Will County Land Use and Development Committee met Jan. 8.
Here is the minutes provided by the committee:
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Rachel Ventura led the Pledge of Allegiance.
II. CALL TO ORDER AND DECLARATION OF QUORUM
Chair Kenneth E. Harris called the meeting to order at 10:32 AM
| Attendee Name | Title | Status |
| Kenneth E. Harris | Chair | Present |
| Mark Ferry | Vice Chair | Present |
| Steve Balich | Member | Present |
| Amanda Koch | Member | Present |
| Jacqueline Traynere | Member | Present |
| Rachel Ventura | Member | Present |
| Tom Weigel | Member | Present |
Staff present were Jessica Gal, Janine Farrell, Marguerite Kenny, Brian Radner, David Dubois, Colin Duesing, Samantha Bluemer, and Kristine Mazon.
Dan McGrath and Mary Tatroe were present from the State's Attorney's Office.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Land Use & Development Committee - Regular Meeting - Nov 13, 2018 10:30 AM
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mark Ferry, Vice Chair
SECONDER: Rachel Ventura, Member
AYES: Harris, Ferry, Balich, Koch, Traynere, Ventura, Weigel
IV. NEW BUSINESS
1. Ordinance Amending the Will County, Illinois Zoning Ordinance Adopted and Approved September 9, 1947 as Amended for Zoning Case ZC-18-059, 1909 LLC – FMB Series; Owner of Record, Paul and Susan Siegel, Each 50% Interest, Paul Siegel, Agent, Requesting (S-18-022) Special Use Permit for Rural Events, for Pin #11-04-30-400-025-0000, in Lockport Township, Commonly Known as Vacant Property on South Weber Road, Lockport, IL
(Jessica Gal)
2nd item, S-18-023, Special Use Permit for Ancillary Liquor Service in Conjunction with Allowed Agritourism Uses, was tabled to the next meeting with a 7-0 vote. (Rachel Venture made the motion and Jacqueline Traynere 2nd the motion).
Chairman Harris asked for a Staff report. Janine Farrell presented Zoning Case # ZC-18-059 which takes place in Lockport Township. This is a 31.51 acre A-1 parcel. The applicant is requesting a Special Use permit for rural events and a Special Use permit for ancillary liquor service in conjuction with permitted agritourism uses. The rural events category is something that was recently approved by the County Board in August. It is part of the broader agritourism category. The rural events specifically addresses these wedding barn type venues, or a banquet hall type facility on a farm. This is something that is becoming very popular throughout the nation.
The applicant is requesting both of these Special Use permits today. The Special Use permit for ancillary liquor service is part 1 (one) of the process for the liquor request. So, the applicant will also need to request separately, through the County Board, that an additional liquor license be added. Should the Special Use permit be approved, then the applicant will actually apply for the liquor license and go through that process with the Liquor Commission.
The applicant operates Siegel's Cottonwood Farm on the subject parcel. It is for agritainment use on the parcel. The applicant has applied for a commercial build out for the structure and also a site development permit, which would provide the parking,
Staff did not receive any objections to the Special Use requests. Staff did recommend approval on both of these Special Use permit requests. Staff recommended 6 conditions for the Spcial Use permit for rural events. Those conditions are:
1. Upon (fourteen) 14 days of written notice to the owner of record at their last known address, Will County Land Use Department and Will County Sheriff’s Department employees are hereby granted the right of entry in and upon the premises for the purpose of inspection the premises and uses thereon for compliance with the terms and conditions of this special use permit.
2. Within 6 months of County Board approval, the applicant shall apply for permits for all structures located on the subject parcel constructed without building permits.
3. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Will County Health Department.
4.The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Lockport Fire Protection District.
5. Outdoor entertainment, such as live music, shall only be permitted in conjunction with the principal rural events use. No other uses outside of the rural events use or other permitted uses in the A-1 zoning district are allowed.
6. The applicant shall comply with all applicable County Codes and Ordinances including but not limited to outdoor lighting provisions as outlined in Will County Zoning Ordinance section 155-14.110 and Chapter 93 Public Nuisances - Noise. Staff also recommended approval of the Special Use permit for ancillary liquor service in conjunction with allow agritourism, which would permit attendees at the wedding to have beer/wine at the wedding, with 3 conditions:
1.Upon (fourteen) 14 days of written notice to the owner of record at their last known address, Will County Land Use Department and Will County Sheriff’s Department employees are hereby granted the right of entry in and upon the premises for the purpose of inspection the premises and uses thereon for compliance with the terms and conditions of this special use permit.
2. The applicant must receive and retain a Liquor License in accordance with the Alcoholic Beverages section of the Will County Code, also referred to as the Liquor Control Ordinance.
3. Within 6 months of County Board approval, the applicant shall apply for permits for all structures located on the subject parcel constructed without building permits.
These Special Use permits are for the entire 31.51 acre parcel. This will allow attendees at the weddings to go on a hayrack ride, and if they are out in the back of the property, they would be able to take their beer/wine with them.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the 2 (two) Special Use permit requests with the Staff recommended conditions. We did have 2 commission members recuse themselves from voting. There were no objectors present at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting either. Jacqueline Traynere asked how it is that this place has been operating all this time and they didn't have any building permits. Janine Farrell commented that the majority of the operations were actually located in the City of Crest Hill.
Steve Balich asked if Land Use and the Will County Sheriff would go out to do the inspections. Janine Farrell stated that is the how it is normally phrased in case the Sheriff is needed as an escort or something along those lines.
Dan McGrath, Assistant State's Attorney, stated that this venue has been the subject to litigation and there currently is a court case. There is a preliminary injunction inhibiting this use. The whole point of that is that the proper permits and other authorizations by the County were not obtained. Consequently, the State's Attorney is not recommending that the board not vote for it. They just want the owner to file the proper permits and go through the appropriate processes, which they are doing. Right now, the next court date is January 24th. Once this gets approved, that court case will become resolved.
Rachel Ventura asked what happens if they don't apply for permits, do they always end up in litigation? Fines? Dan McGrath said once they are made aware, once somebody makes a complaint, then they would take appropriate action. It may just be a violation or it could mean going into court and getting an injunction. It would just depend.
Jim Moustis stated that there are no liquor licenses available. His concern is that when a Special Use permit is given for liquor, that we are indicating that we are going to issue a liquor license. He is concerned that this could create certain liability for the County. Jim Moustis stated that we need some sort of process to increase the number of liquor licenses, that there currently is no process in place to do this. He has talked with Mary Tatroe from the Will County State's Attorney Office about this previously. He recommends that they put all these requests for liquor on hold.
Mary Tatroe said there was a process put into place. The ordinance to ammend the liquor license ordinance would go forward at the same time as the Special Use permit. That way the applicant would know if there would or would not be a liquor license available at the time the Special Use permit was granted or denied. She talked with David Dubois and Brian Radner to see if this was put into place and they affirmed that it did. What should be happening is, there should be and ordinance also on the County Board agenda to increase the number of licenses, because there currently is not one available.
Jacqueline Traynere stated she is feeling that maybe the variance for the liquor license should be tabled until the next meeting. She said she cannot believe that we have a Liquor Commissioner, but no process.
Mary Tatroe said that we need to sit down with the Liquor Commissioner and talk about this.
Jacqueline Traynere asked Mary Tatroe if it would be appropriate to table this request for now. Mary Tatroe stated that it was up to them as a committee, but you certainly can.
Jim Moustis stated that there has been no new liquor licenses issued because there have been none available.
David Dubois said the department did meet with the former chief of staff and the executive office to formulate how we would run the zoning and the liquor requests concurrently. In the zoning department, we would have a pre- application meeting in which we would invite all interested parties, including the district reps to come in. We would advise the interested party of the process going forward with both concurrently. The purpose of that meeting was also to give the potential applicant an idea of the likelihood of them being able to make an acceptable request or not. So then they would be able to make a better business decision, as to whether or not they would want to file for zoning to go concurrently with the liquor license request. That is the way that we have been processing these 2 particular projects. Due to the recent election as far as the change of staff, we had the zoning ready to go forward but the County Board may not have had the public hearing posted yet. So, we have had a process and we have been going through it for at least the past year. These are the first 2 that he has seen going through this process.
Jim Moustis agreed that they did talk about this process, but it was never brought back to the County Board, It is a County Board decision on this process. Jim Moustis stated that yes, there was discussion but there was no formal County Board approval of a process.
Steven Balich said that he was fine with taking away the liquor licenses, then the process was to go through a variance to get it. He said that's what they were told. If you were able to get a variance, that didn't mean you were going to get a liquor license, that was a whole other step. Mr. Balich stated that now all of a sudden, he is hearing something different. He stated he would never vote to get rid of liquor licenses totally. In some districts, people don't want them, but some places we don't have a lot. People have asked him what the procedure is and he has told them they have to go through a variance process, and if that gets approved then you can go through with the request for the liquor license, but you may not get it. He said that was the rule. And now with this wedding barn, it is like saying no to the business if he can't get a liquor license.
Rachel Ventura asked if it was possible to separate these 2 special use permits for today? That way he can come into compliance before the court date and they can get the permits filed for, and then table the liquor license so that when we vote on it, we are voting on it with the ordinance for increasing the number of liquor licenses, because that hasn't been added to our agenda.
Mary Tatroe stated that you can separate the issues out.
Rachel Ventura made the motion to separate the 2 (two) Special Use permits out, approving the rural events permit and tabling the ancillary liquor service until the next meeting.
Nick Palmer stated that Jim Harvey, who handles these requests directly, is not here to speak. In the past, we had excess licenses. The County Board chose to get rid of those excess licenses. Much like municipalities, we have 0 (zero) licenses available on a daily basis. The only way to get additional licenses is to go through the process and for the Board to increase the license number to accommodate that. From his understanding, there was a process that was worked out with the County Board staff and the County Executive's office. It was in the spirit of giving business owners or entrepreneurs who are going to spend the money, a realistic expectation, hence the meeting with the Board reps, the Executive's office who handles the liquor licenses, and the Land Use staff. This way they will understand what the odds are. It is still a risk because the Board can shoot it down. This is now all driven by the Board, the County Executive cannot do anything. We have to rely on the approval of the Special Use and the liquor license. If we need to formalize that and bring that back to a vote, I think we should. It seemed to be a good process to bring people in early and let them know what the outlook looked like before they spend a lot of money and time. If there is something else we can do, please let us know so we can help.
David Dubois stated that the department did try and work to tee up both these matters, but our department only can have influence on the process of the zoning.
We were trying to coordinate both concurrently from the beginni
Judy Ogalla asked if the meetings were held with the district reps?
Steve Balich asked if he was correct in saying there was a process currently in effect.
Brian Radner confirmed he was correct.
Steve Balich then asked if Mr. Siegel was going about everything the correct way? Brian Radner said that was correct.
Steve Balich said if he is doing everything the correct way, then why are we trying to change the process midstream? He stated that doesn't seem correct to him. Janine Farrell said that yes, we did have a pre-application meeting with Mr. Siegel and both Lauren Staley-Ferry and Annette Parker were present at the meeting, as well as Land Use staff and some County Board staff as well.
Janine Farrell stated that Mr. Balich was correct, and that was the process in place.
Rachel Ventura asked who will put the second part of that on the agenda? Is that Land Use?
Janine Farrell stated that Land Use is only in charge of their agenda. The County Board office would be in charge of the other aspect, and that would appear on the Executive Committee for the license.
Paul Siegel introduced himself. He agreed that the meeting did take place and both the County Board reps were there, Marie Barnes from the Executive office was also there. He said that he left that meeting knowing that there was no guarantee. The person speaking for the County Board as a whole was very much in favor of it, or at least she seemed to be. The 2 County Board reps were very much in favor of it. Miss Barnes thought there was a process to follow to go through this. Mr. Siegel stated he did have several other conversations with Miss Barnes, as well as Jim Harvey. Jim Harvey did say there was a process to follow. He stated he actually spoke with Mr. Moustis on several occasions about this. His understanding was that there have in fact been 2 additional liquor licenses issued, in June 2015 and October 2015. Mr. Siegel stated that going forward he did have relative confidence that there was a process in place. He asked if there was anything telling him he may not get approved, why would he spend the $3,000? Mr. Siegel stated the only thing the court case is for is bringing the barn up to commercial code. They currently use caterers for the weddings on the farm, which the caterer has the required liquor licenses. He said he has bent over backwards trying not to break the rules. He is trying to fix things done wrong previously. Why, at this point, is the rug being pulled out from underneath him, he has done everything to follow the process? He stated that he is extremely frustrated, he has paid a lot of money. He stated if the elected officials are confused, then where does that leave the poor citizens that have to follow the rules?
Jacqueline Traynere stated this is just merely a change in the staff. She understands his frustration.
Jacqueline Traynere 2nd the motion to table the Special Use permit for the ancillary liquor until next month's meeting. By then, hopefully, our County Board staff will have an item on the agenda to allow for a liquor license to be added. Then we can vote on both at the same time and move forward, which does seem to be the process.
Paul Siegel said he did speak with Miss Dunne and she stated she admitted shed didn't know what the process was. He also spoke to her predecessor and she didn't seem to think that there was any confusion as to what the process was. He has been very dependent on Land Use and they have been good at telling him what the steps are.
Jacqueline Traynere said to Mr. Moustis' point, we probably need to have both items on the agenda at the same time. The only way we can do that is to table the liquor request until the next meeting.
Rachel Ventura apologized that we don't have it correctly on there. She also stated she doesn't want to set any precedence on doing it wrong.
Jim Moustis said that what Paul stated is not factual, as far as the 2015 licenses being issued.
Racehl Ventura asked if the $3,000 was all for just the liquor, or for the other one too.
Paul Siegel stated that was just for the liquor. He asked if he would be able to get a refund of that and stop the liquor process? He said he can continue to do things through the caterer.
Rachel Ventura said she wasn't saying that they weren't going to approve it, she was saying that they want to make sure they are doing the process correctly. Since that other line item to increase the number of liquor licenses available is not on here, then they come back and say no, we are not approving the license. It just needs to be moved forward together.
Paul Siegel stated that in addition to the process he is following today, is that when it goes to County Board, they would have to have a separate hearing to extend the liquor licenses. He stated that really is separate from the Special Use matter.
Rachel Ventura stated that there is a process, but we did not put it on our agenda correctly.
Amanda Koch asked if there were any adjacent neighbors coming out to dispute this? She was told no. Amanda stated that she doesn't believe that with it being tabled, that doesn't change the chance of him getting approved. It is more for them to be administratively transparent.
Paul Siegel said he does hold a liquor license in the City of Crest Hill, that he got last year.
Jim Moustis stated the County has never issued additional licenses. If there were some issued in 2015, there may have been some left to issue.
Paul Siegel asked when this was changed.
Jim Moustis stated maybe it was in 2016. He stated Agritourism is not addressed in the Liquor Ordinance. Maybe we need to amend the liquor ordinance to refine some of the classifications. He also said that his impression is that Mr. Siegel has gone through this process with the expectation that his liquor license will get approved. The Board needs to look at the liquor ordinance and maybe make some changes.
Chairman Harris said this is a zoning process and not a liquor license process.
Jim Moustis said there has never been a formalized process
Chariman Harris said we need to get more insight as to the process of the liquor license.
Jacqueline Traynere asked if he has applied for the license yet?
Paul Siegel said he has not applied just yet, there is no categories that really pertain to Agritourism. They really need a hybrid type of permit. They want to be able to consume alcohol outside of the building. He has that type of license with the City of Crest Hill, an AG license.
Rachel Ventura said she is the rep for 9. She does support what Paul Siegel is trying to do. She state she is happy to sit down with Jim Harvey and do whatever needs to be done to get this on the proper. She is happy to work with Ken and Speaker Denise to get that on the agenda for the Executive Committee, so we can vote on this properly next month.
Judy Ogalla asked what made him wait to apply for Will County licenses?
Paul Siegel, said the first thing they had to do was move forward with the proper category of Agritourism. So, we had to work on that process first. Once the County figured out where we fit, which didn't happen until after August, then it was determine we needed to go through with the rural events. He did what he needed to do in Crest Hill and they are fine with that.
Jacqueline Traynere asked if this is impacting his business? He mentioned he had caterers that have a liquor license.
Paul Siegel said his business is not being impacted.
Dan McGrath stated that right now there is no business because the court has ordered there is no business. Until the process goes forward, the court order prohibits the use of the property for any type of event. Until the County Board approves it, the court order will remain in place.
Paul Siegel stated the court order is the 4 corners of the barn, not the entire property. He stated they were granted a Temporary Use permit for the use of a tent. They cannot use the new structure for weddings.
Judy Ogalla, stated that the issue is for Land Use, the committee approves whether or not you want to approve the Special Use for liquor. She stated that they can go ahead and approve both of these Special Use permits, so if you choose to, they can go forward. That would have to be put on the Executive Committee's agenda to determine if they want to add another license or not. This Board does not make this decision. That Board does and that can be added on. Then at some point in the future, if that Special Use permit is denied, then she feels that this Board would have the right to determine if he would get a refund or not. It happens on occasion. She stated that they don't have to table this if they don't want to. Judy Ogalla stated this Board will never decide if he will be issued a liquor license or not.
Steve Balich said he feels they should vote on the variance now. If it passes fine. If it doesn't then he loses his money. Then he might have a lawsuit against us if we went and tabled it because we are going contrary to our existing policy. Our existing policy is to get the variance first and then if you don't get the liquor license, it is too bad for him. He stated he didn't have a problem tabling it for a month so we can actually have a better discussion of it, but not much is going to change. Are we going to use the policy that is in place now? Or are we going to wait and change the policy, while this guy is in the middle? He stated he is in favor of tabling this until next month, but if we decide not to move forward on it and we want to change the policy, then Mr. Siegel should be able to get his money back. David Dubois stated the department has done nothing but to try to facilitate this process for Mr. Siegel. He is not the victim of process. He has done many things without a permit. He has put the cart before the horse. We have done our best to try to work through this process. Brian, Janine, and Owen in our office have put in countless hours trying to explain the process, dealing with building permit issues, zoning issues, and getting things squared away to make this right.
Moira Dunn introduced herself as the new Chief of Staff for the County Board. She stated she met with the Siegel's the other day and met with Land Use yesterday. She asked Mr. Siegel if he was understanding this to be a parallel process, with the zoning and liquor license requests moving forward at the same time. Is that correct?
Mr. Siegel said that was correct.
Moria Dunn stated that the zoning ordinance that they are voting on today is completely separate from the liquor license.
Chairman Harris asked if they have to vote on each on separately.
Rachel Ventura said that there currently is a motion and a 2nd on the floor.
Moria Dunn said the voting would be on the variance and not the liquor. Then she was corrected that they were Special Use.
Rachel Ventura stated that the way this is written, it is written as one ordinance. She asked Mary Tatroe for her opinion.
Mary Tatroe, said what she understands is that the motion on the floor is to table the one. There is no splitting them out. They are 2 separate issues all the time. The variances were already approved and that does not come to you at all. So, there are 2 Special Uses.
Chairman Harris asked for a motion for the -022 Special Use.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Jacqueline Traynere, Member
SECONDER: Steve Balich, Member
AYES: Harris, Ferry, Balich, Koch, Traynere, Ventura, Weigel
2. Ordinance Amending the Will County, Illinois Zoning Ordinance Adopted and Approved September 9, 1947 as Amended for Zoning Case #ZC-18-082, Lenny's Food N Fuel Harlem Avenue LLC, Owner of Record, Leonard McEnery 92% Interest, Requesting (S-18-081) Special Use Permit for Packaged Liquor Sales, for PIN #19-09-12-202-023-0000, Commonly Known as 19420 S, Harlem Ave, Frankfort, IL
(Marguerite Kenny)
Chairman Harris asked for a Staff report. Marguerite Kenny presented Zoning Case # ZC-18-082, which takes place in Frankfort Township. The applicant is Lenny's Food N Fuel Harlem Avenue LLC, where Leonard McEnery is 92% beneficiary. Mr. Cass Wennlund and Mr. Lyman Tieman are the attorney's representing the applicant. The applicant is requesting a Special Use permit for package liquor sales to allow the retail sale of alcoholic beverages from the existing convenience store. A Special Use permit for package liquor sales is required in C-1 through C-4 Commercial Zoning districts.
The Special Use will apply to the entire 4.87 acre site but will be contained within the convenience store.
The subject site is zoned C-2.
Proposed liquor sales will occur within a secluded cooler located to the rear of the store, opposite of the cash register. There is a separate door that controls access to and from the cooler, with a security located inside.
A previous zoning case, 6078-MS3 denied the Special Use for package liquor sales in 2013.
The property is located on the east of Will County. It is south of I-80 and the Hollywood Casino Amphitheatre.
The Village of Tinley Park is located just north and west of the site.
This past March, the applicant has approached the village to petition the village to be annexed, but that was unsuccessful.
The property is improved with a gas station, convenience store, accessory parking, Dunkin Donuts drive through, and a car wash. The gas station, convenience store, and accessory parking were all established in 2015. The car wash and drive through were approved as Special Use permits through a court order associated with court case 15 CH 2565 back in 2017.
There are 2 entrances along 194th Street, 1 along Lakeside Drive (where trucks can only turn left), and right turn in/right turn out on Harlem Avenue.
There is a landscape buffer, detention, and berm to separate the commercial and residential uses.
The following agencies were notified of the variance requests and provided no comment: the Frankfort Fire Protection District, the Village of Mokena, the Will County Land Resource Management Plan: Suburban Community
Village of Matteson, the Village of Tinley Park, the Frankfort Township Supervisor, the Frankfort Township Clerk, and the Illinois Department of Transportation.
Staff recommended approval of a Special Use permit for packaged liquor sales with 2 conditions:
1. Upon fourteen (14) days of written notice to the owner of record at their last known address, Will County Land Use Department and Will County Sherriff’s Department employees are hereby granted the right of entry in and upon the premises for the purpose of inspecting the premises and uses thereon for compliance with the terms and conditions of the special use permit.
2. The applicant and future owners must receive and maintain a liquor license in accordance with the Alcoholic Beverages section of the Will County Code (§110 et. seq.) also referred to as the Liquor Control Ordinance.
There were several neighbors at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing that had objected to the Special Use. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-1 in approval of the Special Use permit with both conditions.
As mentioned with previous discussion, the applicant will be required to petition the County Board separately for the increase in the number of liquor licenses available, The applicant has applied for a liquor license through the Liquor Commissioner but will be unable to get the liquor license until the liquor licenses are increased.
Rachel Ventura asked if this was the same problem as the prior case. Marguerite Kenny said that was correct.
Rachel Ventura made a motion to table this until the next meeting. Amanda Koch 2nd the motion.
Steve Balich asked if we were going to change policy next meeting. Rachel Ventura said not necessarily.
Jim Moustis said all the issues involved with the prior case are in this one also. Mr. Moustis stated he opposes the liquor license request on this one and he feels the Special Use should be denied. Special Uses are not something you get by right. There is a reason for that, because it has impact on a community. He feels this impacts the use, comfort and safety of this community in a negative way. This isn't a technicality that we have to work out. For this particular use, Mr. Moustis does oppose it.
Amanda Koch stated she would like to see this process clarified and she does agree that this needs to be tabled until the next meeting. She stated she has also received a lot of comments from residents. She has also provided information from the CDC regarding the Alcohol Outlet Density. Although she always tends to side with the residents, she wanted to make sure that the Alcohol Outlet Density does meet the CDC guidelines. The CDC does say that high Alcohol Outlet Density is associated with many social harms among neighborhoods in and around the alcohol outlet, such as disorderly conduct, noise, public nuisance, and property damage. Amanda Koch does feel that property values and neighborhood safety will be affected. She also agrees that they should not issue a Special Use if they have no intention of issuing a liquor license.
Rachel Ventura asked if Amanda Koch is planning on voting no anyway, is there a reason to table this particular case because you are not in support of it?
Amanda Koch stated she wants to make sure that since they are tabling it, she wants to be sure the process is clear and to do the research, so when they come in for the next meeting they are educated instead of learning right here on the floor.
7 concerned citizens spoke with concerns regarding safety, crime, decrease of property values, traffic, noise, damage to roads, and pollution.
Jacqueline Traynere wanted to let the Chairman know that anybody that comes to the County Board is not obligated to give their address. She noted that everybody is stating their address.
Len McEnery introduced himself. He has packaged liquor in all of his other stores except this one. Why make their customers go somewhere else? There wouldn't be any additional traffic, they would just service their existing customers. What changes with them not having it? People still buy it, they buy it somewhere else. People drink, they still drink. Give us a chance to service our 158,000 customers that live within a 5 mile radius. Please consider some fairness in your decision.
Cass Wennlund, attorney for the petitioner, introduced himself. He reminded the committee what was up for a vote--a special use permit to sell package liquor. As you heard the staff say, the professionally trained staff, that it is in their professional opinion that this meets all of the Special Use criteria. He stated that he did receive information from the Liquor Commissioner that there was an increase of 2 licenses issued in 2015, they are not making that up. A lot of what we have heard here are complaints saying that they didn't do their due diligence. Much to the contrary! Prior to this, we had the traffic studies done. We had professional engineering. We had professional surveying studies done. We did all that. We had traffic counts. All that was testified to through the court. You heard a lot of concerns here today. Those are the same kind of statements that were made before the court. In Judge Anderson's opinion, in regards to the resident's testimonies, "they seem to lack sound and articulate factual basis". So, we did our due diligence. And we continue to do our due diligence. Our previous requests, were recommended for approval by the PZC, just like this one was. Your professional staff recommended approval, but the board members changed their vote at the final meeting, as the court found, after the County Board Chairman exerted pressure by way of intimidation. That's not the way we should make our decisions, because one board member told another this is my district and this is how I want it. You should follow your professional Staff's opinion and vote on it in a Land Use perspective. Do not make a political decision. Follow your ordinance. Follow your professional Staff's opinion and the actual facts that exist. At the time the residents bought, this property was zoned commercially for a gas station. That is the character of the neighborhood. If Miss Arnold would have gotten what she wanted, where you could not sell packaged liquor or have a liquor license, Mr. Moustis would not have been able to operate his White Hen Pantry and sold packaged liquor on St. Francis Road, right around the corner. Again, I ask you to follow the ordinances and the professional opinions of your Staff.
Rachel Ventura stated that she has not seen the applicant prove that this Special Use will not be detrimental to the health and enjoyment to the residents homes. She stated that a lot of the gas stations selling liquor in that area are in Cook County, not Will County.
Cass Wennlund said there is a County liquor license located 1700 feet to the south and also 2 miles to the south and then around the corner, on St. Francis Road, there is the 7-11 selling packed liquor through the County, which is where Mr. Moustis used to own.
Rachel Ventura asked Staff if they were able to prove that this would not be detrimental to the health and enjoyment to the residents homes.
Marguerite Kenny said that the way Land Use looks at it is in terms of the lands use. We defer terms of the liquor sales and distribution to the Liquor Control Ordinance to enforce. In terms of land use, it is accessory to the gas station, which is permitted in the commercial zoning district. Special Uses for packaged liquor sales is a commercial enterprise within the zoning districts. The property being zoned C-2 is considered a neighborhood commercial zoning district. In terms of the other zoning districts within the area, it does not detract from somebody improving their property or improving their house, making any type of addition to their house, or having enjoyment on the property. In terms of the commercial districts, they still can improve and sell according to those commercial districts. In terms of safety and morals, in a larger perspective, we didn't see limitations to those abilities or those criteria.
Rachel Ventura made a motion to rescind her table.
Mark Ferry stated that in both of the statements from Cass Wennlund and Len McEnery, they both made statements regarding the integrity of the County Board. He stated he resents that. Mr. Moustis is his colleague, and just because he sticks up for his residents, don't think you can insult him or any member of the County Board. He said they are always going to be here to stick up for the residents first.
Cass Wennlund stated for the record, that he was merely citing the court's ruling after they heard all the evidence.
Jim Moustis said that the applicant and his attorney said to the court that he put extreme pressure on the County Board members and intimidated people. That came from them. And just because Judge Anderson may agree with you, even though the testimony certainly was contrary to that, because the County Board members that testified all said they were never intimidated by him, but Judge Anderson kinda left that out. But, that is in the past. I bring it up because you keep bringing it up. He said he did give some more thought to those 2 liquor licenses that keep coming up. That did happen, because the County Executive's office did not make the County Board aware that there were licenses available. So, we never had the opportunity to eliminate those licenses. When the County Board became aware of that, it never occurred again. The County Board never issued additional licenses, there were licenses that became available.
Cass Wennlund asked, as with the prior case, that they vote to table it so both requests can move forward together.
Rachel Ventura said for procedural, she absolutely agrees and that is why she made the motion initially to table it. However, in the interest of Government and being efficient and the people that came out and spoke, she knows how she is going to vote on this. She stated they have not actually voted to table it and that is why she is rescinding her motion to table it to next month.
Jim Moustis said he would just stay consistent and you may just want to table it. Stay consistent that we are going to review the liquor ordinance. That has merit and gives the County less liability.
Judy Ogalla said she was going to essentially say the same thing. You guys tabled the first one but you didn't have to, and you chose to table it. For those reasons that you stated, those same reasons would pertain to this case. So, if we don't table this as well, you have given 2 residents, 2 different responses on the same day.
Jacqueline Traynere stated that they are 2 different kinds of venues and 2 different locations, and that does make them different. A gas station in a residential area and an Agritourism place on Weber Road. They are different.
Judy Ogalla stated that the reason they decided to table it was not those reasons.
Jacqueline Traynere said that they tabled it because they were looking into the Agritourism.
Judy Ogalla said no, they were tabled because they were not sure what the process for the liquor license was.
Rachel Ventura stated she completely agrees and if that is the case, procedural wise, that is how we should proceed. She stated that she is not in support of this project. Unless this applicant can prove those particular things, she will not move forward with it.
Chariman Harris said there is a motion on the floor to table this item for the meeting next month.
RESULT: TABLED [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Rachel Ventura, Member
SECONDER: Amanda Koch, Member
AYES: Harris, Ferry, Balich, Koch, Traynere, Ventura, Weigel
3. Ordinance Amending the Will County, Illinois Zoning Ordinance Adopted and Approved September 9, 1947 as Amended for Zoning Case ZC-18-076, Charles D. Sharp, Owner of Record, Speedway Solar Energy Center LLC, Brian Quinlan, Member, Speedway Solar Energy Center, LLC, Calvert Energy, Agent, Requesting (S-18-028) Special Use Permit for a Solar Farm; (V-18-082) Variance for Lot Frontage from 300 feet to 0 feet, for PIN #10-11-04-101-013-0000 and 10-11-04- 200-004-0000 (to be consolidated), in Jackson Township, Commonly Known as Vacant Property on W Sharp Road, Elwood IL.
(Jessica Gal)
Jessica Gal presented Zoning Case, # ZC-18-076, which takes place in Jackson Township. The owners are Charles D. Sharp and Susan Brooke. The agent is Brian Quinlan of Speedway Solar Energy Center LLC. This is a Special Use permit for a solar farm.
The proposed development does occupy 2 separate parcels. The applicant will consolidate both parcels into one. A variance was heard and approved at the Planning & Zoning Commission last week. That was a variance for lot frontage. The subject parcels do not have frontage along the road. The parcels do not touch the right of way. They are land locked by a pipeline property. They do have legal access through a recorded access agreement. In terms of the access agreement, they are allowed to install up to six (6) driveways to enter the property. Staff did recommend approval of that variance and the Planning & Zoning Commission did approve it.
The Special Use request does apply to the entire parcel, which is about 31 acres. Due to a zoning flood plain that occupies a good portion of the parcel, only about 8 acres is actually going to be developed.
This would be about the 15th solar farm request, but this one will be the first one in Jackson Township.
Staff is recommending approval with 12 conditions. Those conditions are as follows:
1. Upon fourteen (14) days of written notice to the owner of record and/or operator at their last known address, Will County Land Use Department and Will County Sheriff’s Department employees are hereby granted the right of entry in and upon the premises for the purpose of inspecting the premises and uses thereon for compliance with the terms and conditions of this special use permit.
2. The subject parcels, identified by PIN 10-11-04-101-013-0000 and PIN 10-11- 04-200-004-0000, shall be consolidated within one year of approval by the Will County Planning and Zoning Commission.
3. Landscaping must be installed in compliance with the provisions outlined in Section 155-9.245-C. of the Will County Zoning Ordinance. A landscape plan shall be submitted at the time of site development permit application for Land Use Department approval.
4. The proposed 7‐foot high chain link fence shall be comprised of black chain link material. (the black was a request from the City of Joliet)
5. Outdoor lighting is prohibited except for that which is required by code.
6.The owner and/or operator shall submit a copy of the decommissioning plan to all property owner(s) within the boundaries of the special use permit area. The property owner(s) shall sign affidavits acknowledging receipt of the decommissioning plan and their respective responsibility for decommissioning costs. These affidavits shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator at the time of building permit and/or site development permit application.
7. Any solar farm that has not produced energy for a continuous period of one (1) year or more must be decommissioned in accordance with the Decommissioning Plan currently on file with the Will County Land Use Department, with updated costs.
8. The owner and/or operator shall execute an Agricultural Impact Mitigation Agreement (AIMA) with the Illinois Department of Agriculture. The owner and/or operator shall submit a copy of the signed Agricultural Impact
Mitigation Agreement (AIMA) at the time of building permit and/or site development permit application. Financial assurance shall be provided to the County in accordance with the AIMA.
9. Prior to submission of a site development and/or building permit application by the owner/operator, a pre-construction meeting shall be held. The agencies/individuals invited to attend shall include Will County staff,
elected officials, Will County Farm Bureau staff, and other interested parties as determined by Land Use staff and/or the owner/operator.
10.The owner/operator shall retain an agricultural specialist or agricultural consultant to serve as part of the development and/or construction team. The agricultural specialist or agricultural consultant shall be retained prior to submission of the site development and/or building permit application.
11.Approval by the Elwood Fire Protection District, the Will County Health Department, and the Jackson Township Highway Commissioner is required prior to building/site development permit issuance.
12.Onsite power lines and utility infrastructure will be allowed above ground if required by the electrical utility provider.
There were 3 concerned citizens at the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. They did speak some concerns about stormwater management, which will be addressed during the site development and building permit process. Staff tried their best to address those concerns at that time. We do also have a Stormwater Ordinance to address those concerns. A lot of those regulations do trickle down from the Federal Government also, especially when it comes to flood plain. Other concerns were related to aesthetics.
The Planning & Zoning Commission did recommend approval of the Special Use permit with the 12 conditions. All 7 members recommended approval.
Steve Balich questioned the lot frontage. Then looked at the aerial and understood, this was because it was landlocked.
Jacqueline Traynere asked if they would have to get permission from the pipeline company or not.
Jessica Gal stated that they did provide an access agreement that has been recorded with the Will County Recorder.
Jacqueline Traynere stated the drawing was a little odd, as to where they are putting the solar racks. There is so much excess property and they are not putting anything on it. Is that part of our ordinance or what?
Jessica Gal stated that was the flood plain. While it is theoretically possible to develop in a flood plain, the requirements to do so are substantial on a developers part. So, generally, they develop outside of the flood plain.
Jacqueline Traynere asked how often they evaluate these flood plains.
Brian Radner stated the flood plain will not be re-evaluated unless there is a study in the area. The County recently adopted the Digital Firm maps, which are the most current Firm maps. These are the panel numbers that show where the flood plains are. Those go into effect on February 9, 2019. So, those maps are not going to be re-done unless someone wants to develop in that area and an engineered study is done and submits a map revision and goes through that entire process. It is a costly process and it does take some time.
Jacqueline Traynere stated she was just curious because people talk about climate change.
Brian Radner stated that the state has a series of technical bulletins that they put together. There is a process of looking at what might be considered 100 year rainfall. Years ago, they flew over the county at a time when there was the 100 year rainfall and they mapped it out. They made lines on a map. So, just because that is where the flood plain is shown, that doesn't mean that is exactly where it is at. That is their best estimate. And that is why there are setback requirements.
Amanda Koch asked what the actual setback is from Sharp Road. Someone noted that it was 100 feet on the drawing.
Chairman Harris stated that Brian Quinlan was there and was available for questions.
Jacqueline Traynere asked if they had any other properties in the County. Brian Quinlan actually stated the next case was his also.
Judy Ogalla asked if they were required to replace all the drain tiles.
Jessica Gal stated that the ordinance only pertains to drain tiles that were damaged.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Tom Weigel, Member
SECONDER: Steve Balich, Member
AYES: Harris, Ferry, Balich, Koch, Traynere, Ventura, Weigel
4. Ordinance Amending the Will County, Illinois Zoning Ordinance Adopted and Approved September 9, 1947 as Amended for Zoning Case ZC-18-080, TKT Properties LLC, Owner of Record, Kenneth T. Sandeno, Todd M. Sandeno, and Tamara L. Hansen, each with 33% Interest, Requesting (S-18-080) Special Use Permit for a Solar Farm, for PIN #02-24-17-103-009-0000, Commonly Known as Vacant Property on S. Route 53, Braidwood, IL
(Jessica Gal)
Chariman Harris asked for a Staff report. Jessica Gal presented Zoning Case # ZC- 18-080, which takes place in Reed Township. It is just outside the city limits of Braidwood, Illinois. The parcel is along the intersection of Illinois Route 53 and Center Street, just north of the Braidwood Generating Station.
The subject parcel isn't a farm parcel, like we have seen in our other cases. It is basically undeveloped.
There are no flood plains, but there are wetlands. None of the solar panels or equipment are proposed to be in any sort of wetland area. There are minimum buffering requirements for wetland areas that will be enforced by our ordinance.
Although the Special Use permit pertains to the entire area of this parcel, only a portion will be developed. Only about 20 acres more or less. Because the northern portion of that parcel is dominated by wetlands, they are not proposing any equipment in that area.
Staff recommended approval with 11 conditions. The conditions are as follows:
1. Upon fourteen (14) days of written notice to the owner of record and/or operator at their last known address, Will County Land Use Department and Will County Sheriff’s Department employees are hereby granted the right of entry in and upon the premises for the purpose of inspecting the premises and uses thereon for compliance with the terms and conditions of this special use permit.
2. Outdoor lighting is prohibited except for that which is required by code.
3. Landscaping must be installed in compliance with the provisions outlined in Section 155-9.245-C. of the Will County Zoning Ordinance. A landscape plan shall be submitted at the time of site development permit application for Land Use Department approval.
4. A permanent fence or temporary silt fence must be installed no later than March 1st prior to any site development in order to prevent identified turtle species from entering the site during construction. The temporary silt fence must remain until November 1st. Any installed silt fence or permanent fence (i.e. the 7 foot chain-link perimeter fence) must be buried at least 6 inches deep.
5.The owner and/or operator shall submit a copy of the decommissioning plan to all property owner(s) within the boundaries of the special use permit area. The property owner(s) shall sign affidavits acknowledging receipt of the decommissioning plan and their respective responsibility for decommissioning costs. These affidavits shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator at the time of building permit and/or site development permit application.
6. Any solar farm that has not produced energy for a continuous period of one (1) year or more must be decommissioned in accordance with the Decommissioning Plan currently on file with the Will County Land Use Department, with updated costs.
7.The owner and/or operator shall execute an Agricultural Impact Mitigation
Agreement (AIMA) with the Illinois Department of Agriculture. The owner and/or operator shall submit a copy of the signed Agricultural Impact
Mitigation Agreement (AIMA) at the time of building permit and/or site development permit application. Financial assurance shall be provided to the County in accordance with the AIMA.
8. Prior to submission of a site development and/or building permit application by the owner/operator, a pre-construction meeting shall be held. The agencies/individuals invited to attend shall include Will County staff, elected officials, Will County Farm Bureau staff, and other interested parties as determined by Land Use staff and/or the owner/operator.
9. The owner/operator shall retain an agricultural specialist or agricultural consultant to serve as part of the development and/or construction team. The agricultural specialist or agricultural consultant shall be retained prior to submission of the site development and/or building permit application.
10.Approval by the Braidwood Fire Protection District, the Will County Health Department, and the Illinois Department of Transportation is required prior to building/site development permit issuance. If township roads will be utilized for to access the site, approval by the Reed Township Highway Commissioner may also be required.
11.Onsite power lines and utility infrastructure will be allowed above ground if required by the electrical utility provider.
An EcoCat consultation did identify many protected resources in this area. IDNR had concerns about potentially endangered turtles on this property. Condition # 4, was provided by IDNR to install either a permanent fence or a temporary fence. They also provided a timeline as to when these turtles may choose to enter this site and potentially nest on this property. So, by installing the fence, the turtle would be on the outside of the boundaries of the actual development. If they do need to nest they can do so around the boundaries. So, we did add that condition specific to this case.
Jacqueline Traynere asked if they whack the weeds around the panels, or does it just grow wild.
Samantha Bluemer introduced herself. She stated that the operator of this system is always going to try to use a low growth seed mix so that they don't have to do a lot of maintenance. However, a lot of these are native or wild seed mixes, so they may have to do a controlled burn or something. Usually they mow about twice a year. It is maintained almost like you would maintain a prairie.
Judy Ogalla stated that when solar farms first came to us, the state did not have any legislation for them. Last summer, the state did pass that legislation.
Samantha Bluemer stated that they are going to have a committee of the whole meeting after the Forest Protection meeting on February 5th. Samantha is going to do a solar orientation. It will go through the history and give you information that you will need. It is highly likely that you are going to see additional applications coming through.
Judy Ogalla mentioned that with a solar farm it is different. The parcel has a PIN # but the solar farm itself will have another PIN #. That piece of property with the solar farm on it is assessed with a higher value than the other. Rhonda Novak will be putting together a white paper to explain this. Sam is hopefully working to put together a white paper with Land Use.
Samantha Bluemer stated that she is hoping in the next month or so to get this out.
There were no questions for Mr. Quinlan.
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Jacqueline Traynere, Member
SECONDER: Steve Balich, Member
AYES: Harris, Ferry, Balich, Koch, Traynere, Ventura, Weigel
5. Authorizing Extension of Special Use Permit SEXT-18-002 for Zoning Case ZC-17- 036, First Community Bank & Trust, Trust #20100385, Mary Dukes, Owner of Record, Kristen Ray of Woodlawn Solar, LLC and Woodlawn Solar II, LLC, Agent, for Pin #23-15-34-200-012-0000, in Crete Township, Commonly Known as Vacant Property on E. Goodenow Road, Crete, IL
(Janine Farrell)
Janine Farrell presented Zoning Case # SEXT-18-002. This case is a Special Use permit extension. It is in reference to ZC-17-036, which was approved in January 18, 2018. Special Use permits are due to come void 1 year after they are issued, unless the Special Use is put into effect, or the person initiates that use, or a building permit or site permit has been issued. In this instance, for that zoning case that was approved last year, those things have not happened. The solar farm has not applied for a site development permit, there's no building permit, and the site has not been established.
This is for a parcel that is located in Crete Township. This is the very first solar farm case that was approved by the County Board. It was actually approved on the same date that the Solar Farm Ordinance update was adopted.
This is a site that is basically in a 1 mile stretch along Goodenow Road. It is near the location where 3 other solar farms have been approved.
The reason the applicant is requesting this Special Use permit extension is due to this lottery system that most of you with the exception of the new members, may have heard about. This lottery system that gives these developers their tax credits to go in and develop these solar farms does not open until January 15th. This Special Use expires on January 18th, therefore the applicant is requesting this extension. This extension, should it be approved, will only be valid for 6 months or 180 days. The applicant does have the ability to apply for another extension for up to another 180 days or 6 months. Under the ordinance, the County Board is authorized to approve this extension request for a good cause.
Jacqueline Traynere stated she doesn't know anything about the lottery system. Please explain.
Samantha Bluemer said there was legislation passed in 2016, stating the state was going to require "x" amount of new solar over a period of time in our ComEd area. We had a lot more participation and interest than initially thought. So, the program is basically over-subscribed. There is more people applying than the incentives that are available to give. So, they are going to take those vendors and throw them all into a lottery pool and they are going to pick those projects. Those are the projects that are going to receive incentives. If a project does not receive incentives, it will not get built. Right now, we are looking at about a 10% chance for your project to be chosen. Samantha believes that there may not be a final list until sometime mid-March.
Jacqueline Traynere asked if the tariff's would affect this at all.
Samantha Bluemer stated she didn't believe so. She said we are going to see, in the next year or so, a lot more US manufacturing of the solar panels, especially in the state of Florida.
V. Jacqueline Traynere asked if the incentives were coming from the state or the feds.
Samantha Bluemer said that they are state incentives.
Rachel Ventura said that the lottery is for the entire state. So is it possible that none of the Will County ones will get incentives?
Samantha Bluemer said that they are broken up by utility territories. So, there will be a lottery here for ComEd.
Rachecl Ventura asked that if they don't get incentives, couldn't they still be built? She said this may probably preclude them from building, but could they still build using their own dime.
Samantha Bluemer said of course they could, but she could assure you that the economics will not pan out. There is a handful of non-profit solar vendors, but the majority are for-profit. It doesn't prohibit them for building, it just makes it economically difficult.
Judy Ogalla stated that ComEd treats everybody that applies, like they are going to get it. Then that way, the solar company would know the cost for the hook up. When ComEd came out previously, there were about 450 projects. At that time, they were thinking 75 or so would get it. So, the chances of them getting picked is minimal like Sam said.
Steve Balich stated when they first started talking about solar, he was completely against it. He said they weren't going to take money from him and give it to a private company to make profit. After talking to Sam and some other people, it turns out that what is really happening is a good thing. They are going to build these solar farms and now they don't have to build another plant to make electricity. So now we are saving more money by doing that. In other words, these incentives are paying for another way to get the juice to your house. Now Steve stated he is favor of these things. It makes sense!
V. OTHER BUSINESS
VI. REPORTS, COMMUNICATIONS, CORRESPONDENCE
1. Chairman, Will County Land Use and Development Committee
Chairman Harris thanked everyone for sitting in. He thanked Land Use staff, the speakers, and fellow County Board members,
2. Committee Members, Will County Land Use and Development Committee
Steve Balich said in August, 2017 he brought forth the idea of not requiring a building permit for minor maintenance items. Chairman Harris said that was in the works.
Moira Dunn said that they touched on that yesterday. Brian Radner stated that was a separate issue.
Steve Balich said this is for, if you wanted to replace a shut off valve, you wouldn't have to get a permit.
Moira Dunn said we can talk about putting it on the agenda.
Steve Balich when they have a shorter meeting, maybe they can look at talking about that.
Moira Dunn said respectfully you can put it on the agenda for the next meeting. If it's alright with the Chairman, we will put it on there.
3. Director, Will County Land Use Department
Brian Radner said the department has been dealing with some people that are looking to construct buildings to a certain height. Almost a year ago there was a change made by this Committee, and it is causing numerous people to apply for variances in height. It had to do with a change in definition as to how the height was measured. So, what we are looking for is the Committee's approval to discuss accessory structure height so that it can be on the Agenda. We would be prepared to talk to you about the impacts of that change and how it has affected the citizens of Will County. We would provide some recommendation as to what we feel we can do to improve that.
4. Other
5. Public Comment
VII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Tom Weigel made the motion to adjourn at 1:50 PM. Rachel Ventura 2nd the motion.
IX. NEXT MEETING - FEBRUARY 12, 2019
https://willcountyil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=15&ID=3153&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up