Zoning Commission Minutes 2010 07-28-10
APPROVED 8/25/210
Page 1 of 3
UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE
ZONING COMMISSION
Wednesday, July 28, 2010 7:00pm
Parks & Recreation Administration Office
201 W. Hydraulic Ave.
Board Members in Attendance:
Michael Crouch, Chairman
Gary Neyer
Jeff Baker
Al Green
Phil Haugen
Absent: Ralph Pfister
Greg Millen
Pete Huinker
City Officials in Attendance:
Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director
Guests:
Land Use and Zoning Attorney Ronald S. Cope, Ungaretti & Harris, LLP
Meeting Called to Order
Chairman Michael Crouch called the meeting to order at 7:10pm.
Roll Call
Roll call was taken and a quorum was established.
Previous Meeting Minutes:
May 26, 2010
May 26, 2010 minutes were approved as read on a motion by Jeff Baker and second by Al Green.
Approved by unanimous voice vote.
Power Point Presentation by Community Development Director, Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble
Ms. Noble presented a power point of how she perceives the progression of the committee’s work towards
an updated and approved Zoning Ordinance. Some general objectives should be met, such as (1) internal
consistency with all operating documents currently in use in the City; and external consistency with Federal
and State land use laws, zoning laws, and case laws; (2) ease-of use in formatting/ style/ layout, utilizing
graphics; (3) evaluating and updating districts to address current and future land use needs and opportunities;
(4) using effective and creative zoning techniques; model ideas include but are not limited to: incentives,
density bonuses, and transfer of development rights; and (5) clarity in administration and enforcement. Ms.
Noble has contacted seven different communities in varying counties within Illinois, to begin researching
implemented zoning regulations for successful and unsuccessful results, to use a guide and a tool for the
Zoning Commission’s task.
A work plan timeline was proposed:
Summer 2010: Review of previously-drafted sections
Summer-Fall 2010: Draft Revisions to sections not previously addressed
Winter 2010-2011: Editing, Formatting of Final Draft
Spring 2011: Open House
Summer 2011: Public Hearing / Adoption/ Training & Follow Up with ZBA, Plan Commission
Page 2 of 3
Guest Speaker: Land Use and Zoning Attorney Ronald S. Cope, Ungaretti & Harris
Ms. Noble introduced Attorney Ronald S. Cope of Ungaretti & Harris, LLP as the meeting’s guest speaker.
Attorney Cope is lead-council in precedent-setting cases upholding modern zoning concepts; he has written
and lectured extensively on recent land-use cases and law, statutes pertaining to zoning and annexation, and
wind energy systems.
Discussion
Attorney Cope passed out copies of “The Powers, Obligations, and Duties of the Plan Commission, Zoning
Board of Appeals, and Village Board”, prepared by Attorney Cope and dated July 28, 2010. Attorney Cope
encouraged the Commission to read the Codes and Statutes to always confirm authority, and included
specifically in his booklet the Illinois Municipal Codes regarding Zoning, Plan Commissions, and
Annexation Agreements, as well as Yorkville Codes regards to Zoning, Plan Commission, Plans, and Plats.
The booklet has a section devoted to “Due Process in Zoning Hearings: Guidelines for Complying with the
Illinois Supreme Court’s Mandate; People ex rel Klaeren v Village of Lisle”. Another well-known case-
Dunlap v Village of Schaumburg- is included. Attorney Cope summarized the Klaeren case, for those
unfamiliar with the particulars regarding the annexation of land in Lisle and the intended development of a
Meijer shopping center; it was stressed that every community should be aware of this case and quasi-judicial
(administrative, as opposed to legislative) due-process, when making zoning decisions.
Attorney Cope reminded the Commission that the Comprehensive Plan cannot “trump” the Zoning
Ordinance, and cited a case in Chicago Heights in which a church was denied as a proposed special use
development in a specific corridor because it didn’t generate sales tax (as per the municipality’s
Comprehensive Plan); however the municipality’s Zoning Ordinance provides for a church as a special use,
and therefore the Illinois Supreme Court ruled the church development could not be denied based upon the
lack of sales tax generation. The Commission was encouraged to read all relative documents and include all
applicable data within their revised Zoning Ordinance, to avoid a situation such as what occurred in Chicago
Heights.
Regarding age-targeted and adult-oriented use districts and Ordinances: Attorney Cope stated that
Ordinances for these types of districts/ uses would normally be located within the Zoning Code. If an
Ordinance regarding these districts/ uses does not include findings-of-fact which specifically relate to the
community, and also a planning and hearing process, then the Federal Courts can rule the Ordinance
unconstitutional. The Commission was cautioned to design their adult-use district(s) carefully and to seek
the advice of experts.
Mr. Crouch noted that Yorkville’s Zoning Ordinance is dated 1973, and to avoid having to modify the
Zoning Ordinance, the City Council has historically passed stand-alone Ordinances dealing with specific
issues as they have arisen. This Commission is working to not only update the Zoning Ordinance, but also to
incorporate the stand-alone Ordinances into the text of the new Zoning Ordinance. The Commission was
cautioned that if the City has an Ordinance which functions as a Zoning Ordinance, but never went through
the public hearing process, then that Ordinance is technically invalid.
The group discussed the question-and-feedback requirements for public hearings; Attorney Cope stated that
in conformance with the Klaeren ruling, once a petitioner has finished presenting, objectors must be allowed
to provide questions and feedback regarding the proposal. Either before or after the objectors, Plan
Commission/ Zoning Board members/ Village Officials must be allowed to ask their questions/ provide
feedback regarding the proposal. Questions, feedback, and any other evidence which is elicited from all
parties should be part of the public record. Witnesses should testify under oath administered via a court
reporter (who should also transcribe the testimony). The Chairperson has the right to steer questions/
feedback away from discussions/ comments not relative to the proposal at hand.
Ms. Noble stated that she would like to have Yorkville adopt the findings-of-fact wording that’s in the
LaSalle Factors (LaSalle National Bank of Chicago v. County of Cook, 1957) and the Sinclair (Sinclair Pipe
Line Co. v. Village of Richton Park, 1960).
When a development is being sought for approval, only impact fees which are uniquely attributable to that
specific development may be assessed, and only via an Annexation/ PUD Agreement.
Page 3 of 3
Continued Review and Commentary of Previously Recommended Zoning Chapters
Agenda Item 5 (a-d) was continued to the next meeting. Four new chapters will be presented at that time; the
Commission can expect to receive seven chapters for review at the next meeting.
Ms. Noble would like the Commission to consider adding a chapter in the Zoning Ordinance regarding
alternative energy systems, including rooftop wind energy systems, small wind energy systems, as well as
other systems.
Ms. Noble suggested that the Commission determine if they would like adult-oriented uses to be listed as a
separate chapter, or incorporated into another chapter; for example: listed as a special-use under a specific
district.
Ms. Noble stated that a Sign Ordinance would typically be located within a Zoning Ordinance- does the
Commission wish to bring it back? Mr. Crouch indicated yes, based upon the discussion at this meeting, it
would make Yorkville’s Sign Ordinance stronger to be located within the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Crouch requested that new drafts be highlighted to indicate it is new material. Ms. Noble will do this.
Additional Business:
The next meeting will be held on Wednesday August 25, 2010 at 7:00pm, and will be held at the Parks and
Recreation Building at 201 W. Hydraulic Ave.
Adjournment:
There was no further business and a motion was made by Mr. Baker to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Haugen
seconded the motion. Meeting adjourned at 8:57pm.
Minutes respectfully submitted by
Jennifer Woodrick