UDO Advisory Committee Minutes 2019 11-14-19Page 1 of 4
APPROVED 4/21/20
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
Thursday, November 14, 2019 6:00pm
City Hall Conference Room
800 Game Farm Road, Yorkville, Il
The meeting was called to order at 6:00pm by Chairman Chris Funkhouser.
Introductions
Roll Call
The following answered present:
Chris Funkhouser, Alderman
David Schultz, Engineer-HR Green
Jeff Olson, PZC, Construction
Billy McCue, Developer
Daniel Transier, Alderman
Absent:
Deborah Horaz, Mike Torrence, Greg Marker, Matt Hively
Others Present:
Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director
Jason Engberg, Senior Planner
Nick Davis, Hauseal Lavigne
Jackie Wells, Hauseal Lavigne
Review of Code Diagnostic Memorandum
Mr. Davis said the committee would be reviewing the diagnostic memo and then engage in questions or
comments. The intent of the memo is to provide an outline on how to move forward and the scope of
the UDO. The first step is to review the Comprehensive Plan, bring the zoning codes up to speed and
determine long range goals, etc. The second step is to review community outreach done to this point
including challenges and feedback received by the consultants. The third step is discussion for the
UDO proposal including reorganization information and recommended revisions.
First Step - Comprehensive Plan:
The first step is to review text and insure graphics represent what should be accomplished, maintain
existing zoning standards and consistency. The Consultants will work with staff to amend zoning maps
as needed. Ms. Noble said the UDO is a 2-year program and the city will be halfway through the
Comprehensive Plan.
Page 2 of 4
The Consultants will evaluate and enhance the downtown overlay district and carry forward the Form
Based Code. They will encourage preservation and re-use of existing buildings, manage downtown
parking and review landscaping standards. In general, they hope to make regulations easier to
understand. Mr. Davis commented that he favors the Form Based Code, but not for the entire
community. One of its challenges is administration of the Code. Promotion of sustainable designs will
be encouraged along with modernized engineering designs and environmental standards, all of which
will be folded into the revised language.
The development process will be streamlined and simplified to be understandable and checks and
balances must be in place. A Conservation District will also be implemented. Public Works will be
consulted regarding cul-de-sac designs, ways to reduce the amount of pavement, sustainable designs
and road connections to future subdivisions.
Second Step - Public Outreach
Ms. Wells opened the discussion for the Public Outreach. Feedback was received from this committee
and also from developers. Some of the topics raised were: 1) Actual parking needed for various
venues—not enough or too much, 2) clarification of landscape regulations, 3) improve and modernize
lighting regulations, 4) rules for multi-tenant building signage, electronic message boards, temporary
signs, LED signs, 5) subdivision standards with more open space, no cul-de-sacs or eyebrow streets,
improved street layouts, conservation areas, 6) administration and enforcement—streamline all
reviews and add administrative relief with level of public review and less need for committee reviews,
7) restart of dormant subdivisions with easier processes for developers, update PUD process to make
less burdensome, use zoning code more instead of adding ordinances.
Ms. Wells asked for other feedback from committee members. Ms. Noble suggested adding the
concept of accessory dwelling units particularly in the older parts of town. This could include living
space converted from garages or attics. Chairman Funkhouser questioned allowing small spaces for
this purpose, though he said garage conversions might be open for discussion.
Committee member Jeff Olson commented on the rationale for pie-shaped lots. Ms. Noble said a
couple developers had extreme angles which created setback issues and the housing for the shape
needing a variance or other relief. She said it would be better to avoid them unless there is adequate
room for setbacks. Other issues raised with these lots is that the streets must be able to accommodate
fire trucks and Public Works maintenance trucks. Chairman Funkhouser asked to have comparisons
done with other communities for cul-de-sacs and eyebrow streets and he said he likes flexibility of lot
sizes. Mr. Olson asked if smaller lots are needed to which Ms. Noble replied they would allow for a
better return of investment for developers and reduce home costs. A deeper lot size would allow for
less infrastructure in the front and the saved money could be put back into the actual home, said Mr.
Funkhouser. He added that Naperville teardowns have zero lot lines. He said narrower lots don't allow
for parking 2 cars, but perhaps parkway space could be used.
Mr. McCue noted there is a need for less expensive homes now and the national builders are building
“boxes”. He suggested smaller lots and requirements for more architectural standards. He said
national builders in Colorado are building beautiful smaller homes based on those standards.
Ms. Noble said sidewalks cost more to build and maintain than asphalt paths and Mr. McCue added
that in one Oswego subdivision, the path is situated in the main section. He said as a builder, he knows
the big equipment goes across the path and they have to do all repairs.
Page 3 of 4
Regarding parking, Mr. Olson said there might not be adequate handicapped parking considering that
baby boomers are reaching retirement age. And he added that parking lots like those in Target, might
have too much parking. Mr. Funkhouser said consultants have studied market standards and have
recommended balanced parking vs. requirements to avoid massive lots. More parking is needed
downtown, he said. In Sugar Grove, parking is severely restricted on the streets at all times, added Mr.
McCue.
Third Step - Discussion for UDO Proposal
Ms. Wells gave a brief overview of the proposed UDO code, saying that many aspects need to be
consolidated and streamlined. She said “General Provisions” is the opening section for all the titles.
This format will allow for easier updates which would go through committee rather than a Public
Hearing. Mr. Olson commented that he is in favor of giving more power to the staff to allow easier
changes. Plain language will be used as well as less legal language, clearer graphics and use of Encode
Plus. Mr. Davis added that simplified graphics, cross references to links and permit fee tables should
also help. Definitions will all be in one section and by hovering over the definition, Encode Plus will
give the ability to pop up other information. Encode will also display standards for types of
developments.
The Use Standards will include tables specifying what type of use is permitted in which zones. Now
the regulations are widely disbursed in the code, but the UDO will bring all of them together into a
single table.
It was stated that signs cannot be regulated by content and this is supported by a court case. Lighting
of the signs was also discussed.
Chairman Funkhouser said that a recent Neighborhood Design Manual should be rolled into the UDO
also. An ordinance was done, however, it is a guide rather than requirement.
Subdivision Standards Comments: Mr. Davis said the recommendations included relocating
administrative requirements for submission, modernizing and introducing new design standards,
conservation design, road connectivity standards, open space requirements including incentivizing
developers, coordinating with Public Works for road engineering design standards, aligning all
application processes, and revising PUD regulations for better outcomes of master plan and
Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. McCue asked if any communities encountered legal challenges when matters were handled by staff
instead of committees and Council. Ms. Wells replied that there are standards for review which are
legally defensible. Ms. Noble also noted there is an appeal process and there was an appeal last year
that was won.
Mr. Davis said the Form Based Code applicability analysis will be incorporated into the UDO and that
the overlay had not been adopted when they drafted this memo.
Appendix Comments: The committee members were all asked to read this.
Comments and Questions
None
Page 4 of 4
Project Schedule and Next Steps
Two steps are now completed: Project Initiation and Technical Analysis. The next phase will be the
draft District Standards and Concepts which includes residential/agriculture district standards and
commercial/industrial standards. This will be the next item to consider in February or March. The
committee will also start looking at Special District Standards and a Proposed Zoning District Map.
This will be presented to the public at a later time. It is hoped to send the draft of Chapter 3 to
committee members at least 2 weeks prior to the next meeting after staff has a chance to review first.
Chairman Funkhouser asked the Consultants if there would be any implications for the UDO if the City
became home-rule. The Consultants did not think so.
Adjournment:
There was no further business and the meeting adjourned at 7:12pm.
Transcribed from digital recording,
Minutes respectfully submitted by Marlys Young, Minute Taker