City of Aurora Planning Commission met Nov. 6.
Here is the minutes provided by the commission:
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Pilmer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
The following Commission members were present: Chairman Pilmer, Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Duncan, Mr. Gonzales, Mrs. Head, Mr. Hull, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Reynolds and Ms. Tidwell. Mr. Divine and Mr. Elsbree called in and excused themselves from the meeting.
OTHERS PRESENT
The following staff members were present: Mr. Sieben, Mrs. Morgan, Mr. Broadwell, Mr. Sodaro and Mrs. Jackson.
Others Present: Andy Perille (Liberty Property Trust), Michael Poulakidas (Fox Valley Developers), Mike Elliott (Kluber Architects), Marty Burke (Mackie Consultants), Christina Rivas (459 S. 4th Street), Alexandria Ruiz (551 S. 4th Street), Jonathan Palmersten (Gribble), John Tebrugge (Tebrugge Engineering) and Tracy Willie (Warren Johnson Architects).
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
19-0925 Approval of the Minutes for the Planning Commission meeting on October 16, 2019.
A motion was made by Ms. Tidwell, seconded by Mr. Chambers, that the minutes be approved and filed. The motion carried.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Chairman Pilmer said if you are here for an item that does not appear on the agenda as 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
19-0901 A Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee Resolution
Approving a Revision to the Final Plat for West Ridge Corporate Center Phase III 1st Resubdivision generally located at the southeast corner of Bilter Road and Mitchell Road (Liberty Property Trust - 19-0901 / AU02/1-19.118-Fsd/Fpn/R - JS - Ward 1).
A motion was made by Mr. Chambers, seconded by Mrs. Anderson, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/13/2019. The motion carried.
19-0902 A Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee Resolution Approving a Revision to the Final Plan for Lot 1A of West Ridge Corporate Center Phase III 1st Resubdivision located at 701 Bilter Road for a Warehouse, Distribution and storage services (3300) Use (Liberty Property Trust - 19-0902 / AU02/1-19.118-Fsd/Fpn/R - JS - Ward 1)
A motion was made by Ms. Tidwell, seconded by Mr. Chambers, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/13/2019. The motion carried.
19-0901 A Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee Resolution approving a Revision to the Final Plat for West Ridge Corporate Center Phase III 1st Resubdivision generally located at the southeast corner of Bilter Road and Mitchell Road (Liberty Property Trust – 19-0901 / AU02/1-19.Fsd/Fpn/R – JS – Ward 1)
Mr. Sieben said I just want to introduce a new Planner on our staff, Jacob Sodaro. He goes by Jake. He is going to present this first item on Liberty Property Trust on Bilter Road. Jake stared with the City of Aurora back in July. He is a May graduate of the University of Illinois. He is an Oak Lawn resident, a fellow south-sider just like me. We went to the same Community College also. We welcome Jake to our staff and hopefully he is here for a long time. I’ll turn it over to Jake.
Mr. Sodaro said first of all it is nice to meet all of you and I look forward to working with you all in the future. The petitioner is currently requesting approval of a revision to the Final Plat for the property generally located at the southeast corner of Mitchell Road and Bilter Road. This encompasses 701 and 801 Bilter Road. The property was informally subdivided with the County in 2004 and as such, is being officially recorded with this proposal. Lot 1A, the north lot, is roughly 10.375 acres with Lot 1B being the south lot being 9.69 acres with the entire subdivision being roughly 20.326 acres. Cross access easements are already pre-existing for the properties located 701 and 801 Bilter, but are also being formalized with this proposal. Concurrently this this, the Petitioner is requesting approval of a revision to the Final Plan for the property located at 701 Bilter Road to construct a 161,986 square foot warehouse building. A Final Plan was submitted for the property in 2006 along with a plan for the property at 801
Bilter Road. This property is slightly smaller than it was proposed in order to accommodate for more trailer parking stalls. The plan currently proposes 167 parking spaces to be built with 13 to be built to accommodate future uses resulting in roughly 7% of the parking being banked.
Ms. Tidwell said there is a note about the approval being contingent upon Engineering approval. Can you speak to those please?
Mr. Sodaro said all Engineering regarding that was they have already given approval for the earthwork and mass grading to begin on the site. They just have a few more details that need to be addressed before they would give final engineering approval. It wasn’t anything major.
Ms. Tidwell so relatively minor?
Mr. Sodaro said yes relatively minor details that they just wanted to address.
I’m Andy Perille of Liberty Property Trust. I’m joined by Bill Perry with Watermark Engineering, our Civil Engineer. The building is the last building in our park at Bilter Road. Originally it was designed to be one building. In 2006 we did a build to suit at 801 Bilter, which is PPG, which caused the subdivision on the land. This is the remaining piece and we feel that the market is right for the final building in the park.
Mr. Sodaro said staff would recommend conditional approval of the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee Resolution approving a Revision to the Final Plat for West Ridge Corporate Center Phase III 1st Resubdivision generally located at the southeast corner of Bilter Road and Mitchell Road with the following condition:
1. That all of the review comments per the Engineering Department be addressed prior to approval of the Final Engineering Plans.
MOTION OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Mr. Chambers
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Anderson
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Duncan, Mr. Gonzales, Mrs. Head, Mr. Hull, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Reynolds, Ms. Tidwell
NAYS: None
Mr. Sodaro said this will next be heard at the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee on Wednesday, November 13, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.
19-0902 A Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee Resolution approving a Revision to the Final Plan on Lot 1A of West Ridge Cop=prorate Center Phase III 1st Resubdivision located at 701 Bilter Road for a Warehouse, Distribution and Storage Services (3300) Use (Liberty Property Trust – 19-0902 / AU02/1- 19.Fsd/Fpn/R – JS – Ward 1)
Mr. Sodaro said staff would recommend conditional approval of the Resolution approving a Final Plan Revision for Lot 1A, Phase III of West Ridge Corporate Center Resubdivision located at 701 Bilter for a Warehouse Distribution and Storage Services Use with the following condition:
1. That all the review comments per the Engineering Department be addressed prior to the approval of the final engineering plans.
MOTION OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Ms. Tidwell
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Chambers
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Duncan, Mr. Gonzales, Mrs. Head, Mr. Hull, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Reynolds, Ms. Tidwell
NAYS: None
Mr. Sodaro said this will next be heard at the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee on Wednesday, November 13, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.
19-0907 An Ordinance Establishing a Special Use Planned Development,
Approving the Avalon Heights Plan Description and Amending Ordinance Number 3100, being the Aurora Zoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map attached thereto, to an underlying zoning of R-5(S) Multiple-Family Dwelling District, O(S) Office District, and P(S) Park and Recreation District with a Special Use Planned Development for the property located along Weston Avenue and Seminary Avenue between S. Lincoln Avenue and S. 4th Street (Fox Valley Developers, LLC - 19-0907 / AU27/1-19.063-SU/PD/Ppn/Psd - JM - Ward 4) (PUBLIC HEARING)
A motion was made by Mr. Cameron, seconded by Mr. Hull, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/13/2019. The motion carried.
19-0908 A Resolution Approving a Preliminary Plat for Avalon Heights
Subdivision located along Weston Avenue and Seminary Avenue between S. Lincoln Avenue and S. 4th Street (Fox Valley Developers, LLC - 19-0908 / AU27/1-19.063-SU/PD/Ppn/Psd - JM - Ward 4)
A motion was made by Mrs. Anderson, seconded by Mrs. Owusu-Safo, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/13/2019. The motion carried.
19-0909 A Resolution Approving a Preliminary Plan for Avalon Heights
Subdivision located along Weston Avenue and Seminary Avenue between S. Lincoln Avenue and S. 4th Street (Fox Valley Developers, LLC - 19-0909 / AU27/1-19.063-SU/PD/Ppn/Psd - JM - Ward 4)
A motion was made by Mr. Chambers, seconded by Mrs. Head, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/13/2019. The motion carried.
19-0907 An Ordinance establishing a Special Use Planned Development, approving the Avalon Heights Plan Description and amending Ordinance Number 3100, being the Aurora Zoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map attached thereto, to an underlying zoning of $-5(S) Multiple Family Dwelling District, O(S) Office District, and P(S) Park and Recreation District with a Special Use Planned Development for the property located along Weston Avenue and Seminary Avenue between S. Lincoln Avenue and S. 4th Street (Fox Valley Developers, LLC – 19-0907 / AU27/1-19.063-SU/PD/Ppn/Psd – JM – Ward) (PUBLIC HEARING)
Mrs. Morgan said as stated, this is a Petition by Fox Valley Developers requesting the establishment of a new Special Use Planned Development. There are multiple zonings currently on the site, so part of the Planned Development will rezone the property to the R-5(S) Multiple Family Dwelling District, O(S) Office District and P(S) Park and Recreation District with a Special Use Planned Development on the property. The property is commonly known as the historic Copley Hospital. This development will be for a mixed use redevelopment of the site, including the historic buildings. So just to give you a little of background to this site if you are not overly familiar with it, it is currently comprised of vacant buildings and lots. I have a map kind of showing an aerial of the site identifying with the different portions of development. The property contains multiple periods of development for the Copley Hospital as a group. Historically the first building dates from 1888 and that’s like the Victorian brick building. As the population grew, there were additional blocks added in 1916, 1932, 1947, 1970 and 1980 to meet the needs of the growing city. The hospital also had a nurses training school and they built a dorm for that school in 1957. The dormitory is kind of by itself and the rest of the buildings all kind of just do a little U-shape as the site grew. The developer’s proposal will adaptively reuse and rehabilitate all the significant buildings with only minor changes. Those include a demolition of a non-contributing 1932 powerhouse and the 1980 block along with two new additions. Just to let you know, the developers are planning on using Historic Tax Credits for this development, so all alterations, including interior and exterior, has to be approved by the State Preservation Office for those tax credits. The project includes the mixed use redevelopment and a new planned park as well. The 1888 block is planned for a commercial use on the first floor, including a potential pharmacy and with offices above. The 1917 to 1947 block, which is the brick building that kind of does a U-shape, is planned for a senior living community consisting of independent living, assisted living and memory care for a total capacity of 99 residents is what they are planning on. The 1970 block is planned to house several health care providers and services on the lower two floors. The upper floors will be renovated into a 53 unit independent apartment community for adults with cognitive and developmental disabilities, which will require minimal support. The developers can kind of explain that in more detail as well. The nurses building, along with a 7,500 square foot addition, will be repurposed to serve the East Aurora School District. They are going to use it for offices and the addition will be used for a training room. That’s kind of a long description of how they are going to use the property. In order to do that, they are asking for a new Planned Development and asking for rezoning. The majority of the site is going to be zoned R-5(S) for Multiple Family Dwelling District, which encompasses the 1888 portion to the 1970 portion and is the majority of the buildings along with most of the parking and the drive aisles. The nurses dormitory and the addition are going to be rezoned O(S) Office District. Then you can see in this map Parcel A is the R-5. Parcel B is what the School District is going to be taking over and is going to be the O(S). To the far right of the site is a park, a 1.3 acre park. That will be dedicated to the Fox Valley Park District. Along with the Plan Description there are going to be some modifications to the base zoning because of the uniqueness of the site, including use regulations, bulk restrictions and signage. The R-5 modifications will allow the following uses. We specifically outlined in the Plan Description what uses will be only permitted in the R-5 portion. Those include housing services for the elderly, age restricted multi-family dwelling units, multi-family dwelling units for adults with cognitive and developmental disabilities, health and human services, retail sales and services use and a business and professional office use. There are also some other modifications to allow a smaller minimum floor area because of the nature of it for senior living. So a minimum of 540 square feet and increasing the height because there is currently a historic building that is taller than the minimum height requirement. Then also reducing the setbacks and the lot coverage to zero because of the existing site. The modifications for the O portion of the uses is going to allow everything allowed in the O currently under our base zoning, as well as allowing educational services, so the school can use it for offices and their training center. There are some modifications to the parking because they are going to be doing shared parking. Some of their uses like the cognitive disability don’t necessarily need parking so we kind of reduced that requirement. Concurrently with the proposal, the Petitioner is wanting a Preliminary Plat. They are just subdividing into 4 lots. Then the Preliminary Plan is slightly a little larger than what is on the Plan Description and the Preliminary Plat. That is because staff wanted to show Bardwell to the south to show how those two are going to be connected. The development of Bardwell includes the vacation of a portion of Seminary Avenue, so you can see Seminary is being vacated and it is going to be turned into like a greenspace walking area so they can walk from the school to the office complex. Because of that vacation, they are also going to dedicate a new alley so you can get from Seminary Avenue and go through the alley to Marion Avenue. Also to note, Weston Avenue has actually been vacated, so it is technically a city road. The developers are proposing actually kind of creating more of an internal road for their development and it is going to end at the park. The rest of the site is pretty much remaining as is, except with demolitions I noted before and two small additions. They are redoing the parking, adding some additional portion of parking for a total 430 spaces. So just to note, in 2005 this area was part of an overlay district and part of the overlay specifically called out this area to encourage the conversion and reuse of the former Copley Hospital in a manner that preserves the character of the existing campus while also promoting economic reuse of the site and potentially creating a Planned Development, which is what the developers are here for. Staff does believe that this proposed development meets that objective of the overlay district while also reducing some parking traffic to the surrounding communities by directing the residential developments to seniors and adults with disabilities. For those reason, staff does recommend support of this Special Use Planned Development. If you have any questions for me or I can bring the Petitioners up and they can get into a lot more detail about the uses if you have questions on those.
Ms. Tidwell said from what I read, your recommendation is conditioned on Engineering.
Mrs. Morgan said I’m only conditioning the Final Plan on Engineering. Well two conditions on the Final Plan. There was fire. The Fire Marshall has, since my memo, reviewed the Fire Access Plan and has approved it, so I do recommend not including that condition. The Engineering condition is kind of our standard Engineering condition. They are in the process of reviewing the resubmittal. They don’t expect any major changes to the site plan. This is preliminary, so they will have to come back through for final with Final Engineering so they will probably get a lot more detailed comments from Engineering at that point.
Ms. Tidwell said does that come back to this committee then?
Mrs. Morgan said it will.
Mr. Hull said I have a question concerning the alleyway. Is that going to be a complete rebuild on that alley to handle the additional traffic that will going through there? The second part of that is, is there any consideration for snow removal that typically was a part of an alley route? The alley routes are typically the last routes that are done during snow removal. The question is, is it going to be a total rebuild and has staff considered the impact of snow removal?
Mrs. Morgan said I’m not certain if it is a total build. Maybe the Petitioners can address that. I do know that our Engineering Division looked at it and wanted certain width requirements to allow it to pass through as we do typically on our alleys. As far as I know, I don’t know if there are any special considerations. I can ask the Engineering or Public Works Department on that if there is any special considerations for this particular alley. The school is also planning on using this to bring their busses through, so I would think they would need to address the snow, but maybe the Petitioner can better answer that.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said just briefly, how does Weston Road operate? They are showing a driveway or some kind of access, but it leads to nothing, so just trying to see what the purpose of that is.
Mrs. Morgan said currently Weston connects all the way from Lincoln Avenue through. This proposal, Weston basically will become a private drive. They are changing the access slightly and shifting the access north. Currently the access is right south of what you are seeing now. Then it will become a private road that people can access through what you see as Weston to get to their site and then it will just dead-end at the park.
Mr. Owusu-Safo said okay. That’s why I was asking what the purpose of that access was where it dead-ends at.
Mrs. Morgan said our Engineering and Public Works Department requested that this actually be dedicated right-of-way so that way if people are coming down Weston they have a turn around. There are two driveways right off of that, so if they are coming to visit those and can’t get to the driveway they can turn around in our dedicated right-of-way.
Ms. Tidwell said just a follow up on Weston. Weston will not be vacated all the way to 4th Street will it?
Mrs. Morgan said no, not all the way. Basically it is currently already vacated from Lincoln Avenue to basically where that turnaround is. What’s shown from 4th Street, I think there is like one property on either side, that will still be public road.
Mr. Cameron said as I look at the traffic flow through there, you’ve got the alley, you’ve got two entrances on Seminary available only from the east and then the access up on Lincoln. Am I reading that right?
Mrs. Morgan said there are two accesses off of Lincoln.
Mr. Cameron said is the second on into the small front lot?
Mrs. Morgan said yes.
Page 7 City of Aurora
November 6, 2019 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
Mr. Cameron said does that go through?
Mrs. Morgan said it does. You can go into the southern entrance and go through this like grey area into the remainder of their parking lot to get to Seminary Avenue or if you needed to get up here toward the park.
Mr. Cameron said so the lower one is basically the access for the East High central office?
Mrs. Morgan said I think that’s more probably how it’s designed, yes.
Mrs. Head said and when you bring up busses, I’m not understanding. What is the plan for Seminary to the alley? If I understood you correctly, is the alley going to be two way traffic and you’re expecting full size busses to go down an alley?
Mrs. Morgan said the alley will be one way traffic. It is wide enough, according to our engineers, for busses to come down that alley. In the hashed area, they are actually going to pull over so that people can pass to the left. The Petitioner might be able to explain that better.
Mr. Cameron said I hope you have a lot of signage because it looks like they could place the drive in at one entry and come out the other entry. It looks to me like it is easy to get lost in there if you don’t really put a lot of signage up.
Mrs. Morgan said we have spoken to the School District. They have approved this plan, but that is good to note, maybe make sure we have signage directing people, especially the first days of school and how that flow is going to have to work.
The Petitioners were sworn in.
I’m Michael Poulakidas, 346 N. Lake Street, Aurora, Illinois 60506.
I’m Mike Elliott with Kluber Architects/Engineers, 10 S. Shumway, Batavia, Illinois.
I’m Marty Burke with Mackie Consultants, 9575 W. Higgins in Rosemont.
Mr. Poulakidas said if I may, I’d start with a few of the questions that were asked before I start. There was a question regarding the snow removal in the alley. We’ve been in constant contact with Engineering. I think Jill was absolutely correct that we don’t anticipate very many revision because we’ve been working since day one with them. For the flow of the snow removal trucks, we give them the access that they need to be able to flow freely in that area. As far as signage, for those of you that know the area, it is a minor miracle what the parents and the school do on a daily basis currently and for the past how many years to get the kids off of those busses. Basically Lincoln and Seminary both almost come to a shutdown. I say almost, not completely. You can still get through on Lincoln. What they do is unbelievably spectacular and we feel as though this plan has been created by, not just us, but in conjunction with the city, the engineers and the School District to ease the flow in that area. Is it 100% perfect? It is not, but we are bound by properties and this was a group effort that not only gave us and the School District a part in between what is going to be their School Administration Building and their large elementary school, but then also lets the flow of traffic on Lincoln proceed during the beginning and end of school when busses are then coming down the alley. We’ve had several meetings with Alderman Donnell and his ward. I can’t speak for everybody, but this was also something we had brought up to the neighborhood and we are very excited about that. I believe that was all the questions. I believe I answered all of the questions.
Mr. Cameron said I think her comment on the snow plowing is we are assuming that it meets the Engineering requirements, but the crucial thing is where does it sit on the city’s snow removal plan? They don’t plow those until last and it needs to be treated other than an alley to make sure that the snow removal comes early in the program.
Mrs. Head said generally the City of Aurora is really good. If they are going to be using that as a bus drop off and pickup, that’s why I’m asking these specific questions, then it’s going to be one of the first plowed because the city is going to get the calls that it’s going to have to get done. My concern is still the tail swing of a bus and the single lane. Someone’s got to explain how you are going to get a 71 passenger, if you have both direction of traffic, how someone going west is going to be able to head south onto the street and not get tail swing from either somebody parked illegally, if we are talking congestion, on that street. Maybe I’m just not seeing it. I went there to try to look at this because it was confusing for me.
Mr. Burke said I appreciate your comments there. What we’re trying to pull up right at the moment is a turning radius exhibit that we prepared. It addressed fire protection, but still very similar size vehicles. We did carefully look at, not only the circulation through the entire property at both access points, but also as you can see down there where the bus drop off is. We worked on the dimensions there and we felt very comfortable that there is enough dimension there to make what you have commented on work. With regard to the Commissioner’s comments about signage, we do recognize that and we have a lot of work to do in our final engineering plans to identify all the appropriate signage throughout the entire property so that whomever is wanting to access one building is going to get to that building rather than have a circuitous route.
Mr. Poulakidas said so for those of you that are not as familiar with the area, as Jill had mentioned, in the 1916 building, the 1932 building and the 1947 building we have a management agreement with Guarded Management Living Solutions, who is the 29th largest senior living management in the country and the 11th largest assisted living firm in the country, to manage our units. In the upper 4 floors of the 1970’s block Jill had mentioned the IAC. It is an emerging model. It is an independent apartment community. There is 1 in St. Louis, 2 in Phoenix, 1 in California with 1 to be open and 1 in Vancouver, Washington. It is a model that houses individuals with cognitive and developmental disabilities that have low support needs. It is very much an emerging model with the level of population that’s growing and in need of those services. We kind of liken it to a college dormitory, if you will, where the individuals have freedom, but they have a resident assistant watching over them. It is not licensed. It is an apartment complex, but it provides those individuals with the level of support that they would need for transportation and for job skills and training. We are very excited about that. On the first 2 floors, as Jill said, this would be our small healthcare center. The first floor we have entered into agreements with Vituity Health Care. It is a healthcare organization that’s based out of California. They do have operations in Illinois. They provide the emergency room care at AMITA Mercy and also at Sherman Hospital in Elgin. So we are very excited to have them on board. We’ve also worked agreements with a local family counseling center and we are working everyday towards our applying for a Certificate of Need for our surgery center, working with Lab Corp for space and also with an x-ray lab and imaging firm that’s based out of Illinois. Plans are moving forward. The reason we are obviously in front of you here today is to get this approval.
As Jill has mentioned also, the pharmacy. We are working with a local independent pharmacist that has over 20 years of experience in the pharmacy to take the first floor of the 1888 building. We are well on our way to having this proposed development filled. It is no small task and we are working every day to finish it. We are moving on several tracks at once and that is because of the Historic Tax Credits. The Historic Tax Credits are providing the major funding source. They also, as some of you may know, have stringent restrictions. We are working with some of the best consultants in the country to make sure that we follow those restrictions. They limit us on what we can do on the outside, so 95% of the entire structure will remain as is. They did allow us to tear down the cancer center and the power plant and that was for fire access. As Marty and his team and Michael and his team were working with the city, it was determined that we needed a pass through and those were blocking the pass through and so in working with the State Historic Preservation Office and the National Park Service they had granted that modification when normally it wouldn’t be something that they would grant. We are also excited that on the first 2 floors of the 1970’s building that is brown brick right now, they are allowing us to pop in windows, which will open up that whole 2 story building that is going to be facing the East Aurora School Administration buildings. With that, along with all of the park space that we are working with the Park District on, proposes a very exciting development. As you see on the plan, we are donating or anticipating to donate almost 1.4 acres of property for an all access community park, something that is sorely needed in that area. Then with the vacation of Seminary, that will be a very exciting park space that not only the community will be able to use, but in talking with Bardwell they are very excited to be able to bring the kids out into the middle of that area and actually hold classes out there, something that just a few years ago that that school would never have thought possible. That, for the most, describes what we are doing. We appreciate all of the concerns, but hope that you understand that we are working through all of them. We are working diligently to get closed on our Historic Tax Credit financing by the end of the year. That’s why we are in front of you here today with the Preliminary Plan and Plat so that our investors see what is anticipated to be approved on final subject to some of the specifics, which some of the concerns have been mentioned here today, all of which we are well aware of and hope that staff would agree. We are working with them to make sure that everything is followed and as agreed.
Mrs. Anderson said being that these are historic buildings, will they all be ADA compliant?
Mr. Poulakidas said we will be ADA compliant in all buildings except for the 1888 building on the second and third floor and that’s because it is such an old building that we’re not going to have elevations. Let me start from the beginning. It is a little complicated. The State Historic Preservation Office was able to give us certain variances for the inside of all the buildings to allow for elevators, to allow for access, to allow for widening of the hallways where needed. In that building, because it is so historic and because they consider that for lack of a better term the gem of the property historically, they want us to bring it back as much as possible to the way it was in 1888. We are literally working with the experts to define all the mill working, the trim working, the stair railings, the exterior brick work, the old roof, and the windows. The windows can’t be new. We have to rebuild every single window from scratch. All the buildings will be except for that. Now the first floor of the 1888 building will be accessible, but the second 2 floors will not be accessible.
The public input portion of the public hearing was opened. The witnesses were sworn in.
My name is Christina Rivas. My question is I live on S. 4th Street and my neighbors are either on the corner of Weston and 4th or at the little store. There is an alley behind there. Is this where you are putting the park? What happens to the alley back there? How do people get in and out of the store if you close that off because there are several houses behind the store that use that parking? What do I have that’s guaranteed once that park is there that nobody is destroying my fence and stuff behind there, the properties behind there?
Mr. Sieben said what’s your address?
Ms. Rivas said 459 S. 4th Street. The parking is right behind me and then there’s a little medical building and then the old Copley.
Chairman Pilmer said what we’ll do, if you have any other questions, let us know, but at the end we will answer everyone’s questions at once.
Ms. Rivas said is it going to raise our taxes? Because it is a historic neighborhood, how is it going to affect that?
I’m Alexandra Ruiz from 551 S. 4th Street, Aurora, Illinois. I just wanted to know how that’s going to affect the churches being that there is lack of parking closing that alley.
Chairman Pilmer said so the question was how it will affect the parking given that the street is being closed?
Ms. Ruiz said yes and the churches nearby that use those alleys.
Mr. Poulakidas said I’d like to address a few of those. Unfortunately, the one as far as the taxes are concerned, I can’t answer whether or not it would raise taxes. What I can say is that we commissioned a study by a gentleman by the name of Joseph Pulaski who completed the study some years ago on the outlet mall, a well-respected third party. We are anticipated to, during construction, to provide 740 jobs to the local economy and once construction is completed to have sustained 261 new jobs in the economy. I think everyone who knows the area knows what it is to not do anything with the level of police, fire and life safety issues that have happened prior to us being there. Since us being there I can tell you and I don’t want to speak for the APD, but I can tell you the level of calls, I believe, have gone down. Now regarding the fact of the park, I can say this. We have an agreement with East Aurora School District that this community development will be providing 24 hours a day 7 days a week security. We will be providing that, so that will be on-site. There had been comments from the neighbors of the concern of the park on how it would be kept clean and if there would be traffic. I can say that we will be having our own security. Not to mention that, but also the great job that our Aurora Police Department does is second to none. I hope that would address that issue. As to the alley, we are not closing down that alley. That alley will be unaffected by the park. The park is being proposed only on the parcels that we have purchased. The alley will remain completely open to the public as it is now and so that will remain unaffected. As to the churches, I guess I’m unfamiliar, and maybe staff would have to answer that. Again, if it has anything to do with the alley, we are not affecting the alley. If it has anything to do with the fact that they may or may not need overflow parking, I hesitate to want to put anything on public record, but I can say that as a businessman in the Aurora community for the last 20 years, my family being in the Aurora community since 1975, I believe we are nothing but good neighbors and if there is an issue with a local church that has an issue with parking, the majority of our parking is going to be during the week for the School District. Our uses don’t provide for very much parking. We’ll have parking for the independents. We’ll have parking for the staff. However, if a church had any issues, we would be more than welcome to talking to them and if the city had no issues, we want to be nothing but good neighbors, for not just the churches, but for everybody.
Mr. Hull said could you elaborate a little bit more about the issues related to crime? You brought it up that there are some things that are going on that you hope that this development will help put in a better light or help out the situation. I took it as there is a lot of crime and a lot things that are going on currently in the Seminary area and around the school.
Mr. Poulakidas said I apologize. I appreciate you letting me clarify that. I’m strictly speaking to the nuisances and the trespassing that was happening on the property. In fact, we are proud to become a part of that neighborhood. That is fantastic neighborhood. We are excited to becoming partners in that neighborhood. We’ve met several of the neighbors. For those of you that would drive by there, the houses are well kept. The neighbors do a great job of community support. I can definitely say this, in the 6 to 8 months where we were really having a problem on the property, 9 times out of 10 the kids that we would catch were from out of town. We believe that we have eliminated those nuisances, those phone calls to the Aurora Police Department. The trespassing to that property is what I was referring to, not to anything other than that.
Mrs. Anderson said I think it is great that you guys are doing this. These buildings have been here for a long time in the city and they are worthy of being saved and repurposed, so thank you for that.
Mr. Poulakidas said I have to say once we cleaned it up, once we remediated and selectively demolished the interior, and Michael and his team and Marty and their team determined that the building was structurally sound, bringing through, for instance, Guarded Management Solutions, again, I apologize if I didn’t say it properly before, but they are the 29th largest senior living provider in the country, the 11th largest assisted living provider in the country and the number 1 assisted living provider in the State and they can’t wait to get started to filling this senior living facility in this property. Walking them through with the tall ceilings, walking them through and seeing what once was the back of the courtyard that’s going to be now, which was the back of the house for the hospital before and now it is going to be the courtyard, so all the seniors will be looking over the courtyard on the south view. They are super excited to get started and very excited. They love that neighborhood, so again, I do apologize if I made any reference that this neighborhood is in our opinion second to none, not just in Aurora but in any town. We are beyond excited to be part of that community.
Mr. Cameron said I’m still confused. The lady here that was asking about, I don’t know if she was talking about the alley off of Seminary or if she was talking over off Weston.
Mr. Poulakidas said can I just point on the screen? So 4th Street is here. On 4th Street there is an alley that runs on the north side of the property. There is an alley that runs east and west across several houses and that’s an access way for them to get to their garages.
Ms. Rivas said there is a little store and then there are 3 houses and then there is the stone house on Weston. Right behind the 3 houses connecting to the store, there’s an alley there and it goes right behind the 3 houses. That’s the alley I’m referring to.
Mr. Sieben said the alleys aren’t being touched.
Ms. Rivas said how is that going to connect to the park? Right behind that alley is where you are putting the park, correct?
Mr. Sieben said you are referring to the alley behind South Avenue, correct?
Ms. Rivas said this is 4th? This is Weston, so this is the third house and the middle one is where I’m at and directly behind these 3 is an alley and they drive from the store entrance all the way back here because a lot of them park behind their houses there. That’s what I was referring to.
Mr. Poulakidas said that’s our property. Unfortunately, if it’s what they are using as a quasi-alley right now, that’s technically our property and that would be deeded to the Park District for a park. I guess I would imagine that over the years the neighborhood has been using that in different ways to get through, but that’s part of the overall parcels and what was anticipated to be donated to the Park District for their park.
Mr. Hull said how is it currently maintained? Does the city currently maintain that property?
Mr. Poulakidas said no. From my knowledge, the city only maintains the alley. We have been and are maintaining all of the property now.
Mr. Hull said are there garages on the alley there?
Mr. Poulakidas said no. Their access is from their driveway off of 4th to the property. In essence, their property would back up to the park.
Ms. Rivas said actually there is one garage at the edge of that alley in between the store and when you start down the alley. That is 457 S. 4th I think, which is my neighbor. Right here is her garage. This is my fence and my garage goes here, but this would be her garage and it comes off if here, so this would all be park here?
Mr. Poulakidas said correct. The garage she is referring to leads to the alleyway that’s there currently, not going to our property. She would have access. This access for this alley is not changing at all.
Ms. Rivas said okay, what about the one behind here?
Mr. Poulakidas said what she is referring to would be the back of the properties that are facing 4th Street that would be now the park. This would all be park.
Ms. Rivas said it would all be park. And what’s to keep kids from dealing with our fence and our garages?
Mr. Poulakidas said again, we can bring that issue up with the Fox Valley Park District, but we also intend on maintaining 24 hour security. The park has its hours of when this can be opened and closed. I would hope that that would eliminate any issues late at night.
Ms. Rivas said and how are you going to stop them from being in the park? Is it going to be fenced in?
Mr. Poulakidas said I apologize. I don’t have those details from the Park District. I would believe that since it is a community park it would not be fenced in.
Ms. Rivas said okay, but I have to maintain my fence.
Mr. Poulakidas said correct.
Chairman Pilmer said as far as the fence, that’s part of your property and you have to maintain it. The park has to maintain their property and provide security whether it be after hours or during hours of operation. That property will be deeded to the Park District. Right now it is part of the parcel.
Ms. Rivas said it is going to go right up to my fence?
Chairman Pilmer said well it would go right up to the property line. The property line today of the property goes right up to your fence, so that portion will be deeded to the Park District. It will be green space instead of concrete.
Ms. Rivas said okay, thank you.
The public input portion of the public hearing was closed.
Mrs. Morgan said for the Special Use Planned Development staff would recommend approval of the Ordinance establishing a Special Use Planned Development, approving the Avalon Heights Plan Description and amending Ordinance Number 3100, being the Aurora Zoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map attached thereto, to an underlying zoning of R-5(S) Multiple Family Dwelling District, O(S) Office District, and P(S) Park and Recreation District with a Special Use Planned Development for the property located along Weston Avenue and Seminary Avenue between S. Lincoln Avenue and S. 4th Street.
MOTION OF APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Mr. Cameron
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Hull
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Duncan, Mr. Gonzales, Mrs. Head, Mr. Hull, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, 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?
Mr. Chambers said yes and those 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 yes 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?
Mr. Cameron said it is typically not a high traffic use for the site, but it has been vacant for a number of years and it looks as though in general the accesses are similar to what was there before so there should be no problem.
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 either in place or will be provided.
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?
Chairman Pilmer said I might add that based on the testimony we heard tonight that I believe the design is less intense than the existing use so it should help to decrease congestion on the public streets.
7a. Is the rezoning a consistent extension of the existing land uses, existing zoning classifications, and essential character of the general area?
Mr. Cameron said it seems to be an improvement of the vacant facility that’s been there for some time and has deteriorated and it is being renovated in the basis of the program that was set up some years ago by the city.
7b. Will the rezoning permit uses which are more suitable than uses permitted under the existing zoning classification?
Chairman Pilmer said I would state that given the shift in the zoning we are accommodating the office use in accordance with the school along with a former parking lot that will be rezoned Park and Recreation, which should be an improvement in that area.
9a. Will the special use not preclude the normal and orderly development of improvement of surrounding properties due to the saturation or concentration of similar uses in the general area?
Mrs. Head said there is no saturation in that area.
9b. Is the special use in all other respects in conformance to the applicable regulations in 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?
Mr. Chambers said yes it is.
Mrs. Morgan said this will next be heard at the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee on Wednesday, November 13, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.
19-0908 A Resolution approving a Preliminary Plat for Avalon Heights Subdivision located along Weston Avenue and Seminary Avenue between S. Lincoln Avenue and S. 4th Street (Fox Valley Developers, LLC – 19-0908 / AU27/1-19.063-SU/PD/Ppn/Psd – JM – Ward)
Mrs. Morgan said staff would recommend approval of a Resolution approving a Preliminary Plat for Avalon Heights Subdivision located along Weston Avenue and Seminary Avenue between S. Lincoln Avenue and S. 4th Street.
MOTION OF APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Mrs. Anderson
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Owusu-Safo
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Duncan, Mr. Gonzales, Mrs. Head, Mr. Hull, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Reynolds, Ms. Tidwell
NAYS: None
Mrs. Morgan said this will next be heard at the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee on Wednesday, November 13, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.
19-0909 A Resolution approving a Preliminary Plan for Avalon Heights Subdivision located along Weston Avenue and Seminary Avenue between S. Lincoln Avenue and S. 4th Street (Fox Valley Developers, LLC – 19-0997 / AU27/1-19.063-SU/PD/Ppn/Psd – JM – Ward)
Mrs. Morgan said staff would recommend conditional approval of the Resolution approving a Preliminary Plan for Avalon Heights Subdivision located along Weston Avenue and Seminary Avenue between S. Lincoln Avenue and 4th Street with the following condition:
1. That all the comments of the Engineering Division be addressed prior to approval of Final Engineering.
MOTION OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Mr. Chambers
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Head
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Duncan, Mr. Gonzales, Mrs. Head, Mr. Hull, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Reynolds, Ms. Tidwell
NAYS: None
Mrs. Morgan said this will next be heard at the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee on Wednesday, November 13, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.
19-0958 A Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee Resolution
Approving a Revision to the Final Plat for Lot 7 and Lot 8 of Fermi Corporate Park, Phase II, Located at 1611 and 1621 Emily Lane, Establishing Lot 1 of the Gripple Subdivision (Gripple Inc. - 19-0958 / AU01/2-18.231-Fsd/Fpn/R - SB - Ward 1)
A motion was made by Mr. Hull, seconded by Ms. Tidwell, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/13/2019. The motion carried.
19-0959 A Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee Resolution
Approving a Final Plan Revision to Gripple Subdivision, Lot 1, located at 1611 and 1621 Emily Lane, for a Business and Professional, Office (2400) Use and a Warehouse, Distribution and Storage Services (3300) Use (Gripple Inc. - 19-0959 / AU01/2-18.231-Fsd/Fpn/R - SB - Ward 1)
A motion was made by Mrs. Duncan, seconded by Mrs. Anderson, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/13/2019. The motion carried.
19-0958 A Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee Resolution approving a Revision to the Final Plat for Lot 7 and Lot 8 of Fermi Corporate Park, Phase II, located at 1611 and 1621 Emily Lane, establishing Lot 1 of the Gripple Subdivision (Gripple Inc. – 19-0958 / AU01/2-18.231-Fsd/Fpn/R – SB – Ward 1)
Mr. Broadwell said this is the Final Plat and Plan for the Gripple business, which is at 1611 and 1621 Emily Lane. The background here is that Gripple is at the property with the address of 1611 Emily Lane. They have been operating there for a number of years. Right now they are in a building that is approximately 15,300 square feet. With the Final Plat, they are expanding their building onto 1621 Emily Lane, which is the 1.4 acre vacant lot to the east. So the Final Plat is consolidating these 2 lots and then the Final Plan is essentially for them to expand the existing building by approximately 23,200 square feet to be a building that will be approximately 38,600 square feet so that they can continue to operate here in Aurora. Other than that, you can see on the Final Plan there will be 87 parking spaces. The building at its highest point will be 29 feet and the addition will be made from precast concrete, which will be consistent with the existing building’s material and style. We do have the Petitioner here.
My name is Jonathon Palmersten. My current address is 7782 Janero Avenue S in College Grove, Minnesota. Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to speak. I wanted to give you just a brief overview of who Gripple is. We have a company that is experiencing our 30th anniversary. We manufacture a proprietary and patented product that we sell into the MEP services market for commercial construction. We also sell into the agricultural market all throughout the world. We also have a civil engineering product that we sell for levy work similar to what you see down in New Orleans. Gripple was started 30 years ago. Our founder developed this little widget and this little widget has allowed us to grow as a company. We are a little bit different than a lot of other companies out there in that we are 100% employee owned. We are privately held. All of our employees are also owners. We moved to Aurora in 2008 occupying our current building. Throughout that time we have grown substantially through automation. We have allowed our employees to have good paying jobs with incredible benefits. We have happy people and they are well taken care of. We need a bigger building for us to be able to grow any further. What we plan on doing is being able to bring in more automation. That will help our employees out because we won’t have to split shifts so it will allow them more time with their families and allow us to grow even more. We’d like to stay in Aurora. We like it here. We need to build a larger building and this is where we are going to put down our US Corporate Headquarters. So we ask for your approval on this plan. Thank you very much.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said I have a question. Just generally looking at the site plan, I didn’t see how stormwater was being addressed.
I’m John Tebrugge with Tebrugge Engineering, 410 E. Church Street, Sandwich, Illinois. The detention facility is located directly south of the building. That is an existing pond that is there. We will be directing all of our drainage with new storm sewer into the pond.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said so it was originally sized for potential development of the other lots?
Mr. Tebrugge said yes. All the lots in this park were sized to allow for up to 80% impervious area on each of the lots and all drain into the pond.
Mr. Broadwell said there is a condition here on the Final Plat and Plan similar to what we’ve seen otherwise tonight. Just as a little bit of background, the city’s Engineering Department is working with the Petitioner to review the engineering drawings. They are working through that so it is just kind of our standard engineering condition. Staff would recommend conditional approval of the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee Resolution approving a Revision to the Final Plat for Lot 7 and Lot 8 of Fermi Corporate Park, Phase II, located at 1611 and 1621 Emily Lane establishing Lot 1 of the Gripple Subdivision with the following condition:
1. That all of the review comments per the Engineering Department be addressed prior to approval of the Final Engineering plans.
MOTION OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Mr. Hull
MOTION SECONDED BY: Ms. Tidwell
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Duncan, Mr. Gonzales, Mrs. Head, Mr. Hull, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Reynolds, Ms. Tidwell
NAYS: None
Mr. Broadwell said this will next be heard at the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee on Wednesday, November 13, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.
19-0959 A Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee Resolution approving a Final Plan Revision to Gripple Subdivision, Lot 1, located at 1611 and 1621 Emily Lane, for a Business and Professional, Office (2400) Use and a Warehouse, Distribution and Storage Services (3300) Use (Gripple Inc. – 19-0959 / AU01/2-18.231-Fsd/Fpn/R – SB – Ward 1
Mr. Broadwell said staff would recommend conditional approval of the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee Resolution approving a Final Plan Revision to Gripple Subdivision, Lot 1, located at 1611 and 1621 Emily Lane for a Business and Professional, Office Use and a Warehouse, Distribution and Storage Services Use with the following condition:
1. That all of the review comments per the Engineering Department be addressed prior to approval of the Final Engineering Plans.
MOTION OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Mrs. Duncan
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Anderson
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Duncan, Mr. Gonzales, Mrs. Head, Mr. Hull, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Reynolds, Ms. Tidwell
NAYS: None
Mr. Broadwell said this will next be heard at the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee on Wednesday, November 13, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.
19-0960 A Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee Resolution Approving a Revision to the Final Plan on Lot 2 of Oakhurst Commons Resubdivision, located at 2889 East New York Street for a Restaurant with a Drive-through Facility (2530) Use (Tri City Foods of Illinois Inc. - 19-0960 / NA20/3-19.070-Fpn/R - SB - Ward 8)
Mr. Broadwell said this is for the existing Burger King at this address, 2889 E. New York Street. Essentially what’s going on is that they are doing a Final Plan Revision. They are adding a second drive through lane with an ordering board to the existing site. I don’t believe there are any changes to the footprint of the building. Other than that, they are updating the handicap accessibility spaces and then also slightly expanding the existing landscaped island along their southern property line.
I’m Tracey Willie, 1191 Clearwater Drive in Yorkville, out of Warren Johnson Architects in Palatine. Anything to add? Not really. He summed it up. We are also updating the exterior finishes as well to the building. That was on the package as well. Everything else was pretty much what he said.
Mr. Cameron said is the primary change adding the second order lane?
Ms. Willie said correct. Burger King Corporate on any remodels that we do from here on out, if there is room on the land, they would like the second drive through lane.
Mr. Broadwell said staff would recommend approval of the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee Resolution approving a Revision to the Final Plan on Lot 2 of Oakhurst Commons Resubdivision located at 2889 E. New York Street for a Restaurant with a Drive-through Facility Use.
MOTION OF APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Mr. Chambers
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Duncan
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Duncan, Mr. Gonzales, Mrs. Head, Mr. Hull, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Reynolds, Ms. Tidwell
NAYS: None
Mr. Broadwell said this will next be heard at the Building, Zoning and Economic Development Committee on Wednesday, November 13, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.
A motion was made by Mr. Chambers, seconded by Mrs. Duncan, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/13/2019. The motion carried.
PENDING
COMMITTEE REPORTS
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mr. Sieben said the next meeting will be in 2 weeks on November 20th.
ADJOURNMENT
Ms. Tidwell made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mrs. Head seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Chairman Pilmer adjourned the meeting at 8:23 p.m.
https://www.aurora-il.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_11062019-2072
Alerts Sign-up