Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 2/21/2012 - Community Development Committee COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING `- Tuesday, February 21, 2012 Aldermen's Conference Room, 7:00 p.m. In Attendance: Committee Members: Chairman Alderman Condon, Alderman Santi and Alderman Peterson. Absent: None. Staff in Attendance: Deputy Administrator Martin, Director Construction and Neighborhood Services Schwalenberg, Deputy Clerk Kunzer. Others in Attendance: Todd Marler, resident and realtor. Chairman Alderman Condon called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. Public Comment There was no one in attendance who wished to speak during the Public Comment portion of the meeting. Chairman Condon, noting Mr. Marler's attendance, suggested the Committee address Agenda Item#2, the discussion regarding economic revitalization of West Route 120, first. Discussion: Economic Revitalization of West Route 120 Deputy Administrator Martin provided the Committee with a brief summary of the information he assembled regarding economic incentive programs which have been adopted by the City of � Crystal Lake and a development flyer distributed by the Berwyn Development Corporation. He noted Crystal Lake's approach includes options of permit/development fee waivers as well as sales tax incentives. Deputy Administrator Martin noted the Committee could also look at ways to provide incentives to have property owners demolish/tear down buildings which have become an eyesore in this area. He stated he has spoken with five property owners or their representatives whose property is located on either the intersection of Route 120 and Ringwood Road or Route 120 and Meadow Lane. These intersections represent the west and east boundaries, respectively of the targeted area. The Ringwood Road intersection includes vacant property owned by John Fuhler which has not yet been annexed to the City, the former Amoco site currently owned by Gene Graham, and the vacant parcel at the southeast corner. Deputy Administrator Martin noted he spoke with property owner representative Dave Backhaus regarding the southeast corner property. Deputy Administrator Martin stated he also spoke with the property owners of the southwest corner of the intersection of Meadow Lane and Route 120. Two buildings exist situated on zero foot setbacks from each other. The western building is owned by Mike Fitzgerald; the eastern building is owned by Terry Wilborn. Mr. Fitzgerald has three leased apartments on the second floor of his building. Mr. Fitzgerald maintains an office on the first floor of his building, and is the sole first floor user of the building. Mr. Wilborn's property is for sale and not leased at the current time, pending insurance settlement for water damage incurred at the site. The building has been vacant for 2-3 years. � Community Development Committee Meeting February 21, 2012 Page 2 �" Deputy Administrator Martin suggested it might be appropriate to offer an incentive to have the building(s) demolished in an effort to make the site more viable. Mr. Wilborn is amenable to demolishing his building if the appropriate incentive were offered. Mr. Fitzgerald is okay with the current stah�s of his building in that it provides rental income from the apartments. Deputy Administrator Martin suggested the City could create a Target Development Zone with a fee waiver whic;h could include demolition incentives. He noted the City could develop a hybrid of the program:� offered by Crystal Lake which might include fee waiver, demolition incentive and perhaps sales tax incentives as well. He requested feedback from the Committee in order to proceed. Chairman Condon stated she approves of the Target Development Zone Fee Waivers. She is also okay with a demolition incentive, noting there are many eyesores in this area. Alderman Santi approved of the permit fee waiver but noted that would not provide much of an incentive. He stated he might support a demolition incentive but questioned how it would be monetarily supported — how would it be funded? Deputy Administrator Martin noted recently passed state legislation provides for the appropriation of funds for economic development and/or the City could consider utilizing Hotel/Motel Tax Funds for this purpose. Alderman Peterson, noting the proposed fee waiver option, inquired how much building permit fee waivers could amount to on a given project. Director Schwalenberg responded building �-- permit fees are negligible. Some discussion followed regarding when capital development fees would be required, and what types of circumstances would suggest waiver of these fees. It was pointed out by Staff that unless a new water or sanitary sewer tap is requested or an increase in water meter size is needed, no capital development fees would be required. City building permit costs would then only relate to permit review and issuance fees which are negligible. Discussion also occurred regarding the possibility of offering a sales tax rebate incentive to new retail businesses in the targeted area. It was noted this would be appealing to the City if a new business generated retail sales tax at a location where there was none before the redevelopment of the site. Chairman Condon noted there should be some limit as to the amount of money the City intends to expend for development incentives. Deputy Administrator Martin stated he would prefer that no specific amount be designated but that the Committee develop specific guidelines/criteria which must be met and judge each request on a case-by-case basis, especially as there are a unique set of circumstances for this area. For instance, does the particular property currently generate property tax? Does the property currently generate sales tax? What types of increases in either are likely? Alderman Peterson suggested the two buildings east of Happy Jacks should be torn down. He � questioned how the City could entice the owners to demolish those buildings. Community Development Committee Meeting February 21, 2012 Page 3 �" Alderman Santi stated his belief that Staff should contact more of the impacted property owners before establishing the economic incentive program in order to obtain their opinions about the area's renovation. Chairman Condon stated it is important that the City put together a program including suggested approval criteria and requirements to offer the impacted property owners prior to offering incentives or discussing the idea with the property owners. Alderman Peterson suggested the vacant property at Scully and 120 as well as the vacant parcel at the southeast corner of Ringwood and 120 should be the first to be targeted for development. The development of these properties would go a long way in enhancing this stretch of Route 120. He opined the City could utilize all three types on incentives in pursuing the development of these parcels (i.e. fee waivers,property tax rebates, sales tax rebates). Deputy Administrator Martin inquired as to the Committee's thoughts on multi-family, office or commercial development/redevelopment in this corridor. Discussion occurred. Mr. Marler indicated mixed use development provides advantages such as being pedestrian- friendly, as well as providing a buffer between single-family residential development and the high-density Route 120 traffic. Deputy Administrator Martin stated he had been provided enough input to move forward with an `— application and approval criteria for the economic development incentive program. He will bring the matter back to Committee for input, consideration and review at its May 15, 2012 meeting. It was the consensus of the Committee that Deputy Administrator Martin proceed with developing documents for review in May. Discussion: Si�n Ordinance 2013 Amortization Deadline for Non-Conformin�Si�s Director Schwalenberg provided the Committee with a list of businesses that are currently in violation of the sign ordinance and would be required to bring their signs into compliance by the August 2014 deadline as recommended by the Committee at its last meeting. He noted there were approximately 80 businesses involved that would be required to either bring their signs into compliance or pay the annual fee as required by the zoning ordinance. Chairman Condon inquired if the businesses have been notified of the need to comply by 2014. Director Schwalenberg responded in the negative. He noted if the Committee directs Staff to proceed with the directive of the sign ordinance, notification would be made to all impacted businesses in August 2012 advising them that compliance would be required by August 2014 or annual fees would be required. Then, again, in August 2013, a second notice would be sent to all of the impacted businesses, reminding them of the need to comply by August 2014 or annual sign non-conforming fees would have to be paid. Director Schwalenberg stated the non-conforming signs involved all types of signs, namely, � wall, free-standing, directional, etc. Community Development Committee Meeting February 21, 2012 Page 4 `' Chairman Condon asked if each business with a non-conforming sign would be required to pay an annual fee. Director Schwalenberg responded they would have to pay a fee for each of the non-conforming signs on their property. Chairman Condon inquired if the businesses could seek a variance to allow the non-conforming sign(s). Deputy Administrator Martin responded they could take that route. There are approximately 80 businesses with non-conforming signs. Several businesses have more than one non-conforming sign on the premises. Chairman Con�ion requested the Committee be provided copies of the minutes of the Community Development c�ommittee meeting and the City Council meeting at which the non-conforming signs being brought into compliance by August 2013 was originally discussed. Deputy Administrator Martin recalled the intent of the 2006 ordinance requiring compliance by August 2013 related solely to freestanding signs with regard to height, area, setback and number per lot. Director Schwalenberg agreed to amend the list of non-conforming signs by removing all that do not relate to freestanding signs. Sandwich Board Si s Director Schwalenberg stated it has been brought to Staffls attention the increasing number of sandwich board signs being displayed in the City. Currently sandwich board signs are not allowed. Suggestion was made by Staff to exempt the sandwich board signs or allow them with a temporary sign permit. Deputy Administrator Martin noted, alternatively, the City could prohibit sandwich board signs, �. particularly in the right-of-way. Alderman Santi suggested those businesses which have a broad/wide sidewalk could be allowed to have a sandwich board sign as it would not impede the walkway. Alderman Peterson noted the goal of the City is to maintain public safety. He questioned the safety of allowing signs on the sidewalks. Lengthy discussion followed regarding the pros and cons of allowing sandwich board signs. Deputy Administrator Martin stated in recent years more merchants are choosing to advertise via signs placed on the sidewalk. The best way to regulate these signs would be to specify where they can be placed, the size of the signs, etc. He noted the concern with the signs relates to public safety. Alderman Peterson suggested obtaining an opinion from the City Attorney if the City were to move forward with no rules governing sandwich board signs. Deputy Administrator Martin noted if someone trips over a sign, the City would incur liability whether there were regulations in place or not. Alderman Peterson suggested making the sandwich board signs exempt subject to the following requirements: 1. Maximum of one per business or per business frontage; �, 2. Maximum size of 24"by 42"; Community Development Committee Meeting February 21, 2012 Page 5 � 3. Sign mt�st be removed at the end of the business day; 4. Sign sh�ill not impede pedestrian traffic or cause pedestrians to have to walk in the street. Sign Ordinance Amendments Director Schwalenberg noted Staff suggested various modifications to the sign ordinance relating to the followin�;: • Temporary signs in City rights-of-way—designating maximum time allowable (i.e. up to fourteer. days) and desired established locations,pending Council approval; • Feather banners—previously not addressed as a temporary sign; • Contractor signs — added restrictions to ensure they are removed when contractor is not working; • Non-residential real estate signs—previously not covered by the ordinance; • Flashing lights — add provisions regarding L.E.D. lights which are becoming more prevalent; • Updating sign definitions. Motion by Peterson, seconded by Santi, to recommend to the City Council the sign ordinance be amended as presented regarding the following: • Sandwich board signs; � Temporary signs in City rights-of-way; • Feather banners; � • Contractor signs; • Non-residential real estate signs; • Flashing lights; � Updating sign definitions; and that Council direct Staff to prepare documentation for consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Voting Aye: Santi, Peterson, Condon. Voting Nay: None. Absent: None. Motion carried. Discussion: Proposed Amendments to Municipal Code regarding Fences Director Schwalenberg stated Staff has been reviewing the fence provisions of the Municipal Code. Several issues have come to light, notably: • Notification of adjoining property owners of the fence variance request is needed in order to be proactive and prevent neighborhood disputes; • Clarification of front setback requirement to coincide with the building line as interpreted by Staff; • Addition of regulations to non-residential fences which closely mirror the residential fence guidelines. � Community Development Committee Meeting February 21, 2012 Page 6 �' Director Schwalenberg provided the Committee with a ro osed amended co p p py of the fence regulations of the Municipal Code. He highlighted the following changes: 1. Adding a provision for relief from the fence regulations including providing written notification via certified mail return receipt requested to abutting property owners of the impending request for variance; 2. Providing approval criteria for use by City Council in determining if the fence variance should l�e granted; 3. Establi�hing a$175 fence variance application fee; 4. Incorporating the regulations found in the provisions for fences on residentially-zoned lots into the regulations for non-residentially-zoned lots. Director Schwalenberg noted Staff is also seeking direction regarding the use of decorative/landscape fences. It was the consensus of the Committee, decorate/landscape fence would not have to comply with the fence regulations as the materials are not used to enclose an area but merely for landscape enhancement. Motion by Santi, seconded by Peterson, to recommend to the City Council the proposed revisions to the fence regulations of the Municipal Code be approved as presented. Voting Aye: Santi, Peterson, Condon. Voting Nay: None. `.- Absent: None. Motion carried. Other Business Chairman Condon requested an update regarding the software proposed to be shared between the Police Department and Construction and Neighborhood Services for the crime-free housing and rental registration programs. Director Schwalenberg noted he spoke with Deputy Chief Birk who advised the software is cost-prohibitive. Deputy Administrator Martin reported the Final Plat for the Panda Express property has been recorded. Family Video is moving forward. The McDonald's on Route 31 will have a grand opening on March 21 St. The next regularly scheduled Community Development Committee meeting is May 15, 2012. The proposed agenda includes: Update on the Economic Incentive Program for West Route 120; Update on status of Non-Conforming Signs issue; Proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments as recommended by Staff. Director Schwalenberg updated the Committee on snow enforcement and stated there have been only two complaints handled thus far this winter season. It was noted the amount of snowfall is greatly reduced from previous years, however. � Community Development Committee Meeting February 21, 2012 Page 7 � Adiournment Motion by Peterson, seconded by Santi, to adjourn the meeting at 8:47 p.m. Voting Aye: Santi, Peterson, Condon Voting IVay: None Absent; None Motion carried Res ectfully L bmitted, �,�"'-Tl�' � Geri A Condon, Chairman � �