VILLAGE OF NORTH AURORA
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
JUNE 5, 2006
ROLL CALL
In attendance: Village President John Hansen, Trustees Paul Shoemaker, Dale Berman, Mike Herlihy, Mark Gaffino and Max Herwig. Not in attendance: Trustee Linda Mitchell.
Staff in attendance: Atty. Kevin Drendel, Sue McLaughlin, Bill Hannah, DeWayne Williams, Mike Glock and Tom Fetzer.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Lynn Muttschall of 308 Magnolia Drive asked for an update on the light situation at Comiskey and Randall. Mutschall said there is one light remaining on the east side that reflects light onto her home and backyard. Jim Bibby said the contractor ordered an updated cutoff that will shield the glare from the lights. Bibby said that the contractor had mentioned three or four weeks ago that the delivery time on this order would be 5 to 6 weeks. Muttschall asked why the light still needed to be on. Bibby said he turned in a memo to the Board showing that IDOT regulations and policy states that two intersection lights need to be on at the side of the T-intersection (far west side) and at least one on the alternating east side. Bibby said that what is currently on is per IDOT policy. Bibby added that if the Village turns off the light, the Village would be outside the standards of IDOT.
Ann Aurelius of 310 Magnolia Drive said that the County informed her that Randall Road had jurisdictional transfer and once it happens all regulations fall onto local government. The local government can follow the regulations of the County but are not required to do so. Aurelius said it seems the Village has a say in how the road lighting can be set up. Bibby said the Board has no say and the recommendation from Staff was to leave the three lights on but try to mitigate it by softening the light. Village President Hansen clarified that if the Village uses MFT Funds for the road, which the Village will do, the Village has to follow IDOT regulations. Aurelius asked if the Village has to follow the IDOT regulations for inlets and outlets. Hansen said that if the Village uses MFT funds, the Village is bound to use IDOT’s requirements. Jim Bibby and Mike Glock said that the Village would take a measurement of the illumination within the intersection and get back to the residents on Wednesday or Thursday.
Mark Aurelius of 310 Magnolia stated that he would prefer the light be turned off on the east side of the street and asked the Board to run the light analysis.
Geraldine Daraban of 214 W. State Street asked the Board how much the Village budgeted for the fireworks display. Trustee Herwig said that there is $22,000 budgeted for this year. Daraban questioned why the Village Board could not afford $125,000 for a Veteran’s Memorial. Daraban then asked if any of the $22,000 for fireworks is reimbursed. Herwig noted that the Village donated $30,000 to the war memorial. Daraban said she realized that but wanted to know if the funds for the fireworks are reimbursed to the Village. Herwig said it is a Village’s display and is paid for by the Village. There is no reimbursement.
Richard Krull of 815 Columbia Circle addressed the Board, recommending the Village change the Village shed regulations to ensure that sheds are not built similar to that which was erected behind his home. Mr. Krull referred to the shed as a 15-foot high farm shed that resembles an outhouse. Krull said that he believes this shed has lowered the value of his home. Trustee Berman said that the Board should look at the regulations and include an architectural requirement. The Board agreed.
Paul McSkimming (617 Hickory St. in Sugar Grove), representing the North Aurora Auto Mall, proposed that the sign on the north side of Orchard Gateway at Orchard & Orchard Gateway be moved, reconstructed so that it is larger and placed on the other side of Orchard Gateway at Orchard Road. The Auto Mall would also want to produce another sign and place it on the east side of Orchard Gateway at Randall where the Target sign is located. Village President Hansen noted that the sign on Randall would be a non-conforming sign since it is not on the premise.
DeWayne Williams noted the following: The sign would be an off-premise sign, which is currently not permitted. The sign ordinance only permits a 10-foot high sign and the proposed sign is 14 feet. The sign referenced on the north side of Orchard Gateway is in the way of the Village’s construction for the road widening so that sign would have to be removed.
Village President Hansen recommended to the Board that an ad-hoc committee be formed. Jim Bibby said that the present sign on the north side of Orchard Gateway is Village property. If that sign is not moved within a couple of weeks it will impact and delay the construction schedule for Orchard Road. Bibby recommended the Village Board consider transferring the ownership to the dealership association to let them initiate the process by moving the sign.
Sue McLaughlin said that the discussion last week was that the sign would be moved further south and a second sign would be placed further south so that there would be two signs on Orchard. McLaughlin said that the Randall proposal is new. McLaughlin proposed the Village move the sign, if it can be retained in a good fashion so that it can be reused, until it is determined whether or not the Auto Mall will be allowed to move the sign to Randall Road or further down Orchard. McSkimming said the Auto Mall would have no problem with getting rid of the sign, but that there needs to be a determination regarding what will be done with the sign. McLaughlin urged caution in the Board’s decision of this because it will set a precedent.
Trustee Herlihy said the current sign on Randall Road is part of the Annexation Agreement and PUD with Rubeloff. Herlihy asked if there is any parcel of land available for the Auto Mall to purchase for their sign. Trustees Berman and Gaffino volunteered to work on the committee.
There were no further Audience Comments.
1.
