Zoning Commission Minutes 2009 01-28-09
United City of Yorkville
County Seat of Kendall County
800 Game Farm Road
Yorkville, Illinois, 60560
Telephone: 630-553-4350
Meeting Summary
Zoning Ordinance Revision Steering Committee
Assessment Meeting
Wednesday January 28, 2009
Yorkville City Hall Conference Room
800 Game Farm Road
ATTENDEES:
Anne Lucietto, Plan Commission Chairperson
Tom Lindblom, Bristol-Kendall Fire Protection District, Plan Commission member
Richard Scheffrahn, Yorkville Green Committee member
Lynn Dubajic, Yorkville Economic Development Corporation
Richard Guerard, Homebuilders Association
Travis Miller, Director United City of Yorkville Community Development Department
Stephanie Boettcher, Senior Planner, United City of Yorkville Community Development Department
MEMBERS NOT PRESENT
Tom Van Boekel, Leo Foelich Construction Co., commercial/industrial building development/construction
John Sterrett, Kendall County Planning Department
Anna Kurtzman, United City of Yorkville Building Department
Donald Schwartzkopf, United City of Yorkville Police Department
Jeff Baker, Zoning Board of Appeals, Plan Commission
MEETING SUMMARY
Travis Miller welcomed those in attendance and gave a brief overview of the timeline for the
zoning ordinance updating, pointing out that this meeting was the end of the assessment phase.
Travis then explained that during the assessment, which involved going through the state statute,
an error was made in the establishment of the committee. The current committee was established
as an advisory committee to the Plan Commission. However, given that the update is
comprehensive in nature, the City needs to follow the statue which requires the Mayor to
establish and appoint a Zoning Commission. A city commission must be made of Yorkville
residents, which would exclude some of the members. Travis apologized for this oversight.
Moving forward, Travis will be working with the Mayor to get a Zoning Commission established
an approved by the City Council. The original zoning committee may be able to serve as an
advisory committee to the newly formed Zoning Commission, which will hold the public
hearings for the update, that could be determined by the Commission once established . This
adjustment will most likely push back the timeline a month or so.
The committee then went through the zoning assessment put together by Yorkville Staff. Phase
One of the assessment identified the statutory powers provided by the State and how they are
addressed (or not addressed) in the current zoning ordinance. There was discussion in relation to
providing affordable housing for Yorkville residents. Rich mentioned that each City is supposed
to have a certain number of affordable housing units and that most cities meet this requirement
through the existing, older housing stock. He also mentioned that some municipalities which
have requirements that make developers set aside housing stock within a development for
affordable housing have a buyout option. This option allows developers to have a more uniform
price point and the city can use the money to purchase affordable housing in other locations. He
also mentioned that affordable housing is much easier to “mask” within a condo/apartment as
opposed to a single family development. Richard asked if any homes on the market in Yorkville
fall into the affordable housing threshold. Staff is going to review the MLS listings and get a
average value of homes to see if this is the case.
The committee recommended that the appearance code remain in the building code and that the
zoning ordinance refer to it. This method allows the appearance code to be more flexible as
opposed to the having to go through the zoning variance process which is established to be very
restrictive.
The committee then went through the non-conforming uses. Tom questioned what percentage of
a redevelopment of a commercial or industrial building would ADA compliance be required.
The committee was unsure of this requirement, but it would be a federal requirement. Trailers
were addressed, as Travis asked if there were any in town the committee could recall. The only
one was the city building along the Fox River. The City may need to address this issue. An
exemption system was mentioned in which non-conforming uses could receive a renewal each
year.
Next, the committee went through Phase Two of the report, which was the summary of current
zoning ordinance deficiencies. Adult entertainment clubs were brought up as they are not
addressed in the zoning ordinance. Lynn mentioned they are allowed in manufacturing districts
and the city passed an ordinance on this, around the 2000-2001 timeframe. Staff was unaware of
this and will research it. Anne mentioned that the City should research Morris to see how they
handle the issue.
Architectural protrusions (i.e. bay windows) were discussed. Rich said that most municipalities
measure setbacks from the foundation. This led into discussion about the maximum building
square footage allowed on a lot. Does this square footage include decks? Rich said a policy
decision should be made on this and felt that decks should not be included as this would put
restrictions on high-end homes and homes with side loading garages (which more municipalities
are requiring).
Accessory structures were discussed. Lynn mentioned that many HOA covenants limit the size
and material of them, and the City could look into doing the same. Rich questioned if it also
limits the use, such as a mother-in-law suite above a detached garage. Play set structures should
not be considered an accessory use.
Temporary use permits should not be put in the zoning ordinance as zoning is a more permanent
regulation. However, the zoning code can refer to the building code in regards to this. The City
could look into requiring different fees dependent upon how “temporary” a structure will be.
Site plan review should stay a part of the building code; however the building and zoning
administrative process should be similar.
The committee then went through two tables prepared by Staff, one of which was terms which
needed to be evaluated and the second were applicable terms placed into use categories. Many
of the terms on the first table were deemed to be outdated and it was decided to remove them
from the zoning ordinance. Of the terms on the second table, some were combined or expanded
upon. The committee also suggested additional zoning districts which many of the uses would
be applicable.
The meeting concluded with a brief discussion about overlay districts. Richard suggested
looking into the Geneva/Naperville model in which a residential area is turned into a commercial
area; however the nature of the residential neighborhood remains. Also, a historic district for the
residential areas downtown to enhance the core of the City, Aurora is a good example of this.
Staff will be contacting committee members about the formulation of the Zoning Commission,
the next steps of the committee, and when the next meeting will be.