City of Aurora Planning Commission met March 21.

By Lhalie Castillo

Apr 13, 2018

Here is the minutes provided by the Commission:

Call To Order:

Chairman Truax called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

Roll Call:

The following Commission members were present: Chairman Truax, Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Bergeron, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Cole, Mr. Divine, Mrs. Duncan, Mrs. Head, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Pilmer and Mr. Reynolds.

Others Present:

The following staff members were present: Mr. Sieben, Mrs. Morgan and Mrs. Jackson.

Others Present: Jeff Gylling (Wendy’s) and Hal Wolken (Sonic Drive-In).

Approval Of Minutes:

18-0162 Approval of the Minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 21, 2018.

A motion was made by Mr. Bergeron, seconded by Mrs. Anderson, that the minutes be approved and filed. The motion carried.

Agenda:

18-0107 An Ordinance Amending Ordinance Number 3100, being the Aurora Zoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map attached thereto, by downzoning Property located at 1201 Dearborn Avenue from R-4 Two Family Dwelling District to R-3 One Family Dwelling District (Ana Lopez - 18-0107 / AU23/2-18.037-Dz - TV - Ward 7) (Public Hearing)

Mr. Sieben said this is part of the cleanup by Property Standards of the records. This property, even though it is zoned R-4, has been previously converted to a single family residence and inspected by the city. The city staff does support rezoning from R-4 to R-3 Single Family on this.

The public input portion of the public hearing was opened. No witnesses came forward. The public input portion of the public hearing was closed.

Mr. Sieben said the recommendation is approval.

Motion Of Approval Was Made By: Mrs. Anderson

Motion Seconded By: Cole

Ayes: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Bergeron, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Cole, Mr. Divine, Mrs. Duncan, Mrs. Head, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Pilmer, Mr. Reynolds

Nays: None

Findings Of Fact

1. Is the proposal in accordance with all applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora?

Mrs. Cole said these are listed in the staff report.

2. Does the proposal represent the logical establishment and/or consistent extension of the requested classification in consideration of the existing land uses, existing zoning classifications, and essential character of the general area of the property in question?

Mr. Reynolds said the proposal represents the highest and best use for the property.

3. Is the proposal consistent with a desirable trend of development in the general area of the property in question, occurring since the property in question was placed in its present zoning classification, desirability being defined as the trend’s consistency with applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora?

Mr. Reynolds said again, it represents the highest and best use of the property.

4. Will the proposal maintain a compatible relationship with the traffic pattern and traffic volume of adjacent streets and not have an adverse effect upon traffic or pedestrian movement and safety in the general area of the property in question?

Mrs. Anderson said there should be no adverse effect.

5. Will the proposal allow for the provision of adequate public services and facilities to the property in question and have no adverse effect upon existing public services and facilities?

Mr. Bergeron said all those utilities should be in place.

6. Does the proposal take adequate measures or will they be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to maximize pedestrian and vehicular circulation ease and safety, minimize traffic congestion, and not substantially increase the congestion in the public streets?

Mr. Chambers said it should not be affected.

7a. Is the rezoning a consistent extension of the existing land uses, existing zoning classifications, and essential character of the general area?

Mr. Reynolds said it is consistent.

7b. Will the rezoning permit uses which are more suitable than uses permitted under the existing zoning classification?

Mr. Reynolds said it is consistent.

Mr. Sieben said this will next be heard at the Planning and Development Committee on Thursday, March 29, 2018, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.

A motion was made by Mrs. Anderson, seconded by Mrs. Cole, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee, on the agenda for 3/29/2018. The motion carried.

18-0154 An Ordinance Approving a Revision to the Savannah Crossing (TMK Aurora Venture, LLC) Plan Description on 1.23 Acres for the Property located at 2962 Kirk Road being north of Butterfield Road and west of Kirk Road (Wendy's - 18-0154 / BA36/3-18.006-SU/PD/R/Fpn - JM - Ward 1) (Public Hearing)

See Attachment for Items 18-0154 and 18-0155.

A motion was made by Mr. Pilmer, seconded by Mr. Cameron, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee, on the agenda for 3/29/2018. The motion carried.

18-0155 A Resolution Approving a Final Plan on Lot 4 of Savannah Crossing Subdivision located at 2962 Kirk Road being north of Butterfield Road and west of Kirk Road for a Restaurant with a drive-through facility (2530) use (Wendy's - 18-0155 / BA36/3-18.006-SU/PD/R/Fpn - JM - Ward 1)

See Attachment for Items 18-0154 and 18-0155.

A motion was made by Mr. Chambers, seconded by Mrs. Cole, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee, on the agenda for 3/29/2018. The motion carried.

Attachment for Items 18-0154 and 18-0155

Mrs. Morgan said this is Plan Description Revision to allow the drive-through use on Lot 4 of the Savannah Crossing Subdivision. The property is also known as TMK Aurora Venture, LLC Special Use Planned Development. As part of the Plan Description currently it allows 3 drive-throughs on Lots 3, 5, 9, 10 or 11. So this would allow up to 4 drive-throughs on those same lots with Lot 4 being added. Concurrently with this proposal is the Final Plan for the restaurant. It is a 2,336 square foot drive through restaurant with 40 seats. The property has one ingress and one egress that are located off of the interior drive, so it abuts Kirk, but you come in on the property from the interior drive isle. It circulates one-way around the building. Unlike some we’ve seen previously, it has one menu board. It meets our stacking requirements of 10 spaces. It is providing 41 parking spaces, which there are only 16 required per code. The elevations do kind of depict one of the more modern prototypes for Wendy’s chain. It features a glass and metal front, which has like a full view of the dining area. The remainder is clad and like fiber cement wood panels. It is accented by taller, higher panels, which is also fiber cement in grey and red. This is a rendering of what it will look like. I think they only have a few of these in the area. It is one of their more recent prototypes.

Mr. Pilmer said could staff just tell on those other lots what the other drive-throughs are?

Mrs. Morgan said the Sonic to the north has a drive-through. The Walgreens has a drive-through, again to the north. You have the Starbucks to the south still along Kirk Road.

Mr. Sieben said I don’t think the corner building does. They took that out where the Chipotle is. I don’t think Chipotle does.

Mrs. Morgan said Chipotle took theirs out.

Mr. Sieben said so I think that’s it.

Mrs. Morgan said so it is just the Starbucks, the Sonic and the Walgreens at this time. There is one open drive-through that can be on one of the lots undeveloped along Butterfield.

The Petitioners were sworn in.

Good evening. My name is Jeff Gylling. I’m a construction manager with Wendy’s and my home address is 852 High Gate Course in Glen Ellyn. As Jill has mentioned, this is our brand new building design. In fact, we only got two of these restaurants in this area. We’ve got one in Villa Park and then we’ve got one in Chicago at Montrose and Pulaski that opened a couple of months ago. As Jill had mentioned, it is a 40 seat building, so our building size has come down dramatically. The attractive or, I guess, modern element to this building is that when you are a customer and you go into the dining room there is no ceiling. You’ve got a 16 feet high space, so you actually see the trusses and the bottom of the metal deck and then on the exterior it is full height glass, so it is a very, very contemporary look. What we are trying to draw into customer-wise are the Millennials. So that is kind of the design logic behind the building. I don’t believe we are seeking any variances with the landscaping, parking or signage. Our goal is start construction here soon. We would like to get this project started hopefully in June and be open before the end of summer. With me tonight is Mike Zac and Greg Haggis. They are both with Wenzak, who is our Franchisee. This is going to be a franchise location, not a company store. Are there any questions for me or for us?

Mrs. Anderson said what are the hours of the restaurant?

Mr. Gylling said at this point it would be 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. The drive-through is open until 1:00 a.m., but we typically close the dining room at 10:00 p.m., so the dining room would be 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and that would be 7 days a week. It would be 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. all week.

The public input portion of the public hearing was opened. The witnesses were sworn in.

Hi. I’m Hal Wolken. I’m the owner of the Sonic Drive-In next to the proposed location for the Wendy’s. I’m happy to be a land owner and a business owner in Aurora for the last 10 years. I recall significant hurdles that we jumped through in order to get into business, but times have changed since 2008 when fast food was not welcomed into the area with open arms. We are happy that it is welcomed today. My purpose in being here was to learn about my new neighbor, potential new neighbor, at Wendy’s. I’ve met them and I’m happy and I wish them well should everything go well for them. My concern and my question is relative to any potential obstruction of the visibility of our Sonic Drive-In. We were limited on our signage to a monument sign, which is extraordinary low and I’m just concerned that any signage and/or landscape construction would further inhibit our customers or anybody from seeing our signage and our facility. I thank you for allowing me to bring that question to you.

Chairman Truax said we’ll see if we can get an answer for you.

The public input portion of the public hearing was closed.

Mr. Gylling said the sign that we are proposing is 5 feet tall by 10 feet wide. It is on a 3 foot concrete block base.

Mrs. Morgan said so it is set back 15 feet from the property line. It is setback more than it is required per code. Also to bring up just kind of the size of the sign and talking about any other issues about visibility, so here’s the landscape plan. They have their sign kind of at the corner with just some bushes around it. There is one tree setback past the sign. Then they just have 3 canopy trees kind of in the center along the frontage. There are not a lot of trees right at that corner that would impact Sonic’s visibility.

Mr. Wolken said this sign is near the road?

Mrs. Morgan said the sign is 15 feet from the property line.

Mr. Wolken said so this is the road that comes in. And that is 5 feet high?

Mr. Gylling said the sign is 5 foot, but it is on a 3 foot base, so the overall height is 8.

Mr. Wolken said he answered my question. He showed me where it is located. It is next to the road between the Sonic lot and the proposed Wendy’s lot. I asked him if he felt that it would inhibit any sight lines from our restaurant and he does not believe that’s the case. At 5 feet tall, I can’t say from here because it is 5 feet tall from grade and I don’t know how high the grade is.

Mrs. Morgan said 8 feet tall from grade.

Mr. Wolken said so it is 13 feet up?

Mr. Sieben said no, 8.

Mrs. Morgan said it is 8 feet total.

Mr. Wolken said so 8 total, so it is 3 plus the 5.

Mrs. Morgan said yes.

Mr. Sieben said it is the same size as your sign, which is 50 square feet, 8 feet high.

Mr. Wolken said so it is the same as ours?

Mr. Sieben said exactly the same. We try to keep them all the same.

Mr. Wolken said and electronic reader board?

Mr. Sieben said no electronic. It is just a static red Wendy’s.

Mr. Wolken said I got it. Thank you very much.

Chairman Truax said I’m going to ask for staff’s recommendation.

Mrs. Morgan said for the first petition for the Special Use Revision, staff would recommend approval of an Ordinance approving a revision to the Savannah Crossing (TMK Aurora Venture, LLC) Plan Description on 1.23 acres for the property located at 2962 Kirk Road being north of Butterfield Road and west of Kirk Road.

Mr. Cameron said I have a question. Have there been any other inquiries about this other than the gentleman from Sonic?

Mrs. Morgan said no. I’ve only had one call and that was just to ask what was going there. I told them it was a Wendy’s restaurant. They had heard it was a car wash, so they didn’t have any comments beyond that.

Motion Of Approval Was Made By: Mr. Pilmer

Motion Seconded By: Mr. Cameron

Ayes: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Bergeron, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Cole, Mr. Divine, Mrs. Duncan, Mrs. Head, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Pilmer, Mr. Reynolds

Nays: None

Findings Of Fact

1. Is the proposal in accordance with all applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora?

Mrs. Cole said these are listed in the staff report.

Mr. Reynolds said yes it does. The proposal represents the highest and best use of the property.

Mr. Reynolds said again it is consistent and it is the highest and best use of the property.

Mr. Pilmer said based on the testimony we heard tonight, it will maintain a compatible relationship with the traffic pattern and meets all the city requirements.

5. Will the proposal allow for the provision of adequate public services and facilities to the property in question and have no adverse effect upon existing public services and facilities?

Mr. Cameron said they are already in place or will be placed as part of the proposal.

Mrs. Owusu-Safo said there is no access onto Kirk Road so there shouldn’t be any impact on traffic movement in the area.

9a. Will the Special Use not preclude the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties due to the saturation or concentration of similar uses in the general area?

Mr. Cameron said there should be no particular change. The change in zoning is for a drive-in and I think we’ve been made well aware of it that a drive-in is virtually required for the survival of what you identify as fast food places. I think there should be no changes.

9b. Is the Special Use in all other respects in conformance to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located, except as such regulations may in each instance be modified by the City Council pursuant to the recommendations of the Plan Commission?

Mrs. Owusu-Safo said I believe this Special Use is in conformance to applicable regulations in the district.

Mrs. Morgan said this will next be heard at the Planning and Development Committee on Thursday, March 29, 2018, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.

Chairman Truax said we also need to have a motion on the Resolution approving a Final Plan on Lot 4 of Savannah Crossing Subdivision.

Mrs. Morgan said originally staff had a condition on this to put a hedgerow along the parking along Kirk Road. The Petitioner has subsequently added that so I will remove that condition. With that being said, staff would recommend approval of a Resolution approving a Final Plan on Lot 4 of Savannah Crossing Subdivision located at 2962 Kirk Road being north of Butterfield Road and west of Kirk Road for a restaurant with a drive-through facility (2530) use.

Motion Of Approval Was Made By: Mr. Chambers

Motion Seconded By: Mrs. Cole

Ayes: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Bergeron, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Cole, Mr. Divine, Mrs. Duncan, Mrs. Head, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Pilmer, Mr. Reynolds

Nays: None

Mrs. Morgan said this will next be heard at the Planning and Development Committee on Thursday, March 29, 2018, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.

Pending

Committee Reports:

A) Amendments

B) Grant and Award Research

C) Comprehensive Plan

Announcements:

Mr. Sieben said the next meetings are on schedule, so April 4th. Just to let you know, Aurora University will be back on April 18th.

Adjournment:

A motion was made by Mr. Chambers, seconded by Mr. Cameron, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried by voice vote. Chairman Truax adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m.

https://www.aurora-il.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_03212018-1401

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

City of Aurora Planning Commission

!RECEIVE ALERTS

The next time we write about any of these orgs, we’ll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Sign-up

DONATE

Help support the Metric Media Foundation's mission to restore community based news.

Donate