Chambana Sun

City of Champaign Plan Commission met June 18

Here are the minutes provided by the commission:

The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m.

Roll Call:

Members Present: Cole, Trautman, Kroencke, Elmore

Staff Present: Marino, Horwick, Trotter, VanBuskirk, Knight, Trevino, Vandeventer, Vonderheide, Teplensky

Approval of the minutes of the May 21, 2025 meeting. Cole: So Moved. Elmore: Seconds.

Unanimous “yes” vote.

PL-25-17 Rezoning of A Portion of 111 E. Clark

Trevino: This property is part of the Boneyard Creek Second Street Basin. The proposed rezoning is from MFUniv, Multifamily University District to CB1, Central Business Urban Fringe District. The property is currently owned by the City of Champaign. The City acquired the property in 2001. There were two structures on this property which have since been demolished for the Boneyard Creek Second Street Basin project. The subject property is planned to be combined with the adjacent 106 E. Clark Street in a replat to be privately owned.

The purpose of the rezoning is to match the zoning of the property at 106 E. Clark to create a lot that is suitable for development.

Mia explains where the property is located and explains that the property does not front either University or First Street. Aerials of the properties are shown. The zoning history of the property is reviewed. Mia explains that since 106 E. Clark is zoned CB1 to make this a viable developable lot combining the two with like zoning districts give the lot more development potential.

The Future Land Use Map shows this lot as part of the Downtown Center.

Plan Commission should consider the range of permitted and provisional uses in the proposed CB1 zoning district, the Development Context Criteria and the LaSalle Criteria. A lot of mixed-use types would be introduced which are wanted for the Downtown Centers future land use. Although it says that multifamily dwellings would go away as a provisional use they would be allowed without any actually provisions in this case because it does not front on any of the restricted streets.

She explains that Development Context Criteria four and five both stood out for this case. She gives details of why these criteria were felt to be important.

The LaSalle Criteria are reviewed, and staff finds that they are balanced in favor of the proposed rezoning.

Staff recommend forwarding this proposal to City Council with a recommendation for approval.

There was one comment received from a citizen in opposition of this case. They were worried about housing but in this case, housing would be allowed. Are there any questions?

Kroencke: Are there any questions for staff?

Elmore: If a developer chose to do multifamily are there any more hurdles that they would need to jump through than if it was zoned MFUniv? Knight: No, in fact in order to combine the now privately owned property with the City owned property we needed to have them zoned the same so basically as it stands now you could not develop as much on the property as you will now be able to once, we combine the two properties under the same zoning. The only provision in the provisional use category applies when it fronts on a specific street that requires ground floor commercial. In this case that is not required. They could have it but that is up to whoever develops it.

Kroencke: Any other questions for Mia or staff? Seeing none, do I have a motion to close the Public Hearing?

Cole: So Moved. Trautman: Seconds. Unanimous “yes” vote.

Kroencke: Any further comments that the Commission would like to make?

Cole: I move that forward this case to City Council with a recommendation for approval as it meets all of the Lasalle Criteria. Trautman: Seconds. Unanimous “yes” vote.

Knight: This will go to the July 8, 2025 meeting.

Adjourn: 4:10 p.m.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/18NKkmF-fQns_WYumfcZdbmkqRXxA3hOa/view