Plan Commission Meeting

March 7, 2013 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING URBANA PLAN COMMISSION APPROVED DATE: March 7, 2013 TIME: 7:30 P.M. PLACE: Urbana City Building City Council Chambers 400 South Vine Street Urbana, IL 61801 MEMBERS PRESENT: Carey Hawkins-Ash, Andrew Fell, Tyler Fitch, Dannie Otto, Michael Pollock, Marilyn Upah-Bant MEMBERS ABSENT: Lew Hopkins, Bernadine Stake, Mary Tompkins STAFF PRESENT: Robert Myers, Planning Manager; Jeff Engstrom, Planner II OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Berns, Kathleen Holden, Vicki Mayes, Carol McKusick, L. Ramu Ramachandran, Deb Reardanz, Mike Rennor, Susan Taylor, Carl Webber, Ron Wilcox 1. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Pollock called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. The roll was called, and he declared that there was a quorum of the members present. 2. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA There were none. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Fitch moved that the Plan Commission approve the minutes of the February 7, 2013 regular meeting as presented. Mr. Ash seconded the motion. The minutes were then approved by unanimous voice vote. Mr. Fitch moved that the Plan Commission approve the minutes of the February 21, 2013 regular meeting as presented. Ms. Upah-Bant seconded the motion. The minutes were then approved by unanimous voice vote. 4. COMMUNICATIONS There were none. Page 1  March 7, 2013 5. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS Plan Case No. 2202-PUD-13 and Plan Case No. 2203-PUD-13: A request by Clark-Lindsey Village, Inc. for preliminary and final approval to construct a Residential Planned Unit Development to include 16 townhouses in four one-story buildings on the northeast portion of the subject property located at 101 West and 201 East Windsor Road. Robert Myers, Planning Manager, began his staff presentation for these two cases together by talking about Clark-Lindsey Village, Inc. He talked about the location of the proposed site and about the surrounding properties and existing land uses. He also discussed the zoning, which is R-3, Single and Two-Family Residential, and future land use designation of the subject property. He talked about the benefits of a continuing care retirement community, approval of previous PUD requests and site plan, and what Clark-Lindsey Village, Inc. is currently proposing to construct to expand their campus. He referred to a written communication that was received from David Wilson in opposition. He reviewed the development regulations for the R-3 Zoning District. He talked about the rationale behind City staff’s recommendation for approval. He stated that the applicants are available to answer questions from the Plan Commission. With no questions for City staff, Chair Pollock opened the public hearing and invited audience participation. Carl Webber, Attorney for Clark-Lindsey Village, Inc., introduced several people who would be presenting on behalf of the applicant. He stated that since the previous Plan Commission meeting Clark Lindsey Village, Inc. has been rated 5 stars out of the 5 star rating system by the U.S. News & World Report in the nursing home rankings. Mr. Webber stated that since the previous meeting, they have discussed alternative layouts for the future expansion of the road and decided that the proposed layout would best serve their needs. He stated that a representative from the Park District and a neighbor are present to speak about the proposed addition to the neighborhood. Vicki Mayes, Executive Director of Urbana Park District, spoke in support of the proposed PUD requests. She stated that Clark Lindsey Village, Inc. and the Urbana Park District have worked well together in sharing a parking lot. They have discussed how to landscape the proposed site to both blend with and compliment Meadowbrook Park and to make a seamless border. She talked about the part of Meadowbrook Park that cuts into the Clark Lindsey Village property. She explained that this small area was purchased with federal funds by the Urbana School District to provide an entryway to the school grounds. When the Park District purchased the school’s property, this small area of land came with it and it must remain in public ownership in perpetuity. They are working with Clark Lindsey to develop this area to be compatible with the park as well. Chair Pollock stated that Ms. Mayes submitted a written communication to City staff which was provided in the most recent packet. Mr. Fitch asked if the Urbana Park District had any specific ideas of how they would like Clark Lindsey Village, Inc. to landscape the border of their property so that it would blend in and compliment Meadowbrook Park. Ms. Mayes replied that the Park District wants to develop the pathway to the east of Clark Lindsey Village into prairie and savannah. Page 2  March 7, 2013 Deb Reardanz, President and CEO of Clark Lindsey Village, Inc., talked about their relationship to the Urbana Park District. She stated that it is very important to them because having Meadowbrook Park as a neighbor is a big asset to the residents of Clark Lindsey Village. With regards to their relationship to the City of Urbana, she commented that if Clark Lindsey Village looks good, then the City of Urbana looks good, which is why the proposed expansion is an important project. Clark Lindsey Village has hosted many community events, and their residents are very active in the Urbana community. Clark-Lindsey Village is also a large tax payer to the City of Urbana and the proposed expansion will be a significant impact to the real estate revenue. They are also an important partner to the University of Illinois by providing a student internship program and by allowing research to be conducted for the aging services field. She stated that the proposed project is critical to Clark Lindsey Village’s future. It will allow them to evolve to meet the changing needs of the residents and future residents. Mr. Fell asked about the construction phase timeline. Ms. Reardanz answered by saying that they intend to have Phase 1A and 1B constructed together. Construction is dependent upon the market’s response to sales. They will use Phase I to receive the feedback needed to decide what they want to build in Phases 2 and 3. Ramu Ramachandran, of Perkins Eastman, talked about his company. He designed the units to be constructed so that there would not be a wall of buildings facing the park. Clark Lindsey Village is concerned about its appearance from the view of Meadowbrook Park. They want to provide a natural and organic edge of landscaping to blend in with the park. He discussed elevations of the units. Mr. Otto questioned if Mr. Ramachandran felt that they could build enough units in the future phases to reach the goal of 80 units. Mr. Ramachandran answered that it will be a bit of a challenge. He stated that the sole purpose for setting a total amount of 80 proposed units is so City staff could see what the traffic impact would be. Construction of future phases depends on the market of the units constructed in Phase I. Clark Lindsey Village should keep their options open as to whether they build one-story units, duplexes, etc. in the future to be able to meet their needs. Tom Berns, Chairman of the Board for Clark Lindsey Village, talked about the arboretum facility at Clark Lindsey Village. Bob Chamberlain, retired from the University of Illinois, was one of the creators who envisioned what Clark Lindsey would look like. There is a variety of choices that they are trying to provide for residents – existing and future, which has not changed much from earlier designs. As Chairman of the Board and as a nearby neighbor, he believes the proposed expansion will blend in with and serve as an asset to the community. Ms. Upah-Bant asked if the proposed expansion is a surprise to neighboring properties. Is this why some of them are opposed to the expansion? Mr. Berns replied that it should not be a surprise to anyone. Clark Lindsey Village has never been shy about what they are and what they plan to be. The plans for future phases that were designed in the 1970s are not much different than the plans being proposed. With no further questions or comments from the audience, Chair Pollock opened the hearing up for Plan Commission discussion and/or motion(s). Page 3  March 7, 2013 Chair Pollock asked City staff if future phases would come before the Plan Commission and City Council. Mr. Myers said yes. Mr. Fell questioned how long Clark Lindsey Village would have to complete Phase IB. Mr. Myers stated that they would have one year to begin construction. If they need an additional year, they can apply for an extension and get it approved administratively. If two years lapse before they start construction, then they would need to come back before City Council. Mr. Fell asked if there is a deadline for completing the first phase. Mr. Myers said no. Ms. Reardanz added that it is Clark Lindsey Village’s intention to build all 16 units. They will take reservations for the 16 units and begin building Phase IA. If they find there is not enough interest for Phase IB, then they will not build it. Mr. Ash moved that the Plan Commission forward Plan Case No. 2202-PUD-13 to the City Council with a recommendation for approval including the two conditions as recommended by City staff. Mr. Fitch questioned whether there needed to be a motion and vote on each case or could they be forwarded under one recommendation to the City Council. Chair Pollock answered that they could be forwarded together. Mr. Ash amended his motion to include Plan Case No. 2203-PUD-13. Mr. Fitch seconded the motion. Mr. Fell commented that it is really hard to make single-story long, thin buildings look good; however, he feels that they have done an excellent job articulating the buildings. Therefore, he commended the architect for being able to do so and the owner for being willing to pay for it to be done. Chair Pollock commented that the proposed expansion looks like a first class project. Roll call on the motion was as follows: Mr. Ash - Yes Mr. Fell - Yes Mr. Fitch - Yes Mr. Otto - Yes Mr. Pollock - Yes Ms. Upah-Bant - Yes The motion was passed by unanimous vote. Mr. Myers noted that these two cases would be forwarded to the Urbana City Council on March 18, 2013. 6. OLD BUSINESS Plan Case No. 2200-M-13: Approval of the Official 2013 Zoning Map of the City of Urbana, Illinois Robert Myers, Planning Manager, presented this case to the Plan Commission. It reflects all of the rezoning changes, planned unit developments and group subdivisions. With no questions or comments from the audience, Chair Pollock opened the item up for Plan Commission discussion and/or motion. Page 4  March 7, 2013 Mr. Fitch moved that the Plan Commission forward Plan Case No. 2200-M-13 to the Urbana City Council with a recommendation for approval. Mr. Ash seconded the motion. Roll call was as follows: Mr. Ash - Yes Mr. Fell - Yes Mr. Fitch - Yes Mr. Otto - Yes Mr. Pollock - Yes Ms. Upah-Bant - Yes The motion was approved by unanimous vote. Mr. Myers stated that this case would go before the City Council on March 18, 2013. 7. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS There were none. 8. NEW BUSINESS Case No. CCZBA-733-AT-12: A request by the Champaign County Zoning Administrator to amend Sections 3, 5.2, and 6.1.3 of the Champaign County Zoning Ordinance regarding Agricultural Drainage Contractors. Robert Myers, Planning Manager, presented this case to the Plan Commission. He talked about the proposed text amendment and explained its purpose, which is to allow an agricultural drainage contractor to earn up to 50% of their income from direct sales. Mr. Fitch asked if there is a special use permit case within the Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) area, will the City have the ability to review the case. Mr. Myers replied that the City has the authority to review County ordinance text amendments and zoning map amendments, but not for special use permit requests. With no questions or comments from the audience, Chair Pollock opened the item up for Plan Commission discussion and/or motion. Mr. Fitch did not like the idea that the City would not have any review over special use permit requests for this use. Mr. Otto responded by saying that it comes down to whether one would find this use offensive within the City’s jurisdiction. The materials are not going to be stored outside for years and years because of UV breakdown. The contractors and the farmers will want to get it installed as soon as possible. Mr. Otto moved that the Plan Commission forward Case No. CCZBA-733-AT-12 to the Urbana City Council with a recommendation to defeat a resolution of protest. Mr. Ash seconded the motion. Roll call on the motion was as follows: Mr. Ash - Yes Mr. Fell - Yes Mr. Fitch - Yes Mr. Otto - Yes Mr. Pollock - Yes Ms. Upah-Bant - Yes The motion was approved by unanimous vote. Page 5  March 7, 2013 Mr. Myers stated that this case would go before City Council on March 18, 2013. 9. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION There were none. 10. STAFF REPORT Mr. Myers talked about establishing procedures for Plan Commission members having last minute absences before meetings. He recommended giving them his cell phone number to let staff know if they cannot attend a meeting at the last minute. He said that he would send it to them in an email. Mr. Otto questioned how the Plan Commission members would know if a meeting is cancelled at the last minute. Chair Pollock replied that if a member has not officially been notified that a meeting has been cancelled, then he/she should assume that the meeting is still going to take place. Mr. Myers added that in the past when a meeting has been cancelled at the last minute, City staff has phoned each member to notify them of the cancellation. They will continue this practice in the future. 11. STUDY SESSION There was none. 12. ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING The meeting was adjourned at 8:46 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ____________________________ Robert Myers, AICP, Secretary Urbana Plan Commission Page 6