Loading...
Plan Council Minutes 1997 10-01-97 r UNITED CITY OF THE VILLAGE OF YORKVILLE Committee Minutes -Planning Council Date of Meeting: October 1, 1997 Location: 111 W. Fox Time: Convened: 9:30 am Time Adjourned: 12:10 pm Attendees: Representing: Keith Kuczkowski Kuczkowski Kim Peterson Kuczkowski Joe Wywrot City of Yorkville Joe Edmeier Edmeier Group/Fox Highlands Dean Edmeier Edmeier Group/Fox Highlands Tim Fairfield BKFD William Perkins BKFD William Dettmer City of Yorkville Tom Grant Attorney for Landmark America/Fox Hollow Jim Nanninga City of Yorkville Randy Metz Ives/Ryan Group/Fox Hollow Jeff Palmquist Lannert Group/City of Yorkville - Planner Ralph Pfister YBSD J.T. Johnson City of Yorkville Garry Dillman Builders Group/Fox Hollow E. John Schumacher Siebert Engineers, Inc. Tony Graff Yorkville PD Jim Zwijack Wight & Company Karl Norberg Landmark America Adam Trott Creal Hyde& Larson Beverly Elleby ReMax Realtors/Landmark America Gary Pike McClure Engineering PC96-21 KUCZKOWSKI - Van Emmon Property Peterson presented the latest plot on the property, and stated the new map shows 33'dedicated as right-of-way from the center of the street. Nanninga stated that if this is increased to 40', which is the current required minimum right-of-way for Van Emmon, the lots would not meet the 15,000 sq. ft minimum for duplex lots, and stated the city would be asking for 40'. Kuczkowski asked what would be the procedure to obtain this Iand from other residents. Wywrot stated it is appropriate to ask for 4U', but the City would not make that a reason to deny his petition. If we do go to 40', it would affect the set-back and questioned if the buildings would still be within the building envelopes ( the flat plateau area where the buildings need to be). Kuczkowski stated he will do whatever is required. Wywrot stated that if the City goes to a 40' right-of-way, they would need to comply with the set back based on the new right-of-way line, also he did go out to the site and walked around, and it looked like the lots have a fairly constant slope going up, and a then it really picks up by the time you get to the third lot, you are basically off the lot with the building envelope. Peterson stated that the area where they wanted to build was fairly flat. Nanninga stated that the area was uniform, but not flat, and then it becomes very steep. Wywrot again asked if they could get a building envelope on those spots with the 40' set backs. Peterson referred to the numbers and said 600-610, was the zone through the middle they were looking at. It had a 10' variation which isn't much, and showed some examples of smaller foot prints vs. larger foot prints of buildings. The larger foot print becomes a problem. Combining that with the set back you start losing the plateau which is why they want to stay with a building that is as narrow as possible from front to back, and also keep it in from the lot line. The problem is that the lots are only 100' wide, and they are not cornfield. By changing the shape of buildings & making a bigger foot print and bigger driveway, and we would lose every tree that is on lot three. On lots one and two by trying to keep the building narrower, we can try to position them in the trees and maybe lose one or two, but not all of them. The original floor plan shows two 20 x 40 units with 12' garages on the sides. Lot 3 has a 34" Oak ( the largest on the property) which has to come down to build anything of any size. Pfister asked who shot the elevation. Peterson stated it was Jim Olson. Peterson stated they were working with a small budget. They would like to pursue the zoning change and build a more conservative building and save the trees, and deal with the ground contour. With the restrictions they are given they don't like the alternatives. Nanninga asked if the trees they had shown on their map are the only ones worth saving, and asked what minimum size they had used in making this determination. Have they shown all trees of a certain size, or how did they end up with these trees on their plot. Peterson stated that there were a lot of 8" & 10" scattered around the lots. Nanninga asked if they had marked trees 8" and bigger for instance, so the Council can tell by their plot that there are no others larger than a certain size on the lots. The plot shows an 18" tree, and that appears to be the smallest shown. Palmquist states, so what Jim is asking is are there a lot of 16", or 15", or 12" trees you haven't shown on here, and asks how can they see what you have set as a minimum. Kuczkowski stated they had not, but there were a lot at 4" to 8" mark, and that a picture in 1969 shows the land was almost bare, with the exception of these major trees. Palmquist asks what variety of trees are there now, are they Boxelder, Elm, Mulberry. Kuczkowski states there is a wide variety, a lot of cherry, apple. Palmquist asks if there any Hickory. Kuzckowski states he has only one Hickory on his entire parcel, and it is about 2" diameter. Johnson states there are a lot of young Oaks. Dettmer asks if the envelope they show is in compliance with the zoning that they have requested. Peterson states approximately, that the small envelope to allow them to stay on the plateau vs. how a larger envelope will be crowding them on sides, and the set back. Dettmer asks what lot sizes are. Peterson states 100' x 150'. Dettmer asked them to draw in their envelope and show set backs on the plot where the foot print would set and asked if they have sketches of buildings. Peterson shows some larger examples and how they are problems. Dettmer stated that the zoning only requires 2 car parking and does not state under roof. Palmquist asks what more does Plan Council need to do for Plan Commission. It's a decision that they have to make if they allow the R-213 zoning with those requirements. They have to understand that there are ramifications on the vegetation, otherwise they would be denying the R-2D request because of the constraints of the site render it difficult to reasonable achieve the and meet the requirements of the City in terms of the duplex units. Nanninga stated that he had hoped to see something practical that would meet our requirements. Palmquist stated that they were all hard pressed to put too many constraints on a zoning change. Dettmer stated he thought that if they could stay on the jP envelope, meet the set back requirements, and do the 2 car garages by jogging the buildings and also save trees, they would have a very positive impact. Palmquist stated that if he can't get in the two car garage then he should be rejected because the lots aren't big enough, and everyone has to deal with meeting set backs and a building envelope. Peterson presented several drawings stating that he wanted to show several representations of what they could do on these lots, some with one car garages, stating that the larger envelope will not fit on lot 1 without losing all the major trees. Palmquist stated that they couldn't fit the large one on any of these lots, because it violates the side yard set backs. Nanninga stated they would like some time to look over the material, and look at two story buildings, and have time to go over this with Palmquist. Dettmer suggested that Peterson and Kuczkowski come back in and show the envelope on the plot, stating he thought they were presenting foot prints that would fit on these lots. Peterson stated some of the designs would fit, but would take away all the trees. Dettmer asked them to show us one or two models, instead of five or six, and do some architectural design. Show the envelope, an what you can build on that envelope. They should also show the elevation and the location of the trees and what they can do to meet the requirements on that specific envelope. Nanninga stated that they could make this work by looking at various styles and shapes, if they gave it some effort. Johnson stated that the record shows they have R-2D Special Use. Palmquist states that would be disallowed, there is nothing in a duplex to qualify as special use. Peterson states that to his understanding there is nothing that states you have to build a two car garage, and nothing that says it has to be brick, and nothing about a roof over a 1-12 pitch, but that is what the City of Yorkville wants. The City would like to save as many trees as possible, and if we agree to build all of this they will give permission to build on these lots. Nanninga stated that the Plan Council can not speak for what they will or will not get, as they are only a recommending body. The other option is to leave it single family and that solves all problems. They could revise to a P.U.D. Peterson stated they would keep working on it, and try to do abetter job. PC96-18 THE EDMEIER GROUP - Fox Highlands This plan addresses the issues from last Planning Council. They have connected the roads in the town home area, relocated the conference facilities along with the Villas, pool, tennis courts and bar, and also added golf cart storage. The current number of lots is 169. The golf cart path raised too many questions about maintenance and easements on private lots. To replace this they are removing lot 33, and it will become a residents club overlooking the 9th green for the members of the Homeowners association, and will include golf cart storage. The Golf Villas have been moved into this space also, so everything will be centrally located for easy access including the tennis courts and pool. They currently have 5 lots that are under 12,000 sq. ft. and do not back open space. Edmeier stated that he wants to avoid the opening from the town homes. into the Halbesma property since they are not land locked, but have access to Route 947, and does not want to influence pr be involved in their zoning. Palmquist asks if there are any legal issue, was there an agreement Edmeier stated that was a question for Dan Kramer, but there was not in the nature of a covenant or other restriction that restricted this land from ever going forward without it. The way he interpreted it was that these parcels should come in together, should have common access point, he has not seen anything except letters between Council members and land owners. There is no restriction on the land. They will address this issue in detail at Plan Commission. Palmquist asked if the town home roads will be private of public. There is a detail of the town homes that they are waiting on now. Randy positions an overlay over the layout showing where they have relocated the spur road to line up with the Roppolo spur road, connecting the two developments and improving the flow of traffic. The pond on the adjoining property is surrounded by wet land, so designated by the State of Illinois and there is no intention of trying to put a road into that area. Chief Graff states that they have 4 entrances now, and the current trend is a closed community for safety reasons. He was also concerned about having access to a private use club house and conference center being too easily accessible from outside and should be limited. But route to Golf Club should be direct. Edmeier stated that they will be before the Plan Commission October 9th on 1 issue amending their application from duplexes to town homes. This requires a public hearing. J.T. Johnson stated they needed to discuss the sewer project, since without the new sewer there won't be any sub-division, and without sub-division there will be no sewer. Wywrot stated that Edmeier's Preliminary Plan should include the offset, the trading of information back and forth. Edmeier stated that this is one package tying the sewer and subdivision together. Nanninga asks for the record if all will have brick, steep roofs, a 25' set back from private drives, and 30' from dedicated road. Johnson stated that he wants that spelled out, he doesn't want Public Works doing anything with these private drives. Graff asks what type of curbs the development will have. Metz answers rolled curbs. Edmeier stated an agreement with the State of Illinois, Department of Transportation is under way for the entrance onto Route #71. Wywrot asks if Edmeier has a listing of Developmental fees. Graff asks what kind of sceening there will be along the golf course. Edmeier states they will have a berm, split rail fence and landscaping all the way around the Golf Course. Back to Plan Council 10/15/96. PC96-20 FOX HOLLOW/Landmark America Tom Grant states that the developer has revised their drawings to reflect the changes based on the last Plan Council meeting. They have softened curbs and roofs, enhanced the pedestrian walks, the exercise path has been articulated, and they now have 17 parking spaces scattered around the site, which could become more, and they will add landscaping. The roads have been set at 28' and the parkway at a minimum of 3', realistically this could perhaps be 5'. Gary Pike has been trying to contact Mulvey to tie in the foot path to the Forest Preserve, and that this is not a final design, but a step toward final. Wywrot asks if tennis courts are out. A discussion follows, ending with perhaps relocating the tennis courts to a more central location. Palmquist suggested behind the maintenance building where they show some roadway that is not needed, space could be adequate by changing a few things around. Wywrot asked about the path into the proposed commercial piece, stating that they need to show it Johnson states the reason being that the City has to be sure it will happen at the time the commercial is developed. Nanninga stated that the driveways need 20' between the building and the sidewalks so when a car is parked there it will not block the sidewalk to pedestrians. Dettmer states the City needs an agreement to allow access for Police and Fire Departments to enforce. Wywrot asks about the storm water management. Gary states that as soon as it enters the property it will go underground. They have inlets to underground from the surface, and generous retention areas. Wywrot asks if they are wet. Gary states no, that they wouldn't want that many ponds. Wywrot states the City needs to study this further. Gary states they are waiting for calibrations regarding ponds. Dillman states that in regard to Land/cash it will be all cash. Wywrot states that they need 2 sources of water (12"), and sanitary will hook to where the divide is and then 2 stubs to the West. Hydrant spacing could provide a stub. Water inside should be 8". Water main should loop. Johnson states they also will need a hydrant for flushing. Nanninga asks for the record if they will have all gravity sewers. Dillman states yes. Palmquist asks why they have three 8 unit buildings (18 & 19& 13 & 14), instead of 6 units, stating that the new standard will be 6 maximum, even though it is not in effect yet. Fox Hollow is planning on 2 more Plan Council meetings in preparation for Plan Commission in November. Back here 10/15/96. PC96-13 FOX MILL/The Development Group -Darren Sloniger There isn't anyone present representing Fox Mill. City representatives have a discussion regarding the direction of Fox Mill. Dettmer states that he spoke with Darren Sloniger regarding his permits. Sloniger stated he wanted to start with the smaller units. Johnson states he spoke to Pottinger regarding easements along his property line. Pottinger will be getting back to Johnson. Palmquist spoke with Sloniger about landscaping and suggested he add a few trees and shrubs. Also that he move the evergreens and make a substitution. Palmquist made suggestions on ground cover and that he be more specific and more appropriate on his plan, and that his quantities were inadequate. Dettmer states the plan shows handicapped parking which is not required in a residential area. Nanninga states there is a storm sewer issue, and Sloniger is not ready. Wywrot asks what the City's position is on the water main. Johnson states they can't even discuss this without Pottinger's easement. Dettmer states he has a lot of pipe in a very small area. Nanninga states Sloniger will never do the East end without the Robb Container property. Dettmer states that Sloniger's plan changes every time it is presented. Palmquist states that this is a change from his original P.U.D., and questions if this is the point where Sloniger is told he is trying to put to much in too small a space. We have all worked with him and tried to make this work, but is just isn't working. Nanninga asks if the Council wants to reject. Wywrot questions if this is the way to do it. Dettmer states that this is no longer a loft project. Wywrot asked if there will be separate water service. Dettmer stated that Sloniger is talking about it. Wywrot stated that he needs to define this area. Dettmer stated that the City is looking at changing the codes for residential to include sprinkler systems in town homes and two family dwellings. Nanninga stated that he and Dettmer were working on standards for town homes. Adjourned 12:10 PM i San ra Marker