Plan Commission Minutes 1992 05-20-92 R 00
MAY 20, 1992 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES OF THE PLAN COMMISSION OF THE UNITED CITY OF
THE VILLAGE OF YORKVILLE, KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS
HELD AT THE KENDALL COUNTY BOARD ROOM
The May meeting of the Plan commission was called to order by Robert. Davidson in
the absence of chairman Harold Feltz. The following members were in attendance:
Don Ament, Gail Digate, Tom Lindbloom, Anne Lucietto,
Bob Davidson. George Stewart arrived at 8:00 p.m.
Absent: Harold Feltz, Clarence Holdiman, Larry Langland,
Sandy Adams, Kevin Coltman, Louis Nauman
Bob Davidson noted that the appointment term of Louis Nauman had
expired and that he would be replaced by Mr. Kolkmeyer.
The minutes of the April meeting were present and approved. The motion was given
by Don Ament and the second by Gail Digate. Voice vote carried.
The first order of business was the Public Hearing on the Woodworth Subdivision;
the vacation of Ridgeway Drive and replatting. Bob Davidson asked anyone wishing
to be heard to be sworn in.
PUBLIC HEARING PC92-7
Mr. Woodworth explained the problem with Ridgeway Drive. Last year he was putting
in the road and the sewer line was put in to the lots 56 & 57. He realized that
there would be a serious problem with the grade that would prevent development of
lots 47, 48, 56, & 57. The present plan would call for the lots fronting on Main
St. The land over the hill will not be developed but will be retained as a park area.
Tom Lindbloom asked if there were original plans to tie Ridgeway in with Gawne Lane;
Mr. Woodworth was uncertain of the plans that were discussed but noted that the
property owners involved were not interested in any tie-in, but would rather keep
Gawne Lane as it is.
Bob Davidson asked if there was anyone interested in speaking. Hearing none, he
asked to adjourn the Public Hearing and resume the Plan Commission meeting. Gail
Digate made the motion; Tom Lindbloom gave the second. Voice vote carried.
PC92-7 PUBLIC HEARING (WOODWORTH - VACATION AND REPLATTING)
Bob Davidson stated that he would like to see the minutes from the June 1988 meeting
and review what was decided at that time on" the preliminary plat approval. It
seems that there were a lot of objections. Mr. Woodworth again explained the grade
of the area and the problems with development; originally, the street was planned
at the request of the City and he agreed.
Mr. Clarage asked if a topographical exhibit could be presented. He would like to
see the present plan in respect to the surrounding conditions. Mr. Woodworth agreed
to provide copies of the original map with lot numbers, etc. well marked. He also
suggested that the Commission members actually visit and view the area in question.
s r
MAY PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 2
Mr. Woodworth asked if the matter could be expedited so he could get on with the
sale and development of the lots involved. He was afraid that tabling the petition
would cause a two month delay. Mr. Lindbloom asked about a special meeting to go
over the plans (after all information is gathered) to be able to work within the
time frame necessary to Mr. Woodworth.
Bob Davidson suggested that Mr. Woodworth get all the necessary information together
and contact Don Peck; then they would see what could be done about a special meeting.
The motion to table the petition until the next meeting was given by Tom Lindbloom
and seconded by Anne Lucietto. Voice vote carried.
Mr. Woodworth asked if Mr. Davidson would look into the matter of the easement on
the adjacent property that was to be taken care of some time ago, but apparently
was not. Mr. Davidson agreed to find out.
PC92-5 FISHER (DISCUSSION)
Mr. Fisher noted that the last meeting produced the following requests: B-2 special
use zoning for the project; development under PUD; Rt. 34 access. He said that
discussion and research had taken place since that time and that there was no problem
with complying with the requests of the Commission with respect to those points.
Mr. Fisher further noted:
1. PUD specifications -- they would include specific-.building criteria such as
block and designer brick, details of fencing, parking and landscaping, and
such things as berming, proper lighting, etc.
2. Emissions -- concerns were addressed and the control would exceed standards.
3. Parking -- there would be lined areas; when all places were filled, there
would be provision for an outboard facility.
4. Access -- would be shared with Midas; one access off Rt. 34 would be used
and a .150' de=acceleration lane would be provided.
5. Positive. results -- increased revenue; 20-25 additional jobs; a business
operated by individuals with proven sound business practices.
Mr. Davidson noted that the Council had agreed to add this type of business to the
list of B-2 special uses, but this does not guarantee the approval for this project.
The appropriate zoning is still B-4 or M-1. The first consideration is: : do we
want to allow this type of business in this area? After that, the specifics of the
PUD can be discussed and detailed. Again, the first discussion and recommendation
is for a general approval of this type of business in this particular area, not the
Fisher project specifically.
Mr. Lindbloom made the motion to accept it as a B-2 special use; Gail Digate gave
the second. Mr. Davidson opened the subject for discussion before voting on the
motion. His first concern is for the outcome of the decision in twenty years. Tom
Lindbloom cited the PUD as the best protection for the City under this type of zoning.
MAY PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 3
He further noted that an approval would necessitate negotiations to set down tight
guidelines. It was agreed that parking, fencing, lighting, and other concerns mentioned
previously would be discussed at length.
Mr. Clarage gave his opinion; he understands what the Commission is thinking and that
the general agreement is that B-2 special use under PUD might, under certain circum-
stances, be appropriate if the proper protection is given to the adjacent owners.
Once that is voted on and taken care of, then the petitioner can come back and prove
that all the concerns have been satisfied. Then the input from the adjacent owners
needs to be considered with respect to the project. This is automotive use and the
Commission needs to give consideration to the fact that the project could affect the
area visually, economically, and with respect to resale value.
Bob Davidson asked that the motion be amended to read: The Plan Commission recommends
to the City Council to create the B-2 special use zoning for this type of automotive
use in this area. Tom Lindbloom seconded the amendment. Roll call vote carried as
follows:
Ament - yes Digate - yes Lindbloom - yes Lucietto - yes Davidson - yes
Discussion followed on the concerns for development under PUD:
Digate -- noted concerns expressed at the previous meeting relative to parking of
vehicles waiting to be worked on, landscaping, exterior fencing, security for
overnight vehicles, and area for car storage after spaces are all used.
Davidson -- a clause related to long term storage to limit the total number of
vehicles and the time they can be left on the property should be included. Mr.
Davidson said this was not targeted at Mr. Fisher's project, but was directed
at any future project as well and was for the protection of the city.
Ament -- asked if IDOT approval had been secured and if the de-acceleration lane
was included.
Davidson -- concerned with the future cut off Kendall Dr. shown on the plan. He
does not want it shown or considered with this plan. This should be considered
as a separate issue at the time any future development for the back half of the
property occurs.
Clarage -- would like the following points considered:
1. Provision of a site plan and a vertical site section to show relation
of this project to other buildings and improvements in the area.
2. Firm up landscaping and berms for a year round screening.
3. Plan on site lighting
4. No curb cut onto the frontage road to the north
5. Proposals for fence, gate, electronic eye system for security
6. What kind of concrete block will be used
Don Peck stated that they might need to run some cross section views and that he
will also get with Mr. Fisher to discuss water retention plans.
t
MAY PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 4
MASTER PLAN FOR KENDALL COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER
Harold Scholle introduced three plans presently under consideration for the future
development of the Kendall County government center. Presently, there are only
7-8 acres in use and development included the correctional facility and the new
sheriff's headquarters. There still remain approximately 40 acres for future
plans. All three plans to be reviewed show the different possibilities for use
and positions of the various structures.
It was stated that input from the Plan Commission relative to the three plans and
the impact on the area was needed. Comments would be welcome during the presentation
and during the weeks to come.
After the presentation of the plans and a brief discussion, Mr. Davidson asked for
a motion to bring the topic up at the next Plan Commission meeting to give all
members time to review what was presented and to give Harold Feltz and Larry Langland
an opportunity to see the material. Gail Digate made the motion and Don Ament gave
the second. Voice vote carried.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Discussion on the Comprehensive Plan will be postponed until the next meeting so
it can be reviewed when more members are present.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Bob Davidson asked that the following minutes be included in the mailing packet
for the June Plan Commission meeting:
Woodworth Subdivision -- June of 1988
Conover -- Special meeting of Sept. 27 (PC89-30)
'This should also include any related drawings surrounding the
Conover zoning to answer questions related to frontage road
development and road extensions.
It was agreed that a review of the related minutes would enable the Plan Commission
to give a better recommendation on the question of the Public Safety Center plan.
With no further business to discuss, the motion to adjourn was made by Don Ament
and the second given by George Stewart. Voice vote carried. The meeting was
adjourned at 9:10 p.m.
Joanne M. Ellertson, Secretary
PUBLIC HEARING /SIGN-IN SHEET y S-,Z 0- a,
NAME ADDRESS
foL
,
au all A--P
i