McHenry Times

City of Woodstock Plan Commission met May 23.

Here is the minutes provided by the commission:

A regular meeting of the Woodstock Plan Commission was called to order at 7:00 PM by Vice- Chairperson Doreen Paluch on Thursday, May 23, 2019 in the Council Chambers at Woodstock City Hall.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch explained the process and procedures for this evening’s meeting. A roll call was taken.

COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Donna Besler, Don Fortin, Robert Horrell, Doreen Paluch, Cody Sheriff, Jackie Speciale, and Erich Thurow.

COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Gavers

STAFF PRESENT: Building & Zoning Director Joe Napolitano, Economic Development Director Garrett Anderson, City Planner Darrell Moore, and City Attorney TJ Clifton.

OTHERS PRESENT: Councilman Jim Prindiville and City Clerk Cindy Smiley

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Motion by D. Fortin, second by E. Thurow, to approve the agenda as presented.

A roll call vote was taken. D. Besler, D. Fortin, R. Horrell, C. Sheriff, J. Speciale, E. Thurow, and Vice- Chairperson D. Paluch. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: S. Gavers. Motion carried

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion by C. Sheriff, second by J. Speciale, to approve the minutes of the April 25, 2019 Plan Commission meeting as presented.

A roll call vote was taken. D. Besler, D. Fortin, R. Horrell, C. Sheriff, J. Speciale, E. Thurow, and Vice- Chairperson D. Paluch. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: S. Gavers. Motion carried

1. PUBLIC COMMENT

There was no comment forthcoming from the Public.

2. OLD BUSINESS

a) Public Hearing – Preliminary Plat of Founder’s Crossing to allow a 92-lot Subdivision on property located on the west side of Clay Street, South of First Street Amendment

Motion by R. Horrell, second by C. Sheriff to open the Public Hearing on a Preliminary Plat of Founder’s Crossing to allow a 92-lot Subdivision on property located on the west side of Clay Street, South of First Street Amendment.

A roll call vote was taken. D. Besler, D. Fortin, R. Horrell, C. Sheriff, J. Speciale, E. Thurow, and Vice- Chairperson D. Paluch. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: S. Gavers. Motion carried.

A roll call was taken.

COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Donna Besler, Don Fortin, Robert Horrell, Cody Sheriff, Jackie Speciale, Erich Thurow, and Vice-Chairperson Doreen Paluch.

COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Gavers.

Vice-Chairperson D. Paluch confirmed the presence of a quorum and opened the Public Hearing at 7:08 PM.

Mr. Napolitano confirmed that all required notices were both hand-delivered and sent via Certified Mail and that the notice was posted on the property as required.

Petitioners Ken Rawson and Rhonda Rawson were sworn in by City Attorney T.J. Clifton.

Rhonda Rawson stated they were happy to return to make a more detailed presentation on Founder’s Crossing, apologizing for their last appearance, noting they had a loved one hospitalized and their hearts were with him at that time.

Ms. Rawson stated she is very passionate about this project, stating she has been an architect for 15 years with a passion for residential design. She stated she prefers architecturally interesting developments rather than traditional design.

Ms. Rawson then gave a PowerPoint presentation on Founder’s Crossing. She described the new movement in architecture, the “Not So Big House Architectural Movement.” She noted this stated “bigger is not better,” and features the “right-size” house with attention to detail and a family feel at the center. She noted with this style, thought is given as to how the spaces are used, citing the kitchen as a gathering place, stating the homes are designed for the way people really use the space. Ms. Rawson stated they are one of the first developers in the country working with this concept.

Ms. Rawson then showed diagrams of the floor plans offered in Founder’s Crossing, including two-story and ranch homes. She stated the development features single-family row houses harkening to historic design and described the floor plans and room detail.

Ms. Rawson stated the base size of the ranch model is 1,475 sf. with an option of 1,565 sf. with a den. She stated the ranches have beautiful 13-15 ft. high ceilings. She described some of the features of the homes including big porches, gathering spaces, and tall windows.

She then showed and described the floor plans for the two models of two-story homes, which feature an open concept, optional basement, and kitchen islands. She noted all the main living spaces and windows are on the right side of the homes, so there will be no windows facing the other homes. Noting the difference between the two models are different upstairs layouts, Ms. Rawson stated these feature 1,848 sf. and 2,024 sf.

Ms. Rawson stated they wished to focus on developing a project of row houses near a downtown, which would be walkable to the downtown stores and restaurants. She noted when they discovered this property; they felt it was perfect for this development.

She then showed photos of some of the homes in Woodstock they love, noting they hope to include some of the features of these homes in the homes of Founder’s Crossing. Showing examples, she stated these features would include large windows, thick columns, porches, and thicker trims.

Ms. Rawson then showed schematic design of elevations. She first presented the two-story with a detached garage, which included a metal roof, flower boxes, tall windows and doors that would bring in much light.

She stated there would be many options available in their models including different detail, roof designs, textures, and colors, noting there would be a lot of attention to detail. She stated the homes will feel special and charming, and will not look like a typical subdivision.

She then reviewed the elevations of the ranch homes and described their features, and showed a depiction of a scale model of a street containing four of the homes side-by-side.

Ken Rawson, developer, talked about the shift in housing, opining Founder’s Crossing is the right product at the right time. He stated the number of private builders has decreased to the point where all are gone and now there are only public builders. He stated this has resulted in many fewer developments.

He asked that people realize this is not the typical subdivision, but is something different. He opined the buyer recognizes the sense of community with this development. He stated they have made changes in their plan since the last presentation.

Mr. Rawson showed photos of porches, noting they would be of a size where people could have furniture and use the space year-round, and also showed photos of other developments with a similar feel.

He then showed the land plan, noting they have made changes including putting a boulevard down Newell Street for a feeling of “arrival.” He stated this will include trees and an entry monument with wrought iron fencing and a landscaped boulevard island noting the island will separate the development from the Metra station. He stated the fencing will create a private courtyard feel and is being included in response to the comments concerning current problems along Clay Street. He stated they have added 32 additional parking spaces in response to comments about the need for more parking. Mr. Rawson showed photos of the types of amenities that will be included in the small parks in the development.

Mr. Rawson showed the floor plans and described the two-story homes and the ranch homes. He talked about pricing and showed a table from Berkshire-Hathaway showing the homes will be in the middle of the market. He stated they will not have any bank loans on the property, noting the importance of this factor.

Concerning the shift in housing, Mr. Rawson talked about why it is not possible to duplicate the Hummel development in today’s market. He stated to duplicate one of the brownstones today, the construction cost would be $480,000, meaning it would have to sell for $600,000, which is not possible.

Mr. Rawson then talked about the market study, including the demand for housing for the 55 years and older market, millennials, and first-time home buyers. He stated the study shows a demand for 1,046 residential housing units in Woodstock. He also showed the current listings available in Woodstock, including their prices.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch opened the floor to comments and questions from the Commission.

Commissioner Horrell stated he likes the design and architectural elements. He stated he has not; however, seen any improvement in the layout of the development. He opined it is an even tighter squeeze than when the Commission first looked at it.

In response to a question from Commissioner Horrell concerning a response from the Woodstock Fire/Rescue District (WFRD), Mr. Napolitano stated none has been received. He noted the plans were submitted to them in February. In response to further questioning, Mr. Napolitano stated the WFRD has not given a reason for not submitting comments. Commissioner Horrell stated he wants to see what the WFRD says about emergency access.

Commissioner Horrell stated as part of the process, submittals are to be requested from WFRD and District 200 (D200). Mr. Napolitano stated the City has spoken with the D200 Superintendent, noting their concern is with the number of children that will be generated by the development. He stated the City is looking at ways this can be addressed with a TIF incentive agreement.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch noted this issue was raised by Commissioner Horrell in February. She stated in reviewing the requirements of the ordinance, as part of the application process information is supposed to be provided to the School District and Fire/Rescue District. She asked whether all information has been provided to them. Mr. Napolitano replied that they have been provided with the plat, but not all accompanying documentation. Commissioner Horrell emphasized this is a requirement.

Commissioner Horrell opined it seems like the development is “bursting at the seams.” He noted the layout is going from a 60 ft. right-of-way to a 40 ft. right-of-way, meaning the homes will actually be closing in and getting tighter. He noted the main alley was 16 ft. and now is 14 ft. Concerning North Street, he said the right-of-way was originally 50 ft and now is 25 ft. from the center line on the south side and 17 ft from the center line on the north side. He stated the homes have been moved closer. Commissioner Horrell stated this reduction in right of way is a major issue for him and a major variation he cannot agree with.

Commissioner Horrell opined the same thing happens on First Street, describing how the homes encroach on the right-of-way. Discussion of this ensued with Commissioner Horrell stating there would only be 6 feet from the back of the curb to the front of the house and Mr. Rawson countering the sidewalk would be 10 feet from the porch. In response to a question from Commissioner Horrell, Mr. Napolitano stated the sidewalk would be adjacent to the curb within the right-of-way. Commissioner Horrell opined this represents the squeeze he is talking about. Noting there is not much parkway, he stated a person walks off the porch onto the sidewalk. Mr. Rawson stated there are only two stairs off the front of the porch which would project two feet.

In response to Mr. Rawson’s statement that there are many things yet to be included in the final plat, Commissioner Horrell stated many things not in the preliminary plat that are intended to be put in the final plat tend to get dropped.

Commissioner Horrell then discussed the alleyway and closeness of the garages calling attention to lots 10, 11, and 12. Mr. Rawson stated there is still a lot of work in final engineering, noting this will be taken into consideration at that time.

Noting Park C has been reduced to accommodate additional parking, Commissioner Horrell stated he wants both – parking and the park.

Commissioner Horrell stated per the City’s ordinance, submittal of a landscape plan is required unless waived by the Commission, which has not been done. In response to a question from Commissioner Horrell, Mr. Napolitano stated the utility easement is along the street in the 10 ft. setback. Commissioner Horrell stated this means the sidewalks will be in the right-of-way and a 10 ft. utility easement.

Commissioner Horrell opined the density of the development is not high enough, meaning the housing density, not the lot size coverage. He noted the Woodstock Station had higher density, but less coverage because of the types of housing, opining the lot coverage with Founder’s Crossing is way too high, but the density is not high enough. He also noted he feels the lack of retail is a problem with the proposed development.

Commissioner Horrell stated in looking back at the initial Staff report submitted in February there was a whole list of variances that were being requested, noting he found these to be excessive. He stated now there are even more variances requested to make this development work. He stated he did not agree with the original request and now does not agree with these requests.

Commissioner Horrell also stated the Downtown Development Plan indicates commercial development in the downtown is a high priority with a mix of residential and commercial, stating he is sorry to see that has been left out of the proposed development.

Commissioner Thurow stated he shares Commissioner Horrell’s concerns.

Commissioner Fortin expressed agreement, opining there are more questions to be answered. He stated he does agree with the concept and asked what the City is waiting for that may come up in the future. He opined there is a niche for this type of development, but agreed there are some concerns. In response to a question from Commissioner Fortin, Mr. Anderson confirmed the Downtown Plan stated the downtown was more urban than had been thought. Commissioner Fortin opined the proposed concept fits with this, stating the number of variances does not surprise him. Commissioner Fortin stated he shares some of the concerns regarding the right-of-way.

In response to questions from Commissioner Fortin, Ms. Rawson stated many of the people who would purchase in an area near the railroad station and the downtown will be without children or downsizing, and would like to be able to walk to these amenities and be next to the train station.

Commissioner Fortin expressed concern that there has been no response from WFRD, but noted the streets are standard size. He stated, still, he would like to see their comments.

In response to a question from Commissioner Sheriff, Mr. Napolitano stated the PUD is still in the original form that was previously approved. He stated the desire was to take the PUD and the Plat to the City Council at the same time. He noted this will have to be re-evaluated to see what has changed; and if there are adjustments, the PUD would have to come back. He confirmed the PUD has not been approved by the City Council.

Since there were variances that were recommended for approval as part of the PUD, which was recommended for approval to the City Council, Vice-Chairman Paluch asked how this is impacted by the fact that the City Council has not approved the PUD. She asked if this should be reviewed as if those variances are not yet approved and are open for discussion. In response, City Attorney Clifton stated the Commission has already approved the PUD, which is where it stands. He stated there is nothing before the Commission to consider further variances within the PUD.

In response to a question from Commissioner Sheriff for further clarification, Mr. Clifton stated all that is before the Commission for consideration this evening is consideration of the plat with the PUD and its variances having been previously approved.

Commissioner Sheriff stated his biggest concern is the many unanswered details because of the many changes made. He stated he is not comfortable without seeing the variations made to address everything. He also expressed concern that comments have not been received from WFRD.

Mr. Napolitano stated preliminary engineering has been reviewed, which resulted in some of the changes. In response to a question from Commissioner Sheriff, Mr. Napolitano confirmed the utilities will be underground and are already present including water and sewer. He again confirmed the power lines will be underground.

In response to a question from Commissioner Sheriff, Mr. Rawson stated the sidewalk adjacent to the UPNW line is 5 ft. wide.

Commissioner Speciale thanked Mr. Rawson for taking the time to make another presentation. She expressed concerns similar to those already raised, noting with the size of the alley, safety is a concern for her as is snow removal. She stated she is happy to hear something can be worked out with D200 through the TIF.

Commissioner Speciale stated she likes the architectural detail and is okay with the housing being close together. She noted in her research she found the target market wants modern, energy-efficient homes. The Rawsons described the energy-efficient features of the home including energy-efficient appliances, insulation, low-VOC paint, and sustainable finishes.

In response to a question from Commissioner Speciale, Mr. Rawson stated he will not sell the property. He talked about the shortage of housing noting 37% of the people in the community are renters. He again noted millennials and people over 55 are interested in this type of development.

Commissioner Speciale stated the lack of a landscape plan is a huge part of the Commission’s inability to envision what this development will look like, stating this is a problem for her. In response to Mr. Rawson’s statement that he was unaware that was needed at this time, Vice-Chairperson Paluch noted this is part of the City’s ordinance.

Commissioner Besler stated she agrees with the other Commission members, noting they have incomplete information to make a major change. She noted she likes the concept, but needs more information before making a final decision. In response to Mr. Rawson’s statement that this will come back at the final plat stage, Vice-Chairperson Paluch agreed it will come back, but noted that is only to make sure everything required is included. Discussion followed of how this could be submitted and approved during final plat consideration.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch stated she shares the concerns expressed by other Commission members regarding the incomplete application. She stated the ordinance is specific in stating what the content of the submission shall include, unless there are waivers. She noted there are instances where items can be waived, but stated this is according to the ordinance, reading aloud the section, which states “the Commission may” waive the submittals and how this could be done, noting the Commission has not waived the requirement for any of the items that are missing. She stated the items could be discussed now, but opined it is not appropriate to say they will be reviewed at the final plat.

Commissioner Horrell stated it is not up to Staff or the developer to waive any of the requirements, but is up to the Commission. He noted the City Engineer can waive some of the requirements that he may need, but otherwise it is up to the Commission.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch stated the missing feedback from WFRD and D200 is important to her as is the landscape plan. She also opined a review of an expenditure plan on what will be spent by the local governments should also be included, as this speaks to the development’s impact on D200. She stated she believes the Commission is being asked to vote on an incomplete plat.

In response to Vice-Chairperson Paluch’s question as to whether the Commission would like to waive the requirements for the missing items and proceed, or would prefer to have them before consideration of the project, Commissioner Sheriff stated he would be more comfortable having those items. Commissioner Fortin stated it would be in the developer’s best interest to submit the items. He noted he likes the concept, but agreed the submittal is incomplete. Commissioners Thurow, Besler, and Speciale agreed they would like the missing items submitted. Commissioner Horrell stated while he would like to see the comments from WFRD and D200 and the landscape plan, these items would do nothing to reduce the bulging effect or address the lack of commercial, so cannot see how he will support the plat. He stated he has objections to things beyond the missing information.

In response to a question from Vice-Chairperson Paluch, it was the consensus of the Commission that they would like the additional information that is required before proceeding with consideration of this item.

In response to a request from Mr. Rawson that the item be tabled, Vice-Chairperson Paluch noted this is a Public Hearing and stated she would like to give the public an opportunity to speak first. She also stated she had additional questions for the petitioner.

In response to a question from Vice-Chairperson Paluch as to what concerns he sought to address with this amendment, Mr. Rawson stated engineering, stormwater lines, additional parking, and park plans. He stated the Boulevard was put in at Staff’s request, with a boulevard included by the Metra station in response to expressed concerns.

Noting he has spent a lot of time talking about the design of the homes and the concept, Vice-Chairperson Paluch asked if there would be deed restrictions that restrict the design of the homes. Noting the Commission has been supplied a copy of the declarations, Mr. Rawson stated homeowners would not be allowed to change the front elevations, with no improvements allowed in excess of $5,000 without HOA approval. He stated the development cannot be changed without a vote of 75% of all homeowners.

In response to additional questions from Vice-Chairperson Paluch, Mr. Rawson stated the alleyways would be privately owned with monthly assessments that should cover snow removal. In response to a comment from Vice-Chairperson Paluch that he had previously stated he did not want an HOA, Mr. Rawson stated he did not believe he said that, but rather had commented that the assessments for the Brownstones is much higher than would be required for Founder’s Crossing, as the townhouses have much more common area that require maintenance.

Brief discussion ensued concerning the calculations used for determining parking as required by ordinance.

In response to a question from Vice-Chairperson Paluch concerning the difference between the previous report and the current Staff report about the amount of open space, Mr. Napolitano explained there was an outlot removed, showing this area on the diagram. Discussion ensued of how this is different from park space.

Noting the amended plat calls for fencing along Clay Street, Vice-Chairperson Paluch stated the Comprehensive Plan encourages that people not be isolated from the community opining this fencing will isolate them. Mr. Rawson replied the fence is more decorative and was added as a result of comments from current residents. In response to a question from Vice-Chairperson Paluch, Mr. Rawson stated there are no porches located along Clay Street. In response to a statement from Vice-Chairperson Paluch that Mr. Rawson is trying to create a walkable community yet is closing it off, Mr. Rawson stated the fencing was not added to create a barrier to people walking. He again stated it was added as a decorative feature and because current property owners complained there were problems with people along Clay Street. He offered to remove the fencing if that is what the Commission wishes. Vice-Chairperson Paluch stated she does not understand the fencing.

In response to a question from Vice-Chairperson Paluch as to whether the declarations submitted are a draft or open for discussion, Mr. Rawson stated he would accept any recommendations.

In response to a question from Vice-Chairperson Paluch, Mr. Rawson stated his previous comments concerning any improvement over $5,000 requiring HOA approval referred to exterior improvements.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch stated the restrictions place limits on outbuildings and fencing, including those for dogs. She stated at a previous meeting Mr. Rawson indicated they wanted dogs in the development. Mr. Rawson stated the intent is to prevent people from putting in other outbuildings and for people to have to go before the HOA for approval noting this section does not refer to dog houses.

Noting she does not have the document before her, Vice-Chairperson Paluch stated she recalls there is a weight restriction on dogs, asking Mr. Rawson about this. He stated he does not believe there is a weight restriction on dogs.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch stated she still does not see a means by which people can access the dog park, opining the only access is via First Street or along and alleyway. In response, Mr. Rawson stated people would walk one-half block to the dog park, describing the access points.

Noting Mr. Rawson had previously focused on the attractiveness of this project to seniors and millennials, Vice-Chairperson Paluch cited a study by the National Association of Realtors, which states that millennials favor larger homes and seniors are holding on to their larger homes. Mr. Rawson responded that this is true for some. He opined most people want to own their own home, noting these homes would be eligible for a 3% loan.

In response to a question from Vice-Chairperson Paluch, Mr. Rawson explained the phases. Vice- Chairperson Paluch stated the first phase would result in loss of the opportunity to maintain a Newell Street connection over the railroad for which she has advocated. Mr. Rawson confirmed this is the case.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch opened the floor to Public Comment at 8:50 PM.

Carlos Acosta, 580 Prairie Ridge Drive, was sworn in by City Attorney Clifton.

Mr. Acosta stated he works on the northeast corner of Newell and Clay in a building which contains government offices, which have been expanded. He described the need for parking for the many people who visit the offices, stating traffic was moved to add on-street parking and a section of Newell Street was striped and designated as parking for DHS. Mr. Acosta noted the proposed boulevard will take away this parking. Noting that people from around the county come to this facility, he opined this could become a problem with the proposed development.

Melissa McMahon, 517 S. Jefferson, was sworn in by City Attorney Clifton,

Ms. McMahon stated she is a concerned resident, owner of a business on the Square who is involved in the community, and a mom. She expressed concerns about safety asking where the school busses will go, and whether the children will have to stand along Clay Street. She asked where the children will play and ride their bikes and noted the 55 and older community has grandchildren. Ms. McMahon also expressed concerns about snow removal and where the mail truck will go.

Stating people may want smaller cars, Ms. McMahon opined they want bigger cars, asking how they will drive them on these streets. She stated she does not feel this is a good idea.

Fred Urquhart, Wheeler and Donovan, was sworn in by City Attorney Clifton.

Mr. Urquhart stated he walks daily to the Square. He stated his first impression of this development is appalling, noting he is shocked by the density and restrictions on the setbacks. He opined there will be no place to play and that dogs will be in other people’s yards, and asked where the moving vans will go. He opined the development is cramming people into the tiniest area stating at least 30% of the homes should be taken out. Mr. Urquhart opined this does not match with the older sections of Woodstock and looks totally out of place.

Mr. Urquhart stated he does not like anything about this and does not have confidence in the developer. He expressed concerns with children in the streets, traffic, and emergency access.

He stated he believes Woodstock needs development, but opined this is not the plan for Woodstock.

James Campbell, 233 N. Tryon, was sworn in by City Attorney Clifton.

Mr. Campbell opined the Die Cast property should be developed with a mixed use of commercial, retail, and residential centered around a conference center. He talked about the appeal and market niche for the type of development for which he is advocating. He stated new houses bring new shoppers. Mr. Campbell noted residents shop all over, but people here for conferences would shop primarily on the Square.

Laura DeWitt, 15 North Street, was sworn in by City Attorney Clifton.

Ms. DeWitt stated she is the Secretary for the Brownstones of Woodstock Station Homeowners’ Association. She read a statement on behalf of the HOA.

The statement noted the HOA is not opposed to developing the property, but is opposed to any development that does not recognize the value and uniqueness that this property contributes to Woodstock’s future along with any development that is not consistent with the character, vision, and wellbeing of our community.

The statement stated there are a number of significant issues and unanswered questions regarding the proposed development. It asked that any decision of any development consider the following important policy issues:

 The use of public property for private development

 The actual viability of this type of proposed development after considering the specific social and economic demographics of the Woodstock community.

It asked that the City consider project-specific development issues including the development’s significantly reduced building setbacks, intersection sightlines, and parkway buffers, as well as its constrained greenspace and parking areas, and its limited architectural diversity.

The statement opined these issues must be consistent with criteria defined in the City’s development visions.

It stated because the Woodstock Station site was selected as “Opportunity Site #1” in the recent Downtown Woodstock Development Plan, it represents the primary area within Woodstock’s historic district where the City’s vision of its future will be displayed.

The statement stated it is the Association’s decision not to support the Founder’s Crossing development, noting this decision was based upon three factors:

Feedback from meetings/discussion/correspondence with the development, informal discussion with the Plan Commission, and feedback from residents located within reasonable proximity to the proposed development and historic district.

Review of Woodstock’s development documents (Woodstock’s Criteria Documents) including the city website, Woodstock’s Vision 2020, Woodstock’s 2008 Comprehensive Plan, 2010 Unified Development Ordinance, Woodstock’s 2018 Downtown Development Plan, and Woodstock TIF #2.

Review of national trends in urban planning and development via the SMART Growth Network, including a comparison of the proposed Founder’s Crossing plan to Woodstock’s Criteria Documents and an outside planning organization’s “10 Basic Principles of Smart Growth.”

The statement then talked about the evaluation results and their review of all the Woodstock Criteria Documents. Concerning the Downtown Woodstock Development Plan, it noted by identifying the Brownstones of Woodstock Station as Woodstock’s Opportunity Site #1, that document positioned the site to represent a statement of the community’s priorities and a guide for both the public and private decision makers regarding the community’s future.

The statement stated the review led to the following conclusions:

 Woodstock’s Criteria Documents are consistent with one another

 The Founder’s Crossing concept is totally inconsistent with Woodstock’s Criteria Documents. Ms. DeWitt then read statements from individuals unable to be present at this meeting.

The first statement was from John McNamara AIA, FAICP, 13 North Street.

Mr. McNamara’s statement highlighted the following areas of critical concern:

 Lack of demonstrated Market Demand

 Revised Preliminary Plat is seriously flawed

 Transportation access, travel demand, and areawide parking problems

 Consistency with Woodstock City Planning Policy and National Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND)/Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Principles

The statement expanded on each of the areas of concern noting the developer has not provided the City with a satisfactory Market Study for this project, opining the City must require the Developer to provide a legitimate, independent Market Study justifying the development of Founder’s Crossing before agreeing to the Revised Preliminary Plat or entering into a Development Agreement.

The statement provided reasons why the Revised Preliminary Plat is not a TND or TOD, because it does not provide an amenity-rich environment that homeowners desire; lacks quality of life features such as usable parks, open space, and maneuverable alleys; and is out of context with its community and surrounding neighbors.

It also outlined several issues with the Revised Preliminary Plat stating it:

 Maximizes developability of the property at the expense of everything else

 Does not exhibit the quality and generous open space feel of a TND and does not maintain setbacks to a level that respects existing neighborhood contest and creates the feeling of compactness in a “park-like” setting

 Contains parks which are hidden away on remnant parcels where a housing unit would not fit in locations not very visible from the street ignoring the principles of defensible space for public safety and security, particularly children play in parks

 Contains no gradient of housing density, a TOD/TND principle

 Does not respect adjacent neighborhoods.

Noting the transitional plan proposed in the original Woodstock Station Development, the statement stated the abandonment of this concept by the Founder’s Crossing proposal misses an opportunity for Woodstock as it forestalls any option for increasing density adjacent to the Metra Station, does not allow flexibility in changing housing products, and locks the City in to an approach that is inconsistent with its own housing policies.

The statement then discussed the transportation access, travel demand, and areawide traffic problem issues created by the development. These included resultant problems on Clay Street, opining it would become heavily congested, probably requiring a traffic signal. It also cited probable parking problems. The statement advocated for a Traffic and Parking Impact Study to further define and expand on the issues and formulate reasonable solutions before approval of the Revised Preliminary Plat.

The statement noted there has been no submittal made to the City as to how Founder’s Crossing responds to any of the City’s Planning Documents nor what the potential economic impacts or revenue potential might be to the City.

Noting the ramifications of approval, in summary, Mr. McNamara’s statement strongly recommended that the Plan Commission not approve the Founder’s Crossing Revised Preliminary Plat until the issues raised are thoroughly addressed.

Ms. DeWitt then read a statement from Ed Houde, Woodstock Station Homeowner.

Mr. Houde stated he is not opposed to developing the property, but is specifically opposed to the proposed Founder’s Crossing development, since it does not recognize or contribute to the unique position this property plays in Woodstock’s economic and social future.

The statement stated the proposed Founder’s Crossing development would not:

 Provide the opportunity for significant mixed-use development to add dwellings and commercial space to downtown

 Offer a mix of housing choices currently not prevalent in the downtown

 Emphasize greenspace while providing a balance of housing opportunities and offering a variety of housing styles and types as identified in Woodstock’s 2018 Downtown Development Plan.

It stated the City is being asked to make major policy changes, not the least of which is the use of public property to support an arguable non-policy-conforming private development, while granting significant planning concessions. It opined the development is highly compacted rather than high-density.

The statement noted the development is inconsistent with Woodstock’s Vision 2020, unfavorably impacts the community’s overall character and its existing residential areas and is inconsistent with Woodstock’s 2008 Comprehensive Plan providing validation for these conclusions.

Debra Glaubke, 600 Lawndale, was sworn in by City Attorney Clifton.

Ms. Glaubke stated she is appalled by the plan and thinks it is disgusting. She opined it is “just not Woodstock” and has a lot of problems. She stated she cannot picture people sitting on the front porches, opining the people next door will hear everything that is going on at the neighbor’s house. She asked why there has to be all of these people crammed together.

Ms. Glaubke expressed concern about the safety of the children. She opined 911 will be called to this neighborhood frequently because of confrontations between people crammed into this “ghetto-ish” neighborhood. She also expressed concerns about the alleyways and emergency access and opined fire would spread quickly through a neighborhood like this.

Ms. Glaubke stated this is not Chicago, opining people come here to have space and quality of life. She stated she approves of developing this property, but opined this is not the answer.

Allen Stebbins, 508 Dean Street, was sworn in by City Attorney Clifton.

Mr. Stebbins stated this is the most significant development parcel in Woodstock and is important to the economic development of the city. He talked about the original vision for this parcel being a high-quality, high-density, mixed use development to transition from the Downtown to residential neighborhoods. He read from the Woodstock Downtown Development Plan concerning this site. He stated the site should include multi-family and townhome dwellings as well as commercial uses.

Mr. Stebbins noted as the former Chairman of the Historic Preservation Commission, he assisted with drafting the Design Review Guidelines for the City of Woodstock, which was one of the HPC’s requirements. He noted these guidelines are not arbitrary and talked about how and why they were developed. He stated the HPC wrote an entire chapter specifically on the Die Cast site, which states these buildings should be able to exist in the context of the historic district. He read further from this document. Mr. Stebbins stated the proposed development does not meet these criteria, noting it is not mixed use and not a TOD.

Mr. Stebbins opined at best the proposed development is a subdivision plopped in the Downtown and is more suitable for the edge of Woodstock, not Downtown.

Mr. Stebbins then talked about what he feels are flaws in the Market Study, noting he conducted his own research on millennials, which found they wish to live more closely to urban areas and those with children wish to live in closer suburbs with homes starting in the $150,000 range. He opined the long commute from Woodstock to the City will not appeal to millennials.

Mr. Stebbins talked about the Chicago neighborhood in which he grew up, stating he does not recognize this development as a Chicago-style neighborhood. He stated he also does not see anything that recognizes this as a Woodstock-style neighborhood.

Mr. Stebbins urged the Plan Commission to reject the Preliminary Plan.

Molly Oakford, 1341 Winslow Circle, was sworn in by City Attorney Clifton.

Ms. Oakford stated after hearing the Commission’s review of the Preliminary Plan and the presentation by Mr. Rawson, she is unsettled because this is a joint project of the City and the developer. She stated the Commission has an obligation to make sure this is best for Woodstock. Ms. Oakford noted 22 units will be contributed to this developer.

Noting Emricson Park is a favorite amenity of the community, Ms. Oakford opined this is one of the sacred places because it is maintained by the community. She stated this is the standard for quality of life in Woodstock.

Ms. Oakford noted the city has renovated the Opera House and the Old Courthouse, putting copper on its roof doing this because the community wants its treasures and appreciates quality. She noted the community prizes what it has and wants quality.

Ms. Oakford noted this space has been reviewed and the community decided what it wanted, talking about the preliminary inducement for a mixed-use development. She asked whether this is not going to be required now, stating the fact that the City is a partner in this means it must make sure it is the best.

Ms. Oakford stated, as a physical therapist, she cringes when she sees detached garages, citing fall statistics for seniors. She asked why the City would want detached garages in Northern Illinois winters and why the City would approve a PUD with detached garages especially after coming off this past winter.

Noting the lack of green space and 14 ft. alleys, Ms. Oakford stated this is constrained living and not how people live in Woodstock.

She urged the Commission to wait for a development that meets the community’s standards.

There being no further comment, Vice-Chairperson Paluch closed the Public Comment at 9:45 PM.

Citing the Commission’s preference not to waive submittal requirements, Vice-Chairperson Paluch asked if it would be appropriate to make a motion.

City Attorney Clifton stated in that case it would be appropriate to make a motion to continue the public hearing to a date certain, that being the next regular meeting on June 27. He stated as this Public Hearing has already been properly noticed it could be continued to a date certain without requiring another notice.

Motion by C. Sheriff, second by J. Speciale, to continue the Public Hearing for the Preliminary Plat of Founder’s Crossing to a date certain, that being June 27, until all government entities as specified in the Unified Development Ordinance have provided their review of the subject development.

Commissioner Horrell opined the motion leaves out some of the things the Commission had requested. He noted as he stated earlier, even if he sees a landscape plan and comments from the Fire/Rescue District and District 200, he knows what he does not see and doubts the additional information will sway him. He opined if the Commission is going to request more information before voting on this, that request should be more inclusive.

Motion by C. Sheriff, second by J. Speciale to amend the motion to read: “to continue the Public Hearing for the Preliminary Plat of Founder’s Crossing to a date certain, that being June,27 until all government entities as specified in the Unified Development Ordinance have provided their review of the subject development as well as a landscape plan.”

Commissioner Horrell stated he will vote no on the motion because to him the biggest concern is not the outstanding information. In response to a question from Commissioner Sheriff, Commissioner Horrell stated he would like to see more open space and commercial space. He noted the setbacks also bother him. He stated he does not believe the developer is prepared to address these concerns. He opined he does not need more information, but a different plan. Commissioner Sheriff stated his motion stands as amended.

A roll call vote was taken. Ayes: D. Besler, D. Fortin, C. Sheriff, J. Speciale, E. Thurow, and Vice- Chairperson D. Paluch. Nays: R. Horrell. Abstentions: none. Absentees: S. Gavers. Motion carried.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch closed the Public Hearing at 9:51 PM.

3. NEW BUSINESS

a) Public Hearing – Map Amendment from B3 Service and Retail District to B2C Central Business District and Variance of Minimum Dwelling Unit Size from 600 Square Feet to 544 Square Feet, 329 Lake Avenue

Motion by E. Thurow, second by J. Speciale, to open the Public Hearing on a Map Amendment from B3 Service and Retail District to B2C Central Business District and Variance of Minimum Dwelling Unit Size from 600 Square Feet to 544 Square Feet, 329 Lake Avenue.

A roll call vote was taken. Ayes: D. Besler, D. Fortin, R. Horrell, C. Sheriff, J. Speciale, E. Thurow, and Vice-Chairperson D. Paluch. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: S. Gavers. Motion carried.

A roll call was taken.

COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Donna Besler, Don Fortin, Robert Horrell, Cody Sheriff, Jackie Speciale, Erich Thurow, and Vice-Chairperson Doreen Paluch.

COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Gavers.

Noting the presence of a quorum, Vice-Chairperson Paluch opened the Public Hearing at 9:54 PM.

Mr. Napolitano confirmed that all required notices were appropriately sent, published, and noticed.

Petitioner John Green was sworn in by City Attorney Clifton.

Mr. Green stated in January he purchased the home at 329 Lake Avenue, noting it is one of the oldest homes in Woodstock, having been built in the 1840s.

Mr. Green stated it is his intent to save the building by converting the home into three apartment units. He noted one of the units is slightly below the required square feet, so he is requesting a variance for this. He stated he is also asking for a zoning change from B3 to B2C.

He stated he has an affinity for finding old things and keeping them alive, noting in an effort to save this home, he decided this is a way to make it financially feasible and ensure its future.

Commissioner Besler thanked Mr. Green for preserving the past and welcomed him to Woodstock.

In response to a question from Commissioner Horrell, Mr. Anderson confirmed this is part of TIF #2. Commissioner Horrell stated as with any rezoning, what happens if the petitioner walks away from the property must be considered. He asked if the City has some protection since this is in TIF #2 should this happen. In response, Mr. Anderson stated if one looks at the Comprehensive Plan, this area is intended for downtown zoning, noting this is a step in that direction. Noting if it is rezoned to B2C that building may not be there because it is the land that will be rezoned not the building, Mr. Napolitano stated the TIF agreement could help with that. Commissioner Horrell stated he is not opposed to the variance or the rezoning.

There were no questions or comments from Vice-Chairperson Paluch or Commissioner Sheriff. Commissioners Sheriff and Fortin stated they were not opposed to the request.

In response to a question from Commissioner Speciale, Mr. Green stated he will abide by the timeline required by the City. Mr. Anderson stated the petitioner has until the end of the year to be done.

In response to a question form Commissioner Speciale, Mr. Green confirmed he will own the building. He talked about what he found in this old house, opining it must have been a high-end home at one time. Mr. Anderson talked about the history of the house, noting this was the oldest of the plaqued homes and that the tracks were laid 15 years after the home was built.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch opened the floor to Public Comment at 10:02 PM. There being none, Public Comment was closed at 10:03 PM.

Noting the B2C zoning classification is more restrictive than B2, Commissioner Besler expressed support for the request.

Motion by R. Horrell, second by C. Sheriff, to recommend approval of a zoning map amendment to B2C Downtown Commercial District for 320 Lake Avenue based on the finding of fact outlined in the Staff Report, all of which he finds applicable and with which he is in agreement.

A roll call vote was taken. Ayes: D. Fortin, D. Besler, R. Horrell, C. Sheriff, J. Speciale, E. Thurow, and Vice-Chairperson D. Paluch. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: S. Gavers. Motion carried.

Motion by C. Sheriff, second by R. Horrell to recommend approval of a variation of minimum dwelling size, Table 7A.2, from 600 square feet to 544 square feet for 329 Lake Avenue based on the Standards for Zoning Variations in Section 4.5.7 of the UDO and the findings of fact per the Staff Report.

A roll call vote was taken. Ayes: D. Fortin, D. Besler, R. Horrell, C. Sheriff, J. Speciale, E. Thurow, and Vice-Chairperson D. Paluch. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: S. Gavers. Motion carried.

The Public Hearing was closed at 10:07 PM.

b) Public Hearing – Text Amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance Relating to Fences and Re-Adoption of Unified Development Ordinance

Motion by E. Thurow, second by R. Horrell, to open the Public Hearing on Text Amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance Relating to Fences and Re-Adoption of the Unified Development Ordinance.

A roll call vote was taken. Ayes: D. Besler, D. Fortin, R. Horrell, C. Sheriff, J. Speciale, E. Thurow, and Vice-Chairperson D. Paluch. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: S. Gavers. Motion carried.

A roll call was taken.

COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Donna Besler, Don Fortin, Robert Horrell, Cody Sheriff, Jackie Speciale, Erich Thurow, and Vice-Chairperson Doreen Paluch.

COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Gavers.

Noting the presence of a quorum, Vice-Chairperson Paluch opened the Public Hearing at 10:08 PM. Mr. Napolitano confirmed that all required notices were appropriately sent, published, and noticed.

Mr. Napolitano stated there was a request from a member of the City Council regarding front-yard fencing, noting the request was to not allow chain link fence in a front yard. He noted the code currently does not limit the type of fencing as long as it is 50% open. Mr. Napolitano stated this is primarily an aesthetic issue to reduce the likelihood of a person installing chain link fencing. He stated the City has received calls from surrounding property owners on one such fence installation.

Mr. Napolitano stated the proposal would be to limit the type of fencing to aluminum rails, picket fencing, etc. and to prohibit chain link fencing in the front yard. He noted existing chain link fencing would be placed into non-conforming status and would be required to comply with the rules for maintenance or repair and replacement. He stated he does not know how many of these are currently in existence.

In response to a question from Commissioner Horrell, Mr. Napolitano stated that anyone wishing to put up a fence must obtain a permit and at that time would be told they cannot use chain link and explained the application process.

Commissioner Sheriff expressed support for the change agreeing that chain link fencing does not look good.

Commissioners Thurow, Horrell, and Besler agreed.

Drawing a diagram, Vice-Chairperson Paluch asked what would happen if a person living on a corner as depicted had a fence that was destroyed. Mr. Napolitano read from the ordinance in response. He confirmed that it may be feasible that the fence could be repaired without having to install a whole new fence.

Mr. Napolitano stated the other request before the Plan Commission is to re-adopt the entire Unified Development Ordinance to be consistent with the City’s Home Rule authority. City Attorney Clifton explained the need for this.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch opened the floor to Public Comment at 10:17 PM. Jim Prindiville, 214 W. Judd Street, was sworn in by City Attorney Clifton.

Mr. Prindiville asked if the City should address when fencing could be a wall. He opined one could build a fence that is a wall.

Mr. Napolitano provided the definition of a fence. He opined a fence and a wall could be synonymous, but would need to be 50% visible in the front yard.

Mr. Prindiville opined allowing people to build walls could be a good thing.

Mr. Napolitano noted there would still be the variance process. He noted the ordinance is typically changed because the City is getting many requests for variances on an issue stating there have not been a lot of requests for walls, so perhaps it is appropriate to handle this through variances. In response to a question from Mr. Prindiville, Mr. Napolitano stated this would be heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals.

There being no further comments, Public Comment was closed at 10:21 PM.

Motion by C. Sheriff, second by J. Speciale, to recommend that the City Council re-adopt the Unified Development Ordinance pursuant to Home Rule authority and approve a text amendment to Section 7.B.3.6.K.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance to prohibit chain link fencing in a front or corner side yard of any residentially-zoned property based on the finds of fact as presented in the Staff Report and the Zoning Text Amendment approval criteria as cited in the Staff Report.

A roll call vote was taken. Ayes: D. Fortin, D. Besler, R. Horrell, C. Sheriff, J. Speciale, E. Thurow, and Vice-Chairperson D. Paluch. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: S. Gavers. Motion carried.

Vice-Chairperson Paluch closed the Public Hearing at 10:23 PM.

4. DISCUSSION

Mr. Napolitano stated at the Commission’s next meeting it will consider a Final Plat approval for the Verizon store in the Farm and Fleet outlot. He stated there may also be a text amendment for a microbrewery.

5. ADJOURN

Motion by C. Sheriff, second by R. Horrell, to adjourn this Regular Meeting of the Woodstock Plan Commission to the next regular meeting on Thursday, June 27, 2019, in the Council Chambers at Woodstock City Hall. Ayes: D. Fortin, D. Besler, R. Horrell, C. Sheriff, J. Speciale, E. Thurow, and Vice- Chairperson D. Paluch. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: S. Gavers. Motion carried.

The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 PM.

https://www.woodstockil.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/plan_commission/meeting/27181/f_-_5-23-19_plan_commission_meeting_-_part_1_of_1_-_minutes.pdf