HomeMy WebLinkAboutPark Board Packet 2025 02-27-25 - Special
Yorkville Parks & Recreation Department
ARC Building – 201 W. Hydraulic Ave.
Yorkville, IL 60560 630-553-4357
Agenda
Special Park Board Meeting
Thursday, February 27, 2025
6:00 p.m.
East Conference Room #337
651 Prairie Pointe • Yorkville, IL 60560
Call to Order:
Roll Call: Dan Lane, Gene Wilberg, Sash Dumanovic, Rusty Hyett, Kelly Diederich, Jorge Ayala and Tiffany Forristall.
Introduction of Guests, City Officials and Staff:
Director of Parks and Recreation – Tim Evans, Superintendent of Parks – Scott Sleezer, Superintendent of Recreation
Shay Remus, and City Council Liaison to Park Board
Public Comment:
New Business:
New Mixed-Density Residential Development (Christie Property) Land Cash Donation Discussion
Adjournment:
Next meeting: March 20, 2025
Have a question or comment about this agenda item?
Call us Monday-Friday, 8:00am to 4:30pm at 630-553-4350, email us at agendas@yorkville.il.us, post at www.facebook.com/CityofYorkville,
tweet us at @CityofYorkville, and/or contact any of your elected officials at http://www.yorkville.il.us/320/City-Council
Park Board Agenda Item Tracking Document
Title:
Agenda Date:
Synopsis:
Action Previously Taken:
Date of Action: Action Taken:
Item Number:
Type of Vote Required:
Action Requested:
Submitted by:
Agenda Item Notes:
Reviewed By:
Parks & Recreation Director
City Administrator
Legal
Public Works
Engineer
Police
Finance
Purchasing
Community Development
Agenda Item Number
New Business #1
Tracking Number
New Mixed-Density Residential Development (Christie Property) Land Cash Donation
Special Park Board – February 27, 2025
None
Direction
Please see the attached memo.
Tim Evans Parks and Recreation
Name Department
Subject
New Mixed-Density Residential Development (Christie Property) Land Cash Donation
Discussion
Background
Attached is a memo from the City’s Community Development Director concerning an
application that was submitted to the City to review a request for Rezoning and Planned Unit
Development (PUD) approval. This request would be for a mixed-density residential
development project known as the Christie Property, generally situated south of Fox Road, west
of Morgan Street, and north of the Greenbriar subdivision. A map included within the memo.
While most of the application request is not related to Parks & Recreation, as part of the City’s
Unified Development Ordinance, the developer is required to dedicate land for park and
recreational purposes and for school sites to serve the needs of residents of the potential
development. Another option is a cash contribution in lieu of the land dedication or a
combination of both, at the discretion of the City.
For reference, the Land Cash Donation Ordinance was created by the City to continue its
commitment to the residents by maintaining a high quality of life for present and future residents
through the preservation of open space for public parks and schools. The most important aspect
of this ordinance is that the objective is met without raising taxes. It places the responsibility on
the developers who create the need when proposing a development within the City.
As stated in the memo, section 25, per the City’s calculations of the proposed mixed-density
residential development, a minimum dedication of 10.728 acres of park land or $1,083,528 cash
donation would be required plus a minimum dedication of 14.163 acres of land for a school or
$1,430,494 cash donation is required. Attached is the calculations and sample fee sheet.
Based on these requirements and calculations, Parks and Recreation staff is recommending the
following to the Park Board to review as related to park land dedication and/or land cash:
a. The minimum size neighborhood park is five acres. We would request one(1) five-acre park
site, centrally located and on level ground.
b. The rest of the land cash obligation in cash to develop the park site.
c. Significant road frontage on two sides.
d. Eight foot wide pave trails in lieu of sidewalk on park land.
e. Perpendicular parking stalls at the park site.
f. Paved trail along Fox Road from White Oak Way to Poplar Drive.
g. Crosswalks on Fox Road at White Oak Way and Poplar Drive.
h. Electric, water and sewer to the Park site.
Memorandum
To: Yorkville Park Board
From: Tim Evans, Director of Parks and Recreation
CC: Scott Sleezer, Supt. of Parks
Date: February 12, 2025
Subject: New Mixed-Density Residential Development
(Christie Property) Land Cash Donation Discussion
i. Trail from westside of the development to connect with the Burning Bush
Drive road stub in the Greenbriar subdivision. This will allow for pedestrian
access to Price Park from the westside of the proposed development.
j. Trail down one side of the developments north/south road to connect with the
future Greenbrier Drive road extension.
Recommendation
Staff seeks Park Board direction on the park land and land cash obligations staff
recommendation of the proposed mixed-density residential development.
1
I have reviewed the applications for Rezoning and Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval
for a mixed-density residential development project known as the Christie Property received January 13,
2025 and submitted by Jason Mick, representing Fox River Enterprise, LLC, the petitioner, along with
property owners Christie Family Trust. Also submitted is a concept PUD plan titled “Yorkville
Development Site – Site Design Study” prepared by ESM Civil Solutions, LLC dated 12/20/24 and also
dated December 23, 2024. The concept PUD plan includes architectural rendered elevations for each
proposed dwelling type.
The petitioner plans to acquire and redevelop approximately 136 acres, two (2) unplatted parcels
and 100 previously subdivided but undeveloped lots within the Williamsport development. The proposal
requests rezoning of the property from R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residence District to R-2 Single-
Family Traditional Residence District, R-2D Two-Family Attached Residence District, and R-3 Multi-
Family Attached Residence District. Additionally, the developer is seeking Planned Unit Development
(PUD) approval for a mixed-density residential project featuring 346 dwelling units. The proposed
development will comprise single-family homes, age-targeted single-family homes, and age-restricted
housing options, including single-family, duplex, and four-plex units. The site is generally situated south
of Fox Road, west of Morgan Street, and north of the Greenbriar subdivision.
Based upon my review of the applications, documents, and concept plan, I have compiled the
following comments:
GENERAL COMMENTS:
1. The submitted Planned Unit Development (PUD) site plan is presented as a single-sheet sketch in
a watercolor format, which has made it challenging to distinguish between the various residential
land uses. While the site data table aids in density calculations, staff recommends providing a
hard-lined drawing with greater contrast to better differentiate the residential dwelling
types.
2. The land use plan deviates from the traditional density transition approach by placing higher-
density four-plex units at the center, surrounded by lower-density single-family and duplex
dwellings. It appears that the petitioner has buttressed the single-family units adjacent to existing
single-family developments to the east, south, and north of Fox Road.As this approach to land
planning for high-density residential developments is uncommon in Yorkville, staff recommends
including a written narrative with the application to explain the rationale behind this
design.
PROPERTY BACKGROUND:
1. This subject property was originally annexed into Yorkville in 1972 via Ord. No. 21 as part of an
approximately 230-acre area (see next page). An approximately 50-acre portion was subsequently
final platted as the Williamsport Unit 1 Subdivision via Document No. 72-4821. However, two
(2) unsubdivided parcels, PIN# 05-05-104-001 (~60 acres) located south of Fox Road and PIN#
02-32-301-003 (~88 acres) which lies north and south of Fox Road.
Memorandum
To: Plan Council
From: Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director
Date: January 31, 2025
Subject: PZC 2025-02 Christie Property (Rezone & PUD)
Proposed Mixed-Density Residential Planned Unit Development
2
2. An approximately 60-acre portion was subsequently final platted as the Williamsport Unit 1
Subdivision via Document No. 72-4821. The Williamsport Subdivision, generally located
southeast of Fox Road, consists of 98 single-family lots, all of which are at least 12,000 sq. ft. in
size with a protective covenant listed on the plat requiring the ground floors must be at least 1,500
sq. ft. for a one-story home and a minimum of 1,200 sq. ft. for a two-story home. The plat also
3
has approximately thirteen (13) lots with direct access off of Fox Road and two (2) larger lots
(No. 99 and 100) at the southwest and northeast corners of the subdivision, presumably for
stormwater detention, as depicted below. The entire annexed and platted areas remain
undeveloped over 50 years later.
4
PUD/ ZONING COMMENTS:
1. PURPOSE OF DISTRICTS – Section 10-3-5 of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance
establishes the purpose of the residential districts. Per the petitioner’s request, the following
zoning districts shall apply to the proposed land plan:
a. R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence District. The R-2, single-family
traditional residence zoning designation is intended to accommodate smaller, more
conventional suburban residential neighborhoods. The primary permitted uses are
single-family detached housing in addition to compatible and complementary
cultural, religious, educational, and public uses.
b. R-2D Duplex, Two-Family Attached Residence District. The R-2D, duplex, two-
family attached residence zoning designation is intended for moderate density duplex
dwelling structures. This district is primarily located off of a major thoroughfare or as
a transitional land use adjacent to single-family residences. Therefore, the R-2D,
duplex district is intended to accommodate single-family attached dwelling structures
of a size and character that are compatible with the surrounding single-family
detached residential districts and adjacent to commercial, office and retail space.
c. R-3 Multi-Family Attached Residence District. The R-3, multi-family attached
residence zoning designation is intended for moderate density residential
developments near commercial areas and transportation corridors, and to promote
economically mixed housing developments and the provision of a range housing
types including multi-family buildings such as duplexes or townhomes.
2. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS – Section 10-8-8 of City’s Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO) establishes standards for Planned Unit Development (PUDs).
PUDs are allowed to modify standards of the base district as long as the requested
modifications are specifically identified and demonstrates how each allowance is compatible
with surrounding development, is necessary for proper development of the site, and is aligned
with at least one (1) modification standard found in Section 10-8-8D of the UDO.
a. The petitioner has identified six (6) modification standards the proposed PUD will
meet per Section 10-8-8D.
i. Modification Standard #1 “Landscape Conservation and Visual
Enhancement” which states the Planned Unit Development preserves and
enhances existing landscape, trees, and natural features such as rivers,
streams, ponds, groves, and landforms.
1. Staff believes this modification standard does not apply due to
the existing densely vegetated mature trees on Lots 99 and 100
will not be preserved but utilized for stormwater detention. No
existing natural features are identified for preservation.
ii. Modification Standard #3 Public Gathering Space which includes public
gathering space, the amount of which is proportional to the size of buildings
or number of dwelling units. The public gathering space is activated through
the use of moveable tables and chairs, a fountain or other water feature, a
sculpture or other public art feature, benches, seat walls, raised landscape
planters, pedestrian scale, and celebratory lighting such as string lights,
and/or other features. The public gathering space is integrated into the overall
design of the Planned Unit Development and has a direct functional or visual
relationship to the main building(s) and is not of an isolated or leftover
character.
1. Staff believes this modification standard does apply due to the
inclusion of two proposed active park spaces, totaling 5.5 acres,
5
within both the single-family and multi-family/attached family
portions of the development.
iii. Modification Standard #5 Universal Design includes buildings designed with
accessible features such as level access from the street and/or zero entry
thresholds.
1. Staff is uncertain whether this modification standard applies, as
the petitioner has not provided a narrative specifying any
planned accommodations for universal design.
iv. Modification Standard #6 High Quality Building Materials which utilizes
time and weather tested building materials that are of a higher quality than
what is otherwise required by this UDO.
1. Staff is uncertain whether this modification standard applies, as
the petitioner has not provided a narrative specifying any
proposed high quality building materials.
v. Modification Standard #7 Age-Targeted Development which includes
residential dwelling units, amenities, and design characteristics intended to
accommodate the lifestyles and needs of senior citizens.
1. Staff believes this modification standard does apply due to the
inclusion of twenty-nine (29) age-targeted and sixty-seven (67)
age-restricted dwelling units.
vi. Modification Standard #11 Funding or Construction of Public Roadways
which includes the construction of roadways adjacent to the subject site as
planned in the City of Yorkville Comprehensive Plan, Kendall County Long-
Range Transportation Plan, or another transportation plan adopted by a local,
County, or regional entity.
1. Staff believes this modification standard does not apply due to no
identified funding or construction of public roadways adjacent to
the subject site as identified in an adopted transportation plan.
b. Petitioner has provided written responses to the standards for a Planned Unit
Development (PUD) which will be entered into the record during the public hearing
process.
3. REZONING – The Petitioner is seeking a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to rezone
the existing 137-acre subject property from R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residence
District to the following underlying zoning districts:
Proposed Zoning Proposed Dwelling Type # of Units Acreage
R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence
District Single-Family Detached 197 59
R-2D Duplex, Two-Family Attached
Residence District Duplex 42 39
R-3 Multi-Family Attached Residence
District
Single-Family Detached;
Townhomes (4-Plex) 107 39
TOTAL 346 units 137 acres
OVERALL DENSITY 2.5 units/acre
6
4. SURROUNDING ZONING & LAND USES - The following are the current immediate
surrounding zoning and land uses to the subject property:
5. PERMITTED USES – Per Table 10-3-12 (B) of the Yorkville Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO), “Single-Family Dwellings” are permitted land uses in the proposed R-2
Single-Family Traditional Residence, R-2D Duplex, Two-Family Attached Residence, and R-
3 Multi-Family Attached Residence Districts. “Duplex Dwellings” are permitted land uses in
the R-2D Duplex, Two-Family Attached Residence and R-3 Multi-Family Attached
Residence Districts. Finally, “Townhouse Dwellings” are permitted land uses in the R-3
Multi-Family Attached Residence District.
6. BULK & DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS - Per the Table 10-3-9(A) Bulk and Dimensional
Standards, the following tables compare each of the proposed Planned Unit Development
(PUD) dwelling type with the requested underlying zoning districts:
1 No acreage provided specifically for duplexes, only a total area for Parcel 2 which includes SF, DU, and 4-Plex units.
Zoning Land Use
North
R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence District
R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residence District
Fox Road
White Oak Estates & Rivers Edge Sub.
Agriculture
Transportation Land Use
East R-2 Single-Family Traditional District Single-Family Residence
South R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence District
A-1 Agriculture (Unincorporated)
Greenbriar Subdivision
Agriculture
West R-4 Suburban Residential (Unincorporated) Fox Lawn Subdivision
R-2 Zoning Regulations Proposed Single-Family
Min. Lot Area 12,000 sq. ft. 12,000 sq. ft.
Min. Lot Width 80 ft 80 ft
Front Yard Setback 30 ft Undetermined
Rear Yard Setback 40 ft Undetermined
Side Yard Setback 10 ft (30 ft corner) Undetermined
Max. Density N/A 1.7 du/acre
Max. Lot Coverage 45% Undetermined
Max. Dwelling Height 30 ft Undetermined
R-2D Zoning Regulations Proposed Duplex
Min. Lot Area 15,000 sq. ft. 15,000 sq. ft.
Min. Lot Size per DU 9,000 sq. ft. Undetermined
Min. Lot Width 100 ft 100 ft
Front Yard Setback 30 ft Undetermined
Rear Yard Setback 30 ft Undetermined
Side Yard Setback 12 ft (30 ft. corner) Undetermined
Max. Density N/A Undetermined 1
Max. Lot Coverage 50% Undetermined
Max. Dwelling Height 30 ft Undetermined
7
Staff found the site data table on the Concept Plan very confusing as to which zoning districts
pertained to which dwelling type.
7. MINIMUM LOT SIZE/WIDTH PER DWELLING UNIT – Minimum lot size per
dwelling unit is 7,000 sq. ft. with a minimum lot width of 70 ft for detached uses and 90 ft.
for attached uses in the R-3 Zoning District.
a. It is noted the Petitioner is seeking relief from the minimum lot widths for the
SF Age-Targeted and SF Age-Restricted dwelling units. Petitioner must provide
a list of written requested deviations from the Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO).
b. It is undetermined the minimum lot size per dwelling unit and minimum lot
width for the proposed townhome (4-Plex) units. Petitioner must provide lot
dimensions for the townhome dwelling units.
c. Note: Any one-story structure in the R-3 District shall have a minimum of 1,200
square feet and any two-story structure shall have a minimum of 1,400 square feet of
livable space. The petitioner illustrated townhome units will have 2 stories and the
single-family age-targeted, single-family age-restricted and duplexes appear to be
one-story dwellings. What is the proposed minimum unit square feet of livable
space for each dwelling type?
8. YARD SETBACKS – Petitioner shall clearly illustrate, with dimensions, where all
proposed yards for each dwelling unit type within the development and determine if
any relief is required.
9. MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT - Maximum building height for the R-2, R-2D and
R-3 Zoning Districts is 30 feet. While the Petitioner has provided architectural renderings
of proposed residential elevations, the Petitioner must denote the proposed building
height in feet using the measurement standard as established in Section 10-3-10 of
the Unified Development Ordinance.
10. BUILDING SEPARATION – Per Section 10-3-9(B) of the Unified Development
Ordinance, minimum building separation standards are only required for the R-3 Multi-
2 No acreage provided specifically for SF Age-Targeted, only a total area for Parcel 2 which includes SF, DU, and 4-Plex units.
3 No acreage provided specifically for SF Age-Restricted, only a total area for Parcel 2 which includes SF, DU, and 4-Plex units.
4 No acreage provided specifically for TH (4-Plex), only a total area for Parcel 2 which includes SF, DU, and 4-Plex units.
R-3 Zoning
Regulations
Proposed SF
Age-Targeted
Proposed SF
Age-Restricted
Proposed TH
(4-Plex)
Min. Lot Area 9,000 sq. ft. 9,000 – 9,750 sq. ft. 9,750 sq. ft. 16,900 sq. ft.
Min. Lot Size per DU 7,000 sq. ft. N/A N/A Undetermined
Min. Lot Width 70 ft (90 ft.
for attached) 60-65 ft 65 ft Undetermined
Front Yard Setback 30 ft Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined
Rear Yard Setback 30 ft Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined
Side Yard Setback 10 ft (20 ft.
corner) Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined
Max. Density 5 du/ac Undetermined 2 Undetermined 3 Undetermined 4
Max. Lot Coverage 70% Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined
Max. Dwelling Height 30 ft Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined
8
Family Attached Residence District (townhomes). The petitioner must provide
minimum separation dimensions on the Concept Plan or a separate plan. Below is the R-
3 minimum building separation that shall apply to the proposed 4-Plex units in the PUD:
Table 10-3-9(B) Building Separation Requirements in R-3
Separation Type Requirement
Side to side 20 feet
Side to rear 40 feet
Rear to rear 60 feet
Front to side 50 feet
Front to front 50 feet
Rear to front 100 feet
11.DUPLEX DWELLING RESIDENTIAL USE STANDARDS - Per Section 10-4-2(A) of
the Unified Development Ordinance duplex dwelling developments shall meet the following
standards:
a. A minimum of one (1) of the parking spaces, as required in Section 10-5-1(H) of this
Title, shall be provided in an attached or detached garage. Attached garages are
encouraged to be located on rear or side façades. Since the proposed elevations
indicate the attached garages for the duplex units are frontloaded (set ahead) on
the primary facade, they shall comply with the following standards:
i. Setback a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet from the street right-of-way or
the required front yard setback, whichever is greater.
ii. The garage may be set ahead a maximum of five (5) feet from the front
façade of the home, inclusive of porches, bay windows, or other minor
projections.
iii. If the garage is set ahead from the front façade of the home, it shall not
exceed forty-five (45) percent of the façade’s total width.
b.The Petitioner shall verify in writing if a deviation from this provision of the
Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) is requested.
9
12. TOWNHOUSE DWELLING RESIDENTIAL USE STANDARDS – Per Section 10-4-
2(C) of the Unified Development Ordinance townhouse dwelling developments shall meet
the following standards:
a. The entrance to a townhouse shall face the primary public street unless otherwise
approved.
b. A minimum of one (1) of the parking spaces, as required in Section 10-5-1(H) of this
UDO, shall be provided in an attached or detached garage.
c. Attached garages shall be located on rear or side façades unless otherwise approved.
i. Architectural renderings illustrate the attached garages are frontloaded.
The Petitioner shall verify in writing if a deviation from this provision of
the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) is requested.
d. A maximum width of a townhome cluster shall be two hundred (200) lineal feet.
i. Petitioner shall provide maximum length of proposed 4-plex dwelling
units.
e. The siting of the townhouse units in a cluster shall be staggered in order to define
street edges, entry points, and public gathering spaces.
i. Petitioner shall provide building footprints for proposed 4-Plex
(townhouse) units to determine if compliance with this standard is met
or if a deviation should be requested.
10
13. APPEARANCE STANDARDS – Per Section 10-5-8 of the Unified Development
Ordinance, there are special provisions for design standards for residential developments, as
explained below:
a. Residential – Single-Family Detached and Duplexes must adhere to Section 10-7-8
Anti-Monotony as described below:
i. No new single-family or duplex dwelling units shall be similar in appearance
to any other single-family or duplex dwelling units within three (3) units on
either side of the subject property or on any of the five (5) units across the
street from the subject property.
ii. On cul-de-sac turnarounds, no single-family or duplex dwelling shall be
similar in appearance to another dwelling on the turnaround.
b. Residential – Single-Family Attached and Multiple-Family Residential Units
must incorporate:
i. Facade treatments that vary between buildings adjacent to one another.
Facade variations may include building materials or colors in any one (1) or
more of the following:
1. Siding;
2. Masonry;
3. Roof;
4. Paint/stain;
5. Doors.
ii. Parking areas shall be treated with decorative elements, building wall
extensions, plantings, berms, and other innovative means so as to largely
screen parking areas from view from public ways.
iii. The height and scale of each building shall be compatible with its site and
adjoining buildings.
iv. Newly installed utility services, and service revisions necessitated by exterior
alterations, shall be underground.
v. The architectural character of the building shall be in keeping with the
topographical dictates of the site.
11
vi. Masonry products shall be incorporated on the front facade of at least
seventy-five (75) percent of the total buildings in the approved community
and shall incorporate a minimum of fifty (50) percent premium siding
material on the front facade. No less than half (twenty-five (25) percent of
the total) of the minimum "premium siding" requirements must incorporate
masonry products. Credit toward the remaining "premium siding"
requirement can be earned via the use of major architectural features. Each
major architectural feature used will earn a credit of ten (10) percent towards
the calculation of the minimum premium siding requirement.
c. The petitioner has provided elevations for the proposed townhome dwelling
units, however, it is difficult for staff to determine if any of the elevations will
require relief from the required minimum masonry products or premium siding
on the front façades of the buildings. Petitioner must verify the materials and
percentages proposed.
i. However, staff has noted the elevations may qualify for a reduction in
minimum required premium siding to 40% due to the presence of
covered porches which is considered a major architectural feature which
accounts for a 10% credit.
14. HOA – Is the developer proposing to create an HOA for the common open space (parks)
and stormwater management outlot?
a. Per Section 10-7-5(B) of the Unified Development Ordinance, stormwater control
facilities easements required for all basins and for overflow routes.
15. LOTS – Per Section 10-7-2 of the Unified Development Ordinance, the size, shape, and
orientation of lots shall be appropriate for the location of the subdivision, and for the type of
development and use contemplated, as determined by the Planning and Zoning Commission
and City Council.
a. It is noted the Petitioner is seeking to resubdivide the existing Williamsport Unit 1
Final Plat since the fronting of residential lots on state and county highways or major
thoroughfares, major collectors as designated in the comprehensive plan is prohibited
per Section 10-7-2 (F) (2) of the Unified Development Ordinance.
b. Double frontage and reverse frontage lots shall be avoided, except where necessary to
overcome disadvantages of topography and orientation, and where a limited access
highway, railroad right-of-way, major street, or similar situation exists.
i. It is noted that double-frontage lots exist for the approximately 20 lots
which abut Fox Road on the proposed concept PUD plan.
ii. Per Section 10-7-2(D)(2), in these instances, double frontage lots shall be
provided with suitable screening. Since Fox Road is a Kendall County
Highway with an equivalent of a City arterial road, the lots must provide
a Type D transition yard (refer to #22 Landscape Review Comments
below).
iii. The double frontage lot may also be subdivided and utilize a separate lot or
outlot where the rear property line abuts the roadway for the required
transition yard. It appears the Concept Plan shows this area as a
‘Landscape Easement” separate from the parcel.
1. Per Section 10-7-5 of the Unified Development Ordinance,
Transition zone easements may be required if the easement is to also
be used for public utilities, only such plant materials that have an
ultimate growth not exceeding fifteen (15) feet shall be used.
12
16. ACCESS – As proposed, the subdivision has three (3) primary points of access off of Fox
Road (under Kendall County jurisdiction) for the mix-density residential development.
a. Alignment – The Petitioner proposes to align access points off of Fox Road with
White Oak Way within the White Oak Estates subdivision to the north.
b. Connectivity – The Petitioner proposes a secondary access connection to Walsh
Drive leading into the Greenbriar residential subdivision to the south. While this was
not planned in the original platted portion of the Williamsport Unit 1 Final Plat, staff
supports this connection point for efficient roadway circulation.
i. It does not appear the Petitioner is proposing to extend Burning Bush
Drive, existing east/west roadway within the Greenbriar Subdivision
connecting the residential development to the Age-Restricted portion of
the development. Does the Petitioner have a reason not to make this
connection?
ii. It appears the Petitioner is proposing to install a stub roadway connection to
a future development to the south which is unincorporated and currently
farmed.
17. PARKING - According to Table 10-5-1(H)(5) of the Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO) stipulates that residential land uses shall provide the following minimum off-street
parking spaces:
Residential Uses 8,000 sq ft or less
Dwelling, duplex 2/unit
Dwelling, multi-family 1.25/unit
Dwelling, single-family 2/unit
Dwelling, townhouse 2.25/unit
Senior housing, dependent 0.25/unit
Senior housing, independent 0.5/unit
a. It appears the Petitioner is providing 2-3 car garage spaces for single-family and
duplex dwelling units, however, townhouse dwellings require a minimum of 2.25
parking spaces per dwelling unit. Petitioner must provide parking data table for
all dwelling types to verify conformity with UDO, or a written request for
deviation to this standard.
18. DRIVEWAYS - One (1) single slab driveway and one (1) curb cut shall be permitted per
every seventy-five (75) feet of frontage of a single-family residential lot. New residential
parcels taking access from collector or arterial streets, shall share driveways in order to
protect public safety by limiting curb cuts.
19. PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION – It appears per the proposed roadway via Walsh Drive
the Petitioner is providing pedestrian circulation to an existing sidewalk network south
through the Greenbriar subdivision to Greenbriar Road, and ultimately to IL Route 47
(Bridge Street).
a. It appears the petitioner is proposing an open greenspace area between two (2)
lots on the southern property line adjacent to the Greenbriar subdivision
stormwater detention basin. Is the intent to provide access to this parcel? If so,
why? For City Public Works access to maintain the pond/mow, when needed?
13
20. STREET DESIGN – Per Section 10-7-3(A)(2) of the Unified Development Ordinance,
blocks shall not exceed one thousand three hundred twenty (1,320) feet in length.
a. Please verify the street length of blocks between roadway nodes/intersections.
b. Cul-de-sacs shall not exceed five hundred (500) feet in length, measured from the
entrance to the center of the turn-around.
c. It is assumed the internal roadway network for the subdivision will be publicly
dedicated streets, the following street design standards shall apply:
d. Mailboxes – consideration should be given to the placement of “gang” or “cluster”
mailboxes within the subdivision, as this is the requirement by the United States
Postal Service (USPS) for all new residential subdivisions.
21. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update designates this
property as “Suburban Neighborhood (SN)” which is primarily intended for single-family
detached residential land uses to create well designed, walkable neighborhoods that
incorporate open space ad appropriate linkages to surrounding zoning districts and areas,
but well buffered from land uses of higher intensity.
a. While the proposed PUD includes a segment of mid-density residential units
(4-plex), the overall subdivision density of 2.5 dwelling units per acre
remains lower than the average density of an R-1 zoned development (2.9
DU/acre) or an R-2 zoned development (3.63 DU/acre). Given this, staff
considers the proposed PUD to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s
future land use designation of “Suburban Neighborhood (SN).”
LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS:
22. LANDSCAPING – Section 10-5-3 establishes landscape standards for new developments.
The petitioner has not submitted a landscape plan for review.
14
a. Per staff’s review, the following sections of the Landscape Plan would apply to the
residential lots:
i. Section 10-5-3-F. Transition Zone Landscape Requirements - Transition
zones shall be provided based on Table 10-5-3(F)(2), except where adjacent
uses are of a similar nature, scale, and intensity as determined by the Zoning
Administrator. As per Table 10-5-3(F)(2), the type of required transition
zone is dependent upon the land use type of the subject lot and the land use
type of the adjacent lot(s).
1. Transition Zone “D” Landscape buffer is required within the
Landscape Easements between Fox Road and the single-family
lots as depicted below:
2. A Transition Zone is not required between the subject property
and the adjacent Greenbriar subdivision along the south and
east boundaries due to the adjacent and proposed land uses
being single family residential and the existence of a very dense
hedgerow.
23. TREE PRESERVATION - No live tree(s) with a four (4) inch diameter at breast height may
be removed without first applying for tree removal and receiving approval from the City.
a. Every reasonable effort shall be made to retain existing trees shown in the tree survey
prepared by a registered landscape architect through the integration of those trees into
the site and landscape plan for a proposed development.
Type A (3) Type B (3) Type C (3) Type D (3)
(a) Minimum Zone Width (1) 8 feet 10 feet 15 feet 20 feet
(b) Minimum Fence/Wall Height (2) optional optional 6 feet 6 feet
(c) Understory Tree optional 3 4 5
(d) Canopy/Evergreen Tree 4 3 4 5
(e) Shurbs/Native Grasses optional 15 25 35
(3) Landscaping elements can be arranged to match to natural topography or natural features of
the site and may be arranged in groupings to enhance site aesthetics as approved by the Zoning
Administrator.
(2) Fence or wall requirements may be satisfied by a solid evergreen hedge with a maximum
height of six (6) feet, as approved by the Zoning Administrator.
Table 10-5-3(F)(3) Transition Zone Types
Specification
Minimum Number of Landscape Elements per 100 Linear Feet
Notes:
(1) Required yard setbacks may be utilized for transition zone landscape.
15
b. Development on all parcels four (4) acres or greater in area shall require the submittal
and approval of a tree removal plan.
c. Any tree approved for removal shall be replaced with new trees in accordance with
the following schedule:
Table 10-5-3(H)(3)(a) Tree Replacement Approved For
Removal
Caliper (Inches) of the tree to be
removed Number of Replacement Trees
30 or Greater 6
13-29 5
8-12 4
4-7 2
d. In the event that a tree identified to be preserved is removed or damaged, such tree
shall be replaced as follows:
Table 10-5-3(H)(3)(b) Tree Replacement Identified For Preservation
Caliper (Inches) of the tree to be removed Number of Replacement Trees
30 or Greater 12
13-29 10
8-12 8
4-7 4
e. Fee in Lieu - A fee may be provided in lieu of the replacement of trees or
preservation of existing trees as established in the City of Yorkville’s adopted
ordinances. These fees will be based upon wholesale pricing for a two and a half
(2½) to three (3) inch tree and shall cover the cost of the tree and the estimated cost
of the installation of the trees required to be planted. Money collected from the fee in
lieu option shall be deposited into a Tree Bank Fund to be used towards tree
replacement and plantings throughout the City.
24. SIGNAGE – The petitioner has not provided a signage plan for the mix-density residential
planned unit development (PUD).
a. Residential subdivisions are allowed a “single-tenant monument” type sign at the
gateway or entryways, per Section 10-6-4 of the Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO).
i. Single-tenant monument signs utilizing base quality sign materials shall meet
the following dimensional standards:
1. Maximum 32 square feet in area; maximum 8 feet in height.
ii. Single-tenant monument signs utilizing high quality sign materials shall meet
the following dimensional standards:
1. Maximum 48 square feet in area; maximum 12 feet in height.
iii. A maximum of one (1) single-tenant monument sign shall be permitted per
every eight-hundred (800) continuous, linear feet of lot frontage.
iv. Base landscape plant material is required.
b. Will subdivision entryway monument signs be proposed?
16
i. If so, will they meet Chapter 6 – Sign Standards of the Unified
Development Ordinance or will a deviation be needed?
25. PARKS & SCHOOLS – Per Section 10-7-9 of the Unified Development Ordinance, a
condition for approval of a final plat of a subdivision, the developer shall dedicate land for
park and recreational purposes and for school sites to serve the needs of residents of the
development, or a cash contribution in lieu of the land dedication, or a combination of both,
at the discretion of the City.
a. Per the City’s calculations of the dwelling types proposed, a minimum
dedication of 10.728 acres of park land or $1,083,528 is required and a
minimum dedication of 14.163 acres of school land or $1,430,494 is required (see
attached calculations and sample fee sheet).
b. Staff will recommend the following to the Park Board related to park land
dedication and land cash:
i. The minimum size neighborhood park is five acres. We would request one(1)
five-acre park site, centrally located and on level ground.
ii. The rest of the land cash obligation in cash to develop the park site.
iii. Significant road frontage on two sides.
iv. 8’ wide pave trails in lieu of sidewalk on park land.
v. Perpendicular parking stalls at the park site.
vi. Paved trail along Fox Road from White Oak Way to Poplar Drive.
vii. Crosswalks on Fox Road at White Oak Way and Poplar Drive.
viii. Electric, water and sewer to the Park site.
ix. Trail from westside of the development to connect with the Burning Bush
Drive road stub in the Greenbriar subdivision. This will allow for pedestrian
access to Price Park from the westside of the proposed development.
x. Trail down one side of the developments north/south road to connect with the
future Greenbrier Drive road extension.
Name of Fee Amount Time of Payment
1 School District Transition Fee $3,000 per unit Paid to School District Office prior to issuance for building permit
2 Yorkville Bristol Sanitary District Connection Fee $1,870 per unit
At time of building permit, paid at City Hall with separate check made out to
YBSD
3 Yorkville Bristol Sanitary District Annexation Fee see YBSD website Paid for entire development, at time of annexation to sanitary district
4 Yorkville Bristol Sanitary District Infrastructure Fee see YBSD website Paid for entire development, at time of annexation to sanitary district
5 Building Permit Fee
$650 + $.0.20 per
square foot Building Permit
6 Water Connection Fee $6,555.00 per unit Building Permit (Single Family) $5,761.00 (Duplex)
7 Water Meter Cost (not applicable to fee lock)
$550 per unit for
SF Building Permit
8 City Sewer Connection Fee $2,000 per unit Building Permit
9 Water and Sewer Inspection Fee $25 per unit Building Permit
10 Plumbing Inspection Fee 135.00 per unit Building Permit
11 Public Walks and Driveway Inspection Fee $35 per unit Building Permit
12a Public Works (Development Impact Fee) $700 per unit Building Permit
12b Police (Development Impact Fee) $300 per unit Building Permit
12c Municipal Building (Development Impact Fee) $1,759 per unit
Municipal Building Impact Fee is paid per unit if paid at time of permit, or at
time of final plat for all units in the entirety of the annexed development.
12d Library (Development Impact Fee) $500 per unit Building Permit
12e Parks and Rec (Development Impact Fee) $50 per unit Building Permit
12f Engineering (Development Impact Fee) $100 per unit Building Permit
12g
Bristol Kendall Fire District (Development Impact
Fee) $1,000 per unit Building Permit
13 Parks Land Cash Fee
Calculated by
ordinance,
$101,000 per acre
Building Permit or Final Plat, depending on annexation/development
agreement and land/cash donations negotiated
14 School Land Cash Fee
Calculated by
ordinance,
$101,000 per acre
Building Permit or Final Plat, depending on annexation/development
agreement and land/cash donations negotiated
15 Road Contribution Fund $2,000 per unit Building Permit
16 County Road Fee
escalating each
calendar year at a
rate determined by
ordinance
Building Permit
17 Weather Warning Siren $75 per acre Final Plat
18 Administration Review Fee
1.75% of Approved
Engineer's
Estimate of Cost of
Land
Improvements Final Plat
19 Engineering Review Fee
5.5% of Approved
Engineer's
Estimate of Cost of
Land
Improvements Final Plat
Payment increases per Ord.2023-28 eff. date 5/1/24 $6,555 (SF) $5,761 (DU); 5/1/25 $7,555
(SF) $6,761 (DU); 5/1/26 $8,555 (SF) $7,761 (DU); 5/1/27 $9,555 (SF) $8,761 (DU); 5/1/28
$10,555 (SF) $9,761 (DU)
5-Feb-25
DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY
2 BDRM 0.102 0.191 0.054 0.057 1.694 2.098
3 BDRM 0.254 0.44 0.126 0.179 1.921 2.92
4 BDRM 0.413 0.665 0.19 0.34 2.142 3.75
5 BDRM 0.236 0.488 0.139 0.249 2.637 3.749
ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY (TOWNHOMES & DUPLEXES)
1 BDRM 0 0.064 0.018 0.037 1.068 1.187
2 BDRM 0.092 0.198 0.056 0.074 1.776 2.196
3 BDRM 0.231 0.298 0.085 0.103 1.805 2.522
4 BDRM 0.332 0.452 0.13 0.205 2.243 3.362
APARTMENTS
Efficiency 0 0.064 0.018 0.037 1.36 1.479
1 BDRM 0 0.64 0.18 0.038 1.749 1.869
2BDRM 0.042 0.16 0.045 0.079 1.614 1.94
3BDRM 0.05 0.339 0.096 0.153 2.499 3.137
=197
=42
=107
=0
= 346
2 BDRM 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 BDRM 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 BDRM 100% 81.361 131.005 37.43 66.98 421.974 738.75
5 BDRM 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 100% 81.361 131.005 37.43 66.98 421.974 738.75
1 BDRM 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 BDRM 50% 1.932 4.158 1.176 1.554 37.296 46.116
3 BDRM 50% 4.851 6.258 1.785 2.163 37.905 52.962
4 BDRM 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 100% 6.783 10.416 2.961 3.717 75.201 99.078
BDRM 1 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
BDRM 2 100% 9.844 21.186 5.992 7.918 190.032 234.972
BDRM 3 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
BDRM 4 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 100% 9.844 21.186 5.992 7.918 190.032 234.972
0
Efficiency 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
BDRM 1 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
BDRM 2 100% 0 0 0 0 0 0
BDRM 3 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 100% 0 0 0 0 0 0
DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY
ATTACHED DUPLEX
ATTACHED TOWNHOMES
APARTMENTS
PARKS CALCULATION
POPULATION CALCULATIONS
TYPE
% of Units with
BDRM Number PRE-SCHOOL ELEMENTARY
JUNIOR HIGH
SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL ADULTS TOTAL PE
DEVELOPMENT SPECIFICATIONS
Detached Single Family
Attached Duplex
Attached Townhomes
Attached Apartments
Total Units
United City of Yorkville Land Cash Analysis for Christie
Property
ESTIMATED POPULATION PER DWELLING UNIT
TYPE PRE-SCH ELEMENT JHS HS ADULTS TOTAL
7.388 acres
0.991 acres
2.350 acres
0.000 acres
10.728 ACRES
10.728 acres
0 acres
10.728 ACRES
10.728 acres
$101,000 per acre
$1,083,528
$0
$1,083,528
Single Family PE 738.75
Duplex PE 99.078
Townhomes PE 234.972
Apartments PE 0
$3,787.50
Duplex Permit: $2,382.59
$2,217.96
Apartments Permit: N / A
4.789 acres 0.388 acres
1.386 acres 0.110 acres
5.597 acres 0.311 acres
11.772 ACRES TOTAL 0.808 ACRES
0.700 acres 0.000 acres
0.222 acres 0.000 acres
0.662 acres 0.000 acres
TOTAL 1.583 ACRES TOTAL 0.000 ACRES
14.163 ACRES
14.163 acres
0 acres
14.163 ACRES
14.163 acres
$101,000 per acre
$1,430,493.73
$0
$1,430,494
$5,000.33
Duplex Permit: $3,145.54
$2,928.19
Apartments Permit: N / A
Townhomes Permit:
REMAINING LAND CASH REQUIREMENT VALUE
What amount (if any) will be paid up front by the developer?
REVISED LAND-CASH REQUIREMENT AFTER UP FRONT FUNDING:
Single Family Permit:
TOTAL SCHOOL LAND-CASH ACREAGE REQUIRED:
Total school land-cash acreage required
- School acreage dedicated
REMAINING SCHOOL LAND CASH REQUIREMENT
Remaining school land-cash requirement
x Current land-cash acreage value
Elementary Elementary
+ Junior HS + Junior HS
+ High School + High School
+ Junior HS + Junior HS
+ High School + High School
TOTAL
ATTACHED TOWNHOMES ACRE REQUIREMENT APARTMENTS ACRE REQUIREMENT
Townhomes Permit:
SCHOOL COMPUTATION
DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY ACRE REQUIREMENT ATTACHED DUPLEX ACRE REQUIREMENT
Elementary Elementary
Unit PE as % of Total PE
69%
9%
22%
0%
Single Family Permit:
REMAINING UNFULFILLED LAND-CASH REQUIREMENT
Remaining unfulfilling land-cash requirement
x Current land-cash acreage value
REMAINING LAND-CASH REQUIREMENT LAND VALUE
What amount (if any) will be paid up front by the developer?
REVISED PARK LAND-CASH REQUIREMENT AFTER UP FRONT FUNDING:
+ Land requirement for attached duplexes
+ Land required for attached townhomes'
+ Land required for apartments
Total park land-cash requirement for development
- Park acreage dedicated
TOTAL PARK LAND-CASH REQUIREMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT:
Land required for detached single family
FEES PER UNIT
A paid receipt from the School District Office, 602-A Center Parkway
Yorkville, must be presented to the City prior to issuance of permit $3,000
Separate Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District fee - made payable to Y.B.S.D. $1,870
United City of Yorkville Fees
1. Building Permit
Cost $650 plus $0.20 per square foot (SF) $650 + $0.20(SF)
2. Water Connection Fees SF $7,555
DU/TH $6,761
3. Water Meter Cost $550 Current Rate
4. City Sewer Connection Fees $2,000
5. Water and Sewer Inspection Fee $25
6. Public Walks/Driveway Inspection Fee $35
7. Development Fees
Public Works $700
Police $300
Building $1,759
Library $500
Parks & Recreation $50
Engineering $100
Bristol-Kendall Fire $1,200
Development Fees Total $4,609
8. Land Cash Fees Apartment
Townhome Duplex Single Family
Park N / A $2,218 $2,382.59 $3,787.50
School N / A $2,928.19 $3,145.54 $5,000.00
Land-Cash Fees Total $0.00 $5,146.15 $5,528.13 $8,787.50
9. Road Contribution $2,000
10. Weather Warning Siren Fee (paid at time of Final Plat) $75/acre 137 acres $10,275
Notes:
a. Rate effective 5/1/25 and subject to annual increases per Ord. 2023-28
Christie Property
(see note 'a" below)
6-Feb-25
DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY
2 BDRM 0.102 0.191 0.054 0.057 1.694 2.098
3 BDRM 0.254 0.44 0.126 0.179 1.921 2.92
4 BDRM 0.413 0.665 0.19 0.34 2.142 3.75
5 BDRM 0.236 0.488 0.139 0.249 2.637 3.749
ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY (TOWNHOMES & DUPLEXES)
1 BDRM 0 0.064 0.018 0.037 1.068 1.187
2 BDRM 0.092 0.198 0.056 0.074 1.776 2.196
3 BDRM 0.231 0.298 0.085 0.103 1.805 2.522
4 BDRM 0.332 0.452 0.13 0.205 2.243 3.362
APARTMENTS
Efficiency 0 0.064 0.018 0.037 1.36 1.479
1 BDRM 0 0.64 0.18 0.038 1.749 1.869
2BDRM 0.042 0.16 0.045 0.079 1.614 1.94
3BDRM 0.05 0.339 0.096 0.153 2.499 3.137
=197
=42
=107
=0
=346
2 BDRM 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 BDRM 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 BDRM 100% 81.361 131.005 37.43 66.98 421.974 738.75
5 BDRM 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 100% 81.361 131.005 37.43 66.98 421.974 738.75
1 BDRM 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 BDRM 50% 1.932 4.158 1.176 1.554 37.296 46.116
3 BDRM 50% 4.851 6.258 1.785 2.163 37.905 52.962
4 BDRM 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 100% 6.783 10.416 2.961 3.717 75.201 99.078
BDRM 1 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
BDRM 2 100% 9.844 21.186 5.992 7.918 190.032 234.972
BDRM 3 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
BDRM 4 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 100% 9.844 21.186 5.992 7.918 190.032 234.972
0
Efficiency 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
BDRM 1 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
BDRM 2 100% 0 0 0 0 0 0
BDRM 3 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 100% 0 0 0 0 0 0
7.388 acres
0.991 acres
2.350 acres
0.000 acres
10.728 ACRES
10.728 acres
5.5 acres
5.228 ACRES
5.228 acres
$101,000 per acre
$528,028
$0
$528,028
Single Family PE 738.75
Duplex PE 99.078
Townhomes PE 234.972
Apartments PE 0
$1,845.74 $1,845.74
Duplex Permit: $1,161.09 $1,161.09
$1,080.86 $1,080.86
Apartments Permit: N / A #DIV/0!
4.789 acres 0.388 acres
1.386 acres 0.110 acres
5.597 acres 0.311 acres
11.772 ACRES TOTAL 0.808 ACRES
0.700 acres 0.000 acres
0.222 acres 0.000 acres
0.662 acres 0.000 acres
TOTAL 1.583 ACRES TOTAL 0.000 ACRES
14.163 ACRES
14.163 acres
0 acres
14.163 ACRES
14.163 acres
$101,000 per acre
$1,430,493.73
$0
$1,430,494
$5,000.33 $5,000.33
Duplex Permit: $3,145.54 $3,145.54
$2,928.19 $2,928.19
Apartments Permit: N / A #DIV/0!
United City of Yorkville Land Cash Analysis for Christie
Property
ESTIMATED POPULATION PER DWELLING UNIT
TYPE PRE-SCH ELEMENT JHS HS ADULTS TOTAL
DEVELOPMENT SPECIFICATIONS
Detached Single Family
Attached Duplex
Attached Townhomes
Attached Apartments
Total Units
POPULATION CALCULATIONS
TYPE
% of Units with
BDRM Number PRE-SCHOOL ELEMENTARY
JUNIOR HIGH
SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL ADULTS TOTAL PE
DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY
ATTACHED DUPLEX
ATTACHED TOWNHOMES
APARTMENTS
PARKS CALCULATION
Land required for detached single family
+ Land requirement for attached duplexes
+ Land required for attached townhomes'
+ Land required for apartments
TOTAL PARK LAND-CASH REQUIREMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT:
Total park land-cash requirement for development
- Park acreage dedicated
REMAINING UNFULFILLED LAND-CASH REQUIREMENT
Remaining unfulfilling land-cash requirement
x Current land-cash acreage value
REMAINING LAND-CASH REQUIREMENT LAND VALUE
What amount (if any) will be paid up front by the developer?
REVISED PARK LAND-CASH REQUIREMENT AFTER UP FRONT FUNDING:
Unit PE as % of Total PE
69%
9%
22%
0%
Single Family Permit:
Townhomes Permit:
SCHOOL COMPUTATION
DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY ACRE REQUIREMENT ATTACHED DUPLEX ACRE REQUIREMENT
Elementary Elementary
+ Junior HS + Junior HS
+ High School + High School
TOTAL
ATTACHED TOWNHOMES ACRE REQUIREMENT APARTMENTS ACRE REQUIREMENT
x Current land-cash acreage value
Elementary Elementary
+ Junior HS + Junior HS
+ High School + High School
REMAINING LAND CASH REQUIREMENT VALUE
What amount (if any) will be paid up front by the developer?
REVISED LAND-CASH REQUIREMENT AFTER UP FRONT FUNDING:
Single Family Permit:
Townhomes Permit:
TOTAL SCHOOL LAND-CASH ACREAGE REQUIRED:
Total school land-cash acreage required
- School acreage dedicated
REMAINING SCHOOL LAND CASH REQUIREMENT
Remaining school land-cash requirement
FEES PER UNIT
A paid receipt from the School District Office, 602-A Center Parkway
Yorkville, must be presented to the City prior to issuance of permit $3,000
Separate Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District fee - made payable to Y.B.S.D. $1,870
United City of Yorkville Fees
1. Building Permit
Cost $650 plus $0.20 per square foot (SF) $650 + $0.20(SF)
2. Water Connection Fees SF $7,555
DU/TH $6,761
3. Water Meter Cost $550 Current Rate
4. City Sewer Connection Fees $2,000
5. Water and Sewer Inspection Fee $25
6. Public Walks/Driveway Inspection Fee $35
7. Development Fees
Public Works $700
Police $300
Building $1,759
Library $500
Parks & Recreation $50
Engineering $100
Bristol-Kendall Fire $1,200
Development Fees Total $4,609
8. Land Cash Fees Apartment Townhome Duplex Single Family
Park (Donated 5.5 acres) N / A $1,081 $1,161.09 $1,845.74
School N / A $2,928.19 $3,145.54 $5,000.00
Land-Cash Fees Total $0.00 $4,009.05 $4,306.63 $6,845.74
9. Road Contribution $2,000
10. Weather Warning Siren Fee (paid at time of Final Plat) $75/acre 137 acres $10,275
Notes:
a. Rate effective 5/1/25 and subject to annual increases per Ord. 2023-28
Christie Property
(see note 'a" below)
Yorkville Police Department Memorandum
651 Prairie Pointe Drive
Yorkville, Illinois 60560
Telephone: 630-553-4340
Fax: 630-553-1141
Date: January 16, 2025
To: Krysti Barksdale-Noble (Community Development Director)
From: James Jensen (Chief of Police)
Reference: Plan Review: PZC 2025-02
List Project Name: Christie Property
List Applicant Name: Jason Mick (Fox River Enterprise, LLC)
List Project Manager: Jason Mick (Fox River Enterprise, LLC)
List Project Location: Fox Road West of Rt. 47, South of Fox Road, Yorkville, IL
Please see comments listed below pertaining to the project referenced above:
Signage
Handicapped Signage Required: ____ Yes ____ No
Comments: IF handicapped parking will be provided the signage must meet
MUTCD standards and fine amounts must be listed on sign.
Speed Limit Signage Required/Recommended __X__Yes ____ No
School Zone Special Signage ____ Yes __X__No
Special Speed Zone Signage Requested ____ Yes __X__No
Comments: Will this property be HOA Controlled? If not properly posted speed
limit signs should be placed at the entrance to the development.
No Parking Signage Required? __X__Yes ____ No
__X__No Parking After 2” Snow Fall
No Parking Locations: No parking locations, if listed must be signed appropriately.
Dedicated parking signage needed? ____ Yes ____ No
Comments: I have not seen plans with special parking identified. Depending on
roadway widths, consideration should be given to no parking on one side of
street.
____ Located by Park
____ School
Yorkville Police Department Memorandum
651 Prairie Pointe Drive
Yorkville, Illinois 60560
Telephone: 630-553-4340
Fax: 630-553-1141
____ Common Parking Area
Are there Street Name Conflicts? ____ Yes ____ No
Comments: I have not seen documents that list street names.
Pedestrian/Bike Path Crossing Signage? __X__Yes ____ No
Comments: Proper signage should be included if a bike path will be added to the
development.
NO Construction Traffic Signage being requested? __X__Yes ____ No
Location:Construction traffic should be kept only to the developed area. No
Construction traffic should not go into existing subdivisions.
***We request that all signage is posted prior to the first occupancy permit being issued for each phase.***
***All traffic control signage must conform to MUTCD Standards specific to location, size, color, and height levels***
Roadway
Street Width:If parking is allowed on both sides of the roadway there needs to be room
for emergency vehicular traffic. If parking is restricted on one side of the street, it
should be restricted on fire hydrant side.
Should parking be allowed on BOTH sides of road? ____ Yes ____ No
Should parking be restricted to fire hydrant side? ____ Yes ____ No
Center Roadway Medians: ____ Yes ____ No
Limit Parking on Median? ____ Yes ____ No
Signage Needed? ____ Yes ____ No
Room for Emergency Veh. w/ one lane Obstructed? ____ Yes ____ No
Do you have intersection Concerns? ____ Yes __X__No
Comments: There are three (3) planned entrance/exits to the subdivision.
Landscape
Low Growth or Ground Cover Landscaping? ____ Yes ____ No
Yorkville Police Department Memorandum
651 Prairie Pointe Drive
Yorkville, Illinois 60560
Telephone: 630-553-4340
Fax: 630-553-1141
Low Growth or Ground Cover Landscaping by windows? ____ Yes ____ No
Low Growth or Ground Cover Landscaping by Entrances __X_Yes ____ No
Comments: Low growth landscaping should be placed at entrance/exit points to the
subdivision and at roadway crossings within the subdivision.
***Landscaping located near the entrance/exits should include ONLY low growth or ground cover so as to not obstruct
site lines***
Ingress / Egress
Entrance/Exits match up with adjacent driveways? ____ Yes ____ No
Total Entrance/Exits for development?__3__
Are vehicle entrance/exits safe? __X__Yes ____ No
Are warning signs for cross traffic requested? ____ Yes __X__No
Raised Median & Signage for Right in & Right Out? ____ Yes __X__No
Concerns: __________________________________________________________
Emergency Contact for after hours during construction: __________________________
__________________________
Is this a gated or controlled access development? ____ Yes __X__No
If yes, will police & Fire and Access? ____ Yes ____ No
Miscellaneous
Individual Mailboxes? ____ Yes ____ No
Cluster Mailbox Kiosks? ____ Yes ____ No
Will this cause traffic choke points? ____ Yes ____ No
Comments: Will there be individual, or cluster mailbox kiosks being used? If they
will be using cluster mailbox kiosks they should be placed so as not to disrupt
the flow of traffic.
Yorkville Police Department Memorandum
651 Prairie Pointe Drive
Yorkville, Illinois 60560
Telephone: 630-553-4340
Fax: 630-553-1141
Are sidewalks being planned for the development? __X__Yes ____ No
Are sidewalk crosswalks needed? __X__Yes ____ No
Are there walking/bike paths planned for the subdivision?__X__Yes ____ No
Proper Signage needed for walking/bike paths __X__Yes ____ No
_X_Stop Signs ____ Yield Signs _X_NO Motorized Vehicles
____ Trespassing ____ Other _______________________________________
Is this an HOA Controlled Roadway OR Parking Areas? ____ Yes ____ No
Comments: This is an age restricted HOA? Will the city be responsible for
maintaining the roadways as well as traffic enforcement?
Comments: Who is responsible for re-surfacing and re-striping?
Security
Will security cameras be in use? ____ Yes __X__No
Comments:
Will the business/management provide the police department remote access to the camera
system (User credentials only)? ____ Yes ____ No
Comments:
What are the business Hours of Operation?____________________
Will the property be alarmed? ____ Yes ____ No
Comments:
Will you provide Floor Plans/Maps to the police department ____ Yes ____ No
Comments: Will building floor plans be made available in case of an emergency
for law enforcement use?
Will a Knox Box be placed on Site? ____ Yes ____ No
Location of Knox Box:
Yorkville Police Department Memorandum
651 Prairie Pointe Drive
Yorkville, Illinois 60560
Telephone: 630-553-4340
Fax: 630-553-1141
I hope you find this information helpful, and we look forward to reviewing the revisions. If you should
have any questions, comments, or concerns please do not hesitate to contact me.
February 13, 2025
Mr. Jason Mick (VIA E-MAIL JMICK@HANNADESIGNGROUP.COM)
President
Hanna Design Group
1955 W. Downer Place
Aurora, Illinois 60506
RE: Christie Property – Rezone & Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept Plan Approval
Plan Council Meeting Follow-Up
Dear Mr. Mick,
This correspondence is intended to follow-up on the recent Plan Council meeting held today to discuss
the applications for Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Rezoning approval for the above project. Per that
discussion, below are the comments presented during the meeting for which additional information, and/or a
written response was requested.
GENERAL COMMENTS:
1. Petitioner will submit a revised hard-lined Concept Plan drawing with greater contrast to better
differentiate the residential dwelling types.
2. Petitioner will provide a written narrative with the application summarizing the proposed development,
specifically explaining the rationale behind the plan’s deviation from the traditional density transition
approach by placing higher-density four-plex units at the center, surrounded by lower-density single-
family and duplex dwellings as well as the decision not to provide roadway connectivity to Burning Bush
Drive.
PUD/ZONING COMMENTS:
3. Petitioner should provide written justification as to how the proposed development meets the
following identified Planned Unit Development (PUD) modification standards:
a. Modification Standard #5 Universal Design includes buildings designed with accessible
features such as level access from the street and/or zero entry thresholds.
b. Modification Standard #6 High Quality Building Materials which utilizes time and weather
tested building materials that are of a higher quality than what is otherwise required by this
UDO.
4. Petitioner will verify if the proposed R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence, R-2D Duplex, Two-
Family Attached Residence, and R-3 Multi-Family Attached Residence Districts bulk and dimensional
standards deviate, meet, or exceed the minimum standards required for each district identified in staff’s
memo as “Undetermined”.
United City of Yorkville
County Seat of Kendall County
651 Prairie Pointe Drive
Yorkville, Illinois 60560
Telephone: 630-553-8545
Website: www.yorkville.il.us
a. Staff recommends providing this information as part of a Site Data table on the Concept Plan
would be useful.
b. Any requested deviations from the minimum UDO standards must be provided in writing by the
Petitioner.
5. Petitioner shall provide typical lot dimensions on the Concept Plan for each dwelling unit type/proposed
zoning designation.
6. Petitioner will provide the proposed minimum unit square footage of livable space for the townhome
dwellings.
7. Petitioner will provide within the site data table calculations of the impervious surface for the proposed
development broken down by building coverage, parking lot, sidewalks, and other hard surfaces.
8. Petitioner must denote the proposed maximum building height in feet using the measurement standard
as established in Section 10-3-10 of the Unified Development Ordinance.
9. Petitioner must verify if a deviation from Section 10-4-2(A) of the Unified Development Ordinance
regarding frontloaded garages for duplexes will be required.
10. Petitioner must verify if a deviation from Section 10-4-2(C) of the Unified Development Ordinance
regarding frontloaded garages for townhomes will be required.
11. Petitioner must verify the maximum width of the townhome units.
12. Petitioner must verify the materials and percentages proposed for each housing type to ensure compliance
with the Appearance Standards in Section 10-5-8 of the Unified Development Ordinance.
STREET DESIGN COMMENTS:
13. Petitioner must verify the right-of-way width of proposed internal road network and the street length of
blocks between roadway nodes/intersections.
LANDSCAPE COMMENTS:
14. Petitioner may submit a landscape plan for review or acknowledge in writing that the following landscape
standards, in addition to all other applicable landscaping requirements in the Unified Development
Ordinance, will apply to the proposed development:
a. Transition Zone “D” Landscape buffer is required within the Landscape Easements between Fox
Road and the single-family lots.
SIGNAGE COMMENTS:
15. Petitioner will provide a signage plan for the residential development to be included as part of the Planned
Unit Development if deviations from the Unified Development Ordinance are requested.
COMMUNITY MEETING COMMENTS:
16. The Petitioner will make contact with the homeowners within the Greenbriar subdivision and the White
Oak Estates prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) public hearing to present the plan and
solicit feedback from the residents.
PARKS COMMENTS:
17. The following comments from the Parks & Recreation Department must be addressed in writing or on
the Concept Plan:
a. The minimum size neighborhood park is five acres. We would request one (1) five-acre park
site, centrally located and on level ground.
b. The rest of the land cash obligation in cash to develop the park site.
c. Significant road frontage on two sides.
d. 8’ wide pave trails in lieu of sidewalk on park land.
e. Perpendicular parking stalls at the park site.
f. Paved trail along Fox Road from White Oak Way to Poplar Drive.
g. Crosswalks on Fox Road at White Oak Way and Poplar Drive.
h. Electric, water and sewer to the Park site.
i. Trail from westside of the development to connect with the Burning Bush Drive road stub in the
Greenbriar subdivision. This will allow for pedestrian access to Price Park from the westside of
the proposed development.
j. Trail down one side of the developments north/south road to connect with the future Greenbrier
Drive road extension.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
18. Petitioner will need to provide a Traffic Impact Study as part of the preliminary engineering process,
however if the Petitioner has general trip generation modeling for the proposed development, this is
encouraged to be shared.
We kindly request that the written responses and updated Site Plan be provided no later than, Friday,
February 21, 2025, so that staff may incorporate the necessary information into our review for upcoming
Economic Development Committee meeting.
The Community Meeting feedback should be provided no later than Wednesday, April 2, 2025, so that
staff may incorporate the necessary information into our review prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 630-553-8573, or via email
knoble@yorkville.il.us.
Sincerely,
Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, AICP
Community Development Director
Cc: Dan Kramer, Petitioner’s Attorney (via e-mail)
Eric Mancke, ESM Civil Solutions, LLC (via e-mail)
Bart Olson, City Administrator (via e-mail)
Megan Lamb, City Attorney (via e-mail)
Jori Behland, City Clerk (via e-mail)
Tim Evans, Parks & Recreation Director (via e-mail)
Brad Sanderson, EEI, City Engineer (via e-mail)
David Hansen, Senior Planner (via e-mail)
Sara Mendez, Planner I (via e-mail)
Sincerely,
KiJBkdlNbl AICP