Loading...
Plan Council Minutes 1997 05-14-97 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE Committee Minutes -Planning Council Date of Meeting: May 7, 1997 Location: 111 W. Fox Street Time Convened: 9:30 am Time Adjourned: 11:45 am Attendees: Joseph P. Hammer Sig Vaznelis Tim Fairfield Wally Ahrens W. A. Dettmer Jeff Palmquist Joe Wywrot Ralph Pfister Ron Wehrli Tony Graff Jim Nanninga GREENBRIAR SUBDIVISION: Results of Review Nanninga stated that he would like to start out with Greenbriar Final plat as that is scheduled to go on Plan Commission on Wednesday, May 14th. Wywrot stated they could go over the review points item by item or skim over them, whatever Wehrli prefers. Wehrli stated that Ron Bauer could not be here today, but he had indicated that forms from City are wrong, Nanninga stated they could have forms revised. Wywrot stated the City normally likes to see the lot sizes written on the plat so we know how big each lot. We also like to see intersections instead of having a tight 90 degree angle, like to see a rounded corner. Wehrli stated that he doesn't have a problem with most, but #3 is a major problem for Ron Bauer, as it changes everything. It wasn't done that way in the other units, it changes lot sizes, lots are all sold already as he had a lottery on them, they are not closed yet, but they are sold. Sig stated since this was not done in first 2 units. They had done everything as it had been done in the earlier units, and they question why they need this. Wywrot stated it is a fairly standard thing with us and other municipalities, it would affect some lot sizes on corners, maybe a half dozen lots. Wehrli stated we are talking about Yorkville where I've already done two units not other municipalities. Nanninga stated it is now in the Standards. Wywrot stated that Yorkville was requiring this now and they are asking developers to round off either with a radius or a cord to top off a little triangular area. As you know there is congestion at corners to get utilities in, not only now, but in the future Its good to have a little extra elbow room at corners where it can get tight, especially in this subdivision where the r-o-w's are a little narrower than what we would consider normal. Wehrli stated wasn't that engineering approved? Wywrot stated that the engineering plan that shows the location of the water mains, yes that has been approved, but the plat has not. Engineering deals with engineering, and the plat deals with Page 2 Plan Council Minutes May 14, 1997 the lot line. Wehrli stated that Ron Bauer has concerns with this. Nanninga stated that they would circle this item. Wywrot stated that each 25 ft. radius would be easy to figure out. Nanninga stated that any shortage here would be pretty small. Palmquist stated corner lots are a little over size anyway, and it is not likely to affect the size much. Wehrli stated he didn't have a problem with this but that Ron Bauer will. Palmquist stated the set-backs are fine. Wywrot stated that it does not affect setback lines. Wehrli stated that with one item out of 20, and if we are agreeing to all but one, he hoped we could work on it a little bit. Wywrot stated that perhaps one way around this is to check easements on these particular lots, perhaps it wouldn't have to be right-of-way if we had easement, we could use as right-of-way at those corners. Wehrli stated that would be fine. It would have to be more than just utilities, as we might want utilities to take the sidewalk there some day. Does that should like a good compromise? Wehrli stated ok. Wywrot stated that if there were no other disagreements, the balance of the comments refer to making changes to certain areas to accommodate water mains, sewers, etc. Wehrli stated he has one problem on page 2. #8-C. Lot A, Ron Bauer went over with Joe this morning as lady who lives there is concerned she would be land locked. It turns out it is not. If she goes single family, he would leave it for a road there, if not used he would turn it back into a lot. Wywrot stated that the lot was reserved for a potential roadway, and it should be on plat. Nanninga stated he thought it was on the annexation agreement. Wywrot stated that it should be repeated and we could work out something that details this and put it on the plat. Wywrot was sure we could work out something. Wywrot stating this covers everything except the plat document itself. There are a few other housekeeping measures that we should talk about before this goes to Plan Commission that deals with the subdivision and Unit 3 before plat can be approved by the City. There needs to be a letter-of-credit in place for Unit 3 to cover the outstanding items that are not completed to guarantee 20% of items completed, and 110% of anything that has not been constructed. You need to get an estimate from Morris Engineering and we will have to go through it line item by line item to figure what the correct amount would be at the time that the letter-of-credit is prepared. Going back to Unit 1 and 2 also, we do have letters-of-credit in place, but only for parts of the items in Units 1 and 2. We don't have anything on Greenbriar Road that I'm aware of, and it would be really nice to have letters-of- credit that cover what they should cover in those units. In units 1 and 2 letters-of-credit are in place only for roadway work and streetlighting and we should have letters-of-credit that also include 20% of the cost of the other items such as water mains, sanitary sewers, sidewalks and things like that. Letters-of-credit should be established for Greenbriar Road. As far as I know there has never been one established for Greenbriar Road. Wehrli stated that is not how we did letters-of-credit for unit 1 and 2. This is the new formula, your 20% of what's already in. The way we did it, it was 110% and as items were done it was taken off, and that was combined with Greenbriar Road. Wywrot stated he had never seen a breakdown. Wehrli stated there wasn't one, it was all combined into one. Wywrot stated that the subdivision ordinance says a letter-of-credit should be in place for items that are not completed. If you complete everything and it is accepted by the City and then the City would sign the plat. The other option would be to establish a letter-of-credit to guarantee the completion of those items. The process I just described on how the dollar amount would be determined isn't anything Page 3 Plan Council Minutes May 14, 1997 new, and I don't think it varies anything from what old ordinances would require. Wehrli stated no it would never get below 20%, and I think Schmanski was following the same rule. Nanninga stated that his letter should have addressed the 20%. Wywrot stated there has only been one request for a reduction in the letter-of-credit and that was for Unit 2, and that was just recently approved. There has never been a request for a reduction for Unit 1. Unit 1 and Phase 1 were combined. Wywrot stated, was stormwater and landscaping included? I know landscaping on Greenbriar was a separate issue but there was some landscaping that you are doing on Greenbriar Road and that normally would be covered in that letter-of-credit and wouldn't be released by the City until accepted, and that is fairly standard. Nanninga asked if that letter-of-credit is still good for Unit 1. Wywrot stated yes, it was renewed, but it is for roadway and lighting only. It doesn't talk about storm sewer, and certainly there is storm sewer under Greenbriar Road, or landscaping that has been done, and there is some jet to be done. Nanninga stated we have had other discussions on what that entails. In my mind storm sewer would be part of the roadway, but it doesn't cover water and sanitary with that kind of language. Wywrot stated that we need to look at the engineers estimate to see if the storm sewer was included in that roadway work, that was broken down as it was in the letter-of-credit. Wehrli stated that it was never in there because we never had an agreement on that. We agreed on that since then on what I was going to do on landscaping and all that. That was never agreed on prior to the letter-of-credit. Wywrot stated that maybe on Greenbriar Road, but the balance of Unit 1, certainly the water main, sanitary sewer, sidewalks, landscaping parkways, trees and all that would normally be covered by the letter-of-credit. There is nothing there to make a guarantee for all that now. Wehrli stated there are no parkway trees in this subdivision. Wehrli stated there are no requirements for trees. Nanninga stated yes, you are right Ron, our requirements now do not require trees in the parkway, but we do require at least one tree to within 4 and 10 feet behind the sidewalk. Wehrli stated not at the time I did this subdivision. This is all grandfathered back to that, and I am not putting trees in the parkway. Sidewalks, we agreed to put on the individual builder and not in the letter-of-credit. This all goes back to then. Wywrot stated if he has some documentation to that effect, then that is fine. Wehrli stated he has no documentation, but that doesn't mean he is going along with your new policy. Nanninga stated that the sidewalk has to be covered, and I know that a developer many times will put that on the builder, but we have no assurances from the builder and that means we would have to get a letter-of-credit from each builder. Ultimately the developer is responsible, and I don't know that that has ever changed. I understand you are putting that on the builder, and do you show that in your contract? Wehrli stated yes it was in his contract. Wywrot stated then the developer is covered but the City would not be. Wehrli asked if you want that in Unit 3? Wywrot stated yes completed sidewalks should be included in the letter-of-credit for Unit 3. And even sidewalks that are completed should be covered for 20% of that cost in the letter-of-credit. Wehrli asked, do you mean if the walk is down you want 20% of the cost of the sidewalk in the letter-of-credit. Wywrot stated yes, if the sidewalk cracks, and construction equipment is running over it. Wehrli asked if this isn't the performance guarantee? Nanninga stated once it is accepted, but until that happens we require this. Wywrot stated actually it is about 35% now and once it is accepted it is reduced to 20% and stays for 1 year. Page 4 Plan Council Minutes May 14, 1997 Wywrot stated that letter-of-credit needs to be established, and looked at again for Unit 1 & 2. Wywrot stated he would recommend that the letters-of-credit from Units 1 & 2 be increased to cover the items that I think by ordinance should have been covered initially and weren't, and they certainly should be in Unit 3. Wehrli stated that he had an agreement that they were not to be in Unit 1 & 2. Wywrot stated that then that would be for someone higher than me to say yes we did, and then that would be the end of it. The other thing is that there are outstanding fees that have not been paid, and they would look for those to be cleaned up prior to signing off on this plat. Wehrli stated that is a whole other can of worms, and a whole other issue, and if you are holding up Unit 3 for that reason, then there is the charge of$60,000. or $70,000 that the City owes me for over sizing that would have to be paid. Nanninga stated that we have not found that in any of the documentation that was agreed to. I know you have mentioned that Ron, but when we have done that with developers it has always been in the agreement. Now, if that was negotiated as an exchange back then for other concessions we don't know, but I don't find anything in writing that says we are obliged to pay for over sizing. Wehrli stated that Schmanski wrote a letter in that regard recently. Wywrot stated that it is not unusual for water main to be sized more than the bare minimum, and developers don't always seek a recapture for that. Nanninga stated that if in negotiations lots were less than 12,000 sq. ft. there wouldn't be the over sizing, but generally that is up front, and doesn't come later and say we owe $40,000. We don't budget that way, and we don't know what happened back then. Wehrli stated that they came to me and told me they wanted that in there. I wouldn't put it in there for kicks. Nanninga stated that you can carry that a lot farther and you can say that you owe a recapture to all the people that brought the main from the well to you, there just has to be a cut off somewhere. You can't carry it to the extreme. Palmquist asked if that wouldn't that be in the P.U.D? Wehrli stated that it was not in there, and there were about 5 changes of hands during that period of time. All we have is Schmanski's letter. It will become a legal matter. As far as holding up Unit 3, whose decision will that be? Nanninga stated that is up to the City Council, all we do is make a recommendation. The minutes from this meting will be going to Plan Commission and they will make the recommendation to the City Council. Wywrot stated that unrelated to the approval of Unit 3 is the issue of a second source of water supply I have been talking to Bill Hammer about that, and what is the status on that? I spoke to Morris and they indicated you had asked for some cost estimates. Wehrli stated from day one Wywrot has been the only one who has brought that up, I was told by the City to spend $70,000 extra dollars to bring the water in down Greenbriar Road. Our initial thoughts were to loop it up there, and we were told not to. I have to go down there and spend $70,000. more to bring it down. In engineering we never put the water in out there because I had to go down there, and now you come along and say I have to loop the water. I'm not doing it if that is your question. Wywrot stated well that was the question, and that is the end. Nanninga stated I would like to pursue that a little further because of my understanding. I was here through some of that, and yes it was originally set up to come through Elizabeth. It was determined that some of those properties could not be served, they would actually fall below 20 psi., and when we presented that to you we did suggest a main along Greenbriar, but that thought was always that that was a second water feed. Now I understand also that you are looking for a Page 5 Plan Council Minutes May 14, 1997 recapture of all that water main when it is your primary source. I do think there is an issue here that needs to be addressed. Wywrot stated it would affect the amount of the recapture for the water main of Greenbriar Road for sure, but the reason I brought it up was because when I first started working here the only set of plans I had to work with from Morris showed a water main extending not only from Greenbriar Road, but a water main extending out, and that was a January of 1993 or 94 set of plans. When unit 3 started going in there, or maybe before that, Morris did supply me with additional sets and those were more recent sets and they did not show that extension. It did show a main going off of there. Wehrli stated those were our original plans. Wywrot stated yes, but it also showed a line going off of Greenbriar, and I believe it intended to go out to 47. I did call the EPA because I was curious, the permit was issued based on a certain set of plans, and the plans that the EPA based their permit off of showed in the overall site utility plan, showed that line going out to Elizabeth Street. But, then when you go to the detailed set, it did not, so even there the waters were muddied as far as what was or wasn't shown. Wehrli stated that the permit was based on the high pressure going off of 47, and the final engineering was approved with that. Nanninga asked if we have a set of final engineering plans that are approved? Wywrot stated I believe that the ones they have given us are the most recent and those are the ones we have been working off, and they do not show a connection to Elizabeth Street on the detailed plan. Nanninga asked do we know they are the approved plans? Wywrot stated no. Nanninga asked if we have a signed set from the City Engineer? Wywrot stated no. Wywrot stated that on the second sheet of the plans showed the entire development, and it showed conceptually all the different lines. On that sheet it shows the line going to Elizabeth Street, but then you go into the body of the plan and it shows in this section more specifically what we are going to do, and in those areas it does not show it. Morris engineering stated that when that permit was issued based on the number of feet, that number did not include that extension to Elizabeth Street. Wywrot stated there is a comment written on the plans, and whether Ron put that on here or we put in on here, it does state that a wider easement is needed. Nanninga stated that the recapture on that line is going to change dramatically if that is the primary water source. Wywrot stated yes it would. Wehrli asked what was meant. Wywrot stated that regarding the water main on Greenbriar Road, as it is the primary source of supply you would only get a recapture on the cost of the increase in size from 8" to 12" rather that the full cost of the 12". Wehrli stated there will be one hell of a lawsuit and that is where I stand. I'm getting totally ripped since Joe brings up everything he wants to do here, I'm not sure who ever he represents, I'm not even sure any more. Wywrot stated he represents The City. Wehrli stated that I've gone through 5 groups of people at the City. I've been told one thing and I've done the best I can, and I'm probably the last developer around here who will sell to individual builders in this area. You are going to have tract builders come in here. I've had it. Nanninga stated well so noted. I think Joe has some valid points and we will carry it that way. Wehrli stated you are hurting your own people. Nanninga stated the standards are not meant to hurt anybody, but they are meant to help. Wehrli stated he doesn't care about the standards I'm talking about how I'm getting shoved. I get threatening letters from Joe Wywrot. Nanninga stated I don't buy into that, I've seen Joe's letters, he is simply asking for conformance. Wehrli stated I have had agreements with Don Peck, and Page 6 Plan Council Minutes May 14, 1997 then Pavia Marting, and I have worked with Tony. I've had my say and I need to know what I need to do to move forward. Nanninga stated you are scheduled for Plan Commission a week from today, May 14th. Wehrli stated and you guys are recommending that I loop the water? Wywrot stated no, I said today when I brought that up that that is unrelated. The other items are, perhaps at least the letters-of-credit both in Unit 3, and as far as the others bringing them up to what is required, and also the payment of fees. Wehrli stated that the fees vs. what I'm out, and I guess that's the legal matter. Palmquist stated a number of these issues are Plan Commission vs. City Council. Nanninga stated Plan Commission shouldn't be affected by that, and asked what is the situation with the park, and the park land dedication? Wywrot stated that the Park Board will accept the park separate from the retention area. They did not accept the retention area,just the park. Wehrli stated he was confused. Wywrot stated the homeowners could take the retention. Wehrli stated then the homes around it would own it and no one else would be allowed on it. Wywrot stated this issue has been talked about at length. Nanninga asked if you want to stop here and go back to the park board? Wehrli stated he would do whatever the council says. Graff stated that who members of the homeowners association would be is confusing and that makes this park an issue and neighbors will be fighting neighbors. Nanninga stated you can't go back and form a homeowners at this point. Wehrli stated he wanted to get it ready and turn it over to the Parks dept. to maintain. Nanninga stated that this was voted on and the Park Board doesn't want it. Graff stated that we could divide it up and have a homeowners assoc.. around it, but the public use will become a problem. Palmquist stated North Aurora had this problem and it was supported by an SSA. Establish an SSA. Nanninga stated that an SSA would work if 50% of the votes are favorable. Wehrli stated he could swing that. Graff stated the opportunity is now, before any more homeowners are in to vote against it due to liability and added costs. The only solution is a homeowners association, or an SSA, and the SSA is the best solution and the opportunity is a small window to do that now. This needs to be done as a homeowners for the entire subdivision and in a partnership situation with the City assisting in getting an SSA, resolve the problem now, and avoid a neighborhood problem. Wehrli stated he would get all the names as necessary, but he will need something legal from the City. Wywrot stated it would be good for the City to be supportive of this. Nanninga stated who will take all of this initiative? Because as it stands now, Ron Wehrli will own that detention area forever. To get an SSA you need more than 50% favorable. Wehrli stated that between him and the builders they owns more than 50%. Graff stated that most homeowners don't want a homeowners association. Wehrli stated can I go back and try to give this to the parks again? Graff stated yes you can try that, but the timing is critical on an SSA to get the 50% vote that is favorable and the public notices and waiting periods that are involved. The City will support an SSA to resolve future problems. Nanninga stated that the City Council may not support an SSA if there is strong opposition by some homeowners. Graff stated that all legal requirements need to be met if the City Council is to accept it. Nanninga stated he would like to know where we are going with this. If we are going to the Plan Commission with this, what are we going to tell them. If we are going to apply for an SSA, that takes time, or if we are going back to the Park Board that takes time. What are we recommending to the Plan Commission? As of right now Ron Wehrli is the owner of this land Page 7 Plan Council Minutes May 14, 1997 forever? Wehrli stated I guess that is where it is. Nanninga stated we will recommend a Homeowners Association be established in Unit III and an SSA be applied for as a back up to provide for the care of the retention area. This has to be done right away so as to not hold up the development of Unit 3. Graff stated that this area can be turned over to the City if there is an SSA for its support, but this SSA needs to be done right away as a back up plan. Wywrot asked how is the amount established? Nanninga stated it is a percentage of the actual value with a maximum. Wehrli stated he would meet with builders now and then with Dan. Nanninga stated we would recommend a homeowners association with a back up SSA for unit III only at this time because that is all Wehrli controls at this time. That gets Ron rolling. The City will work cooperatively with the developer and Crestview/Greenbriar. This will go to Plan Commission 5/14/97. FOX HILL -ROUTE 934 IMPROVEMENTS Wywrot stated that these are the plans and they have gone back and forth between IDOT and the developer for a long time trying to get these plans approved by the state, and trying to get the developer to revise them to get them approved by the state and get the rest of Fox Hill going. This is holding up approval of Unit 5. There are 3 outstanding main issues. There should be completion of the traffic signal. The developer says he won't do this until traffic warrants it. He is now agreeable to do those plans, but as yet he hasn't started them. Once the signal is warranted it should be built. The developer is responsible for 25% of the cost, but it doesn't say who is to pay the other 75%. IDOT has not offered anything on this. Palmquist stated that there may be other developments in the area to help support the signal. Wywrot stated the only other issue is the ditch on the North side of 34 and it runs willy nilly, some of the storm sewers should be changed to have better cover. These comments went to IDOT and they will comment to the developer. Pfister stated the condos are too close to Route#34. Wywrot stated that according to the plan they are OK, but IDOT is looking to widen Route#34. Nanninga asked if you are saying that people weren't listening when they should have been? Palmquist stated yes. STANDARDS ON EXISTING SITES WITH BUILDINGS Wywrot stated we are having increasing requests in situations where there are owners wanting to expand, or add parking on an existing site. How do we approach and handle this as the City. This is development and there are questions as to how far we should go regarding detention, landscaping, etc. Dettmer stated we should give them some information on guidelines. Nanninga asked if we want to set new rules? The ordinance is not clear on this. We have to come to conclusions. Dettmer stated that Joe and he could work as a team. Nanninga stated regarding pavement, any new areas have to paved. Wywrot stated that once we establish what we can, we should enforce those standards as far as development, stormwater retention, etc. Then we need to get a letter-of-credit or bond. Dettmer asked what do we do when they say they are only doing Page 8 Plan Council Minutes May 14, 1997 some minor things, since the owners have been coming to the Inspector first. Nanninga stated he will meet with Dan Kramer, and Dettmer can attend. Dettmer stated for parking they seek a permit and it is referred to Joe. When I see something happening in the field I contact Joe Wywrot. Nanninga stated we don't currently require security for improvements. Palmquist stated this can only be done on a case by case. Nanninga stated we want to encourage expansion. Wywrot asked how do we get the ordinance to cover that. Pfister stated that this needs to be on a case by case basis. Dettmer stated that we need a misc. permit to cover some of these areas. Nanninga stated this will come back to next Plan Council with input from Dan Kramer. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW Palmquist stated he had reviewed the Comp Plan and needs to meet with Wywrot in that regard. Graff stated new aldermen are calling and questioning as there are some minor changes. Nanninga stated the Plan Commission requested colored maps of comp. plan and they did get those. Pfister stated there are some concerns about growing together with the sanitary district. There is an agreement to grow, and annex together. KANE COUNTY COUNCIL OF MAYORS MEETING Graff stated the Kane County Council of Mayors has grant information on engineering for traffic signals for FY98. There is $600,000. in grant money available and they are willing to accept other projects, so if you have any Federally Exempt projects this is a possibility for funding to get them done. They have some resurfacing funds and some other help available, as well as the traffic signals funding. Contact Tom Talsmba, Chairman of the Sub-committee on Transportation for the Kane County Council of Mayors in Geneva. Nanninga stated this needs to be for a non-state route. Pfister stated the only area he could think of that might possibly be eligible is Game Farm Road at the High School. Graff agreed that something needs to be done there before junior high starts going to the old High School. Graff stated they are also looking for someone to attend future meetings. This funding could be something to look at for a new bridge. Wywrot stated that is over $600,000. Graff stated it could be multi-year. Nanninga stated it is OK for follow-up. Graff stated he wondered if we have adopted a standard for bike trails. Nanninga stated that it has been pretty well established now with Roppolo's path at 10'wide and paved. Adjourned Minutes by: Sandy Marker CITY OF YORKVILLE PLANNING COUNCIL May 7, 1997 SIGN IN SHEET PROJECT NAME (PLEASE PRINT!) REPRESENTING PHONE # Joy 1 krk Ot OIL Z7/-0°7-76) ll1f7�-JNeY?-T- 377-62 900 Lj 17/t7l� ZG sY c ©�