City of Aurora Planning Commission met April 5.
Here is the minutes provided by the Commission:
Call to Order:
Chairman Truax called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Roll Call:
The following Commission members were present: Chairman Truax, Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Bergeron, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Cole, Mr. Divine, Mrs. Head, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Pilmer and Mr. Reynolds. Mrs. Duncan and Mr. Garcia were absent.
Others Present:
The following staff members were present: Mrs. Vacek and Mrs. Jackson.
Others Present: John Duggan (Attorney), Mike Setork (Fox Valley Property Services, LLC), Ed Seifert (Intech), and Colleen Marnell (Kimley Horn & Associates).
Approval of Minutes:
17-00218 Approval of the Minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of March 8, 2017.
A motion was made by Mr. Bergeron, seconded by Mrs. Anderson, that the minutes be approved and filed. The motion carried.
Agenda:
17-00105 An Ordinance Establishing a Special Use Planned Development, Approving the Plan Description and Amending Ordinance Number 3100, being the Aurora Zoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map attached thereto, to an underlying zoning of B-2 Business District, General Retail and P Park and Recreation District for the property located on the south side of New York Street, west of Welsh Drive (Fox Valley Property Services, LLC - 17-00105 / AU24/4-16.080-PD/R/Ppn/Psd - TV - Ward 7) (Public Hearing)
Mrs. Vacek said the subject property is currently a vacant lot with B-3(S) Business and Wholesale zoning with a Special Use Planned Development on the property, which was done in the 1970’s. The Petitioner is before you tonight for approval of the establishment of a new Special Use Planned Development and to change the underlying zoning to B-2 Business District General Retail and P Park Recreational District. The Plan Description that is being proposed includes some modifications to the standard B-2 regulations, which include the addition of up to one of each of the following uses as permitted uses:
1. Used car dealership with major auto repair when it would be accessory to the used car dealership.
2. Retail sales and services with a drive-thru.
3. Financial institutions with a drive-thru.
4. Restaurant with a drive-thru.
5. Mini-Storage.
Each one of those would be allowed. One would be a permitted use. The Plan Description also established the parking regulations for vehicles and mini-storage. It also establishes the standard prohibited uses. The Plan Description allows for an 18 foot development sign along New York Street, which is comparable to all the other signs that are out along New York Street in that area. Lastly, the Plan Description also includes the ability to waive certain sections of the Aurora Subdivision Control Ordinance. Parcel 4, which is in the back of the lot, is actually anticipated to be dedicated to the Kane County Forest Preserve. In addition, the Petitioner is requesting a Preliminary Plan and Plat for the Fox Valley Square Subdivision, which includes a 4 lot subdivision with dedication of 5 feet of right-of-way and dedication of a 15 foot city easement along New York Street. The proposed Lot 1 is anticipated to be developed as a 4,380 square foot used car dealership with 3 bays. There is a total of 58 parking spaces proposed on the lot, of which 43 can be used for auto sales display. For the proposed Lot 2, it is anticipated to be developed as a 14,000 square foot retail strip center with 80 parking spaces on the lot. Proposed Lot 3, which is located in the rear of the development, is proposed to be developed with about 25,000 square feet of mini-storage buildings and a total of 3 parking spaces. There is one full access that will be off of New York Street, being a shared drive along Lot 3. The access aligns with the private drive of TT Technologies, which is across the street from New York Street. As I said before, Lot 4 is anticipated to be dedicated to the Kane County Forest Preserve.
Mrs. Cole said I have a question. I drove by there the other day and maybe someone can refresh my memory. When we have heavy rains, how far does the water come up in that vacant area there? It seems like I can remember it coming pretty, well it seems like it would cover where they are going to put their mini-storage.
Mrs. Vacek said I can have the developers speak to that. I did forget to tell you one other thing. Back in the 1970’s when the Plan Description was established the first time around, there were provisions in there that they could pay a fee in lieu of the construction of Oakhurst Lake, so they are basically buying some detention from that lake that they built in the 1970’s. There were provisions that laid out that they were able to do that, so instead of doing detention on this property, they would actually be paying for a portion of that construction when it happened. Does that make sense?
Mrs. Cole said no, it doesn’t. I believe I’ve seen a lot of water on that piece of property since 1970.
Mrs. Vacek said I’ll let them talk about the water and everything. That pond was an overall detention pond for that whole area.
Mrs. Cole said I understand the premise on that.
Mrs. Vacek said I’ll let them talk about the engineering and how they are all going to make it work.
The Petitioners were sworn in.
Good evening ladies and gentlemen. My name is John Duggan and I’m the attorney for Mike Setork, who is one of the managers of the company that owns this property and is proposing this development. First we’d like to thank the city staff, the Engineering Department and the entire Planning Department, for all the assistance they’ve had. They’ve had a long series of meetings and conferences and submittals and numerous versions of the project, which we think has improved it quite a bit and we are very appreciative of the effort that the staff has put into this. As far as the land use, this is basically comparable to the plan and the use and we feel it is appropriate for this purpose. The used car lot is being built by the owner for his own use. They previously operated a comparable business that I think was very well run and very presentable on Aucutt Road, east of Route 31 in Montgomery. They have been in that business for many years and have done that business properly and honorably. You had the question about the detention plan and, again, as Tracey mentioned this is part of a regional detention area and it is one of the tributaries of the regional pond that was built and we have a cash in lieu agreement with the city that the Engineering staff has approved and provides for the detention to be off-site. We are donating the southerly 9 acres, approximately, to the Forest Preserve District. That area is going to be preserved as open space as part of the plan. Ed Seifert is here and he can discuss the civil engineering conclusions, which have been approved and then demonstrated to the city staff as part of their recommendation.
Mr. Seifert said this area back in the 1970’s and earlier had experienced a tremendous amount of flooding, which was one of the reasons that the Oakhurst Lake was built in 1980 to increase a whole lot of additional storage in the area and to control that flooding. Flooding still does occur on the back portion of this property, but it is confined solely to the area that is going to be given to the Forest Preserve District. It does not intrude upon the area that we are showing for development here at all.
Chairman Truax said Tracey, can you get the map up onto the screen?
Mrs. Vacek said I hope this gives you a little bit better of a perspective. This portion back here is the portion of Lot 4 that actually is anticipated to be dedicated to the Kane County Forest Preserve. So that portion that kind of goes along with that line is where they would be developing then, north of that.
Chairman Truax said so the portion on the map that is tan colored is what we are talking about going to the Forest Preserve?
Mrs. Vacek said correct, and this is all Forest Preserve behind it. It is all part of the Oakhurst Forest Preserve.
Chairman Truax said where’s the lake? Where is Oakhurst Lake more or less? Is it straight down from here?
Mrs. Vacek said yes. It is just down a little further.
Chairman Truax said to our left as we look at it, it looks like a line of trees that are maybe a third of the way across that northern portion of the lot. What’s going to be there?
Mrs. Vacek said that will be developed. A portion of it will be the used car dealership, Lot 1 and a portion of it will be the storage facility.
Chairman Truax said what is the Petitioner’s thoughts about the use of those trees or the demise of those trees? What are we talking about for landscaping?
Mr. Duggan said they have submitted a landscaping plan that complies with the code. I think most of those trees will be removed. I don’t believe they are going to be kept.
Mrs. Vacek said let me expand on that. This is just preliminary, so we haven’t really got into the landscape plan. We haven’t really reviewed that. When they come back, we’ll look at what kind landscaping, or what kind of trees, especially since there are a whole bunch of trees out there, what kind of trees they are and if there are any good trees that should be kept. If there are some around the perimeter of each of those lots that we could keep, we will try to keep those.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said what kind of storage facility is it going to be? It is going to be like a couple of story buildings with climate control or not climate control if there are some potential flooding concerns there?
Mr. Duggan said the contemplation is naturally that we hope that the buyer of the property will have the best ideas on what market is best at that location. We’re believing it would be individual rental storages of a non-climate controlled nature is the conception that we have now. If someone chooses to build a climate controlled building, obviously, they’ll have to manage the grades and the civil engineering appropriately.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said in just looking at the map where they show all the storm sewer lines, is it out-falling directly into the lake or is it through a ditch to get to the lake? How is that discharged?
Mr. Seifert said it outfalls into the depressed area at the back of the property that we are going to be giving to the Forest Preserve District and then that depressed area naturally drains down through a waterway down to the lake from there.
The public input portion of the public hearing was opened. No witnesses came forward. The public input portion of the public hearing was closed.
Mrs. Vacek said staff would recommend conditional approval of the Ordinance establishing a Special Use Planned Development, approving the Plan Description and amending Ordinance 3100, being the Aurora Zoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map attached thereto, to an underlying zoning of B-2 Business District General Retail and P Park and Recreational District for the property located on the south side of New York, West of Welsh Drive with the following conditions:
1. That the property owner shall enter into a dedication agreement with the Kane County Forest Preserve District for Parcel B, being Lot 4 of the Fox Valley Square Subdivision, within 90 days of the approval of this Plan Description.
Mrs. Cole said I’m sorry, I have 2 more questions. Apparently our Engineering is comfortable with the drainage from this site?
Mrs. Vacek said correct. They have looked at this. Obviously this is, again, preliminary so they have looked at it preliminarily. They are okay with everything.
They do need to meet the runoff like any normal standard runoff that meets the ordinance. I believe it is like 1 per acre. Like I said, they have looked at it preliminarily and they are comfortable with it.
Mrs. Cole said my other question is have you agreed on the, I think there was some question about sidewalks?
Mrs. Vacek said they are providing sidewalks along New York Street.
Chairman Truax said the Forest Preserve District, I’m assuming, has also agreed to the acquisition of the property?
Mrs. Vacek said I know that they are making contact.
Mr. Duggan said we are in the process of tendering the donation to the Forest Preserve District.
Chairman Truax said so they’ve agreed to the.
Mr. Duggan said we haven’t gotten there agreement. That’s why they suggested the condition. The Forest Preserve would have to accept the back property or we would have to make other arrangements to maintain it with a conservation easement. The developer’s commitment is that that will be maintained as permanent open space in either event and it will be available to receive and transmit both the discharge from this property and also the overland flow that flows across it into that waterway.
Mr. Cameron said on the original aerial shot, is the spot where the notch occurs basically the bottom end of the development?
Mr. Duggan said yes sir. It is just a few feet southerly of that notch that will be dedicated to the Forest Preserve District or otherwise permanently maintained as open space.
Mrs. Vacek said it looks like it is about 12 feet.
Mr. Cameron said and it is apparent where all the dead grass is, is where all the flood waters are.
Mr. Duggan said probably.
Chairman Truax said what’s the total acreage?
Mrs. Vacek said of the entire property?
Chairman Truax said yes.
Mrs. Vacek said 14 acres.
Chairman Truax said and then 6 acres is preliminary planned to go to the Forest Preserve?
Mrs. Vacek said 9.08 acres. So here is basically the layout of the lots. So Lot 1, Lot 2, Lot 3, and then Lot 4 is what would be dedicated to the Kane County Forest Preserve.
Motion of Approval was Made by: Mr. Cameron
Motion Seconded by: Mrs. Anderson
Ayes: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Bergeron, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Cole, Mr. Divine, Mrs. Head, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Pilmer, Mr. Reynolds
Nays: None
Findings of Fact:
1. Is the proposal in accordance with all applicable official physical development policies and other related official plans and policies of the City of Aurora?
Mrs. Cole said these are listed in the staff report.
2. Does the proposal represent 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?
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said yes it is. There are other proposed similar uses in the area.
3. Is the proposal 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?
Mr. Cameron said it is a commercial use area.
4. Will the proposal maintain a compatible relationship with the traffic pattern and traffic volume of adjacent streets and not have an adverse effect upon traffic or pedestrian movement and safety in the general area of the property in question?
Mr. Chambers said there should be no effect because there is a business directly across the street that has the drive aligned perfectly with the drive across the street.
Mrs. Anderson said with the addition also of sidewalks as well.
5. Will the proposal allow for the provision of adequate public services and facilities to the property in question and have no adverse effect upon existing public services and facilities?
Mrs. Cole said some of these will need to be installed after the decision is made on just how this is going to develop, such as if there is a restaurant they’ll have to put in the special grease traps and different types of public facilities.
6. Does the proposal take adequate measures or will they be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to maximize pedestrian and vehicular circulation ease and safety, minimize traffic congestion, and not substantially increase the congestion in the public streets?
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said I think we don’t have enough information to say yes or no yet since this is at the preliminary stage.
9a. Will the Special Use not preclude the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties due to the saturation or concentration of similar uses in the general area?
Chairman Truax said this is somewhat a concern of mine as there are a lot of used car lots in this particular area.
9b. Is the Special Use in all other respects in conformance to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located, except as such regulations may in each instance be modified by the City Council pursuant to the recommendations of the Plan Commission?
Chairman Truax said I believe it is conformance.
Mrs. Vacek said this will next be heard at the Planning and Development Committee on Thursday, April 13, 2017, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.
A motion was made by Mr. Cameron, seconded by Mrs. Anderson, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee, on the agenda for 4/13/2017. The motion carried.
17-00106 A Resolution Approving a Preliminary Plan and Plat for the Fox Valley Square Subdivision Being Vacant Land located on the south side of New York Street, west of Welsh Drive (Fox Valley Property Services, LLC - 17-00106 / AU24/4-16.080-PD/R/Ppn/Psd - TV - Ward 7)
Mrs. Vacek said the subject property is currently a vacant lot with B-3(S) Business and Wholesale zoning with a Special Use Planned Development on the property, which was done in the 1970’s. The Petitioner is before you tonight for approval of the establishment of a new Special Use Planned Development and to change the underlying zoning to B-2 Business District General Retail and P Park Recreational District. The Plan Description that is being proposed includes some modifications to the standard B-2 regulations, which include the addition of up to one of each of the following uses as permitted uses:
1. Used car dealership with major auto repair when it would be accessory to the used car dealership.
2. Retail sales and services with a drive-thru.
3. Financial institutions with a drive-thru.
4. Restaurant with a drive-thru.
5. Mini-Storage.
Each one of those would be allowed. One would be a permitted use. The Plan Description also established the parking regulations for vehicles and mini-storage. It also establishes the standard prohibited uses. The Plan Description allows for an 18 foot development sign along New York Street, which is comparable to all the other signs that are out along New York Street in that area. Lastly, the Plan Description also includes the ability to waive certain sections of the Aurora Subdivision Control Ordinance. Parcel 4, which is in the back of the lot, is actually anticipated to be dedicated to the Kane County Forest Preserve. In addition, the Petitioner is requesting a Preliminary Plan and Plat for the Fox Valley Square Subdivision, which includes a 4 lot subdivision with dedication of 5 feet of right-of-way and dedication of a 15 foot city easement along New York Street. The proposed Lot 1 is anticipated to be developed as a 4,380 square foot used car dealership with 3 bays. There is a total of 58 parking spaces proposed on the lot, of which 43 can be used for auto sales display. For the proposed Lot 2, it is anticipated to be developed as a 14,000 square foot retail strip center with 80 parking spaces on the lot. Proposed Lot 3, which is located in the rear of the development, is proposed to be developed with about 25,000 square feet of mini-storage buildings and a total of 3 parking spaces. There is one full access that will be off of New York Street, being a shared drive along Lot 3. The access aligns with the private drive of TT Technologies, which is across the street from New York Street. As I said before, Lot 4 is anticipated to be dedicated to the Kane County Forest Preserve.
Mrs. Cole said I have a question. I drove by there the other day and maybe someone can refresh my memory. When we have heavy rains, how far does the water come up in that vacant area there? It seems like I can remember it coming pretty, well it seems like it would cover where they are going to put their mini-storage.
Mrs. Vacek said I can have the developers speak to that. I did forget to tell you one other thing. Back in the 1970’s when the Plan Description was established the first time around, there were provisions in there that they could pay a fee in lieu of the construction of Oakhurst Lake, so they are basically buying some detention from that lake that they built in the 1970’s. There were provisions that laid out that they were able to do that, so instead of doing detention on this property, they would actually be paying for a portion of that construction when it happened. Does that make sense?
Mrs. Cole said no, it doesn’t. I believe I’ve seen a lot of water on that piece of property since 1970.
Mrs. Vacek said I’ll let them talk about the water and everything. That pond was an overall detention pond for that whole area.
Mrs. Cole said I understand the premise on that.
Mrs. Vacek said I’ll let them talk about the engineering and how they are all going to make it work.
The Petitioners were sworn in.
Good evening ladies and gentlemen. My name is John Duggan and I’m the attorney for Mike Setork, who is one of the managers of the company that owns this property and is proposing this development. First we’d like to thank the city staff, the Engineering Department and the entire Planning Department, for all the assistance they’ve had. They’ve had a long series of meetings and conferences and submittals and numerous versions of the project, which we think has improved it quite a bit and we are very appreciative of the effort that the staff has put into this. As far as the land use, this is basically comparable to the plan and the use and we feel it is appropriate for this purpose. The used car lot is being built by the owner for his own use. They previously operated a comparable business that I think was very well run and very presentable on Aucutt Road, east of Route 31 in Montgomery. They have been in that business for many years and have done that business properly and honorably. You had the question about the detention plan and, again, as Tracey mentioned this is part of a regional detention area and it is one of the tributaries of the regional pond that was built and we have a cash in lieu agreement with the city that the Engineering staff has approved and provides for the detention to be off-site. We are donating the southerly 9 acres, approximately, to the Forest Preserve District. That area is going to be preserved as open space as part of the plan. Ed Seifert is here and he can discuss the civil engineering conclusions, which have been approved and then demonstrated to the city staff as part of their recommendation.
Mr. Seifert said this area back in the 1970’s and earlier had experienced a tremendous amount of flooding, which was one of the reasons that the Oakhurst Lake was built in 1980 to increase a whole lot of additional storage in the area and to control that flooding. Flooding still does occur on the back portion of this property, but it is confined solely to the area that is going to be given to the Forest Preserve District. It does not intrude upon the area that we are showing for development here at all.
Chairman Truax said Tracey, can you get the map up onto the screen?
Mrs. Vacek said I hope this gives you a little bit better of a perspective. This portion back here is the portion of Lot 4 that actually is anticipated to be dedicated to the Kane County Forest Preserve. So that portion that kind of goes along with that line is where they would be developing then, north of that.
Chairman Truax said so the portion on the map that is tan colored is what we are talking about going to the Forest Preserve?
Mrs. Vacek said correct, and this is all Forest Preserve behind it. It is all part of the Oakhurst Forest Preserve.
Chairman Truax said where’s the lake? Where is Oakhurst Lake more or less? Is it straight down from here?
Mrs. Vacek said yes. It is just down a little further.
Chairman Truax said to our left as we look at it, it looks like a line of trees that are maybe a third of the way across that northern portion of the lot. What’s going to be there?
Mrs. Vacek said that will be developed. A portion of it will be the used car dealership, Lot 1 and a portion of it will be the storage facility.
Chairman Truax said what is the Petitioner’s thoughts about the use of those trees or the demise of those trees? What are we talking about for landscaping?
Mr. Duggan said they have submitted a landscaping plan that complies with the code. I think most of those trees will be removed. I don’t believe they are going to be kept.
Mrs. Vacek said let me expand on that. This is just preliminary, so we haven’t really got into the landscape plan. We haven’t really reviewed that. When they come back, we’ll look at what kind landscaping, or what kind of trees, especially since there are a whole bunch of trees out there, what kind of trees they are and if there are any good trees that should be kept. If there are some around the perimeter of each of those lots that we could keep, we will try to keep those.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said what kind of storage facility is it going to be? It is going to be like a couple of story buildings with climate control or not climate control if there are some potential flooding concerns there?
Mr. Duggan said the contemplation is naturally that we hope that the buyer of the property will have the best ideas on what market is best at that location. We’re believing it would be individual rental storages of a non-climate controlled nature is the conception that we have now. If someone chooses to build a climate controlled building, obviously, they’ll have to manage the grades and the civil engineering appropriately.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said in just looking at the map where they show all the storm sewer lines, is it out-falling directly into the lake or is it through a ditch to get to the lake? How is that discharged?
Mr. Seifert said it outfalls into the depressed area at the back of the property that we are going to be giving to the Forest Preserve District and then that depressed area naturally drains down through a waterway down to the lake from there.
Mrs. Vacek said staff would recommend conditional approval of the Resolution approving a Preliminary Plan and Plat for the Fox Valley Square Subdivision being vacant land located on the south side of New York Street, west of Welsh Drive with the following condition:
1. That the property owner enter into a dedication agreement with the Kane County Forest Preservice for Parcel B, Lot 4 of the Fox Valley Square Subdivision, within 90 days of the approval of this Plan Description.
Chairman Truax said we’ve heard the staff’s recommendation. I don’t know if we might want to add another condition about looking carefully at a heavily forested area on this property or someone can make a motion.
Mrs. Cole said I would agree with Margaret’s addition there that this area be looked at. We have no idea if these are quality trees or not. It might be a little creative in the development of the site, but I think it is worth adding.
Motion of Approval was Made by: Mrs. Cole
Motion Seconded by: Mr. Chambers
Ayes: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Bergeron, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Cole, Mr. Divine, Mrs. Head, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Pilmer, Mr. Reynolds
Nays: None
Mrs. Vacek said this will next be heard at the Planning and Development Committee on Thursday, April 13, 2017, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.
A motion was made by Mrs. Cole, seconded by Mr. Chambers, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee, on the agenda for 4/13/2017. The motion carried.
17-00196 A Resolution Approving a Revision to the Final Plan on Lots 8 and 9 of Meijer Subdivision located at 778 N. State Route 59 for a Restaurant Use (2500) (Miller's Ale House - 17-00196 / NA21/2-16.066-Fpn/R - TV - Ward 10)
Mrs. Vacek said the Petitioner is requesting approval of a Final Plan Revision. The request includes the construction of an 8,010 square foot building for Miller’s Ale House Restaurant. The new building will be constructed in the same general location as the old restaurant, so the existing 115 space parking lot can be reused. The parking lot will be resurfaced and restriped and the Petitioner is proposing a new 10 foot monument sign pretty much in the same location as the existing sign that was up there. The Final Plan does include some building elevations. There is also landscaping being supplemented throughout the site. The building would be pretty much in the same location. It is just a little bit of a smaller building. This used to be the Luigi House. The Petitioner is here.
Mrs. Cole said is Drexel Avenue a public or private street?
Mrs. Vacek said it is a public street up until it comes into the Meijer area, then it goes private. So right behind the Meijer it goes private.
Mrs. Cole said right behind the Meijer?
Mrs. Vacek said right. For the residential portion it is a public street. It is Lehigh Station. When it comes into the Meijer Subdivision then it would turn into a private.
Mrs. Owusu-Safo said is Luigi’s getting demolished?
Mrs. Vacek said it is already demolished. Luigi House is demolished so they are putting up a new restaurant.
My name is Colleen Marnell. I live at 3014 N. Sheffield Avenue in Chicago, Illinois. I’m the Civil Engineer for the project. I work for Kimley Horn & Associates and I’m here representing Miller’s Ale House. So just some background on Miller’s, they are based out of Orlando. They have many restaurants in Florida, but here locally there is a location in Lombard, North Riverside, Chicago Ridge, and there is one that is about to be open in Norridge as well. Then there is one that is kind of running concurrently with this project in Schaumburg. So if you are familiar with any of those, that’s what you can expect. It is a family friendly restaurant with a nautical theme and a sports theme. It is about 70% food, 30% alcohol, so it is a restaurant, but they do have the bar area there as well. About 150 new local jobs will be created with this restaurant. There are TV’s in there, so that’s part of the sports theme, so you can go there to watch sporting events. They have 48 beers on tap. The menu price is a good price point. It is really affordable for what you get. That’s what Miller’s is about.
Mrs. Anderson said will there be any outside seating for this?
Ms. Marnell said yes. There is a patio. It is going to be roughly in the same area where Luigi’s had kind of that outdoor area.
Mr. Cameron said what’s the mix on restaurant tables against bar?
Ms. Marnell said there are 3 separate dining area the way that it is broken out. They’ve got the main interior dining room and bar, which has about 179 seats. Then they have what they call the Florida room dining and bar area. It is a conditioned space, but it can be opened to the outside during nice days, so they can kind of open up the windows there. That is about 111 seats. Then the patio with the TV’s is covered and has 44 seats. It is not like there is separate bar area only. It is all kind of combined together.
Mr. Reynolds said is there any entertainment like Luigi House?
Ms. Marnell said I guess I’m not familiar with what entertainment Luigi’s has had, but other than the TV’s and the food, nothing that I’m aware of.
Mrs. Anderson said I have a question. Once everything is approved, when is the opening?
Ms. Marnell said that is a great question. I think all the meetings, I think, are going to be done by the middle of May I want to say, so they will start construction and be open by the end of the year.
Mrs. Vacek said staff would recommend approval of the Resolution approving the revision to the Final Plan on Lot 8 and 9 of the Meijer Subdivision located at 778 N. State Route 59 for a restaurant use.
Motion of Approval was Made by: Mr. Chambers
Motion Seconded by: Mrs. Cole
Ayes: Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Bergeron, Mr. Cameron, Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Cole, Mr. Divine, Mrs. Head, Mrs. Owusu-Safo, Mr. Pilmer, Mr. Reynolds
Nays: None
Mrs. Vacek said this will next be heard at the Planning and Development Committee on Thursday, April 13, 2017, at 4:00 p.m. on the fifth floor of this building.
A motion was made by Mr. Chambers, seconded by Mrs. Cole, that this agenda item be Forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee, on the agenda for 4/13/2017. The motion carried.
Pending
Committee Reports:
A) Amendments
B) Grant and Award Research
C) Comprehensive Plan
Announcements:
Mrs. Vacek said the next meeting will be in 2 weeks on April 19th. There will also be a ZBA meeting that night.
Adjournment:
A motion was made by Mrs. Cole, seconded by Mrs. Head, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried by voice vote. Chairman Truax adjourned the meeting at 7:40 p.m.
https://www.aurora-il.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_04052017-1017
Alerts Sign-up