City of Aurora Planning Commission met November 7.

By Kristine Gonzales-Abella

Dec 1, 2018

City of Aurora Planning Commission met Nov. 7.

Here is the agenda 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. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Cole, Mr. Divine, Mrs. Head, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Pilmer, Mr. Reynolds and Ms. Tidwell. Mrs. Duncan called in and excused herself from the meeting. Mr. Hull was absent.

OTHERS PRESENT

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

Others Present: Jon Grzywa (Woolpert Inc.) and Bruce Goldsmith (Dykema).

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

18-0997 Approval of the Minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of October 17, 2018.

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

PUBLIC COMMENT

Chairman Truax said if you are here for an item that does not have a public hearing and you wish to speak to the Commission, we can give you 3 minutes to do so.

No one came forward.

AGENDA

18-0845

An Ordinance Approving a Revision to the Savannah Crossing (TMK Aurora Venture, LLC) Plan Description on 1.04 Acres for Property located at 1382 Butterfield Road being north of Butterfield Road and east of Church Road (Woolpert/Popeyes - 18-0845 / BA35/4-17.220-SUPD/R/Fpn - JM - Ward 1) (PUBLIC HEARING)

See Attachment for Items 18-0845 and 18-0846.

A motion was made by Mr. Reynolds, seconded by Mrs. Anderson, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/15/2018. The motion carried.

18-0846 A Resolution Approving a Final Plan on Lot 10 of Savannah Crossing Subdivision located at 1382 Butterfield Road being north of Butterfield Road and east of Church Road for a Restaurant with a drive-through facility (2530) Use (Woolpert/Popeyes - 18-0846 / BA35/4-17.220-SUPD/R/Fpn - JM - Ward 1)

See Attachment for Items 18-0845 and 18-0846.

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 11/15/2018. The motion carried.

Attachment for Items 18-0845 and 18-0846

Mrs. Morgan said the Petitioner is requesting a Plan Description Revision for the Savannah Crossing Plan Description located at 1382 Butterfield Road. The subject property is currently a vacant lot zoned for commercial use. The details of the request include revising the Plan Description from allowing 4 drive-thru restaurants to allowing 5 drive-thru restaurants, along with allowing an electric reader board monument sign that adheres to the Aurora Sign Ordinance requirements for reader boards. The size of the sign, the height, the setback and square footage would be the same as the other outlots, which is 8 feet tall and 50 square feet, which is our standard for most Plan Descriptions in the area, or in the city as a whole. Concurrently with this proposal, the Petitioner is requesting a Final Plan on a 2,827 square foot restaurant with 72 seats. The staff has worked with the Petitioner, along with the Burger King, which is on the adjacent property being built now, over the past 2 years to create a cohesive plan for the 2 lots in order to coordinate them both being developed with drive-thru restaurants. This included coordinating a cross access between the 2 lots in order to limit the access point on the north interior drive isle to 1 access point. This was to alleviate potential traffic backing up on to Church Road with the 2 drive-thru restaurants. The Petitioner, Popeye’s Restaurant, is working to align their drive isle and their parking to meet the Burger King so you have one easy flow around both lots. There are 10 stacking spaces and 26 parking spaces, which meet our requirements. The landscape plan features a mixture of trees along with a hedgerow along the parking spaces facing Butterfield Road. The building elevations depict a building that references Louisiana architecture, including being clad in rusticated stone veneer with portions being on the side being EIFS along with faux architectural elements such as a balcony and windows covered with louvered shutters. This is, I think, a kind of common branding for the Popeye’s brand that you can kind of see throughout the area. Just to kind of give a little brief background, when the overall shopping center of Savannah Crossing was planned in 2005, the Plan Description did limit drive-thru restaurants to 2 lots. Over the years, the Plan Description has been revised several times to allow additional drive-thru restaurants on additional lots, but it didn’t number the amount. Currently it is 4, so we are asking it be allowed to 5. This property is a 1 acre size lot and with that smaller size, as well as its close association to the Burger King lot, it really created an opportunity for the developers to come in and coordinate 2 similar uses on these lots. The lot has sat vacant for the past 13 years. There hasn’t been any interest from other developers to develop on the lot. Therefore, with a coordinated plan to mitigate any traffic concerns, staff does support the Plan Description Revision as staff believes that an additional drive-thru on the lot, this 1 acre lot, would not have any negative impact to the area as a whole. Are there any questions for staff? I’ll bring up the Final Plan again. You can see to the left is the Burger King, so you can see how the 2 kind of have a nice access along all of the properties being able to get out both to the north interior drive isle as well as to the east interior drive isle.

Mrs. Cole said I probably should know this, but I don’t. What is the parking requirement? 72 seats in a Popeye’s restaurant seems like a lot of people eating in a Popeye’s.

Mrs. Morgan said our parking requirement is 1 space per 3 seats, which would be 24 required.

Mrs. Cole said I just was curious. It seems like that’s a large number of seats, but that’s Popeye’s concern.

Mrs. Morgan said right. Some of the ones that came in recently, I feel some of the drive-thru restaurants have kind of been backing down on their number of seats and kind of doing some smaller restaurants, but that is really, I guess, just up to the Petitioner on how many seats they want as long as they meet the parking requirement.

The Petitioner was sworn in.

Good evening. My name is Jon Grzywa. I’m with Woolpert, 1815 S. Meyers Road, Oakbrook Terrace, Illinois. We are the Civil Engineer. We are here on behalf of the Petitioner this evening and we would be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you for your time.

Mr. Cameron said I have a question. What kind of a restaurant is Popeye’s? I’ve never been in one.

Mr. Grzywa said it is chicken.

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

Mrs. Morgan said staff would recommend approval of an Ordinance approving a Revision to the Savannah Crossing (TMK Aurora Venture, LLC) Plan Description on 1.04 acres for property located at 1382 Butterfield Road, being north of Butterfield Road and east of Church Road.

MOTION OF APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Mr. Reynolds

MOTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Anderson

AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Cole, Mr. Divine, Mrs.

Head, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Pilmer, Mr. Reynolds, Ms. Tidwell 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 of 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, the proposal 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?

Chairman Truax said we’ve heard from the staff that the plan is constructed to mitigate concerns about traffic.

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?

Mrs. Cole said these are all in place or will be put 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. Cameron said it has been designed to function with the next door neighbor facility to alleviate those kinds of problems.

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?

Chairman Truax said well it does have a certain concentration of similar uses, but in this case I think that was part of the planning that went into this.

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?