City of Aurora Planning and Zoning Commission met Nov. 16.
Here are the minutes provided by the commission:
CALL TO ORDER
Acting Chairperson Shanita Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm
ROLL CALL
The following Commission members were present: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers,
Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, and Mrs. Owusu-Safo. Chairman Pilmer and Mr.
Gonzales were excused. Mrs. Martinez arrived at 7:10 pm.
OTHERS PRESENT
The following staff members were present: Mr. Sieben, Mr. Sodaro, and Ms. Burden.
Public Commenting:
Carlos Hernandez (for 22-0932)
Eduardo Villarreal (for 22-0935 and 22-0936)
Oscar Garcia (for 22-0937)
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
22-0958 Approval of Minutes from November 2, 2022 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting
A motion was made by Mrs. Owusu-Safo, seconded by Mr. Chambers, that the minutes be approved and filed. The motion carried.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Acting Chairperson Anderson said if you are here for an item that does not appear on the agenda as a public hearing and you wish to speak to the Commission, we can give you 3 minutes to do so.
No one came forward.
AGENDA
22-0930 An Ordinance amending Chapter 49 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Aurora, by modifying the zoning map attached thereto to rezone Property located at 930 W New York St from R-4 Two Family Dwelling District to R-2 One Family Dwelling District
Mr. Sodaro said good evening everybody. This property is currently a vacant property owned by the City and zoned R-4. The City is currently going through all of our properties, vacant and otherwise, and determining what the best course of action is, whether it is retaining or disposal. In case it’s not necessary for the City of Aurora, we are intending to dispose of them. For this lot, this is a downzoning to a single-family use. It is currently zoned vacant and zoned for multi-family. The City has a longstanding density reduction policy so this would meet that criteria. The intention for this is to be sold to a single-family developer with the intention of selling, for developing a single-family home. That’s all I have in terms of discussion, if anyone has any questions.
Acting Chair Anderson said any questions for Staff? Okay, is the Petitioner here tonight for this case?
Mr. Sieben said that’s us.
Acting Chair Anderson said oh, yeah. So, would you like to add any additional information?
Mr. Sodaro said in terms of discussion, no. I would be able to briefly discuss the Findings of Fact that are necessary for these petitions.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay.
Mr. Sodaro said:
1. The proposal is in accordance with all applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora.
2. The proposal represents the logical establishment and/or consistent extension of the requested classification in consideration of the existing land uses, existing zoning classifications, and essential character of the general area of the property in question. The surrounding area is primarily residential.
3. The proposal is consistent with a desirable trend of development in the general area of the property in question, occurring since the property in question was placed in its present zoning classification, desirability being defined as the trend's consistency with applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora. The subject property is in an area zoned a mixture of R-4 and R-2.
4. The rezoning will allow uses which are more suitable than uses permitted under the existing zoning classification. The proposed downzoning is consistent with the City’s long-standing density reduction policy.
5. The rezoning a consistent extension of the existing land uses, existing zoning classifications, and essential character of the general area. The area is primarily residential.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay. Do we need to have anyone come up and speak on this?
Mr. Sieben said you have to open up the public hearing.
Acting Chair Anderson said this is open for public comment now if anyone in the audience would like to speak, please do so on this particular item. No one’s come forward. I’ll close the public hearing. Hearing the Staff’s Findings of Facts, do I to propose this?
Mr. Sieben said yeah, you need a motion to accept.
Acting Chair Anderson said motion for Findings of Fact, Staff’s approval?
MOTION OF APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Mr. Chambers
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Choudhury
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers, Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, and Mrs. Martinez
NAYS: 0
Motion carried.
A motion was made by Mr. Chambers, seconded by Mr. Choudhury, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/21/2022. The motion carried.
22-0931 An Ordinance amending Chapter 49 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Aurora, by modifying the zoning map attached thereto to rezone the property located at 574 E Galena Boulevard from R-4 Two Family Dwelling District to R-2 One Family Dwelling District
Mr. Sodaro said okay, so the property is currently vacant and is zoned R-4, Two-Family Dwelling District. The intention is to rezone the property to R-2, One-Family Dwelling District. Just like the last property and all the properties we’ll hear tonight, it is owned by the City and the intention of the City is to take an inventory of all lots and determine the best course of action for them. This lot is intended to be sold to a single-family developer with the intention of building one single-family home. The downzone is required to guarantee a single-family development which is consistent with the City’s long-standing density reduction policy. In addition, the proposed R-2 zoning designation is consistent with the zoning of the surrounding neighborhood.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay, any questions for Staff on this item? I will open up the public hearing for this item 22-0931. Would anyone in the audience like to
comment on this item as well? No one’s come forward so we have Findings of Fact, I guess, for this as well.
Mr. Sodaro said Staff would like to briefly touch on the Findings of Fact as is required of Rezoning Petitions:
1. The proposal is in accordance with all applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora.
2. The proposal represents the logical establishment and/or consistent extension of the requested classification in consideration of the existing land uses, existing zoning classifications, and essential character of the general area of the property in question. The surrounding area is primarily residential
3. The proposal is consistent with a desirable trend of development in the general area of the property in question, occurring since the property in question was placed in its present zoning classification, desirability being defined as the trend's consistency with applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora. The subject property is in an area zoned a mixture of R-4 and R-2 .
4. The rezoning will allow uses which are more suitable than uses permitted under the existing zoning classification. The proposed down zoning is consistent with the City’s long-standing density reduction policy.
5. The rezoning a consistent extension of the existing land uses, existing zoning classifications, and essential character of the general area. The area is primarily residential and will remain that way.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay, great. Hearing the Findings of Fact from Staff, can we make a motion?
MOTION OF APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Mr. Choudhury
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Martinez
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers, Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, and Mrs. Martinez
NAYS: 0
Motion carried.
A motion was made by Mr. Choudhury, seconded by Mrs. Martinez, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/21/2022. The motion carried.
22-0932 An Ordinance amending Chapter 49 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Aurora, by modifying the zoning map attached thereto to rezone the vacant property located at 801 Claim St from M-2 Manufacturing District - General to R-3 One Family Dwelling District
Mr. Sodaro said the City is requesting to rezone the vacant property from M-2 Manufacturing District- General to R-3 One Family Dwelling District. The City has no plans to maintain this property and is looking to sell the property for a higher and better use. This use being single family residential. Four single family homes would be able to fit on this lot and the intention is to sell the property for a fair market value.
Acting Chair Anderson said I will open up the public hearing now for any comments from the audience. Please come up. When you come up, state your name and also write down your address for the record as well.
Mr. Sieben said do you want me to swear them in?
Acting Chair Anderson said yes.
Mr. Sieben said can you raise your right hand; I’ll swear you in. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Hernandez said yes.
Mr. Sieben said and then if you could sign in your name and address.
Mr. Hernandez said good evening. My name is Carlos Hernandez. I am a Deacon at the Potter’s House Apostolic Church which is the property that is adjacent to the 801
Claim Street property. As a church, we would like to request the City, if it is going to get rezoned, which I don’t know what the interest of the City is to rezone this property, but we would like to request from the City that this property be donated to the Potter’s House Apostolic Church. I know I’m going out on a limb by asking this request, but I think, we feel that it would pose a conflict to our church if this property was developed into single-family dwellings.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay, thank you very much. Would anyone else like to comment as well?
Mr. Sieben said so…Ed Sieben, Zoning Director….so, I did talk to the pastor and we’ll take his information and take it under advisement. The purpose of the down zoning is obviously this property is the heaviest manufacturing zoning there is, so we don’t want a factory to go in next to the church, obviously. So, we feel a single-family zoning is a much lower use there. The City is still determining what we want to do with the property, like Jake said. Potentially, with the R-3 single-family, you could maybe get 4 lots there, but we’re going to do any appraisal and then we will be in contact with the church.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay, thank you.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said can I ask a question, Ed?
Mr. Sieben said sure.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said on the zoning map, where the church is, I think it looks kind of odd.
Mr. Sieben said yellow?
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said you have yellow and then it has some quasi…public….
Mr. Sieben said public? Sure, this property used to be a factory. The building…I believe….is there also a flea market?
Mr. Hernandez said yes.
Mr. Sieben said so, about 15 to 20 years ago when I was here, we did a special use to allow the church use in part of the building and then the rest of the building is the, I believe, it’s the East Side Flea Market or East….no, what….
Mr. Hernandez said it’s the Grand Plaza.
Mr. Sieben the Grand Plaza now, it used to be a different name, but part of it is a retail kind of market and the rest of it is the church and the old building that’s there.
There is a special use, we left the underlying residential zoning because that fits the neighborhood, but their use was allowed. I’m sorry, Yvonne.
Mrs Owusu-Safo said that’s fine, okay. I know the property; it’s just I didn’t know why the quasi….
Mr. Sieben said yeah, that’s why. And the quasi-public was the church type use.
Acting Chair Anderson said any additional questions for Staff?
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said one more question. Sorry. If this is rezoned into basically the lowest form of dwelling, which is the residential…
Mr. Sieben said lowest intensity use.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said intensity use or lower intensity, and for some reason it becomes an option for the church, does that remain residential or do you come back to rezone again?
Mr. Sieben said so the base zoning would stay residential but let’s say they wanted to expand for parking or a park or whatever, they could come back and ask for that zoning.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said okay.
Acting Chair Anderson said are we planning on building how many buildings there? Do we know yet?
Mr. Sieben said so potentially with the R-3 zoning, you could do 4 single-family lots.
Okay?
Acting Chair Anderson said okay. Thank you.
Mr. Sodaro said Staff would like to read into the record the Findings of Fact as required of Rezoning Petitions:
1. The proposal is in accordance with all applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora.
2. The proposal represents the logical establishment and/or consistent extension of the requested classification. This area is a mix of single-family residential, some businesses, some multi-family residential and we seek to eliminate the higher intensity use.
3. The proposal is consistent with a desirable trend of development in the general area. The area to the east and to the south is zoned R-3 and it would match that zoning classification.
4. The rezoning will allow uses which are more suitable than uses permitted under the existing zoning classification. We’re looking to protect the residential uses from a potential higher intensity use that would be typically allowed under the M-2.
5. The rezoning a consistent extension of the existing land uses, existing zoning classifications, and essential character of the general area.
With these Findings of Facts read into the record, Staff would recommend approval of the Ordinance.
Acting Chair Anderson said thank you. Hearing the Findings of Facts, can we get a motion?
MOTION OF APPROVAL WAS MADE BY: Mr. Kuehl
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Martinez
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers, Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, Mrs.
Owusu-Safo, and Mrs. Martinez
NAYS: 0
Motion carried.
A motion was made by Mr. Kuehl, seconded by Mrs. Martinez, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/21/2022. The motion carried.
22-0933 An Ordinance amending Chapter 49 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Aurora, by modifying the zoning map attached thereto to rezone the property located at 127 N Sumner Avenue from B-3 Business and Wholesale District to R-3 One Family Dwelling District
Mr. Sodaro said the City is requesting to rezone this vacant property from B-3 Business and Wholesale District to R-3 One Family Dwelling District. If you look at the attached zoning map, the properties to the south of New York Street are typically zoned B-3 along the street, and then once you move away from it, it goes to a single-family residential use. This is one of the few parcels that is sized perfectly for a single-family residential but zoned B-3. So, we’re looking to allow for a single-family home to be built there. That is the intent to sell the property to a potential home builder.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay, thank you. This is a public hearing so anyone who wants to comment on this particular item tonight, please come forward, raise your hand. Please note that no one’s come forward and we’ll just go into the Findings of Fact.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said can I ask a question?
Mr. Chambers said I have a question too.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said what…who owns the property adjacent to that and is that something that the rezoning should take into account, depending on what’s going to be done to that B-3 property?
Mr. Sieben said so, that’s not owned by the City, it’s a private owner. I don’t know who owns that, but we do have that set aside for commercial use. We did not want to extend the commercial use further south to intrude into the residential neighborhood.
So, that’s why the City lot, which is in blue there, we would like to have just residential. We feel the existing vacant lot is deep enough they could have a small commercial use.
Mr. Chambers said actually, that was my same question was asking who owned that lot and what the zoning was.
Mr. Sieben said I’m not a hundred percent sure, but it’s also B-2, so we’re okay along the frontage of New York to stay commercial.
Mr. Chambers said okay, thank you.
Acting Chair Anderson said and they’re all notified of this public hearing as well, right?
Mr. Sieben said oh yeah, absolutely.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said the only reason I brought it up was there was some commotion of Burger King going up on a property that backs against a residential.
So, there’s nothing on here to begin with….
Mr. Sieben said we’ll make sure if we sell this that people know that it’s next to business, okay?
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said okay.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay, any additional questions?
Mr. Sodaro said Staff would like to briefly touch upon the Findings of Fact as required for Rezoning Petitions:
1. The proposal is in accordance with all applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora.
2. The proposal represents the logical establishment and/or consistent extension of the requested classification. As we stated that there is a large amount of properties zoned R-3 to the south of this, to the west, and to the east as well.
3. The proposal is consistent with a desirable trend of development in the general area of the property in question. The area to the south, as I’ve stated, is zoned R-3 and the comprehensive plan also designates this property as well into the Low Density Residential. This is keeping in with that.
4. The rezoning will allow uses which are more suitable than uses permitted under the existing zoning classification. The residential zone is intended, as Ed stated, to move the commercial uses away from the residential, from the existing residential.
5. The rezoning is a consistent extension of the existing land uses, existing zoning classifications, and essential character of the area. Hearing all these Findings of Facts, Staff would recommend approval.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay, thank you. Hearing the Findings of Facts, do we have a motion?
Mr. Sieben said do we need to accept the Findings first?
Acting Chair Anderson said what’s that?
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said a motion to accept the Findings for Facts.
Mr. Sieben said right, do we have to do Findings first, right? Separate motion?
Acting Chair Anderson said right, okay. So, can we get a motion on the Findings of Fact?
MOTION OF APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT WAS MADE BY: Mr. Choudhury
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Chambers
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers, Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, and Mrs. Martinez
NAYS: 0
Motion carried.
Acting Chair Anderson said on to the next item which is…..
Mr. Sieben said we have to do the motion.
Mr. Sodaro said we have to do the motion to approve the item as well. You just accepted the Findings of Facts but we need the….
Acting Chair Anderson said oh, okay. Motion to approve. Can we motion?
MOTION OF APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE WAS MADE BY: Mrs. Martinez
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Chambers
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers, Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, and Mrs. Martinez
NAYS: 0
Motion carried.
A motion was made by Mr. Chambers, seconded by Mrs. Martinez, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/21/2022. The motion carried.
22-0934 An Ordinance amending Chapter 49 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Aurora, by modifying the zoning map attached thereto to rezone the vacant property located at the northwest corner of Prairie St and BNSF Railroad from R-1 One Family Dwelling District to P Park and Recreation District
Mr. Sodaro said the City is requesting to rezone the vacant property from R-1 to P Park District. The City has no plans to utilize this property. It’s mainly overgrown, partially in the flood plain, it is surrounded to the north and to the south by Kane County Park District owned property. The intention for this is to rezone to Park with the inevitable donation of the property to the Kane County Park District.
Mr. Sieben said Forest Preserve.
Mr. Sodaro said Forest Preserve, my apologies. This is….there is precedent in this transaction with other lots that the City has obtained that are no longer buildable or the City wishes to divest from.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay, alright. So, let’s commence the public hearing so anybody in the audience who wants to comment on this item, you’re welcome to.
Please note that no one came forward. Any questions for Staff on this?
Mr. Choudhury said I do have a question. It seems like….I mean….oh, not on this one. Alright, I’ll wait. (laughing)
Mr. Sodaro said Staff would like to briefly touch upon the Findings of Fact as required of Rezoning Petitions:
1. The proposal is in accordance with all applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora.
2. The proposal represents the logical establishment and/or existing extension of the requested classification. The area to the north is zoned P Park and is operated and owned by the Kane County Forest Preserve. This would be keeping with that.
3. The proposal is consistent with the desirable trend of development in the general area of the property in question. For instance, this property was placed in its present zoning, it hasn’t been really touched by any sort of human interference, so we’re looking to keep it as a protected area for the Kane County Forest Preserve.
4. The rezoning will allow uses which are more suitable than uses permitted under the existing zoning classification. Due to the property being in a floodplain, it’s not really buildable as anything other than being left vacant and it being in a forest preserve.
5. The rezoning is a consistent extension of the existing land uses, existing classifications, and essential character of the area.
Acting Chair Anderson said hearing the Findings of Facts, can I get a motion on the
Findings of Facts?
MOTION OF APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACTS WAS MADE BY: Mrs. Martinez
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Owusu-Safo
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers, Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, and Mrs. Martinez
NAYS: 0
Motion carried.
Acting Chair Anderson said the public hearing is closed. We don’t need to do another roll call, do we? Do we? Okay. Can we get a motion?
MOTION OF APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE WAS MADE BY: Mr. Choudhury
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Kuehl
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers, Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, and Mrs. Martinez
NAYS: 0
Motion carried.
A motion was made by Mr. Chambers, seconded by Mr. Choudhury, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/21/2022. The motion carried.
22-0935 An Ordinance amending Chapter 49 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Aurora, by modifying the zoning map attached thereto to rezone the property located at 169 Oakview Avenue from R-1 One Family Dwelling District to P Park and Recreation District
Mr. Sodaro said would you be able to read the next item as well as they are related?
A motion was made by Mrs. Martinez, seconded by Mrs. Owusu-Safo, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/21/2022. The motion carried.
22-0936 An Ordinance amending Chapter 49 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Aurora, by modifying the zoning map attached thereto to rezone the vacant property located south of East New York Street and east of
Oakview Avenue from R-1 One Family Dwelling District to P Park and Recreation District
Mr. Sodaro said so these two are two vacant properties zoned for single-family residential and if you look in the area on the zoning map, you will see a mix of residential zoned and park zoned. Those park properties are also owned and operated by the Kane County Forest Preserve. The policy that Staff has adopted with this area is to down zone them to P Parks and to donate them to the Kane County Forest Preserve as they come into our possession.
Mr. Sieben said just to add one more thing. So, the area south of the commercial on New York Street, there are a couple of existing homes but anything new that would develop there….there is not City water or sanitary sewer in that area, so we would not issue a new well or septic permit to build a house. The intent is everything south of that southern commercial line on New York Street would go to the Oakhurst Forest
Preserve. Slowly, these vacant lots, as the City acquires them, then we work out a deal with the Kane County Forest Preserve. That’s the purpose of that.
Acting Chair Anderson okay, thank you.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said so Ed, just a quick question. So, like you said, there are at least 4 currently occupies properties.
Mr. Sieben said sure, those obviously can stay. They’re on a well and septic, but we’re just not going to allow new homes to be built.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said okay.
Mr. Sieben said I’m sure in the future if the owner wanted to sell those, the Forest Preserve would be willing to buy them. It’s at the owner’s choice.
Acting Chair Anderson said alright, so this is a public hearing I’d like to open up for public comment. If anyone in the audience would like to…..sir, go ahead. Come up and we’ll swear you in and please sign your name and address as well.
Mr. Sieben said I’ll swear you in if you raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Villarreal said yes.
Mr. Sieben said okay, just give your name and address and sign in.
Mr. Villarreal said good afternoon. So, the address 173 Oakview Avenue is actually my mother in law’s, the one next to it we are actually planning on buying it, we’re in the process of buying it…my wife and myself….and we want to see if that lot is, if we can buy it for our family.
Mr. Sieben said is that north or south of this?
Mr. Villarreal said so this is my mother in law’s house, and this is the house we’re buying, and I believe the house that we’re buying comes with this lot. So, we would….
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said can you help us?
Mr. Sodaro said yeah, so the property shown, if you see the red roof house….that’s the one that the mother in law owns, the house to the north of that would be being purchased and it is believed that that vacant property would be included in that transaction, is that correct?
Mr. Villarreal said yes.
Mr. Sieben said this does not impact that address.
Mr. Villarreal said and also, the last 16 years, my father in law is the one that’s been maintaining that lot, cleaning.
Acting Chair Anderson said alright, thank you. Anyone else like to comment at this time?
Mr. Choudhury said yeah, but he’s not talking about the lot which we are talking about, right? The rezoning?
Mr. Sieben said no, he’s talking about…..
Mr. Chambers said yeah, his lot would not be affected by this.
Mr. Sieben no, right.
Mr. Sodaro said the lots owned by the City are the ones highlighted in blue and the one immediately to the south of that. Those are owned by the City, those are the ones in question. This does not affect the property owned by the speaker or the property to the north and its adjacent parcel.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said can I ask a quick question? Does the Kane County Forest District, Forest Preserve have an overall plan for this area and you know, potential plan to acquire all these properties or is going to let them take whatever course that they take until……
Mr. Sieben said right, so it’s kind of a slow acquisition. The Oakhurst Forest Preserve is to the south of that…kind of the dead end there, where it’s kind of more to the south. But the goal is to….because this is all, like floodplain and it’s wetland, a lot of it and the goal would be to eventually acquire those and then make it all contiguous. We’ve been doing this for 20-some years or more with the Forest Preserve, so it’s just an incremental as they come on the market. These are owned by the City so we’re just rezoning it to P, so P allows for the Forest Preserve use, but I’m not aware specifically on the north end of this until the Forest Preserve gets more properties.
Acting Chair Anderson said any additional questions for Staff?
Mr. Sodaro said Staff would briefly like to touch upon the Findings of Fact as is required of Rezoning Petitions:
1. The proposal is in accordance with all applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora. With the comprehensive plan as well, it does dictate that this area go over to the Parks and
Open Space use.
2. The proposal represents the logical establishment and/or consistent extension of the requested classification in consideration. As you can see on the Zoning map, there is a patchwork of Parks department….Parks zoned properties in this area.
3. The proposal is consistent with a desirable trend of development in the general area of the property. As the comprehensive plan dictates, and this we’ve spoken on tonight, there is a plan to donate these properties….and there has been a plan to donate these properties to the Forest Preserve.
4. The rezoning will allow uses which are more suitable than uses permitted under the existing zoning classification.
5. The rezoning a consistent extension of the existing land uses, existing zoning classifications, and essential character of the general area.
Acting Chair Anderson said and this will apply to both ordinances 0935 and 0936?
Mr. Sieben said yes, correct.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay, alright. Hearing these Findings of Fact from Staff, can we motion that for approval?
MOTION OF APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT WAS MADE BY: Mr. Choudhury
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Kuehl
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers, Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, and Mrs. Martinez
NAYS: 0
Motion carried.
MOTION OF APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE WAS MADE BY: Mrs. Martinez
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mrs. Owusu-Safo
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers, Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, and Mrs. Martinez
NAYS: 0
Motion carried
A motion was made by Mrs. Martinez, seconded by Mrs. Owusu-Safo, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/21/2022. The motion carried.
22-0937 An Ordinance amending Chapter 49 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Aurora, by modifying the zoning map attached thereto to rezone the property located at 536 East New York Street from P Park and Recreation District to R-2 One Family Dwelling District
Mr. Sodaro said this property is currently owned by the City and is built as a park. In our meetings on discussing the inventory of lots owned by the City, the Parks
Department has cited that there is a declining/lack of use of this park in particular, mainly due to development of other larger parks in the area. Think of McCarty Park, that’s one that took some of the traffic away from this one. And with declining quality of the playground equipment and things like that, the Parks Department determined that the best course of action would be to sell this property off, to down zone it from Parks, and to potentially develop it as single-family homes.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay, thank you. And this is a public hearing I’d like to open this at this time. Would anybody in the audience like to speak on this item in particular? Okay, if you could please come up, we’ll swear you in and you’ll sign your name in and address as well.
Mr. Sieben said I’ll swear you in. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Garcia said yes.
Mr. Sieben said okay. Just do your name and address and sign in.
Mr. Garcia said I’m the owner of the house that’s right next to the park.
Mr. Sieben said what’s your address, sir?
Mr. Garcia said 59 N. Anderson Street. So, I’ve been there like since 2004 and this been in use same as before but kids still going playing there. It’s going to hurt a little bit the neighborhood if it’s removed. But nothing else is can be done, it’s fine but my question is it’s only 1 single-family home or it would be more than 1? Because…..I’m sorry, because my question is because we already have too many problems with traffic and parking spots because apartments on New York Street between Root and Anderson, most of the people doesn’t have enough parking for (unintelligible) and they all park on Anderson and we have the church that is on the corner of New York and Root and Saturdays it’s always park there because not enough parking spots, so I’m just worried about more traffic problems there.
Acting Chair Anderson said right.
Mr. Sieben said is this you right here, the little house?
Mr. Garcia said yeah, this, the one next to it.
Mr. Sieben said oh, okay. If I can respond?
Acting Chair Anderson said sure.
Mr. Sieben said thank you. So, looking at the aerial, it’s kind of a little bit of an L shaped property so we were, we’ve been in contact with the owner on East New York Street, right next door, and then Oscar who is on Anderson. We would like to work with them if we could donate some of the land to make their lots a little larger. For example, Oscar’s is a very small lot on Anderson, so we could maybe make his backyard a little bigger and the one on New York a little bit bigger. And then maybe there would be one single-family home that would be the majority of the rest of the property. Just one single-family home.
Acting Chair Anderson said okay, alright.
Mr. Sieben said that hasn’t been worked out yet, but we’ll be in contact with them. Acting Chair Anderson said okay. Any additional questions for Staff? At this time, I’ll close public hearing and we’ll hear from Staff.
Mr. Sodaro said Staff would like to briefly touch upon the Findings of Fact as is required of Rezoning Petitions:
1. The proposal is in accordance with all applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora.
2. The proposal represents the logical establishment and/or consistent extension of the requested classification. The surrounding area is primarily residential, and this zoning classification would be keeping with that.
3. The proposal is consistent with a desirable trend of development in the general area. The subject property is in area zoned a mixture of R-4 and R-2 and as with our density reduction program, we’re looking at the lower intensity use.
4. The rezoning will allow uses which are more suitable than uses permitted under
the existing zoning classification. With the intention of selling this lot to a single-family residential developer, the R-2 zone is the most fitting classification.
5. The rezoning a consistent extension of the existing land uses, existing zoning classifications, and essential character of the area.
Hearing all these Findings of Facts, Staff would recommend approval of this ordinance.
Acting Chair Anderson said alright, hearing the Findings of Facts by Staff, can I get approval?
MOTION OF APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT WAS MADE BY: Mrs. Martinez
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Kuehl
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers, Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, and Mrs. Martinez
NAYS: 0
Motion carried.
MOTION OF APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE WAS MADE BY: Mr. Choudhury
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Kuehl
AYES: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Chambers, Mr. Choudhury, Mr. Kuehl, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, and Mrs. Martinez
NAYS: 0
Motion carried.
A motion was made by Mr. Choudhury, seconded by Mr. Kuehl, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee, on the agenda for 11/21/2022. The motion carried.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Acting Chair Anderson said alright, the discussion is done for all the items listed in the agenda tonight. Do we have any other announcements?
Mr. Sodaro said all the items heard tonight will next be heard at the Building, Zoning, and Economic Development Committee meeting to be held November 21st in City Council Chambers at 3:00 pm.
Acting Chair Anderson said alright, thank you. Alright, can I get a motion to adjourn the meeting tonight? Oh, Ed….Ed’s got something to say.
Mr. Sieben said oh, just our next meeting is going to be Wednesday, December 7th, our next regular meeting. We’ll have several items because it’s the last of the year.
And then a week later, on the 14th we will have our annual dinner so if you haven’t already contacted Sharon, please let her know. We look forward to seeing you at Craft Urban.
Acting Chair Anderson said alright, thank you all.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION OF ADJOURNMENT WAS MADE BY: Mr. Choudhury
MOTION SECONDED BY: Mr. Kuehl
Motion carried by voice vote.
Acting Chairperson Anderson adjourned the meeting at 7:44 pm.
A motion was made by Mr. Choudhury , seconded by Mr. Kuehl, that this meeting be adjourned. The motion carried by voice vote.
https://www.aurora-il.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_11162022-3062
Alerts Sign-up