Loading...
Plan Commission Minutes 1977 10-25-77 I .. YORKVILLE PLAN COMMISSION YORKVILLE ILLINOIS 60560 Dr. Robert Coleman Lawrence Langland James Kenton Robert J. Mahoney x*Fff&R9U9W Harold Feltz Fred Dollman Dale Woodworth Mary K. Price Steve Franks MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE YORKVILLE PLAN COMMISSION 25 OCTOBER 1977 Chairman Robert Coleman called the regular meeting of the Yorkville Plan Commission to order. Those in attendance were Dr. Coleman, Mr. Mahoney, Mr. Feltz, Mr. Langlandl, Mrs. Price, Mr. Kenton, Mr. Woodworth, Mr, Franks, Mr. Clarage, Mr, Bushing, Mr, Madden, Mr. Beach, Mr. Simmons and Mr. Behrens. Mr. Feltz moved to approve the minutes of the September meeting and was seconded by Mr. Woodworth. All present voting aye. Motion carried. 77.25 Tom McNelis - Subdivide Lots on Acreage at end of Olsen and Walter Streets Attorney Tom Grant, representing Mr. McNelis, stated that their purpose tonight was to keep the petition alive. He passed out a Reduction of Larger Plat to all plan commission members and stated that sixty foot easements, turnarounds and 2.5 acre lots were shown. He stated that between the August and September meetings there had been confusion as to whether Mr. McNelis could obtain one building permit for the entire acreage. The city attorney had indicated that he could not. The present proposal indicates the present R-1 zoning for two - 2.5 acre or more lots. They will dedicate a sixty foot roadway on the westerly edge of the property. Mr. Grant stated that the question of access to the far easterly property was to come before the plan commission later tonight and Mr. Grant suggested that perhaps Walter, Olsen or Orange Streets should be extended. He stated that Mr. McNelis does not intend to build until next spring and that they do not want to improve the road, as according to their calculations, this would cost Mr. McNelis approximately $409000 in order to comply with the provisions of the subdivision control ordinance. He said they wanted the plan commission to waive the ordinance for road construction for these two lots as the cost would be pro- hibitive. He then said he would like the plan commission to table the petition until November in order to keep the petition alive. Mr. Clarage stated this plan was basically what we wanted. Mr. Grant then said that if the plan commission would approve the plan, he could ask the surveyor to do a preliminary based on the sketch and that they would not want to go to this expense if the plan commission would deny the plan. Mr. Clarage stated that the two gravel T turnarounds located at the end of Walter and Olsen Streets needed to be shown. Mr. Grant stated that he would submit an amended petition and asked to be placed on the agenda for November. Mr. Feltz then moved to table the petition until the plan commission hears the Metzger petition. Seconded by Mr. Woodworth. All present voting aye. 77.26 James Stark - Bristol Station - PreAnnexation Attorney Jim Wilson, representing Mr. Stark, stated that he was unaware that the Impact Study Committee would have to review the petition and that although they would be unable to get a formal reaction, they could get an informal reaction to the petition tonight. He then passed out an Amended Petition for Pre-,Annexation Agreement and Zoning Amendment and=also passed out sketches of Bristol Station. He said that basically all changes as reguested by the plan commission in September have been effected. He asked the members to look at paragraph 3 e of the amendment which requested a variance allowing for sixty feet right-of-ways rather than eighty feet as required by ordinance. Mr. Wilson stated that all buildings will have seventy-five foot setbacks and that off street 2 - October, 1977 Meeting r ' parking will be provided next to each building. He said the reasoning behind asking for the variance was that people would not park on the street if parking were provided adjacent to each building. Mr. Feltz asked how site useage would be enforced. Mr. Wilson stated that seventy five foot setbacks would be recorded on the final plat and also that covenants could be made. Mr. Wilson stated all they were talking about tonight was zoning, pre-annexation and a variance. Mr. Langland stated that the plan commission had just approved sixty-six foot right-aways at Unit 5 of Fox Industrial Park. Mr. Stark stated that they were trying to be current and the idea was to de-empha- size automobiles, large roadways, etc. He stated that a big road could easily become a parking lot. Mr. Wilson stated he would like an informal reaction from the plan commission. The amended petition was reviewed with no objections to paragraph 3, items a. b. c, and d, although item e caused considerable discussion. Mr. Clarage stated that street widths should not be less than 33 feet. Mr. Mahoney asked if the land where the Market Place is now located is part of Bristol Station. Mr. Stark replied affirmatively and stated it also was to be annexed to the city. Mr. Clarage stated that no commercial development ever allowed less than sixty-six foot right-of- ways. He also stated that if there were seventy-five foot setabcks, it should be in the petition that there would be no parking in the setbacks and if they wanted sixty foot right-of-ways, this stipulation should be stated on the pre-annexation agreement. Mr. Clarage stated that the petitioner was asking for a concession regarding right- of-ways and that we would want a concession in order to keep the development looking good. This had been presented as a quality development and if it were required that the buildings and parking be set back seventy-five feet then the owners could plant and have attractive green areas. As it stands now, all lots could conceivably be black topped and all green space could be lost. This would be one reason for asking for eighty foot right-of-ways which gives a chance to have grass between curbs and property lines. He indicated the wider right-of-ways was not only for traffic but also for green space. Mr. Wilson stated that it was Mr. Starks' intention to provide a quality development. It was noted by Mr. Langland that with sixty foot right-ofways, it would leave only eight feet of grass on each side of the street. Mr. Woodworth felt that a larger right-of-way should also be provided for utility purposes. Mr. Clarage stated that he would recommend eighty foot right-of-ways. Mr. Madden stated that the preliminary plat for Fox Industrial Park had been approved before the present ordinance went into effect and also that they did not have the traffic that Bristol Station would probably generate and also that Fox Industrial Park did not have sidewalks. He stated that room was needed for utility people to work. Mr. Mahoney inquired if the petitioner could not ask for eighty foot easements and then specify the width of the street. Mr. Clarage indicated that although they were talking about a thirty-three foot width for the street, the present ordinance required a fifty-six foot road. 14i-. Stark indicated that he would have no objections to the setback requirements as the lots are deep. He said that the final sentence of paragraph e could state that a seventy-five foot setback would be required for all lots and that there would be no buildings or parking within that setback.