Plan Commission

PLAN COMMISSION AGENDA Monday, April 16, 2018 7:00 PM Regular Meeting _________________________________________________________________ I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. January 17, 2018 Regular Meeting Minutes B. March 19, 2018 Regular Meeting Minutes III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case 2017-34 Greenspace Ordinance Amendment IV. CONCEPTUAL WORKSHOP A. Case 2018-10 Hillsboro Senior Living Phoenix Real Estate Services LLC / TWM PUD – Preliminary Concept B. Case 2018-11 Edwardsville Town Center Edwardsville Town Center LLC / TWM PUD – Preliminary Concept V. OLD BUSINESS VI. NEW BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT 118 Hillsboro Avenue P.O. Box 407 Edwardsville, Illinois 62025-0407 Tel 618-692-7535 Fax 618-692-7505  1 PLAN COMMISSION January 17, 2018 7:00 PM MINUTES Approved:____________________ I. ROLL CALL: Present Absent V. Armouti, Chairman M. Brandmeyer G. Coffey W. Catalano D. Gerber D. Hummel J. McDole P. Pitts J. Mullane, Vice Chairman B. Powell M. Pierceall M. Rabe B. Schlueter W. Williams, Staff R. Zwijack, Staff C. Porter, Staff L. Schneck, Staff E. Gowin, 22 Gateway Commerce Center Dr, Edwardsville J. Mundy, 22 Gateway Commerce Center Dr, Edwardsville J. Venvertloh, 600 Country Club View, Suite 1, Edwardsville A. & A. Ohms, 459 Tamarach Drive, Edwardsville II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. One change to the minutes was pointed out on page 10, 4th paragraph from the bottom which should read, “Coffey stated the fees mentioned are “not” mandatory.” Minutes of the regular meeting for the November 20, 2017 meeting are hereby approved with the change noted. MOTION: Mullane. SECONDED: Gerber. All Ayes. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case 2018-02: 157 Center Adam Ohms PUD Amendment Cheryl Porter gave staff’s report on the proposed amendment. The Planned Unit Development is located a distance of 691 feet South of the Southwest corner of the intersection of Center Grove Road and South State Route Illinois 157 on the west side of South State Route Illinois 157. The PUD site contains seven (7) buildings addressed as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 157 Center and more specifically known as PIDs, 14-2-15-22-00-000-017, 14-2-15-22- 00-000-018, 14-2-15-22-09-102-001, 14-2-15-22-09-102-002, 14-2-15-22-09-102-003, 14-2-15- 22-09-102-004, 14-2-15-22-09-102-004, 14-2-15-22-09-102-005, 14-2-15-22-09-102-006, 14-2- 15-22-09-102-007. The property is zoned B-2 Commercial/Business district with a PUD overlay known as the 157 Center PUD from December 1996. The subject tract is fully developed and there are limited trees and landscaping associated with this 1996 PUD.  2 The City of Edwardsville provides sanitary sewer, water and fire protection to the subject tract. Electric and gas utilities are provided by Ameren Illinois. These were installed as part of the 1996 PUD. The subject tract is within the “Commercial” District on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed PUD is consistent with the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The subject property is generally flat in character. Site is accessible via a full entrance on South State Route Illinois 157. There are no public sidewalks in place along the portion of South State Route IL 157 that is adjacent to this PUD. Sidewalks were not required or installed along IL 157 when the 1996 PUD was approved. Porter displayed the uses allowed for this PUD which were listed as Standard Industrial Codes. The 157 PUD will remain unchanged except for the possible addition of one additional allowable use within the Planned Unit Development. The requested amendment would include the Standard Industrial Code 0742 for Veterinary Services for Animal Specialties. The addition of this SIC code would allow for the establishment of a veterinary practice in the PUD. The existing terms of the PUD approved December of 1996 will remain in effect. Dr. Ohms, 459 Tamarach Drive, present to discuss his petition. Dr. Ohms stated the facility will be used primarily for veterinary services for dogs and cats. The only outdoor use will be for the dogs to relive themselves. There will not be any outdoor housing of animals. It was his understanding that there were two codes: one for large animals and one for small animals. The code used will be for the small animals. There will be no kennels involved. Porter stated staff recommends approval of the petition for veterinary services to be added to the PUD amendment. No one to speak in favor of the petition. No one present to speak against the petition. The Land Use Committee also recommended to approve the PUD amendment as requested. MOTION: Pierceall. Motion to approve. SECONDED: Rabe. VOICE ROLL CALL: 8 Ayes, 0 Nays, 0 Abstains. B. Case 2018-01 Theatre View Commons Developer: Contegra Engineer: TWM PUD – Development Plan Cheryl Porter gave staff’s report regarding the Development Plan for Theatre View Commons PUD. The applicant is Contegra Construction which is the contract purchaser/developer. The subject PUD property totals 5.67 acres and is comprised of the majority of the Common Area that was initially platted in the Theater View Commercial Park. The site is West of Plum Street and North of Center Grove Road. (part of PID 14-2-15-23-00-000-020). The property is zoned B02 Commercial Business District. The 2010 Comprehensive Plan shows this tract as “Commercial” district. The subject site is generally flat in character with a small wetland near Plum Street. The property is wooded and generally contains grassy vegetation that is minimally mowed or maintained. The City of Edwardsville provides sanitary sewer, water and fire protection to the subject tract. Electric and Natural gas utilities will be provided by Ameren Illinois. All utilities will be further extended throughout the PUD as necessary for development. Access will be from two existing cross access easements within the Theater View Commercial Park and one additional entrance will be provided from Plum Street. Sidewalks were installed on the site as it  3 was developed within the Theater View Commercial Park and more recently a shared use sidewalk connection to the MCT trail was completed by First to the Finish. Staff Discussion 1. Planned Unit Development: Theater View Commons will contain 3 lots and be a commercial use Planned Unit Development that will feature office buildings and retail space. There are a total of four (4) buildings planned for the PUD. 2. Access connections: The development will be accessed through the existing entrance from Center Grove Road and Plum Street. One additional entrance will be provided from Plum Street for the development. There has been a provision made to provide access to the adjacent undeveloped parcel west of this PUD. The site has an existing link to the MCT Trail system. Bicycle parking should be included in the development to compliment the trail accessibility from the subject site. The development has included provisions for pedestrian circulation within the development. The City received a traffic study on October 10th for the mentioned project. This study was for the construction of a one story 22,400 sq. ft. retail building and a 3 story 27,600 sq. ft. office building. The submitted traffic study met warrants for installing a separate southbound right-turn lane and a separate northbound left-turn lane. Upon receiving the PUD Development plan, it was noted that the proposed plan did not match the traffic study. The developers’ traffic engineer was notified that they would have to resubmit a traffic study that matches the development plan. Staff has not received a revised traffic study as of December 20, 2017. The outcome of this study may impact the access to the PUD and adjacent Right-of-way needs for IL Route 159-Plum Street. Ryan Zwijack, City Engineer, stated staff received a revised traffic study and feels overall the traffic study matches the development. The study does warrant the installation of a northbound left-turn lane and also a southbound right-turn lane. These lanes are on a state route so IDOT will need final approval for the installation of those turn lanes. Zwijack explained how the traffic study is conducted and how it is determined for peak times. There is an AM peak time and PM peak time which would be work times. There is also a Saturday Mid-Day peak time for this specific area. The study evaluates at all those peak times. 3. Greenspace: This requirement has been satisfied at the time the Theater View Commercial Park Subdivision was plated. The Subdivision provided 20,938 (0.48 acres) of passive green space at the time it was developed. Members present discussed the green strip which was dedicated as greenspace. This land is recorded to The Bank of Edwardsville as the trustee. This area is outside of the PUD but satisfied the greenspace requirement for the entire Theatre View subdivision. It was asked why that strip had a different owner than the PUD. Justin Venvertloh, TWM, present to respond to the question. When the original subdivision as developed, there were two separate common areas on the plat. One of the areas is the lot in question. It is outside of the PUD but still within the original overall development. The passive greenspace is dedicated to the association which will maintain that area. The covenants and restrictions will be recorded to reflect the maintenance of the greenspace area. 4. Landscape: A Landscape plan will be required at the time of submission for building permits for each of the lots. Landscaping shall be required to meet or exceed the minimum landscape standards required by ordinance and shall include the landscape screening planting along the western property line to screen the adjacent site.  4 5. Setbacks: Lot 5 and Lot 6 will require minimal setback variances as noted below. Both of the requested setback variances are internal to the site and will not affect adjacent properties or property owners. The building on Lot 4 will maintain the required setbacks for the closest points in all directions. The buildings on Lot 5 will maintain the required setbacks for the closest points in all directions except the north side which is adjacent to PUD Common-1. The required setback is 25 feet but the provided setback will be 22.81 feet. The buildings on Lot 6 will maintain the required setbacks for the closest points in all directions except the rear which will be 21.25 feet in lieu of the required 25 feet. 6. Parking: Provided Parking: Proposed Ord. PS per Ord. Use Total Provided Sq. Ft. Requirement Requirement Lot 4 – Office 7,819 1 space/200 sf 39 ps Lot 5 – Multi- 21,886 6 spaces/1,000 sf 132 ps Tenant Retail 9.200 retail r-6 spaces/1,000 Lot 6- Retail/or or 18,400 sf or 1 space/200 92 ps office office sf Total parking 227 or 263 ps 216 Difference 11 or 47 The difference between the ordinance requirement totals range and the provided parking is 11 or 47 parking spaces. Internal Pedestrian Access has been addressed by the developer since the conceptual workshop with the addition of pedestrian walkways that connect the building sites within the PUD. 7. Drive thru-facility: Only one drive-through will be permitted for this site. 8. Utility Extension: The eight (8) inch water main will be extended to the West through the PUD development. 9. Trash Enclosures: Two (2) Trash enclosures have been shown and will be required to adhere to the City’s screening requirements. 10. Exterior Lighting: Will be a mix of street lighting provided within the parking lot and building lighting on each individual building. The proposed parking lot light poles shall be a maximum height of 20-foot installed on a 3-foot concrete base for a total height of 23 feet. The proposed lighting will adhere to the ordinance of zero spillover at the property lines. All building mounted lighting to be installed so light is directed downward to eliminate glare from beyond the property lines and should be included in the photometric calculations. 11. Phasing/Completion: The PUD site work will be constructed in three phases. Phase 1 will consist of the development of Lot 5 which will include approximately 22,000 sq. ft. of retail and restaurant space within 2 buildings. It is anticipated this phase will break ground in Spring of 2018 with a projected completion of Fall 2018. Phase 2 will be the development of Lot 6 for a planned office or retail building located in the southeast corner of the development. It is anticipated this phase will break ground in 2019.  5 Phase 3 will complete the development and will be the completion of Lot 4. It is anticipated this phase will break ground in 2020. Greg Coffey stated there are two trash receptacles within the development. It looks like one of the receptacles is placed in public access. Can it be moved further south off of the public access area? Justin Venvertloh stated they will move it back as far as possible. They tried to split up the two locations so one can service the building to the North and the other one to service the building to the South. There is a proposed stacking lane to the back of the building so there is not a real good location to put the dumpster behind the building. This was the next logical place to place it. They will look into a better option for this dumpster. Board members discussed the proposed drive-through on the plans. It was asked if there was access from the First to the Finish site to the proposed development. Venvertloh stated there would not be access because of the difference of grade. There is about an 8-foot difference in elevation from Plum Street to the proposed development. The sidewalks will need to be reconstruction to accommodate the turn lane installation. Mark Rabe asked if the property to the North would have any environment impact on this development. It looks like they used that property as a dumping area. Venvertloh stated Phase 1 is currently having an environmental survey done. The owners of the property to the North have made efforts to clean up their site. Mike Pierceall stated after looking at staff’s report, the parking may be from 5 percent all the way to 20 percent under the parking requirements. John McDole stated this was mentioned at Land Use Committee meeting. The developers stated there would be one type of restaurant which will be a morning only type of restaurant within the development. This could eliminate some of the parking concerns. Beth Schlueter added that is assuming nothing ever changes on the site. Mike Pierceall stated he could understand 5 percent but 20 percent variance is a lot. He suggested adding some parking to the West to meet the requirements. Justin Venvertloh stated not all of the buildings have the tenants set in stone. The uses could change which could meet parking requirements. Cheryl Porter stated the Public Works Director could approve a variance for parking up to 10 percent. The PUD can be approved without a variance. At the Land Use meeting, a different site plan was submitted. At the last minute a new site plan was submitted with the idea that Lot 6 would become either retail or an office. That meant staff had to go back and refigure the calculations for parking. The numbers are different at tonight’s meeting from the Land Use Committee meeting. These numbers are now correct. Justin Venvertloh stated the traffic study does not allow for a building of 9,200 square feet for retail. There would be too much traffic for that size building. That building will be reduced to 3,000 to 6,000 square foot for retail. It is in the interest of the developer to have enough parking. If there is not enough parking provided, the tenants will not stay. They intend to get a cross-parking agreement with the entire development including First to the Finish and Planet Fitness. The site plan submitted will not change and there will be no mixed use building on Lot 6. It will be either retail or office space but not a mixed use. Veronica Armouti asked staff if the motion could be made contingent on the accommodation for the required parking. Porter stated there has never been an approval for a PUD based on contingencies. She explained that parking would only be an issue if the building becomes office space. Once the building has been built, no one knows who the future tenants will be.  6 Ryan Zwijack stated the development proposed will have a wide mix of uses. Offices will have set times unlike the other uses proposed. The times will be offset for other uses which will be beneficial for the development. He thinks the development will accommodate the parking proposed. Staff supports the parking variance. Cheryl Porter also mentioned the vacant ground to the North which may get development in the future. John Mullane stated the developer will know if the development does not have enough parking by the time they get to Phase 3 of the development which includes the restaurant. Beth Schlueter stated she was concerned with approving a development knowing there will not be enough parking. Veronica Armouti stated the tenants will make sure their business will have enough parking otherwise they will not lease the space. As mentioned, there is also the vacant ground to the North that may get developed in the future which may have cross-access. No one present to speak in favor of the proposed development. No one present to speak against the proposed development. MOTION: McDole. Motion to vote for approval. SECONDED: Pierceall. VOICE ROLL CALL: 6 Ayes, 1 Nay, 1 Abstain. IV. LAND USE CASE A. Case 2018-03 Reserve Developer: Richland Residential Engineer: TWM PUD –Final Site Plan Cheryl Porter gave staff’s report for the Final Site Plan for the Reserve PUD. The applicant is New Poag Associates LLC. The property is located on the West side of New Poag Road, directly adjacent and North of the Enclave West PUD (now known as “Axis Edwardsville” (PIN 14-1-15-08-00-000-007). The property is 15.22 acres and zoned R-2 Multiple Family Residence District. The PUD contains 162 dwelling units, comprised of a mix of 2, 3 and 4 bedroom units for a total of 486 bedrooms. The buildings will contain (18 dwelling units per building, 9 residential buildings overall). Overall density will be 10.64 dwelling units per acre. Bedrooms per acre will be 31.93. The PUD has one primary entrance to the subject tract from New Poag Road. A 10-foot wide multi-use sidewalk for bicycles and pedestrians will be provided just south of the entrance to the property, running parallel to and leading south along the New Poag Road right- of-way to the traffic signal and pedestrian crossing across New Poag Road. The applicants will provide 8-foot wide sidewalks around the perimeter of the entire parking area and automobile lanes. In addition, 5-foot wide sidewalks interior to the site connecting the “quad” areas are provided. The 8-foot wide sidewalks, when signed appropriately as a “jogging/walking path”, will serve toward meeting the required 12% Active Greenspace for this PUD. The topography is generally flat and gently rolling in character. The property is agricultural with some tree cover. The City of Edwardsville will provide sanitary sewer, water and police/fire protection to the subject tract. Electric and gas utilities are provided by Ameren Illinois. The 2010 Comprehensive Plan shows this tract as being within the “Neighborhood” area of the Plan. This designation is consistent with the residential nature of the proposed PUD.  7 Staff Discussion: 1. Planned Unit Development: Reserve is a residential student housing planned unit development containing 9 residential buildings in addition to a clubhouse and bathhouse. 2. Access connections: The PUD has one primary entrance to the subject tract from New Poag Road. An emergency ingress/egress has been provided along the south property line and will be paved with the development improvements providing an appropriate surface for emergency vehicle use. Internally, all roads will be privately owned and maintained within the PUD. A cross-access easement near the southeast corner of the PUD will allow the subject tract to connect to the adjoining B-2 Commercial/ Business zoning district to the South. This will enable future pedestrian and automobile traffic to access the B-2 zoned land without having to access New Poag Road first. Additionally, this traffic will be able to use the traffic signal at Northwest University Drive. 3. Greenspace: The multi-family zoning designation requires a 20 percent greenspace dedication consisting of 8 percent active and 12 percent passive green space. The developer is providing a pool, gathering area, gardens, area for yard games, an eight-foot shared use sidewalk and courtyard that satisfy the 1.83 acre active greenspace requirement. Passive greenspace, 2.57 acres, has been provided along the northern property boundary. (Required per Ordinance is 1.22 acres.) The total greenspace provided for this development exceeds the ordinance requirement of 20 percent. The total greenspace required for this development is 3.04 acres. They will be providing 4.40 acres. 4. Amenities: Features for the PUD will include a Clubhouse with a fitness facility that will include a yoga studio, tanning facility, computer lab, game room with pool table and outdoor bathrooms for the pool. 5. Landscape: The PUD is required to adhere to Section 1228 Landscaping and Screening of the ordinance. Landscaping shall be required to meet or exceed the minimum landscape standards required by ordinance. 6. Setbacks: Will be provided as follows: front yards will be 30 feet, side yards will meet the minimum of 20 feet between structures, and rear yards will be 30 feet. 7. Architectural Requirements: All 12 buildings will have pitched roofs. Note that the buildings will NOT include balconies, but will have an “open breezeway” design. Residential Buildings Clubhouse/Bathhouse Maintenance 30% brick/masonry 50% brick/masonry 100% vinyl 30% cement fiberboard 50% cement fiberboard Architectural Asphalt Shingles 40% vinyl Architectural Asphalt Shingles Architectural Asphalt Shingles 8. Parking: Parking provided will comply with City ordinance space requirements and consist of 537 parking spaces including 11 handicap parking spaces. 9. Trash Compactor: One (1) Trash compactor has been provided near the entrance to the development and shall comply with the City of Edwardsville screening requirements. 10. Staff/Security: There will be multiple staff members on site for day to day operations. Support staff will include a General Manager, Leasing Manager, Resident Manager, Maintenance, support staff and student assistants. A security company will be employed to monitor the site as needed at the discretion of the Property Manager.  8 Security cameras will be located throughout the facility, including breezeways on each floor of the buildings, clubhouse, pool, trash compactor and surrounding area. The security cameras will be monitored 24 hours a day. 11. Exterior Lighting: Will be a mix of street lighting provided within the parking lot and building lighting on each individual building. The proposed parking lot light poles shall be a maximum height of 20-foot installed on a 3-foot concrete base for a total height of 23 feet. The parking lot light fixtures shall be “shoe-box” style with downward facing lights. Exterior lighting for parking lots and building wall pack units will adhere to the ordinance of zero spillover at the property lines. All building mounted lighting to be installed so light is directed downward to eliminate glare from beyond the property lines and should be included in the photometric calculations. Because of the sensitive nature of the site location, best practices lighting techniques that further reduce glare/spillover as found at darksky.org or similar resources are strongly encouraged. 12. Fencing/Screening: A vinyl coated chain link fence has been provided along the western property line of the development. An eight (8) foot vinyl fence is provided along the northern property line and will start at the northwest corner of the property following the parking lot layout and continue to the eastern property line. The interior face of the fence shall have evergreens or other plantings placed at regular intervals to break up the fence profile. 13. Stormwater Detention: The property owner will be responsible for inspections and maintenance of the stormwater detention basins as required per the stormwater maintenance agreement. 14. Environmental and Conservation: The PUD site has no floodplains, wetlands or environmental concerns. An Eco CAT was submitted and consultation with Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) was required due to the proximity of the project to Bohm Woods Nature Preserve. The consultation resulted in a vegetative buffer strip along the northern side of the fence between the proposed fence and the existing tree line. The vegetative buffer strip will be native species from a list provided by IDNR. In addition, a conservation easement has been dedicated to IDNR. The conservation easement includes the buffer strip in addition to the existing tree line. The easement will be maintained by IDNR in perpetuity. 15. Signage: Signage provided for the development will comply with the ordinance requirements for placement and size. The sign will be place at minimum 13-foot from the property line and not exceed 8 feet in height and 40 square feet in area. 16. Phasing/Completion: The PUD will be constructed in two phases with a projected completion date of both phase of July 1, 2019. John Mullane asked what about the slight change in layout. Porter stated there has been an addition of a bath house because of a condition of the state requirements by the health department. McDole added the last residential building was too far from the pool which then required the facility to be added. John Mullane wanted to make sure the residents in the area had their questions resolved because of the large interest from the public at the last public meeting on this development. He understands there is no one present at this meeting but wanted to make sure. Porter stated those were addressed at the time of the Development Plan. The concerns were light spilling and the nature preserve and natural species that live next to this development.  9 Greg Coffey requested the detention be called out on the plat even though it is private. Venvertloh stated he could add it to the utility plan. Zwijack added the entire lot is addressed in the stormwater maintenance agreement. Mike Pierceall asked where the location of the trash compactor was. Venvertloh pointed to the area at the entrance of the development. Pierceall asked if there was any other location which would serve the development better. Venvertloh stated the developer has 30 other locations with the same layout and has not had a problem with trash. Pierceall asked if construction has begun. Justin Venvertloh stated the mass grading is complete. The sanitary sewer is complete but still needs to be tested. The storm sewer is about 50 percent complete. The civil work could be done within one month. Eric Going with Contegra Construction wanted to add if students or occupant leaves their trash lying out, they would be fined and added to their rent assessment. There will be constant patrol of the site. David Gerber asked if the emergency access would be a paved two lane road. Ryan Zwijack stated it would be paved but only the width of the driveway. The driveway will be paved up to the cross access easement. MOTION: Coffey. Move for approval. SECONDED: Mullane. VOICE ROLL CALL: 8 Ayes, 0 Nays, 0 Abstains. V. OLD BUSINESS None VI. NEW BUSINESS None VII. NEXT MEETING Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers, 118 Hillsboro Ave. VIII. ADJOURNMENT  1 PLAN COMMISSION March 19, 2018 7:00 PM MINUTES Approved:____________________ I. ROLL CALL: Present Absent V. Armouti, Chairman M. Brandmeyer W. Catalano G. Coffey D. Gerber (arrived late) J. McDole D. Hummel J. Mullane, Vice Chairman M. Pierceall B. Schlueter P. Pitts M. Rabe W. Williams, Staff E, Williams, Staff C. Porter, Staff L. Schneck, Staff J. Venvertloh, 600 Country Club View, Suite 1, Edwardsville B. Loman, 812 Timberlake, Edwardsville, IL 62025 II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes of the regular meeting for the January 17, 2018 meeting have been tabled for approval at the next meeting. One member was not present and would like to hold off on voting for approval. Without that vote, there are not enough members present for a quorum to vote. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case 2018-05: Timberlake Village Kamadulski, Crays, & Fischer / TWM PUD Amendment Cheryl Porter gave staff’s report on the proposed PUD amendment. The Planned Unit Development is a 4.48 acre parcel located at the northwest corner of South State Route Illinois 157 and Lewis Road containing 1411 Lewis Road (US Bank Site) PIDs 14-2-15-15-01-101-090 & 14-2-15-15-01-101-091. The existing zoning is B-2 Commercial Business District (Timberlake Village PUD approved July 5, 2016 by Resolution 105-07-2016 and amended by Resolution 205-12-17 – fka/JRG Planned Unit Development approved July 5, 2006 by Resolution 491-7-2006.). The subject tract is within the “Commercial” District on the 2010 Comp Plan. The proposed PUD is consistent with the 2010 Comp Plan. The topography is generally flat with some landscape berming as required by the 2006 PUD along the north and west property lines. The vegetation is mostly without trees except for landscaping that was installed as part of the 2006 PUD along the west and north property lines. The City of Edwardsville provides sanitary sewer, water and fire protection to the subject tract. Electric and gas utilities are provided by Ameren Illinois, installed as part of the 2006 PUD. Site is accessible via a full entrance on Lewis Road and a “right in/right out only” entrance off of IL 157. Per the 2006 PUD, no direct driveway access to the site or to individual lots is allowed off of Timberlake Drive. The 2016 PUD site plan also states that no driveway access is allowed  2 off Lewis Road or IL 157 for the existing US Bank Site (Lot 2). The site can also be accessed via a cross access easement to the adjacent Timber Lake Village Commercial Plaza. Background: The PUD was initially developed as the JRG PUD in 2006 under the 1996 PUD Ordinance that required all property within a PUD be held in single ownership or unified control. In 2016 the PUD was approved under the 2015 PUD Ordinance that allowed parcel divisions within a Planned Unit Development. The PUD Conditions remained the same as those approved in the 2006 JRG PUD after significant input was considered from the affected surrounding property owners. In December of 2017, a PUD Amendment was approved allowing the following changes:  A text amendment to PUD Conditions from the original JRG PUD changed the required parking setback of twenty feet (20’) along the northern property line adjacent to the eastern residential zoning, not covered by a cross parking/cross access easement, to five feet (5’); and  The division of the PUD into a third lot. Lot 3 contains 33,770 square feet. and is irregular shaped parcel measuring ±133’ x 272’ immediately North of Lot 243,212 square feet (US Bank site), the residual 118,051 square feet remained as Lot 1. The terms of the former JRG Ventures PUD approved July 5, 2006 by Resolution 491-7-2006 continue to apply to the Timberlake Village PUD. The PUD development will contain a minimum of four buildings up to a maximum of seven buildings for uses limited to retail, day care center, professional offices including medical offices, or a restaurant of up to 1,600 square feet The proposed Timberlake Village PUD Amendment is a near identical version of the 2006 JRG PUD and 2016 Timberlake Village PUD and 2017 Amendment. The requested 2018 PUD Amendment would allow the further division of Lot 1 to create Lot 1A and 1B. All the terms of the 2006 JRG PUD as referenced in the 2016 Timberlake Village Planned Unit Development and amended by Resolution 205-12-2017 will continue to apply. Review of PUD for Plan Commission: 1) Building Envelope locations: The 2017 Amendment showed a 6,840 square feet bldg. on Lot 3 and on Lot 1 Buildings 3 and 4 were reduced in size. Building 3 had previously been shown as 6,500 square feet, was reduced to 6, 000 square feet. Building 4 previously shown as 6,500 square feet was reduced to 5,850 square feet. As stipulated in the original PUD, the buildings will not exceed a total of 32,000 square feet. 2006 PUD 2016 PUD 2017 PUD Amendment 2018 PUD Amendment 3,274 sf US Bank 3,274 sf US Bank 3,274 sf US Bank 6,840 sf Bldg./Lot 3 6,840 sf Bldg./Lot 3 28, 276 sf remaining 21,886 sf remaining 21,886 sf remaining 32,000 sf allowed 32,000 sf allowed 32,000 sf allowed 32,000 sf allowed 2) Greenspace. The designated greenspace locations and overall percentage of greenspace provided in the PUD Amendment is consistent with the approved 2016 Timberlake Village PUD and the initial 2006 JRG PUD. 3) Trash Enclosures. All trash enclosures provided are required to comply with City ordinance. 4) Sidewalks. Sidewalks remain consistent with the 2016 PUD and 2017 PUD Amendment and exceed those required in the initial 2006 PUD.  The initial 2006 PUD did not require sidewalks along IL 157 due to the reconstruction of 157 occurring at the time. The 2016 PUD added sidewalks along IL 157 and pedestrian connections to the subject tract off Timberlake Drive that were not included  3 in the 2006 PUD.  The 2017 PUD amendment increased the width of the sidewalk along IL 157 to a ten foot (10’) shared use path to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian traffic.  During discussion of the 2017 PUD Amendment, the developer was requested to provide a sidewalk for pedestrian access through the development to IL Route 157. On the 2018 Amendment plat, the requested sidewalk has been provided south of Buildings 3 & 4 connecting to the sidewalk adjacent to Weber Drive and the internal drive within the PUD. 5) Landscape. Has remained consistent with the increased landscape required in the 2017 PUD amendment that added a continuation of the screening/landscape provided on Lot 2 for Lot 3 to screen the parking adjacent to IL 157 on Lot 3. 6) Building Spacing. The 2006/2016 PUD required a minimum spacing of 20 between buildings. The proposed buildings show on Lots 1A and 1B comply and remain consistent with 2017 PUD Amendment. 7) Parking Setbacks. The parking remains consistent with that shown in the 2017 PUD Amendment and has not changed. Discussion: Lot Creation/Addition. The stated intent by the applicant for this PUD Amendment is to allow for the division of Lot 1 into Lot 1A and 1B. Lots 1A and 1B would be allowed to come under separate ownership from the rest of the subject tract, just as occurred when Lot 2 was created for U.S. Bank and Lot 3 for Unger Eye Care. This is allowed by and consistent with the 2015 PUD ordinance. Even though the 4 lots associated with this PUD can be under separate ownership, all portions of the PUD will be subject to the 2006, 2016 PUD Resolution as amended by the 2017 PUD amendment and associated exhibits and the site plan. Justin Venvertloh with TWM present to answer any questions regarding the proposed PUD Amendment. Mike Pierceall asked about the divisions of Lot 1A and 1B which shows the property line going through the parking space. Will this area of parking be used jointly? Justin Venvertloh stated the intent is for cross parking agreement which will also include the development to the North. Mark Rabe asked if the separating lot lines in the parking lot would tort liability since it would have separate owners. Justin Venvertloh stated the parking lot will be shared for the entire development. Mark Rabe asked if the sidewalk would then be the same as the parking spaces within the development. Justin Venvertloh stated that sidewalk will be the responsibility of the lot owner of Lot 1B. Staff’s recommends approval of the proposed PUD Amendment. MOTION: Pitts. Move for the board to accept staff’s recommendation. SECONDED: Rabe. VOICE ROLL CALL: 7 Ayes, 0 Nays, 0 Abstains. No one to speak in favor of the petition. IV. LAND USE CASE None. V. OLD BUSINESS None.  4 VI. NEW BUSINESS None. VII. NEXT MEETING Monday, April 16, 2018 at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers, 118 Hillsboro Ave. VIII. ADJOURNMENT  1 ORDINANCE SUB-COMMITTEE EDWARDSVILLE PLAN COMMISSION March 12, 2018 6:00 PM PRESENT ABSENT M. Rabe, Vice Chair G, Coffey, Chair M. Brandmeyer P. Pitts D. Gerber B. Schlueter D. Hummel M. Pierceall V. Armouti, PC Chairman E. Williams, Staff R. Zwijack, Staff C. Porter, Staff L. Schneck, Staff B. Pfeiffer, Staff K. Grable, Staff Bruce Riedel, RLP Development Jeff Lantz, Lantz Homes A meeting of the Plan Commission's Ordinance Sub-Committee was held on Monday, March 12, 2018, and the following proposed ordinance amendment was discussed: A. An amendment to the Greenspace Ordinance. Cheryl Porter pointed out the areas which were changed by either herself or Katie Grable from the previous meeting. She also pointed out specific changes that were recently requested to be done such as industrial was to be changed to manufacturing, “or an amount as determined by resolution approved by City Council (bottom of page 2 in green), and payment will be due upon submission of the final plat. Cheryl Porter received an email from Mr. Coffey with a couple of changes he is suggesting since he is unable to attend this meeting. He would like to see language unified throughout the sub- sections in Section 5-17.2. Mr. Rabe asked if there have been any manufacturing subdivisions yet. Porter stated there has been nothing yet. There has been discussion of adding another residential zoning district. There should be language which either does not specifically call out the R-2 district or adding additional language so the ordinance doesn’t have to change again later. Discussion of multi-family uses above commercial uses, neighborhood districts, and the I-55 Corridor - how greenspace would be figured with the revisions of the ordinance. The Town Center district will be hard to figure greenspace. It was suggested to look at those developments as commercial for greenspace purposes. Cheryl Porter stated they just went through that with Whispering Heights. The 2 commercial lots were originally platted as part of the Enclave subdivision. The greenspace was originally calculated and met when platted. Now that there is multi-family above the commercial use, would it require more greenspace? It was mentioned that young children on the upper floors would not have an area to play. Most of the zoning designations in the I-55 Corridor are in line  2 with the City’s zoning except for the Town Center designation which is puzzling. Matt Brandmeyer stated it should be considered as a commercial district. Bob Pfeiffer explained the intent for the revision of Section 5-17.2(c) was for a development which was platted as commercial and later decides to have multi-family development but greenspace has been paid according to the commercial rate. Veronica Armouti suggested addition Town Center sub-section. Mark Rabe asked if she proposed a different percentage rate. She stated not necessarily. Rabe stated leaving it with the correct subsection percentage. Brandmeyer stated it is more of a dense district so he thinks 4 percent is more applicable. The open space would be more hard surface and not green space. David Gerber stated all the zoning districts will need to be called out within each sub-sections. Items discussed to be changed. 1. All of A, B, C, and D should use the same phraseology to describe the same thing rather than some subsections being very short and others not. 2. Incorporate the appropriate I-55 Corridor designations into the same percentage categories for where they go. 3. The extent to which the commercial use affects either a PUD target or as it is converted to residential should it change the nature of the greenspace. (The proposed ordinance shows it has been changed in green.) People who chose to live in a city center, they know to live with what they got. It would only apply to commercial plans which convert to some residential. Only with a PUD it would have a sliding scale but all PUDs are negotiable. Greg Coffey also suggested removing the wording “or amount determined by resolution approved by City Council” in Section 5-17.3(b). City Council can change the amount at any time by resolution and there is no need to state that. Bob Pfeiffer stated the reason that it was put in was so the ordinance didn’t have to be changed but the amount could be changed within the ordinance by resolution only. There was further discussion and they agreed to leave the green language in the subsection. David Gerber suggested the sentence reading, “this base amount may be adjusted annually by resolution determined by City Council.” Bruce Reidel, 106 Carrington Court, wanted to speak regarding the changes to the Greenspace Ordinance. He works for RLP Development and other corporations or LLCs who develop properties. He has sold lots for many years within subdivisions. Speaking on experience, most people do not want to buy lots right next to active greenspace within a subdivision. They are afraid of all the activity in their side or back yards to get to the greenspace areas. Now Hawthorne Hills put in a beautiful pathway throughout the development which is an attraction. The Homeowners Associations have trouble collecting their HOA dues which would maintain the active greenspace areas. It has been a struggle raising HOA dues from $100 a year to $150 a year for maintenance. It is proven that Edwardsville has only 29 new single family homes in 2016 and 2017 had 32 new single family homes. No one would predict 10 or 15 years ago that Edwardsville would be down and only averaging only 32 new homes. If the City is going to increase the greenspace fees then fees will have to be pulled off from somewhere else. Edwardsville is an undesirable place to live because of the costs. Everybody wants to live in Edwardsville but they have priced their selves out of the market. He also felt that active greenspace for commercial use could be a danger. Jeff Lantz, Lantz Homes, stated with commercial their only option would be to buyout the active greenspace. Eric Williams stated they have a choice of active or passive greenspace. The committee agreed to forward to Plan Commission with proposed changes. Amendment to Green Space Ordinance – V12 – 03-14-18 Section 5-17. - Provision of green space. 5-17.1 General green space requirements: (a) Proposed Except as provided otherwise in this Section 5-17 subdivisions and Planned Unit Developments (PUD) shall contain active and passive green space in perpetuity. Such green space shall be owned (either in fee simple or by perpetual easement), supervised, managed, and maintained by the developer, subdivision or PUD property owner’s or owner's association. The green space shall be shall be identified and specifically located on the subdivision plat or PUD site plan and be independent from any other land intended for any other use. The green space must be contiguous to a public access right of way; ingress/egress easements will not be permitted except in cases of approved PUDs. The green space shall consist of active and passive green space, whether developed for recreational uses or not, but shall not include water retention, water detention, or other stormwater management areas; however, ponds, lakes or natural wetlands that are part of the stormwater management system shall be considered as green space if they can be used for fishing, boating or other aquatic recreation. Active green space must be constructed in compliance with any and all applicable laws and regulations (including the Americans with Disabilities Act). Green space must be accessible to all lots via rights-of-way or easements to preclude having to cross private land. Creative uses of green space will be are encouraged. (b) By way of example, Active green space may include, but is not limited to the following: (1) Multi-use paths or walking trails: Multi-use paths or walking trails intended for the use of pedestrians, bicycles and other forms of self-propelled transportation. All trail or path construction shall be in conformance with any and all applicable laws and regulations, including those relating to thickness and width. Curbs at all intersections shall be depressed and the path or trail shall be ramped in accordance with applicable standards. Multi-use paths or trails that are part of or are connected to an existing public trail system, are part of an adopted Pedestrian / Bicycle Plan as adopted by Council, or connect directly to a developed school or university property shall be allowed as credit to meet the active green space requirement. (2) Outdoor swimming pools: Outdoor swimming pools and deck areas intended for the use of residents of a subdivision or PUD. (3) Official “fields of play”: Fields of play intended for the use of residents of a subdivision or PUD that meet the national recreational standards for that sport facility or use. For example, tennis courts which meet standard size and court dimensions and are marked accordingly. Areas with benches and shade within close proximity to play area may be credited toward the active green space requirement. (4) Playground areas for small children. Outdoor playground area in designated commons areas with amenities such as slides, swings, jungle gyms, climbing walls etc. with surfaces designed for low maintenance and soft landings in case of fall. Areas with benches and shade within close proximity to play area may be credited toward the active green space requirement. (5) General recreational areas. Open areas without trees or other obstructions intended for the use of residents of a subdivision or PUD which allow for a variety of recreational uses such as throwing a baseball/softball. These areas must be graded and placed in locations not prone to flooding or prolonged periods of standing water. They must be reasonably available for these intended purposes and topographically appropriate for the intended use. (c) Active green space areas shall not include areas reserved for non-active outdoor use such as picnic tables, pavilions, gazebos, grills/outdoor barbeque pits, and hammocks. These features may be placed in passive green space areas. Page 1 Amendment to Green Space Ordinance – V12 – 03-14-18 (d) Active green space areas shall not include indoor areas such as clubhouses, study rooms/centers, and computer terminal areas. (e) The subdivision's or PUD’s covenants and restrictions shall include language to the effect that, if the property owners fail to maintain the green space, the city has the authority to maintain the green space and impose a lien on each lot in the subdivision or PUD for its share of the maintenance costs. The developer shall have the duty to maintain the green space until such time as 70 percent of the lots have been sold or individual property owners control the association. However, the developer shall be responsible for construction details and construction quality of green space areas for a two-year period as provided in section 3.5, Maintenance of improvements, of this code. (f) As part of developer's site plan approval responsibilities, developers shall be responsible for the installation of improvements to the development for active and passive green space purposes including, but not limited to, finished grading and ground cover for all green spaces within their development. (g) In a phased subdivision or PUD the developer must provide the required green space for the subdivision or PUD in proportional amounts for each phase of the development. The amount of green space exceeding the requirements in a completed phase may be applied toward any future phase of the subdivision or PUD. 5-17.2 Minimum green space requirements: The amount of green space to be contained in subdivisions and PUDS shall be as follows: (a) Single-family residence district (R-1), single-family residence estate lot district (R-EL), Neighborhood Residential District, Rural Residential district and General Neighborhood district (when developed as single family) and all other zoning districts except as provided in subsection C below multiple-family dwelling district (R-2) – Ten percent (10%) of the total area of the subdivision or PUD, which shall consist of four percent (4%) of the total area as passive green space and six percent (6%) of the total area as active green space. (b) Multiple-family residence district (R-2) and General Neighborhood – Twenty percent (20%) of the total area of the subdivision or PUD, which shall consist of eight percent (8%) of the total area as passive green space and 12 twelve percent (12%) of the total area as active green space. (c) Central Business district (B-1), Commercial/Business district B-2, Mixed-use Business District (B-3), Mixed-use Commercial, Town Center and General Neighborhood (when developed as commercial) – Four percent (4%) of the total area of the subdivision or PUD, which call consist of either passive green space or active green space. However, if the commercial use develops as a mixed-use development with a residential component at a future date, payment of fees in lieu of active green space or provision of active green space proportional to the residential use is required. with multi-use development added later subject to additional fees. (c) All other districts —Four percent of the total area of the subdivision, which shall consist of passive green or active green space all of which shall be provided within the subdivision. (d) Manufacturing district (M-1) – Four percent (4%) of the total area of the subdivision or PUD, which shall consist of either passive green or active green space all of which shall be provided within the subdivision. 5-17.3 Compliance with green space requirements: In providing the required areas of green space within the subdivision or PUD, the required amount of passive green space must be provided within the boundaries of the proposed subdivision or PUD. The required amount of active green space may be provided in the following ways: (a) Construction of the active green space within the development; (b) A cash contribution in lieu of constructing active green space may be made by the developer to the park improvement fund. The amount to be paid to the fund shall be determined pursuant to Page 2 Amendment to Green Space Ordinance – V12 – 03-14-18 a formula established by the city, which formula multiplies is the product of the acreage amount of active green space required in the subdivision or PUD or development multiplied by $12,500.00 per acre; a base amount of $41,000 per acre. This base amount may increase annually by two percent (2%) on May 1 of each year. by an amount as determined by resolution approved by City Council. If a cash contribution is made in lieu of providing active green space, then the calculation of the cash contribution (being total paid, number of acres being bought out, and the applicable base amount per acre) shall be included on the final subdivision plat or the final PUD site plan, as applicable. If this option is utilized, the cash contribution amount due shall be paid at the time of the approved upon submission for approval of the final plat or land division that is consistent with utilization of the Illinois Plat Act exemption (See Section 1-4 of the Land Development Code) or, if applicable, upon submission for the approval of the final PUD site plan. By separate written agreement between the city and owner/developer in which the owner/developer agrees to pay the park improvement fund the sum of $500.00 per lot to be developed in a R-1 district or R-EL or $250.00 per dwelling unit in a R-2 district. However, if at least three percent of the required active green space in a R-1 district or R-EL district is provided in the subdivision, the payment of the sum of $300.00 per lot shall be paid; or if at least six percent of the required active green space in a R-2 district is provided in the subdivision, the sum of $150.00 per dwelling unit shall be paid. The remaining amount due shall be paid within one year of the date of the approval of the final plat. If either payment is not made, the city shall have the right to proceed against the bond provided in section 3-5, Maintenance of improvements. (c) In lieu of providing the active green space within a proposed subdivision, developer may, if found acceptable to the City, provide the required amount of green space at an alternate site which would meet the needs of the community. If an alternate “off -site” green space is allowed, said amount of acreage and exact location of said green space shall be noted on the final plat of the proposed subdivision and recorded as the acreage provided to conform to the green space requirement for the subdivision. (d) A combination of subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) above as approved by the city council. 5-17.4 Protection of green space: Green space shall be protected from development through platting, deed restrictions or restrictive covenants which will ensure its perpetual use as a green space as defined in the ordinance and which further provided that no changes in use may be made without the express written consent of the city. Page 3