Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 10/21/2004 - Planning and Zoning CommissionMinutes of the City of McHenry PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION October 21, 2004 The October 21, 2004 Meeting of the City of McHenry Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Howell at 7:30 p.m. in the McHenry Municipal Center Council Chambers. Commission members in attendance: Buhrman, Ekstrom, Howell, Nadeau, Schepler, Thacker. Absent: Cadotte. Also in attendance: Planner Martin, Deputy Clerk Kunzer, Attorney Kelly Cahill. Approval of Minutes Ekstrom noted the vote on the first motion of the October 7, 2004 minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission was incorrect and stated one member (Nadeau) actually voted in favor of the zoning map amendment and the remaining six opposed the map amendment as requested in File No. Z-626. Motion by Buhrman, seconded by Ekstrom, to approve the minutes of the October 7, 2004 regularly scheduled Planning and Zoning Meeting as amended. Voting Aye: Buhrman, Ekstrom, Howell, Nadeau, Schepler, Thacker. Voting Nay: None. Not Voting: None. Abstained: None. Absent: Cadotte. Motion carried. 6-0. Public Hearing – Gerstad Builders File No. Z-613 Adams Farm Property Chairman Howell at 7:33 p.m. called to order the Public Hearing regarding a petition filed by Gerstad Builders for the Adams Farm Property as follows: • Zoning Map Amendment upon annexation: o Neighborhood 1 – RS-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential; o Neighborhood 2 – RM-1 Low Density Multi Family Residential; o Neighborhood 3 – RS-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential; o Neighborhood 4 – RA-1 Attached Single Family Residential; o Neighborhood 5 – RS-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential; o Neighborhood 6 – RS-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential; o Neighborhood 7 – RS-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential; o Parcels 7A and 7B – C3 Neighborhood Commercial; • Variances: o Lot width from 80 feet to 70 feet for Neighborhoods 1, 3 and 5; o Lot size from 10,890 square feet to 9,000 square feet for Neighborhoods 1, 3, and 5; o Front yard building setback from 30 feet to 20 feet for Neighborhood 3 and 5. In attendance representing the applicant were: P&Z Commission October 21, 2004 Page 2 Property owner and developer Roger Gerstad of Gerstad Builders, Attorney Sam Diamond of Diamond LeSeuer and Associates; and land planner Roger Dupler of Welch Hanson Associates, who were all sworn in by Chairman Howell. Also in attendance were the following Observers/Objectors: 1. Kelly Grimshaw, 119 Creekside Trail, McHenry. 2. Laurri Lowe, 5515 Winding Creek Drive, McHenry. 3. Steph Gaspers, 1107 S. Bonita Lane, McHenry. 4. Jeanine Dammann, 8220 Mason Hill Road, McHenry. 5. John Nelson, 1507 Moraine Drive, Woodstock. 6. Jorie and Scott Nicholls, 5901 Eaglewood Trail, McHenry. 7. David and Pat Adams, 6404 W Bull Valley Road, McHenry. 8. Phyllis Scheu, 6809 Bull Valley Road, McHenry. Chairman Howell stated notice of the Public Hearing was published in the Northwest Herald on October 4, 2004. A Certificate of Publication and receipts of certified mailing of notification to abutting property owners of record are on file in the Office of the City Clerk. An Affidavit of Service and property posting is also on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Attorney Diamond provided a brief opening statement. He noted the applicant has made numerous presentations before this Commission as well as the McHenry City Council. The concept plan for the Adams Farm Property has changed considerably following each presentation. The applicant has made a concerted effort to listen to city concerns and amend his plan accordingly. Following the most recent presentation before the Council’s Committee of the Whole, recommendation was made to bring the matter back before this Commission at a Public Hearing. Attorney Diamond noted the applicant has addressed previous city concerns such as preservation of the environmental corridor and lot widths adjacent to existing neighborhoods. In addition the project density has been greatly reduced from the initial 803 dwelling units to the proposed 550 dwelling units. Mr. Gerstad stated the Adams Farm Property is held in trust. Gerstad Builders intends to develop the property pursuant to the concept plan included in the Petition before the Commission. The plan includes a mix of single family residential, multi family residential and commercial use. The property is comprised of 303 acres. In respond to Attorney Diamond’s inquiries, Mr. Gerstad affirmed the statements made in the application regarding the Approval Criteria for Zoning Map Amendments and Variances. Mr. Gerstad then summarized various aspects of the project. He noted community, Staff and City Council concerns had been addressed including: 1. Match up lot lines when the lots are adjacent to existing residential neighborhoods; 2. Preserve environmental corridor; 3. Preserve existing hydric soils; 4. Provide larger open space and usable park areas; 5. Reduce the commercial portion of the project; 6. Utilize clustering concept; P&Z Commission October 21, 2004 Page 3 7. Maintain maximum density of not more than 550 dwelling units. Mr. Gerstad noted he is proposing a varied streetscape, incorporating side load and rear load garages. In consideration for this feature, he is seeking variance to permit reduced lot sizes in Neighborhoods 1, 3 and 5, as well as reduced front building setbacks in Neighborhoods 3 and 5. He stated in Neighborhoods 6 and 7 he is anticipating 50% side load garages and 50% front load garages. Mr. Gerstad also pointed out he has acceded to existing residents’ request to align lots abutting existing neighborhoods so that lot lines match up. Mr. Dupler provided a brief summary informing the Commission how the applicant had arrived at the current concept plan. He noted the commercial area has been considerably reduced in size. The overall density of the project is now 1.9 dwelling units per acre. Mr. Dupler stated the present concept plan respects the environmental corridor, addresses storm water treatment and settling ponds. Water which will drain into the creek will be considerably cleaner than its present condition. Mr. Dupler also stated the green space has been consolidated to increase neighborhood parks and open space. Two parks are shown on the plan, one is 2 acres and the other is 2.2 acres. Both of these areas contain usable park space. The city’s bike path is also incorporated into the open space on the plan. Mr. Dupler noted previous traffic studies of the area indicated no traffic signal would be required as a result of this development. The multi-family housing shown along the environmental corridor has been included at the request of the city. The multi-family units will provide a buffer between single family houses and the environmental corridor along both sides of the creek. Previously, the Commission expressed concern regarding having single family homes immediately adjacent to the environmental corridor, as homeowners might begin to begin utilizing the required open space buffer as part of their own property. Multi-family homeowner’s association covenants should address this issue and prevent this from occurring. Mr. Dupler stated the plan includes one long cul-de-sac in Neighborhood 1 which cannot be eliminated due to the existing hydric soils. The commercial portion of the development has been split between areas east and west of Curran Road. In conclusion, Mr. Dupler stated the developer is proposing a neo-traditional development with reduced front yards, clustering, and curvilinear streets in order to vary the streetscape throughout the project. Planner Martin provided the Commission with an overview of the Staff Report. • Staff believes that the current land use mix is appropriate for this area. • The concept plan provides for a diversity of housing products, including a community- oriented convenience commercial area; it also utilizes multi-family housing for the buffering of the single-family homes from the commercial areas. • The commercial areas proposed will serve the immediate areas and not the city at-large. • The proposed density of 1.9 units per acre is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as well as the densities of the surrounding area. • The changes made to the plan are beneficial including the following: • Use of additional environmental measures, such as the infiltration swales to reduce the amount of silt flowing towards Boone Creek P&Z Commission October 21, 2004 Page 4 • Preservation of hydric soils • Land uses that are commensurate with the city’s Comprehensive Plan and Long Range Transportation Goals • Managed and planned growth for a large area of the City • Neighborhood commercial area for the southwest side of the City Planner Martin stated Staff’s only concern with the design is the duplex area west of Curran Road. Because of access limitations to Curran Road, the only full access point to serve the west side of Curran Road will be on the northernmost part of the site. Consequently, commercial traffic must drive through the residential (duplex) neighborhood in order to turn northbound onto Curran Road. Staff believes that alternative configurations should be considered, such as having a frontage road east of the duplex neighborhood so the residential areas would not be bisected. Planner Martin noted the following regarding the variances being requested: • Variances are necessary in order to apply some of the clustering techniques proposed by the developer, as well as to provide a more interesting streetscape. • Many lots will have side load garages, with the exception of the lots on the cul-de-sacs. This will create a pleasant streetscape setting, with the homes dominating the street instead of the garages. • The side and rear load garages will have a positive impact as far as calming traffic, as the homes are pushed closer to the street creating more of a residential atmosphere and providing for larger backyards. • The topography, particularly east of the creek is very steep and, by allowing smaller lots, more open areas can be preserved, particularly adjacent to the creek. Planner Martin stated certain issues will be addressed in an Annexation Agreement including: • Road and intersection improvements and/or contributions: • Contribution for the establishment and long-term maintenance of the Boone Creek Corridor. • Architectural guidelines. • School Impact Fees/Operations Fees In conclusion, Planner Martin stated it is Staff’s recommendation to • Approve the Zoning Map Amendment from E, Estate to RS-2, RM-1 RA-1and C-3 upon annexation to the City of McHenry. • Approve Variances as requested. Chairman Howell requested questions and/or comments from members of the Commission. In response to an inquiry, Mr. Gerstad stated the extension of Farmstead Drive from Legend Lakes Subdivision through the subject property and intersecting with Bull Valley Road was done P&Z Commission October 21, 2004 Page 5 at the request of Staff. He noted all detention areas would be wet-bottom detention areas, but would not be established as lakes or ponds. Natural features would be utilized around the perimeter of the detention areas to discourage corporate geese. Responding to a question, Mr. Gerstad stated the street stubs indicated at the northeast and northwest corner of Mr. David Adams property were provided so that Mr. Adams could have direct access to the proposed development. Mr. Gerstad stated bike trail surface has not yet been determined. That would be known following final engineering for this project. Question was raised regarding growth and the possibility of annual building permit limitation being incorporated into the annexation agreement. Mr. Gerstad stated that would be addressed in the annexation agreement. Responding to an inquiry regarding subdivision covenant enforcement, Attorney Diamond acknowledged there are several different types of issues which may require covenant enforcement, notably: 1. City requiring maintenance or upkeep of common areas; 2. City spending money to provide actual maintenance and/or upkeep of subdivision property. These monies would be recouped by the city, typically through a Backup Special Service Area. Special Service Area fees are passed on to homeowners and paid via the real estate tax bills. 3. City would not be involved in individual issues between the homeowners association and private homeowners. The City supports subdivision covenants but does not enforce them. Some discussion followed regarding the commercial areas and potential outlots, particularly on Parcel 7A located west of Curran Road. Mr. Gerstad noted architectural standards would be created and all commercial buildings would be required to pass the architectural review of the developer and/or the master property owners association. Responding to inquiries regarding the proposed right-in right-out access along Curran Road, Mr. Gerstad stated this issue would be addressed during final engineering for this project. Planner Martin explained once the concept plan has been approved the city’s traffic engineer will review the proposed subdivision layout including all points in ingress/egress. Mr. Dupler responded to commissioner’s inquiries regarding the request to vary the front yard building setback from 30 feet to 20 feet on three of the neighborhoods. He stated in neighborhoods where a predominance of side and rear load garages would be implemented, having a reduced front yard and increased back yard is desirable. In response to a question, Mr. Gerstad stated the farmhouse and barn would be removed from the site. Further questions were raised regarding the proposed commercial use at the northwest and northeast corners of the intersection of Curran Road with Bull Valley Road. Mr. Gerstad confirmed the City’s Comprehensive Plan designates this intersection as commercial. Mr. Dupler noted the commercial area has been greatly reduced since the last presentation of this property before this Commission. The purpose of the commercial district in this development is to provide neighborhood retail services for the area. P&Z Commission October 21, 2004 Page 6 Responding to an inquiry, Mr. Gerstad stated he has had conversations with both McHenry School District 15 and School District 156 regarding the Adams Farm Property development. Both districts acknowledged growth greatly impacts school services. However, neither district requested a land donation. Both districts voiced the need for developer donations and operations fees. Question was raised as to the future expansion of Bull Valley Road. Planner Martin responded noting the developer would be required to dedicate land for future right-of-way for both the possible expansion of Bull Valley Road and the eventual West McHenry Bypass. Further questions were raised regarding the method of buffering the commercial district from adjacent residential properties. Mr. Dupler responded noting 60% opacity is required. The screening would be comprised of landscaping, trees, shrubs, evergreens and berming. The issue was raised regarding the request to vary the minimum lot size in the RS-2 District from 10,890 square feet to 9,000 square feet. Attorney Diamond noted it is a city policy decision to maintain a minimum lot size of 10,890 square feet. He stated the concept plan provides a creative, unique product. He opined it takes flexibility to make the plan work. Mr. Dupler noted it is the city’s intent to raise the minimum lot size in order to secure open spaces. In response to the city’s request to provide residential cluster development, a need to reduce lot sizes is a direct result. As the developer is offering a neo-traditional development, perhaps some concessions by the city may be sought. Mr. Gerstad stated he agreed to Council’s request for a maximum density of 550 dwelling units. He was requested to be creative in finding a way to make 550 units work on this property. He has taken steps to preserve the environmental corridor. He is providing a water infiltration system. In order to make this plan work, he was required to think “outside of the box”. The result is a more innovative streetscape. He noted if smaller lots are utilized, more common open space will result. Some discussion followed regarding the unique layout of the concept plan. Members of the commission concurred with the creative design of the development, particularly with regard to side and rear load garages. The Commission also noted its preference for the curvilinear streets and lack of grid-like format. It was suggested the developer should retain architectural review and approval of the commercial structures. Regarding subdivision covenants, the commissioners requested the developer address such items as outdoor storage of recreational vehicles, boats and disallowance of sheds in an effort to maintain an aesthetically-pleasing neighborhood. The neo-traditional design would not allow room for storage of such vehicles or the construction of sheds on the premises. Attorney Cahill suggested the Commission could include a recommendation that language governing these items be included in the text of the annexation agreement for this property. Chairman Howell opened Public Comment at 8:46 p.m. He swore in the following persons prior to their making statements before the Commission. David Adams: Mr. Adams noted he had not requested the development include access to his property located at 6804 Bull Valley Road from within the Adams Farm Property. He requested possible traffic congestion be addressed. He stated for the record he did not request a stub onto his property. P&Z Commission October 21, 2004 Page 7 John Nelson: Mr. Nelson, representing the Boone Creek Watershed Alliance, stated the Alliance had met with the Applicant. The Applicant admirably responded to several issues raised by the Alliance. Mr. Nelson stated the Alliance is looking forward to continue working with the developer and protecting the watershed and creek. Chairman Howell closed the Public Comment at 8:50 p.m. In response to a Commission inquiry, Mr. Gerstad stated there would actually be three property owner associations: Master Property Owners Association for all of the subdivision Property Owners Association for commercial property east of Curran Road Property Owners Association for duplex units west of Curran Road. Initially, the developer would be responsible for enforcing subdivision covenants, prior to the establishment of the property owners associations. It was noted in order to achieve a unique development layout which approaches a PUD design, the Commission is willing to bend the rules as far as minimum lot size and front yard building setbacks. The result is a unique subdivision layout and different design concept plan. In closing Attorney Diamond noted the developer has been working with the city to develop and acceptable concept plan for the Adams Property for several years. The developer has listened to the city and modified his plan according to city directive. He stated the proposed concept plan adheres to all city issues previously raised regarding this property. He requested the Commission recommend to the City Council that the zoning and variances requested be granted. Motion by Nadeau, seconded by Buhrman, to recommend to the City Council with regard to file no Z-613, an application for zoning map amendment filed by Gerstad Builders for the Adams Farm Property to classify the property as follows upon annexation to the city: o Neighborhood 1 – RS-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential; o Neighborhood 2 – RM-1 Low Density Multi Family Residential; o Neighborhood 3 – RS-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential; o Neighborhood 4 – RA-1 Attached Single Family Residential; o Neighborhood 5 – RS-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential; o Neighborhood 6 – RS-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential; o Neighborhood 7 – RS-2 Medium Density Single Family Residential; o Parcels 7A and 7B – C3 Neighborhood Commercial; and that Table 33, the Approval Criteria for Zoning Map Amendment, Page 401 of the Zoning Ordinance, has been met. Voting Aye: Buhrman, Ekstrom, Howell, Nadeau, Schepler, Thacker. Voting Nay: None. Not Voting: None. Abstained: None. Absent: Cadotte. Motion carried 6-0. P&Z Commission October 21, 2004 Page 8 Commission Comments on Motion: Ekstrom: Commended the developer on the design and layout of the concept plan; in favor of C- 3 Commercial and the fact that no service station would be allowed at the Curran Road and Bull Valley Road intersection. Chairman Howell: Reemphasized his request that the city include stipulations in the annexation agreement prohibiting outside storage of recreational vehicles and boats, and preventing the construction of sheds within the subdivision. He commended the design team on a great concept plan. Schepler: Commended the subdivision design noting the neighborhoods have character. He encouraged the preservation of the Boone Creek Corridor. Thacker: Commended the developer on willingness for give and take to create a neo-traditional design. The proposed creative concept should benefit the city as well as the developer. Motion by Ekstrom, seconded by Thacker, to recommend to the City Council with regard to file no. Z-613, an application for variances to the development of the Adams Farm Property upon annexation to the City of McHenry as filed by Gerstad Builders, be granted as follows: o Lot width from 80 feet to 70 feet for Neighborhoods 1, 3 and 5; o Lot size from 10,890 square feet to 9,000 square feet for Neighborhoods 1, 3, and 5; o Front yard building setback from 30 feet to 20 feet for Neighborhood 3 and 5. and that Table 32, the Approval Criteria for Variances, pages 377-378 of the Zoning Ordinance, has been met. Voting Aye: Buhrman, Ekstrom, Howell, Schepler, Thacker. Voting Nay: Nadeau. Not Voting: None. Abstained: None. Absent: Cadotte: Motion carried 5-1. Commission Comments on Motion: Nadeau: Is not entirely opposed to the request for lot size in Neighborhoods 1 and 2; however, Neighborhood 5 should maintain minimum lot size of 10,890 square feet. Buhrman: Regretfully voted in favor of the motion. Chairman Howell closed the Public Hearing regarding File No. Z-613 at 9:02 p.m. Other Business Planner Martin provided a brief report of recent Council action. He noted a Community Development Committee Meeting was held on October 13th. Future Commission agenda items will include a Public Hearing regarding a Child Care Facility, a Senior Housing Development, and the city’s PUD Ordinance. P&Z Commission October 21, 2004 Page 9 Brief discussion occurred regarding the vacant lots at the Dartmoor Drive stub on the east end of Park Ridge Estates. Planner Martin advised the city has an option on these lots until 2006. The lots could be used to extend Dartmoor Drive east over or under the Union Pacific railroad tracks. Adjournment Motion by Ekstrom, seconded by Thacker, to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 p.m. Voting Aye: Buhrman, Ekstrom, Howell, Nadeau, Schepler, Thacker. Voting Nay: None. Not Voting: None. Abstained: None. Absent: Cadotte. Motion carried 6-0. Respectfully submitted, _________________________________ Kathleen M. Kunzer, Deputy Clerk Planning and Zoning Commission C: Mayor, Aldermen, City Administrator, City Clerk, City Attorney, City Planner, City Engineers, Applicants, Landmark Commission Chairman, Chicago Tribune, Northwest Herald, Aldermen Conference Room, File Copy.