Economic Development Packet 2004 03-18-04 Q arUnited City of Yorkville
,
County Seat of Kendall County
esr. tuft 1836 800 Game Farm Road
�ito Yorkville, Illinois 60560
0 II ;7 0 Phone:630-553-4350
Fax:630-553-7575
�
` v
L E
AGENDA
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Thursday, March 18, 2004
7:00 p.m.
City Hall Conference Room
Presentation: Financial Planning for Northeast Land Use Plan Area for Public
Infrastructure of Water, Sewer, and Roads by Peter Rapheal
1. Approval/Correction of Minutes: February 19, 2004
2. Facade Revisions
3. Building Permit Reports for February 2004
4. PC 2001-16 Fox Hill Rezoning
5. PC 2004-02 Triangle Investments Request to Rezone Cornerstone
6. PC 2001-06 Grande Reserve Units 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 — Final Plats
7. Review of the Landscape Ordinance
8. Discussion of Rescheduling the April EDC Meeting Date —April 19th or
April 21st.
9. Additional Business
Page 1 of 4
D F T
UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
YORKVILLE CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 2004
ATTENDANCE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Aldermen Richard Sticka and Joe Besco; and Alderwoman
Wanda Ohare. GUESTS: Mayor Art Prochaska; City Administrator Tony Graff; Kelly
Kramer,representing the City Attorney's office; Richard Young, Kimball Hill Homes;
Bob Nelson; and Lynn Dubajic, Yorkville EDC.
1. Minutes
Minutes from the January 19, 2004 meeting were approved.
2. PC 2003-28 Tanglewood Trails 1.5 mile review
Bob Nelson, owner and developer, stated the plan has gone through a few modifications
from the drawing shown as result of going through the approval process. The green
spaces in the cul-de-sacs have since been removed at the request of the county. Also, he
said the detention pond was reconfigured and made deeper to make a larger park area
near the entrance. And, the Yorkville Park Board has asked him to create a separate lot so
that at some point in the future there could have a park, which could eventually be deeded
from the homeowner's association to the city or a park organization.
The road right-of-way has been increased to 70 feet and the pavement has increased from
24 feet to 28 feet, which is in line with city requirements.
Also, Nelson said he plans to use the list of historic names given to him by the city for
roadways in the development. The main road will be named Wilson Court.
Likewise,Nelson said they have reconfigured the walking path. The path will continue
along High Point Road. They will take the path along the roadway and to the property
line so that it will act more like a sidewalk and it will create a circle path for people to
use.
Nelson added he's signing a pre-annexation agreement in which the development would
automatically become annexed to the city once it becomes contiguous.
Committee Chairman Richard Sticka said there is a page of comments from City
Engineer Joe Wywrot. And Nelson said they agree with the comments and will meet
Wywrot's recommendations.
If the development were to be annexed and the septic or well fails,the residents if they
live within 250 from city lines, must hook onto the city service, said, Kelly Kramer,
representing the city attorney's office.
Page 2 of 4
As far as city staff is concerned, most of the issues have been addressed, Kramer said.
However, Nelson said the one issue still under consideration concerns a hump in one
road. Wywrot is concerned about sight distances for traffic. Wywrot suggested relocating
the street. However, Nelson said the street is in a great location from a structural soil
standpoint and it gives the developers the best septic layout. Obviously, he said they will
need to deal with the sight distance issue either by moving the roadway or dealing with
the crown in the roadway.
City Administrator Tony Graff said the county is recommending a backup SSA and
Nelson said he wants to do one. Also,Nelson said every property line will have a 10-foot
easement for utilities.
Sticka mentioned that the Plan Commission gave its unanimous approval for the project.
The EDC members agreed to give their recommendation and forwarded the matter to the
March 16 Committee of the Whole meeting.
3. PC 2003-29 Whispering Meadow Units 1 and 2—Final Plat
Richard Young, from Kimball Hill Homes, said the developers tried to get started with
some dirt work on neighborhood 1 last year, but were stopped because of the weather.
In all, there are 189 lots in neighborhoods 1 and 2. Young said the developers would like
to get some model homes built as soon as possible this spring in neighborhood one and
would like to do dirt work in both neighborhoods.
Also, he said they have no problems meeting the comments raised by Wywrot. In fact, he
said the marketing representatives in his company have hired specialists and they may
end up improving on the landscaping plan taking it beyond city standards.
In response to a question from Alderwoman Wanda Ohare, Young said that the new
Faxson road will be constructed as roads in neighborhood one are built.
Sticka then asked if the road questions were resolved with the property owners to the
south. Graff said they have been. He said Kimball Hill Homes released the right of way
to a triangular portion at the south of the property and the city will dedicate it as a right of
way. Also, he said they Yabsleys will have part of the roadway as a private drive. Instead
of calling that section Old Faxson Road, he said the city will ask the Yabsleys if they
want to name it.
Likewise, he said Mayor Art Prochaska met with the Illinois Department of
Transportation and IDOT gave consent for an entrance on Remline Road.
Graff added that with the skate park planned at New Life Church, the developers were
asked to put up additional landscaping when the houses get built.
Page 3 of 4
Sticka noted that the Plan Commission gave a unanimous recommendation to the final
plat request.
Graff said the city still needs to look at the park and school site. Young said the park
likely will be in the back of the designated section and the school site will be in the front.
He said the details need to be worked out. He added that Kimball Hifi Homes will put in
a playground or tot lot.
Graff said the storm water engineering for the development will allow for recharging on
the property which will keep the natural flow of water to Blackberry Creek. Plans are to
allow as much water to stay on site as possible before it gets released, he said. There are
also plans to erect a gazebo by the pond.
Ohare commented that the plans seem upscale and that what the developers have
proposed fits the area very well.
The committee decided to bring the request for final plat approval to the Committee of
the Whole tentatively on March 2. The request will come before the city council on
March 23.
4. Building permit reports for December 2003 (revised) and January 2004
The building reports for December 2003 (revised) and January 2004 were accepted.
5. Bank moratorium
Sticka said he asked for the issue to be placed on the agenda because it seems as if prime
commercial space in the city has been going to banks. He asked the committee to
consider if it should look at pursuing a moratorium on banks. Other communities are
pursuing special use permits for banks to limit them, he said.
Mayor Prochaska, however, said generally special use permits are reserved for businesses
such as gas stations and asphalt plant that have some safety issues with them. While
Yorkville is being hit with a proliferation of banks, Prochaska said he believes in true
capitalism. He doesn't believe Yorkville should do anything to restrict the number of
banks coming to the community.
Kramer said she strongly suggests the city not pursue any sort of moratorium on banks
because it would set the city up for a potential lawsuit.
Sticka said he's concerned because it seems the best commercial areas in town are going
to businesses that generate no sales tax. But Kramer said if some sort of moratorium or
special use permit were put into place regarding banks, it would take away the vested
rights of property owners.
Lynn Dubajic, executive director of the Yorkville Economic Development Corporation,
said as most communities grow, banks come first. It seems to be the typical growth
Page4of4
pattern of communities. In a few years as other developments come in, she said the
community won't seem so saturated with banks.
Kramer said while the topic is a good one to bring up, she said she thinks any limitations
would be a hard sell to a court.
Prochaska recently asked representatives from one bank about whey they were interested
in coming to Yorkville. The bank representatives responded that they want to go where
the growth is. They're strategically locating their businesses, he said.
One issue the community needs to address is structural standards for banks, Graff said.
He said Yorkville doesn't want a cookie cutter look. Sticka agreed saying that the city
needs architectural standards for all commercial businesses including banks.
6. Additional business
Ohare said that as more gas stations are built, she doesn't want them all to get permits to
sell liquor. She said the issue of liquor licenses will be coming up at a safety meeting.
iasked about the old jail and said if it is moved as the countyisproposing, what
St cka
would the city do with the property. Mayor Prochaska said since the property is zoned
business, he would encourage the property to be used as such. However, he said at this
point, the city needs to wait and see what happens.
The meeting adjourned at 8 p.m.
Minutes respectfully submitted by Dina Gipe
William Blair & Company
Limited Liability Company
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tony Graff and Traci Pleckham
FROM: Peter Raphael
RE: Waterworks and Sewerage Revenue Bonds
DATE: March 3,2004
I have revised the Summary of Proposed Terms and Cash Flows to reflect the adjusted Sewer Connection
Fee that would be required due to the incorporation of engineering fees as a reimbursable item. Under
this structure we would need to do the following:
1) Sewer Connection Fees—Increase the Sewer Connection Fee to approximately$3,600 ($3,400
net) from$2,000 ($1,800 net). The increase would be in effect until the bonds were retired.
Thereafter,the City would agree to rebate the difference($1,600/unit)back to each developer,
but only from the Sewer Connection Fees generated from within the Service Area.
2) Infrastructure Participation Fees—Rather than having the Fee due at the time of the Plat,the Fee
would be deferred and paid at a rate of approximately 1 acre per every 2 building permits. We
would have to modify our agreement with YBSD,however,the money for the expansion would
be available upfront through the proceeds of the bonds.
3) Annexation Issues —We still need to address the issue of what happens if an"Original
Developer" enters into a Facilities Expansion Agreement that is never annexed.
4) Payment Deferral—The analysis assumes that the bonds are issued in the third quarter of 2004.
The developers would have a one year hiatus before minimum permits were due(third quarter of
2005 or June of 2005).
5) Additional Collateral—Village—We have deleted the requirement for any additional Village
collateral.
6) Additional Collateral—Developers—The City may want to consider requiring each developer to
post a letter of credit equal to one year's Facilities Expansion Fees.
222 WEST ADAMS STREET CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60606 312.236.1600
IIMENNEMMENEMOMMENEMENNOMEMINME
United City of Yorkville,Illinois
Waterworks and Sewerage Revenue Bonds
(Rob Roy Interceptor Project)
Fixed Rate Summary of Proposed Terms
AMOUNT: $9,200,000*
ISSUER: United City of Yorkville
ISSUE: Waterworks and Sewerage Revenue Bonds
PURPOSE: Proceeds will be used to engineer,build and install an interceptor,
forcemain and temporary pump station,to fund a debt service reserve
and capitalized interest on the Bonds and to pay the cost of issuing
the Bonds.
SECURITY: The obligation to make the payments due under the Bonds shall be a
limited obligation of the Village,payable from:
i) Facility Expansion Fees generated within the Service
Area; and
ii) letters of credit from certain developers equal to one
years of such developer's Facilities Expansion Fee; and
iii) a lien against the property for all unpaid Facilities
Expansion Fees.
FACILITY PLANNING The Facility Planning Area subject to the Facilities Expansion
AREA: Agreement will be the approximate land area north of the
Commonwealth Edison Right of Way, south of Baseline Road, west
of Dickson Road and east of Beecher Road all within the United City
of Yorkville.
FACILITIES EXPANSION In order to pay debt service on the Bonds,certain developers within
AGREEMENT: the Facility Planning Area will enter into a Facilities Expansion
Agreement whereby each developer agrees to pay on a quarterly basis
an agreed upon fee(the"Facilities Expansion Fee"). The Facilities
Expansion Fee for each developer will be calculated on the number of
units planned for its development and on the number of acres within
its development. Facilities Expansion Fee payments will act as
credits against each developer's Infrastructure Participation Fee and
Sewer Connection Fee.
FACILITIES EXPANSION Pursuant to a Facilities Expansion Agreement,the Original
FEES: Developers will be required to pay a Facilities Expansion Fee of
approximately$4,350*per unit. The Facilities Expansion Fee shall
be due quarterly beginning in the second quarter of 2005 based on
1/36t of the total units originally available for development x$4,350.
The Facilities Expansion Fee will be deemed a sewer fee.
*Estimated,subject to change
AMENNOMMEIMMINIME
ORIGINAL'DEVELOPERS: The Original Developers that will be subject to the Facilities
Expansion Fee include those developers or parcels known as:
Rosenwinkle Bertrum
Saratoga Brummel
O'Keefe LayCom
Northgate Westbury
Runge Konieck
YORKVILLE BRISTOL The YBSD Infrastructure Participation Fee will be paid upfront out of
INFRASTRUCTURE bond proceeds for all acreage controlled by the Original Developers.
PARTICIPATION FEE: This payment will guarantee capacity for each Original Developer.
YORKVILLE SEWER The Standard Sewer Connection Fee of$2000(currently) will be
CONNECTION FEE: credited as Facility Expansion Fees are paid. Pursuant to a formula,
each Original Developer will be paying approximately$3600 per unit
toward the Sewer Connector Fee via the Facility Expansion Fee. As
additional users develop in the Facilities Planning Area, Original
Developer will be entitled to recapture up to$1600 per unit. See
Recapture Agreement.
RECAPTURE AGREEMENT: Additional users of the improvements in the Service Area will be
required to pay sewer connection fees of$2,000 per unit, $1,800 of
which shall be pledged as security to the Bonds as long as any Bond
remains outstanding. When no Bond remains outstanding, the sewer
connection fees shall be paid to the Original Developers until such
time as each Original Developer's net sewer connection fee is equal
to$2,000 per unit and thereafter paid to the City. See"Facilities
Expansion Agreement."
RATING: To be determined.
INTEREST: Semi-annual interest is payable December 1 and June 1 commencing
June 1, 2004. Interest will be capitalized for the first 12 months.
OPTIONAL REDEMPTION: The Bonds are callable at the option of the Village on any date at a
price of par plus accrued interest.
SOURCES & USES OF Certificate Proceeds $9,200,000
FUNDS: Interest Earning 150 000
Total Sources $9,350,000
Project Fund 7,000,000
Engineering 550,000
Capitalized Interest 552,000(I)
Debt Service Reserve Fund 920,000
Estimated Costs of Issuance 328,000
Total Uses $9,350,000
(1)Interest has been capitalized for 12 months.
PRINCIPAL: Due serially each December 1, commencing December 1, 2006
through December 1, 2014.
DENOMINATIONS: $100,000 or integral multiples of$1,000 in excess thereof.
*Estimated, subject to change
BUILDING PERMIT REPORT
United City of Yorkville
February 2004 .
Types of
Permits
er is
• Number of Permits Issued SFD 2-
Famt1Y Multiple-Family Commercial IndustrialMiscellMiscellaneous TotalCost
February 2004 41 19 0 0 1 0 21 $4,497,798.00
Calendar Year 2004 91 46 0 0 3 0 42 $10,228,279.00
Fiscal Year 2003 I 770 i 310 12 7 29 0 412 $78,777,606.00
February 2003 36 20 0 0 0 0 16 $3,350,501.00
Calendar Year 2003 72 42 0 0 1 0 27 $9,856,470.00
Fiscal Year 2002 23 637 233 4 2 30 1 367 $49,591,559.00
February 2002 43 20 0 0 5 0 18 $4,501,948.00
Calendar Year 2002 3 77 35 2 0 10 0 30 $8,345,648.00
Fiscal Year 20014 5 6 436 168 9 3 27 2 225 $51,426,567.00
February 2001 20 6 1 0 0 0 13 $2,221,968.00
Calendar Year 2001 36 14 1 1 0 0 20 $3,565,668.00
Fiscal Year 2000 78 262 114 3 1 5 0 154 $23,934,000.00
February 2000 15 6 0 0 0 0 9 $788,888.00
Calendar Year 2000 24 8 0 0 0 0 16 $1,060,088.00
Fiscal Year 1999 9 187 67 4 1 8 0 130 $16,242,799.00
I Permit Number Y-2003-324 was voided,thus only 894 of 895 assigned permit numbers were actually issued.
2 The SFD permit issued in August as Y-2002-579 was voided and reissued as Y-2002-691 in October. To maintain a correct count,it shall remain on the August 2002 count.
5 Permit Numbers Y-2002-034,Y-2002-467,and Y.2002-579 were voided,thus only 806 of 809 assigned permit numbers were actually issued.
Permit Number 01490 was voided,thus only 583 of 585 assigned permit numbers were actually used. Also,Permit Number 01478 was for 4 Attached SFDs(Townhomes);reissued as
Permits 01478A,B,C,and D. Also,Permit Number 01480 was for 6 Attached SFDs;reissued as Permits 01480A,B,C,D,E,and F.
3 Permit Number 01385 was for 6 Attached SFDs;reissued as Permits 01385A,B,C,D,E,and F.
6 Permit Number 01259 was for 4 Attached SFDs;reissued as Permits 01259A,B,C,and D.
Permits Number 00122,00189 and 00262 were each for 6 Attached SFDs.
5 Permit Number 00101 was voided,thus only 233 of 234 assigned permit numbers were actually issued.
5 Permit Number 99080 was for 5 Attached SFDs.
UNITED CITY OF
YORKVILLE
Memo
To: Alderman Rich Sticka&EDC Committee
___--
From: Tony Graff_C-1tr Administrator
CC: Mayor, Department Heads, Mike Schoppe, &Atty. Kramer
Date: 3/14/04
Re: Review of the Landscape Ordinance
The current landscape ordinance was established an approved on September 14,
2000 and during the last 12-18 months there have been a few issues and
problems identified by staff, elected officials and citizens. I was instructed by the
Mayor and Alderman Sticka to review and assess the current ordinance, so on
March 5, 2004 a meeting was conducted with staff, consultants, and current
businesses owners who have voiced an interest with reviewing the ordinance. I
have provided a copy of the current ordinance for your reference and review.
Here is a summary of the meeting which began at 9am and ended at 10:40am.
Attendees:
City Representatives:
Alderman Sticka, Bill Dettmer, Mike Schoppe, Jeremy Meek, Eric Dhuse, Joe
Wywrot, and Tony Graff
Business Owners - Consultants
Don Burks (Burks Drywall),Rick Hoover(Spring Green), Wallace Murdy
(Murdy Landscape), Mike Knierim (Windham Homes), Richard Stancu
(Windham Homes & S & K Development), Scott Sanders (McClure
Engineering), and Jim Ratos (Cannonball Run)
Here is a summary of the meeting:
• Landscaping for Industrial usage
o Side yard requirements
1
o Parking lot islands and perimeter areas (snow removal & salt
tolerant issues)
o Light pole spacing—Photometric requirements
o Storm Water quality
o Plant maturity/grow out—maintenance& enforcement
• Property Owner flexibility maybe the standards should have a minimum
and maximum ranges for the amount of landscaping needed for specific
purposes
• A friendlier ordinance in regards to interpretation/understanding terms
• Shorter review time after submittal
• Appeal process
• A pre-conference with staff to discuss requirements and standards
• Credit for existing landscaping
• Definitions in the ordinance for the terms—easy to interpret
• Roadway buffering should begin at street level if the purpose is to screen
the type of business; an example used was the new concrete plant the
landscape wall is below street grade, nice wall but does not screen the
operation of the plant.
• Landscape should compliment adjacent commercial properties
• Review lot coverage requirements for each zoning classifications and the
landscape ordinance ability to have enough green space to plant the
required material; an example would be if a certain zoning class allows
for 70 or 80 % lot coverage which make it difficult to plant all the
material as specified in the ordinance
• Contact the University of Illinois Extension service to request their
assistance to review the ordinance and provide and suggestions
• Develop a Tree preservation and replacement standards
• The trigger for the ordinance to apply based on all building permits needs
to be defined instead of being broad for all permits this causes problems
for current businesses expanding or retooling that need a permit but the
outside isn't changing
• Maybe develop a matrix for design standards for shared property lines,
front yard buffering areas
• Landscaping plan needs to be reviewed at the beginning of the site plan
review process when engineering is submitted and architectural/building
permit review begins
•Page 2
Recommendations:
The meeting discussed many recommendations and areas of concern that
need to be addressed. I am recommending the Economic Development
Committee review the comments and provide any input/feedback for the
staff to review. Staff will prepare a draft to be reviewed by the EDC
Committee and then present the draft for public review/comment period.
Furthermore, I would send copies to the Chamber of Commerce and
University of Illinois Extension service for comments.
Any other thoughts regarding this matter please contact me.
•Page 3
Revised June 27, 2000
STATE OF ILLINOIS ) •
) ss •
COUNTY OF KENDALL ) •
ORDINANCE NO'. 2000- W.
ORDINANCE AMENDING
UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE NO. 99-18
SECTION 1: APPLICABILITY: For all development activity requiring a building
permit in all zoning districts, landscaping shall be provided, as follows:
1. For single family detached and duplex residential development:
a. New Construction: Parkway landscaping, and landscaping adjacent to
primary and secondary arterials and collector.
b. Existing Construction: Parkway landscaping, as required by the City
Council for any conditional use, rezoning, variance or change to a PUD.
2. For all other development, other than single family detached and duplex
residential development; parkway landscaping, perimeter landscaping,parking lot
landscaping, lot landscaping and landscaping adjacent to primary and secondary
arterials shall be required as provided in this Ordinance.
SECTION 2: LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: •
•
The following requirements in this section are cumulative:
1. Parkway Landscaping:
a. For all single fRmily detached and duplex residential development, the
minimum required number of parkway trees are as follows:
1
Interior lots - one tree per lot.
Corner lots -two trees per lot (one tree per side).
All other lots - (such as parks and retention/ detention areas) one tree per
50 lineal feet of frontage.
b. For all development other than single family detached and duplex
residential development, the minimum required number of parkway trees
is one tree per 50 lineal feet of frontage.
c. All parkways shall have minimum of 6 inches of good, clean, clump-free
topsoil neatly leveled to uniform grade from the top of curb to the top of
sidewalk after settling. Trees shall be planted within the public parkway
between the curb and sidewalk.
d. All parkways shall have a good, thick stand of grass utilizing sod or seed
per the IDOT specifications including fertilizing. The developer as
covered by the required maintenance letter of credit will repair any settling
of grass loss during the one-year maintenance period. The minimum
gradient of all parkways toward the curb shall be 2% and the maximum
shall be 8%. All areas shall be seeded or sodded and fertilized in an
approved manner. Grass watering and mowing to a maximum height of 5
inches will be the responsibility of the developer through the one year
required maintenance period after City acceptance. Parkways will be a
minimum of 10 feet in width from the back of the curb to the front edge of
the sidewalk.
e. No tree shall be planted closer than 30' of the right-of-way intersection.
f. Trees shall have a minimum spacing of 20 feet from light poles, street
signs, fire hydrants and any other such items that may, in the opinion of
the Public Works Director, require similar intervals.
g. Trees under wires are not to exceed 20 feet in height at maturity.
h. Parkway trees shall be planted prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy. It shall be the responsibility of the developer or builder to
properly water all newly planted parkway trees at the time of planting, and
subsequently thereafter, to insure their survival for a period of one year
after City Council acceptance of the public improvements.
i. Only approved shade trees may be used as parkway trees.
2
2. Perimeter Landscaping: Perimeter landscaping shall be required for all
developments, other than single family detached and duplex residential
development, in accordance with the following:
a. Non-residential adjacent to residential: Where a non-residential property
is adjacent to residential property a 30' wide buffer yard shall be provided.
The bufferyard shall consist of a berm or architectural masonry wall, at
least 3' in height as measured from the property line. The bufferyard shall
also consist of 2 shade trees, 5 evergreen trees and three ornamental trees
per 100 lineal feet of bufferyard.
b. Non-residential adjacent to a public right of way: Where a non-residential
property is adjacent to a public right-of-way,.a landscape bufferyard shall
be provided and shall be the width of the required parking lot setbacks or
30' whichever is lessor. The bufferyard shall consist of one shade tree, one
evergreen tree and 33 shrubs per 100 lineal feet of bufferyard.
c. Multi-family residential adjacent to single family detached and duplex
residential: Where multi-family residential property is adjacent to single
family detached or duplex residential a 30' landscape bufferyard shall be
provided. The bufferyard shall consist of three shade trees, three
evergreen and two ornamental trees per 100 lineal feet of bufferyard.
3. Parking Lot Landscaping: All parking lots with ten (10) or more parking
spaces, shall provide landscaping in accordance with the following:
a. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping:
1. Interior Landscaping: One tree shall be provided for every 20
parking space and shall be planted within the interior of the
parking lot. Trees shall be located in landscape medians, which
have a minimum area of 190 square feet and a minimum dimension
of 10 feet. The landscape median shall be covered with shrubs,
round cover, turf or organic mulch.
?. Visibility: To ensure proper visibility within the parking lot, the
branches of trees shall start no less than six feet (6') above the
pavement and shrubs shall be maintained at a height of no greater
than 30" above the pavement.
3
Perimeter Parking Lot Landscaping: When a parking lot, which is located
b. d
on a non-residential property, is adjacent to another non-residential
property, a 5'perimeter bufferyard shall be provided along the parking lot.
The buffer yard shall consist of two shade trees and 15 shrubs per 100
lineal feet of buffer yard.
4. Lot Landscaping: Lot landscaping shall be required for all developments other
than single family detached residential and duplex developments in accordance
with the following:
a. Multi-family: Two canopy trees and 15 shrubs shall be provided for every
four units.
b. -on-residential: Two shade trees and 15 shrubs shall be provided for
every 20,000 sf. of lot area.
5. Landscaping Adjacent to Primary and Secondary.Arterials and Collector:
Residential lots which back up to an Arterial or Collector as defined in the
Yorkville Comprehensive Plan, shall provide a minimum 30'wide landscape
easement running the full length of the residential lots. This easement shall he
planted with 3 shade trees, 4 evergreens and 20 shrubs per 100 feet.
6. Storm WaterStorage Basins: A 30'bufferyard shall be provided around storm
water storage basins which are within the front or side yard or 10' from side yard
with 1 tree per 30' foot of storm water basin within 30' of side yard to be planted
between storm water basin and adjacent side lot line. The bufferyard shall be
located above the average elevation between normal water level and the high
water line for retention basins and shall be located above the average elevation
between the lowest basin elevation and the high water line for detention basins. A
10'bufferyard may be allowed here with an additional 1 tree per 30' foot planted
within said 10'bufferyard for the full Iength of the reduced bufferyard allowed.
SECTION 3: GENERAL STANDARDS
1. Landscape Plan: A landscape plan shall be submitted for review and approval.
The landscape plan shall contain the following information:
a. The location and dimensions of all existing and proposed structures,
parking lots, sidewalks, ground signs, refuse disposal areas, free standing
electrical equipment, and other freestanding structural features.
b. Name,location, right-of-way and pavement widths of abutting streets.
1
4
c. The current zoning and land use for adjoining properties and properties
located across abutting streets.
d. The location, quantity, size, and type (both botanical and common names)
of all existing landscaping to be preserved and all proposed landscaping to
be added.
e. The location and contours, at one-foot (1') intervals, of all proposed
berming and storm water detention/retention ponds.
f. Specification of the type and boundaries of all proposed ground cover.
g. Elevation and location of all existing and proposed fences.
h. Location of all existing and proposed utilities and easements.
i. Property line dimensions.
2. Quality: All trees shall be planted according to the minimum standards
established by the American Association of Nurserymen. Plant material shall be
grown in nurseries from the Central or Northern Illinois region.
3. Size: The size of plant material required by this ordinance shall be as follows:
Shade Tree - 2 '/z cal. measured 6" above grade
Evergreen Tree-- 8' height
Ornamental Tree - 6'height
Shrubs =24"
4. Substitutions: For the purposes of providing flexibility in the landscape design
substitutions may be allowed at the following rates:
1 Tree equals 2 Evergreen Trees •
1 Tree equals 2 Ornamental Trees
1 Tree equals 20 Shrubs
5. A mixture of trees is required so that a maximum of 33% of the total amount of
required trees should not be of the same species.
Inspection of the applicant's property will be conducted by the Development
Department after the installation of all materials by the applicant and again after at
least one(1) full growing season has passed.
5
•
6. Alternative Methods of Compliance: Site conditions may arise where normal
compliance is impractical or impossible or where maximum achievement of the
City's objectives can only he obtained through alternative methods.
a. Requests for alternative methods of compliance may be considered by the
City for any application to which the requirements of the Ordinance apply
when one(1) or more of the following conditions are present:
1. Topography, soil, vegetation or other site conditions are such that
full compliance is impossible or impractical, or improved
environmental quality would result from the alternative
compliance.
2. Space limitations or the existing character surrounding
neighborhood may justify alternative compliance for infill sites and
for improvements or redevelopment in older developed areas.
3. A change of use on an existing site increases the screening required
to more than is feasible to provide.
4. Safety considerations make alternative methods of compliance
necessary.
•
b. Requests for alternative methods of compliance shall be accompanied by
sufficient explanation and justification, written and graphic, to allow
appropriate evaluation and decisions by the City Planner.
c. A proposed alternative compliance measure must be equal to or better than
normal compliance in terms of quality, effectiveness, durability, hardiness
and ability to meet the landscape standards of the Ordinance.
d. Alternative compliance shall be limited to the specific project under
consideration and shall not establish precedents for acceptance in other
eases.
7. Credit for Existing Vegetation: Credit shall be given for existing trees that are
preserved. Each tree that is preserved which is greater than 3" caliper and is a
permitted tree per section, shall be credited towards the required tree planting on a
tree for tree basis. Other existing vegetation may be credited towards the required
plantings subject to the review and approval of the City Planner.
8. Permitted Plantings: The plantings used to meet the requirements of this
ordinance shall be selected from the follow list of approved plant material.
6
Shade Trees
Ash, Green Fraxinus pennsylvanica spp.
Ash, White Fraxmnus americana spp.
Coffeetree, Kentucky Gymnocladus dhioica
Ginkgo Ginko biloba
Hackberry Celtis occidentialis
Linden American Tilia americana spp.
Linden, Littecleaf Tilia cordata spp.
Linden, Silver Tilia tomentosa
Maple, Black Acer nigrum
Maple,Norway Acer platanoides spp.
Maple, Red Acer rubrum spp.
Maple, Sugar Acer saccharum spp.
Oak,Burr Quercus macrocarpa
Oak,Red Quercus rubra
Oak, Swamp White Quercus bicolor
Oak, White Quercus alba
Pear,Bradford Pyrus cahleiyana
Sycamore Platanus occidentahis
Tuliptree Liriodendron tuhipifera
Evergreen Trees
Fir,Douglas Pseudotsuga menziesil
Fir, White Abies coneolor
Pine,Austrian Pinus nigra
Pine, Scotch Pinus sylvestris
Pine, White Pinus strobus
Spruce,Blackhills Picea glauca"densata"
Spruce, Colorado Picea pungens
Spruce,Norway Picea abies
Spruce, White Picea glauca
Ornamental Trees •
Alder Alnus glutinosa
Birch, River Malus spp.
Hawthorne,Downy Craetoegus mollis
Hawthorne,Washington Craetoegus phaenopynu,
Hawthorne, Thorn less Cockspur Crataegus crusgalli "inermis"
Hornbean, American Carpinus caroliniana
Lilac, Japanese Tree Syringa reticulata
7
Magnolia, Saucer Magnolia souulangiana
Magnolia, Star Magnolia stellata
R'edbud Cercis canadensis
Servicebeny, apple Amelanchier grandiflora
Serviceberry, Shadblow Amelanchier canadensis
Shrubs
Those species and varieties hardy to USDA Zone 5.
Other plant material not listed may be allowed on a case by case basis as
determined by the City Planner.
9. Severability: The various parts, sections, and clauses of this Ordinance are
hereby declared to be severable. If any part, sentence, paragraph, section, or
clause is adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by a Court of competent
jurisdiction, the remainder of the Resolution shall not be affected thereby.
10. Repealer: Any Ordinance or parts thereof in conflict with the provisions of this
Ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict.
_
c)x.)‘A DAVE DOCKSTADER
RICHARD STICKA MIKE ANDERSON
VALERIE BURD Jibl ROSE SPEARS
LARRY KOT THOMAS SOWINSKI
APPROVED by me, as Mayor of the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois,
this Day of S 5,,nl / , A.D. 2000.
MAYOR
8
PASSED by the City Council of the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois
this\ Day of , A.D. 2000.
Attest: 0...the4:4.-A714 44rr irrc.`wo
CITY CLERK
•
Prepared by:
Law Offices of Daniel J. Kramer
1107A S. Bridge Street
Yorkville, Illinois 60560
630.553.9500
9