City of Aurora Planning Council met June 25

By Kristine Gonzales-Abella

Aug 6, 2019

City of Aurora Planning Council met June 25.

Here is the agenda provided by the council:

CALL TO ORDER

Mr. Sieben called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.

ROLL CALL

The following members were present: Mr. Sieben, Mrs. Vacek, Mrs. Morgan, Mr. Broadwell, Mr. Minnella, Mr. Dick, Mr. DuSell, Mr. Beneke, Mr. Curley and Mr. Hughes.

OTHERS PRESENT

Others Present: Mike Frankino (Fox Metro), Jon Monsma (Invest Aurora), Ron DiNardo (Cedarwood Development), and Josh Terpstra (Haeger Engineering).

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

AGENDA

19-0530 Requesting the Establishment of a new Special Use Planned Development, and to change the underlying zoning district from B-2(S) General Retail District to R-5(S) Multiple-Family Dwelling District, R-5A(S) Midrise Multiple Family Dwelling District, B-2(S) General Retail District, and OS-1(S) Conservation, Open Space and Drainage District with a Special Use Planned Development on the property located east of the intersection of Ogden Avenue and 75th Street (CDI Development Services, LLC / Cedarwood Development Inc. - 19-0530 / NA28/1-16.085-RZ/SU/PSD/PPN - ES - Ward 10)

Representatives Present: Josh Terpstra and Ron DiNardo

I’m Josh Terpstra. I am with Haeger Engineering. We are the Civil Engineer for the project.

My name is Ron DiNardo. I’m the Director of Development for Cedarwood Development that’s going to be working on this project along with Laura Hester, who is VP of Senior Housing who was not able to attend, but will be here for the next meeting. Mr. DiNardo said I will start with what we’re planning on doing phase-wise, which is essentially what you have there, but in color. What we are proposing is to redevelop this 30 acre site at Ogden and 75th. This is going to be a multi-phased construction project consisting of senior housing, retail and office area with a different zoning. The senior housing components will be assisted living and memory care and independent living, which is essentially age restricted apartments, if you will. Along with the multi-phase process, we do intend on extending Commons Drive through here, which will really fall under the second phase. What we have is a current zoning, which is B-2 General Retail. I think it is for the entire site, so we are requesting a zoning modification to add R-5(S) and R-5A to accommodate what we’re proposing. Of course, you guys have had time to look at this and you’ve had time to look at the resolution. It is R19-053, at least for the minutes, authorizing the City of Aurora to enter into this redevelopment agreement with us. That was passed at the end of February. We what have here is a phased construction. Parcel A is Phase 1. Parcel B is Phase 2. Phase 2 can also consist of the retail and the office and, of course, Commons Drive extension. That’s important to understand that the Commons Drive extension will occur in the Phase 2 of our project. In the Phase 1 construction, we are going to install all of the detention basins and access points off of Ogden and 75th. That’s our intent and, of course, to build the assisted living and the memory care. For your meeting minutes, we are looking at an approximate $19 million dollar construction cost supporting around 68 full time employees just so you guys are aware of how big of a project this is. That’s important. In Phase 2, which is the independent living, which is an age restricted housing, let me go back so you have for the record how big of a building we want, what we are going to propose. It is about 75,000 square feet approximately. That way you kind of get an idea. It is really in two parts; memory care and assisted living. On the independent living side, that is 180,000 square feet.

That’s an approximate number. That cost is probably going to be in the $35 million dollar area supporting about 27 full time jobs. Of course, when Phase 2 and Commons Drive extension is constructed, then access to these retail parcels will be really more convenient. Well I shouldn’t say that. These parcels will have access, cross access, so there will be cross access allowed so people don’t have to come (inaudible). The same thing with the office. We are proposing 2 traffic signals here, 1 here at Ogden and 1 here at 75th, all the improvements along the 75th and Ogden corridor to minimize any impact to any traffic issues.

Mr. Sieben said actually there is already a signal up there at Commons.

Mr. DiNardo said there is a signal there, but it would have to be modified. So the surrounding area, which you guys all know the site, this is Met Life. I don’t know if it is corporate headquarters or the main office. Then residential, apartments and then commercial down here. We are here to answer any questions. I’m sure you guys have dove into this project. Josh and I can answer any other questions.

Mr. Sieben said I don’t know if you said how many units are in the 2 buildings. Do you want to just for the record state that?

Mr. DiNardo said right now it is 88 combined, 63 assisted and 25 memory care and then 144 units on the independent living. Those are approximate. There’s probably some flexibility if a 2 bedroom becomes a 1 bedroom or something. I don’t want to be held to that if we are off 1 or 2, but that was the initial proposed design.

Mr. Sieben said can you touch on your timing?

Mr. DiNardo said so timing on this, I was thinking about this flying in this morning as I figured you would ask that question, and if we can get this entitled by the end of the year, by the time we’re done, I’m looking 36 to 48 months. I just don’t know how we can get it done any sooner because we would build this, of course, first and start the occupancy and then get into Phase 2. We’ve got to get a window. 48 months is probably a complete of it.

Mr. Sieben said for completion of the 2 buildings?

Mr. DiNardo said yes, for the completion of the 2. That gives you an idea of in a couple of years maybe Commons Drive will begin, but our goal is to move quickly once we get out entitlements.

Mrs. Vacek said I am reviewing it now in more detail. I will get you formal comments probably in the next few days, so you will get those formal comments from me. I know that Engineering may have some questions on the phasing and utilities on that so I’ll let them comment on that. There are some, maybe, sidewalk suggestions that I might have, so I’ll be sending you an exhibit on that. But otherwise the only other thing that we were talking about a little bit earlier is we may have you either put a note on or maybe even grey out the street on the Commons Drive street because since you guys aren’t doing it we don’t know exactly what that’s going to totally look like just because we have to go to DDOT and to the State on that so we don’t want to show something that’s incorrect, so we’ll have to kind of work through that.

Mr. DiNardo said so for the public hearing, do you not want to?

Mrs. Vacek said we want to show it, but we are going to have to figure out how to do that. Maybe it is just the outline of it and not directions or the lanes just because we don’t know what that’s going to look like and we don’t want anybody to come back to us and be like well you said and that’s where it showed.

Mr. DuSell said identify it as by others.

Mrs. Vacek said and then we’ll have it identified as by others. So just a heads up on that. I’ll turn it over to Engineering.

Mr. DuSell said we have not a chance to really start looking at it at all in depth, just a cursory review. We do have concerns about the water main layout. I think we will probably be making some changes. We do not like those loops that are done for the hydrant. There is going to be a change there for sure. I understand they’ve got to be the 5 foot rule. Probably what will be happening is the water main will be moved into the (inaudible) to get it closer to the hydrant.

Mr. Terpstra said to be clear, we don’t like those loops either. We are just looking to satisfy.

Mr. DuSell said technically, or more than likely, it is probably not going to work as they think it is going to function because you still have the main line going through and then looping around you are probably not getting flow around the loop that they think they are getting anyway. That’s one thing we will be looking at.

Mr. DiNardo said it is interesting you bring that up because we actually hired a consultant who has a PhD in water quality to challenge IDPH in their crazy notion of whatever they want to do with this hydrant. It is not the right way to prevent Legionella, any form of that, into the water system.

Mr. DuSell said in our comments we will probably be giving you some ideas of where we think the main should probably run. At this point we are also a little concerned about how this is going to get platted. I don’t know what’s going on, but if do plat all the lots as shown on the Preliminary up front, you will have to install more utilities as part of what you are calling Phase 1. You will have to provide service to every lot that gets platted.

Mr. DiNardo said I don’t think that will be an issue. We can talk about that more. These large parcels could be split into 2.

Mr. DuSell said the other option would be to just plat for the first phase and everything that is Phase 2 is just a lot on its own. Then you come back when you do Phase 2 maybe and then plat the remainder when you install the remainder of those utilities over there. That’s something to consider.

Mr. Sieben said so the platting is Phase 1.

Mr. DiNardo said the platting would have to be phased. That makes sense.

Mr. DuSell said within 2 weeks we will have comments out to you. Those were just a couple of things on the surface that we saw in our cursory look at it so far that are jumping out at us.

Mr. Mr. Terpstra said and you’ll include those comments in your official letter? Mr. DuSell said yes.

Mr. Sieben said Tim, are you the engineer on it?

Mr. DuSell said yes.

Mr. DiNardo said so how do you deal with the IDPH in the City of Aurora? We’re going through a lot in Lake in the Hills.

Mr. Curley said we heard about it already and we’ve had similar issues. Mr. DiNardo said so do you guys take the lead and support us?

Mr. Curley said we try and although the State will remind us who grants who, we are trying to get onto a couple of Boards downstate. I think Herman and I might be sitting on something going forward and try to get them to be more reasonable, but I don’t know what that’s going to look like or how effective we’ll end up being. We will try and help you in every way we can. I don’t want to mislead you to think that we’ve pushed them back to the point where we’ve gotten what we wanted every time. We had a project on hold for 2 months or something because of a ridiculous stance that they took earlier this summer. I believe they’ve backed off on that stance state-wide.

Mr. DiNardo said so I’m wondering if it warrants a meeting in Springfield with Justin DeWitt to show him our plan ahead of time. We’ve been in communication with him for the last 4 or 5 months with regard to our project in Lake of the Hills and they’re not publicly friendly, let’s put it that way to be politically correct.

Mr. Curley said if you think that would be helpful that wouldn’t be a bad introduction for us to sit down with him too.

Mr. DiNardo said maybe that would be something where you come back with your comments. I don’t mind taking a trip out to Springfield and if I have to pay for someone’s time I’m willing to do that just to sit in front of him if we can get in front of him because this is not going to go well from what’s going on in Lake of the Hills.

Mr. Curley said do you know who the regional inspector was? I think that meeting might be valuable. I think the local position has been more harsh than the State’s position, but they defend their person after they’ve taken a position is what I see.

Mr. Terpstra said we have sent letter after letter and they don’t respond.

Mr. DuSell said I think you might be able to make it work though with some adjustments.

Mr. Terpstra said maybe bending it in and bending it back out or something like that.

Mr. DuSell said well I think we were looking of running the main up in the pavement along the road and then it would be right there where those hydrants were. Some of those other mains like along Ogden, that main where it was shown is kind of a useless spot. The hydrants aren’t even near any road, so again, looking at pulling the main back maybe along the south side of your main entrance road there at first and then it cuts up into the pavement. We’ll massage it.

Mr. Terpstra said we’re willing to work with you. If you give us a markup, we’ll.

Mr. DiNardo said when you consider that, if you can keep it away from areas where we are going to have to provide an easement and if something happens they are not digging up right in front of our entry somewhere. It allows for any work to occur outside. So please keep that in mind so I don’t end up having an easement right there.

Mr. DuSell said everything will be marginally based on where you are showing hydrants. If you have a hydrant that’s.

Mr. Terpstra said we need a hydrant for the Fire Department Connection. Mr. DuSell said we are going to have to have an easement there regardless.

Mr. DiNardo said so if we wanted to add an additional hydrant above and beyond to help alleviate maybe some of that issue maybe that’s an option.

Mr. Terpstra said I think saying every hydrant would be an easement, correct?

Mr. DuSell said every main, every hydrant if they are all ours, all have to be in an easement.

Mr. Terpstra said we’ll have to massage that. We can work with them.

Mr. DuSell said we’ll give you something and then you can take it from there and do however you want to adjust it.

Mr. DiNardo said so we’ll keep you in the loop as we progress with the guys in Springfield.

Mr. Beneke said so on the fire side and building side, we took a look at it. We met earlier on and worked through a lot of things. Our good news is that we are good with the fire plan. If you need to through the process adjust hydrants or something, then obviously, we’ll have to have a resubmittal, but everything looked good for us. We’re comfortable with where we are there. I would encourage you that in your conservation with your consultants and everything associated with the whole IDPH thing that they agree to keep us in the loop so we can see what you are presenting and see where it goes. Like John said, we have to have a plumbing program.

Mr. DuSell said so the Fire Marshall is good with the hydrants on the islands? Mr. Beneke said yes.

Mr. Sieben said Tracey, where does this go?

Mrs. Vacek said this set for the July 17th Planning Commission, so that will be the next hearing that it goes to. We will vote this out on July 9th, so we can hopefully get comments out and everything kind of resubmitted by then and that would be great.

Mr. DuSell said have you guys at all approached DDOT or DuPage County regarding your access point?

Mr. DiNardo said we have.

Mr. Terpstra said he’s not here, but we have Calloway as the Traffic Consultant, and I believe that they had some preliminary discussions with IDOT and DDOT.

Mr. DiNardo said I know these access points were discussed early on. They don’t line up because I think it was DuPage. They didn’t want this to line up.

Mr. DuSell said I just wanted to make sure you got the process started because when we get to final engineering, obviously, they will have to had approved all that.

Mrs. Vacek said and we have a question on this one.

Mr. Sieben said what is that? Is that a 3⁄4?

Mrs. Vacek said it says proposed right-in/right-out, but then you are showing it 3⁄4. I’m assuming if you guys are going through the 3⁄4 that you are going to need to put in the lane to turn in, so just keep that in mind.

Mr. Sieben said so there was a discrepancy with what you are saying versus what you’ve drawn, but yet you didn’t draw the whole thing.

Mr. Terpstra said I believe that should be a right-in/right-out and the pork chop should just have a little bit of a western.

Mrs. Vacek said the pork chop then just needs to be (inaudible). That’s going to be one of my comments. I’ll have my comments done within the next couple of days and then Engineering, once they are able to review, will send out comments too.

19-0531 Requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat for Aurora Town Center Subdivision located east of the intersection of Ogden Avenue and 75th Street (CDI Development Services, LLC / Cedarwood Development Inc. - 19-0531 / NA28/1-16.085-RZ/SU/PSD/PPN - ES - Ward 10)

Representatives Present: Josh Terpstra and Ron DiNardo

I’m Josh Terpstra. I am with Haeger Engineering. We are the Civil Engineer for the project.

Mr. DiNardo said I will start with what we’re planning on doing phase-wise, which is essentially what you have there, but in color. What we are proposing is to redevelop this 30 acre site at Ogden and 75th. This is going to be a multi-phased construction project consisting of senior housing, retail and office area with a different zoning. The senior housing components will be assisted living and memory care and independent living, which is essentially age restricted apartments, if you will. Along with the multi-phase process, we do intend on extending Commons Drive through here, which will really fall under the second phase. What we have is a current zoning, which is B-2 General Retail. I think it is for the entire site, so we are requesting a zoning modification to add R-5(S) and R-5A to accommodate what we’re proposing. Of course, you guys have had time to look at this and you’ve had time to look at the resolution. It is R19-053, at least for the minutes, authorizing the City of Aurora to enter into this redevelopment agreement with us. That was passed at the end of February. We what have here is a phased construction. Parcel A is Phase 1. Parcel B is Phase 2. Phase 2 can also consist of the retail and the office and, of course, Commons Drive extension. That’s important to understand that the Commons Drive extension will occur in the Phase 2 of our project. In the Phase 1 construction, we are going to install all of the detention basins and access points off of Ogden and 75th. That’s our intent and, of course, to build the assisted living and the memory care. For your meeting minutes, we are looking at an approximate $19 million dollar construction cost supporting around 68 full time employees just so you guys are aware of how big of a project this is. That’s important. In Phase 2, which is the independent living, which is an age restricted housing, let me go back so you have for the record how big of a building we want, what we are going to propose. It is about 75,000 square feet approximately. That way you kind of get an idea. It is really in two parts; memory care and assisted living. On the independent living side, that is 180,000 square feet.