Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 09/30/1991 - City CouncilVEL1AL MLLI1NG MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1991 A Special Meeting of the McHenry City Council was called to order by Mayor Busse on Monday, September 30, 1991 at 8:00 P.M. in City Hall. At roll call the following Aldermen were present: Bolger, Donahue, Locke, Lieder, Smith, Adams. Patterson arrived at 8:26 P.M. Absent: Serritella. City Staff in attendance were: City Clerk Gilpin, Attorney Narusis, City Administrator Peterson, Park Director Merkel, Director of Building and Zoning Halik. Petitioner Mark Albert, representing Albert's Park Ridge Subdivision, was in attendance along with his Attorney, Kenneth Glick, Land Planner Frank Salathe of Jen Land Design and Jim Congdon of Smith Engineering. Mayor Busse presented an overview of the petition for annexation from the Capital Bank S Trust as Trustee under Trust Agreement #1496. Beneficiaries of the Trust are Joseph Albert and Cragin Service Corporation, each the owner of an undivided 50% interest in the Trust. The property to be annexed contains 126.84 acres of land located on the east side of Crystal Lake Road, south of Marietta Street and west of the Chicago/Northwestern railroad tracks. The property is presently vacant and unimproved, Petitioners are requesting an RS-2 Zoning Classification and plan a subdivision of 211 lots. Average lot size would be 12,135 square feet, a gross density of 1.66 units per acre, and 49.26 acres of open space, which would include wetlands, detention areas and park areas, with 16.29 acres suitable for active park land. Since this was a Public Hearing, five people in the audience wished to address the Council on the annexation. The first to speak was Chris Lawson of 1213 Capri, McHenry Shores. She expressed concern about annexing any more property to the City because of additional traffic on Crystal Lake Road, the overcrowded schools, and the lack of employment for local people in the job market. She felt there were many unfinished subdivisions in the City which had hones available and they should be filled before any new developments are started. The second person to speak was Marcy Fischback of 4813 W. Crystal Lake Road, an adjacent property owner. She was concerned about the effect of additional students on the school system, lot sizes, soil management, swales, water run-off, and the traffic on Crystal Lake Road. She felt the road should be widened with additional lanes to help carry the traffic. The next to speak was Lucy Fick, President of McHenry Elementary School District #15. Her concern was the 211 hones that would be generating children for a school system that was already overcrowded and in debt. She asked that the City incorporate into the annexation agreement, a donation of land for a new school and annexation fees for the school district in addition to the regular developer donation fees. The last to speak was Jerry Benes of 200 Nindridge. His concern was the donation of land for bike paths and trails and for the traffic on Dartmoor and Crystal Lake Roads. He was also concerned about the 5% tax cap, whether it would allow the City to provide the infrastructure needed for this and future annexations. The Mayor felt that all of the questions raised by these citizens would be answered during the Council's review of the annexation agreement. Regarding a question on developer donation fees and contributions toward the school, it was estimated that the Albert's Park Ridge subdivision would generate approximately $425,000 for District #15, and approximately $229,000 for School District #156. Mrs. Fick said in the School District's estimation, an annexation of this size would bring in approximately enough children to fill 1/4 of a new school. They estimate that a new school building, including land, would cost $6,000,000,000. She stated that if given land for a new school, they would build another school on this property even though it was within 2 1/Z blocks of Riverwood School. It could possibly become a middle school building, she said. September 30, 1991 Page 2 In answer to a question about water capacity to handle this new subdivision, City Administrator Peterson reported that the Public Works Committee proposed, and the Council approved in July of this year, an Engineering Services Contract with Baxter & Woodman to locate additional wells in the City to produce an additional 750 gallons per minute. Baxter & Woodman are now in the process of doing test well locations, and their findings will be brought to the Council for future construction of two wells. Plans are to put the wells in first and hold off on the water treatment facilities until it is determined that additional water supply is needed. The staff is working with Baxter & Woodman to make sure that water and sewer facilities will be available for new developments. At the present time there is in excess of $2 million on hand to do these projects. In answer to another question, Condon of Smith Engineering reported that development of this property will not impact on water drainage from properties on the west side of Crystal Lake Road. Regarding Dartmoor, it would be developed as a secondary street -residential with a 76 foot right-of-way, which would include the parkway, bike path, sidewalk, and pavement. The actual street pavement would be 42 feet wide. Aldermen Lieder and Patterson also expressed concern about the impact on the school system from this subdivision. The annexation agreement was then reviewed paragraph by paragraph. Page 3 Paragraph 6: Delete February 5, 1991 date and insert current revised plat a es. ditional language will be added to this paragraph based upon the City Attorney and the petitioner's attorney referencing the preliminary plat by Exhibit number. Page 4 P_ara2ra_ph 7: It was pointed out that developer donations can be use y a sth c o 1s for other uses besides land acquisition. Attorney Narusis explained such language has already been incorporated into our existing ordinances. Concerning the cash donations from this property to the schools, Mrs. Fick responded that the schools would like to have a donation of land in addition to the developer donation fees. It was pointed out that the school could use the money from the developer donations to buy additional land. The Mayor noted that up until this point, there has been no discussion or input from the schools as to a request for a school site until just the last few days. The agreement as proposed calls for cash contributions only. Concerning donation of park land, the petitioners were donating 16.29 acres for a park site, and 32.97 acres for open space, wetlands, and retention areas. The current ordinance requires that the petitioner donate just 11 acres for park land. Concerning a question of potential liability and environmental problems on the property, Attorney Glick said his client would agree to hold the City harmless with regard to existing conditions that might be in violation of the USEPA or IEPA Rules and Regulations. On a question of whether or not to specifically define the 16 acres of park land for any municipal use or just for park use, the vote was as follows: Six Aldermen voted to designate the 16 acres for use of any general municipal purpose. Two Aldermen voted to designate 15 acres for park land and 1 acre for other general municipal purposes. The Aldermen felt they should have the flexibility to use the land for whatever City purpose arises in the future. It is fully intended to develop the 16 acres as park land, but that could change in the future. Page 5, Paragraph 9: Annexation fees would be $500 per acre, plus $500 per unit or a total payment for annexation fees of $168,920.00, payable within 90 days after approval of the annexation agreement by the City Council, but at no time later than April 15, 1992. Mayor Busse called for a recess at 9:40 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 9:55 P.M. with everyone still in attendance. Page 5, ragraph 10: Crystal Lake Road should be designated as a Coun y roa Paan not a City road. The last sentence was to indicate that access to Crystal Lake Road from any lot abutting it is prohibited, except for lots 210 and 211. All other lots will have restricted access to Dartmoor Drive. September 30, 1991 Page 3 Discussion was held on the railroad crossing at Dartmoor. It was the petitioner's understanding that a formula would be determined as to its share of the costs of said crossing. The amount determined would be placed in an escrow account which would bear interest to be held for a period of 10 years. If at the end of the 10-year period the railroad crossing was not put in, the funds together with the interest, would be paid back to the petitioner. The question was raised as to obtaining the necessary permits from the appropriate authorities for the railroad crossing. It was the petitioner's feeling that a private developer would have no chance at all of obtaining such a consent from the authorities, and that it should be the City's obligation to obtain such a permit. Mayor Busse said it should be determined who pays for the crossing, who applies for the permit, who petitions the ICC, and who would install the crossing. Alderman Lieder suggested the petitioner should get an estimate of the cost for the railroad crossing, obtain a figure from our City Attorney for anticipated legal fees, and those two numbers should be inserted in the annexation agreement as a cost estimate. He felt the City should make the application and start the process for a railroad crossing, and have our City Attorney do the work through retained personnel monies. A specific dollar amount should be put into the annexation agreement at a 50/50 cost sharing. Attorney Glick felt that the percentage suggested was out of line because it is not going to help their subdivision to have Dartmoor Drive going through into property zoned industrial and possibly having industrial traffic coming through their subdivision. He felt the cost sharing percentage should be substantially less based on who would be using that extension of Dartmoor. i Page 5, Pa�ragra�phh 11: Insert language to the effect that the bike path wiTi a nbs TTedon the south side of Dartmoor Drive through the subdivision. Specifications on a Class 1 bike path will be sent to Attorney Glick for his information. An additional sentence in Paragraph 11 should indicate that sidewalks and the bike path will be installed before the first occupancy permit is issued on any phase of development as Dartmoor is constructed." Page 6, Paragraph 13: Insert that the property will be developed in four phases. MarK Albert said the first phase would be along Crystal Lake Road, and they would cane back with a phasing plan to show how and when access would be made to the park area. Page 6, Paragraph 14: The language will be changed to meet the stanaa� agreemen that the City has on recapture agreements, which is that the costs and the territory to be effected will be determined by the City Engineer. Page 7, Paragraph 16: Delete "prior to development". Pagge�� �9, Paragraph 19b: Should indicate that all requirements of the subdivis�n control ordinance must be met. Kenneth Glick wanted to clear up the language on the sign -off and will confer with Attorney Narusis as to a hold harmless agreement to be signed by the owner on temporary occupancies. Pa a 9, Paragraph 21: The Council requested language that would dedicate a par an immediately to the City with appropriate easements to access that park property if it is not done in the first phase of development. The petitioners said they would return with a phasing plan which would define the standards for the parking lot and when the park access would be in place. Also in Paragraph 21, the parking areas should be for 12 automobiles instead of 10. Page 9, Paragraph 22: Last sentence on the page, instead of "water tower language should indicate that it should be for municipal purposes. Also clarify language that only lots 210 and 211 can access onto Dartmoor Drive. Paae 10, Para raph 22: Delete all references to construction of a water tower an inser anguage to indicate it will be used for municipal purposes. September 30, 1991 Page 4 Page 10, Paragraph 23: Concerning the cost sharing percentage that the petitioner should pay for installation of a stop light at Dartmoor and Crystal Lake Road, it was suggested that an estimate of the cost for installation of that light be obtained by the petitioner and a percentage determined as to the petitioner's share. The petitioner's money could be put into an interest bearing escrow account and if the traffic signal is not installed within 10 years, the money would be returned to the petitioner. Alderman Lieder suggested a 25% cost sharing. The 25% share would be payable within 90 days after the execution of the annexation agreement. It was determined that the petitioner should get the estimated cost of the traffic signal installation and then submit it to Baxter 8 Woodman for approval. A question arose on the need for fencing along the railroad tracks. The petitioners did not believe that a six-foot chain link fence along the railroad right-of-way was justified by ordinance or by practicality. They felt some justification for a fence abutting lot 211 could be made if lot 211 is improved with a single family residence. However, the balance of the chain link fence north of Dartmoor along the open space, wetland, detention area, they felt was not justified. The Mayor said he had no strong feelings about construction of the fence. Alderman Lieder felt that if a house was built on Lot 211, it would be up to the property owners to construct a fence and if, at a later time, it was determined that a fence was needed along the park land, that the City should install it. Concerning a landscaping plan, the petitioner said they would prepare a landscape plan and present it at the next meeting on this annexation hearing. Mayor Busse announced this Public Hearing would be recessed until Monday, October 28 at 8:00 P.M. to review the annexation agreement as amended. Motion by Smith, seconded by Adams, to recess the meeting until Monday, October 28 at 8 P.M. in the Municipal Center Council Chambers. Voting Aye: Bolger, Donahue, Lieder, Locke, Smith, Adams, Patterson, Serritella. Voting Nay: None. Absent: None. Motion carried. The meeting recessed at 11:59 P.M.