11,9:6, 1 -------- = 11:12,13:9,13:10, I Z 15:9 j----•-- - -----; values psi-8:13,9:19, zoning 131-12:19, I 11:17,13:23,18:7, I 12:20,14,5 18:18 Verne Ill-3:16 Village[11-10:2 village Ill-20:4 villages ill-9:22 Vltosh[21-22:31 23:6 vote Ill-10:18 W walks ill-17:6 Walter[13]-5:1,5:6, I I 6:20,7:2.7:8,7:13, 8:5,9:9,9:12,10:16, 15:12,15:19,15:20 I wants[21-7:18,20:9 WEAVER[l1-4:9 Weaver hl-2:8 Wednesday[l1-1:14 welcome Ill-16:23 whereof 1i1-23:1 whole Ill-13:17 W innin9'efhl-2:9 wish[21-13:20,16:22 wishes[i 1-5:9 wihresses[tl-5:12 I wondering I+1-15:6 Woodridge[21-10:1, 10:2 I Woodridge-Lisle Ill 10:1 world ill-14:10 Worsley Rl-3:20,4:1 I I Depo-Court Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Memorandum EST. 1 j , 1836 To: Zoning Board of A pp eals From: Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, AICP, Community Development Director 0 CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator Date: October 27, 2011 jLLE ��'� Subject: ZBA 2011-02 - 312 Walter Street Bulk Variance Requests from R-21) Duplex Two Family District ZBA PUBLIC HEARING: The City has received an application for variances from the City's Zoning Ordinance related to the R-2D Duplex Two Family District. A public hearing has been scheduled before the Zoning Board of Appeals to be held on Wednesday, November 2, 2011, at 7:00 pm at the Yorkville Public Library Meeting Room (902 Game Farm Road). BACKGROUND/REOUEST: The petitioner, Robert Claesson, has an existing single-family residential dwelling located at 312 Walter Street proposed for interior renovation after a mid-summer fire, with ultimate conversion into two (2) rental units. At the October Plan Commission meeting, a recommendation was made in favor of the petitioner's request for rezoning from R-2 One Family Residence District to R-2D Duplex Two-Family Residence District. Due to the size of the approximately 0.21-acre residential parcel, the petitioner is requesting the following relief from certain bulk regulations of the R-2D Duplex Two Family District. • Section 10-6D-3-B to permit a lot size less than 15,000 square feet; property currently has approx. 9,150 sq. feet. • Section 10-6D-3-B to permit a lot width at the building line less than 100 feet. • Section 10-6D-3-B to permit a density greater than 4.8 dwelling units per each acre. EXISTING CONDITIONS: An analysis of the required bulk regulations of Section 10-6D-3-B for the R-2D Duplex Two Family Residence District in comparison to the requested variances of the existing property are indicated below: Current R-2 Zoning Proposed R-2D Requested %Difference Between Requirements Requirements Variance Proposed R-2D and Re uested Variance Minimum Lot Size 12,000 sq.ft. 15,000 sq.ft. t 9,147.6 sq.ft. -5,852.4 sq.ft.(-60%) Minimum Lot Width' 80 ft. 100 ft. f 70 ft. -30 ft.(-30%) Max Density 3.3 d.u./acre 4.8 d.u./acre2 9.6 d.u./acre +4.8 d.u./acre(+200%) It is also important to note that the surrounding land uses of existing lots within the vicinity of the subject property are also duplex residential dwelling units considered legally non-conforming, as Lot width is measured at the building line. 'Density is calculated as the number of dwelling units(d.u.)per acre.In this instance,4.8 d.u.per acre is equivalent to 4.8/43,560=0.00011 Old.u.per sq.ft.and 2 d.u.per 9,147.6 sq.ft.is equivalent to 2/9147.6=.0002186 d.u.per sq.ft. they are currently zoned R-2 One-Family Residence District and do not meet the minimum bulk requirements for that district: 06 Subject Property 1+[1.04 APPROX.LOT SIZE APPROX.LOT WIDTH DENSITY 906—908 MILL ST. 0.29 AC.(12,632 SQ.FT.) 132 ft. 6.9 d.u./acre 303 WALTER ST. 0.21 AC(9,150 SQ.FT.) 72 ft. 9.6 d.u./acre 305 WALTER ST. 0.22 AC(9,560 SQ.FT.) 73 ft. 9.1 d.u./acre 311 WALTER ST. 0.21 AC(9,150 SQ.FT.) 70 ft. 9.6 d.u./acre 313 WALTER ST. 0.21 AC(9,150 SQ.FT.) 73 ft. 9.6 d.u./acre 1002-1004 MILL ST. 0.25 AC(10,890 SQ.FT.) 131 ft. 8.0 d.u./acre 310 WALTER ST. 0.22 AC(9,560 SQ.FT.) 70 ft. 9.1 d.u./acre STANDARDS FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE: The Zoning Board of Appeals must base its decision to vary, or recommend varying, any regulation of the Zoning Ordinance upon the following standards (Section 10-14-5C): 1. Because the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations was carried out. 2. The conditions upon which the petition for a variation 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. 3. The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Title and has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property, 4. The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. 5. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger to the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. ZBA ACTION: Upon closing the hearing, staff requests that the Zoning Board of Appeals make its findings for the requested variances based upon each of the standards listed above and testimony/evidence provided during the public hearing. The purpose of the standards is to help guide you in making your decision. Municipal Code 10-14-5-D-1-B outlines the following occasions when the Zoning Board of Appeals may make a final determination: To permit the use of a lot or lots for a use otherwise prohibited solely because of insufficient area or widths of the lot or lots but in no event shall the respective area and width of the lot or lots be less than ninety percent (9001o) of the required area and width. The percentage set forth in this subsection is not to be reduced by any other percentage for minimum lot width and area set forth in this title. Since the requested lot width and lot size reductions exceed the Zoning Board of Appeals final determination authority, the ZBA will be making only a recommendation to the City Council regarding this variance request based upon your findings of fact. Your recommendation may be to approve the requested variances, recommend approval of the requested variances with condition(s) or recommend denial of the requested variances. RAFT UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Wednesday,November 2, 2011, 7pm Yorkville Library Historic Room 902 Game Farm Road Board Members in Attendance Jeff Baker, Chairman Mike Skinner Charlie Walker Don Hirsch Corey Johnson Absent: Ryan Woods Other City Officials In Attendance Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Economic Development Director Alderman Carlo Colosimo Alderman George Gilson Other Guests Dan Kramer, Attorney Robert Claesson Peter Gabor Dan Sokolowski Mike Sokolowski Christine Vitosh, Depo Court Reporter Meeting Called to Order Chairman Jeff Baker called the meeting to order at 7:OOpm. Roll Call Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. Previous Meeting Minutes August 3, 2011 The minutes were approved as read on a motion by Johnson and second by Walker. Unanimous voice vote approval. Citizen's Comments None Public Hearing 1. ZBA 2011-02 —Robert Claesson, petitioner, has filed an application with the United City of Yorkville, requesting variations to (a) Section 10-6D-3-B to permit a lot size less than 15,000 sq. ft. and width at the building line less than 100 ft as required for the R-2 Duplex, Two-Family Residence District, and (b) Section 10-6D-3-B to exceed the permitted maximum density of 4.8 dwelling units per acre as required for the R-2 Duplex,Two-Family Residence District. The real property consists of a total of approximately 1 0.21 acres located immediately south of Walter Street and east of Mill Street, Yorkville, Illinois. The property is commonly known as 312 Walter Street. A motion was made by Skinner and seconded by Johnson to enter into Public Hearing at 7:02pm. Voice vote approval. Chairman Baker swore in those who would give testimony. The Public Hearing ended at 7:43pm on a motion by Walker and second by Johnson. Voice vote approval. (See Court Reporter's transcript of Public Hearing). Discussion Skinner questioned the width of the lot. It is 70 feet, which is 10 feet narrower than single-family lot requirements. Chairman Baker noted that if the property were to be sold, it would have to be rezoned. The variance requested is for 1 home with 2 units, which is different than duplex lots. The zoning for this property was originally passed in 1997. Chairman Baker noted that when this area was laid out, the homes were built as duplexes according to the code at that time. Ms. Barksdale-Noble pointed out that the original zoning did permit duplex housing under zoning classification R2 and this section of town became legally non- conforming. Skinner stated the following. The lot is too small for single family according to the current standards. He said density is at issue and noted that Elgin, Naperville and Aurora are paying residents to turn their homes back into single family. He felt that the Board would be setting a precedent if they granted the variances. He said he was surprised that the Plan Commission recommended approval and that he would attend the next Plan Commission meeting to express his concern. Chairman Baker then reviewed the Finding of Fact for this petition. Motion: Board member Walker made a motion to vote on the petition as one issue rather than 3 separate requests. Mr. Skinner seconded this motion. Roll call vote: Hirsch-yes, Johnson-yes, Skinner-yes, Walker-yes, Baker-yes. Passed 5-0 Motion: Mr. Skinner moved to approve ZBA 2011-02 (he read the petition description). Mr. Hirsch seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Walker said he believed in property rights, but the issue is property rights and the rights of others. He believed approval of the petition would be spot zoning and he did not agree with that. Roll call: Hirsch-no, Johnson-no, Skinner-no, Walker-no, Baker-no. Motion failed 0-5. 2 Chairman Baker noted the City Council has the final authority on this request and they will meet on December 13t" Additional Business 1. ZBA Meeting Schedule for 2012 This Board will continue to meet on Wednesdays in 2012. Mr. Skinner thanked Ms. Barksdale-Noble for her hard work on the recent building code revisions and said the committee was very fortunate to have her expertise. There was also a very brief discussion of zoning changes in other towns. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:1Opm on a motion by Walker and second by Johnson. Minutes respectfully submitted by Marlys Young 3 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING PUBLIC HEARING 902 Game Farm Road Yorkville, Illinois Wednesday, November 2 , 2011 7 : 00 p.m. D-954111 DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (63 0) 983-0030 Page 2 1 PRESENT: 2 Mr. Jeff Baker, Chairman, 3 Mr. Corey Johnson, 4 Mr. Charles Walker, 5 Mr. Don Hirsch, 6 Mr. Mike Skinner. 7 8 ALSO PRESENT: 9 Ms . Krysti Noble, Community Development 10 Director; 11 Ms . Marlys Young, Minute Taker. 12 - - - - - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 3 1 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Could I have a motion 2 to go into public hearing, please? 3 MR. SKINNER: So moved. 4 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Do I have a second? 5 MR. JOHNSON: Second. 6 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Moved and seconded. 7 All those in favor say aye . 8 (A chorus of ayes . ) 9 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Opposed? 10 (No response . ) 11 CHAIRMAN BAKER: All right. We are now 12 in a public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak in 13 this public hearing tonight, I need to swear you 14 in, so if you would now stand, I ' ll swear you in, 15 we can all talk. 16 (The witnesses were 17 thereupon duly sworn. ) 18 CHAIRMAN BAKER: All right . 19 Mr. Claesson. 20 MR. CLAESSON: Yes, sir. 21 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Would you like to tell 22 us what you want to do? 23 MR. CLAESSON: Okay. What I am looking 24 to do is add a second story onto my house, which I DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 4 1 have drawn a picture here. This would be the 2 second story, onto this house right here -- Where 3 am I? Find my own house. 4 MS . NOBLE: 312 . Second row. 5 MR. CLAESSON: There you go. You can 6 barely see it. I want to put a second story here 7 and add other living space. 8 I 've actually been to the building 9 commissioner, I 've been to the person in charge of 10 building and zoning, and there is nothing stopping 11 me from putting a second story on there. 12 I am completely within the law and 13 my rights to put extra bedrooms, completely with 14 the law and my rights to put in a kitchen, and 15 it ' s completely within the law for me to rent 16 these rooms out to people, I can have roommates . 17 There is nothing stopping me from doing any of 18 that . 19 I was actually doing that before I 20 had an accident to my house and it caught on fire. 21 I had other people there living with me to help 22 supplement my rent, okay? 23 So what I had to do, though, because 24 it is zoned single family, was pay all of the DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 5 1 utilities myself, and that made it difficult, so 2 what I want to do is split the utilities so I have 3 two separate meters . The only way I can do that 4 is to change my house into multi-family. 5 I can still rent it out, I can still 6 put two kitchens in it, there is nothing stopping 7 me from doing that, into a single family home. 8 I have already talked to the 9 building guy, he said my plans will pass, so I am 10 actually going to do it . 11 I basically want permission to 12 change it to multi-family so that I could have a 13 separate meter for one side, a separate meter for 14 the other side. 15 Where I 'm restricted is I have to -- 16 if it ' s not multi-family, I have to live in the 17 house in order to do that, which I 'm willing to do 18 and what Ism planning to do, but if I can get it 19 switched to multi-family, it will allow me the 20 flexibility in my life to move out if my -- you 21 know, when my daughter grows up or whatever, I can 22 move on or stay there, but it gives me the 23 flexibility to do what I want, to treat the 24 property the way I want to treat it, which is an DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 6 1 income property like the other houses . Many, many 2 of the other houses on our street are already 3 duplexes . 4 I mean, you can see this one here, 5 which has all been built back in the 70s or 60s . 6 This home here is right across the street, it is 7 already a duplex, this house here at the corner is 8 a duplex, this house here is a duplex, this house 9 here is a duplex, this house here is a duplex. 10 The single family homes in the -- on 11 the street already have gone into foreclosure 12 probably due to people not being able to pay their 13 mortgage, which is what I would guess, and that' s 14 kind of what I 'm trying to avoid having happen to 15 my house . 16 So that ' s the reasoning why I want 17 to change it. I want to have the flexibility to 18 move out of my house if I want to, or, you know, 19 so that I don' t have to stay there, and basically 20 split the utilities off . 21 I have the plans . Anyone wants to 22 see them, they're right here . They' re drawn up. 23 And that ' s pretty much it. 24 I know that my lot size it shows DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 7 1 doesn' t comply with what Yorkville is requesting, 2 but neither do the other lot sizes that have 3 already been accepted as duplexes, so I really 4 don' t see -- I 'm not -- I 'm not changing the 5 footprint of my house at all . 6 All I 'm doing is going up one story 7 on one section and want to add three bedrooms and 8 a bathroom. Really that ' s the only difference of 9 what I wanted to do before. 10 I had a kitchen in my garage, I had 11 a kitchen in my upper part . I changed my garage 12 into a living quarters, and that ' s what I was 13 living in. I have a bedroom, a kitchen and a 14 dining room in there, two bedrooms downstairs, and 15 I just have a better plan. 16 It will improve the property, it 17 will improve the land around it. It will look 18 nicer than it is now, and with the board' s 19 permission, that ' s what I hope to be able to do, 20 split it off multi-family and have separate -- 21 separate utilities. So that ' s it. 22 CHAIRMAN BAKER: All right. 23 MR. CLAESSON: Any questions? 24 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Does the board have any DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 8 1 questions for Mr. Claesson at this time? 2 MR. WALKER: Yeah, I do. What is the 3 total square footage in the house? 4 MR. CLAESSON: Well, right now the 5 square footage, not including the garage -- 6 MR. WALKER: As it stands now. 7 MR. SKINNER: Well, the garage is 8 occupied now, correct? 9 MR. CLAESSON: My house had a fire, so 10 right now my house is gutted. Before the fire, it the garage had a kitchen, a bedroom and a dining 12 room in it . 13 MR. SKINNER: So you should include that 14 as occupied space . 15 MR. CLAESSON: Correct, which I would -- 16 I 'm not -- I 'm saying around 1900 square, 17 approximately. 18 MR. WALKER: Is that with or without the 19 garages? 20 MR. CLAESSON: That ' s with the garages . 21 MR. WALKER: What about without the 22 garages? 23 MR. CLAESSON: Without the garages, 1400 24 square I believe, 1450, very close to that. DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc . (630) 983-0030 Page 9 1 MR. WALKER: Okay. And how much are you 2 adding for the second -- Well, then the first 3 unit -- 4 MR. CLAESSON: I 'm not -- 5 MR. WALKER: Would you say the first 6 unit is 1400 square foot? 7 MR. CLAESSON: They are 19 by 25 times 8 three, so -- 9 MR. WALKER: But that includes the 10 garage. 11 MR. CLAESSON: That ' s not including the 12 garage . 13 MR. WALKER: So the basic unit is 1400 14 square foot? 15 MR. CLAESSON: Yes . 16 MR. WALKER: What will the second unit 17 be? 18 MR. CLAESSON: Approximately another 450 19 square foot . 20 MR. WALKER: So you' re adding 450 square 21 foot? 22 MR. CLAESSON: Correct . 28 by 19 . 23 MR. WALKER: And will that be the entire 24 second unit? DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 10 1 MR. CLAESSON: That will be the entire 2 second floor above -- 3 MR. WALKER: But that ' s a separate unit. 4 You are making a duplex. 5 MR. CLAESSON: Yes, sir. 6 MR. WALKER: So one unit will have 7 1400 square feet, the other will have 450 . 8 CHAIRMAN BAKER: No, no. 9 MR. CLAESSON: No, they' ll be the same. 10 This is what I have now; I 'm going to put an 11 addition above here, so this will be one unit. 12 And then this here is a tri-level . I have three 13 foot buried here. One -- 14 They are basically mimicking each 15 other; they' re the same unit, same square footage, 16 just with the wall down the middle. 17 You don' t -- It doesn' t look like 18 the same height because this level is a tri-level 19 and it ' s under the ground level, so I have one 20 level here, if you could like look behind the 21 garage, and another level, one level here and 22 another level . 23 MR. WALKER: So are you saying both 24 units will be 1400 square foot? DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (63 0) 983-0030 Page 11 1 MR. CLAESSON: No, sir. No, sir. 2 MR. HIRSCH: No, 925 . 3 MR. CLAESSON: Yeah. Yes . Separate -- 4 Beforehand the whole thing together, with this, 5 this and this, was 1400 . I 'm adding about 450 and 6 I 'm splitting it in half, so you' re looking at 7 about -- I haven' t done the exact, but I 'm looking 8 at about 950 apiece. Does that sound about right? 9 MR. WALKER: Okay. So you're saying 10 that both units would be somewhat equal at 950 . 11 MR. CLAESSON: Very close to equal, if 12 not identical . 13 MR. WALKER: How many bedrooms would 14 each unit have? 15 MR. CLAESSON: Three. 16 MR. WALKER: Each unit would have three? 17 MR. CLAESSON: Yes, sir. 18 CHAIRMAN BAKER: How many baths? 19 MR. CLAESSON: One bath in the right 20 unit, two baths in the left unit. That ' s just 21 because it ' s all -- 22 MR. WALKER: And each would have a 23 kitchen you said? 24 MR. CLAESSON: Each would have a DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 12 1 kitchen, yes . 2 MR. WALKER: And to accomplish this, you 3 have to forego the two-car garage? 4 MR. CLAESSON: No, the two-car garage 5 will stay. To do this all I have to do is add the 6 second story to the right half of the house. 7 MR. WALKER: There will be a garage? 8 MR. CLAESSON: There will be a two-car 9 garage, one car for each side, and then I have 10 off-street parking enough to accommodate three 11 cars for each apartment all off the street, 12 because my driveway can accommodate two cars on 13 each side and then the garage can accommodate one 14 car on each side. 15 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Any other questions 16 from board members? 17 MR. WALKER: One other. When I asked 18 about the bedrooms, so basically each unit ' s going 19 to be three bedrooms, one and maybe two baths . 20 How about any other living areas? 21 MR. CLAESSON: Living room, dining room. 22 MR. WALKER: And what ' s the size of 23 those going to be? 24 MR. CLAESSON: These are all laid out DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 13 1 here, if you care to look at it. 2 MR. WALKER: I ' ll accept what you tell 3 me . 4 MR. CLAESSON: Let ' s see. I have -- The 5 dining rooms are about 9 by 11 . The kitchens are 6 looking to be approximately 8 by 13 , the other one 7 is more like 10 by 13 . 8 The bedrooms are coming out to be 9 about 8 by 11, a master bedroom bigger than that 10 on the one unit, and a master bedroom bigger on 11 the other unit by a few feet . 12 Living area, big living area, you' re 13 looking at about four, 12, 16 -- 17 by 14 approximately 14 on the one, and the other side is 15 a little bit smaller than that because of the 16 laundry room, and that ' s four -- again, about 15 17 by 14 it looks to be . 18 Dishwasher in each unit, gas range . 19 The one unit has an extra bathroom because it 20 already was there, so the one unit had a bathroom 21 downstairs and a bathroom upstairs . The other one 22 I 'm adding a bath to. 23 CHAIRMAN BAKER: If there ' s no more 24 questions, I ' ll take questions from the public. DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 14 1 None? 2 MR. SKINNER: None. 3 MR. JOHNSON: No. 4 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Is there anyone in the 5 audience that wishes to discuss this tonight? 6 Please raise your hand. When you stand up, please 7 state your name so that we can have it recorded. 8 Sir. 9 MR. GABOR: My name is Peter Gabor, 10 G-A-B-O-R, and it sounds like based on the 11 gentleman' s statements it ' s a done deal, 12 apparently he talked to everybody who said it ' s 13 going to be approved, so I don' t know why there is 14 a Board of Appeals. Apparently it ' s not a done 15 deal . 16 I hope it ' s not a done deal because 17 I 'm not familiar -- familiar with the six other 18 duplexes that are down the road, six other ones, 19 as far as whether they meet the requirements, but 20 I do know that the gentleman' s asking for a 21 variance to the lot size because his lot is too 22 small, the width of his lot is short by 75 feet 23 and the density requirement is not met . 24 So basically my problem with another DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 15 1 duplex on the street where I live is that how many 2 is enough. 3 I talked to a realtor from Coldwell 4 Banker and she ' s told me that the value of the 5 single family homes on Walter Street will be less 6 because of the appearance of the street, and a lot 7 has to do with the appearance of the duplexes . 8 If you take a drive down Walter 9 Street, you will see some homes, duplexes, for 10 sale, some apartments for rent constantly. 11 A majority of the duplexes don' t 12 have blacktop, their gravel is in the street, so 13 it ' s like a big gravel parking lot as you' re 14 driving down the road, Mill Street. 15 I was here at the last meeting and 16 after that I talked to all of my neighbors, and 17 apparently the information that I got was that the 18 gentleman does not live there, has not lived there 19 for years, which is contrary to what was told here 20 last month, and that ' s -- that ' s fine, except tell 21 the truth. 22 My concern is that who' s going to 23 move into those apartments? Is it going to be a 24 sex offender? Is it going to be a drug addict? DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 16 1 Is it going to be a house of ill repute? 2 You put down a thousand dollar 3 deposit for security, trash the house, you 4 disappear, you 've got nothing invested. 5 Us homeowners have got hundreds of 6 thousands of dollars invested in our homes, and if 7 Yorkville wants to progress instead of taking care 8 of the special interests of one person, take care 9 of the special -- take care of the interests of 10 the majority. 11 You know, the thing that ' s on the 12 news today, we 're the 99 percent, he ' s the one 13 percent, well, that applies to Walter Street. The 14 people who own the single family homes who live 15 there are the majority. The people who own the 16 duplexes who don't live there, all they want is 17 income so that they can pay their mortgage. 18 I ' d love to rent out two of my rooms 19 because my children are gone and, you know, I 20 could get extra money, but maybe I should ask for 21 a variance and do that, but I talked to my 22 neighbor right next to me on Illini Drive, they -- 23 Speaking of cars, do I want to see six cars in one 24 driveway? You see the whole street parked up all DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc . (630) 983-0030 Page 17 1 night . 2 One of the cars of my neighbors, the 3 Pape ' s, was vandalized in August, some piece of 4 equipment was taken, and in the back seat somebody 5 either poured a liquid or poured urine on the back 6 seat, and I don' t know -- I 'm not saying the 7 people in the duplexes or the single family homes 8 are the culprits, but let ' s make Walter Street a 9 community of single family homes and let ' s leave 10 the six duplexes, and enough is enough. it CHAIRMAN BAKER: All right. Thank you 12 very much for sharing your opinion with us 13 tonight . 14 MR. GABOR: You' re welcome . 15 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Does anyone wish to ask 16 him any questions on anything that he said? 17 (No response . ) 18 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Very good. Would you 19 like to state an opinion tonight? If so, please 20 stand and state your name . 21 MR. SOKOLOWSKI : Hi, my name is Dan 22 Sokolowski, and I 'm here to also comment on the -- 23 in essence, first of all, the residency of this 24 gentleman here, and truly, we live -- kind of DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 18 1 share kitty-corner backyards, and I haven' t seen 2 him there full-time. I know he has been there. 3 When we first moved in, there wasn' t 4 a lot of upkeep in the backyard, the dogs were 5 always back there, and to me, it didn' t seem like 6 it was well kept or well maintained. 7 Certainly things are different now, 8 he has a younger daughter, he ' s responsible for 9 her, and I know that is probably why he is doing 10 this, he has a family he is responsible for. 11 However, to Peter' s comment is like 12 I -- you know, tell the truth. It ' s -- You 13 haven' t been there the whole time, so let ' s be 14 honest. 15 The other question I have is -- 16 possibly the board can answer this -- we currently 17 have parking restrictions in our area, so there is 1s no street parking for ourselves, so how many cars 19 can a driveway satisfy with how many residents 20 that may actually be licensed drivers with 21 vehicles? 22 How many vehicles does this 23 gentleman own and what will he need to keep in the 24 driveway? I 'm just, you know, stating the obvious DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc . (630) 983-0030 Page 19 1 here. 2 So we have issues with parking in 3 our area as it is . I have multiple vehicles and 4 it is difficult for me to park in my short 5 driveway, and I just can' t imagine that being easy 6 to do either having multiple tenants . 7 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Those are very good 8 questions . As far as the parking goes, I don' t 9 believe there is a sidewalk in front of his house, 10 and I don't believe we ' ll be requiring one. 11 MS . NOBLE: No. 12 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Which means he can use 13 it all the way out to the street because he ' s not 14 crossing a pedestrian access . 15 MR. SOKOLOWSKI: Okay. 16 CHAIRMAN BAKER: That I do know. As far 17 as the other topics you have brought up, would you 18 like to respond to any of those? 19 MR. CLAESSON: I definitely would. I 20 bought the house in 199 . Me, my wife, her three 21 kids and my one daughter, moved in. I lived there 22 with them until 106 . I went through a divorce . 23 I ' ll admit during the divorce I may 24 have let my yard go a little bit. My life wasn' t DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (63 0) 983-003 0 Page 20 1 in perfect order and I may not have mowed my lawn 2 on time . I apologize to you for that. 3 The reason I moved out temporarily 4 was my girlfriend has lymphoma, was going through 5 chemotherapy for about a 12 to 11-month period of 6 time. 7 I rented my portion during that 8 period of time. I moved in with her, took care of 9 her. She went through her chemotherapy and she is 10 now feeling better. After she got back on her 11 feet, I moved back into my house. 12 The only reason it was that duration 13 of time is because I didn' t want to move my 14 daughter from one house to the other house, 15 otherwise I would have been back in less than the 16 amount of time, but since I wanted to keep her and 17 not move her during the school year, I was gone 18 for a year. Not years, but one year. And that 19 was why, because I wanted to take care of her 20 while she was under chemotherapy, and that ' s the 21 truth, and I can give you name and information and 22 everything if you would like to check up on it. 23 As far as the gravel in the street, 24 that ' s not my house. I have a concrete driveway. DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 21 1 My house does not apply to the gravel in the 2 street . 3 Not lived there, that ' s my reasoning 4 why I didn' t live there . You know, maybe shame on 5 me, maybe not . I 'm going to take care of my 6 girlfriend when she ' s going through chemotherapy. 7 Who will rent it, you know, you've 8 got all these other rental properties . If he' s 9 worried about sex offenders, we ' re next to a 10 school . They will all have to -- you know, they it all have the restrictions next to the school . If 12 you' re worried about that, you' re going to worry 13 about that with all of those. 14 He says homeowners have hundreds of 15 thousands of dollars invested into their house . 16 So do I . I am a homeowner and I have that amount 17 of money invested in my house, too, so I do have a 18 vested interest in my property, in how it's 19 maintained, how it ' s kept, so I don' t see how that 20 really applies to me . 21 I 'm not 99 percent and I 'm not the 22 one percent because six houses out of 14 are 23 already duplexes . That ' s not really one percent . 24 A three-bedroom apartment, as far as DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc . (63 0) 983-0030 Page 22 1 that goes, I suppose they could have three cars to 2 each one . I 'm looking to rent to a family with 3 some kids, maybe two cars . You know, even if they 4 do have three cars in each, it ' s one in the garage 5 and two in the driveway. That ' s I think perfectly 6 acceptable. It ' s all off of the street . And I 7 actually have space in front of my house that the 8 other duplexes already park there, so my house is 9 accommodating some of the other neighbors already. 10 Let ' s see. As far as Mr. Gabor, 11 he ' s concerned about all these duplexes, but all 12 of these duplexes -- I went down to the County -- 13 were already built, standing, and being rented 14 when this gentleman already bought his house. 15 So he knew he was buying a house on 16 a street with rental property. Now that he' s 17 unhappy living there with the rental property, I 18 don' t really see how that pertains to my 19 particular instance, you know. The rental 20 property was there ahead of time before he bought 21 it. If it was a huge issue with him, he at least 22 knew it was there, you know. 23 I touched on Mr. -- Dan ' s, as far 24 as me not keeping my yard, well, you know, that DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 23 1 was for a short period of time . It ' s been kept 2 well now. 3 I do have a daughter, she goes to 4 school right down the street, she walks to that 5 school, and I plan on renting to, you know, other 6 families, not -- I 'm certainly not going to rent 7 to three single men or three single people to come 8 in there and disturb the neighborhood. That ' s not 9 going to be from me . 10 I guess I touched on everyone ' s 11 topics . The driveway, like I said, you're worried 12 about all the cars . On my property, it can 13 accommodate six cars, so why can' t I park six cars 14 on my property? I mean, it ' s my property, it ' s my 15 driveway. It can accept all of it . 16 MR. SOKOLOWSKI : Not saying you can't, I 17 just asked. That ' s all . 18 MR. CLAESSON: So, I mean, it ' s the 19 other duplexes that have on the street parking, 20 not what I want to do to mine, so I don't really 21 see all of these issues pertaining to me. Seems 22 like some of these issues are just pertaining to 23 the circumstances and where they live and the 24 situation he lives in. DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 24 1 He ' s right, there are a lot of 2 duplexes on that street already. That ' s why I 3 don' t think it ' s a big stretch for mine . 4 And my house is a home -- If you 5 were to look at it from the outside when I get 6 done with my addition, it still looks like a home, 7 it doesn' t look like a duplex. 8 I showed you the front picture of 9 it . It still looks like a single family home, it 10 just looks like a bigger single family home. It 11 doesn' t look like any of those other duplexes . 12 So as far as the rental of the 13 property value going down, if I was building one 14 of these half-roofed duplexes like that, I could 15 see it going down. 16 And I think Mr. Gabor is upset, he 17 lives over here directly by two of these, of the 18 less attractive looking duplexes, and one of these 19 backs up directly to his property, and he stated 20 the other day he was unhappy with the pets going 21 in his yard and this and that, but here again, all 22 due respect, that ' s not my property, that's this 23 other gentleman' s property, and that ' s not my dog, 24 that ' s their dog, and my house is not even DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 25 1 visible. 2 If he steps out his front door, he 3 cannot even see my house. Can' t even see it. So 4 is it going to affect his view? Is it going to 5 affect the street like the other ones? I don' t 6 think so. I think it will make my house look 7 bigger, nicer and add value. 8 I think if you just say just the 9 rental property, yeah, it might decrease, but as 10 you can see from the drawings, you would never 11 know that ' s a duplex. You would never know it 12 from the street . I mean, you really wouldn't . 13 And there ' s no way to tell . It looks just like -- 14 just like a regular family home . 15 This is -- this is what I look to 16 build. What I already have there is this very, 17 very roof . This roof slid down. That' s what my 18 house looks like right now. 19 I have two levels, and that ' s what 20 it ' s going to look like afterwards. Just one 21 extra story accommodating some more living space . 22 I 'm in construction, you know, I got hit by the 23 recession really hard, and my mortgage is really 24 trumping me now, so I have to rent out part of my DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 26 1 house to keep from losing my house. I 've been 2 paying on it for 13 years . I don' t -- 3 MR. SKINNER: Excuse me . Point of 4 order, Mr. Chairman. He should be addressing the 5 board, not other members in the audience . 6 MR. CLAESSON: Oh, I 'm sorry. 7 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Very good. Point of 8 order taken. 9 MR. CLAESSON: I just wanted them to see 10 what I was doing. 11 CHAIRMAN BAKER: I understand, and all I 12 want is everyone to get along and be happy, so 13 that ' s why I let things slide. 14 MR. CLAESSON: Oh, I 'm sorry. I didn' t 15 understand I was doing something wrong. 16 MR. SOKOLOWSKI : Does the tax basis 17 change at all from a single family home to a 18 duplex? 19 CHAIRMAN BAKER: No, it ' s not really 20 going to change at all . 21 MR. SKINNER: Yes, they do. 22 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Not really. 23 MR. SKINNER: I 'm a duplex owner. 24 MR. JOHNSON: How is it -- DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 27 1 MR. SKINNER: Well, when it was zoned as 2 one piece of property on one tax bill, my tax bill 3 was $7, 000 . When I split it into two separate 4 dwelling units, two separate owners, it went 5 immediately to $8 , 000 , $4, 000 per side. 6 Subsequently each side has gone up. 7 MR. JOHNSON: I have a duplex and I own 8 the whole thing and it hasn' t done any of that . I 9 mean -- 10 MR. SKINNER: But you own both sides, 11 right? 12 MR. JOHNSON: Right. 13 MR. SKINNER: When I split mine into two 14 tax bills is when it split . 15 MS. NOBLE: Your unit will be a rental, 16 so you will be the only owner, one parcel. 17 MR. CLAESSON: Absolutely. Well, my 18 taxes just went up 40 percent this year, so it ' s 19 not like Ism not paying taxes, I certainly am, you 20 know. 21 CHAIRMAN BAKER: So yours wont be 22 affected, where yours will because you sold it 23 off, both halves -- 24 MS . NOBLE: His won' t be affected. DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 28 1 MR. SKINNER: I sold half. 2 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Right . But no, that ' s 3 still a single family home and it ' s not going to 4 be -- 5 MR. SKINNER: His is -- He can sell half 6 of his . 7 MS . NOBLE: He would have to split the 8 lot. 9 CHAIRMAN BAKER: No . 10 MS . NOBLE: His house, his lot, would 11 not be able to be split unless he comes in for 12 another variance. 13 MR. CLAESSON: No. 14 MR. SKINNER: Exactly, that' s -- 15 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Right. Well, yeah, he 16 would need another variance to do so. 17 MR. SKINNER: Exactly. Well, it could 18 be split. It would be almost a condominium. 19 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Yeah, but he would have 20 to come back before us to do that . 21 MR. SKINNER: Whatever, but yes, he 22 could. 23 MR. CLAESSON: Apologize for not 24 addressing the board earlier. DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 29 1 CHAIRMAN BAKER: That ' s quite all right. 2 Yes, sir. 3 MR. GABOR: So your property went from a 4 single family to a duplex and your taxes went up? 5 MR. SKINNER: No, no. My property -- I 6 built a duplex. 7 MR. GABOR: Okay. And your taxes went 8 up a thousand dollars? 9 MR. SKINNER: When it was one -- one tax 10 bill -- 11 MR. GABOR: Right . 12 MR. SKINNER: -- I owned half and rented 13 half . When I sold half, I had to split the tax 14 bill . Then at that time I had to have two tax 15 bills . 16 I went from 3500 per side, 7, 000 17 total actually, but one tax bill, so it was -- 18 they still pay taxes, they paid it in rent . When 19 I sold half, the new owner then and mine went from 20 3500 to $4 , 000 . 21 MR. GABOR: Okay. The assessor who 22 evaluates the value of single family homes, 23 duplexes, has certain things to go by, the square 24 footage, what ' s usable, what ' s not usable, and the DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 30 1 equation does not take into consideration that if 2 it ' s a duplex and it has a family of four, two 3 kids, family of five, three kids in each, that ' s 4 six more kids going to school, all the school 5 budget is financed by real estate taxes, so right 6 now the value of my property because of the 7 economy has gone down, the real estate taxes have 8 not . 9 Someone ' s going to have to pay for 10 the lunches for those kids, someone ' s tax money is 11 going to have to pay for the arts, the activities, 12 and I am not against education, I have a college 13 degree, both my children have a college degree, my 14 wife is a teacher. What I 'm saying is there ' s no 15 way to know who is going to rent that apartment. 16 You may think of the ideal I 'm going 17 to rent only to a married couple, no single men, 18 no single girls, no wild parties, but that ' s a -- 19 that ' s a pipe dream. 20 The reality is it' s quite possible 21 each apartment is going to be cluttered with ten 22 people, six kids, and all I 'm -- I 'm not against 23 the duplex, and I knew the duplexes were there 24 when I purchased my house, and I purchased my DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (63 0) 983-003 0 Page 31 1 house . 2 All I 'm saying is the village of 3 Yorkville should have some kind of a guideline as 4 to how you plan the streets by -- the street Dan 5 lives on is all single family. It ' s beautiful . 6 Walter Street is quite -- it ' s like day and night. 7 Just planning for the future, I have 8 no problem with the duplexes that are there. I 9 don' t think Walter Street needs any more. It ' s 10 that simple . Because not only does Walter Street, 11 but when you go on Mill Street, all those homes 12 are duplexes . 13 Is Yorkville going to be just -- I 14 mean, everybody -- maybe I should get my home into 15 a duplex. I 've got three acres, and one side can 16 have an acre and a half, one can have an acre and 17 a half, and I can live in one and -- you know, is 18 that what Yorkville wants, everybody who is 19 entitled to having a duplex do it? I don't think 20 so. 21 It should be a single family 22 community with planning for duplexes, townhomes, 23 condominiums, apartments, but it ' s got to be 24 planned, not random where we already have six, and DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (63 0) 983-0030 Page 32 1 I don' t think I 'm out of line in saying six is 2 enough. 3 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Thank you for your 4 comments tonight . If anyone has any new 5 information to speak of, I will listen to it. 6 Otherwise I have a letter from Russell and Lisa 7 Pope -- Pap? 8 MR. GABOR: Pape. 9 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Pape, excuse me . I 'm 10 sorry. They are at 320 Illini Drive, and it ' s to 11 the City Clerk. 12 The letter states : We are unable to 13 attend the public hearing for the board -- for the 14 appeal, but would like to share our comments and 15 concerns. 16 The lot in question resides on 17 Walter Street . While there are already duplex 18 units on Walter Street, those units were designed 19 and built as duplexes on lots that were sized for 20 duplexes. 21 The lot in question currently 22 contains a single family unit, but for the last 23 couple of years, that single family unit has been 24 converted into two separate unit dwellings by DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (63 0) 983-0030 Page 33 1 transitioning a garage space into a living area. 2 I would like to recommend not 3 approving this appeal on the following concerns : 4 Number one, the lot size is not significant to 5 hold a duplex unit and the zoning should not be 6 changed to get around that . It is barely able to 7 hold a small single family house right now; 8 Number two, there is no way we 9 should -- and "no way" is capitalized -- we should 10 allow the density to be increased because of 11 garage space -- garage space would be gone, all 12 the vehicles would have to park outside, and the 13 driveway is shortened and can barely hold four 14 vehicles; 15 Number three, the owner, to our 16 knowledge, has not been living there for the past 17 couple of years, but was renting it out to several 18 tenants, operating it as a duplex rental unit 19 already. 20 I have met and talked to the owner, 21 he is a nice man, I have no personal grievance 22 against him; however, I do not see that allowing 23 this duplex appeal would improve the neighborhood 24 at all . In fact, could further reduce the value DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 34 1 of units in the immediate area, including my home. 2 Walter Street supports duplex 3 housing units, but within the bounds of zoning, 4 and was set up for a good reason in the past. 5 There is no reason to make an exception for the 6 zoning in this case. 7 The house was designed as a single 8 family house and should not be converted, nor does 9 the lot size support the duplex living 10 arrangement . Sincerely, Russell and Lisa. 11 I 'd like to put that into evidence 12 or whatever. 13 MS . NOBLE: Record. 14 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Record. All right. ' I 15 would like to thank everyone for their opinions 16 tonight. 17 MR. WALKER: I have a question. Can I 18 do that? 19 CHAIRMAN BAKER: If you want to do it in 20 the public hearing, I will accept it, yes. 21 MR. WALKER: All right . As long as I 22 can discuss that with the board, I don' t care 23 whether it' s public or not. 24 CHAIRMAN BAKER: I don' t care, that' s DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc . (630) 983-0030 Page 35 1 fine . 2 MR. WALKER: The question which I asked, 3 the existing duplexes on Walter Street, they' re 4 non-conforming; is that correct? 5 MS . NOBLE: For -- 6 CHAIRMAN BAKER: No, that ' s not correct. 7 MS . NOBLE: Are you asking me? 8 MR. WALKER: Yes . 9 MS. NOBLE : There are two standards, 10 yes . On Page 2 of the memo, it lists all of the 11 units on Mill and Walter Street, showing that 12 most, if not all, are not in conformance with the 13 current R2 zoning. 14 MR. WALKER: But does that mean with the 15 status of non-conforming that the zoning was 16 passed after those homes had already been 17 constructed? 18 MR. JOHNSON: Yes . 19 MS . NOBLE: Yes . 20 MR. WALKER: All right. And what we 're 21 asking for here now is a variance, which is 22 different from a non-conforming status . 23 MS. NOBLE: Correct. 24 MR. WALKER: If it was a non-conforming DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 36 1 status , if these homeowners or property owners 2 would make major improvements, then they would 3 have to seek variances; is that correct? 4 MS . NOBLE: Correct . 5 MR. WALKER: Okay. 6 MS . NOBLE: Or bring the property into 7 compliance. Yes. 8 MR. WALKER: Thank you. 9 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Very good. 10 MS. NOBLE: May I add something? 11 CHAIRMAN BAKER: You may certainly add 12 anything you like, just let me know. 13 MS. NOBLE: Thank you. I would like to 14 give a little history on the hearing. Last month, 15 as the gentleman mentioned, this project was up 16 before the Plan Commission for the zoning. Right 17 now it is zoned R2 , which are all the properties 18 on Mill and Walter Street . 19 The rezoning was recommended for 20 approval 5 to 2, and now we ' re here with the 21 actual variances that are requested. 22 On Page 2 of your memo, it lists 23 each of the properties on Walter and Mill Street, 24 those that are duplexes, and it shows the lot DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc . (630) 983-0030 Page 37 1 size, the approximate lot width, and the density. 2 If you notice, each of those 3 properties, I believe there are seven, do not meet 4 their current R2, as well as this property does 5 not meet its current R2 zoning requirements for 6 both. 7 Lot sizes for most are less than the 8 15 , 000 square feet that ' s required. Lot sizes -- 9 the lot width are -- pretty much most of them are 10 less than the hundred feet that are required, and 11 the density is greater. 12 So this property is in line with the 13 character and density that already exists within 14 the actual prop -- the actual fabric of the 15 neighborhood already, and that ' s something that 16 should be considered when the Zoning Board of 17 Appeals considers the variance. And you have your 18 standards listed. 19 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Very good. Thank you 20 for that. Now, if there are no more discussions 21 with the board, I wish to have a motion to close 22 the hearing. 23 MR. JOHNSON: Jeff? 24 CHAIRMAN BAKER: I 'm sorry. Yes, DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 38 1 George . 2 ALDERMAN GILSON: Just a quick question. 3 Krysti, does that mean that any of them have lot 4 sizes this small, though? 5 MS. NOBLE : Yes, they do. Yes, they do. 6 This lot size -- the question -- The property in 7 question is about 9100 square feet and, let ' s see, 8 you have 303 Walter Street, which is 9150 ; 305, 9 9500 ; 311, 9100 ; 313 , 9150 ; and 310, which is 10 9500 square feet. 11 ALDERMAN GILSON: So a total of what? 12 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Four. 13 MS . NOBLE : There is one, two, three, 14 four, five. 15 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Five . I 'm sorry. 16 MS. NOBLE: Five, not including your 17 property. 18 MR. CLAESSON: The width -- the 19 requirement is a hundred feet? 20 MS. NOBLE: The width for R2 is 80, and 21 the width that you' re going for is 100 , for the 22 R2D, and out of 8o -- with a requirement of 23 80 square feet in the current R2 zoning, only two 24 meet that requirement, and those are the two DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc . (630) 983-0030 Page 39 1 corner lots which are on Mill Street . The others 2 are about averaging the same width as yours, about 3 70, 75 feet, linear feet . 4 CHAIRMAN BAKER: All right . Is it new 5 information or repeating old? 6 MR. GABOR: Question. What is the 7 current requirement for a duplex size-wise that -- 8 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Lot size? 9 MR. GABOR: Yes . 10 CHAIRMAN BAKER: 15, 000 square feet. 11 MR. GABOR: Okay. So if he' s -- The 12 existing duplexes are basically -- they're 13 grandfathered in? 14 MS . NOBLE: Correct. They are legally 15 non-conforming, yes. 16 MR. GABOR: And anyone building a new 17 one that ' s not grandfathered in would have to go 18 by the current? 19 MS. NOBLE: Correct . 20 CHAIRMAN BAKER: That is correct. 21 MR. GABOR: So that ' s where he falls 22 short. 23 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Very good. Does anyone 24 have anything else they wish to speak in the DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc . (630) 983-0030 Page 40 1 public hearing? 2 (No response. ) 3 CHAIRMAN BAKER: If not, I ' ll entertain 4 a motion to close the public hearing. 5 MR. JOHNSON: So moved. 6 MR. WALKER: Motion to close the public 7 hearing. 8 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Second? 9 MR. JOHNSON: Second. 10 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Very good. All those 11 in favor? 12 (A chorus of ayes . ) 13 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Opposed? 14 (No response. ) 15 CHAIRMAN BAKER: All right. Very good. 16 Thank you all for coming tonight. 17 (Which were all the 18 proceedings had in the 19 public hearing portion 20 of the meeting. ) 21 ---000--- 22 23 24 DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc . (630) 983-0030 Page 41 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS . 2 COUNTY OF LA SALLE ) 3 I, Christine M. Vitosh, a Certified 4 Shorthand Reporter, do hereby certify that I 5 reported in shorthand the proceedings had at the 6 hearing of the above-entitled cause and that the 7 foregoing Report of Proceedings, Pages 1 through 8 42 , inclusive, is a true, correct, and complete 9 transcript of my shorthand notes so taken at the 10 time and place aforesaid. 11 I further certify that I am neither 12 counsel for nor related to counsel for any of the 13 parties to this suit, nor am I in any way related 14 to any of the parties to this suit, nor am I in 15 any way interested in the outcome thereof. 16 I further certify that my 17 certificate annexed hereto applies to the original 18 transcript and copies thereof, signed and 19 certified under my hand only. I assume no 20 responsibility for the accuracy of any reproduced 21 copies not made under my control or direction. 22 23 24 DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 Page 42 1 In testimony whereof, I have 2 hereunto set my hand this 14th day of November, 3 A.D. , 2011 . 4 5 6 Christine M. Vitosh, CSR 7 CSR No. 084-002883 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 DepoCourt Reporting Service, Inc. (630) 983-0030 e'Ty United City of Yorkville 43 800 Game Farm Road ES` Yorkville, Illinois 60560 I>9 :i Telephone: 630-553-4350 Fax: 630-553-3436 PC# APPLICATION a PETITION ANNEXATION, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT,ZONING OR SPECIAL USE REQUEST Development Name: f_-6��rJ�:-- ?I'd ��pate of Submission: �- Requesting: 0 Annexation Zoning 0 Planned Unit Development 0 Special Use: 1. Name of Petitioner(s): _ ?0 / ��2 S S p� Address: Phone Number: Fax Number: Email Address: Relationship of Petitioner(s)to subject property: 4.1)wner 0 Developer 0 Contract Purchaser 2. Name of holder of legal title,if different from#1: 62ki cc C_ Alo r 6_s�C If legal title is held in a Land Trust, list the names of all holders of any beneficial interest therein: 3. a). (i). Street address and physical location of subject property: _ 30 (ii), Zoning of surro nding parcels: North: -a South: East: West: -� b). Legal description of property;attach as Exhibit"A". j,T q E04-Ewvu) 3rd 4.w., c, �y c 1 I c). Total Acreage: _ e d). Kendall County Parcel Number(s)of property: 02 '22 ` .3 7 -00 t% 44 4. Names and addresses of any adjoining or contiguous landowners and landowners within 500' entitled to notice of petition under any applicable City ordinance or State Statute: Attach a separate list and label as Exhibit"B". 5. List all governmental entities or agencies required to receive notice under Illinois law: r te;J12. 1 I dlJ IP _ Ce.1 6. List the Illinois Business Tax Number(IBT#)for the State of Illinois and names of businesses located on subject property to be annexed: (9!� 7. Does a flood plain exist on the subject property? i� D 8. Do Electors reside on the subject property? _ �4 0 If so, they must execute this petition to annex. (Electors as defined by Illinois Law is a resident of the parcel who is a registered voter. Legal owners of the annexing parcel must sign the petition regardless of place of residence or legal voting status.) 9. Contact Information: Name, address, phone number, fax number, and email address of person to ii ' Attomey: Name: Address: Phone Number: Fax Number: Email Address: Engineer: Name: Address: Phone Number: Fax Number: Email Address: Land Planner: Name: Address: Phone Number: Fax Number: Email Address: United City of Yorkville Annexation,PUD,Zoning,Special Use Application Revised: 1.29.09 45 10. Submit the following to the Community Development Department in order to be scheduled for the necessary committee meetings. An incomplete submittal could delay the scheduling of your project. a. Original application with legal description plus 35 copies. b. Appropriate filing fee(Please refer to page 4 of this application to"Petitioner Route, Step 1, Fees"and/or contact the Community Development Department for verification of this amount.) c. Concept or Preliminary Site Plan:35 sets folded to fit in a 10"x 13"envelope. d. One CD containing one electronic copy(pdf) of each of the signed application (complete with exhibits) legal description,and site plan. In witness whereof the following petitioner(s)have submitted this application under oath and verify that to the best of their knowledge its contents are true and correct and swear that the property to be annexed is contiguous to the United City of Yorkville. Date: Petitioner(s)Signature: (All legal property owners:signatures must appear on this application.) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7 day of 209-/2-0 f . 4.k I ary SeabFFICIA1 SEAL PAMELA B OLSEM N ��'PUBUC•STATE OF ILUN6U' PPLICATION MUST BE NOTARIZED. Wy OOMMMION WIRES:11119/11 United City of Yorkville Annexation,PUD,7anmg,Special Use Application Revised: 1.29.09 46 ANNEXATION, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT,ZONING OR SPECIAL USE REQUEST PETITIONER ROUTE Step 1: Petitioner must submit a completed application,fees'and all pertinent materials to the Community Development Department a minimum of 45 days prior to the targeted Plan Commission meeting. Petitioner is responsible for making submittals to other review agencies such as Kendall County, Illinois Department of Transportation, Illinois Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, etc., to allow timely review by City. 'Fees: a. Annexation or Annexation and Rezoning-$250 plus$10 per acre for each acre over 5 acres b. Rezoning only-J20 lus$10 per acre for each acre over 5 acres c. Special Use-$250 plus $10 per acre For each acre over 5 acres d. Engineering Review Fees- 1.25% of the approved engineer's estimate of cost of all land improvements,to be determined by City Engineer. e. Planned Unit Development fee-$500 f. Engineering Review Deposit-up to 1 acre=$1,000; over 1 acre but not over 10 =$2,500 over 10 acres,but not over 40=$5,000 over 40 acres,but not over 100=$10,000 over 100 acres=$20,000 g. Deposit for Outside Consultants-under 2 acres=$j,,OQQ-, 2 to 10 acres= $2,500 over 10 acres=$5,000 Note: Owner/Developer will be responsible for payment of recording Fees and costs,public hearing costs including a written transcription of public hearing and outside consultant costs(i.e. legal review, land planner, zoning coordinator, environmental, etc.). Should Owner/Developer not pay these fees directly, they will be responsible for reimbursing the United City of Yorkville for the aforementioned fees and costs. Note: You must present your plan at each of the meetings below as indicated. Step 2: Plan Council: The Plan Council meets the 2nd and 4'h Thursday of the month at 9:00 a.m.in the city conference Room. Upon recommendation by the Plan Council,you will move forward to the Plan Commission Meeting. Attendees to this meeting include: Community Development Director, City Engineer,Zoning Official, Public Works Director, Director of Parks and Recreation, Fire Department Representative, and Police Department representative. Step 3: Park Board planning meeting: The Park Board makes recommendations on any park sites included in residential developments. The Park Board planning meeting is the 4th Thursday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at the Parks and Recreation Office at 201 W. Hydraulic Street. _ Step 4: Plan Commission: The Plan Commission meets the 2nd Wednesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. in the Yorkville public library at 902 Game Farm Road. The Plan Commission will make a recommendation for the City Council's consideration. The Plan Commission consists of 10 members appointed by the Mayor. A public hearing will be held at this time for the Annexation Agreement and/or Rezoning request or Special Use request. Notice will be given by publication by the United City of Yorkville in the Kendall County Record and certified mail by the petitioner to adjacent property owners within 500 ft.of the subject property no less than fifteen days and no more than 30 days prior to the public hearing date. A certified affidavit must be filed by the petitioner with the Community Development Department's office containing the names, addresses and permanent parcel numbers of all property owners. United City or Yorkville Annexation,PUD,Zoning,Special Use Application Revised: 129.09 47 r Step 5- Economic Development Committee: The Economic Development Committee meets the 1st Tuesday of the month at 7:00 p.m, in the Conference Room at City Hall. The project will be discussed in an informal atmosphere where no formal voting takes place. This session is to discuss and consider recommendations of prior committee meetings. Step 6: City Council:A public hearing is required for annexation or PUD agreements. The City Council meets the 2"a or 4'"Tuesday of the month at 7:00 p.m.in the Council Chambers at City Hall, A public hearing will be held at this time for the Annexation Agreement and/or Planned Unit Development Agreement. Notice will be given by publication by the United City of Yorkville in the Kendall County Record. A certified mailing to surrounding landowners is not required for this public hearing. Any annexation agreement, PUD agreement or development agreement must be signed by the Petitioner prior to being voted on by the City Council. Agreement: I understand and accept all requirements,fees as outlined as well as any incurred Administrative and Planning Consultant Fees which must be current before this project can proceed to the next scheduled committee meeting. Please sign and return this original (retaining a copy for your records) to the Community Development Department, United City of Yorkville, 800 Game Farm Road,Yorkvill ois 60560 Date: Signature of Petitioner United City of Yorkville Annexauon,PUD,Zoning,Special Use Application Revised; 1,29.04 I JD Ct;-kp United City of Yorkville 39 t 10 800 Game Farm Road Yorkville, Illinois 60560 a { Sri � Telex one: 630-553-4350 fate; w L cFax: 630-553-3436 ZBA# APPLICATION VARIANCE REQUEST Date of Submission: 8`29-11 1. Name of Petitioner(s): Robert Claesson Address: 312 Walter Street, Yorkville, IL 60560 Phone Number: Fax Number: Email Address: 2. Name of holder of legal title, if different from#1: GMAC Mortgage If legal title is held in a land trust,list the names of all holders of any beneficial interest therein: 4, a. Street address and physical location of subject property: 312 Walter Street Yorkville, IL 60560 b. Proposed name of subdivision (if any): c. Legal description of property for which zoning variance is sought: LT 9 Edgewood 3rd Addition City of Yorkville (If more space is needed, attach as"Exhibit A".) d. Kendall County Parcel Number(s)of property for which variance is sought: 02-33-354-006 United City of Yorkville Variance Request Application Revised: 1.29.1v 40 5. Names and addresses of any adjoining or contiguous landowners and property owners within 500 feet of subject parcel for which variance is requested entitled to notice of petition under any applicable City ordinance or State Statute: (Attach a separate list as "Exhibit B".) 6. State the variance requested and the City ordinance including the section numbers to be Varied: Variances to section 10•6D-3-B of the Yorkville City Code. 7. Name, address,phone number, fax number, and email address of person to whom inquiries regarding th' Robert Claesson Attorney: Name: Address: Phone Number: Fax Number: Email Address: 8. Submit application with a filing fee in the amount of$85.00. Note: Owner/Developer will be responsible for payment of$500 deposit for consultants(i.e. legal review, land planner,zoning coordinator, environmental, etc.). In addition, owner/developer will be responsible for payment of recording fees and costs,public hearing costs including a written transcription of public hearing. Should owner/developer not pay these fees directly,they will be responsible for reimbursing the United City of Yorkville for the aforementioned fees and costs. 9. Submit 35 copies of each of the application, proposed drawings,location map.site plan, and any other pertinent materials, and one CD containing electronic copies (pdf) of each of the application(complete with exhibits), drawings,map, and site plan to the Community Development Department. Large items must be folded to fit in a 10"x 13" envelope. United City of Yorkville Variance Request Application Reused: 1.214.09 41 In witness whereof the following petitioner(s) have submitted this application under oath and verify that to the best of their knowledge its contents are true and correct. Petitioner{s) or lega property owner's signature must appear on this application. Subscribed and sworn before me this day of C` e 7' 200 --201 �-2 -7 (�-'� ,� �f� OFFICIAL SEAL Notary Public/ ANDREA M WEINW WARY PU9UC•STAIE OF LLWW Notary Stamp THIS APPLICATION MUST BE NOTARIZED. United City of Yorkville Variance Requcst Application Revised: 1.29,QQ 42 VARIANCE REQUEST PETITIONER ROUTE Step 1: Petitioner must submit a completed application, fees and all pertinent materials to the Community Development Department. Upon receipt the variance request will be forwarded to the Zoning Coordinator for review and to coordinate setting a meeting date for the public hearing in front of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Note: You must present your request at each of the meetings below as indicated. Step 2: Zoning Board of Appeals: The Zoning Board of Appeals meets on an as needed basis, the 1 st Wednesday of the month at 7 P.M., in the City Council Chambers. The Zoning Board of Appeals will make its recommendation to the City Council in writing within 30 days of the public hearing. The Zoning Board of Appeals consists of 7 members appointed by the Mayor. A public hearing will be held at this time for the variance request. Notice will be by the United City of Yorkville in the Kendall County Record and certified mail by the petitioner to adjacent property owners within 500 ft.of the subject property no less than fifteen days and no more than 30 days prior to the public hearing date. Prior to the public hearing, a certified affidavit must be filed by the petitioner with the Community Development Department containing the names, addresses and permanent parcel numbers of all parties that were notified. Step 3: City Council: The City Council meets the 2"d and 4`h fourth Tuesdays of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. This session considers recommendations of the Zoning Official and Zoning Board of Appeals. This is where all City Council voting takes place. Agreement: I understand and accept all requirements, fees as outlined as well as any incurred administrative and planning consultant fees which must be current before this project can proceed to the next scheduled committee meeting. Please sign and return this original(retaining a copy for your records)to the Community Development Department, United City of Yorkville, 800 Game Road,Yorkville, Illinois 64560. Date; United Citv of Yorkville Variance Request Application Revised: 1^29114 ,"'�D C/ly Reviewed By: Agenda Item Number ® Legal ❑ NB #5 isas Finance F]EST. Engineer ❑ Tracking Number I : u, City Administrator ®;P `°" tea' 4 Consultant ❑ EDC 2012-04 Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Residential Building Pennit Fees Meeting and Date: EDC-January 3, 2012 Synopsis: Continued discussion of potential building permit and impact fee incentives. Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: N/A Action Taken: N/A Item Number: N/A Type of Vote Required: Informational Council Action Requested: Direction. Submitted by: Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, AICP Community Development Name Department Agenda Item Notes: Cary AN L Memorandum EST. , '^- 1836 -- To: Economic Development Committee From: Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator ,tE �� Date: December 29, 2011 Subject: Residential Building Permit Fees In furthering the City's discussions over the past several months regarding building permit and impact fee reductions as a way to spur development, staff is seeking direction on a comprehensive incentive/stimulus package for new residential construction. The proposed incentive/stimulus package, which is a culmination of previous fee research conducted by staff and recent meetings with developers/homebuilders interested in purchasing undeveloped subdivisions or vacant lots within existing subdivisions, contains the components listed below. Additionally, Meadowbrook Homes has sent us a letter outlining their wishes for building permit fee changes, and the letter narrates the success they've had in Minooka with a similar program. Representatives from Meadowbrook Homes will be at the meeting to discuss their request and answer questions. 1. Delayed Payment of Building Permit Fees To assist the developer/builder, staff is considering allowing the building permit and impact fees to be paid at the time of receiving the certificate of occupancy rather than prior to construction. Various other local municipalities have also implemented delayed building permit fee incentives such Plainfield and Minooka. • Pros — This flexibility in the timing of the City receiving payment for permits would allow builders to move forward with construction without this up-front expense. The proposed delayed payment of building permit fees would also be coupled with the EDC's previous direction to reduce the Municipal Building Fee from $5,509 per unit to $1,759 per unit. • Cons — Administratively, this option may pose the most challenges as the City would have to "front-fund" any out-sourced inspections (e.g. plumbing, engineering); verifying all building permit fees to other agencies are paid in full prior to issuing final occupancy which may delay closings; and ensuring occupancy has not occurred if outstanding issues have not been resolved prior to receiving Final CO. There is also the concern of "lag time" between building permit issuance and occupancy which may require a time limitation of 6 months to 1 year before payment is required or proof that the lot has been sold to a buyer prior to construction. 2. Residential Building Permit Fee Rebate Program To assist the homebuyer of new construction, this program would rebate portion of the City's permit and impact fees, up to $5,000, with a matching contribution of up to $5,000 from the developer/homebuilder and given to the homebuyer at time of closing. 1 Again, other neighboring communities are also offering similar programs such as Sugar Grove and Minooka. • Pros — This cash incentive of up to $10,000 to the new homebuyer is a significant "draw" for new construction purchases and widens the market options beyond foreclosed or short sale properties. • Cons—The City will have to determine which fees can be reduced to fund the $5,000 homebuyer rebate, and should the program be limited by time (e.g., 2-years) or quantity (i.e., up to 35 building permits). Consideration will also have to be given to the those developments which have pre-paid certain building permit fees (such as parks, connection fees, etc.) versus those which have not to see if the benefit is equitable to the City as well as the developer/builder. 3. Land-Cash Donation Reduction As you know, the City's land-cash ordinance establishes the fair-market value for any parcel of residential land as a means of determining the per acre fee for cash-in-lieu of park land donations. The current land-cash value is $101,000 per acre for a residential development and was last re-evaluated in 2006. The EDC has already considered the land-cash donation reduction at the November meeting and provided direction to Staff to conduct an initial land appraisal study to determine the current"Fair Market Value" for and acre of land within Yorkville. Should the findings result in a decrease from the present $101,000/acre, and ordinance could be passed reducing the valuation for a set period of time (e.g., 2 years) for Land-Cash Donation at which time the Fair Market Value would incrementally increase a certain percentage a year (i.e., 25% per year for 4 years) until it fully restores to the current market rate. The Pro's and Con's discussed in a previous staff memorandum on the topic are reiterated below for your reference: • Pros — This would not require the City to permanently reduce its Land-Cash Donation to a level that far below other surround communities, thereby jeopardizing future funding for park developments. This option would also require only one (1) land appraisal over at least five years. • Cons - This option may prove difficult to administer as it would require the yearly review and calibration of the land-cash valuation with the potential for the same development to have multiple Land-Cash contribution valuations at any given time during its construction. Staff is seeking input for the committee to see if there is enough interest to pursue the proposed comprehensive incentive/stimulus package, in whole or in part, for new residential construction. If so, the next step in the process would be to draft a resolution outlining the specifics of the incentives for City Council consideration at an upcoming meeting. I will be available at Tuesday night's meeting to discuss the information provided in this memo in greater detail. 2 MEADOWBROOK December 22, 2011 Via Email Mr. Bart Olsen City Administrator City of Yorkville 800 Game Farm Road Yorkville, IL 60560 RE: Building Homes in Yorkville Dear Bart, My father and I enjoyed meeting with you, Krysti & Lynn last week. As you know, in 2005 Meadowbrook Homes invested close to 5 Million Dollars in the City of Yorkville. We purchased 161 acres near the intersection of Route 47 & 71 due to our strong belief that Yorkville is a great, vibrant and growing community. The meltdown in the new-construction market prevented us from developing that property. Over the course of the last year, we have found a way to sell a substantial number of homes even in the current real estate climate. Currently, our primary active development is the 379 home community: Arbor Lakes in Minooka. In the last 14 months, we have sold 46 homes in this community making it the second best selling community in the Chicagoland area. The factors that led to this success were: 1. We lowered our prices dramatically. To start we offered a 4 bedroom, 2.5 bath home for $168,500. This opened up Arbor Lakes to buyers who thought they could only afford a foreclosure. 2. We increased our standard inclusions.At these low prices we still include Certified Energy Star Construction, Granite Countertops in Kitchen & Bathrooms, Real Hardwood Floors, Basements, Upgraded Cabinets & Trim & Much more. 3. The Village of Minooka Stimulus Program. Minooka understands the benefits of encouraging buyers to build new homes in town. Therefore they created an economic Stimulus Program where any buyer who built a new home in Minooka, would receive a check for$10,000 back from the Village of Minooka. The builder would contribute $5,000 and the Village would match with an additional $5,000. This proved to be a great sales tool for buyers to build new versus buying a short sale or foreclosure. 4. Reasonable Permit Fees. The Village of Minooka has also locked in our permit fees to be in $12,000-14,000 range for our Single Family Homes. This is incredibly important in allowing us to keep our costs down. 5. Delayed Payment of Permit Fees. The Village of Minooka also allows all builders to now pay for Building Permits prior to the issuance of an Occupancy Permit. Like Plainfield and other communities, the Village of Minooka adopted this policy to help Builders' cashflow greatly in these challenging times. 479 Quadrangle Drive Suite D I Bolingbrook,IL 60440 1 P:(815)467-4700 1 F:(888)506-0950 1 www.mbhomes.com MEADOWBROOK HOMES . INC Page 2 We feel that Yorkville is a more desirable location for many buyers than Minooka. We would like to duplicate our recent success by building our highly competitive homes in Yorkville. We are currently in negotiations to purchase a 100-lot subdivision in town. In order for us to move forward and invest an additional 2.5+ Million Dollars in Yorkville, we are asking for the City to implement a stimulus program that would be available to all builders similar to the program in Minooka. (Manhattan & Lockport as well as others have implemented the same program) Also,we are asking for a roll back in permit fees to an average similar to Minooka. At the same time, we would like the City to allow for building permit fees to be due at some point prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit. Since we missed the opportunity to meet with Mr. Gary Golinski in our last visit to Yorkville, we would like for you to please arrange for such a meeting. We would like to discuss the mutual benefits for the City of Yorkville and Meadowbrook Homes by making our home building happen in early 2012. Also, if you think it would be beneficial for the discussion of the above points to be on the agenda at the January 3 Economic Development Committee meeting, we would be more than happy to attend and to provide any information that could help move this process along. The new home construction season typically begins in early February. We would like to capitalize on it with fully-staffed sales office allowing for a strong push in Yorkville. We strongly believe that together we can create a success story for Yorkville and Meadowbrook Homes. Best Regards, MEADOWBROOK HOMES, INC. Aladdin Nassar Vice President cc: Mayor Gary Golinski Krysti Barksdale-Noble Lynn Dubajic 479 Quadrangle Drive Suite D I Bolingbrook,IL 60440 1 P:(815)467-4700 1 F:(888)506-0950 1 www.mbhomes.com Reviewed By: Agenda Item Number O J 4 - Legal NB #6 EST. 1836 Finance ❑ '— Engineer El Tracking Number City Administrator ■ �® Consultant ❑ EDC 2012-05 ElKenGii ccunry Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Ordinance Renaming Wheaton Ave. to Boombah Blvd. Meeting and Date: EDC–January 3, 2012 Synopsis: Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Majority Council Action Requested: Approval Submitted by: Bart Olson Administration Name Department Agenda Item Notes: Ordinance No. 2012- ORDINANCE OF THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE, KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS, RENAMING WHEATON AVENUE TO BOOMBAH BOULEVARD WHEREAS, the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, is a non-home-rule municipality pursuant to the Illinois Municipal Code and Article VII, Section 7 of the Constitution of the State of Illinois of 1970; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the Illinois Municipal Code, 65 ILCS 5/1-1-1, et seq., (the "Code") as from time to time amended, and more specifically, Sec. 8-11-20 (the "Act"), the Corporate Authorities are empowered to enter into economic incentive agreements or redevelopment agreements relating to the development of property or improvements to properties within the City's corporate limits; and, WHEREAS, Boombah of Morris, Illinois, a manufacturer of customized sports apparel, footwear, uniforms and accessories, approached the City to propose that it acquire property located west of Route 47, north of Cannonball Trail on Wheaton Avenue (the "Subject Property") and relocate its distribution center to this location (the "Project") on the condition that the City provides certain incentives to induce it to proceed with this major undertaking; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance 2011-64, the Mayor and City Council (the "Corporate Authorities) approved a Redevelopment Agreement whereby Boombah was granted certain incentives in the event Boombah proceeded with the Project at the Subject Property including a commitment to rename Wheaton Avenue to Boombah Boulevard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and City Council of the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois as follows: 1 Section L That the foregoing preambles are hereby incorporated in this Ordinance as if fully restated herein. Section 2. That street now known as "Wheaton Avenue" from Route 47 to Caledonia Street is hereby renamed to Boombah Boulevard. Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage by the Mayor and City Council and approval as provided by law. United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, this day of , A.D. 2012. CHRIS FUNKHOUSER GEORGE T. GILSON, JR. CARLO COLOSIMO DIANE TEELING JACKIE MILSCHEWSKI MARTY MUNNS ROSE SPEARS LARRY KOT APPROVED by me, as Mayor of the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, this day of , A.D. 2012. Mayor Attest: City Clerk 2