Plan Council Minutes 2004 02-26-04 1 099SOVED BY THE
COMMI E180ARD
UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE ON: t
Plan Council Meeting Minutes
Thursday,February 26,2004
9:30 A.M.
Attendees:
City Administrator Tony Graff Mike Schoppe—Schoppe Design
Planning Coordinator Anna Kurtzman Sergeant Ron Diedrich
Ex. Director Parks&Recreation,Laura Brown Public Works Director Eric Dhuse
Jeff Freeman,EEI John Whitehouse, EEI
Guests:
Brian Urban,MPI Keith Berg,MPI
Brent Lewis,Westbury Todd Lundquist,Westbury
Kevin Serafin,Westbury Attorney Sandy Stein,Westbury
The meeting began at 9:30 AM,with guests Mr.Urban and Mr. Berg in attendance from MPI.
Minutes:
The February 11,2004 minutes, after spelling revisions,were approved.
Addition to Plan Council
Mr. Graff explained from this date forward that Deputy Clerk,Liz D'Anna,will be filling out
forms for proposed resubmittal dates for all developers after their respective meeting with the
Plan Council.
Grande Reserve,Units 5,7 & S—Final Plat
Mr. Graff stated Units 4 and 6 will go to Plan Commission on March 10. EEI and Schoppe
resubmittal final plat comments will need to be to Liz by AM on March 3rd, for Plan Commission
packets. Units 1,2& 3 packet information is complete.
1) PUD Review—Anna Kurtzman
a) Units 5 (Neighborhood 10)and Unit 8(Neighborhood 9)—Easement language,
which has been used on other plats,will be added to exhibit D 1 by Moser.
b) Unit 5,Unit 7 and Unit 8 (Neighborhood 9)—Architectural standards language,
as stated in the annexation agreement,needs to be provided at final plat. This is
for single family dwellings,and will be provided by Moser.Mr. Graff stated this
is a planning issue for City Council, and they would expect Anna Kurtzman to
provide a letter, also for Plan Commission, approving elevation, facade materials,
and standards that will be attached to the exhibit.
c) Plats for Units 7 & 8: (1)Two lots are excluded to differentiate between home
owners association and public areas. One lot will be school/park lot and the
second lot will the storm water basin. Moser will include in Unit 7; (2)Mr.
Urban suggested Unit 7 and Units 8 bike paths changes, (10 feet minimum from
residential property lines and no path encroachment upon high water lines)had
been changed on the plat. The engineering/mass grading plan (#5) shows Lot 5N
with the addition of a portion of the bike plan on the lot, as confirmed by Ms.
Kurtzman.
2) Design review—Mike Schoppe
2
a) Unit 5: (1)Mr. Urban will look at spacing in berms, and it will not be eliminated,
as it was designed to assist with non-blockage of drains from the Lynwood
subdivision. There is a flood route through this area, which prevents a berm, if
complaints come from Lynwood. Mosier will look at additional landscaping on
the Lynwood side. Mr. Graff suggested additional screening may be offered on
the Lynwood side if complaints are heard; (2)Mr. Schoppe says Unit 5
(Neighborhood 10)shows a bio-swale path up to the edge (Lot A). Engineering
plans shows a path on the cross section of the bio-swale. Mr.Urban said the path
will be removed on the revised plat.
b) Unit 7(Neighborhood 16): (1) Storm water management issues allow for
pedestrian trails—there should be a blanket easement over all of lot 5N for
access, as stated by Mr. Schoppe, and stated in EEI's recently revised storm
water management easement language; (2)Mr. Berg commented on the width of
the bike path, which is shown in the park development standard language. Detail
will need to be shown,with 2"of asphalt to 8"of aggregate, and extending the
12"base out and up to the surface; (3)The maintenance plans,which are
mentioned on all unit's comments,will need to be provided to Mr. Schoppe prior
to the final landscaping plans.Most,if not all the areas, as stated by Mr.
Schoppe, are maintained by the home owner's associations. Mr.Urban
suggested MPI has put other maintenance plans together for other development
plans and would submit.
c) Unit 8(Neighborhood 9)—Mr. Whitehouse suggested all water and sewer stubs
must be on plans. Mr.Urban suggested separate permit will be issued by EPA
for sewer and water connection permits.
d) Unit 7, as commented on by Mr. Whitehouse, suggests that Blackberry Oaks
Golf Course is potentially looking at annexation of their clubhouse.Road
crossing would occur with Kennedy Rd.reconstruction,but stubs need to be
headed in that direction,and to right of way lines. Mr.Urban suggested these
plans are being considered by MPI. Mr. Whitehouse will forward any new
sketches for development to MPI.
e) IDSADOT comments will be provided to EEI from MPI. The 75' right of way
will not be changed,but ultimately there will be not right turn lanes when the all
5 lanes are completed.
f) CDF comments will be addressed in another meeting. MPI has a meeting on
March 1 with CDF,and Mr. Schoppe and Mr. Whitehouse plan to be in
attendance. Mr. Graff stated CDF is now reporting directly to Mr. Schoppe, for
coincidental issues that may be raised with developers.Mr. Berg asked if CDF
recommendations will be city wide, and this will be determined.
3) EEI review
a) Unit 5—(1)Mr.Urban asked for clarification under#41,water main
constructions,which are in the Illinois standards,according to Mr. Whitehouse;
(2)Mr.Whitehouse stated that the final plat boundary for Unit 5 (Neighborhood
10) does not correspond to the previously platted Unit 2. It should not be
included in both plats; (3)Two dimensional items are not in compliance with the
legal description—two lot width setbacks in unit 7; (4)Mr. Whitehouse stated
that the IDOT certification can be removed; (5)Discussion of Com-Ed pedestals
was discussed. EEI's recommendation is that 20' easements are on the lot side,
for storm sewers as well as underground public utilities, so as not to cut through
landscaping at the home; (6)Mr. Whitehouse said Olson Court needs to be re-
named; (7) Grand Trail is a minor collector, and there would be no direct
3
vehicular access. These must be off load,not a side load,because driveways
need to be diminished in number, and especially because they are near
intersection; (8)Lots 360-361 should have no access to Edith Street—these are
dedicated rights of way,per Mr.Whitehouse; (9)Mr.Urban asked for guidelines
for manholes under curbs, and Mr. Whitehouse suggested Joe Wywrot, City
engineer, would like to eliminate every other one; (10) Mr. Urban questioned the
collector road 40' curb return on Grand Trail Drive. He suggested MPI stay with
the smaller radius to prevent excess speeds. A further discussion is warranted
with Joe Wywrot; (11)Mr.Urban asked about cost sharing regarding Anne
Marie Lane in Unit 8. Mr.Whitehouse suggested that EEI would be meeting
with Jim Heinz,Bristol Township Hwy. Commissioner. The vertical grade is
fine,but the concern is with pavement width. There is a possibility of its use as
emergency only,and possible Lynwood school site bus traffic,but this is still
under consideration. Mr. Graff suggests the meeting occur before April Planning
Commission. Mr. Urban said the water main ends at dead end at Anne Marie
Lane, and there will be a hydrant on the live side. Mr. Whitehouse will advise on
the feasibility of this remaining a dead end at this time.
b) Unit 7(Neighborhood 16)—(1)John Whitehouse reiterated the school park site
suggested have 50' setbacks lines; (2)Within the school site in Unit 7, there are
major storm sewers needing to be platted as public utility and drainage easements
stated John Whitehouse; (3)Discussion was held on the relocation of the storm
sewer on the school site plan, in Unit 7, in regards to surface structures and
facility designs, and giving the city the most flexibility. Mr. Graff and Mike
Schoppe suggested meeting with the school district and Kimball Hill,taking the
current concept plans,with the current piping place 4'-6' deep,to determine the
school district's direction.
c) In Unit 8 (Neighborhood 9): (1)There is a section of Grand Trail on two units
that needs to be removed from the plat,per Mr. Whitehouse; (2)Need wider
easement between#660 -661 overflow channels per John Whitehouse.
4) Police Department/Public Works/Park& Recreation Reviews
a) No additional comments per Sgt. Ron Diedrich,Directors Dhuse and Brown.
Grande Reserve will be scheduled for Plan Commission on April 14. Their deadline for submittal
of 35 Preliminary Plans must be in the Clerk's office by April 6"'. Required are new submittals
for engineering, landscaping and plats(full size),and addressing Mike Schoppe's,Anna
Kurtzman's, EEI's and CDF's comments. In addition,the Clerk's office needs four copies of
Exhibit D5, architectural design standards,for all units,to be submitted no later than March 24".
11:15 AM Westbury Village Annexation and PUD Agreement and Preliminary PUD Plan
1) EEI comments—A determination for completeness of engineering information will be
provided by Deputy Clerk, Liz D'Anna. Jeff Freeman said EEI goal was to have review
comment out by March 4"'. John Whitehouse said they need offsite sewer and water
plans for movement to Plan Commission. Mr. Stein said easements drafts will be written
at his office, will be presented to Kramer's office,but a determination needs to be made
on who will hold the escrow. Route 47 easements will be honored,however these are tied
to the annexation agreement because of contractual issues with the buyer.Mt. Graff stated
the bid process will proceed because the City will have easements signed in the
4
annexation agreement through Westbury, or the City has Undesser signatures on the
original annexation agreement. Construction target date is May 1s1.
2) Annexation Agreement—Anna Kurtzman
a) Mr. Stein stated Westbury is prepared to offer architectural elevations and
language with the final plan(#3) and(8A)landscape plan.
b) Regarding the Exhibits: (1)Mr. Stein will rectify the Undesser continue business
statement in Exhibit G; (2)Mr. Stein will make each reference to Exhibit N
consistent throughout the documentation; (3) Mr. Graff, in reference to Exhibit
L, stated the Park Facilities Plan has been adopted.Mr. Stein will attach the Plan
to their annexation agreement. The Park Facilities Plan is not a part of the
subdivision ordinance. Mr. Graff stated the architectural standards ordinance
have not yet gone to a City committee level, so will not not be approved by date
of Westbury's annexation approval. Mr. Graff stated the impact of the water
connection fee has increased to $2650, and sewer connection fee is under yet
under discussion. Rob Roy Creek fees will need to be agreed upon by all
developers, and Mr. Graff stated it may be presented as an infrastructure fee; (4)
New subdivision engineering standards are going to be provided to Kevin
Serafin.
c) Regarding the Annexation Agreement: (1)Cleanup needed on page 5 to delete
concept plan,because the preliminary plan has been approved, per Anna
Kurtzman; (2) On page 17, Mr. Schoppe stated Westbury's annexation
agreement at 2 (a)ii is consistent with the plan. However,the city requested 30'
setbacks for the roads,and Mr. Stein suggested the reason Westbury wants 20'
setbacks in Pods 1,2 and 6 would be for 3-car garages. Mr. Graff said City
Council is promoting the 3 car garage market to deter additional vehicles parking
in the street. Mr. Graff would like Westbury to identify the lots. Mr. Graff said
City Council,in other subdivisions,has agreed to reduce side yards for a 3-stall
garage. Westbury may want to look at a trade off for a side lot variance issue,
leaving corner lots as they are. Mr. Graff suggested looking at Wiseman-Hughes
language, which has been approved; (3)Regarding page 28, Section D,Mr. Stein
and Mr. Graff are in agreement that developer will be able to use their portion of
sales rebate or incentive on Westbury property until the properties are
fully leased. If there is an area wide improvement, then the proportional share
would benefit Westbury, especially singlization and the Rob Rob Creek bridge;
(4) Westbury is adding a trail along the Corneils buffer in lieu of a sidewalk;
(5) Regarding the commercial site, Ms.Kurtzman asked that when the final plat
site is submitted,that the architectural standards would also be submitted. Mr.
Stein expects an entry into the commercial property area off Rt. 47 and south
off Galena and language needs to be added that the City would be supportive of
an MOT request. Mr. Schoppe believes City should not commit to an additional
secondary service access,without review of the site plan for the school.
3) Design review—Mike Schoppe
a) (1)Regarding item#3,Mr. Schoppe is requesting adequate footage from
Westbury for the school site, in preparation for a site plan, and the City will
request this from the Yorkville school district; (2)Mr. Stein agrees to comply
with item#4; (3)Mr. Stein will look#5 over and comment; (4)Mr. Stein has
no comment on item#6; (4) Regarding item#9,Mr. Stein commented that
5
4
Westbury does not want to extend the bike path through the commercial
property. Mr. Schoppe suggested the bike path go through the 30' buffer, and his
concern is that there be frontage access along Galena. Mr.Whitehouse suggested
there would be an additional 20' right of way that the county would require.
b) Preliminary Engineering—(1)The City will provide information to Mr. Stein
after they have met with the IDNR; (2) Regarding#5,Mr. Stein stated these are
public streets, and Westbury did not want to provide parkways for carriage walks
along POD 7.
c) The City staff will bring additional comments to a staff meeting, followed by a
meeting with Dan Kramer's office,then forward comments to Mr. Stein.
Engineering will have comments to Liz D' Anna by March 4t", and engineering
will be reviewed again on March 11
4) Annexation Agreement—Laura Brown
a) Ms.Brown questioned the language on page 20, A(ii)in that if the school site is
not developed, does it revert back to the developer. She suggests the City needs
language stating that the City needs road front frontage for the park land. In the
Westbury north section it is all one POD and the parks site is not stipulated in that
Unit. In the reverter clause, language should be added stating what property
would be returned to the school district and what would remain park. The City
would want frontage on one road only,that being more accessible to the regional
trail(which is connected) and Ms. Brown is considering the northeast section of
the lot. City is asking for a school/park site and a conceptual design if it is a
park site only. Mr.Whitehouse suggested that the lot be subdivided before the
reverter clause would kick in. Dan Kramer needs to address this.
b) In answer to Ms. Brown's question regarding which trails are private and which
are public,Mr. Seraphin stated that 3.2 acres is the measurement for the regional
trail running from the southwest corner to the northeast, and is not inclusive of
any private trails. Mike Schoppe suggests to Westbury that the plan show
differentiation of public and private trails.
5) Galena Rd—EEI clarification
a) John Whitehouse was assured distinction was being made as to the dedication of
the right of way for this particular plan by Mr. Seraphin.
6) Open Space issues will be clarified between the land planners. Westbury will be on the
agenda at the next 2 Plan Council meetings on March 11 t"and March 25"', and is
scheduled for the Plan Commission on April 14"'. The March 25d'meeting will be for
finalization of the annexation language. All resubmittals for the April Plan Commission
must be in the Clerk's office by March 24`x'.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:25 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Annette Williams