The URL can be used to link to this page

Plan Commission Packet 2008 04-09-08 ,sf,v Cir o United City of Yorkville i•,_ '" 800 Game Farm Road EST. - 1836 Yorkville, Illinois 60560 ! Telephone: 630-553-4350 lux Fax: 630-553-7575 67<CE 1,•Y PLAN COMMISSION AGENDA Wednesday, April 9, 2008 City Council Chambers 800 Game Farm Road Revised: 4/7/08 This meeting has been cancelled. K*.0 co.). United City of Yorkville 800 Game Farm Road Est 1836 Yorkville, Illinois 60560 Telephone: hone: 630-553-4350 09 ��`-3— p Fax: 630-553-7575 PLAN COMMISSION AGENDA Wednesday, April 9, 2008 City Council Chambers 800 Game Farm Road Meeting Called to Order: 7:00 p.m. Roll Call: Previous Meeting Minutes: February 13, 2008 March 12, 2008 Public Hearings: 1. PC 2008-06 Titanium Investment Properties, LLC, petitioner, has filed an application with the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, requesting a special use for a daycare. The real property consists of 1 acre, located in Lot 3, Prairie Point Subdivision, Yorkville, Illinois, 60560 and is zoned B-3. Action Items - Special Use 2. PC 2008-03 The United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, is considering amending Chapter 14 Section 10-14.7 (B) 2. of the Yorkville Zoning Ordinance to require applicants to give notice to the owners or occupants of other properties affected by annexation, re-zoning and special use requests. Action Items - Amendment to Ordinance Page 1 of 6 DRAFT UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PLAN COMMISSION YORKVILLE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Wednesday, February 13, 2008 7:01pm Chairman Anne Lucietto called the meeting to order at 7:01pm. Roll Call: Sandra Adams Clarence Holdiman Tom Lindblom Mike Crouch Jack Jones Anne Lucietto Absent: Charles Kraupner, John Hegeler, Brian Schillinger, Jeff Baker Other City Staff: Travis Miller, Community Development Director Gary Golinski, Alderman Stephanie Boettcher, Senior Planner Guests: Tony Graff Mike Schoppe Dan Kramer Attorney Matt Schury,Kendall County Record Gregg Ingemunson Lynnette Neal, Depo Court Bill Dunn, EEI Richard Scheffrahn, Rogina& Assoc. Kelly Kramer, Attorney Michelle Moses Lumie Emini Myles Jacobs, Attorney-Sunny Valley Farm Carolyn Pottinger Edward Block, Sunny Valley Farm Willa Bretthauer Gary Bretthauer Bill Mortl Walt & Kathy Sullivan Hal Davis Paula Wilkinson, Realtor Michelle Cullen Kathy Kotelis Glenn Fiala Ralph &Peggie Legrand Jim Brown, RayCorp Atty. Bob Kenny, Raycorp Atty. Tom Ray, Raycorp Emo Furfori, Schoppe Design Adalma Stevens Roll Call: A quorum was established. Previous Meeting Minutes: January 9, 2008 The minutes were approved as read on a motion and second by Lindblom and Holdiman respectively. Approved unanimously on voice vote. Page 2 of 6 Chairman Lucietto simultaneously swore in all those attendees wishing to speak at this meeting. Public Hearings 1. PC 2007-39 Hattner Trust#1, petitioner, has filed an application requesting annexation and zoning from Kendall County A-1 Agriculture to the B-3 Service Business zoning for approximately 28 acres, 14 acres of R-2 Multi-Family Zoning and 51 acres of R-1 Single Family zoning. Crouch and Lincblom moved and seconded,respectively, to open the Hearing. Unanimous approval on voice vote. Attorney Dan Kramer represented the petitioner, Annette Hattner, whose property is at Rte. 47 and Walker Road. They were requesting recommendation for annexation and flex zoning in the PUD. (SEE COURT REPORTER'S DEPOSITION OF PUBLIC HEARING) A motion was made by Jones and seconded by Adams, to close the Public Hearing at 7:10pm. Discussion: Crouch commented that this petition was not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and exceeds the density recommendations. Jones, Adams and Holdiman agreed. Crouch questioned the appropriateness of commercial that is planned here due to more intense commercial slated for north and south of the property. Miller presented the staff reports and said that the commercial portion is not consistent with the commercial frontage. The Comp Plan hopes to control expansion along Rt. 47 so that it is not all the same. There are three concept plans for this property and also an annexation agreement. Because of that, Miller said some flexibility could be allowed. Bill Dunn of EEI commented that with the passage of the new Wetland Ordinance, there may be some higher standards that would need to be followed. Tom Lindblom raised a legal concern, asking if 14 acres of multi-family would automatically be approved if the zoning were granted. Kramer said they would have that right under the flex zoning, but in order to adhere to staff recommendations, they would not exceed the density per acre indicated. Kramer said he would work with staff on the recommendations and include in the PUD. Page 3 of 6 Action Items i. Annexation Lindblom made a motion and Jones seconded that motion, to recommend to the City Council that the property be annexed when it becomes contiguous. A roll call vote was taken: Jones-aye, Lindblom-aye, Holdiman-aye, Crouch-aye, Adams-aye, Lucietto-aye. Unanimous vote. ii. Zoning Discussion: Crouch asked if there was any flexibility if the preliminary and final came back later and the PUD was approved. Miller said it would be tied to the density and number of units. Crouch was concerned since 3 options were presented in the request. Lindblom moved and Crouch seconded that motion to recommend approval of PUD zoning, subject to staff comments and knowing this matter will come back to the Plan Commission on two additional occasions. Roll call: Lindblom-aye, Holdiman-aye, Crouch-aye, Adams-aye, Jones-aye, Lucietto- aye. Unanimous approval. 2. PC 2007-42 Jake Land Group filed an application requesting annexation and zoning. Currently the property is zoned A-1 County and B-3 Service Business. The petitioner requests a zoning classification to Planned Unit Development for uses permitted in the B-3 Service Business District, "O" Office District,R-4 General Residence District for Assisted Living and R-2, Age Targeted Two-Family Residence District. The property consists of 52.44 acres and is located at 8614 Route 71. Jones moved and Adams seconded to open this Public Hearing. Unanimous voice vote. Attorney Dan Kramer was present on behalf of the petitioner. (SEE COURT REPORTER'S DEPOSITION OF PUBLIC HEARING) (SEE ALSO A LETTER FROM GLENN FIALA, READ BY MR. FIALA DURING PUBLIC HEARING AND A LETTER FROM VICTORIA COVENY, BOTH TO BECOME PART OF OFFICIAL MINUTES). Crouch and Jones moved and seconded, respectively,to close the Public Hearing. Approved unanimously on a voice vote. Page 4 of 6 Discussion: Travis Miller presented the staff comments relating to the difference of the 2 plans, also the access point, turn lane and others. The concept plan showed 2 possible uses: daycare center or gas station. Attorney Kramer stressed there is a need for daycare. Several Commission members said the plan appeared to be laid out very well and was much improved. Jones commented that he liked Concept Plan#1 with age-restricted townhomes and more green space. And Crouch added that he was pleased to see the light and intersection were addressed. Jones also said that Mr. Fiala's letter should be considered regarding tree preservation. Bill Dunn of EEI asked that EEI comments be included in the recommendations. He said the following two things should be noted: 1) potential water zone break 2) insure that the outfalls do not affect adjoining properties. Action Items: i. Annexation Crouch moved and Jones seconded to approve annexation of PC 2007-42. Roll call vote: Holdiman-aye, Crouch-aye, Adams-aye, Jones-aye, Lindblom-aye, Lucietto-aye. Unanimous approval of motion for annexation. ii. Zoning Miller read the findings/criterion for special uses. A motion was then made by Lindblom and seconded by Crouch, to recommend zoning as presented. Roll call vote: Crouch-aye, Adams-aye, Jones-aye, Lindblom-aye, Holdiman-aye,, Lucietto-aye. Approved unanimously. iii. Concept PUD Crouch moved and Jones seconded,to approve the concept PUD with a preference for Plan#1, subject to staff comments. Roll call vote: Adams-aye, Jones-aye, Lindblom-aye, Holdiman-aye, Crouch-aye, Lucietto-aye. Unanimous approval. 3. PC 2007-24,Don Kalant,petitioner filed an application requesting rezoning from R-2 to B-2. The property consists of 0.3 acres located at W. Center St. A motion was made and seconded by Crouch and Jones, respectively, to open the Public Hearing. Attorney Gregg Ingemunson was present on behalf of the petitioner. (SEE COURT REPORTER'S DEPOSITION OF PUBLIC HEARING) Crouch moved and Jones seconded to close the Public Hearing. Approved unanimously on a voice vote. Page 5 of 6 Discussion: Crouch expressed concern that there is a road cut on Rt. 47 halfway between Spring and Center,making traffic worse. Commission members agreed this area should remain residential. Action Item i. Rezoning Crouch moved and Jones seconded, to approve the rezoning as requested in PC 2007-24, from R-2 to B-2. Prior to the vote, the findings for a zoning amendment were reviewed by Chairman Lucietto. Roll call vote: Adams-nay, Jones-nay, Lindblom-nay, Holdiman-nay, Crouch-nay, Lucietto-abstain. Motion failed. Jones cautioned that this Commission is merely advisory in nature and this negative recommendation could be overridden by City Council. Mr. Ralph Legrand, a nearby resident of the property in question, asked if residents would be notified regarding this matter. The request will appear on future EDC and City Council agendas. Victoria Coveny also asked that a system be put in place so that residents are properly notified for such zoning requests. Chairman Lucietto stated that this would be addressed in"New Business"with a request for a zoning amendment. 4. PC 2007-41,Raycorp, petitioner filed an application requesting rezoning from R-2 Duplex Two-Family District to a PUD to allow for uses allowable within the B-3 Service Business Zoning Classification. The property consists of 23.95 acres located at 10312 Rt. 71. Crouch moved and Jones seconded a motion to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Bob Kenney, Attorney, represented Raycorp. (SEE COURT REPORTER'S DEPOSITION OF PUBLIC HEARING) At the conclusion of the Public Hearing, Crouch moved and Jones seconded to close the Hearing. Unanimous approval on voice vote. Discussion: Miller presented the staff comments and noted a correction on the agenda— the second action item" Concept PUD" should be struck. Jones asked that the nearby landowners' comments from the Public Hearing be considered in the decision and also new design standards applied. Holdiman noted that the area is landlocked with the Forest Preserve on one side and ag land on the other. This plan is not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan according to Crouch. Chairman Lucietto reviewed the list of 6 standards. Page 6 of 6 In relationship to the stoplight, there was discussion from area residents concerning drivers taking shortcuts through their subdivision. Chairman Lucietto suggested that concerned residents be included in the planning process. Action Item i. Rezoning Lindblom made a motion for rezoning from R2 duplex to B3 Service Business Zoning subject to staff comments, citizen input, concessions for traffic and citizen input from the design level. Second by Jones. Roll Call vote: Jones-aye, Lindblom-aye, Holdiman-aye, Crouch-nay, Adams-nay, Lucietto-nay. Motion defeated. New Business: 1. Suggested amendment to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 14 Section 7-B-2. Amendment necessary to make the ordinance and the current application requirements/procedures consistent. Miller said that next month there will be 2 amendments recommended for the Zoning Ordinance and there will be a Public Hearing. He stated this resulted from certified mail notices not being sent out in the Kalant petition heard earlier. There is currently a discrepancy between the Zoning Ordinance and the instructions in the application. The City Attorney said the Plan Commission is responsible to determine who the affected parties are in an application and to notify them. After a review of 2007 petitions, it was determined that the Kalant case was the only situation that notifications had not been made. In another matter, Miller said the EDC has recently been discussing a possible policy regulating the location of financial institutions. The reason for this action is because banks do not generate sales tax for the City. Staff has worked with EDC to possibly view banks as special use facilities and they have asked the Plan Commission to consider the idea and a Public Hearing will be held. 2. Comprehensive Plan Update and Open House Stephanie Boettcher, City Senior Planner, presented a flier detailing a public open house scheduled for March 5th at the Library. She also gave an overview of recent meetings held. Chairman Lucietto encouraged all Plan Commission members to attend. The Chairman summarized the recently held Planning Consortium and said the next meeting is March 24. There was no further business and Crouch moved and Jones seconded to adjourn the meeting. Adjourned 9:05pm. Minutes by Marlys Young, Minute Taker UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS MEETING OF THE PLAN COMMISSION REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS taken at the meeting of the Yorkville Plan Commission for the United City of Yorkville, taken on February 13 , 2008 , at the hour of 7 : 00 p.m. , before Lynette J. Neal , C. S .R. , at Yorkville City Hall , Yorkville, Illinois . D-838608 DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 2 1 PRESENT: 2 MS . ANNE LUCIETTO, Chairman, 3 MR. MICHAEL CROUCH, 4 MR. BRIAN SCHILLINGER, 5 MR. JEFF BAKER, 6 MR. TOM LINDBLOM, 7 MR. JACK JONES, 8 MR. TRAVIS MILLER, 9 MS . MARLYS YOUNG, 10 MS . SANDRA ADAMS, 11 MR. CLARENCE HOLDIMAN. 12 - - - 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 3 1 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: We have four public 2 hearings . You do need to be sworn in if you are 3 going to speak, so think carefully. If you think 4 you are going to speak, swear in, and if you think 5 you might and you are not sure, swear in. 6 I 'm going to ask you to stand up 7 and repeat after me . 8 (The audience was duly 9 sworn. ) 10 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Thank you. The way 11 we are going to handle this is - - okay. what we 12 are going to do, if you do have a copy of agenda, 13 there are some up front . We are going to go 14 through each one . We are going to have the 15 presenters present their situation. That will be 16 your time to ask questions or make comments or 17 statements, and then we will close that part of 18 the public hearing, and then we will have our 19 discussion and take a vote. So it is all going to 20 happen -- and what I 'm going to ask you to do, 21 when your part ' s done and you want to leave, just 22 quietly leave. And if you could go closer to the 23 outside doors and talk, it makes it difficult for 24 us otherwise because we still hear your voices and DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 4 1 we would like to give everybody the same attention 2 your project has . 3 So I entertain a motion to open the 4 public hearing PC 2007-39 . 5 MR. JONES : So moved. 6 MR. LINDBLOM: Second. 7 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: I have a first and 8 second. All in favor say aye? 9 (Chorus of ayes . ) 10 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: We are now in public 11 hearing PC 2007-39 . When you come up to speak, if 12 you could kindly state your name and where you 13 live and proceed from there . We have a court 14 reporter and she ' s taking all of this down. 15 MR. KRAMER: Thank you. My name is 16 Daniel J. Kramer. My address is 1107A South 17 Bridge Street, Yorkville, Illinois . I am an 18 attorney licensed to practice law in the State of 19 Illinois, and I represent the petitioner, Annette 20 Hattner. 21 This property, as you can see by 22 the conceptual plan that Emo has put up on the 23 board, is located just slightly north of the 24 intersection of Route 47 as the north/south road DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 5 1 and Walker Road as the east/west road in Kendall 2 Township. It is not currently contiguous to the 3 city but it is well within the one-and-a-half mile 4 planning jurisdiction of the city. 5 You ' re probably asking us in some 6 respects giving market conditions currently what 7 the dickens are you doing here tonight? And 8 Annette has lived in the area a long time. She ' s 9 served on the Kendall County regional plan to commission and she ' s seen these ebbs and flows 11 over the last 20 years in Kendall County. And 12 really what we are doing is setting the table 13 tonight . 14 We know the City of Yorkville has 15 looked at its comprehensive planning well to the 16 south. They were very mindful of the westward 17 expansion of the City of Joliet and frankly 18 Annette wants to make sure the property is 19 governed by the City of Yorkville. She also wants 20 to make sure she has a seat at the table of the 21 sanitary sewer interceptor that the city put in 22 some years ago together with the Weisman Hughes 23 and Menards project . In other words, that giant 24 interceptor that crossed the road that looked DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 6 1 incredibly big for future growth at the time, but 2 there is only going to be so much capacity in 3 that . 4 So we are asking you folks for two 5 things : We asking you for a recommendation to the 6 City Council to annex the subject property, and we 7 would enter into a written annexation agreement 8 which you are permitted to do with a property 9 owner in the mile-and-a-half, and then we are 10 asking for some flex zoning within the PUD it request . 12 Again, with this being future 13 development, we have looked at the comprehensive 14 plan and at the front, or the westernmost portion 15 of the property, we think that it should have some 16 commercial zoning at this point . In the future if 17 you get large regional or medium-sized regional 18 centers, your comprehensive plan generally says to 19 put those right at the intersection. But, again, 20 we see this as probably a six-lane cross-section 21 of Route 47 in the near future when that ' s 22 improved, four through lanes and turn lanes in 23 each direction, and so this property is going to 24 sit just a little bit -- there is one little DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 7 1 square of 30 acres that ' s right on the northeast 2 corner of the intersection and we sit right above 3 it . 4 Ideally we think it would be a 5 neighborhood type center, maybe about 14 to 15 6 acres . And, again, the reason we are suggesting 7 putting this as a B-3 , as a commercial now or even 8 a B-2 neighborhood type commercial zoning, is if 9 it turns out that the commercial is all clustered 10 at the intersection, it is very easy to down zone 11 to the residential . 12 However, if you get county homes or 13 county subdivisions backing up to a residential 14 and it turns out that you want more commercial, 15 you want more office on 47 as one of the 16 communities commercial arteries, it is very, very 17 difficult to go the other way from residential up 18 to commercial . 19 Emo did just classic land planning 20 from Shoppe Design in that we show a second tier 21 or a buffer between the commercial and 22 single-family, that we would have a maximum of 14 23 acres of multifamily housing. Again, we are way 24 too early in the game to know what form that would DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 8 1 take. would it be townhomes, could it be active 2 adult, could it be assisted living, could it be 3 duplexes? It could be a whole range of products 4 but, again, it is classic land planning to buffer 5 that commercial from single-family. 6 And then we show the third tier in 7 the back as being single-family, your more 8 restricted zoning. Again, as you are moving out 9 in the country, you want to feather into larger 10 lots, not your minimum sized lots, and that ' s 11 something we worked with the staff on the PUD 12 agreement . 13 So we think the flex zoning makes 14 sense, setting maximum acreages for the three 15 kinds . We are certainly going to be back here as 16 the area develops with preliminary plans, with a 17 final PUD, and you are going to have two full 18 shots at how it is going to develop, but we think 19 it is a good piece of business for the property 20 owner and the city to get control of it and get it 21 in the City and, again, give yourselves some 22 flexibility in the future market conditions . 23 We don' t know what it will bring 24 but we know when it heats up, it will be a prime DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 9 1 piece of property on a major artery. So, thank 2 you, and I will be happy to respond to any 3 audience questions we get . 4 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Any questions or 5 comments from the group? Okay. I will give you a 6 second chance. Okay. 7 Hearing none, I 'm entertaining a 8 motion to close PC 2007-39 public hearing. 9 MR. LINDBLOM: So moved. 10 MS . ADAMS : Second. 11 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Hearing closed. 12 (whereupon a portion of the 13 hearing was not herein 14 transcribed. ) 15 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: The next item that 16 we ' re going to take up is PC 2007-42 , the Jake 17 Land Group. I will entertain a motion for the 18 planning commission to open the public hearing. 19 MS . ADAMS : So moved. 20 MR. CROUCH: Second. 21 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: All in favor say 22 aye? 23 (Chorus of ayes . ) 24 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Are you here for DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 10 1 that too? 2 MR. KRAMER: My name is still Daniel J. 3 Kramer. My address is 1107A South Bridge Street 4 Yorkville, Illinois . I 'm an attorney licensed to 5 practice law in the State of Illinois and I 6 represent the petitioners in this action. 7 Emo Furfori from Shoppe Design is 8 here with me tonight - - and I think your drawing 9 is going. It may have been operator error by the 10 gentleman who put that together, which was me 11 unfortunately. 12 This property was before you for a 13 public hearing probably about 90 to 120 days ago, 14 and it was, as you can see, a very crucial or 15 important intersection for the future development 16 of the City of Yorkville . It is at the 17 intersection of Route 126 and Route 71, generally 18 northeast and going southeast of that intersection 19 as it is now reconfigured with the new light . 20 we have got a lot happening out in 21 that area and the triangle between the old 22 intersection, as you know, we annexed and rezoned 23 about 100 acres for Edward Hospital from 24 Naperville to build a large campus facility over a DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 11 1 number of years out here. We have had some office 2 zoning to the west of that intersection on the 3 north side of Route 126 that we all hope takes off 4 as, again, the market comes back and develops . 5 And I think probably the biggest 6 feature or question that we had in terms of this 7 property when we were here before is the 8 interfacing with the Country Hills development to 9 our west and then the residential developments 10 that sat to the south and then a very important 11 consideration in a county that we are still 12 primarily area wide an agricultural county, our 13 relationship with our farm neighbors to the east 14 and north of Route 126 . 15 One of the very big practical 16 difficulties that the partnership had with this 17 property when we first came to you -- and, Emo, if 18 you can show them on the drawing -- what we had 19 just east of the intersection of Route 126 and 20 Route 71, we did not have under contract property 21 on the south side that would let us get further 22 away from the intersection than 500 feet . And 23 that was a terrible design issue, because IDOT 24 would prefer to see something in the nature of a Depocourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 12 1 thousand feet as a minimum for a full access and 2 yet, you know, if you talk to every banker or gas 3 station that wants to go on a corner, they want 4 cuts right on that corner. 5 So what we did after that hearing 6 and working with staff is we attempted to arrive 7 at some compromise that would work, and the 8 petitioners went out and they were able to get 9 another property on the south side of 126 under 10 contract . And what that enabled us to do was 11 slide that main intersection another 240 feet to 12 the east . So, as you see in your staff report 13 tonight, we probably bridged the hardest gap we 14 had to do in that we now have our main 15 intersection 740 feet from 71 and 126, which staff 16 is supporting, the City is supporting. 17 We have been down to IDOT on a 18 meeting and unfortunately, with their short 19 staffing situation, they were hoping to get back 20 to us before Christmas . We haven' t gotten final 21 clearance but the permit gentleman there, Rich 22 Balorini, feels that with the City' s positive 23 recommendation and with the owner doing everything 24 they could to push it to the east, that it will DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 13 1 come out positive. 2 A second goal with the property, 3 again, was finding a suitable compromise between 4 our neighbors, as I said, our residential ones to 5 the south. Originally the proposal was commercial 6 on the front and a little bit -- I mean, if you 7 were coming from a more urban area, it wasn' t 8 heavy townhome density but heavier than you like 9 to see here in Yorkville. 10 And, Emo, if you can take me 11 through the different designs you did as far as 12 the residential alternatives adjacent to Country 13 Hills and the subdivision to the south, please. 14 MR. FURFORI : what I did do is brought 15 the previous plan so that might help everybody 16 understand how it has changed. And, again, this 17 is the plan from about August of last year and -- 18 and this is the area of townhomes that Dan was 19 referring to. And, again, this was the older 20 configuration so that distance right there, that 21 full access point from Route 71 and 126 , was about 22 500 feet . 23 This is a parcel that ' s been 24 acquired, a sliver of that, and enabled us to push DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 14 1 that down. we heard staff comments and heard plan 2 commission comments from last time about the 3 density, we had an opportunity to revisit this 4 area. The balance of the plan has changed as 5 well . The eastern portion is fairly consistent, 6 but what you will see when we bring up the first 7 of the two plans is this change to the western 8 portion, specifically the multifamily component . 9 And this concept plan, what we are 10 referring to as Concept Plan 1, now addresses 11 that . You have got three townhome units for a -- 12 three buildings for a total of 16 units and that ' s 13 the extent of the multifamily component now. An 14 additional component integrated into this plan but 15 different from a typical townhome component would 16 be this dark brown unit right there, which would 17 be an assisted living component, three stories, 99 18 units of assisted living. 19 So we have got a pretty drastic 20 change in the number of townhomes and we are 21 envisioning these to be potentially age-targeted 22 townhomes as before they would be a typical 23 townhome development . 24 MR. KRAMER: Go ahead, Emo, with the DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 15 1 others . 2 MR. FURFORI : Sure . We will go ahead 3 and talk about the balance of the plan. This is 4 the new plan so this now reflects about 740 feet 5 of distance separation from the intersection and 6 it will be considered a full access point now. 7 And then all the way south on the plan now we 8 have -- we are envisioning another full access 9 point about 700 feet from the two full access 10 points . That ' s as far as we could go and be 11 allowed in the plan with the subject property that 12 we own. 13 Some of the other components -- and 14 let me just jump back for a second. I think when 15 you see them contrasted, you can see how much the 16 plan has evolved both internally from our end but 17 definitely hearing staff comments and plan 18 commission comments over the last year. 19 The configuration of what is the 20 retail and office component is still basically 21 located in this area of the western portion of the 22 plan but it will look a lot different . The 23 stormwater, there is a bigger basin there and one 24 right at the corner, and then this is an existing DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 16 1 pond and there is a small component of stormwater 2 management there. In the previous plan about a 3 year ago we were envisioning possibly a potential 4 banquet facility. 5 So now we have -- we are looking 6 about a year later, petitioners had some 7 discussions with potential buyers of the property, 8 we firmed up some things, and the biggest thing to 9 notice is there is a different configuration to 10 this portion of the retail and office component . 11 We provided a stub to the west into 12 the Boyer property. This access point off of 71 13 is right-in/right-out but what you are looking at 14 now is a few components that are pretty set . A 15 potential bank facility there, potential gas 16 station there, some retail components, and then a 17 larger strip of retail, and then another 18 configuration with the balance of the shared 19 parking concept for all of these uses concentrated 20 up there. 21 The detail of the stormwater 22 management ponds on either side of the 23 intersection has been addressed as well . We have 24 been working more closely with the landscape DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 17 1 ordinance and working on the need for signage up 2 there that would identify this portion of the site 3 and the whole site but specifically on the west 4 end, this one . 5 we also have an office component 6 now to the north of the existing pond there, four 7 buildings around that area, and then I mentioned 8 before that there is a three-story 99 unit 9 assisted living component there too. 10 In this plan the banquet facility 11 is gone and in its place are two smaller retail 12 lots along 126 . And, again, this is a full access 13 point, connects all the way around, and to there 14 there will be a right-in/right-out and that brings 15 you to the north end or east end of the plan as 16 well . 17 I will talk briefly about the east 18 end. It is pretty consistent with where we were a 19 year ago. A number of retail office and 20 restaurant uses configured along Route 71 as more 21 or less an access drive to the south of that and 22 that connects to the full access point here. This 23 full access point here now connects in -- more in 24 a direct line into the larger user there . And DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 18 1 while this parcel has now been brought in, 2 whatever the future holds, this full access point 3 we can envision working with this petitioner, or 4 certainly the village would, to make this a 5 potential access point into this user utilizing 6 the full access point . 7 The stormwater management on the 8 east end is fairly consistent . There are four 9 main basins that there were before. The Penman 10 Road alignment is consistent with where it was it before. So east end fairly consistent with where 12 we were before . The biggest changes is the west 13 end, the drop in the number of townhome 14 components, and now the addition of the assisted 15 living components, a reconfiguration of the office 16 in here, and a bigger reconfiguration and a more 17 organized look to the retail component on that 18 portion of the site. 19 MR. KRAMER: Thank you, Emo. With 20 respect to the third element I talked about, when 21 we were here for our initial public hearing, I 22 know a representative -- I believe at the time it 23 was Attorney Ingemunson that was here for the 24 Block family -- and they had made a couple of DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 19 1 concerns known to us . There has been some zoning 2 activity out adjacent to their property before 3 where they have requested some landscaping in 4 terms of fencing and berming, which we indicated 5 in the first hearing we have no objection to and 6 that still stands . 7 Also, again, whenever you develop 8 at the edge of a town, you have drainage issues . 9 They don' t have to be a problem but they need to 10 be addressed. And Mrs . Block shared with me 11 before the meeting tonight who their engineer is 12 which we could put our engineer in touch with, and 13 then there is also the issue that we have always 14 included in our Kendall County and City of 15 Yorkville PUD annexation agreements, and that is 16 that right-to-farm easement language that not only 17 this developer but anybody who buys from them 18 waives any right to object to odors, smell, hours 19 of operation, for protection for the ag/non-ag 20 use. we are good with any of those . 21 So we are happy to take any public 22 comments and we will address that . At the end of 23 the night we would ask for a positive 24 recommendation to annex the portions that are not DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 20 1 already in the City, because it is mixed in that 2 sense, and we would ask for approval of the PUD 3 zoning. Thank you. 4 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: We did have one 5 letter. Glen, I believe that was yours? Did you 6 want that entered into the public record or would 7 you like to read it? 8 MR. FIALLA: Okay. My name is Glen 9 Fialla. I live at 914 Farm Hedge (phonetic) 10 Court, Yorkville . My property is at the southwest 11 corner of that drawing. We are way at the bottom 12 where that little secondary pond is . My property 13 is right behind that . 14 And with regard to that, as a 15 resident with property adjacent to the 52 . 44 acres 16 located at 8614 Route 71, Yorkville, Illinois, 17 several concerns come to mind. We have seen 18 conceptual plat drawings of windmill farms and 19 agree that Yorkville has a need for additional 20 age-restricted homes . Affordable assisted living 21 is a plus . Those would be high on our priority 22 list that would be -- the assisted living center 23 not to exceed two stories . Provisions for the 24 agreement and zoning to spell out no high-density DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 21 1 housing should ever be allowed. Dry or aerated 2 retention areas would be necessary to breeding of 3 mosquitos and the problem with the West Nile 4 virus . 5 In the six years we have lived 6 here, we have enjoyed the nature setting. The 7 property has wildlife and nature abounding. Water 8 runoff has never been a problem with the present 9 topography. An environmental friendly parking 10 area should also be taken into consideration. 11 There are many trees with a number of tags . We 12 only hope that these are ones that will -- ones 13 that will stay and have a 25-foot no big radius 14 applied. 15 A row of large evergreen trees on 16 the west side of the property should most 17 definitely be preserved. The trees are in good 18 health and are located adjacent to our property. 19 We consider this to be an excellent buffer and 20 should not be removed. I sent a photograph with 21 that . 22 Thoughtful attention should be 23 taken to all the already over-burdened 24 infrastructure. Will the type of buildings being DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 22 1 built all be revenue-producing for Yorkville, that 2 is sales tax? Will the overall appearance of the 3 property be landscaped? And in closing we would 4 like to say thank you for giving us an opportunity 5 to express our concerns . Sincerely, Glen Fialla. 6 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Thank you. 7 MR. KRAMER: I think most of his points 8 were well taken. we will take them into 9 consideration, obviously ask for a copy of the 10 letter so we can respond. And frankly what we 11 have done in some of these is set up a site where 12 people can check in on a website and get responses 13 so when we get letters like that, we can put them 14 on it . 15 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Very good. Are 16 there any other comments from the group here 17 tonight? Okay. Ism giving you a second chance. 18 Anybody else? I here a motion to close the public 19 hearing. 20 MR. CROUCH: So moved. 21 MR. JONES : Second. 22 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: All in favor. 23 (Chorus of ayes . ) 24 DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 23 1 (Whereupon a portion of the 2 hearing was not herein 3 transcribed. ) 4 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Thank you. Moving 5 onto PC 2007-24 , the Don Kalant property. Do we 6 have a motion to open the public hearing? 7 MR. CROUCH: So moved. 8 MR. JONES : Second. 9 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: The public hearing 10 is opened. 11 MR. INGEMUNSON: Attorney Ingemunson on 12 behalf of the petitioner, Don Kalant . I 'm not 13 going to be very long since we were already in 14 front of you one time for the same petition. we 15 are essentially asking for the rezoning again from 16 R-2 to B-2 for the 101 Center Street . The reason 17 we are back here is because the publication within 18 500 feet was not done. The publication was done 19 in the paper but the mailing was not done so we 20 are back here before you asking for the same 21 requests that we were before. 22 There is probably a few things that 23 were changed from the time we went in front you 24 that got to the City Council and one was an DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 24 1 agreement for right-in/right-out to the parking 2 lot . I don' t think that was requested the first 3 time, and when this gets redeveloped the parking 4 lot will be right-in/right-out and won' t be full 5 access to Route 47 . That was one thing that was 6 changed since the first time to now, and there was 7 also some issues that someone had brought up about 8 the septic system out there . 9 My client did have someone go out 10 and shoot a camera down in the sewer and it was 11 the City sewer. It is not a septic system. It is 12 connected so -- so that ' s not an issue as well . I 13 think that ' s about the only two things that really 14 came up from that time to now that has changed. 15 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Do we have any 16 comments from want public? 17 Come up here and tell us your name 18 and where you live and whatever it is you have to 19 say. The only thing I 'm going to ask too is 20 whatever is said, please don' t repeat it . We have 21 heard it once and we are trying not repeat it . 22 MS . PIERSON: My name is Valerie Pierson 23 and I live at 103 West Center Street, the property 24 that ' s directly adjacent to this property in DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 25 1 question. I 'm coming here today to speak against 2 the rezoning petition made by the property owners 3 101 West Center Street . When I found out the 4 property had been rezoned without the proper 5 notification of property owners, I was upset that 6 such an important piece of the rezoning process 7 was overlooked. Further frustrated when the City 8 was notified that they failed to bring it before 9 the City Council until I contacted my alderman, 10 who then brought the issue out into the open. 11 The fact that this mistake was 12 allowed to stand and continue as a business is 13 disturbing and try as I might it is very hard to 14 have confidence in the City government looking out 15 for the rights of its citizens . 16 The property in question is 17 directly adjacent to our family' s home and to the 18 Town Square Park. One of the main reasons this 19 neighborhood appealed to us was because of all the 20 family-friendly activities and the atmosphere that 21 the park offers . All three of the streets that 22 surround the park west of Route 47 are entirely 23 residential with the exception of the Chapel on 24 the Green Church. It is a wonderful neighborhood DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 26 1 for -- and our family loves it . There are several 2 reasons why I 'm asking that you turn down the 3 request to rezone the property. 4 Number one, it does not face Route 5 47, it faces the park and Center Street . And even 6 though this house is directly adjacent to Route 47 7 because it aces the park, it makes a great 8 residence. The two previous residents that we 9 have known since we have lived there loved living 10 there . 11 Number three, an additional 12 business entrance would further hinder the traffic 13 flow on Route 47 . And, number four, just the 14 close proximity to the schools and to the park has 15 potential to endanger the safety of the children 16 in the neighborhood. And, number five, once the 17 business is allowed to operate in this residential 18 area, it opens the doors for more to follow and 19 ruin the family atmosphere created by the 20 neighborhood, parks, and family activities . 21 When we moved here the last thing 22 we envisioned for our backyard was that it would 23 overlook a parking lot . I respectfully ask that 24 you commit to keep the quality of this residential DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 27 1 area surrounding the Town Square Park intact by 2 denying the encroachment of the business into our 3 neighborhood. Thanks for your time. 4 MS . COVENY: My name is Victoria K. 5 Coveny and I live on the corner of Route 47 and 6 River Road. I did receive a certified letter 7 concerning the zoning questions . 8 Ladies and gentlemen, I am 9 addressing you today because I received a 10 certified letter requesting a zoning request for 11 the property located on the northwest corner of 12 West Center Street and Route 47 . I would like you 13 to know that I 'm completely against the zoning 14 change from residential to business . I 'm shocked 15 that the request for zoning change on this 16 property made it through the system last summer 17 without any city employee verifying that proper 18 procedures had been followed prior to the matter 19 appearing before the city council . 20 In addition to being a property 21 that recently received a certified letter 22 concerning the request, I would like to also state 23 that I 'm a current city park board member. 24 The property zoning should remain DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 28 1 residential for a number of reasons . It is 2 adjacent to residential property, an adjacent 3 homeowner is protesting the request for a zoning 4 change, the property is adjacent to Town Square 5 Park, the property is near four schools and a 6 library, the property owner does not reside in 7 Yorkville. 8 13 years ago I was an active 9 participant in a neighborhood control group that 10 walked the streets of Aurora evenings to assist 11 the Aurora Police Department in keeping and making 12 neighborhoods safe. I also completed citizens 13 police academy training. The single most 14 important point stressed was people living in 15 residential neighborhoods that paid attention to 16 all activity in their neighborhood who knew who 17 belonged in their neighborhoods and who did not 18 and got involved in keeping their neighborhoods 19 safe by participating in neighborhood watch 20 programs were responsible for keeping good and 21 safe neighborhoods . 22 There is an adjacent property owner 23 with her children at home taking responsibility 24 for her children' s safety requesting the property DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 29 1 be zoned residential as it was when she acquired 2 her property. The property owner requesting the 3 change does not reside on the property. He in 4 does not reside in Yorkville. 5 I 'm urging you to zone this 6 property residential . Thank you. 7 MS . CULLIN: My name is Michelle Cullin 8 and I live at 405 North Bridge Street . The 9 property comes up to the south side of my house. 10 And, going back, I had stated before approximately 11 ten years ago with the petition for real estate 12 person in Yorkville that wanted to open up an 13 office, we had done a petition and went through 14 all the procedures, and it was stated at that time 15 that there would not be any businesses across from 16 the City park. 17 So now I guess the zoning has been 18 changed against our knowledge that it was 19 happening, and if it does change, I want to know 20 what rights I have as far as having a parking lot 21 up to my front room almost . And I just think it 22 is a bad corner to have a business on there in 23 Yorkville because there is so much traffic, it is 24 a neighborhood, and you have the City schools and DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 30 1 you have a good Christian school in the area with 2 traffic, and there is a lot of homeowners there 3 that go to those schools . And if Route 47 is 4 changed, I know what it is going to do to my 5 property. How -- what ' s it going to do if you 6 allow a parking lot there? It just seems like 7 there is not going to be enough property there to 8 support a parking lot . That ' s what I care to say. 9 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Thank you. Is there 10 anyone else? 11 MR. LAGRAND: Evening everybody. All my 12 notes went down the drain now. I should have went 13 first . 14 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Tell the court 15 reporter what your name is, please. 16 MR. LAGRAND: Ralph LaGrand. Residence 17 is 311 Church Street in Yorkville . Basically 18 probably to start with is that I have been at 19 these meetings before, and I 'm somewhat -- I don' t 20 know, words have be used before, flabbergasted or 21 shocked that I had to wait until I got a notice in 22 the mail from the property owner himself, his 23 lawyer, to make me aware of this public meeting. 24 There is records here going back to August 21st DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 31 1 when this was discussed, May 11th, 2007, all the 2 way to August 28th. It is kind of a little bit 3 slighted, I guess, by the town of Yorkville since 4 the first time since I lived here not being 5 notified of this residence wanting to be changed 6 into a business . 7 Other than what ' s been said before, 8 I know Mr. Horton, Junior, was denied his request 9 of having a realtor there . And I know from living 10 in that area for a number of years, Town Square 11 Park with its activity, the school down the block, 12 the historical church, somebody' s got to be crazy 13 to approach this as a business section on this 14 corner of this busy street of 47 and Center. 15 And then when we redid the 16 highway -- or I should say the road passing 17 through the school area there on Center, it didn' t 18 allow for enough parking even for the Town Square 19 Park. Instead of allowing for angled parking, you 20 put in horizontal parking so you have very little 21 space . 22 But I guess the other kicker I want 23 to put in here on is the political part of it, 24 where they allow residents, so to speak, if I went DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 32 1 to Florida for two months, to use my residence as 2 a political campaign office. Now, I know this 3 resident that ' s in there maybe wasn' t aware she 4 couldn' t have it as a business . It is too late 5 now, the voting time is over, political issues are 6 settled. 7 So I really think the City Council 8 or somebody in this town of Yorkville owe not me 9 but the rest of the neighbors and the neighbors 10 who didn' t show tonight an apology. This is a 11 little bit of a back door slide or city politics 12 played in the old days . And I 'm not saying any of 13 you are involved in this but this is dirty 14 politics in my day. And I don' t like what was 15 going on on this . 16 And even if we did a side entrance 17 like they have done on some residences on 47th 18 Street, you are dealing with a lot of children in 19 this area and a lot of summer activities in this 20 area. And as of lately a great Christmas outing 21 they had out there and the spirit that was there, 22 and I was glad to be part of this Christmas 23 outing. 24 So please consider this seriously DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 33 1 when you think about turning this location into a 2 business area. I really appreciate it and I thank 3 you for your time . 4 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: .Anyone else? 5 Everybody' s quiet again. 6 MR. PIERSON: My name is Doug Pierson, 7 and I live on 103 West Center, the property just 8 west of the residence we are talking about . We 9 purchased that land as a vacant lot that we 10 purchased about five years ago, and we were told 11 too that at one time that was proposed to be a 12 business but they turned it down because they 13 wanted to keep the park as is with -- surrounded 14 by residents . And we have been living there for 15 about four years now been, enjoying the area. 16 We ' re talking about putting a parking lot right 17 there next to our swimming pool . we have three 18 little girls and that ' s not something I 'm looking 19 forward to. 20 It has been nice that we feel safe 21 living there. With a business there you never 22 know who is going to be coming and going, and 23 there is a lot of reasons I think it should remain 24 a residence. We have known two residents that DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 34 1 live there since we have been there, and even 2 though it is on 47, you usually think of living on 3 a highway isn' t very appealing, but both the 4 residents that live there really loved living 5 there and I see no reason why it should be 6 changed. It is a beautiful area. we really enjoy 7 it, and we are happy with Yorkville, and we hope 8 that it will stay as it is . Thanks . 9 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Anyone else? Okay. 10 I entertain a motion to close the public hearing. 11 MR. CROUCH: So moved. 12 MR. JONES : Second. 13 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: All in favor say 14 aye? 15 (Chorus of ayes . ) 16 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Okay, out of public 17 hearing. 18 (Whereupon a portion of 19 the hearing was not herein 20 transcribed. ) 21 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Okay. Moving onto 22 PC 2007-41 Raycorp. 23 MR. CROUCH: I move we open the public 24 meeting. DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 35 1 MR. JONES : Second. 2 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: I hear a second. 3 All in favor say aye? 4 (Chorus of ayes . ) 5 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Okay. The public 6 hearing is open. 7 MR. KEMMY: Thank you, Madam Chairman. 8 My name is Bob Kemmy, attorney for Raycorp, Inc . , 9 officed at 22 North LaSalle in Chicago. This 10 property consists of approximately 23 . 95 acres, 11 almost 24 acres, about a quarter mile west of the 12 Route 47 and Route 71 intersection on Route 71 . 13 In approximately 2003 this property was the 14 subject of an application and annexation, R-2 15 duplex planned unit development . That was 16 approved at the end of 2003 . I think the plat was 17 recorded in 2004 . 18 And since that time the property 19 has been attempted to be marked for the 20 residential use that was proposed. A model 21 building was built and the market has pretty much 22 determined that that was an inappropriate use, 23 much to all of our surprise. 24 We are here tonight asking for a DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 36 1 B-3 highway business zoning, and what we had done 2 when we started the process is prepared a concept 3 site plan just to show an idea of what it would 4 look like . We are just going for -- and applied 5 for and seeking the B-3 zoning so that we can then 6 market it and determine with our users -- they 7 would be coming back to you for site plan 8 approval . 9 Because we don' t have any users, 10 this plan is just a reflection of what could be 11 done . Those are not users that we have. That is 12 not a layout that we are able to commit to. And, 13 in fact, it includes land -- I 'm going to turn 14 this upsidedown so that more of -- so that north 15 is up. what the plan does is it includes some 16 land on the east side that is not owned or 17 controlled by our client . It is owned by the 18 Hughes family. We show that on that plan just to 19 show how that parcel would be integrated into an 20 overall development . It is already zoned B-3 , but 21 I just wanted to kind of put that concept plan in 22 context so you understood that . 23 At this stage we believe that a B-3 24 zoning would be appropriate for this property. It DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 37 1 allows the -- the intersection node of 71 and 47 2 to be developed for commercial and expanded to 3 include our property. Immediately to the west of 4 our property is forest preserve, so that basically 5 will stop whatever use is going, in this case the 6 commercial . 7 we have been in contact with the 8 Forest Preserve, and I think it is fair to say 9 that they do not have any objection to the 10 application to rezone . They have asked us for -- 11 to work with them at the time it gets developed on 12 screening and things like that, which we have 13 indicated we would do. We have been in contact 14 with the Hughes family in terms of activity 15 between our parcel and their parcel and will 16 continue to work with them. And earlier today I 17 got a letter from Kelly Kramer, who represents the 18 owners of the property basically to the south and 19 east of us that kind of comes into a "V, " and they 20 have expressed some concerns, one of which was the 21 intensity of the building that we showed on the 22 concept plan. And we will be working with them as 23 well . 24 They also expressed a concern about DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 38 1 landscape buffering and future road connections as 2 well . So I think all of the property owners in 3 that immediate area recognize and realize that we 4 all need to be working together so that that 5 quadrant, if you will , is developed in an 6 appropriate manner. And we will continue to work 7 with all of them to help accomplish that . 8 But, as I say, we don' t have a user 9 at the present time, so -- but our goal is to seek 10 the business zoning so that we can attract a 11 commercial developer and then when we identify 12 that developer or the users, if we were to develop 13 it, we would be back to you for site plan approval 14 so you -- what you are doing for us is helping us 15 market it so that we can come back to you when we 16 have a user and a plan. 17 I think that includes my 18 presentation unless you have any questions of me 19 or my client, Tom Rayburn, who is here as well . 20 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: we are going to ask 21 for public questions first, so I think there is a 22 lady who wants to step up. 23 MS . MOSES : My name is Michelle Moses 24 and I live at 1844 Columbine Drive in Yorkville . DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 39 1 I live in the Sunflower Estates subdivision and 2 that ' s directly across from those model buildings 3 that could be developed over there. I know that 4 we are on the corner of a very busy intersection 5 of 47 and 71 and it is probably going to go 6 commercial over there . One of the people that 7 haven' t been addressed in looking at this is the 8 residents over there as far as working with us . 9 Our subdivision, right now we have 10 a lot of trouble getting out of our subdivision 11 onto Route 71 . Developing that into any kind of 12 entryway into a commercial is going to make it 13 worse. I understand from Travis that it is within 14 the amount of square feet that another stoplight 15 can be put there . My concerns about that is 16 people driving through our subdivision to get to 17 the commercial property and avoid the lights on 47 18 and 71 . It is going to increase the traffic 19 through that subdivision. There is a park there 20 that would come into play and our children are on 21 these streets . 22 So the entryway to the development 23 concerns me, water drainage issues concern me, 24 empty strip stores concern me, and I would ask DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 40 1 that a group of residents be included on the site 2 plans and approval . would this too be going to a 3 March 6th economic development or isn' t it to that 4 stage? 5 MR. MILLER: Yeah. A recommendation -- 6 assuming that the plan commission makes a 7 recommendation from tonight ' s meeting, it would go 8 to the March 6th EDC meeting as well . 9 MS . MOSES : Well , I ask that the 10 subdivision be considered in the plans, and at the 11 site plan stage that a stoplight and 12 accommodations to the residents in the subdivision 13 be included as part of the plan. Thank you. 14 MR. MILLER: Actually, I misspoke . Let 15 me correct myself . This requires an amendment to 16 the PUD agreement, which requires a public hearing 17 at the City Council level . I will ask the 18 petitioners, has that date been scheduled for the 19 public hearing? What is that date? 20 AUDIENCE MEMBER: The fourth Tuesday. 21 MR. MILLER: In February? Okay. So the 22 26th of February will be a public hearing for the 23 PUD agreement in front of the City Council , and 24 following that it would go to the EDC. So with DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 41 1 the late date in February, this will be going to 2 an April -- the first Thursday in April EDC 3 meeting and then -- 4 MR. LINDBLOM: April or March? 5 MR. MILLER: April, because the 26th -- 6 yeah. 7 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Anyone else? Kelly? 8 MS . KRAMER: My name is Kelly Kramer, 9 and I 'm an attorney that has been retained by the 10 Pottinger Farms, LLC, to represent them with 11 regard to this particular petition. 12 Pottinger Farms, LLC, owns 13 approximately 145 acres directly southeast of the 14 subject property. And as Attorney Kemmy said, 15 their primary concerns are the landscape buffering 16 that would be along and abutting their site and 17 the proposed site . They are currently zoned 18 Kendall County A-1 and so they would like to see, 19 depending on how the site plan and the end-users 20 that are interested in the property, some sort of 21 increased landscape buffering due to the different 22 zoning classifications along that line. And my 23 clients do realize that this is at the concept 24 stage and there are no end-users here in site and DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 42 1 do not object to the B-3 zoning classification but 2 they would like to see the more intense commercial 3 uses up front and have a minimal impact at their 4 property line . We do understand that it is simply 5 a concept plan and you just have a recommendation 6 regarding the zoning. 7 The other two issues that my 8 clients have - - i believe we will be able to come 9 to an amicable resolution with the petitioner -- 10 is they would like to see some sort of 11 connectivity to Route 71 with their particular 12 property. 13 I dont know if any of you are 14 aware, this particular property contains dense, 15 dense woods, and essentially is landlocked off of 16 71 at this point in time. The other major issue 17 is probably more of a staff issue as far as the 18 drainage and stormwater management of this site. 19 There are several drainage swales that empty from 20 my clients , property down into this site and we 21 have requested that at some point in time we have 22 an opportunity to sit down with the petitioner and 23 staff and go over the engineering for this site. 24 We did speak with the petitioners DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 43 1 and they are amenable to sitting down and going 2 over our particular concerns and we feel that they 3 most likely will be met . 4 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Okay, thank you. 5 Anyone else? Okay. Tony? 6 MR. GRAFF: Tony Graff representing the 7 client, Raycorp. In regards to Pottinger Farm, 8 our discussion we have had with the Forest 9 Preserve District, the client has indicated -- the 10 Forest Preserve actually owns on the south end of 11 the property, the Forest Preserve actually comes 12 around our corner here. And we have indicated 13 that we would work with the Forest Preserve about 14 donating this sort of triangle that ' s non-use to 15 the Forest Preserve, which would actually 16 straighten out the property line to come up here. 17 This is the Pottinger Farm, heavily 18 wooded, highly -- high quality woods back in here 19 too, and we would be -- we will be glad to work 20 with them in regards to providing some type of 21 buffer. And, generally speaking, this looks like 22 it is going to be a natural forest preserve and 23 the Pottingers maybe will get together in the 24 future too. The drainage issues and other staff DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 44 1 issues you guys received comments on, when this 2 property was first engineered for the duplexes, 3 all the engineering concerns at that point were 4 addressed and properly handled for the off-site 5 drainage coming off of the Harris Forest Preserve 6 and also off the Pottinger Farm. You can tell 7 there is a drainage way coming through here. 8 So it can be engineered and 9 stormwater controls can be put in place under the 10 commercial element and the residential element, 11 and when we do come back to with you a user, we 12 will have full engineering plans to address the 13 drainage and meet the Army Corps permit that we 14 have on the site and also the City' s code and 15 ordinances . 16 The Hughes family, at this point 17 their property comes right up just -- just past 18 the first open lot there and we currently have an 19 agreement verbally that ' s been honored at this 20 point in talking to the Hugheses for easements for 21 water and sewer and we have talked to them about 22 cross access and creating better flows for this 23 whole project . 24 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Thank you. Anyone DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 45 1 else? Okay. I entertain a motion to close the 2 public hearing. 3 MR. CROUCH: So moved. 4 MR. JONES : Second. 5 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: All in favor say 6 aye . 7 (Chorus of ayes . ) 8 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Not in favor, nay? 9 (No response. ) 10 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Public hearing is 11 closed. 12 (Whereupon a portion of the 13 hearing was not herein 14 transcribed. ) 15 - - - 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 46 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) SS . 2 COUNTY OF DU PAGE ) 3 I, Lynette J. Neal, a Certified 4 Shorthand Reporter, do hereby certify that I 5 reported in shorthand the proceedings had at the 6 hearing of the above-entitled cause and that the 7 foregoing Report of Proceedings, Pages 3 through 8 45 , inclusive, is a true, correct, and complete 9 transcript of my shorthand notes so taken at the 10 time and place aforesaid. 11 I further certify that I am neither 12 counsel for nor related to counsel for any of the 13 parties to this suit, nor am I in any way related 14 to any of the parties to this suit, nor am I in 15 any way interested in the outcome thereof . 16 I further certify that my 17 certificate annexed hereto applies to the original 18 transcript and copies thereof, signed and 19 certified under my hand only. I assume no 20 responsibility for the accuracy of any reproduced 21 copies not made under my control or direction. 22 23 24 DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 47 1 In testimony whereof, I have 2 hereunto set my hand this 14th day of March, A.D. , 3 2008 . 4 5 6 Lynette J. Neal 7 CSR No. 084-004363 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 1 of 4 1DRAFT1 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PLAN COMMISSION YORKVILLE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Wednesday, March 12,2008 7:00pm Chairman Anne Lucietto called the meeting to order at 7:00pm. Roll Call: Sandra Adams Clarence Holdiman Tom Lindblom Mike Crouch Jeff Baker Charles Kraupner Jack Jones Anne Lucietto Absent: John Hegeler, Brian Schillinger, Other City Staff: Mayor Valerie Burd, 7:25pm Travis Miller, Community Development Director Guests: Nicola Gengler, Depocourt Tony Hughes Michelle Moses Tom Rayborn, Raycorp Bob Kenny, Raycorp Atty. Tony Graff, Graff Mgmt. Kelly Kramer, Atty. Nelson Pottinger Mark Mathre Matt Schury,Kendall County Record Bill Dunn, EEI A quorum was established. Chairman Lucietto swore in those attendees who would speak during the Public Hearings. Public Hearings: 1. PC 2008-04 Raycorp, petitioners filed an application requesting rezoning from R-2 Duplex Two-Family to PUD, to allow for uses allowable in the B-3 Service Business Zoning Classification. This request is for 23.95 acres located at 10312 Rt. 71. A motion was made by Crouch and seconded by Jones to open this Public Hearing. Approved by voice vote. (See Court Reporter's Transcript) (See also, letter from 4 Sunflower residents, read during Public Hearing) Page 2 of 4 It was moved and seconded by Crouch and Jones respectively, to close the Public Hearing. Approved by voice vote. Discussion: Travis Miller reviewed the staff reports and said an advantage to the PUD classification would be a PUD agreement. A hearing will be held before City Council on March 25th and he said more limitations and requirements can be applied. Staff is also asking for more specifics regarding the signage. Architectural design guidelines from the Comprehensive Plan will be required according to Mr. Miller. Guidelines for the proposed bank were also noted. A report by Bill Dunn, EEI, stated concerns regarding wetlands and drainage issues,but he said the developer will address them. More detention may also be needed. Kraupner requested that the minimal lighting standards be written into the PUD. It was noted that the light will be kept to a minimum especially in consideration of the nearby Harris Forest Preserve. Lindblom said that a second access would be needed if this property is developed prior to the Hughes development and it should be included in the PUD. He said this plan is appropriate considering the Shell station is already there. Tony Graff said the property will yield a higher EAV since there would be no schools required and the businesses would produce sales tax and provide jobs. Left and right turn lanes were requested by Jones. These lanes will be constructed according to Graff. Crouch said if there was no outlot near the detention pond, there would be more detention area to solve the drainage problem. He also questioned the waiver the developers requested regarding the topography. Some specifics will be provided by Senior Planner Stephanie Boettcher at a later time. All Commission members agreed this plan was a good use of this property. Chairman Lucietto noted that the waiver refers to IDOT standards for the bike trail. The IDOT standards are less than those of the City and it was also noted the bike trail will be in the original location. Action Items: i. Rezoning (R-2 Duplex to PUD) Ms. Lucietto summarized the requirements prior to a motion: a. Pottinger family requests direct access to Rt. 71 b. Pottinger family wants February meeting correspondence to be included c. Include staff comments and engineering comments d. Insure that store lighting issue is clearly stated in PUD e. 2 access points needed for property until another connection is made f. Left and right turn lanes request be put into PUD Page 3 of 4 Crouch made a motion to approve zoning from R2 Duplex to PUD, subject to all above requirements. Jones seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Holdiman-aye, Crouch-aye, Kraupner-aye, Adams-aye, Jones-aye, Baker- aye, Lindblom-aye, Lucietto-aye. Unanimous. ii. Concept PUD Plan Lindlbom moved and Jones seconded a motion to approve the concept PUD plan. Roll call vote: Crouch-aye, Kraupner-aye, Adams-aye, Jones-aye, Baker-aye, Lindblom-aye, Holdiman-aye, Lucietto-aye. Unanimous. 2. PC 2008-03 Amend Zoning Ordinance to require that applicants are required to give notice to owners/occupants of other properties that may be affected. Travis Miller requested a continuance of this item to April 9, 2008. Crouch and Jones moved and seconded,respectively to open the Public Hearing so that it could be continued. Approved on a voice vote. Travis gave a short report detailing the request. The Hearing was then continued on a motion and second by Jones and Crouch, respectively. Approved on a voice vote. 3. PC 2008-02 The City is considering amending the Zoning Ordinance to change banks, credit unions and savings and loan associations from a permitted use to a Special Use and add Drive Through Facilities as a Special Use in the 0 Office Zoning District. It was moved by Crouch and seconded by Jones to open the Public Hearing. Approved on a voice vote. (See Court Reporter's Transcript) At the conclusion of the Hearing, Crouch made a motion to close the Public Hearing and Jones seconded. A voice vote approved the motion. Discussion: Lindblom commented that this proposal would just add a few more steps for a potential petitioner, while Baker said the economy is resolving the issue by reducing the number of banks locating in Yorkville. Crouch noted that banks do not generate sales tax and they occupy prime sites. According to Miller, several communities have rules in place already and this measure would monitor any future problems. Staff recommends including a Special Use. Page 4 of 4 Opposing the restrictions, Kraupner said he has no problem with banks coming in as opposed to a strip mall with businesses that go in and out. He said bank buildings might even include professional offices. Banks also provide jobs. Lucietto said caution should be used,because limitations might then be requested to be placed on other businesses, i.e., pizza parlors, churches etc. Drive-through banks were then addressed. The Special Use would also include such facilities. The orientation of the drive-through and the actual site plan would also be considered. Action Items i. Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Tom Lindblom made a motion to recommend the changes as presented by the staff report. Jones seconded this motion. Additional Discussion Jeff Baker suggested written rules/criteria that can be handed out to a petitioner requesting a Special Use. Lindblom said the criteria would be driven by a particular site and might not apply to another site. One of the rules suggested was to keep the drive- through away from the building front to keep traffic contained. Lighting was another possible consideration. Some existing rules were found in the Zoning Ordinance for Special Use. Miller also noted that as part of the approval process, City Council can require certain restrictions. Roll call vote: Kraupner-aye, Adams-aye, Jones-aye, Baker-aye, Lindblom-aye, Holdiman-aye, Crouch-aye, Lucietto-aye. Unanimous approval. Additional Business: 1. Chairman Lucietto briefly discussed a memo regarding Chicago Matters: Growing Forward, a TV series that examines choices that impact our environment and region. 2. The Plan Commission Journal was reviewed and Crouch commented that it is a good publication. 3. The next Consortium meeting will be held March 20th at the Library. Bike trails and green spaces will be discussed. 4. Comprehensive Plan open house was reviewed. 5. Land use will be the topic at the next Advisory meeting on March 26th , residential land use at the April meeting and another meeting will be held to plan a second open house. Over 100 people attended the first open house. There was no further business and a motion was made and seconded by Crouch and Jones respectively. Motion approved on a voice vote. Meeting adjourned at 8:26pm. Minutes by Marlys Young, Minute Taker Page 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) COUNTY OF KENDALL ) BEFORE THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PLAN COMMISSION REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS had at the hearing of the above-entitled matter, before Nicola Gengler, C. S .R. , on the 12th day of March, 2008 , at 7 : 00 p.m. at 800 Game Farm Road, Yorkville. D-841808 Page 2 1 PRESENT: 2 MS . ANNE LUCIETTO, Chairman; 3 MS . SANDRA ADAMS, Commissioner; 4 MR. JEFF BAKER, Commissioner; 5 MR. MICHAEL CROUCH, Commissioner; 6 MR. CLARENCE HOLDIMAN, Commissioner; 7 MR. JACK JONES, Commissioner; 8 MR. CHARLES KRAUPNER, Commisioner; 9 MR. TOM LINDBLOM, Commissioner. 10 11 ALSO PRESENT: 12 13 MR. TRAVIS MILLER, Community Development 14 Director; and 15 MS . MARLYS YOUNG, Minute Taker. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 3 1 (Proceedings were had which are not 2 herein transcribed. ) 3 (Audience members were thereupon 4 duly sworn. ) 5 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Okay. We have a motion and 6 a second. We are in public hearing. 7 MR. KENNY: Good evening. For the record, my 8 name is Bob Kenny. I am an attorney for Raycorp, Inc. 9 With me tonight is Tom Rayburn, principal of Raycorp, 10 and Tony Graff, his consultant . 11 As you know, we were last before you 12 on February 13 ; and at that time, we had an 13 application for straight B-3 zoning. We do not have 14 users for this property. We didn' t then. We don ' t 15 now, and it was our initial thought that going for 16 straight B-3 zoning would help us market the property. 17 Hearing the comments of the Plan 18 Commission, talking with staff, it was recommended 19 that we withdraw the B-3 straight zoning application 20 and file for Planned Unit Development zoning which is 21 what we have done. We are here tonight on the public 22 hearing on that Planned Unit Development rezoning. 23 This property consists of 24 approximately 23 . 9 acres and fronts on Route 71 just DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 4 1 off of the Route 47 and 71 intersection. 2 In your packet, you have minutes from 3 the Plan Council meeting. My reading of those 4 suggests that, as staff has indicated to us, the 5 preference is that we pursue the Planned Development 6 application which we have, and there were a number of 7 items in there that we have also incorporated into the 8 plan. 9 Hopefully there is enough people here 10 that they can hear me, but for purposes of 11 understanding the concept plan, Route 71 to the north, 12 and the property that is the subject of this 13 application is this property here . These three 14 parcels to the east are labeled Hughes parcels . They 15 are not part of our property. The only purpose of 16 showing them on this concept plan is to show how they 17 would integrate between the parcels to their east and 18 our parcels so that in the end the City will have an 19 integrated development, but these three parcels are 20 not part of the concept plan. The concept plan is 21 limited to this area. 22 Our main desire is to attain a 23 grocery anchor. We think that will be the key towards 24 a successful commercial development, and we anticipate DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 5 1 outlots . We don' t know the number of outlots now and 2 then two smaller w inline stores . 3 In conversations with the Forest 4 Preserve, we anticipate deeding over the southern 5 triangular portion of that property with detention to 6 the northwest corner. We have also provided buffer 7 around the commercial which isP ursuant to our 8 conversation with the Forest Preserve. 9 Tony Graff will bring you up to speed 10 with conversations we have had with adjacent property 11 owners . As we indicated last time, we are working 12 with the Hughes family, Pottinger family, to make sure 13 that the whole quadrant or node of that part of the 14 intersection will be developing as an integral whole 15 so to speak. 16 There are a number of comments in 17 there . For example, one comment related to the 18 wetlands . This property is subject to the Army Corps 19 of Engineers . We have an Army Corps permit for the 20 residential project that was approved. We will have 21 to go back to the Army Corps of Engineers and work 22 with them for the plan to revise that permit according 23 to this plan. 24 We were successful in getting a DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 6 1 letter from IDOT which I don' t know if that was in 2 your packet or not, but that letter came out of IDOT a 3 day after our Plan Commission meeting with you. I 4 will submit a copy, but it states that the concept 5 plan is acceptable. Access locations are acceptable. 6 They are asking for traffic impact 7 study for the development and commented that it may be 8 at some time in the future that the access point that 9 is closer to the intersection may end up being a 10 right-in right-out . I will give that to you to pass 11 around. 12 So that may be in the future as that 13 whole area develops . We will be developing according 14 to your design guidelines and your landscaping plans . 15 Much of that - - those facts are contained in our 16 written narrative . 17 We will , however, be requesting -- we 18 anticipate having to request waivers at the time that 19 we find users and the time they come in. One of which 20 we anticipate having to ask a modification to allow 21 this entry road to be within 30 feet of the detention 22 pond. You have a buffer requirement between the 23 detention pond and any development . So that would be 24 one modification we anticipate we will need. DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 7 1 Also, there will proposed to be 2 private roads on the property. So we would be 3 maintaining those. 4 We don' t know yet, but we anticipate 5 some modifications being required probably from your 6 subdivision code due to the topography on the 7 property. That would be something we encounter no 8 matter what plan we have. 9 This isn' t really a modification, but 10 we are planning to extend the bike trail along the 11 frontage of the property to connect the Forest 12 Preserve property to the properties to the east . We ' d 13 also be asking and you will see on your agenda that we 14 are anticipating at least probably one free-standing 15 bank and probably a minimum of four drive-through 16 windows for the outlots, but those will be handled 17 when the users come in, but I just wanted to put that 18 out there in terms of what the expectations are . 19 Then the interior developable lots 20 adjacent to the private roads instead of the public 21 roads and then the allowance for the building setbacks 22 from that, that also would be part of it . 23 What I ' d like to do quickly is just 24 run through the findings that you are called to make DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 8 1 and then turn it over to Tony to -- answer any 2 questions you have and then turn it over to Tony so he 3 can bring you up to speed with conversations we have 4 had with adjacent property owners . 5 In terms of the findings, your 6 ordinance talks about existing zoning and existing 7 land uses in the general area of the property. We 8 have vacant commercial B-3 zoning to our east, the 9 Hughes property. We have vacant commercial B-3 zoning 10 to our north across on Route 71 . We have county 11 zoning ag to our south, the Pottinger farm, and county 12 ag to our west, the Forest Preserve. 13 Obviously our commercial is in sync 14 and compatible with the B-3 zoning that it is adjacent 15 to, and basically it will finish out if you will that 16 quadrant of the intersection as it abuts up to the 17 Forest Preserve property to our west . 18 The next standard is suitability of 19 the property for its existing zoning. Existing zoning 20 is the residential planned development . The market 21 basically has said it is not going to work. 22 We improved the property. We built a 23 model for residential use . We marketed for about a 24 year and a half . In between the model building and DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 9 1 the amount of advertising that was done during that 2 time period, a million dollars was invested just in 3 those two activities . 4 So the market in our opinion has 5 spoken that it is just not a residential piece . Maybe 6 it is just not big enough to sustain itself surrounded 7 by the commercial and the Forest Preserve without 8 having enough of a neighborhood. We don' t know, but 9 clearly the market has not accepted it . 10 Trend of development we feel supports 11 the commercial use . We have commercial immediately to 12 our north. We have commercial to our east . We feel 13 that if we are successful in bringing like a grocery 14 anchor, we can really jump start that entire quadrant 15 with commercial because we think what is missing is 16 that anchor tenant to attract the customers in the 17 first place . 18 Impact of the plan development on 19 traffic, as you see by the letter, IDOT has looked at 20 the property concept plan and has approved it and 21 looked at the access and have approved it . We 22 anticipate that as soon as we meet warrants, we will 23 be able to put a stop light at our main intersection; 24 and that will substantially improve the neighbors to DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 10 1 our north, their ability to get out of Walsh Drive . 2 Right now it is not the easiest thing to do, and we 3 think that a stop light will substantially improve 4 their ability to get in and out of their subdivision 5 as well as ours . 6 We are asking for your support of our 7 application. If you have any questions of me, I ' d be 8 happy to answer them. Otherwise, I will have Tony 9 come up and bring you up to date with his 10 conversations . 11 MR. GRAFF: Since the last time we addressed 12 you on the other straight zoning, a couple of issues 13 that we have been able to accomplish. One was we did 14 meet with the Pottinger family, Attorney Kramer. She 15 is here tonight . She will probably be able to give 16 you more of an update. 17 In our viewpoint, we have modified 18 the plan to where we have provided access for the 19 Pottinger ' s property. It is right on the border of 20 the Hughes property and Raycorp. 21 Also, we have the buffer zoning that 22 they requested, the landscape, the existing tree 23 covering, and we recognize that we are not going to 24 move these trees because of your ordinance for one, DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983 -0030 Page 11 1 and it does provide a nice screening immediately to 2 their longstanding history of trees on their property. 3 If you have ever been out there -- the Forest Preserve 4 has a high interest in the property. So I think we 5 are moving forward there . 6 The Hughes family, we met with the 7 Hughes, Mike Hughes, working out the reason we now -- 8 you can see the black line going in. Since we are 9 going to a concept PUD, the staff recommended not to 10 confuse the one -- the legal processes, our property 11 versus their property. They are not asking for PUD. 12 They got straight zoning. They are already in. They 13 have everything going for them. 14 However, there is some advantage for 15 them to work with us, and one of the advantage is our 16 detention pond has been sized now to look at accepting 17 their stormwater off their three lots which now makes 18 it more marketable and also meets some of the criteria 19 that the City would like to see on Route 71 as they 20 call Gateway Corridor and southwest plan for 21 commercial nodes . 22 So that outlot becomes now a more 23 useful outlot for the Hughes family, and then the 24 cross access allows for more safety for people to DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 12 1 come, one, from theg as station over to here and vice 2 versa. Also, itemer enc ves g iaccess for the fire emergency 3 department and police department to get in and out of 4 this site. 5 The last time the R-2 only had one 6 access in, one access out . 71 would have had a cut 7 off, you know, people would have a hard time getting 8 in and out of their subdivision. So I think the 9 traffic plan with the cross access is going to 10 definitely benefit and meet the criteria what the City 11 would like to see. 12 The Forest Preserve, what we have 13 done is reiterated the buffer zone 30 feet, and in our 14 narrative we have provided the PUD annexation 15 agreement working with the Forest Preserve and working 16 with the City' s code on the stormwater for native 17 plantings and screening adjacent . Due to the fact for 18 screening purposes, it would probably be very well 19 received for the type of passive use of the Forest 20 Preserve . 21 I think in general we have heard 22 clearly from the Planning Council that I attended -- 23 you know, the minutes don' t reflect all the 24 conversations that was going on there. It was very DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 13 1 highly recommended and unanimous by the Plan Council 2 to reject the B-3 zoning and go to PUD zoning. 3 One of the main things -- and I have 4 met with Stephanie for the City, senior planner. She 5 brought up a very good point which we are 6 incorporating - - we are going to incorporate . The 7 topography of this site definitely has challenges but 8 also has possibilities . 9 Because of 71 being lower and the 10 back part being higher, we are finding out it is going 11 to be a marketable piece for that anchor store. We 12 are going to have clear visibility from 71 because of 13 their topography, and then taking the landscaping 14 back. So we can use the water features to make sure 15 we move the water from the high end to the low end, 16 incorporate that into the landscape design once we get 17 an end user. 18 But we are letting you know as the 19 Planning Commission we are only looking for minimal 20 variances in the PUD agreement that are not in regards 21 to the architectural landscaping. 22 One is just basically a right to have 23 internal lots go up against private roads, have the 24 private roads be considered the public road. Because DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 14 1 of the zoning code, every parcel has to have a public 2 road. That is common in most of the PUDs . That is 3 another reason why we go PUD instead of straight 4 zoning. 5 So I think we have now moved to that 6 next level to why a PUD is more acceptable . We do 7 know the comp plan shows transitional area. The 8 challenges with transitional area -- take in the 9 history when the comp plan was done in 2005 and 10 revised, the City took what zoning was in place at the 11 time . The R-2 (d) zoning was in place here when that 12 comp plan was being reviewed. There was no major 13 discussion in regards to it . 14 Under the southwest plan, too, and it 15 says under your reclassification to meet the criteria 16 for change of zoning. If something changed in the 17 area, definitely there has been a couple of changes . 18 Silica Sand is no longer Silica Sand. 19 At that point in time, it was a very 20 difficult challenge for Silica Sand and outlots to 21 turn into the Walgreen' s . Three different parties had 22 to get involved. Silica Sand had to sell . DUT 23 Investment had to come in. Krystafano family had to 24 give up some of their property to make it look right . DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 15 1 So that corner was basically at the 2 time this property was being zoned it was in doubt 3 that that corner would ever turn into some type of 4 commercial outlot on the corner. Of course, that was 5 probably the best use in having it work there. 6 So having that happen in the last 7 couple of years, that definitely screamed out to us 8 about let ' s continue with the commercial zoning along 9 here . Even though we are against a green space, the 10 Harris Forest Preserve, we are willing to work with 11 the Forest Preserve to make sure we are going to 12 complement in some way or form at least not hinder any 13 of their activity there . 14 And the other thing that has been 15 commented and said meeting with elected officials is 16 an anchor store down here with grocery is dearly 17 needed. We are thinking it is a good spot for it . 18 That is sort of how the changes 19 occurred, how we evolved, how we are now at PUD, and 20 hopefully get the approval of the Board. 21 I will turn it over to Tom Rayburn. 22 MR. RAYBURN: My name is Tom Rayburn. I am the 23 president of Raycorp. I am the happy owner of the 24 buildings that are out there and have been for quite DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 16 1 sometime. 2 We stared at that site and worked at 3 that site. We have tried to sell it . We have tried 4 to - - you name it, we have tried it, after we ran into 5 marketing issues with the sales on the duplex homes 6 out there. 7 What I am basically here -- rather 8 than rehashing what Tony and Bob have already told 9 you, there seem to be some question, well, what would 10 our commercial buildings look like? Well , this is 11 actually from Minooka, Illinois, Town Center Concept 12 on Ridge Road. We are going back through to add more 13 retail to that to accommodate a big box user down 14 there . That is why we haven' t broken ground. 15 The Minooka Village Hall will be 16 located in the back of this site, and we are going to 17 be dedicating some property, but this demonstrates 18 kind of our concept of the quality of buildings and 19 the building materials that we like to use. 20 I think it will fall well within the 21 appearance codes that are applicable down in that end 22 of Yorkville. We tend to like the parapet look. I 23 don' t know if we will have as many colors of stone and 24 brick and so forth as this, but you can have one DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 17 1 business located behind three store fronts . It is a 2 little more quaint, little nicer look, than your 3 typical tilt up building. 4 And, you know, you can disregard -- 5 we are not looking at any second floor. It is really 6 only the top one, but we like to have signage . Other 7 than a monument sign at our entrance, we like to have 8 signage on the front of the buildings. Any signage we 9 would do -- we have reviewed the code. We are 10 relegated to not requiring any type of variance with 11 that signage, but masonry all the way around which I 12 believe is in the appearance code, shielding of 13 rooftop units, things that are very unsightly. 14 One other aspect that we have 15 committed to doing to help with the Forest Preserve 16 when they have - - you know, if they are looking at an 17 eclipse of the moon or something, we are going to 18 focus hard on night skylighting or something that 19 doesn' t have that glare up that you see to minimize 20 the impact on the Forest Preserve . 21 And, likewise, there is a strip that 22 would be located along here . I think we would be 23 very, very selective on what we use to light the back 24 of that building. If we did light it at all , I think DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 18 1 that is a real sensitive area. We have committed to 2 the Forest Preserve that we are going to work with 3 them. 4 The green space will be leveled and 5 seeded and some trees and so forth put in there, and 6 it is my intent to go ahead and just give that to the 7 Forest Preserve because I believe they wrap around to 8 somewhere in here with their property if I am not 9 mistaken. So it just kind of squares the property off 10 and starts to get rid of these funny angles . 11 I am having conversations with a 12 couple of the larger anchor stores, and they are being 13 very receptive pending rezoning. I don' t have any end 14 users yet . As we get end users, an earlier meeting 15 with staff had indicated that as we come in, we will 16 just bring back the lots because some user might want 17 an acre . Some might want two acres . So we will kind 18 of chop it up and bring it back in front of the 19 appropriate boards at that time to look at the actual 20 site plans . 21 You know, some other users we have 22 been contacted by are your typical coffee shops . A 23 lot of restaurants have contacted me . So that is kind 24 of what we anticipate, nice neighborhood services I DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 19 1 guess, conveniences sort of atmosphere down there. 2 Any questions that I can answer? 3 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: We will ask you when we get 4 out of public hearing. 5 What I am going to do -- I was asked 6 by a group of people from Sunflower Estates to read a 7 letter that they faxed to the City it looks like 8 yesterday or -- yes, it would have been yesterday. 9 So I am going to go ahead and read 10 it . After that, if anybody in the audience has 11 anything more that they want to add, we will call on 12 you; and you will have an opportunity. 13 The letter is written March 11, 2008 , 14 addressed to the United City of Yorkville Planning 15 Board. 16 "Dear Board Members : As residents of 17 the Sunflower Estates subdivision, we attended the 18 last Planning Board meeting in February where the 19 Raycorp property at Route 71 and 47 was on the agenda 20 regarding a change from residential to commercial use, 21 i .e . , a potential Jewel Food Store and commercial 22 out-buildings . " 23 "Unfortunately freshman orientation 24 night at Yorkville High School is at the same time as DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 20 1 Raycorp will be addressing the Planning Board on 2 March 12th and we and other Sunflower Estates 3 residents will be unable to attend the meeting when 4 Raycorp will once again come before the Board. Please 5 accept this letter as our formal address to the 6 Planning Board. " 7 "At the February meeting, the 8 petitioner stated that they had been working with and 9 addressing concerns with respect to the Forest 10 Preserve, neighboring businesses and farms, and the 11 City. Michelle Moses spoke at that meeting and 12 expressed our concerns about the effect commercial use 13 would have on the Sunflower Estates Subdivision. It 14 was expressed that as former officers of the now 15 dissolved homeowners ' association, many residents 16 still look to us for answers to questions that effect 17 our neighborhood. " 18 "In speaking with the petitioner and 19 his representatives after the February meeting, we 20 were told they would work with us and possibly set up 21 a meeting with us and our district ' s aldermen to 22 address our concerns . While Michelle Moses did 23 receive a couple of calls from Tony Graff, 24 unfortunately no meeting has taken place and we are DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 21 1 still in the dark as to the effect this development 2 will have on our subdivision. " 3 "We would like to reiterate our 4 concerns regarding the Raycorp site . First, as 5 Yorkville grows, traffic becomes more and more of an 6 issue. We already have traffic issues in our 7 subdivision from people cutting through from Route 71 8 to avoid traffic backup at the stoplight . Many of 9 these cars end up traveling at a high rate of speed on 10 Route 71, continue at that speed while traveling 11 through our subdivision. " 12 "We should point out that cars 13 cutting through our subdivision pass by our playground 14 and there are no stop signs to slow them down. 15 Further, many times it is very difficult for residents 16 of Sunflower to get out of our subdivision at the 17 Route 71 entrance. A commercial, high traffic 18 development would only make these problems worse. " 19 "Any plans for a stoplight or traffic 20 determent paving or curbs should be mandatory and 21 should solely be at the developer ' s expense . It is 22 our understanding that the Planning Board' s function 23 is to make a recommendation to the City Council and 24 the Board is unable to make a specific mandatory plan DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 22 1 requirements . Therefore, we cannot be assured that 2 these concerns will be addressed and encourage denial 3 of any commercial use at the site at this time . " 4 "Second, the petitioner is the second 5 owner of the site and has said that there is no 6 interest in the site for residential use especially 7 given today' s economy. Economy aside, we do not feel 8 that residential use was ever given a fair shot at 9 that site . There are no roads that would allow 10 potential buyers to view the property or the models 11 that sit on the property. There are no curbs . Water 12 drainage is an issue, and the models don' t even have 13 power. Providing the basics would go a long way in 14 making the site attractive to potential residential 15 buyers . " 16 "Third, as we stated at the February 17 meeting, there is no question that our end of town 18 needs a grocery store. However, we are concerned 19 about crowding in the area. It would seem that there 20 is an abundance of vacant land available for a market 21 where crowding a residential subdivision and Forest 22 Preserve isn' t necessary. " 23 "Fourth, water drainage is an issue 24 which petitioner stated would be taken care of . DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 23 1 However, at this time, since we have not had the 2 opportunity to formally address our concerns with 3 petitioner, we would like further explanation on this 4 issue . " 5 "Fifth, changing the site to 6 commercial use is not in compliance with the 7 Comprehensive Plan. " 8 "Sixth, given the economy, many strip 9 stores are sitting vacant . While a food store is an 10 anchor which would make the proposed strip stores 11 attractive, what about the strip stores that presently 12 sit empty? Building more when we can' t fill existing 13 seems irresponsible. We question whether strip stores 14 are a good use of the property. " 15 "Thank you for allowing us the 16 opportunity to voice our concerns . If you have any 17 questions, please feel free to call Michelle Moses, 18 (630) 882-6610 or Lumie Emini , (630) 553-9803 . " 19 And this is signed by Michelle and 20 Edmond Moses at 1844 Columbine Drive, Lumie M. Emini 21 at 1854 Columbine Drive, Robert Spiers at 225 Walsh 22 Circle, and Michelle Senffner at 1882 Walsh Drive . 23 MR. GRAFF: If I can have 30 seconds to respond 24 to the letter very quickly. DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 24 1 Generally regarding working with 2 Sunflower, I did try to set up a meeting. I sent 3 e-mails to Wally Reterick, the alderman. I talked to 4 Wally at the land use parks open house the other 5 night, and Alderman Reterick would like to set a 6 meeting up with Michelle and the group to talk about 7 the traffic issues . 8 Generally speaking in regards to the 9 traffic talking to this group, the traffic light once 10 it is warranted -- under the residential use, it will 11 not be warranted because there is not enough traffic 12 generation, trip generation. We have been told that 13 by IDOT. A traffic light will not be warranted for 14 the residential use for this particular property. 15 Possibly when the Krystafano family 16 comes in with their property, 17 acres, that is zoned 17 commercial right on Sunflower' s backyard, that could 18 generate the need for a traffic light once they do so. 19 Generally by us coming in, we are 20 going to be looking at and bringing in road 21 improvements, turning lanes, and making it safer to 22 get out of 71; and living in that neighborhood and 23 understanding their concerns and talking to them on 24 the phone afterwards, the trip generation cut-through DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 25 1 traffic they are talking about needs to be examined 2 further. 3 Generally looking at and observing 4 it, a lot of the traffic that is cutting through is 5 not cutting through. It is going to Greenbriar which 6 is the north subdivision, not avoiding the light . I 7 have sat out there . I have watched, and I have seen 8 it, but it is an issue where the park is at, and that 9 is why they would like to be able to meet with the 10 Alderman and the Board and Wally lives there. He ' d 11 like to talk to them about this issue. 12 In regards to the water drainage, the 13 residential or the commercial, we are under an Army 14 Corps permit . We will only release what is currently 15 being released off the property, into the property, 16 and handled by Sunflower under their engineers . I 17 explained that to them, and we definitely have the 18 meeting to give them more engineering perspective . 19 And in regards to the residential 20 use, the models, when the models were fully opened, we 21 did have power to them. We had a generator out there. 22 We did have sales people sitting in the models 23 marketing the models in the Chicagoland and metro area 24 in the papers, spending close to a quarter of a DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 26 1 million dollars, for this property over a 14-month 2 period. And the road is a hard surface road as 3 required by the City under the annexation agreement 4 for the traffic to get in and out to the models . 5 Just for the record, it is sort of 6 the update. We will be glad to still set up a 7 meeting. Hopefully Alderman Reterick and I can get 8 that organized now that I have been given the phone 9 numbers and exchange for that to happen. 10 MS . KRAMER: My name is Kelly Kramer, 11 K-R-A-M-E-R, and I am the attorney for the Pottinger 12 family who owns approximately 145 acres southeast of 13 the subject property. 14 And as stated at the previous public 15 hearing, my clients are not adverse to the rezoning of 16 the property and are particularly not adverse with the 17 rezoning with the planned unit development 18 designation. We believe that is actually probably a 19 very, very good idea in this particular case given the 20 difficulties of the topography, the drainage issues, 21 the stormwater issues . 22 And we appreciate the developer 23 including in a stub to our property and showing a 24 landscape buffer. My clients have no access -- no DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 27 1 direct access to Route 71 and would reiterate their 2 previous request to allow for a connection to their 3 property on the abutting portion of this site. 4 We understand also, too, after 5 meeting with the developer ' s representative that the 6 Hughes property is not included in this, and we plan 7 on contacting them also to see how their property is 8 going to develop and if we can' t integrate mutually 9 agreeable access to my client ' s property between all 10 three parties . 11 We would also request that staff ' s 12 comments that were in the packet be addressed 13 regarding the stormwater management on the site and 14 also the permitting process with the wetlands on the 15 site. 16 But overall my clients are not 17 adverse to that particular rezoning request and would 18 appreciate their comments being added into the Plan 19 Commission' s recommendations . 20 And if we could reenter our 21 February 13 , 2008 correspondence previously forwarded 22 to staff and the petitioner ' s attorney into the 23 record, we would like to do so with the one change 24 that obviously it is not a straight B-3 rezoning DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 28 1 request but the B-3 planning and development request . 2 Thank you. 3 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Did you get sworn in? 4 MR. HUGHES : No. 5 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: You can now. 6 MR. HUGHES : Can I swear? 7 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: You can. 8 MR. HUGHES : Do I raise my hand? 9 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Yes, you do. 10 (The audience member was thereupon 11 duly sworn. ) 12 MR. HUGHES : Well, I just wanted want to - - I 13 am Mike Hughes . 14 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Where do you live? 15 MR. HUGHES : I live in St . Charles, Illinois . 16 My mom is here and my sister and brother. 17 So we just are in support of 18 Raycorp ' s plan like they already stated, and we have 19 no objections to their development . 20 It just seems to us like it is a 21 natural tie-in for that end of Yorkville to have some 22 kind of shopping center. 23 I just wanted to state our position 24 that we are supporting them. So that is all . DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 29 1 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Okay. Thank you. 2 Anyone else? 3 (No response. ) 4 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Okay. There being no 5 others, can we have a motion to close. 6 COMMISSIONER CROUCH: So moved. 7 COMMISSIONER JONES : Second. 8 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: All in favor say aye . 9 (Ayes heard. ) 10 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Not in favor, say nay. 11 (No response. ) 12 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Okay. 13 (Proceedings were then had which 14 are not herein transcribed. ) 15 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Do we have a motion to open 16 PC 2008-03? 17 COMMISSIONER CROUCH: So moved. 18 COMMISSIONER JONES : Second. 19 COMMISSIONER BAKER: Motion and continued. 20 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Do we have any discussion? 21 MR. MILLER: I can give a short report on the 22 status and what staff is preparing. 23 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Please do. 24 MR. MILLER: This will be a commitment to -- or DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 30 1 staff is going to recommend is a commitment to 2 Chapter 14 of the Zoning Ordinance. This chapter 3 deals with the enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance and 4 enforcement of procedures . 5 So our application procedures and 6 standard practices in the City aren' t consistent with 7 the text of the Zoning Ordinance. So staff is going 8 through the exercise of updating the Zoning Ordinance 9 procedures for everything from annexation requests to 10 special use requests to zoning requests in making sure 11 that the Zoning Ordinance, the law of the City, is 12 consistent with the appropriate practices that have 13 evolved over probably the last decade. 14 So when we bring that forward, we 15 will be pointing out what our text is, what the 16 ordinance says, and have discussion on which is the 17 better option and whatever the best action is needs to 18 be reflected within staff ' s opinion in the Zoning 19 Ordinance as an amendment . 20 We went ahead and published this for 21 tonight and from staff standpoint, we were optimistic 22 that we would have all the text drafted and ready for 23 your review. That did not happen. 24 So we would like this to be continued DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 31 1 until April where we will have a text for you and 2 ready for your consideration. 3 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Any discussion? 4 COMMISSIONER LINDBLOM: Anne, just from my 5 point of -- this is a public hearing. Probably for 6 the record, we should point out there is nobody here . 7 We need to probably make a point that 8 there isn' t anybody that wishes to speak to that . 9 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Since there really isn' t 10 anyone left, I don' t believe -- 11 COMMISSIONER LINDBLOM: Bill would like to 12 speak to it . 13 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Thank you. Do we have a 14 motion to continue this public hearing to April 9? 15 COMMISSIONER JONES : So moved. 16 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: We have a motion. 17 COMMISSIONER CROUCH: Second. 18 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: We have a second. 19 All in favor say aye. 20 (Ayes heard. ) 21 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Not in favor, nay. 22 (No response. ) 23 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: We will close the public 24 hearing. DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 32 1 (Proceedings were then had which 2 are not herein transcribed. ) 3 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: We are in public hearing. 4 Do you want to explain this one? 5 MR. MILLER: You do have a report in your 6 packet dated March 5 . 7 There are two requests, and in the 8 report, I have identified the issue for both of the 9 requests, the background behind the issues and the 10 staff recommendation. 11 Attached to your report is a two-page 12 front and back modification to delay the Zoning 13 Ordinance that staff is recommending to address the 14 issues . 15 The first item is dealing with 16 financial institutions . Current ordinance includes in 17 its permitted uses in the office district, banks, 18 credit unions, savings and loan associations . All of 19 which are financial institutions as is defined in the 20 staff report and as is defined in the policy recently 21 passed by City Council regarding financial 22 institutions when land use plans are prepared and 23 presented to the City. 24 COMMISSIONER JONES : So, Travis, you came up DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 33 1 with this or staff came up with this? 2 MR. MILLER: Staff came up with the text . 3 COMMISSIONER BAKER: Do you really want us 4 to - - 5 COMMISSIONER JONES : I just thought it was 6 ghost written by Mike here . 7 COMMISSIONER BAKER: No offense, Mike, but do 8 you really want us to ordinance someone being able to 9 come into town and start a bank? 10 MR. MILLER: Let me explain the ordinance. 11 This change takes that lists from a permitted list and 12 puts it under special use. 13 So anyone petitioning will be 14 required to apply for a special use which the Plan 15 Commission would be required to review, give 16 recommendations, and Council will have to approve a 17 special use . 18 So what it does is add a higher level 19 of scrutiny to those petitioners than what the current 20 ordinance does . 21 COMMISSIONER LINDBLOM: It is a few more steps 22 they have to go. 23 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: It allows more - - 24 COMMISSIONER BAKER: I don' t go with it . I DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 34 1 don' t buy it . 2 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Since there is no one in 3 the audience, I am going to entertain a motion to 4 close the public hearing so that we can continue our 5 discussion. 6 COMMISSIONER CROUCH: So moved. 7 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Do we have a second? 8 COMMISSIONER JONES : Second. 9 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: All in favor. 10 (Ayes heard. ) 11 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Not in favor. 12 (No response. ) 13 CHAIRMAN LUCIETTO: Thank you. We are out of 14 public hearing. 15 (Proceedings were then had which 16 are not herein transcribed. ) 17 18 * * * * * 19 20 21 22 23 24 DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Page 35 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS . ) SS . 2 COUNTY OF KENDALL ) 3 I, Nicola Gengler, C . S .R. No. 84-003780 , do 4 hereby certify that I reported in shorthand the 5 proceedings had at the hearing of the above-entitled 6 cause and that the foregoing Report of Proceedings, 7 Pages 1 through 34 , inclusive, is a true, correct, and 8 complete transcript of my shorthand notes so taken at 9 the time and place aforesaid. 10 I further certify that I am neither counsel 11 for nor related to counsel for any of the parties to 12 this suit, nor am I in any way related to any of the 13 parties to this suit, nor am I in any way interested 14 in the outcome thereof . 15 I further certify that my certificate annexed 16 hereto applies to the original transcript and copies 17 thereof, signed and certified under my hand only. I 18 assume no responsibility for the accuracy of any 19 reproduced copies not made under my control or 20 direction. 21 In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my 22 hand this 21st day of March, 2008 . 23 24 Certified Shorthand Reporter DepoCourt Reporting Service (630) 983-0030 Plan Council March 27, 2008 Attendees. Joe Wywrot, City Engineer Charles Wunder, Urban Planner Stephanie Boettcher, Sr. Planner Bill Dunn, EEI Dave Mogle, Dir. Parks & Recreation Anna Kurtzman, Zoning Coordinator Eric Dhuse, Director of Public Works Stephanie Boettcher, Sr. Planner Travis Miller, Dir. Of Comm. Development Bill Dunn, EEI Sgt. Don Schwartzkopf, Yorkville Police Jackie Dearborn, Civil Engineer Al Goss, Building Inspector Guests: Bob Brown, Titanium Development Alan Cruzan, Barrington Engineering Wade Joyner, Attorney The meeting was called to order at 9:10 am by Joe Wywrot. The February 14 minutes were approved as written. Prairie Pointe Lot 3 Crimson Lane—Special Use Permit Ms. Kurtzman questioned the petitioner regarding the use of the 0.47 narrow strip of land within Lot 3. Mr. Brown suggested with the size of the facility that his client did not need the space. On the current plan there are not enough parking spaces shown. With the administrative and teaching staff accounted for, there are 5 spaces short. No pavement should be allowed into the platted parking setback along Crimson Lane. The dumpster placement should change because it prohibits the 5 ft. wide buffer strip to be located along the perimeter of the parking lot. Stephanie Boettcher offered a correction on her memo, in that Crimson Lane, noted as an arterial roadway, is actually a collector road. Ms. Boettcher asked if parents would be signing the children in and out, and Mr. Brown assured her they would be, in his comments regarding a drop-off zone for the facility. Ms. Boettcher suggested the play area not be parallel to the road, but that the area might rather wrap-around the facility, in a potential use of the 0.47 excluded from the plan. Bill Dunn stated that the petitioner should be aware that there would be a fee for the regional run off provided by the storm water detention basin. He suggested bio-swales be in incorporated in the plan, to mitigate the storm water, reducing the rate of release. Joe Wywrot said the originally the proposed driveways along Prairie Pointe Drive were opposite each other, and f this is not the case, depending on how the lots opposite the day care on Prairie Pointe Drive develop, that the daycare's drive should be shifted to the north. Consideration of the Crimson Lane right of way must be considered. There is no gate within the fencing; the only entrance/gate is through the building. Dave Mogle, commenting regarding the safety of the children in the playground, insisted that the licensing with the state of Illinois is very stringent, and the safety of the children is paramount. There will be a side walk along public frontage on Crimson Lane. This will be presented at the Plan Commission on April 9. 1 Cross Evangelical North Campus—Annexation, Rezoning and Special Use The petitioner noted that the 2.5 acre spot would have a similar use as the other uses on the property. She suggested that design guidelines from the 2005 comprehensive plan should be incorporated in this development, and reflective of the surrounding neighborhood's architectural style. Conservation design principles, ex. bio-swales, best management practices, are suggestions for the petitioner. There should be a buffer along the far side of the develop- ment. The worship center will be 2-stories high. Zoning classification will be R-2, with setbacks 30', 10' and 40', for front, side, and rear, respectively. Joe Wywrot stated there would be a 50' right of way set back along Mill Road, and an additional 30' setback from the right of way line. Parking is prohibited in the landscape buffer. The proposed property to the south puts a driveway 250' west of the east property line. The city would like this to comply with intersection spacing, which is 400' for a collector road. The petitioner will look at moving this driveway to the west. Unit 20 Gr. Reserve is to the east of the property, and Joe Wywrot stated the would be favorable to 0 candles at the lot line, if lighting was installed in the parking area on the northeast side. The overall landscaping buffer of 30' along the north and east side of the development is suggested by city staff The buffer behind the parking area on the east side is 5 feet. The petitioner was encouraged to contact Grande Reserve Unit 20 developers to see if the storm water basin could be enlarged to accommodate the needs of this plan. A buffer along the north side and a smaller pond, to address the neighbors' concerns, was suggested by Joe Wywrot. Dave Mogle stated the map shows that the trail runs along the south side of Mill Road. He will check on tying both church sites together, with a trail to the north of Mill. Mill Road will be marked on the map. A separate application should be filled out if engineering is needed for the project. The annexation agreement should be submitted prior to plan commission. This will be at the May 14 Plan Commission. i Minutes submitted by Annette Williams s 2 .„u o United City of Yorkville County Seat of Kendall County 800 Game Farm Road EST �' 1836 Yorkville, Illinois, 60560 Telephone: 630-553-4350 t 1 0 Fax: 630-553-7575 IlktE 0> ..d. `,s Website: www.yorkville.il.us PC# cil'c03 U'7 APPLICATION & PETITION ANNEXATION, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, ZONING OR SPECIAL USE REQUEST Development Name: Titanium Investment Properties Day Care Date of Submission: 69/vVo'3 Requesting: [] Annexation [] Zoning[] Planned Unit Development [X] Special Use: Day Care 1. Name of Petitioner(s): Titanium Investment Properties, L.L.C.—Yorkville Series Address: 1291 Peoria Street, Washington, IL 61571 Phone Number: (309)444-8339 _ Fax Number: (309)481-0481 Relationship of Petitioner(s)to subject property: [] Owner 0 Developer [X]Contract Purchaser 2. Name of holder of legal title, if different from#1: Jason Poppen, Robert Wegener and Thomas C. Zanck If legal title is held in a Land Trust, list the names of all holders of any beneficial interest therein: 3. a). (i). Street address and physical location of subject property: Lot 3 in Prairie Point Subdivision, Crimson Lane, Yorkville, Illinois (ii). Zoning of surrounding parcels: North: South: East: West: b). Legal description of property; attach as Exhibit"A". c.). Total Acreage: 1 acre Page 1 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD,Zoning, Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 3. (con't): d). Kendall County Parcel Number(s) of property for which PUD is sought: 02-21-482-003 e). Current Zoning Classification: B-3—Service Business District f). Zoning Classification Requested: Special Use—Day Care g). Is this property within City limits? X Yes No, requesting annexation 4. Names and addresses of any adjoining or contiguous landowners and landowners within 500' entitled to notice of petition under any applicable City ordinance or State Statute: Attach a separate list and label as Exhibit"B". 5. List all governmental entities or agencies required to receive notice under Illinois law: United City of Yorkville 6. List the Illinois Business Tax Number(IBT#)for the State of Illinois and names of businesses located on subject property to be annexed: Not Applicable 7. Does a flood plain exist on the subject property? No 8. Do Electors reside on the subject property? No If so, they must execute this petition to annex. (Electors as defined by Illinois Law is a resident of the parcel who is a registered voter. Legal owners of the annexing parcel must sign the petition regardless of place of residence or legal voting status.) 9. Contact Information: Name,address, phone number and fax number of person to whom inquiries regarding this petition may be directed: Scott B. Underwood, 1291 Peoria Street, Washington, IL 61571; (309) 444-8339; Facsimile (309)481-0481; scott titan iumdevelopmentgroup.com Attorney: Name: Robert W. Brown, Jr. Address: 1291 Peoria Street,Washington, IL 61571 Phone Number: (309)444-8339 Fax Number: (309)481-0481 Engineer: Name: Keith E. Lacy, III, P.E., P.L.S., Barrington Engineering Consultants, Ltd. Address: 720 Fox Glen, Barrington, IL 60010 Phone Number: (847) 382-6337 Fax Number: (847) 382-6366 Land Planner: Name: Scott B. Underwood Address: 1291 Peoria Street, Washington, IL 61571 Phone Number: (309)444-8339 Fax Number: (309)481-0481 10. Submit the following to the Deputy Clerk in order to be scheduled for the necessary committee meetings.An incomplete submittal could delay the scheduling of your project. a. Original application with legal description plus 40 copies. b. Appropriate filing fee (Please refer to page 4 of this application to"Petitioner Route, Step 1, Fees"and/or contact the Deputy Cler k for verification of this amount). c. Concept or Preliminary Site Plan: 40 sets folded to fit in a 10"x 13"envelope Page 2 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation,PUD,Zoning,Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 In witness whereof the following petitioner(s) have submitted this application under oath and verify that to the best of their knowledge its contents are true and correct and swear that the property to be annexed is contiguous to the United City of Yorkville. Date: ,U2- 2 z - , 2003. Petitioner(s) Signature: (All legal property owners signatures must appear on this application.) Jaso9.en / Robert Wegener T .mas C. Zanck Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 2007. _ C� OFFICIAL SEAL DESK POSITANO Notary Seal NOTARY ROMtSTATE OF ili1019 - W COMMON THIS APPLICATION MUST BE NOTARIZ '. Page 3 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD,Zoning, Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 In witness whereof the following petitioner(s) have submitted this application under oath and verify that to the best of their knowledge its contents are true and correct and swear that the property to be annexed is contiguous to the United City of Yorkville. Date: r«,.tile. to , 2007. Pe . ..ner(s) Sign. (All legal property owners signatures must appear on this application.) vl.N Jason Poppen Robert Wegener Thomas C. Zanck Subscribed and sworn to before me this I C TAI day of b F.'.. cerr)g Pry , 2007. „9----e--c-c=4N,L-A-/,,,,___A----- Notary Seal OFFICIAL SEAL JUDITH M KOESTER NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF ILLINOIS THIS APPLIC ' 0Y•�� t Ylr..r• 'rft ; .' ED. Page 3 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD, Zoning,Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 In witness whereof the following petitioner(s) have submitted this application under oath and verify that to the best of their knowledge its contents are true and correct and swear that the property to be annexed is contiguous to the United City of Yorkville. Date: l 2/ ,2007. Petitioner(s) Signature: (All legal property owners signatures must ape- on this application.) . ,,1 , 440 Jason Poppen Rob rt Wei`ner Thomas C. Zanck Subscribed and sworn to before me this —1 day of Dpc�rn , 2007. �0,�, OFFICIAL SEAL Notary Seal f/''� NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF ILLINOIS MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:12/06/09 THIS APPLICATION MUST BE NOTARIZED. Page 3 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD,Zoning,Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 ANNEXATION, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT,ZONING OR SPECIAL USE REQUEST PETITIONER ROUTE Step 1: Petitioner must submit a completed application, fees*and all pertinent materials to the Deputy Clerk a minimum of 45 days prior to the targeted Plan Commission meeting. Petitioner is responsible for making submittals to other review agencies such as Kendall County, Illinois Department of Transportation, Illinois Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, etc., to allow timely review by City. *Fees: a. Annexation or Annexation and Rezoning -$250 plus$10 per acre for each acre over 5 acres b. Rezoning only -$200 plus$10 per acre for each acre over 5 acres c. Special Use- $250 plus$10 per acre for each acre over 5 acres d. Engineering Review Fees- 1.25% of the approved engineer's estimate of cost of all land improvements, to be determined by City Engineer. e. Planned Unit Development fee- $500 f. Engineering Review Deposit - up to 1 acre = $1,000; over 1 acre but not over 10= $2,500 over 10 acres, but not over 40= $5,000 over 40 acres, but not over 100 = $10,000 over 100 acres= $20,000 g. Deposit for Outside Consultants - under 2 acres = $1,000 2 to 10 acres =$2,500 over 10 acres =$5,000 Note: Owner/Developer will be responsible for payment of recording fees and costs, public hearing costs including a written transcription of public hearing and outside consultant costs (i.e. legal review, land planner, zoning coordinator, environmental, etc.). Should Owner/Developer not pay these fees directly, they will be responsible for reimbursing the United City of Yorkville for the aforementioned fees and costs. Note: You must present your plan at each of the meetings below as indicated. Step 2: Plan Council: The Planning Council meets the 2nd and 4th Thursday of the month at 9:30 a.m. in theCity Administration Office. Upon recommendation by the Plan Council, you will move forward to the Plan Commission Meeting. Attendees to this meeting include: City Administrator, City Land Planner, Sanitary District Director, City Engineer, Building Department Official, Emergency Medical Rep, Public Works Director, Executive Director of Parks and Recreation, Fire Department Rep, and Police Chief. Step 3: Park Board Planning Meeting: The Park Board makes recommendations on any Park Sites included in residential developments. The Park Board Planning Meeting is the fourth Monday of each month at 7:00 p.m.at the Riverfront Building, 301 E. Hydraulic Street. Step 4: Plan Commission: The Plan Commission meets the second Wednesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. inthe Council Chambers at City Hall. The Plan Commission will make a recommendation for the City Council's consideration. The Plan Commission consists of 10 members appointed by the Mayor, the City Attorney and City Land Planner. A Public Hearing will be held at this time for the Annexation Agreement and/or Rezoning request or Special Use request. Notice will be given by publication by the United City of Yorkville in the Kendall County Record and certified mail by the Petitioner to adjacent property owners within 500 feet of the subject property no less than fifteen days and no more than 30 days prior to the public hearing date. A certified affidavit must be filed by the petitioner with the City Clerk's office containing the names, addresses and permanent parcel numbers of all parties that were notified. Page 4 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD,Zoning, Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 Step 5: Economic Development Committee: The Economic Development Committee meets the third Thursdayof each month at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Conference Room. All projects(regardless of a positive or negative EDC recommendation) proceed to the Committee of the Whole for discussion.The Economic DevelopmentCommittee consists of three(plus one alternate) City Council members. Step 6: Committee of the Whole: The Committee of the Whole meets the first and third Tuesdays of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the Conference Room at City Hall. The project will be discussed in an informal atmosphere at the Committee of the Whole where no formal voting takes place. This session is to discuss and consider recommendations of prior committee meetings. Step 7: City Council: The City Council meets the second and fourth Tuesdays of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. This is where all City Council voting takes place. A Public Hearing will be held at this time for the Annexation Agreement and/or Planned Unit Development Agreement. Notice will be given by publication by the United City of Yorkville in the Kendall County Record. A certified mailing to surrounding landowners is not required for this public hearing. Any annexation agreement, PUD agreement or development agreement must be signed by the Petitioner prior to being voted on by the CityCouncil. Agreement: I understand and accept all requirements,fees as outlined as well as any incurred Administrative and Planning Consultant Fees which must be current before this project can proceed to the next scheduled committee meeting. Please sign and return this original (retaining a copy for your records)to the Deputy Clerk, United City of Yorkville, 800 Game Farm Road, Yorkville, Illinois 60560. Date: c7 , 2- 2— ,2008 4 „..� �1111111" ign-.'r a of `etitio 41 Page 5 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD, Zoning, Special Use Application Revised: 2/25/04 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS Application & Petition Special Use Legal Description Lot 3 in Prairie Pointe Subdivision, being a part of Section 21 and Section 28, both in Township 37 North, Range 7 East of the Third Principal Meridian, in the United City of Yorkville, Bristol Township, According to plat thereof recorded November 30, 2006 as Document No. 2006038768, in Kendall County, Illinois PIN: 02-21-400-008 02-28-226-006 Commonly known as: Lot 3 in Prairie Point Subdivision, Crimson Lane, Yorkville, Illinois February 13,2008 r Mayor Valerie Burd City Council Members United City of Yorkville Ladies& Gentlemen: I am addressing you today because I received a certified letter requesting a zoning change for the property located on the Northwest Comer of W. Center Street and Route 47. I would like you to know I am completely against the zoning change from residential to business. I am shocked that the request for zoning change on this property made it through the system last summer without any city employee verifying proper procedure had been followed prior to the matter appearing in front of City Council. In addition to being a property owner that recently received a certified letter concerning the request, I would also like to state that I am a current City Park Board Member. The property zoning should remain residential for a number of reasons: It is adjacent to a residential property. An adjacent homeowner is protesting the request for zoning change The property is adjacent to Towne Square Park. The property is near four schools and a library. The property owner does not reside in Yorkville. Thirteen years ago I was an active participant in a Neighborhood Patrol Group that walked the streets of Aurora evenings to assist the Aurora Police Department in keeping and making neighborhoods safe. I also completed Citizen Police Academy Training and Landlord Training. The single most important point stressed was people living in residential neighborhoods that paid attention to all activity in their neighborhoods,who knew who belonged in their neighborhood and who did not,who got involved in keeping their neighborhood safe by participating in neighborhood watch were responsible for keeping"good and safe" neighborhoods. There is an adjacent property owner with children at home taking responsibility for her children's safety requesting the property be zoned residential as it was when she acquired her property. The property owner requesting the change does not reside at the property address He does not reside in Yorkville. I am urging you to zone this property residential. Vee ruly UG `� Viet inK. Coveny 201 No. Bridge Street, Yorkville, 60560 Cell 815/791-8107 February 2, 2008 Yorkville Plan Commission As a resident with property adjacent to the 52.44 acres located at 8614 Route 71, Yorkville Illinois several concerns come to mind. We have seen Conceptual Pud Plans for Windmill Farms and agree that Yorkville has a need for additional age restricted homes, affordable assisted living is a plus. These would be high on our priority list with the assisted living center not exceeding two stories. Provisions of the agreement and zoning to spell out no high density housing should ever be allowed. Dry or aerated retention areas would be necessary do to breeding of misquotes and the problem with the West Nile virus. In the six years we have lived here we have enjoyed the natural setting the property has offered with trees and wild life that abounds. Water run off has never been a problem with the present topography, noise and night illumination acceptable. Environmentally friendly parking areas should also be taken into consideration. There are many trees with numbered tags, we can only hope these are the ones that will with a twenty five feet radius no dig zone applied. A row of large evergreen trees on the west side of the property should most definitely be preserved. These trees are in good condition and are located adjacent to our property; we consider this to be an excellent buffer and should not be removed! See attached Picture. Thoughtful attention should be taken to the all ready over burdened infrastructure. Will the type of buildings being built all be revenue producing for Yorkville i.e. sales tax revenue? Will the overall appearance of the property be maintained prior to construction? In closing we would like to say thank you for giving us an opportunity to express our concerns. Sincerely, Glenn E. Fiala & Lana J. Fiala 914 Fawn Ridge Ct, Yorkville IL Tidy. 5. pI� fill c�"'��hyy�� qw .M��„�S�yte�'� 4:i' +Q p.;.:�' 1• Y •. / ,. `y Por T' �^ .. yA ` � ...� xt � �al {e1 \ w � Ntr i a Plan Council March 27,2008 Attendees: Joe Wywrot, City Engineer Charles Wunder,Urban Planner Stephanie Boettcher, Sr. Planner Bill Dunn, EEI Dave Mogle, Dir. Parks &Recreation Anna Kurtzman, Zoning Coordinator Eric Dhuse, Director of Public Works Stephanie Boettcher, Sr. Planner Travis Miller, Dir. Of Comm. Development Bill Dunn, EEI Sgt. Don Schwartzkopf, Yorkville Police Jackie Dearborn, Civil Engineer Al Goss, Building Inspector Guests: Bob Brown, Titanium Development Alan Cruzan, Barrington Engineering Wade Joyner,Attorney The meeting was called to order at 9:10 am by Joe Wywrot. The February 14 minutes were approved as written. Prairie Pointe Lot 3 Crimson Lane—Special Use Permit Ms. Kurtzman questioned the petitioner regarding the use of the 0.47 narrow strip of land within Lot 3. Mr. Brown suggested with the size of the facility that his client did not need the space. On the current plan there are not enough parking spaces shown. With the administrative and teaching staff accounted for,there are 5 spaces short. No pavement should be allowed into the platted parking setback along Crimson Lane. The dumpster placement should change because it prohibits the 5 ft. wide buffer strip to be located along the perimeter of the parking lot. Stephanie Boettcher offered a correction on her memo, in that Crimson Lane, noted as an arterial roadway, is actually a collector road. Ms. Boettcher asked if parents would be signing the children in and out, and Mr. Brown assured her they would be, in his comments regarding a drop-off zone for the facility. Ms. Boettcher suggested the play area not be parallel to the road,but that the area might rather wrap-around the facility, in a potential use of the 0.47 excluded from the plan. Bill Dunn stated that the petitioner should be aware that there would be a fee for the regional run off provided by the storm water detention basin. He suggested bio-swales be in incorporated in the plan, to mitigate the storm water, reducing the rate of release. Joe Wywrot said the originally the proposed driveways along Prairie Pointe Drive were opposite each other, and f this is not the case, depending on how the lots opposite the day care on Prairie Pointe Drive develop,that the daycare's drive should be shifted to the north. Consideration of the Crimson Lane right of way must be considered. There is no gate within the fencing; the only entrance/gate is through the building. Dave Mogle, commenting regarding the safety of the children in the playground, insisted that the licensing with the state of Illinois is very stringent, and the safety of the children is paramount. There will be a side walk along public frontage on Crimson Lane. This will be presented at the Plan Commission on April 9. 1 Cross Evangelical North Campus—Annexation,Rezoning and Special Use The petitioner noted that the 2.5 acre spot would have a similar use as the other uses on the property. She suggested that design guidelines from the 2005 comprehensive plan should be incorporated in this development, and reflective of the surrounding neighborhood's architectural style. Conservation design principles, ex. bio-swales, best management practices, are suggestions for the petitioner. There should be a buffer along the far side of the develop- ment. The worship center will be 2-stories high. Zoning classification will be R-2, with setbacks 30', 10' and 40', for front, side, and rear, respectively. Joe Wywrot stated there would be a 50' right of way set back along Mill Road, and an additional 30' setback from the right of way line. Parking is prohibited in the landscape buffer. The proposed property to the south puts a driveway 250' west of the east property line. The city would like this to comply with intersection spacing, which is 400' for a collector road. The petitioner will look at moving this driveway to the west. Unit 20 Gr. Reserve is to the east of the property, and Joe Wywrot stated the would be favorable to 0 candles at the lot line, if lighting was installed in the parking area on the northeast side. The overall landscaping buffer of 30' along the north and east side of the development is suggested by city staff. The buffer behind the parking area on the east side is 5 feet. The petitioner was encouraged to contact Grande Reserve Unit 20 developers to see if the storm water basin could be enlarged to accommodate the needs of this plan. A buffer along the north side and a smaller pond,to address the neighbors' concerns, was suggested by Joe Wywrot. Dave Mogle stated the map shows that the trail runs along the south side of Mill Road. He will check on tying both church sites together, with a trail to the north of Mill. Mill Road will be marked on the map. A separate application should be filled out if engineering is needed for the project. The annexation agreement should be submitted prior to plan commission. This will be at the May 14 Plan Commission. Minutes submitted by Annette Williams 2 • • `,ou coodrlik United City of Yorkville County Seat of Kendall County ,� 800 Game Farm Road EST `4. Z WS Yorkville, Illinois, 60560 Telephone: 630-553-4350 011 Fax 630-553-7575 , 43 Website: www.yorkville.il.us NC E' 0 PC# XO8-(AO APPLICATION & PETITION ANNEXATION, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, ZONING OR SPECIAL USE REQUEST Development Name: Titanium Investment Properties Day Care Date of Submission: D�/v�04.4.3 Requesting: [] Annexation [] Zoning[] Planned Unit Development [X] Special Use: Day Care 1. Name of Petitioner(s): Titanium Investment Properties, L.L.C. -Yorkville Series _ Address: 1291 Peoria Street, Washington, IL 61571 Phone Number: (309)444-8339 _ Fax Number: (309)481-0481 Relationship of Petitioner(s)to subject property: [] Owner 0 Developer [X]Contract Purchaser 2. Name of holder of legal title, if different from#1: Jason Poppen, Robert Wegener and Thomas C. Zanck If legal title is held in a Land Trust, list the names of all holders of any beneficial interest therein: 3. a). (i). Street address and physical location of subject property: Lot 3 in Prairie Point Subdivision, Crimson Lane, Yorkville, Illinois (ii).Zoning of surrounding parcels: North: South: East: West: b). Legal description of property; attach as Exhibit"A". c.). Total Acreage: 1 acre Page 1 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD,Zoning,Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 3. (con't): d). Kendall County Parcel Number(s) of property for which PUD is sought: 02-21-482-003 e). Current Zoning Classification: B-3—Service Business District f). Zoning Classification Requested: Special Use—Day Care g). Is this property within City limits? X Yes No, requesting annexation 4. Names and addresses of any adjoining or contiguous landowners and landowners within 500' entitled to notice of petition under any applicable City ordinance or State Statute: Attach a separate list and label as Exhibit"B". 5. List all governmental entities or agencies required to receive notice under Illinois law: United City of Yorkville 6. List the Illinois Business Tax Number(IBT#)for the State of Illinois and names of businesses located on subject property to be annexed: Not Applicable 7. Does a flood plain exist on the subject property? No 8. Do Electors reside on the subject property? No If so,they must execute this petition to annex. (Electors as defined by Illinois Law is a resident of the parcel who is a registered voter. Legal owners of the annexing parcel must sign the petition regardless of place of residence or legal voting status.) 9. Contact Information: Name,address,phone number and fax number of person to whom inquiries regarding this petition may be directed: Scott B. Underwood, 1291 Peoria Street,Washington, IL 61571; (309)444-8339; Facsimile (309)481-0481; scott@titaniumdevelopmentgroup.com Attorney: Name: Robert W. Brown,Jr. Address: 1291 Peoria Street,Washington, IL 61571 Phone Number: (309)444-8339 Fax Number: (309)481-0481 Engineer: Name: Keith E. Lacy, Ill, P.E., P.L.S., Barrington Engineering Consultants, Ltd. Address: 720 Fox Glen, Barrington, IL 60010 Phone Number: (847) 382-6337 Fax Number: (847) 382-6366 Land Planner: Name: Scott B. Underwood Address: 1291 Peoria Street,Washington, IL 61571 Phone Number: (309)444-8339 Fax Number: (309)481-0481 10. Submit the following to the Deputy Clerk in order to be scheduled for the necessary committee meetings.An incomplete submittal could delay the scheduling of your project. a. Original application with legal description plus 40 copies. b. Appropriate filing fee(Please refer to page 4 of this application to"Petitioner Route, Step 1, Fees"and/or contact the Deputy Cler k for verification of this amount). c. Concept or Preliminary Site Plan:40 sets folded to fit in a 10"x 13"envelope Page 2 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation,PUD,Zoning,Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 In witness whereof the following petitioner(s) have submitted this application under oath and verify that to the best of their knowledge its contents are true and correct and swear that the property to be annexed is contiguous to the United City of Yorkville. Date: 02-2 2 - , 2001 Petitioner(s) Signature: (All legal property owners signatures must appear on this application.) A , Jaso •en / Robert Wegener T •mas C. Zanck Subscribed and sworn to before me this \ day of C.0)1/4. A2007. 01\ OFFICklEAL OEM It POMTANO Notary Seal ,iMWUILIC.siTAtE�I/ RO woall a+ `1 ,w.A `i7 TIVTHIS APPLICATION MUST BE NOTARIZ 2. Page 3 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD,Zoning,Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 In witness whereof the following petitioner(s) have submitted this application under oath and verify that to the best of their knowledge its contents are true and correct and swear that the property to be annexed is contiguous to the United City of Yorkville. Date: Dec t —h . go , 2007. Pe ' '•ner(s) Sign (All legal property owners signatures must appear on this application.) tyJason Poppen Robert Wegener Thomas C. Zanck Subscribed and sworn to before me this / C TN day of D£cFr„B Pvf--- , 2007. 51,—../-...74N;11/62../......47----- Notary Seal OFFICIAL SEAL JUDITH IU KOESTER NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF ILLINOIS My.. THIS APPLIC • - '' mO or• s • ' ED. Page 3 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD,Zoning,Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 In witness whereof the following petitioner(s) have submitted this application under oath and verify that to the best of their knowledge its contents are true and correct and swear that the property to be annexed is contiguous to the United City of Yorkville. Date: [Z/ 3 2007. Petitioner(s) Signature: (All legal property owners signatures must appeeon this application.) _1,• A' .:'A�� 11111 Jason Poppen Rob rt We.`ner Thomas C. Zanck Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1 day of Vp��4,ti1 , 2007. de/y24/11., .� OFFICIAL SEAL Notary Seal LINDA S JAHN NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF ILLINOIS MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:12/06/09 THIS APPLICATION MUST BE NOTARIZED. Page 3 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD,Zoning,Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 ANNEXATION,PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT,ZONING OR SPECIAL USE REQUEST PETITIONER ROUTE Step 1: Petitioner must submit a completed application,fees*and all pertinent materials to the Deputy Clerk a minimum of 45 days prior to the targeted Plan Commission meeting. Petitioner is responsible for making submittals to other review agencies such as Kendall County, Illinois Department of Transportation, Illinois Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, etc., to allow timely review by City. *Fees: a. Annexation or Annexation and Rezoning-$250 plus$10 per acre for each acre over 5 acres b. Rezoning only-$200 plus$10 per acre for each acre over 5 acres c. Special Use-$250 plus$10 per acre for each acre over 5 acres d. Engineering Review Fees- 1.25% of the approved engineer's estimate of cost of all land improvements, to be determined by City Engineer. e. Planned Unit Development fee-$500 f. Engineering Review Deposit - up to 1 acre = $1,000; over 1 acre but not over 10=$2,500 over 10 acres, but not over 40=$5,000 over 40 acres, but not over 100 =$10,000 over 100 acres=$20,000 g. Deposit for Outside Consultants- under 2 acres = $1,000 2 to 10 acres=$2,500 over 10 acres=$5,000 Note: Owner/Developer will be responsible for payment of recording fees and costs, public hearing costs including a written transcription of public hearing and outside consultant costs (i.e. legal review, land planner, zoning coordinator, environmental, etc.). Should Owner/Developer not pay these fees directly, they will be responsible for reimbursing the United City of Yorkville for the aforementioned fees and costs. Note: You must present your plan at each of the meetings below as indicated. Step 2: Plan Council: The Planning Council meets the 2nd and 4th Thursday of the month at 9:30 a.m. in theCity Administration Office. Upon recommendation by the Plan Council, you will move forward to the Plan Commission Meeting. Attendees to this meeting include: City Administrator, City Land Planner, Sanitary District Director, City Engineer, Building Department Official, Emergency Medical Rep, Public Works Director, Executive Director of Parks and Recreation, Fire Department Rep, and Police Chief. Step 3: Park Board Planning Meeting: The Park Board makes recommendations on any Park Sites included in residential developments. The Park Board Planning Meeting is the fourth Monday of each month at 7:00 p.m.at the Riverfront Building, 301 E. Hydraulic Street. Step 4: Plan Commission: The Plan Commission meets the second Wednesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. inthe Council Chambers at City Hall.The Plan Commission will make a recommendation for the City Council's consideration.The Plan Commission consists of 10 members appointed by the Mayor, the City Attorney and City Land Planner. A Public Hearing will be held at this time for the Annexation Agreement and/or Rezoning request or Special Use request. Notice will be given by publication by the United City of Yorkville in the Kendall County Record and certified mail by the Petitioner to adjacent property owners within 500 feet of the subject property no less than fifteen days and no more than 30 days prior to the public hearing date. A certified affidavit must be filed by the petitioner with the City Clerk's office containing the names, addresses and permanent parcel numbers of all parties that were notified. Page 4 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD,Zoning,Special Use Application Revised:2/25/04 Step 5: Economic Development Committee:The Economic Development Committee meets the third Thursdayof each month at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Conference Room.All projects(regardless of a positive or negative EDC recommendation)proceed to the Committee of the Whole for discussion.The Economic DevelopmentCommittee consists of three(plus one alternate) City Council members. Step 6: Committee of the Whole: The Committee of the Whole meets the first and third Tuesdays of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the Conference Room at City Hall. The project will be discussed in an informal atmosphere at the Committee of the Whole where no formal voting takes place. This session is to discuss and consider recommendations of prior committee meetings. Step 7: City Council: The City Council meets the second and fourth Tuesdays of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. This is where all City Council voting takes place. A Public Hearing will be held at this time for the Annexation Agreement and/or Planned Unit Development Agreement. Notice will be given by publication by the United City of Yorkville in the Kendall County Record. A certified mailing to surrounding landowners is not required for this public hearing. Any annexation agreement, PUD agreement or development agreement must be signed by the Petitioner prior to being voted on by the CityCouncil. Agreement: I understand and accept all requirements,fees as outlined as well as any incurred Administrative and Planning Consultant Fees which must be current before this project can proceed to the next scheduled committee meeting. Please sign and return this original (retaining a copy for your records)to the Deputy Clerk, United City of Yorkville, 800 Game Farm Road, Yorkville, Illinois 60560. Date: c , Z Z 2005 ��'� ign-.'of `etitio - Page 5 of 5 United City of Yorkville Annexation, PUD,Zoning, Special Use Application Revised: 2/25/04 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE, ILLINOIS Application & Petition Special Use Legal Description Lot 3 in Prairie Pointe Subdivision,being a part of Section 21 and Section 28,both in Township 37 North, Range 7 East of the Third Principal Meridian, in the United City of Yorkville, Bristol Township, According to plat thereof recorded November 30, 2006 as Document No. 2006038768, in Kendall County, Illinois PIN: 02-21-400-008 02-28-226-006 Commonly known as: Lot 3 in Prairie Point Subdivision, Crimson Lane, Yorkville, Illinois ,,,o c,,. Memorandum O To: Plan Commission From: Travis Miller, and EST. 1836 Stephanie Boettcher Dat Annette Williams,Administrative Assistant(for distribution) 0� Date: April 2, 2008 Subject: PC2008-06 Prairie Pointe Lot 3,Crimson Lane(Special Use) Staff Comments/Recommendations: • The legal description attached to the petition encompasses all of Lot 3 of the Prairie Pointe Subdivision. However, all graphic drawings of the site (site plan, engineering plans and landscape plans)reduce the size of the site by approximately 70 lineal feet (resulting in a 0.47 acre area). An explanation of why there is this discrepancy should be provided by the applicant, along with an explanation of what will happen with this strip or land. • Staff recommends the parking lot entrance be moved to the north portion of Lot 3 to allow for shared access to Lot 2 (undeveloped parcel to the north)to provide better ingress and egress to this parcel and to conform with The Zoning Ordinance (Title 10, Chapter 11, Section 3)requirement for commercial driveways to be a minimum distance of 200 feet measured from the nearest intersecting right-of-way edge. • Staff has determined that there is inadequate parking for this facility. Based on Zoning Ordinance requirements for this use, 39 spaces are required. 34 parking spaces are being proposed, providing a shortage of at least 5 parking spots. Staff recommends this development comply with the parking lot requirements prior to site development permit approval. Special Use Standards(10-14-6 of Zoning Ordinance) F. Standards:No special use shall be recommended by the Plan Commission unless said Commission shall find that: 1. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will not be unreasonably detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals,comfort or general welfare. 2. The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted,nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. 3. The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. 1 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage or other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. See staff comment regarding driveway entrance location above 6. The special use shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located, except as such regulations may in each instance be modified by the City Council pursuant to the recommendations of the Plan Commission. (Ord. 1973-56A, 3-28-74) 2 miciwita.,TA....gARTAUL422,LIG, FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION PRAIRIE POINTE � "�.' "" .,.�; rim. .p ,......:,. ....a.....T4AI1 14.-em(m , A SUROi1ASION Or PAR'OF SECTIONS 21 ANO 28, TW° 37 N.,RANGE 7 E OP THE - +>`.r TNNRO RM.,IN THE UNITED CITY OP YORK ILL itt•t/.{tp,wwp BRISTOL TWA.KENOALL GO.,ILLINOIS. et-2786 at-am, Slot Ili& Litaill'%:=T' t ,alra SEE CONCREE, 21l, I a /�'\ It,.,► , . t eaN 4, r d w7 a „ < i4 \\ dNaT i {: a t � 0� AA i 7761>4 �a 0.1 261#:"b q oa \ ..T.„;.,.....,,,.,:., ,' ;Pm. 4 ,p' Fi" �, cPC,. 'L.•o ,. 6 vay \v v N8N1ToVN \ I� Y L7.401 2\\O` sa � (167 S�DbY ,,,..;„:„.:,.\\ i".: T\ Miro \ P.G9 ! LOT I tSPA ! \ COMER OF LOT,sT ,N4'. ntir or CNEEMS 0,RANEE MEADOWS 9A2105Wr k• 'V'ro• 'L \ith,mf6•ADar7 8a5Y \ DEMO 1W' 1 MO P.U. / ;I'm, , y[+/,'ew}6�� ]b7• \ OMANAGEMEENNE 1 ADC uj�j A.ea. '� c�,:r>/ L ?' NJ878bTM 4'486 > as oory�m:000rsau ', I sC N. Yr/"\./IIko' Qa4 / ,A P� /--, I 4 tsM� \ � er.ar e� R// a.er°�/' l6nas e C 4-b� "RNEE's�. 7_ tai / / x, (a•� �p�-�ye t fuC8*2'/O�CT �� .., . t Ny 47'44/.F-7.. )"'ffi'm•z c, 94f�" Foo. \ / ;/ f f M.rYS60• Sa (li 0 — .4'a—————__._swuraz',r;I 1-- — / COMES S177nr LO a.9 ear /� ��wII la 538.46 N8S•$q pp-y q.: a q 8a07 L7,0 T o f fANO OEM 7t, 'CTyV, 1 1 I EASEMENT NE COME 1(m+em - t I \�` ,ya4 b 4 ;S. l 1 \ USPS LA880 1 +® $• p>S' @j 7/1 END Mir ( ` �,,,� �r l ..4.\‘‘A„ S.\ \ , ser aP."E ( Sal,,,,p604 0_ G L \ \ \''�r3� /,.9 ry' 5-1•P';00,000,326%2 1 4� ♦ (/^a4`-R - / co.tk� s'• q•5�' N5 \rj„��'F' / TA'P 4-- / efe. i 4/- - —7........ gga eta / I f ^Ay`•�h /` / / /r / sso•uaMs ( 2: dN` / M`. �/ 48 1 / .w :ry s1ANTAer se.Ear I e �� ' r / Ls782t R81SDDA7 Sr rr I, / `r 882182 47'2rO f`G MSL I / "ate■-- J xiv //Mir / // I ! =' DBMS "tan�El 352N8ST no/ / S<1EOIYQiOnI COtYTAh�., n.G6+'!- �� f6 ,/ /ACRes of LAN MORE 02 Less "o-al..«a.w _ , AIRY P _',KOK arum ■ m�a*MOWm sEr w ..w..a.. w'T 4..- ..e. .w w.......ww 1�- —_I AMMor�...9.. Ah m"..•_�v-..or �easoswr ---RR?Cr Mr ua 3W`"' :tyrt.sai alert WOW Iasi '--��_.-art--........ _`°*im L _ —/Mart WSW UNE ...w �w�w-tv.7..:..°ter....:, Ler®z --�., awrxra¢ Arnim ...en..w.e.....••.r. A ovens ACCESS rwsA2Ar lea ram lots i.a S AAD rant-....._ AAS 4088?ARWlR DIES ACAS t4Etr8'ISM ACCEIS ' 1.w e..tr.= 1%28.'.4 ..-...__ ___.._._ _ .� SIM a..+q Aw.wW.a'weM w�..L #40 86 EI 9r RSC 840 aD7448 Macon OMAN MAIOEMr 2800 M/AMI9419 saws AIM EASDAPI IaMIabS A(aef Nags uxoFo'MSS AGSM lA9EYNr• GRAPHIC SCALE PE IS AGY-,YQ1tl1K'2886446 nae AVMS MX CAM a as WWI!6 DE Mat 04444428"8640040 me SM. I oseore50 AE982A 0AN8- sr(DV s OPOV MSS 400482 soar Isass Aran &AL.-moos&TMdr LAE .00 0Y£4645 AS C6D ON Me RAr 403[000129 (N u POB.POO Oa&MOW Aae81 a T£ Artde S 044428 tare 4 Ya-49 O. MOO v PON:a COOECEMprt MC 2886p®OE s 0460,Nee 4820 14R6 War #11&ELL-RENE OTEUIV ME 944,46E nurtsor sr 44186846104084106405 E>R8ittft X!NE CANT aut. S.M.-Sia EEANR sosso entr 44404?A6V01116a]8 AC 10r 42886160'26 WAWA SE 642E-EIPORARY Ac ESS E(:11d0 DISH AT AT HRr se 28288000444185(2802805052828 aura 101.8 ¢,i.4 sononases A282rmrr FINAL FLAT OF SUBDIVISNON- A ArtNPAICAL pawns is neasysnsanvesM6e no S ons NDN 6 MDA!ME exaso6IIE IAoa 6 PC(.YOB pre CM IrMalasE MOM AM DE MAWS Or to*I.8.S/MO a Aar WSW PRAIRIE POINTE mew raw•1 SA`sib.Md7S$6 00.YL$8086 4 LYDABpe 640085 a2EMi� 004 AAA.mess sten aE MIR MELS V• SEM MOS 050 864746 Alt AMON OMENS 0028 ft 1074127,40%am YoaecvlLL�,ILLINOIS 4 Dtlf8ME'M6 A(12O¢(,IMI AM 4AC 06642!8 084096'OM2,@.'MOM 0405 0440� a N6 442ams 984:4 er 4x86868 er smuts MA6N; F fil-- 6614 8640 ms., (arch! maw ow B ALL .40848628802842808046028280428 2!DE epL6Sr SWAM'4050. 1 �--+ • a DAO -. DAR'IM MC aiiiF `4a t 114 .•02-C 86 ARE 4429 DAY 10648 MR 415 BYSR'& �O ¢e��A.40Me,,..� ap B•EI COiaWY03 440 28128sOa MR FA®rxr P9casa6 AZT sIaIW 444!'016 i i :I= A c as r'. Dm 16 y sessC 1 of 2 I _ ,aM - Vo 4 �W . $ 1111W R ^�a t " p n i. Y " e6li �" aeW €r > 0- tCikika v %Ova, It1 dli, I , 1 bik �� Ic1110p IV �il a 7 g - '� ; �+ y �tia 3i ra .,ifil .4— .. � r �� ,,14, �gzINI g� a a ' "1111P Yll g ° 4 +11 I `.„a ,„ 1 p � o W .,„ , nhe , i 9 v P7” k qe: )pj'4lio C+CYin le i fi� E 1 48. 3 w � t ZE a i cl e� aE1i, g : Ri S 4ia[E © `� }6g � � 7 W $ t' �i v 1 p 1 ql piIM m alg gg �g � @� gi at 0MII R E4aaa lei agR171 a paQ � � 9 $ppD Rgr�l3 :41 ly 1e e a a, i � t ! g ;iga =a 134 ,fig I !1M 4 pUi A dt a VI ; 'gpE ;��!! Yp e 1". 4 it 1 3 '4 . TIN1:111/11 / Tp r P d h1% ! Qi 1;!!!;!(V41.110 01111140161q;1"1 a � 1 11/ it 14411 113 !3ie it !1:1111141/1/ 21 11i ;O Huai° k _ x 04 taae W cal z e a lt : �' a 4 + p g Si 11 I R * R g401lio16 1� i4 !,% lv i;1. 11' I !II • j 7�x 1) '!i ! i 8 R tPli11 a s It vg „oh Avi ' 1 , - 014 ij • 0 1 2 t :J4! y�#j�+ qy7 _ ��gakYEs8 a �" it:111 1 e ;%i 1 1 P. e� 2 oIi11 4e X1 15 1i' R F Ri�i1a1 1= 141 004 k` a . b : iz eqa *a 3IY1y o N k ' _ ;-1' sacrashW p g �� a F' m • , k � pa a est a e b e a w g 35 g hi1116440410 1 'w yh6 ; p "r 1a 4 �n 1 ' k ' � g a 4 ea ga_� g a V g �g � � a '� 132s a g • '�. , Q h a R s` _01,111414.12:11,404 R t Ill ;h �ai�l ° g`�} `�� g hi �a ' i 111 i � 1:4111 I '3$ I p aI It z p '41ai 3� dad Ix A5 1 1 l gg e ` a a p� 1 : lq% li a3p I at 8 ; 41 — 2. g o e„ ;44 / ai i R S. a a a g a 0a il Vg g s� � Fill tdat� iya} itill/14% i 1 , ab • a `k i ilii eft€Ai ;5 3 3Ri 1.64r " ; 114:11 e 1 !tic d ihii Memorandum 0," To: Plan Commission EstFrom: Charles Wunder, AICPAN CC: Travis Miller Date: 4/2/2008 Subject: Zoning Ordinance Chapter Fourteen Amendment The proposed amendments to Chapter 14 of the Zoning Ordinance could be characterized as "housekeeping"amendments. Chapter 14 "Zoning Administration and Enforcement" outlines the procedures the Zoning Ordinance is enforced, amended, varied, Special Uses granted and Annexation Agreements enacted . The proposed changes clarify what needs to be done,when it needs to be done and who is responsible for doing them. The first changes proposed are in Section 10-14-5 are dealing with variations. The changes in this section are recommended so that the ordinance actually reflects who is responsible for some of the actions necessary to grant a Zoning Ordinance Variation. The second changes proposed are in Section 10-14-6 dealing with Special Uses. The changes in this section are recommended so that the ordinance actually reflects who is responsible for some of the actions necessary to grant a Special Use. The third changes proposed are in Section 10-14-7 dealing with Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. The changes in this section are recommended so that the ordinance actually reflects who is responsible for some of the actions necessary to make changes or additions to the Zoning Ordinance. The last changes proposed are in Section 10-14-8 dealing with Annexation Agreements. 10-14-1: ENFORCEMENT: A. Zoning Officer: The City Building Inspector,hereinafter referred to as the "Officer", is designated as the Zoning Officer of the City,to be responsible for enforcing this Title. Said Officer shall have the power and shall see that the provisions of this Title are properly enforced. B. City Officers, Employees and Citizens: It shall also be the duty of all officers, citizens and employees of the City,particularly of all members of the Police and Fire Departments,to assist the Building Inspector by reporting to him any new construction, reconstruction, improved land uses or upon any seeming violation. (Ord. 1973-56A, 3-28-74) 10-14-2: PLAN COMMISSION: The City Plan Commission, which has been duly created by the Mayor128 , shall have the authority,responsibility and duties as set forth herein and as follows: A. To hear and report findings and recommendations to the Mayor and City Council on all applications for amendments and special use permits in the manner prescribed by standards and other regulations set forth herein. B. To initiate, direct and review, from time to time, studies of the provisions of this Title, and to make reports of its recommendations to the Mayor and City Council not less frequently than once each year. C. To hear and decide all matters upon which it is required to pass under this Title. (Ord. 1973- 56A, 3-28-74) 10-14-3: BUILDING PERMITS: A. Building Permit: 1. Permit Required:No building or structure shall be erected,reconstructed, enlarged or moved until a building permit shall have been applied for in writing and issued by the Officer. Said permit shall be posted in a prominent place on the premises prior to and during the period of erection,reconstruction, enlargement or moving. 2. Compliance With Provisions: Before a permit is issued for the erection, moving, alteration, enlargement or occupancy of any building or structure or use of premises,the plans and intended use shall indicate conformity in all respects to the provisions of this Title. 3. Site Plan: Every application for a building permit submitted to the Officer shall be accompanied by a site plan, drawn to scale, showing the lot and the building site and the location of existing building on the lot, accurate dimensions of the lot, yards and building or buildings,together with locations and uses,together with such other information as may be necessary to the enforcement of this Title. B. Sign Permit: No sign shall be erected,reconstructed, enlarged or moved until a sign permit shall have been applied for in writing and issued by the Officer-129- (Ord. 1973-56A, 3-28- 74) 10-14-4: CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: A. Certificate Required: 1. A certificate of occupancy to be issued by the Officer shall be required for any of the following, except buildings incidental to agricultural operations other than residences: a. Occupancy and use of a building hereafter erected or enlarged. b. Change in use of an existing building. c. Occupancy and use of vacant land except for the raising of crops. d. Change in the use of land to a use of a different classification except for the raising of crops. e. Any change in the use of nonconforming use. 2. No such occupancy, use or change of use shall take place until a certificate of occupancy therefor shall have been issued. B. Application for Certificate; Action on: 1. Written application for a certificate of occupancy for a new building or for an existing building which has been enlarged shall be made at the same time as the application for the zoning permit for such building. Said certificate shall be acted upon within three (3) days after a written request for the same has been made to the Officer after the erection or enlargement of such building or part thereof has been completed in conformance with the provisions of this Title. 2. Written application for a certificate of occupancy for the use of vacant land, or for a change in the use of land or of a building, or for a change in a nonconforming use, as herein provided, shall be made to the Officer. If the proposed use is in conformity with the provisions of this Title, the certificate of occupancy therefor shall be issued within three(3) days after the application for the same has been made. C. Temporary Certificate of Occupancy: Pending the issuance of such a certificate, a temporary certificate of occupancy may be issued by the Officer for a period of not more than six (6) months during the completion of the construction of the building or of alterations which are required under the terms of any law or ordinance. Such temporary certificate may be renewed,but it shall not be construed in any way to alter the respective rights, duties or obligations of the owner or of the City relating to the use or occupancy of the land or building, or any other matter covered by this Title, and such temporary certificates shall not be issued except under such restrictions and provisions as will adequately insure the safety of the occupants. D. Contents of Certificates: Each certificate of occupancy shall state that the building or proposed use of a building or land complies with all provisions of this Title. E. Records Kept: A record of all certificates of occupancy shall be kept on file in the office of the Officer and a copy shall be forwarded, on request, to any person having proprietary or tenancy interest in the building or land affected. (Ord. 1973-56A, 3-28-74) 10-14-5: VARIATIONS: A. Authority: The Zoning Board of Appeals, after a public hearing,may determine and vary the regulations of this Title in harmony with their general purpose and intent, only in the specific instances hereinafter set forth,where the Board of Appeals makes findings of fact in accordance with the standards hereinafter prescribed, and further finds that there are practical difficulties or particular hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of this Title. B. Application for Variation; Hearing: An application for a variation shall be filed in writing with the Zoning Officer. The application shall contain such information as the Zoning Board of Appeals may from time to time,by rule,require. Variations other than those authorized by this Section on which the Zoning Board of Appeals may act shall be submitted to the Zoning eats Zoning Officer and acted on in the following manner: 1. Notice of Hearing: The City Clerk shall publish notice of a public hearing on such application for variation, stating the time and place and the purpose of the hearing. Notice shall be published at least fifteen(15) days but not more than thirty(30) days in a paper of general circulation in the City. '-- : - -:, - :- :' -- affcctcd thercby. The applicant shall also provide a copy of this notice to all property owners within 250 feet of the subject property of the variance request. The applicant shall send the notice by certified mail properly addressed as shown on the Tax Assessors rolls and with sufficient postage affixed thereto and return receipt requested. Copies of the return receipt must be submitted to the City Zoning Office at least 24 hours before the Public Hearing. 2. Decisions by Zoning Board of Appeals; Council Action: The Zoning Board of Appeals shall, within thirty(30) days after the public hearing or hearings, make its recommendations to the City Council in writing. The City Council shall then act upon such petition for variation within a reasonable time. C. Standards for Variations: 1. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall not vary the regulations of this Title,nor recommend to the City Council variation of this Title,unless it shall make findings based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case that the standards for hardships set forth in the Illinois Municipal Code 132 are complied with and the following: a. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations was carried out. b. The conditions upon which the petition for a variation is based are unique to the property for which the variation is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. c. The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Title and has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. d. The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. e. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger to the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 2. The Zoning Board of Appeals may impose such conditions and restrictions upon the premises benefitted by a variation as may be necessary to comply with the standards established in this subsection to reduce or minimize the effect of such variation upon other property in the neighborhood and to better carry out the general intent of this Title. D. Authorized Variations: 1. Variations from the regulations of this Title shall be granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals only in accordance with the standards established in subsection C of this Section and may be granted only in the following instances and in no others: a. To permit any yard or setback less than the yard or setback required by the applicable regulations,but by not more than twenty five percent(25%). b. To permit the use of a lot or lots for a use otherwise prohibited solely because of insufficient area or widths of the lot or lots but in no event shall the respective area and width of the lot or lots be less than ninety percent(90%)of the required area and width. The percentage set forth in this paragraph is not to be reduced by any other percentage for minimum lot width and area set forth in this Title. c. To permit the same off-street parking facility to qualify as required facilities for two (2) or more uses,provided the substantial use of such facility by each use does not take place at approximately the same hours of the same days of the week. d. To reduce the applicable off-street parking or loading facilities required by not more than one parking space or loading space, or twenty percent (20%) of the applicable regulations, whichever number is greater. e. To increase by not more than twenty five percent(25%)the maximum distance that required parking spaces are permitted to be located from the use served. f. To increase by not more than twenty percent (20%) the gross area of any sign. g. To increase by not more than ten percent(10%) the maximum gross floor area of any use so limited by the applicable regulations. h. To exceed any of the authorized variations allowed under this subsection when a lot of record or a zoning lot, vacant or legally used on the effective date hereof, is,by reason of the exercise of the right of eminent domain by any authorized governmental domain proceeding, reduced in size so that the remainder of said lot of record or zoning lot or structure on said lot does not conform with one or more of the regulations of the district in which said lot of record or zoning lot or structure is located. i. The concurring vote of four(4)members of the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be necessary to grant a variation. 2. Variations other than those listed may be granted by the City Council,but only after a public hearing as set forth herein for an authorized variation. The concurring vote of two- thirds (2/3) of the elected members of the City Council shall be necessary to reverse the recommendations of the Zoning Board of Appeals. (Ord. 1973-56A, 3-28-74) 10-14-6: SPECIAL USES: A. Purpose: The development and execution of a zoning ordinance is based upon the division of the City into districts,within which districts the use of land and buildings and the bulk and location of buildings and structures in relation to the land are substantially uniform. It is recognized,however, that there are uses which,because of their unique characteristics, cannot be properly classified in any particular district or districts without consideration,in each case, of the impact of those uses on neighboring land and of the public need for the particular use at the particular location. Such special uses fall into two (2) categories: 1. Uses publicly operated or traditionally affected with a public interest. 2. Uses entirely private in character but of such an unusual nature that their operation may give rise to unique problems with respect to their impact upon neighboring property or public facilities. B. Initiation of Special Uses: Any person owning or having an interest in the subject property may file an application to use such land for one or more of the special uses provided for in this Title in the zoning district in which the land is situated. C.Application for Special Use: An application for a special use or expansion of a special use shall be filed with the City Clerk and shall be accompanied by such plans or data as prescribed by the Plan Commission from time to time. D. Hearing on Application: Upon receipt of the application referred to above, the Plan Commission shall hold at least one public hearing. At least fifteen (15) days in advance of such hearing,but not more than thirty(30)days, the City Clerk shall publish the notice of the time,place and purpose of such hearing shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. The applicant shall give notice of the public hearing to the owners of all properties within 250 feet of the subject property.The applicant shall send the said notice by certified mail properly addressed as shown on the County Tax Assessors rolls and with sufficient postage affixed thereto and return receipt requested. Copies of the return receipt must be submitted to the City's Zoning Office at least 24 hours before the Public Hearing. E. Authorization: For each application for a special use, the Plan Commission shall report to the City Council its findings and recommendations, including the stipulations of additional conditions and guarantees that such conditions will be complied with when they are deemed necessary for the protection of the public interest. The City Council may grant or deny any application for a special use;provided,however,that in the event of written protest against any proposed special use, signed and acknowledged by the owners of twenty percent(20%) of the frontage adjacent thereto, or across an alley, or directly opposite therefrom, such special use shall not be granted except by the favorable vote of two-thirds (2/3) of all members of the City Council. F. Standards: No special use shall be recommended by the Plan Commission unless said Commission shall find that: 1. The establishment,maintenance or operation of the special use will not be unreasonably detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,morals, comfort or general welfare. 2. The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted,nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. 3. The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. 4. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage or other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. 5. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. 6. The special use shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located, except as such regulations may in each instance be modified by the City Council pursuant to the recommendations of the Plan Commission. (Ord. 1973-56A, 3-28-74) 10-14-7: AMENDMENTS: A. Initiation: Amendments may be proposed by the Mayor and City Council,the Plan Commission,the Zoning Board of Appeals or any property owner. B. Processing: 1. Filing of Application; Contents: An application for an amendment shall be filed with the City Clerk. The application shall be accompanied by such plans or data and such other information as specified by the Plan Commission, and shall include a statement in writing by the applicant and adequate evidence showing that the proposed amendments will conform to the standards set forth herein. Copies of such application shall be forwarded by the City Council to the Plan Commission with the request to hold a public hearing. 2. Notices: The Zoning Officer shall give notices of the public hearings to the applicant. :,-: ; .- - : -- • ; ;--. . .- : : - - ::- -• .. ;- - . . . - . . - - - ---' - ' ; '•-•: -. The applicant shall send written notices to all of the surrounding properties within 250 feet of the subject property with said notices giving All notices shall be in writing and shall give the time,place and purpose of such hearing and shall be mailed not more than thirty(30) days in advance of such hearing. The notice shall be sent by certified mail,properly addressed as shown on the County Tax Assessor's rolls and with sufficient postage affixed thereto, with return receipt requested. 3. Publication: The Zoning Officer shall cause a notice of time,place and purpose of such hearing to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Yorkville no more than thirty(30) days nor less than fifteen(15) days in advance of such hearing. 4. Hearing: Upon receipt in proper form of the application and statement referred to above, the Plan Commission shall hold at least one public hearing on the proposed amendment. However,the Plan Commission may continue from time to time the hearing without further notice being published. (Ord. 1973-56A, 3-28-74) 5. Findings of Fact and Recommendation of the Plan Commission: Within forty five(45) days after the close of the hearing on a proposed amendment, the Plan Commission shall make written findings of fact and shall submit same, together with its recommendations to the Mayor and City Council. Where the purpose and effect of the proposed amendment are to change the zoning classification of particular property,the Plan Commission shall make findings based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case with respect to the following matters: a. Existing uses of property within the general area of the property in question. b. The zoning classification of property within the general area of the property in question. c. The suitability of the property in question to the uses permitted under the existing zoning classification. d. The trend of development, if any, in the general area of the property in question, including changes, if any, which have taken place since the day the property in question was placed in its present zoning classification. e. The impact that such reclassification and/or annexation will have upon traffic and traffic conditions on said routes; the effect, if any, such reclassification and/or annexation would have upon existing accesses to said routes; and the impact of additional accesses as requested by the petitioner upon traffic and traffic conditions and flow on said routes. (Ord. 1976-43, 11-4-76) C. Decisions: 1. Plan Commission: a. The Plan Commission may hear a request for any change in zoning and may recommend a zoning classification more restrictive than that requested. A concurring vote of a majority of those members present at the meeting with a minimum of three(3) concurring votes shall be required to recommend granting or denying an application for an amendment. b. Report to the City Council shall contain number present and number of votes for against the motion. 2. Mayor and City Council: a. The Mayor and City Council, upon receiving the recommendation of the Plan Commission,may grant or deny any proposed amendment in accordance with applicable Illinois statutes or may refer to the Plan Commission for further consideration. b. If an application for a proposed amendment is not acted upon finally by the City Council within six(6)months of the date upon which such application is received by the Mayor and City Council, it shall be deemed to have been denied. (Ord. 1973-56A, 3-28- 74) 10-14-8: ANNEXATION AGREEMENTS: A. Petition for Annexation Agreement: All annexation agreements shall be initiated by the filing of a petition with the City Clerk. Such petitions shall be verified under oath by all the record title owners, including mortgage holders, of all the lands included within the annexation agreement. B. Request for Zoning Amendments or Variations: 1. All petitions for annexation agreement requesting a zoning classification other than the zoning classification assigned to lands annexed to the City or for variations shall be processed in the same manner as a petition for a request for zoning amendments or variations, as provided herein, for lands within the jurisdictional limits of the City. All such requests for zoning amendments or variations shall be accompanied by the fees as provided in Section 10-14-9 of this Chapter, and the said fees shall be paid at the time of filing the petition for annexation agreement. 2. The Plan Commission shall hold a public hearing on the zoning amendment aspects of Annexation Agreements.Notice of the Public Hearing shall include the time,place and purpose of the Public Hearing and be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Yorkville no more than thirty (30) days nor less than fifteen (15) days in advance of the hearing. The applicant shall send written notices to all of the surrounding properties within 250 feet of the subject property with said notices on the Tax Assessor's rolls and with sufficient postage affixed thereto,with return giving the time, place and purpose of such hearing and shall be mailed not more than thirty (30) days in advance of such hearing. The notice shall be sent by certified mail, properly addressed as shown receipt requested. In the event that a zoning variation is being requested as part of the Annexation Agreement the Zoning Board of Appeals shall hold a public hearing on the zoning variation request in the Annexation Agreement. Notice of the Public Hearing shall include the time,place and purpose of the Public Hearing and be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Yorkville no more than thirty (30) days nor less than fifteen (15) days in advance of the hearing. The applicant shall send written notices to all of the surrounding properties within 250 feet of the subject property with said notices on the Tax Assessor's rolls and with sufficient postage affixed thereto, with return giving the time,place and purpose of such hearing and shall be mailed not more than thirty (30) days in advance of such hearing. The notice shall be sent by certified mail,properly addressed as shown receipt requested. 3. The Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals, after consideration and hearing of the request for zoning amendment or variations incidental to the part of petitions for annexation agreement, shall make specific findings of fact and recommendations with respect to zoning amendments or variations upon the property included within the annexation agreement, as in all cases within the jurisdictional limits of the City. C. Other Annexation Agreement Requests: In all cases of petitions for annexation agreement which do not include requests for zoning classifications, other than those assigned to property annexed to the City, or a request for variations, the City Council may refer the petition to such committees or bodies as it deems appropriate, or as required by law, for study and recommendations. Upon receiving the recommendations of such committees or bodies, or, if no such referral is made, the City Council and Mayor of the City shall set the time and place of public hearing and the City Clerk shall cause notice of the said hearing to be published in the manner specified in subsection D hereof. D. Public Notice and Hearing: At the conclusions of the hearings before the City Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals, and upon those bodies reporting their specific findings and recommendations,the Mayor and City Council shall set the time and place for hearing on the petition for annexation agreement. Thereafter,the City Clerk shall cause public notice, as provided in the statutes,to be published one time in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Yorkville, giving notice of the time and place of the public hearing for the annexation agreement before the Mayor and City Council, said notice to be published not less than fifteen(15) nor more than thirty(30) days prior to public hearing before the said Mayor and Council. (Ord. 1973-56A, 3-28-74) The applicant shall send written notices to all of the surrounding properties within 250 feet of the subject property with said notices on the Tax Assessor's rolls and with sufficient postage affixed thereto,with return giving the time, place and purpose of such hearing and shall be mailed not more than thirty (30) days in advance of such hearing.The notice shall be sent by certified mail, properly addressed as shown receipt requested. 10-14-9: FEES 131 : A. Fee Schedule: A certified check shall accompany an application form for an amendment, appeal, special use, temporary use, variation or zoning certificate. The fee shall be based on the following schedule: Fixed Fee Maximum Fee Minimum or AMENDMENTS To the text of the Title $85.00 $ 300.00 To the Zoning Map Base fee 85.00 For each acre,up to and including 20 acres 10.00 500.00 For each acre in excess of 20 acres 5.00 APPEALS FROM DECISIONS OF THE $85.00 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR SPECIAL USES Planned Developments Base fee $300.00 For each acre up to and including 20 acres 10.00 $2,500.00 For each acre in excess of 20 acres 5.00 All Other Special Uses Base fee $250.00 $ 500.00 For each acre 5.00 TEMPORARY USES $25.00 VARIATIONS $85.00 ZONING CERTIFICATES Single-Family Residences $5.00 All Others 25.00 B. Minimum Fees: The minimum fees are established to cover the expenses that may be incurred due to staff time plus consultant's time required to review and process such application, and other expenses such as printing and publication of notices,postage and other costs. The minimum fees are payable at the time of filing of application for any request covered above. C. Maximum Fees: The maximum fees are established to reimburse the City for charges incurred over and above the minimum fees due to the complexity of the project to be reviewed and also due to studies that may be needed in addition to those provided by the petitioner. The maximum fees are payable upon receipt of an invoice from the City during the course of processing the petition. The City shall invoice the petitioner for expenses in excess of the minimum fees already paid at the time of submission. The petitioner shall not be invoiced more than once a month. The total sum of the fees charged to the petitioner shall not exceed the amount stated as maximum fee. D. Consultants' Fees and Payment to City Personnel: 1. Payment to all consultants retained by the City in any capacity connected with the application shall be based on mutually agreed upon contracts formally authorized by the City Council. The computation of the City's staff time shall be based on salaries of the City personnel involved plus fifty percent(50%)to cover overhead and administration. 2. At no time shall there be any transfer of funds from any developer to any consultant or City staff personnel. All payment to consultants shall be executed only under the conditions specified in the paragraph above, and the developers shall be invoiced directly and solely by the City. (Ord. 1973-56A, 3-28-74) 10-14-10: PENALTIES: Any person who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects,refuses to comply with or who resists enforcement of any of the provisions of this Title shall be fined as provided in Section 1-4-1 of this Code. (Ord. 1973-56A, 3-28-74; 1994 Code)