HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 5/17/2005 - Community Development Committee COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMIVIITEE MEETIl�IG
Tuesday,May 17,2005
Aldermen's Conference Room at 7:00 p.m.
�
In Attendance: Committee Members Chairman Alderman Condon, Alderman Santi, Alderman Glab,
Alderman Wimmer. Absent;None. Also in attendance: Director of Community Development
Napolitano, Asst. to City Administrator Martin, Deputy Clerk Kunzer, Building Commissioner
Schwalenberg, Landmark Commissioner Pat Schafer. The meeting was called to order by Chairman
Alderman Condon at 7:00 p.m. .
Chairman Condon welcomed all members to the recently appointeti Community Development
Committee. She provided the Committee with guidelines she will follow in conducting meeting in
order to maintain order and stay on topic. Chairman Condon requested Staff add"New or Qther
Business" as an agenda items for future meetings. She also requested Staff add projected meeting
dates when goals and objectives for 2005 would be addressed.
Homeowners Association Approval for Minor Permits
Director of Community Development Napolitano stated the requirement that Home Owner's
Associations {HOA) must approve all minor building permits prior to their being issued causes a
backup of permits being issued in the department. Director Napolitano informed the Committee,
although Staff daes not enforce covenants, HOA review is sought when Staff is aware of a HOA
being active in the development for which the minor permit is being requested. This does, however,
cause a la� in permit issuance time. Reasons for the lag include frequent turnover of HOA board
members, infrequency of HOA meetings at which permit review and appraval could be granted, and
�. applicant apathy regarding securin� HOA approval for the requested permit. Director Napolitano
noted Staff suggested three options to address this issue:
1) Maintain the status quo;
2) Issue permits, inClude a reminder that HOA approval may be required;
3) Discontinue requiring HOA approval on minor permits.
Alderman Glab suggested option 3 that the City discontinue seeking HOA approval for minor
permits. Alderman Glab further su�gested the applicants be told that if they have a HOA in their
subdivision, HOA review and approval may be needed.
Chairman Condon concurred with Alderman Glab, stating the onus should be on the homeowner and
not the City, to secure HOA approval if needed. Alderman Condon stated, however, Staff should
remind the applicant that HOA approval mi�ht be required.
Alderman Wimmer agreed stating the City should not bear the burden of seekin� and obtaining
HOA approval for all minor permits. He opined the responsibility should rest on the homeowners to
seek HOA approval.
Motion by Gl ab, seconded by Wimmer, to recommend to Council tha.t a policy be created whereby
minor building permits sha11 be issued to homeowners but that accompanying paperwork include a
�-' reminder that if the homeowner resides in a subdivision in which there is an active HOA, the review
and approval of the HOA may also be needed. All ayes. Motion carried.
Community Development Committee
May 17, 2005
Page 2
Building Code Updates
�
Director Napclitano stated notice of impendin� building code updates was mailed to alt City
builders. Most builders responded favorably to the proposed changes, although Gerstad Builders
noted the updates would cause an increase in cost of constructing a single family home of
approximately $5,000. Staff believes the actual increase to be in the neighborhood of $1,200 to
$1,540.
Direitor Napolitano, noting the attendance of Building Cvmmissioner Schwalenberg, suggested the
Committee address all questions regarding the proposed Building Code Updates to him.
Commissioner Schwalenberg stated the City has set a policy of updating building c�es every three
years. The current updates are the Intemational Code year 2000 series. He noted the 2000 code is a
transitional code in which the BOCA Code was merged with the International Code. Most changes
are of an administrative nature. Commissioner Schwalenberg stated the greatest changes occur
regarding energy conservation.
Commissioner Schwalenberg stated some of the City's builders are already utilizing many of the
updated standards in the International Code. Implementation of the revised code which cause all
builders to be forced to use the updated standards.
In response to an inquiry by Alderman Wimmer, Director Napolitano stated the updated code would
be implemented appro�mately 90-120 days following ordinance approval. Buildings already under
�,. construction when the ordinance is passed would continue to follow the e�usting building code and
not be required to adhere to the updates. It was noted the developers and builders would not bear the
burden of increased cost due to adopting the revised building code. Increased costs would be passed
on to the consumer.
Responding to an inquiry, Commissioner Schwalenberg stated Staff is recommending adoption of
the 2000 International Code Series, as the City would then be one cycle behind as there is currently a
2003 series. Codes are revised and updated every three years.
Following a brief dis�ussion on the requirement of sprinklers in buildings in excess of two stories
including basements, Commissioner Schwalenberg stated sprinkler systems add only appro�umately
$2.50 per square foot to construction cost of a building. Alderman Glab expressed concerns
regarding possible leaking or defective sprinkler heads. He opined recessed sprinkler hea.ds should
be used in a residential use. Commissioner Schwalenber� stated at this time sprinkler systems are not
required in the residential single family uses. Sprinklers are required in multi-family use.
A brief discussion occurred regarding the proposed changes to the energy conservation portion of the
code.
Motion by Wimmer, seconded by Santi, to recommend that Staff forward proposed code updates to
the City Council for direction to send to the Illinois Building Commission for approval prior to City
implementation by ordinance. All ayes. Motion carried.
�
Teardowns
Community Development Committee
May 17, 2005
Page 3
pirector Napo(itano provided the Committee with a PowerPoint presentation regarding teardowns.
� He defined teardowns as the removal of an existing structure and replacing it with another in its
place. Typically the newer structure is larger and taller than the existing structwe. Director
Napolitano stated teardowns have an impact on the existing neighborhood:
- loss of character;
- loss of historical character and landscaping;
- fewer affordable homes and housing options;
- increase in impervious surfaces.
Director Napolitano stated there are three general methods of controlling teardowns in the City:
Performance Standards:
implement design guidelines
Utilize a board or commission to review potential teardown projects.
Zoning Regulations:
� Utilize bulk requirements, i.e. setbacks, lot coverage, aznount of impervious surfaces;
Garage locations, i.e. setback from font fa�ade, side load, rear load, etc.
Roof design.
Administrative Requirements:
Implement a waiting period prior to issuing teazdown permit;
Require notice to adjoining property owners;
Utilize a commission [Landmark Commission or hybrid including Landmark Commission
member(s)) for review of proposed teardowns;
Create historic or teardown overlay district;
Institute tear down fees;
Require additiona.l impact fees when new structure ineludes more bedraoms than initial
structure;
�
Address tree preservation;
Implement construction standards to protect neighbors during teardpwn and re-construction
process.
Community D�,velopment Committee
May 17, 2005
Page 4
The Power Point presentation included examples of teardowns in Park Ridge, Illinois. Director
� Napolitano stated Staff was in the process of drafting language which would address teardowns in
the City of McHenry. Re�arding design guidelines, Director Napolitano su�gested the following be
inctuded:
Site consideration
Building design
Building scale and mass
Garage style, location, setback
Mechanical equipment location
Utility location
Front yard landscaping.
Some discussion occurred regarding if teardown district guidelines should be implemented city-wide
or only in specified districts in the City, i.e. the historical downtown district. Administrator Assistant
Martin suggested if the teardown district is enact� by ordinance, it would be applied city-wide
whenever an application was made to teardown and rebuild on a site. The goal is to maintain the
�- character of the neighborhood when teardowns occur. Discussion then occurred regarding the
composition of a possible teardown review board/commission. It was suggested that at least one
member of the board/commission be a Landmark Commissioner, and a Planning and Zoning
Commissioner be included as well.
Landmark Commissioner Schafer noted the Landmark Commission typically utilizes 50 years of age
to declare an historic structure. She opined the Landmark Commission would not necessarily be
interested in reviewing non-historic teardowns, although perhaps a Landmark Commissioner might
sit on the Teardown Review Board/Commission as previously suggested.
Alderman Santi stated he concurred with the proposed teardown guidelines and encouraged Sta.ff to
cantinue drafting language to be implemented by ordinance. Alderman Santi stated preservation of
City neighborhoods is imperative, no matter which part of town they are located in.
Alderman Glab opined designation of historic sttuctures should be tied to a specific date as opposed
to the 50 year old requirement. He cautioned the Committee that teardown re�ulations should not be
overly restrictive to impede potential teardowns of eyesores within the City. Alderman Glab also
expressed concern regarding the legality of requiring additional impact fees when houses with
additional bedrr�oms are constructed on a site.
Alderman Wimmer stated the teardown ordinance should apply to the entire City and not just the
historic district Chairman Condon concurred.
�
Director Napolitano stated it is Staff's intent to further refine the draft teardown guideline language.
Design guidelines will be drafted, zoning regulations will be created and administrative requirement
Community Development Committee
May 17, 2005
Page 5
language will be clarified. Director Napolitano suggested the proposed teardown ordinance would be
L' prepared for Committee review and recommendation at its July meeting.
It was the consensus of the Committee to direct Staff to proceed and to prepare aan ordinance for
Committee consideration at its July meeting.
Crvstal Lake Road Sub-Area Plan
Administrator Assistant Martin provided the Committee with background an the Crystal Lake Road
Comdor. He noted following recent discussions with potential developers, it has come to Staf�s
attention that it would be desirable to have a land use plan for this area. Administrator Assistant
Martin stated the follpwing factors play into the discussion when creating a land use plan for the
Crystal Lake Road Sub-Area:
- E�sting and future land uses in the area
- Adjacent land uses
- Incorporated and unincorporated areas within the area
- Number of existing curb cuts
- Two unimproved rights-of-way(Marietta Boulevard and Kelter Street)
`— - Sensitive area to the east(Cold Springs Park)
- Proximity of the Prairie Path
- Three-way signalized intersection at Front Royal Drive
- Pro�mity of the high school
- Possible future signalized intersection at Dartmoor Drive.
Director Napolitano state�i the overall goal in creating a land use for the Crystal Lake Road Sub-
Area is to create a unified development which is compatible with surrounding land uses and to
provide direction as pockets of this area are developed/re-developed. Responding to an inquiry,
Director Napolitano stated the boundary of the azea would be Lillian Street to the north and
Dartmoor Drive to the south. The area lies east of Crystal Lake Road. Director Napolitano stated this
area is currently a hodge-podge and is prime for redevelopment.
Administrator Assistarrt Martin noted it is important for the City to create policy and objectives for
the development of the Crystal Lake Road Sub-Area.
Alderman Wimmer favored a road parallel to Crystal Lake Road which would cut through the
mifldle of the d�;ep lots fronting on Crystal Lake Road. He expressed concern that due to the depth of
these lots potential side-ways strip malls could be construded on these lots.
�
Alderman Santi also sta.ted his support for a pazallel road to Crystal Lake Road bisecting the deep
lots along Crysial Lake Road. He stated he would like to see a plan of how this would be laid out and
Community De;velopment Committee
May 17, 2005
Page 6
where such a road would intersect with Crystal Lake Road, Panca. Street, etc. Alderman Santi
�— suggested Stafl'investigate extending Royal Drive east crating a four-way intersection.
Alderman Glab stated he would favor a road beginnin�at Royal Drive e�ctended which would end in
a cul-de-sac rather than intersect Crystal Lake Road at a second point to the south (i.e. Kensington
Drive).
Alderman Wimmer suggested Staff present several possible options at the next Committee meeting
in July.
It was the consensus of the Committee to proceed with a Crystal Lake Road Sub-Area I,and Use
Plan and to dirc�t Staffto prepare options to be presented to the Cammittee at its meeting in July.
Adiournment
Motion by Wimmer, seconded by Glab, to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 p.m. All ayes. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
� L' 1:�;��:%��v1.
Geri A. Condon, Chairman
� �
`..