Will County Planning and Zoning Commission met March 1.
Here are the minutes provided by the commission:
WILL COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
302 N. CHICAGO ST.
JOLIET, IL 60432
MARCH 1, 2022
County Board Room Public Hearing 6:30 PM
AMENDED AGENDA : ADDED VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ITEM #4.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Roger Bettenhausen led the Pledge of Allegiance.
III. ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF QUORUM
Chairman Hugh Stipan called the meeting to order at 6:40 PM
| Attendee Name | Title | Status | Arrived |
| Michael Carruthers | Commissioner | Present | |
| Kimberly Mitchell | Commissioner | Present | |
| Hugh Stipan | Chairman | Present | |
| Barbara Peterson | Commissioner | Present | |
| John Kiefner | Vice Chairman | Present | |
| Roger Bettenhausen | Commissioner | Present | |
| Matthew Gugala | Commissioner | Absent |
Land Use staff present were Dawn Tomczak, Adrian Diaz, Lisa Napoles and Marguerite Kenny.
Chris Wise present from the Will County State's Attorney's Office.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Planning and Zoning Commission - Public Hearing - Jan 4, 2022 6:30 PM
The minutes will be brought back to Planning and Zoning Commission. Matthew Gugala was present at the January 4, 2022 meeting and will have to vote in order to have a quorum.
| RESULT: TABLED [3 TO 0]
AYES: Mitchell, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSTAIN: Carruthers, Stipan, Peterson ABSENT: Gugala |
Due to personnel shortage the February 1st minutes will be brought forth when completed by Dawn Tomczak.
V. ZONING CASES
Chairman Hugh Stipan swore in the public present in the gallery and announced to make sure their cell phones do not interrupt the meeting.
1. WILL COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NOTICE OF VARIANCE AMENDING THE WILL COUNTY, ILLINOIS ZONING ORDINANCE Adopted and Approved September 9, 1947 as amended, for Case ZC-21-080, Monika Grochowski and Slawomir Staszel , Owner of Record and Thaddeus S. Kowalczyk of Thaddeus S. Kowalczyk, Attorney at Law , requesting (V-21-096) Variance for Maximum floor area of an Accessory Dwelling Unit from 650 Sq. Ft. to 1,450 Sq. Ft. , (V-21-097) Variance for Maximum height of an Accessory Dwelling Unit from 20 ft. to 25 ft. and (V-21-116) Variance for Maximum accessory building area from 1,800 sq. ft. to 2,331.94 sq. ft. , for PIN # 21-14-18-202-001-0000, located in Monee Township, commonly known as 24810 S. Murphy Ln., Monee, IL
Chairman Hugh Stipan announced that the first case on the Agenda, Zoning Case ZC-21-080 is going to be postponed until it is republished.
Roll Call was taken. Motioned passed unanimously, 6-0, to postpone this Case.
| RESULT: POSTPONED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman SECONDER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Peterson, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Gugala |
The owners are Keith and Karen Lyons.
The purpose is to remove an old 20'x20' building and replace with a new 24'x30' wood workshop.
I have to make a correction from the staff report. In the staff report I identify the structure as a detached garage. Per the plat of survey, it is in fact a shed.
The site is on a corner lot of approximately 27,500 feet it has 110 feet of lot frontage on Wolf Rd and 250 feet of lot frontage on Woodland Circle. The lot is improved with a house which per the assessor’s office was built in 1957 with an attached garage and a shed. The applicant acquired the house towards the end of 2017. The lot is a conforming R-3 lot. The parcel is Lot 128 in the Woodland Acre subdivision which was platted in 1942. To the north, west and south the properties are zoned R-3. Across Wolf Road the two R-3 parcels are actual cemeteries. The village of Mokena is to the north and the west. The land in Mokena is zoned residential.
When the subdivision was platted the building line for the Woodland Circle lot line was set to 10 feet. The R-3 requirements for a street setback are 30 feet. The zoning ordinance honors approved building line setbacks within plat of subdivision allowing for the street setback to be 10 feet along Woodland Circle. The R-3 district also requires a 10-foot side yard setback. Giving that the driveway utilizes Woodland Circle, staff determined that Woodland Circle is in fact a street setback.
Outlined in red is the location of the proposed workshop. The workshop would be 1 foot from the lot line on Woodland Circle, within the 10-foot building line of the Woodland Circle subdivision. The property a has 660 square foot attached garage, 285 square foot shed, and 400 square foot shed. The property is currently utilizing about 1,345 square feet of its total accessory building area.
The applicant is seeking to demolish existing 400 square feet shed and replace it with a new 720 square feet shed to house a wood workshop. This would create a total accessory building area of 1,665 square feet exceeding what is what is permitted R-3 Zoning District by 165 square feet.
Looking at some photos of the subject property. View of Woodland Circle looking east towards Wolf Rd. View of the neighboring property at 20218 Woodland Circle. View of Woodland Circle looking west from the corner at Wolf Rd. View of Wolf Rd looking north. Wolf Rd looking south. View of the applicant’s residence, the east elevation. This is a view of the existing building to be demolished and of the applicant’s detached garage. And this is a view and there is a shed and towards the rear of the property. A view of Woodland Circle looking west.
Staff recommends denial of the variance for minimum street setback from 10 feet to 1 foot and a denial for the variance for maximum accessory building area from 1,500 square feet to 1,680 square feet.
Staff finds that the plight of the owner is not due to unique circumstances. The property has no apparent hardship present that prevents the applicant from complying with the subdivision’s setback requirements or the maximum building accessory requirements outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. These variance requests are based upon the applicant's desire to house his wood working equipment in a larger space.
Staff also finds that if the variance are granted will alter the essential character of the surrounding community.
Staff could not find any other property in the subdivision with a structure built 1 foot from the lot line. Also, per the Frankfort Township Assessor, Staff could not find any other property exceeding the maximum building requirements in that block. No condition of the property prevents the applicant from complying to the requirements outlined in the Zoning Code for maximum accessory building area or setback requirements because the lot is a conforming R-3 lot.
Chairman Stipan said Thank you. Presuming that the commission would determine there go ahead and given extra space. Is there anywhere on the lot that he could put that building where it would not conflict with covenant of the community and with the rules of the road?
Adam Diaz said so, I suppose that per the survey there, there is other places on the lot where it can be placed. Towards the west but I would guess it would depend on where the septic requirements are for the lot.
Chairman Stipan said thank you. Are there any questions?
Michael Carruthers said question, were talking about 180 additional square feet right. 1500 to 1680? And at the same time during the summer, you cannot even see these houses because of the trees that bloom and everything. Just wondering.
Chairman Stipan said thank you. Requests to bring the owner up to let him testify. He asks is there anyone here to speak for him?
A gentleman said I am here to speak for myself.
Chairman Stipan said I'm sorry for calling out the incorrect property owner’s name.
Keith Lyons introduces himself to the Commission. That’s okay. Well good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I am asking for the variances. We moved into this house in 2017. Me and my wife do foster children. For years I’ve made wood toys for them. Where I make them now is the detached shed you see which is very unsafe for one thing. When you are running power equipment, saws, drill presses and plains. It’s pretty dangerous if you ain’t have no space to get out of the way if something happens. The reason I asked to build this shed is because last summer I retired, last year January and we were going to have the shed remodeled. It needs a new roof and a new floor. The concrete is all broken up because of the trees next to it. The shed would have to be jacked up and would be a major cost to redo it. My lovely wife of 43 years and she said why don’t you just build what you want. I just looked at her and said thank you honey. God is great and has blessed me with the skills. I would like to have enough area where I can take the kids in to help me with the painting of projects. It’s something that I like to do, and I love to do.
Chairman Stipan said is it possible you could demolish the shed and put this new building up in the same location.
Keith Lyons said that’s what I’m requesting to do. The only problem with moving the shed back 10 feet.
Chairman Stipan said Yeah, but I’m talking about not moving it.
Keith Lyons said well, no, no. If I follow the code by setback of 10 feet, the building would actually be into the deck of my house. If you look at the drawing up there.
Kim Mitchell said, or you’ll have to make it smaller?
Keith Lyons said yeah or smaller.
Kim Mitchell said is it anyway for you to put it towards the backyard? Is your septic back there.
Keith Lyons said yeah, my septic is in my back yard.
Kim Mitchell sad okay, that’s the question that I had. Wondered if you were restricted in the back.
Keith Lyons said yeah, I’m trying to stay away from my septic system. It runs about 10 ft back from that deck and then it runs across the length of
Kim Mitchell said is there a fence on the outside?
Keith Lyons said the full property is fenced in.
Kim Mitchell said on the outside of that fence, that property, do you have to maintain the grass outside of the fence?
Keith Lyons said oh, I cut it all. I have a retention, a ditch there. We cut the front and the back.
Kim Mitchell said and then there’s the street. There are no neighbors? There’s never going to be any neighbors?
Keith Lyons said no there are no neighbors thereof. In fact, I did a little record ordaining today because I see where they had denied setback. I walked down the street maybe about 300 ft and my one neighbor has got garage that probably 25 feet off the street and I have pictures of it. It’s exactly what I am going to build. So, it’s like okay it’s one there so why can’t I have another one.
Chairman Stipan said the one is not encroaching upon the 10-foot setback from what I understand from staff.
Keith Lyons said well, I have pictures, if you would like to look back how far it sits back from the street and if you look at the street, he’s got to be sitting right on his property line, or as they would say building line.
Chairman Stipan said I would venture to have to say I would have to have staff look rather than me.
Keith Lyons said okay. The address to this property is on the block next to it. So, his house is on the street next to this street. His property runs the whole entire lane, street to street. That’s why is garage is so far back.
Chairman Stipan said alright, we taped your testimony. We have a question?
Kim Mitchell said I have a question. Adrian, have all of the green cards been received on this? Everyone notified?
Adrian Diaz answered yes.
Kim Mitchell said okay, very good. Thank you.
Keith Lyons said of the 11 sent out I got back 10. I talked to my neighbors before I started doing this.
Kim Mitchell said that was very good.
Keith Lyons said because at first when she said to me to just tear it down and build a new one. Then I went down for permits, well I didn’t go for permits but to see what was required.
Chairman Stipan said may I ask for you sit over there for a moment? And I’ll check to see if there are any objectors or concerned citizens in this case. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Stipan asks are there any objectors or concerned citizens in this case. No response
Chairman Stipan said there are none.
Chairman Stipan said you have been approved sir, thank you for your time and patience.
3. Motion to Approve Variance for Minimum Street Setback from 10 feet to 1 foot (Woodland Circle) (V-21-113)
Voice Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Michael Carruthers, Commissioner SECONDER: Kimberly Mitchell, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Peterson, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Gugala |
Voice Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Michael Carruthers, Commissioner SECONDER: Kimberly Mitchell, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Peterson, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Gugala |
Motion to postpone Variance for Maximum Accessory Building Area from 1,800 sq ft to 2,210 sq ft (V21-119)
Voice Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
| RESULT: POSTPONED [UNANIMOUS] Next: 3/15/2022 6:30 PM
TO: Will County Planning and Zoning Commission MOVER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman SECONDER: Kimberly Mitchell, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Peterson, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Gugala |
Marguerite Kenny presented Zoning Case ZC-21-74, which takes place in Custer Township.
The owner is Dean E Cunning and the attorney is Mr. Richard Kavanagh of Kavanagh Grumley & Gorbold LLC.
It is property that is identified as being vacant land between Zilm Road and Route 113 in Custer Township.
The applicant is requesting a map amendment from A-1 to R-1 in order to allow the property owner to create 15 5-acre home sites. This is not a subdivision as it is creating sites larger than what would trigger the subdivision provisions.
So, I have the subject property on the screen. It is outlined the entire property in red. The blue just shows one of the two lots. Combined it is 78.98 acres. It is all zoned A-1 It is currently unimproved in the sense of any structures. It is currently for agricultural purposes. There is lot frontage along Zilm Road which is under the jurisdiction of the Will County Division of Transportation. Route 113 is under IDOT jurisdiction. And you can see that in the middle of the property there is already one 5-acre parcel that has previously been removed from the area. It also has 165 feet of lot frontage which is what you see is being proposed. This red circle shows the only area where there is an identified wetland and flood plain associated with that wetland. Which may impact potential development of this locality in terms of future residential development. But for the most part of it, if they stay outside of it, it should not cause any significant impacts.
Looking at some photos of subject property. Just looking at the general area these images are looking north and northeast from Zilm Road. So, this is that northern part of the property. This is looking south and east at that southern section along Zilm Road. Looking from Route 113, looking northwest and south at the subject property. Looking at the plat of survey you can see it is a fairly large piece of property. The conceptual site plan shows approximately the fifteen 5-acre parcels to be created. Along Route 113 there will be 8, all ranging about 5 acres, a little bit over 5 acres and then all the lots have at minimum 165 feet of frontage. Along Zilm Road there will be 7 lots. One lot will be deficient by ½ inch along Zilm Road and its mainly because of just how the property is in terms of lot frontage and the configuration. So, looking again at just the surroundings area, so looking northwest and west along Zilm Road, southwest along Zilm and at that 5-acre parcel that’s in the middle of the subject area. And this is looking south and north along Route 113. The Kankakee River is just on the other side of the houses in this area.
So, with regard to map amendments, there is certain criteria by which we review this request upon. The main two or the first two criteria deal with the property uses within the general vicinity as well as the zoning.
So, on screen within a 1-mile radius the uses and zoning classification are very similar. It’s residential, commercial and public within the city of Wilmington and unincorporated Will County. However, based on the city of Wilmington, the limits are actually 2 miles, a little over 2 miles north of this side of the Kankakee River. Its Coal City Rd is actually their southern boundary but within map amendments we typically use a mile and a half jurisdiction, and they have 2 parcels on the eastern side of the Kankakee River that have been annexed into the city of Wilmington which house the Wesley Township Highway Department and a vacant parcel next door. Aside from that the city of Wilmington is not within the mile radius. So similar uses as I mentioned agricultural, residential, commercial, the closest R-1 zoned property is just 500 ft to the west of the subject property.
And then moving on, so the suitability of the subject property, residential dwelling are permitted in agricultural zoning districts. However, there is limits to the number of residences. So, typically 1 lot you get 1 house. If you build a smaller house, it would be considered an accessory dwelling unit and there would be certain requirements. The applicant is looking to divide up the property into smaller lots so he would have to meet the minimum lot standards if he was creating 15 lots out of the division. Each lot would have to meet the minimum requirements. A-1 is 10 acres with 300 ft of frontage. What is he proposing meets R-1 requirements aside from the one lot that is deficient by a half inch. Similar uses in the R-1, they could go through further zoning to allow farm animals, which is something that is permitted in A-1. So, it is similar type of use. It is a large lot residential zoning district.
Again, just looking at the trend of developments as with this map on the screen, it is showing that this area has been developed for residential purposes there’s a lot of nature preserves in this area to kind of supplement residential uses and houses in the area. So, within this area we have the Wauponsee Glacial Trail which is located northeast and across the Kankakee River. The Sand Ridge Savanna Nature Preserve which is west of the subject property. The Sand Ridge Savanna Preserve also located west. The Kankakee Sands Preserve which is located northwest of the subject property. Then we have Rivals Lookout which is located northeast across the Kankakee River and is owned by the Wesley Township. The County originally zoned the property was in 1947. The trend has been towards residential and similar uses.
So more and more zoning requests have been towards residential zoning districts in this area. With consistency with the County’s adopted plans, this request is in conformance with the county Land Resource Management Plan. This is both identified as Rural Areas as being in the Kankakee River Corridor Form as well as a Conservation Design Use.
Typically, R-1 is 16,000 square feet. These properties will be over 5 acres so there will be some type of component where they will remain vacant, unimproved and just large lots. Which is in conformance with the adopted plan. Typically, the density under Conservation Design Use is 1 dwelling to 2 ½ to 10 acres. So, this is within the density requirement. Within the Kankakee River Corridor form, the settlements with this area are desirable when use patterns can coexist with Rural Form.
Again R-1 is large lots. There are zoning request that could continue some of those rural uses like keeping farm animals on site. Again, in terms of the city of Wilmington, it is outside of their planning boundary. With regard to the LESA score, The Land Evaluation Site Assessment, was calculated and the score placed the property in the protective farmland category.
So, looking at the requested variance, you can see site 502 is just north the already existing 5-acre parcel. It will be technically 164.67 feet of frontage measured currently where it is along Zilm Road. However, the Will County Illinois Department of Transportation (WCIDOT) will want a 50-foot right-of-way dedication once a building permit is obtained for the residential use. In doing so, the right of way line moves into the property and giving that the property is slightly narrower along Zilm Road, they actually gain a little more lot frontage 50 feet into the property making it 164.96. So, they are just under half an inch of meeting the requirements of 165 feet. In terms of that, Staff finds that it is not going to be noticeable. That half inch is going to be very similar to what is existing in the area. There are deficient A-1, A-2 and R-3 districts in the near vicinity.
Staff finds the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances, mainly just because of that half inch. The applicant could potentially reduce the lot and create larger lots and have them all meet. The applicant is requesting the variance to bring it into compliance. The surrounding area does have a mix of nonconforming lots that don’t meet the existing lot frontage. The IDNR identified a protected turtle, an ornate box turtle in the area. The IDNR has requested that the applicant submit their plans to the IDNR for review to ensure that any adverse effects are not going to occur with the developments. With regards to the Soil and Water Conservation District they basically commented to be mindful of the soil conditions at time of building which is a typical comment.
After the Staff Report was published, we did get a response from the Illinois Department of Transportation. They mentioned the possibility of requiring only a couple of entrances on to Route 113 since it is a state highway. The applicant is aware of this comment from IDOT and is looking at the possibility of recording an ingress/egress easement along all the properties, where they still would have frontage along Route 113, but they also would have guaranteed access property lines which would be in conformance with the zoning ordinance. Or potentially have each lot have shared driveway. So out of the 8-lot proposed along Route 113, they would propose four entrances off if they can get that and have each of those two lots share a main entrance and then have their driveways come off that point. Again, we would probably want to see some type of recorded easement so that if the driveways shift across property lines, but properties have sufficient access.
Of the agencies that were notified, none have objected.
And I am happy to answer any questions.
Chairman Stipan said I have no questions. Does anyone have any questions?
Vice Chairman Kiefner said is this unusual to go to the R-1? Wouldn’t estate zoning be more appropriate here. I’m assuming width of the estate is 180.
Marguerite Kenny said in terms of how may lots the applicant wanted, R-1 was the closest thing to have him meet and still be exceeding lot area, but he needs the lot frontage. Otherwise, he would be coming forward potentially asking variances for each lot created if he would go estate residential.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said so, the plan we are looking at here, are they bound to that or can they change that after the zoning is approved.
Marguerite Kenny said they could change it, but they would still need to meet the minimum lot requirements. If the variance is approved, it would be pertaining to that specific lot based on the legal description that was published and is part of that variance request.
Chairman Stipan said thank you very much, we appreciate it. Is the owner or his representative here? I see Mr. Kavanagh.
Mr. Kavanagh said Yes sir.
Chairman Stipan said are there any objectors or concerned citizens to this case? No response
Chairman Stipan said to Mr. Kavanagh would you please come down please? Thanks for coming.
Mr. Kavanagh said thank you Mr. Chairman, my name is Richard Kavanagh I’m an attorney with K.G.G. LLC. Located at 111 N Ottawa St in Joliet. I represent Dean Cunning and we appreciate the work Staff did on this case. It’s been unusual. I’ve never seen a case where I needed to ask for a variance for quarter of a half an inch, that’s for sure. In my mind, it’s an awfully good plan to have very nice suburban 5-acre residential lots in an area that is bounded on 2 sides, one by a county road and one by a state highway. We’re asking for the R-1 zoning because the minimum lot frontage of 165 ft, but we are still creating 5-acre lots. We think it is something worthwhile. The city of Wilmington was notified and said they had no objection. We notified the Township. I was told that we might get a call from the plan commission in Custer Township, but we never did. So, we are asking you to approve the rezoning from A-1 to R-1 and the variance for the half of a quarter inch which happens to be 165 to 164.96. I would be happy to answer any questions. My client Dean Cunning is here, he’d also be happy to answer any questions.
Chairman Stipan said would you mind taking a seat right here until we hear from any concerned citizens or objectors. Would the first concerned citizens come up please? Please state your name and address for the record.
Ronald Madding introduces himself to the Commission. I’m the property right that’s next to him. There’s a drainage ditch between us and we have had a lot of issues with water run-off into our properties from that property. I believe he’s tried to correct it and help but the drainage ditch is not being maintained at all and it floods. Worst part about it, it floods so bad the water goes on to the highway. I’ve got pictures to the damage it’s done to the highway that the State of Illinois for five years will not fix. With the extra traffic, we’ve got school buses and everything going through there. Now the semis are coming through and the extra traffic is destroying the highway. Of course, we don’t have the clout to get the road fixed. I’ve had them come out there, I’ve complained. I’ve got their names and numbers and they’re just what are we to do, we do not have the money. There are big humps in it. Now we got horrible potholes going through there. But the big thing with the property is, I don’t have a problem with him building something. I’m kind of leery of the 165 feet frontage. I was going to buy a property down the road there and I was told by Will County that it had to be 300 feet or 350. Now with the residential to they automatically go down to 165?
Chairman Stipan said would you care to respond?
Marguerite Kenny said yes, typically to divide property if you keep it A-1 that is typically 300 ft minimum for frontage. If you go down to a residential zoning district, it goes down based on what size district you go down to.
Ronald Madding said I guess my point was, why didn’t they down to and stay around 250-300 ft and make 3 sections of it. You know a middle section. Because you can’t get access to 113, that’s so dangerous there. My friend is here, he lives on the other side of the property. That road so hazardous in that turn, I mean it’s bad. If you go through there, you’ll see it and you’ll say what is going on. I raised my adopted children, my grandkids and the bus stops in front of my house. They bus has to start slowing down in a 45 mile per hour zone about a half mile away from my home to keep the semis from hitting the back of it. They can’t see them.
If you drive down that road, you’ll see. I hope the state doesn’t allow any driveways. I just hope they don’t do it. Or they’ll have to modify the highway. It needs modifying to be honest. My wife and myself and anyone that comes to my property, it’s dangerous. You better look both ways and keep looking because there’s a hill coming from one way and hill coming from the other way. I’m at the top. And his property, Dean’s property, his is like mine, everything runs towards 113, midway of the property but that drainage fills up, now we got a bus hydro planing as it did 2 years ago, went sideways on the highway almost flipped over with kids in it. Now I complained to the State about it and there was at least 3 inches of water on it. Now this is before they repaved it. When they repaved it, now all the water is pitched to my ditch, all of it. I mean it floods. I had to redo all my ditches just to accommodate it. I just paid this year, well 2021, to have all my new culverts put in. In order to help the drainage. Its flooding my yard and it’s affecting my sewer. So, another thing is I’m worried about my well and our sewer. We’ve already had problems with the radon from the nuclear powerhouse. So, of course everyone that lives in a rural area knows when you farm, you will get their chemicals they use in your well. And I’m sure the owner of the property they have done what they’ve had to do according to the agricultural rules and laws and state. I don’t think building them is going to be a problem. I just want these things addressed to make sure that whoever moves in there, they’re not going to have a problem. I don’t have any objections to him building this. We gotta address these problems, they have to be addressed before you build. Because all that water run off is gonna create more issues. Everyone knows when you improve a land, and you have grass or blacktop or concrete driveways that means water runs off. I’m a carpenter by trade, retired out of local 174. The parents are good friends mine and I don’t want to tell the guy hey, I don’t want you to build. I want him to build. It’ll be alright. I just don’t want my taxes to go crazy. They’ve already increased double since I’ve been there for 17 years but uh, I hope you address these things and really look at it. I’m not objecting to as far as the lot sizes and the width. I’m kind of…I’m not too happy about that. I think he probably went over it engineers to see what would be the best thing to get his money for what he is trying to do. I know he’s invested a lot of money.
Chairman Stipan said our county engineers don’t allow a building until it’s done right.
Ronald Madding said well, that’s what I want to hear. That’s good that you’re listening. I’m all for what he is doing. That water issue has gotta be tended to. You can’t have kids getting killed and it is an issue.
Chairman Stipan said there’s a whole bunch of us that grew up on well and septic. We know exactly what you’re talking about.
Ronald Madding said, and you know what, fortunately, I am one of the few in that area that doesn’t have bad water. I’ve got good water. I’m very lucky because everybody else has got sulfur in their water and it’s costing them a lot of money to maintain. And is the eco system in that area gonna handle the sewer.
Chairman Stipan said thank you very much.
Ronald Madding said thank you for letting me talk.
Chairman Stipan said can we have the next gentleman, please? Will you also give your name and address?
Dan Hullett introduces himself to the Commission. Good evening honorable members of the County Board. I’m on the northwest corner of this property that is being discussed. I’m knew Houck Cunning, Dean’s late father, as well as Dean. I have no quarrels with either one of them, good men. But I do have some concerns and some objections to some of this. Number 1, I would curiously like to know, if those members across 113 and across Zilm Road were afforded knowledge of this hearing because to my understanding, the property I own is up to the middle of the highway and the people across the road, their property line is up to the middle of the highway. Although the highway has right of way, we still own half and half. And if those that did live across the highway and did live across from Zilm Road weren’t afforded the notification, I think the process is really null and void.
Chairman Stipan said well, I will inquire right now. Do you have any idea whether the green cards were returned?
Dawn Tomczak said all notifications that went out. The green cards were returned. And the boundaries are the abutting landowners.
Dan Hullett said what I’m saying that land, the people that live across the highway, their land also abuts it. Just because of the right of way, the highway doesn’t stop the abutment to the property being discussed in my opinion.
Mr. Kavanagh said everybody across the highway, everybody across Zilm Road was notified.
Chairman Stipan said with a quick look, I come up with about 18. Does that sound about right?
Mr. Kavanagh said there were about 24 or 25 notifications that were sent out. Custer Township, City of Wilmington but yes.
Dan Hullett said thank you, I just wanted to clarify that.
Chairman Stipan said we do endeavor to do it as honestly as possible. That is what our job is.
Dan Hullett said huh?
Chairman Stipan said we do endeavor to do it as honestly as possible. That is what our job is.
Dan Hullett said I understand, I do appreciate that. Will County for a while was starting to get a reputation of Crook County Jr. And I wanted to see that we weren’t being like that.
Barbara Peterson said we’re not Crook County.
Chairman Stipan said I was an electrical contractor in Chicago and an electrical contractor out in Will County. Believe me, the differences are far apart.
Dan Hullett said getting back to the other concern. It’s a little bit off but in a little way it’s tangibly associated in that the County has as well as the State has had the course of expanding its tax basis by allowing inter modals and we’ve become the warehouse capital of the world. They have not kept up the infrastructure that the traffic has caused which has turned I-80 and I-55 into a death corridor. This needs to be addressed.
Chairman Stipan said unfortunately, what you have mentioned are state roads.
Dan Hullett said exactly, but the County should be on the States butt about this too. I mean we all like to have progress and we all would like to have expansion. And the tax base gets expanded doesn’t necessarily lower our taxes. Which I haven’t been able to figure out that math yet, but the concern is the infrastructure does not support the expansion we have. And it can even go all the way down to county roads. And that’s the point I’m making. In that Zilm Road and 113, there have been over 6 deaths in the past at that intersection and numerous, numerous serious accidents. There’s no traffic light there, there’s no turn lanes for the expansion, we’re talking about another 60 cars on the road.
Chairman Stipan said we’ve heard that it maybe, they may be required to do something as far as entering 113 they may have to do something as far as changing the traffic pattern. So that’s in the planning.
Dan Hullett said it’s all a safety factor as the other member mentioned the school bus and the semi traffic is horrible. They’ve got so many potholes just outside of my road on 113. When they hit them at night, it sounds like a train wreck, it shakes the whole house. I know its regardless to this, but I just want to make sure that even if this property goes through, they do not have access to 113. The other issue I have is an environmental issue. Okay, this piece of property, Dean has done a very good job of upkeeping the property. He came in some time ago and put in hundreds and hundreds of feet of drain tile on the property. But I have a pond that is in 40 feet of the property line, that side of the property line is like a ravine where a lot of water catches. Its 40 feet from my pond, I have a 1-acre pond that is used for recreational purposes, fishing, swimming for the children and stuff like this. I’m concerned about all these subdivisions coming in and they’re on septic systems. I don’t need that in my pond. I don’t think the drain tile has they just go in.
Chairman Stipan said are you suggesting that all these brand-new septic systems are going to start to leak?
Dan Hullett said they leak…yeah, but I now didn’t know if they were having city sewer or if they are going to be on septic. If it was city sewer, it probably wouldn’t be nearly as much concern. When you got hundreds and hundreds of feet of drain tile in fields and now, you’re putting in septic tank, where do you think, those septic tanks are going to drain to? They’re gonna drain in the drain tiles and that’s gonna go right back into the Kankakee River.
Chairman Stipan said I’m not going to debate that with you sir. There are all kinds of septic systems. Some of them are 99% pure water coming out nowadays. Which is a big difference from when we were young.
Dan Hullett said certainly, things are different from when we were young. There are more stringent requirements, and a lot of county zone board requirements I am very disgusted with. When it comes down to how many trees you can plant and how many species of this tree you can have and so forth, but I am not here to debate that. I am just here to bring up my concerns with the environmental issues.
Chairman Stipan said, and I think you have done that admirably, thank you. Dan Hullett said well, thank you, I’m sorry I took out any more of your time.
Chairman Stipan said no, that’s fine. Thank you, sir, I’m glad for your testimony. Mr. Kavanagh, do you care to respond to those comments?
Mr. Kavanagh said well, I think obviously Mr. Chairman, what we are going to do is built in accordance with Will County zoning and building codes. They will be well and septic, they will be. There is no central water or sewer anywhere near us. Everything across the street is smaller cottages, across 113, some of them may not be year-round residents because they are right on the Kankakee River, but these are nice large lot residences that will be built, and it’ll be basically 15 on 78 acres. We would appreciate your support for the rezoning and also for that half inch variance or quarter inch variance.
Chairman Stipan said apparently, she can’t round up to the tenth of an inch, .6?
Mr. Kavanagh said well, we didn’t want to do it. I’ve never seen something like this before, never. I’d be happy to answer any questions.
Chairman Stipan said I have no more questions. Does anyone else have any questions?
No one answers
Chairman Stipan said okay, thank you very much sir.
Dawn Tomczak said please note for the gentleman that had a drainage issue, I will give you my card, please call me. We can talk about maybe discussing different options with our storm water management committee.
Chairman Stipan said request to open floor for discussion. Mr. Kiefner will open the floor for discussion.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I’m just wondering what will come of the state. Obviously, when I look at the global view here on my phone, there are a lot of driveways already on 113. Looking at this, if I was a developer or this person, I would instantly I got this R-1 zoning be thinking of putting a street entrance on 113 to the state and possibly even putting R lots in the middle of the property. And it’s my understanding then with staff, there’s nothing this couldn’t handle, once we get the R-1 zoning.
Marguerite Kenny said so, once it’s rezoned to R-1, it really comes down to how they want to divide up the lots. If they do not want to go through the actual subdivision process which usually takes way more money because have to do a plat of subdivision, you hire an engineer, you plat out the streets, you have right of way dedication, you have to put in landscaping requirements, you go to the public hearing process for the subdivision. If they are looking to circumvent that, just keep the lots greater than 5-acres which basically exempts them from having to go through the subdivision. They would have to be the R-1 district requirements.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said so, they just couldn’t just do this without the subdivision plat, that’s what I was asking. They would require more from the County if they changed their mind.
Marguerite Kenny said if they change their minds and do more than 15, yes.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I think that somewhat addresses my concerns. Anybody else?
Chairman Stipan said anyone else want to discuss anything on this case? No answer
Vice Chairman Kiefner said; Mr. Chairman, I'd like to point out that each person should have a strict 3-minute time limit.
7. Motion to Approve Map Amendment from A-1 to R-1 (M-21-019) Voice Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Michael Carruthers, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Peterson, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Gugala |
Voice Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Michael Carruthers, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Peterson, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Gugala |
Lisa Napoles presented Zoning Case ZC-21-082, which takes place in New Lenox Township.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to take the opportunity to correct a typo in the staff report. On page 1 the case number should read ZC-21-082/S-21-022. Staff regrets the error.
Staff received emails objecting to the request after the publication of this staff report. Commissioners were forwarded the 1st memo with 3 emails. Staff received 2 additional emails today, which I will read into the record. The 1st email is from Constance Santiago, it reads, good afternoon, I am unable to attend the meeting, but I am submitting my opinion to this matter. Please be advised that I respectfully request that this request for our neighbor to be permitted to keep farm animals of any kind be denied. We feel that our neighborhood is not the appropriate place for farm animals and would not like to see this approved. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Signed, Constance Santiago.
The 2nd email reads. This was addressed to my colleague Adrian Diaz, Adrian, I am writing this letter in response to Mr. Glen Banks' s application for a special use permit variance, case ZC-21-082 that will be addressed tonight at the zoning meeting. Glen wants to bring pigmy goats on his property. I live behind Glen on the south side of his lot. He has chickens, roosters, ducks and two goats soon after he purchased his home. He currently only has chickens. I have no objections to the chickens as long as they are kept in his yard. I do not want the variance granted because they had their chickens getting out and running through our and our neighbor’s yards all summer. They knew they were getting out and didn’t secure them properly. I had to chase them out of my garden on several occasion. I don’t want to have to chase goats too. If we allow goats, what’s next? Glen mentioned his wife said she wouldn’t mind having a potbellied pig at some point. I don’t want a petting zoo back there. I do not have an objection to farm animals, but they don’t belong in a residential subdivision. Our lots are roughly half-acre lots. We will see, hear and smell them. Do I need to appear in person at this hearing to file an opposition to this request, or is this email sufficient? Signed, Gerald Murrie.
The owner of the property is Glen Banks.
The parcel measures 23,500 square feet in lot area with 117.5 ft of lot frontage and is zoned R-3.
The applicant is seeking a special use permit, to keep farm animals, specifically goats on the property. The property is improved with a single-family residence with a detached garage and a shed.
In June of 2021 the property was placed in violation #21LU00400 by Will County Land Use Department Code Enforcement staff in response to a complaint received pertaining to ducks and goats on the property. As of May 20, 2021, Ordinance No 21-138 the keeping of ducks and goats requires special use permit approval in the R-3 zoning district. The inspection report noted that there were chickens on the property as well. Chickens (not roosters) are permitted as of right in the R-3 zoning district.
The applicant attended pre-application meeting with staff on September 23, 2021, to address the violation. At that time the applicant stated that he planned to temporarily re-home the ducks and goats and to apply for a special use permit in order to keep the animals on the property and resolve the violation. Staff informed the applicant of the requirements for the keeping of farm animals in the R-3 district. On October 8, 2021, the applicant submitted a special use permit application in order to keep the goats on the property. Per section 155- 10.10(B)(30)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance, two adult goats over 6 months of age not exceeding 60 pounds in weight are permitted in the R-3 zoning district with an approved special use permit.
The applicant has requested that the special use permit not be transferable to subsequent property owners. This is the applicant’s first request for this special use.
On January 11, Staff received an email from Code Enforcement Staff that the goats and the ducks had been removed from the property and that the Violation #21LU00400 was closed. The New Lenox Village Board held their own hearing regarding this case on January 10, 2022.
Staff received a letter dated January 11, 2022, informing the Land Use Department that the Village Board voted not to object to the special use permit pending five conditions. Which are included in your packet. The Zoning Ordinance stipulates that only two goats are permitted in the R-3 District with special use permit approval, that the goats must be kept in a fenced in area, and that all the structures housing the goats be a minimum of 25 feet from any residence (with the exception of the animal owner’s). Two of the conditions, that the fenced area should be located behind the existing garage, and that the required fenced in area should have a solid fence a minimum of 4 feet in height, are beyond the requirements of the County Zoning Ordinance and cannot be enforced by the County.
The property is zoned R-3 as are the surrounding properties. The parcel meets the lot standards for the R-3 district and is legal and conforming. The parcel is in close proximity to the Village of New Lenox which is less than 300 ft to west of the west side of S Spencer Road.
Looking at some pictures. This is the plat of survey for the property. This is a view of the subject site looking southeast. This is a view of the subject parcel looking northwest. This a view of subject parcels looking north. This a view of adjacent parcels looking west. This a view of adjacent parcels looking northwest. This a view of adjacent parcels looking northeast. This a view of adjacent parcels looking west. This a view of adjacent parcels looking east.
The criteria by which Staff Commissioners and County Board members evaluate special use permit requests are shown on the screen. In regard to criterion 1, it is Staff’s professional opinion that the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the special use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public’s health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare. While the applicant had not first obtained the special use permit prior to acquiring the goats, the applicant has worked with Land Use Department staff to resolve the violation and bring the property into conformance. The applicant is pursuing zoning approval to be able to home the two goats which is the permitted number in the R-3 district.
In regard to criterion 2, it is Staff’s professional opinion that the special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The R-3 district only allows up to two goats to be kept on the property with special use permit approval.
In regard to criterion 3, the subject parcel is located within a completely developed residential subdivision. Per Section 155-10-.10(B), all buildings and structures that house animals must be located at least 25 ft from all existing dwellings, except the animal owners.
In regard to criterion 4, the property is improved as a single-family residence, the keeping of goats is accessory to that use. The applicant has stated that the goats will live primarily indoors. The applicant has built an outdoor confinement area for when the goats are outdoors. A condition proposed by the Village of New Lenox requires a fenced in area behind the garage enclosed by a solid fence a minimum of 4 ft high.
As stated previously, the County requires that the enclosure be 25 feet from any residence, except the animal owners. The Zoning Ordinance permits fences up to 7 feet high inside and rear years in residential zoning districts. Erecting fences in easements is not recommended.
In regard to criterion 5, the subject property is improved as a residential property and has access onto E Chelsea St to the north. The keeping of goats as companion animals should not impact traffic congestion in the public streets.
In regard to criterion 6, the special use permit will conform to all other applicable regulations of this zoning district. Conditions have been added to ensure compliance with the County’s adopted codes and ordinances.
Staff is recommending approval with the 4 conditions shown here.
Of the agencies that were notified and of who provided comments, none have objected.
The letter from the Village of New Lenox referenced earlier is included in your packets. And this includes Staff’s presentation.
Chairman Stipan said does anyone have any questions?
No one answers
Chairman Stipan said thank you very much.
Lisa Napoles said thank you Mr. Chairman
Chairman Stipan said is the owner or agents here for this case? Nathaniel Washburn??
Lisa Napoles said no, the applicant, the owner is representing himself. Chairman Stipan said oh, he’s representing himself. Okay.
Chairman Stipan said are there any objectors or concerned citizens for this case here?
Chairman Stipan said okay, thank you. Good evening, would you state your name and address sir.
Glen Banks introduces himself to the Commission.
Chairman Stipan said okay. Have you talked to your neighbors? I understand you have some objectors and concerned citizens here tonight.
Glen Banks said we have not spoken. The violation was called in and there was 1 conversation since then. There has been no communication since then.
Chairman Stipan said okay, thank you. Would you care to take a seat?
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I have a question.
Chairman Stipan said go ahead, you had questions?
Vice Chairman Kiefner said so, you did have goats on this property? Glen Banks said initially, yes.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said what breed were they?
Glen Banks said Nigerian dwarf goats they are actually smaller than pygmy. Vice Chairman Kiefner said do you have male and female?
Glen Banks said two males.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said were they wethered?
Glen Banks said they were disbudded. We had to remove them off the property before we could get them wethered? If they were to be brought back on the property, they would be wethered. The smell goes down immensely once they’re wethered. Male goats that are not wethered, urinate on themselves to create a musk for the females. So, the smell goes down, way down.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said and that would eliminate the chances for you to have accidental birth.
Glen Banks said correct.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I was asked. Do you milk these?
Glen Banks said the doe you can, but we have two males, we have two bucks. They’ve been disbudded and will be wethered if we get them.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said and if you were milking you would do pygmy. You’d be very disappointed.
Barbara Peterson do you still have same 2 somewhere else that you are waiting to get back?
Glen Banks said yes, when we went in violation, we had I think 21 days to remove them. We had them off within the 21 days. Then I talked to my wife, and we started going through the approval process. We got rid of the ducks. You pick and choose your battles, and I didn’t want to fight for the ducks, so they were re homed. So right now, we only have 3 chickens.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said follow-up question, are you aware of your chickens jumping the fence and going into the neighbor’s property?
Glen Banks said this was the first time of I’ve had chickens and I wasn’t aware of the height they could get. We had a fence that was 4 ft high. They’ve scaled the enclosure a few times. They would go back into their house at night instinctively. We have the pen, and I wasn’t aware that they could get out but ever since then, we’ve kept them locked up unless one of us is right there with them.
Mike Carruthers the neighborhood in looking at the pictures, looks like it’s kinda of close together and nice suburban home. Why?
Glen Banks said my wife has always wanted goats. I’ve always wanted a boat. The deal was a goat for a boat. So, I purchased the goats to in order to get my boat. I love my wife and she wanted goats. I’m doing my due diligence to try to keep that intact.
Chairman Stipan said any other questions?
No one answers
Chairman Stipan said would you please take a seat right there sir while I call some of the concerned citizens. Would the first concerned citizen, come up please. When you get to the podium, would you please give your name and address for the records?
Joyce Nelson introduces herself to the Commission. Our concerns what has already been talked about. First, they never talked to anybody, which is a question you asked them. My husband and I are the ones that called them in originally because we had goats being brought out onto the patio at like 1:30 in the morning. Our bedroom window faces their patio. We can hear everything off the patio. So, we can hear goats bellowing at 1:30 in the morning. The other concern we have is the shelter. They had ducks, which they did show you on the pictures, where they had them. That wasn’t even a picture of the fence they have. They’re kept on the side by the pool, they are not by the garage at all where they should be. The place is a piece of mud right now. The ducks that were there half of the time had no shelter half of the time. The finally threw a patio umbrella in there but most of the time it was collapsed. We would hear the ducks quacking, most of the time because they did not have any water. He is saying the chickens don’t get out. They were just out last Monday coming towards our yard and the kids ran out and put them away. So, the chickens are out more than what he’s saying. The other thing is the smell. We are concerned about that because the ducks being there the length of time that they were last year during the summer, not once was the pen cleaned. My husband and I are both from farms in Wisconsin. Grew up with ducks and chickens and cows and everything else. You have to clean this. There’s no cement base. The chickens get cooped up like they do on a farm, but you have a base where you can clean the manure. My question is where is the manure going to go? Another thing, is where is the feed going to be kept? Most of them eat alfalfa and they eat some grain. Where are you going to keep it? What are you going to do with these animals in the winter? There is no shelter there for them. For right now, the chickens get put in the coop but what are you going to do with the goats? I would say you’d keep them in your house, but you have kids in your house. Now you’re gonna have them walk out into the manure and then walk into your house? I think a lot of that you have to look at the infection control part of that. And that is one of our biggest concerns and the noise.
Chairman Stipan said okay, thank you for your testimony. Any questions? No, then thank you ma’am. May I have the next concerned citizen or objector? Please give your name and address for the record.
Emily Devries introduces herself to the Commission. I had to bring my speech. Sorry, I’ve never done this before. My family and I live to the immediate left of the Banks family, and we share the 2nd largest property line. I’d like to feel like my family had a sound relationship with my surrounding neighbors. I hope that I am found with no ill will with how I proceed. I’ve spoken with Jamie Banks about the concerns involving the Nigerian Dwarf goats, so I’d like to address a few of those. I know there were complaints about their garbage cans, their garage and their children’s bicycles and I just feel like none of those things are really hurting anybody. I also feel like, since we are adults, wouldn’t it be more productive to address these issues while they are happening instead of bringing them up at a later time? None of these things seemed to be an issue previously, so why are they an issue now? There have been may occasions where fellow neighbors helped cut each other’s grass and same with shoveling snow from driveways. So why couldn’t these issues be addressed head on? Also, there was a mentioned of being worried about decrease in property value, um if you’re worried about that I feel that the efforts would be better focused on you know the driveway with multiple broken-down cars.
Chairman Stipan said excuse me, I know it sounds terrible but I’m old but we’re leaning forward trying to hear what you are saying. Speak a little louder.
Dawn Tomczak said you’ve gotta talk louder.
Emily Devries said I’m sorry, that is usually not an issue for me. Dawn Tomczak said go on, pretend you’re home yelling at the kids Emily Devries said not them but my husband.
Emily Devries said I feel like the efforts be better focused on the driveway with the multiple broken down cars or finding out who has been tossing beer cans all over the road. Instead of worry about these things. Um, instead of focusing on our children being children leaving bikes lying around. After all the isolation the children had to endure during the height of the pandemic. It’s nice to see them outside enjoying their childhood. When we purchased our home in 2008, we found out we lived in an unincorporated area. And I took that time to research what exactly that meant. Living in this area means there are fewer restriction and regulations that are applied to your property. Specifically zoning restrictions when it comes to owning livestock. I understand that we do live in an older neighborhood. Many residents have lived here for decades but as older residents move out, younger couples and families will be moving in. We’ve already noticed a few on our street and many in the surrounding area that have moved in and in consensus with the reaction to the goats during their walks, I believe that the goats will continue to be a big hit with this demographic. I know from personal experience there is a family with a potbellied pig named Olive just a block over and my children never miss an opportunity to try and feed her during our walks. It’s a unique experience that not many people get to deal with but a memorable one. And I feel like those goats can offer a similar one to the neighborhood children. With the Banks family downsizing a large portion of their animals, the concern of whether or not they have too much on their plate should diminish severely among all the parties involved. The Banks family has always remained consistent with their lawn maintenance. Even offering to help us with ours. The curb appeal remains pleasant with blooming flowers, and I also know for a fact that they run a tight ship. There’s been plenty of times where play dates among the children have been put on hold until the chores are completed, and the bedrooms are clean. They lost their dog tragically over the summer, when he escaped through a small hole in his gated area. As sad as this is, there have been plenty of dogs from loving homes that have met the same fate. Accidents happen. When the goats arrived, the family had them disbudded, which if you are unfamiliar with term, it means they had a procedure to ensure their horns won’t grow. This allows preventing of injury amongst themselves and the people they encounter. They were also UpToDate on their shots, dewormed and once they are home, they will be neutered along with regular worm prevention. This breed of goats is strictly bred to be pets. When they were told to get rid of the goats, they begrudgingly did so. They took every opportunity to get them back the proper way. Which is why we are here. The Banks family doesn’t want a farm or to be allowed to do whatever they want. Nor do that want anarchy or animosity among the neighbors. They just want their goats back.
Chairman Stipan said so, you’re in support?
Emily Devries said what?
Chairman Stipan said you’re in support?
Emily Devries said I am. They were super cute.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said you are not opposed to them?
Emily Devries said no, I am just here in support.
Chairman Stipan said okay, thank you very much.
Emily Devries said thank you.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I didn’t gong you, even though you went 5 minutes. You were nervous and I didn’t want to add to it.
Chairman Stipan said are there any more concerned citizens or objectors? No response
Chairman Stipan said, nope? Okay, you have one objector and one concerned citizen. In listening to the objector, would you like to respond for the objector?
Glen Banks said yes.
Chairman Stipan said to our Board of course.
Glen Banks said I’m sorry, say that again.
Chairman Stipan said you’re responding to us. Yeah, you’re talking to us. Glen Banks said in reference to the ducks
Chairman Stipan said yeah, speak a little louder please.
Glen Banks said in reference to the ducks, we had a house the whole time. It was in the corner of the fence which angles down to the pool. As far as why we got the goats, other than the humor from earlier. During this pandemic, it’s been a pretty interesting time for our families, we have six kids between the two of us, between me and my wife. We have medically complex children in the house, so they have been home schooled for the past two years. So, if I could find activities to do away from other people, where they keep them busy. We’re not out trying to kill each other basically. We bought a bunch of kites. We bought a bunch of bikes. With stimulus. Just anything I could think of to keep our minds busy and not go crazy and get out of the house and get away from people and not be cooped up in the house the whole time. The animals were when we were at the house when the weather permitted. It was a good experience for them on how to take care of them. The species that we had are bred to be companions or for dairy. We have two males so dairy is out of the question. They’ve been therapy animals for us to play with, to pet or whatever. When we first had them before they were removed, they were still bottle-fed because they were still young. There was in one of the line items up there talked about them being inside goats. They would not be if they came back to the property. They would only be outside. The only reason we had them inside was because they were bottle-fed. We had them caged while there if were small children around. When the small children were gone, we took them out multiple times a day to walk them around the neighborhood on a leash.
Barbara Peterson said what do you do with them in the winter? Glen Banks said goats in the winter, their coats get kind of like a horses. Barbara Peterson said so, they stay outside even in the winter?
Glen Banks said I have an old child’s playhouse that I modified and blocked off all the windows to prevent coldness. That’s what their living in now. We’ve had no issues.
Barbara Peterson so, they’ll have shelter?
Glen Banks said correct, yes.
Barbara Peterson said, and you’re done with the ducks? The ducks are gone, there’s gonna be no more ducks?
Glen Banks said I done.
Barbara Peterson said and how will you store the feed? That was another question.
Glen Banks said there’s a plastic bin. We know some people that are housing them right now. Some people use it for putting their trash cans in. Kinda like a plastic container. You can lock it. When only have 2 goats, its not like we have a herd, so a pail full of pellets and 10 ft hay bail. They eat quite a lot. It’s enough where we do not have to have a barn to store all the feed and stuff.
Barbara Peterson said and it’s not outside?
Glen Banks said it will probably be where they want us to have the fence behind the garage. It would probably be around the corner adjacent somewhere against the building or enclosed inside the fence.
Barbara Peterson said and then the chickens. How are you keeping the chickens? They said the chickens were out again on Monday.
Glen Banks said that I wasn’t aware of. Nobody said anything to me. The fence we have now, I’m going to change into a hardwire, welded wire fence. That way I can put chicken wire across top. I already bought the fence. I have the roll in my shed. I’ve been waiting for this to warm up again so I can run the chicken wire across the top. I need a harder more sturdier fence be able to run the chicken wire. This will prevent them from being able to fly out. The fence choice I tried at first, they’ll jump on top of it and push it down. The other option would be to clip their wings. Which I don’t wanna do.
Barbara Peterson said the other issue was keeping the manure clean up. Doing a better job at.
Glen Banks said we spent a lot of money going through this process. I’m not gonna throw that all away to just let the goats go.
Barbara Peterson said the special use permit comes with some requirements at this part. And neighbors are calling and complaining and you’re finding that you’re going to lose this special use permit. Do you understand?
Glen Banks said yes, I’m sure we’re probably gonna lose. Even if it is granted.
Barbara Peterson: Well, it will be a good idea to make friends with the neighbors and maybe get them to communicate with you instead of the County, if they got concerns. You know. I mean you may be given a chance and you should do all the things that you are saying.
Mike Carruthers: Mr. Banks. Your abutting neighbor, how can you appease? They had an issue with your houses right next door to one another, they can see you, hear and everything. How can you solve that problem? I see that there is only one objector in here.
Glen Banks said as far as the noise nuisance?
Barbara Peterson said the goats out at 1:30 in the morning.
Glen Banks said that I am not sure, I have no recollection.
Barbara Peterson said the ducks quacking is not going to be an issue?
Glen Banks said no, I’m in bed at 1:30 in the morning. So, I don’t know anything where that came from.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said since you mentioned it. Why don’t you want to clip the chicken’s wings?
Glen Banks said I’d rather not maim them if I didn’t have to.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said this is perfectly acceptable. If you want your neighbors to like you, snip them 5 feathers on one wing, that chicken doesn’t go over a 4 ft fence anymore and your neighbors are gonna like you a lot more. As a man that has had chickens, this won’t get dunce. And has had goats, you want a chicken to stay in, just clip the wing. Now debeaking them so they don’t break and egg and another thing, now that’s a little more controversial. Everything on the internet. And that’ll make your neighbors happy. Well, if they’re not in the property. I’ll ask Staff.
Chairman Stipan said may I stop this discussion? This has nothing to do with the zoning. Let’s go back to the zoning.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said let’s ask Staff. Is there a limit to the number of chickens he can have?
Lisa Napoles said yes Mr. Commissioner. There is, I can pull up the zoning ordinance. In the R-3 zoning district there is a limit to the number of chickens that can be kept on the property. Let me just find that for you.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I only state this because my experience, to many chickens would be far worse smell than 2 goats. Especially if they’re wethered.
Glen Banks said we had 6 originally.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I do have to address there’s at least 4 or 5 of your neighbors that are opposed to the goats. Apparently, there are not the goat yoda.
Glen Banks said we had a petition that we had going around the neighborhood and had people sign. We have 7 signatures on it.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said let me see that. Don’t want to hide stuff from us.
Lisa Napoles said Vice Chairman Kiefner, the animal density is limited to 1 chicken for every 2,500 square feet of lot area.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said: So, he can have 10 or 11 chickens.
Lisa Napoles said yes, we round down, we don’t round up.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I seen that tonight.
Mike Carruthers says Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stipan said yes.
Mike Carruthers said someone is addressing you.
Joyce Nelson said can we ask you a question about the signatures he’s handing you. Are they the immediate neighbors or the neighbors at the end of the block that it does not affect?
Glen Banks said they’re on our block. Some of them are on Chelsea, some of them are on Anderson and some of the are on Regent.
Chairman Stipan said we are looking that up right now.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I have Regent, Chelsea and Anderson to the east, but I will say they are all within, I'd say a rooster’s crow.
Chairman Stipan said thank you very much, we appreciate your testimony.
10. Motion To Approve Special Use Permit for Keeping Farm Animals (Goast) in the R-3 District w/4 Conditions (S-21-022)
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion Denied 2-4.
Dawn Tomczak said please know that this case 2-4 thereby denying the request will be heard at the Land Use Development Committee on March 8th. It moves forward to County Board on March 17th.
Chairman Stipan said thank you.
| RESULT: DEFEATED [2 TO 4]
MOVER: Kimberly Mitchell, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell NAYS: Stipan, Peterson, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Gugala |
Lisa Napoles said presented Zoning Case ZC-21-092, which takes place in Joliet Township.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, this case is a mapping amendment from R-3 to C-4.
The owner is Maria Del Rosario Franco, and her Attorney is Nathaniel Washburn of K.G.G. LLC.
The owner is seeking this map amendment to rezone a vacant R-3 parcel to C-4 to consolidate the subject parcel with the parcel to the north in order to expand the existing tire shop use taking place on that north parcel.
The subject parcel is Lot #14 of the Chelsea Village Subdivision Unit 2 and is located on the west side of S Chicago Street north of W Laraway Road. It measures approximately 1.73 acres in lot area with 365.23 feet of lot frontage along Chicago St on the east side of the parcel and approximately 235 feet of lot frontage along Haviland Dr on the west. The parcel is unimproved.
The GIS aerial shows a gravel driveway at the southwest corner of the parcel which provides access from the adjoining parcel to the south pin 30-27-28-214- 002-0000 to the intersection of Haviland Drive and Minton Road and that’s hard to see but it is right at the southwest corner of the property.
The owner acquired the subject parcel in January 2018. The applicant owns the tire shop Mr. Tire located on the adjoining parcel to the north at 1801 S Chicago Street.
The applicant attended a pre-application meeting on May 17, 2018, to discuss the proposal to develop the subject parcel to serve as outdoor storage for vehicles awaiting repair and repaired vehicles to be picked up by customers. The applicant attended a second pre-application meeting to discuss the same proposal on August 19, 2021.
The owner applied for this zoning case in November 2021 to request a map amendment from R-3 to C-4 to expand the tire shop use occurring on the property at 1801 S Chicago Street on to the subject property. The property at 1801 S Chicago Street is zoned C-4. Tire shops are categorized in the Zoning Ordinance as Motor Vehicle Repair Limited and are permitted as of right in the C-4 zoning district.
The parcel is located approximately 1/3 of a mile from the corporate boundaries of the City of Joliet to the north, south, east and west. The eastern corporate boundary of the Village of Rockdale is approximately 1 ½ from the subject parcel. Per the Will County Division of Transportation’s 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan the study to upgrade the I-80/Chicago St interchange is an investment priority for the Illinois Department of Transportation with the Illiana Expressway. The I-80/Chicago Street interchange is approximately 1 ¼ miles north of the subject parcel.
Looking at some pictures. This a zoning map of the parcel outlined in red. The parcel meets the lot standards for the R-3 zoning district and is conforming.
This is a plat of survey for the property. These are the map amendment review criteria used to review the proposal for this case. A LESA score was not calculated.
Staff evaluated the existing uses and zoning classifications within a half mile radius of the subject property. Within this radius the uses of the properties in the general area include agriculture, residential, commercial and industrial within unincorporated Will County and the City of Joliet.
Residential uses include subdivisions with both single-family and multi-family residences in both Will County and the City of Joliet. Within a ½ mile radius the zoning districts include A-1, R-3, R-4, R-5, R-6, C-2, C-3, C-4 and I-2 in unincorporated Will County. In the City of Joliet, the zoning districts are R-1A (Single-Family Residential) R-2 (Single-Family Residential), B-3(General Business) I
1 (Light Industrial) and I-2 (General Industrial). The parcel would be suitable for a single-family residential use permitted under the current R-3 zoning classification.
Based on GIS aerial images, the current use of the property is crop farming. Per Section 155-15.30(G) of the Zoning Ordinance, crop farming is a permitted use if the parcel was previously zoned Agricultural and has been continuously farmed since.
The current parcel was created in 1962. Since that time the general trend the area has been for the division of agricultural parcels for residential subdivision development as well as increasing commercial and industrial development on former farmland, especially on Chicago Street.
The first unit of the Sugar Creek Highlands subdivision to the southeast of the subject parcel was platted in 1964, with Units 2, 3 and 4 following in 1968, 2005 and 2005 respectively. The first unit of the Laraway Crossings Business Park, also to the southeast of the subject parcel was platted in 2001, with subsequent units following through 2015.
The request is in conformance with the County’s Land Resource Management Plan or LRMP. The proposed use for the subject site falls under the definition of mid scale commercial. Per the LRMP, mid-scale commercial may include uses such as general retail, offices, restaurants, motels, automotive service uses, building supply uses and other related uses.
The subject parcel falls outside but immediately adjoins the north boundary of the City of Joliet’s South side Comprehensive Future Land Use Plan. The properties south of the subject parcel on the west side of S Chicago Street are identified as a commercial corridor on the Future Land Use map.
Looking at some pictures. This is a view of subject parcel looking northwest. This is another view of subject parcel looking southeast. This is a view of adjacent parcels looking north on Haviland Drive. This is a view of adjacent parcels looking west on Minton Road. This is a view of the adjacent parcels looking north. And this is a view of adjacent parcels looking south along Chicago Street.
The Illinois Department of Natural Resources submitted recommendations to avoid adverse impacts to a threatened species, the Rusty Patched Bumblebee. Which are included as an attachment to the Staff Report. The IDNR stated that if the recommendations are followed, impacts are unlikely.
Of the agencies that were notified and of who provided comments, none have objected.
Staff is recommending approval of the map amendment request. This concludes Staff recommendations.
Chairman Stipan said thank you very much.
Lisa Napoles said thank you Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stipan said does anyone have any questions?
No one answers
Chairman Stipan said are there any objectors or concerned citizens to this case? There are. Okay. May I have Nate Washburn, the attorney representing.
Nate Washburn said: Good evening, Nate Washburn said, 111 N Ottawa St with K.G.G. LLC. I represent the applicants and the property owner. The applicant is the owner of Mr. Tire, and the property owner is a friend and business partner with the applicant. The plan is, if this is approved the two lots will be consolidated. I believe that is one of the conditions that is going to be placed upon this before we can develop it. The idea is to expand our existing parking lot, so that we have some more room to move vehicles around and have customers wait and have vehicles parked that are done getting service waiting for pickup. We stand behind Staff’s recommendations we would ask for your consideration and approval this evening.
Chairman Stipan said okay sir thank you; would you please take a seat while we talk to the concerned citizens. Will the first concerned citizen come up please? Please give your name and address for the record.
Kathy Washington introduces herself to the Commission. Okay I will. Can you hear me? I live right next to this farmland. That is my property, my car in the picture. My house. I have a lot of concerns. We moved into this family neighborhood 21 years ago. It is a lot of elderly people but now we have some young families with kids. Our biggest concern is the existing business now. There are constantly trucks, and semis and trailers filled with stuff on the back of them. Now they are doing U Hauls. And there are a million tires everywhere and broken-down pieces of vehicles and junk and animals and raccoons and possums and everything. And if you drive by it, you’ll see all this crap. The police have been called by a million different neighbors in our neighborhood. There’s an 80-year-old woman maybe 85.
Someone from the galley says, no, she’s about 95.
Kathy Washington said right across the business, and it scares her to death all the trucks. We finally got the Township to put up no parking signs because there would be so many trailers and empty trailers and kids would go jump on them. Like there were flatbed trailers from a trailer park. So, and the trucks come through our neighborhood, the Township just did our roads. And the trucks constantly coming through, the semis trying to get out and they are blocking the blocking the entrance on Zurich. Because there’s Zurich, Haviland and Minton. And this property is over here. So, I have a question, if it’s zoned for industrial, that means he can move all his junk all the way down our neighborhood on the side. So, will that mean more animals, more trucks, more everything? Because it’s a family residential neighborhood for over 50 years. So, what happens to that? I mean I know it’s not goats and chickens but its semis and trailers and traffic, a lot of traffic. So that’s very concerning. And also, is the entrance that they are going to build if it got zoned, is it got to come off of Chicago St and not come through our residential neighborhood. Or are all of these trucks and trailers going to be allowed to come down Haviland into our neighborhood to get access to his piece of property. Or will it be a rule or a law they have to come up Chicago Street. Because Zurich, he’s on Zurich and Chicago St, there’s a median in the middle because the traffic goes this way down Chicago St which if anyone drives down it, you’ll see 100 semis if you blink an eye. So, my children come out and have to cross this median. So now it is going to be it said on the application it was going to be 15-20 a day. I can probably stand there with my phone and count if you would need me to how many come in and out a day. But how are they even going to do that with that median with the trucks? They can only go right down Chicago Street. But how do you kept semis out of your home, out of your neighborhood when you have kids riding bikes, you have people walking dogs. I mean why does this keep getting allowed because we live on the east side of Joliet?
Barbara Peterson said it happens everywhere. And usually there’s weigh limits on Township roads posted sometimes.
Kathy Washington said we have no parking signs, they did that. There are weight limit signs on the bridge.
Chairman Stipan said are you saying its Township then and not the City of Joliet? Kathy Washington said no, we are Township, Haviland, Zurich, Minton.
Chairman Stipan said your Township Road Commissioner should have a weight limit on this road.
Barbara Peterson said she said there are.
Kathy Washington said there is, but the trucks still come through because they don’t know where to go on Zurich. So, we’re Township, Chicago Street is the City of Joliet, but the median is State. Because my daughter got into a car accident. We had every police officer there because we couldn’t figure out whose jurisdiction. Yeah, and my daughter lays there bleeding. So, I just don’t understand, where is the rules.
Mike Carruthers said Haviland goes all the way over to Brandon Road.
Kathy Washington said yes, there’s Brandon Rd, Zurich, Chicago St it goes straight across. And you can’t even get out due to the trucks and the trailers. It has always been farm since we bought it. Since we bought our home personally. We have neighbors that have been there for almost 60 years since it was built.
Chairman Stipan said we have your questions, and we will get a response for you. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Kathy Washington said thank you. I appreciate it.
Chairman Stipan said would the next concerned citizens or objector. Please give your name and address when you get up there.
Sherry Knight said sure, my name is Shari Knight and I represent the Laraway School District. I am the Transportation Director. In that area, that she is talking about we have 4 to 5 buses that go through there daily. It is a nightmare to put our school buses and school vans in there. Just coming off of Zurich to get on to Route 53 is a nightmare due to the semis. I understand we can’t control that. But now we have to fight the semis that are parked by this tire company on Haviland. There are usually park 3 flat beds. So, when traffic is coming off of Chicago St and they make that turn onto Haviland, my bus driver has to go on the side of the flatbed trailers, so the traffics is coming right into them. I’ve got one of my ladies who is a seasoned driver, and she is petrified to go around there. Because several times there has been almost head on collisions. The police have been called; we’ve asked this gentleman to move his vehicles. He’s gotten nasty and he refuses to do it. It’s a nightmare waiting to happen. And the trailer park, I’m surprised Stephanie McCullum is not here. She owns the trailer park that has been there for many, many years. And there’s children all over.
Chairman Stipan said is it possible to get the Joliet Police out to direct traffic at certain hours of the day?
Sherry Knight said we can’t get the Joliet Police to direct traffic in front of the school. Rowell Ave wasn’t supposed to be for semis when they built the new school, and the semis are constantly down. It’s all over, I understand progress and all that, but this has been a rural area for how many years and now they want to put this there. What is going to happen to the water the water itself in that area is a nightmare. I’m not understanding why there are allowing the Mr. Tire to be in the middle of a residential area with children. A big concern.
Chairman Stipan said thank you very much for your testimony. May I have the next concerned citizen? Will you please state your name and address when you get up there?
Debra Betts introduces herself to the Commission. I live next to Kathy Washington. Well, a couple of years ago a guy named Greg, from the zoning or somewhere. He came out and told us the guy could not put nothing there because that was wetlands. And it is full of water. So, whatever become of that. When we’ve called the police on those semis parked along Haviland. You see because they’re blocking this lady’s garage. She’s 99 years old, she shouldn’t be driving but still she comes home late at night from church or whatever and here these semis are out here. When I call the police on that guy that owns Mr. Tire, the Will County Sheriff will come. Of course, a Hispanic sheriff will come and he’s Hispanic. They’re talking in their language. I don’t know what they’re saying. And then the sheriff will tell me, he’ll take care of it, but he doesn’t. Then he asked me “Who do you think you are”? I said, I’m gonna show you. So, nothing ever happens. My concern is I thought this was wetlands.
Barbara Peterson said that’s a good question. Are we looking at anything?
Debra Betts said if it’s not wetlands, why wasn’t anybody notified. I didn’t get no letter, but I have a concern.
Chairman Stipan said excuse me, would you let her answer?
Lisa Napoles said the applicants in the case have not applied for their site development permits which would if they were to pave the area will require them to submit an engineered site plan. Therefore, we don’t have that information regarding the soil conditions of the property. That would be something that would be addressed during the site development process. They wouldn’t be able to obtain their site development permit unless all requirements of the zoning ordinance as well as stormwater ordinances were to be conformed to.
Barbara Peterson said so, you are not aware?
Lisa Napoles said I am not aware, personally no.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said there’s no sense in doing that research unless the case gets approved.
Lisa Napoles said correct.
Chairman Stipan said I didn’t mean to interrupt. I just wanted to get you the answer. You may go ahead and continue.
Debra Betts said oh, I’m finished.
Chairman Stipan said ok, thank you very much, we appreciate your testimony. Do we have anymore objectors or concerned citizens?
Nobody answers
Chairman Stipan said to Nate Washburn, can you please respond? I presume you took down questions.
Nate Washburn said I did. So, to answer a couple of questions, 1) I think Staff can answer this. To the best of my knowledge, there are code violations pending or currently in process for the existing business operations at 1801.
Lisa Napoles said to my knowledge, no.
Nate Washburn said I can’t speak to how many times a sheriff or Joliet cop has been called but to the best of my knowledge the business is operating according to the ordinances. And what we are trying to do with our request is fix some of the problems that have been noted about the lack of space on the property currently. To park the vehicles, to park the incoming trucks or anything that needs to be sitting there for a while. The plan is to re-zone this lot, consolidate the two lots into one piece of property and then expand the parking area to alleviate the concerns that are being raised with regard to trucks, parking and the tight confinement. As far as any semi-trucks going down the residential streets that the chairman pointed out, that’s really a concern for the Township Road Commissioner. My understanding there are no parking signs and Weight limits on these roads. If the trucks are illegally going down them, I don’t know that I or anything that planning, and zoning can do to prevent those trucks from doing something they are not supposed to be doing in the first place.
Chairman Stipan said the Road Commissioner can get them ticketed. Nate Washburn said correct. So, I don’t know if this is the proper Forum to be addressing that concern. And as far as to Ms. Washington, there was some talk about the trailer park, again, that is beyond our control. I’m not sure I fully understood the comments there, but I did here the comment about us being industrial. We are not rezoning to Industrial we are rezoning to commercial. Which is in line with existing zoning, it will be the identical zoning what the Mr. Tire property is currently operating on. So, what we are attempting to do here is make an existing business more efficient, safer and a better neighbor to the community. We are not looking to grossly expand operations. We are trying to take the operation we have more palatable and that’s why we need extra space.
Chairman Stipan said along those lines, there were several people that mentioned housekeeping.
Nate Washburn said I believe that would be a matter for Code Enforcement. And that’s why I led off with asking whether or not there were any pending code enforcement violations. And we are not, to the best of our knowledge in any violations. I’m more than happy to relay any concerns to my client. I also note notice signs have been posted. We sent notice to everybody we were told to notify. And I wasn’t contacted by anybody with any questions or concerns. As this board well knows, I’m always available to answer any questions for anybody should they have them. I’d be happy to entertain and have further discussions with Ms. Knight, Ms. Washington or Ms. Betts. The truth of the matter is we haven’t done full-scale engineering as we didn’t want to spend that cost of that engineering if the zoning isn’t approved in the first place. So, we want to start with the first step, zoning approval. Then we want to move on which again will be back in front of the County for building permitting, stormwater management, paving and any other concerns. Including some of the traffic which we are well aware of that its highly probable that IDOT will not give us any other access but what is already there. We’ve already discussed internally that we need to access from the existing Chicago St access point for Mr. Tire. So, it’s not like we are going to be putting in a new access point and frankly I don’t know where that gravel driveway came from on Haviland came from, but it shouldn’t really be there in the first place because it is not ours.
Barbara Peterson said I have a question. How long has Mr. Tire been there?
Nate Washburn said I don’t know the answer to that off the top of my head, but I know they have been there for quite a long time. My client I believe is the son of the original owner. They’ve been there for decades. I can get that answer.
Barbara Peterson said it doesn't matter. I was just hoping that.
Nate Washburn said it’s been multiple decades. Well over 20 or 30 years.
A few concerned citizens yell out from the galley said no, it’s not. Debra Betts said from the galley it’s only been about 3 or 4 years. Barbara Peterson said 4 years?
Kim Mitchell said 3 or 4 years.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said to Nate Washburn, I guess while you’re there you wouldn’t mind if I entertain a couple of questions to the Staff and we’ll probably come back to you.
Nate Washburn said yeah.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said to Staff, in this C-4 zoning, there would be screen and fence requirements for the property.
Lisa Napoles said that would be part of the site development process, Commissioner.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said so, the people of the galley that live up against this, what would they be looking at if this was approved.
Lisa Napoles said: For the use, we would need to see the site development permit. I don’t have the exact amount of screening and landscaping that would be required. We would need to see amount of landscaping required which the site plan would show us. As Mr. Washburn said, we have only received a plat of survey which you saw so there was no proposed new entry, or we don’t know what the new lot will look like.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said what would the County require per a C-4 would they be required a fence or live screen.
Marguerite Kenny said I can jump in. Any type of new development that exceeds 25,000 square feet where the site is currently is unimproved would require onsite detention in accordance with the Water Resource Ordinance. Any outdoor storage of materials has to be screened by all sides of the property. It can be by the existing or new landscaping or a solid fence or a combination of those features. It’s at the discretion of the applicant at the time of site development to propose what they believe is sufficient. We would review and if it meets the intent of the zoning ordinance, it is approved and then it has to be installed.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said would the existing property be required to have that same screen? Regardless if they were to combine the pin numbers.
Marguerite Kenny said with the existing property, it would go to when the use was established. If there is outdoor storage of tires that would result in an IEPA violations because usually tires have to be stored inside. That really comes down to we need a complaint to be filed. We cannot self-file them. If you would call our office, we’d put the through to Resource Recovering Energy Division and they would go out an inspect the property for any IEPA violations regarding anything being kept improperly on the property.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said so, my point is with the new property being added, there’s chance for the County to have more control to bring the currently property under a better scope.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said to Nate Washburn, it would be your due diligence as their Attorney you would be instructing them to this as well.
Nate Washburn said correct.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said to Nate Washburn, they will know this ahead of time. I want to make sure we address the neighbors. I’ll let you finish now.
Mike Carruthers said question, if not approved by this Board, then it goes to Land Use?
Lisa Napoles said yes Commissioner, regardless if this commission passes or denies, the request will move forward to Land Use and finally to the Will County Board.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said it does not end with us.
Roger Bettenhausen said we don’t have any idea that this property is considered wetland or falls within a flood plain unless engineering comes in and tells us that?
Barbara Peterson said that’s public information and they can go to the Soil & Water Conservation District to find that out.
Marguerite Kenny said the County’s GIS website does have the listed inventoried wetlands. This property did not identify any but that does not mean there are no wetlands there. It might require further site development requirements.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I need come back to one of the concerns. Would the
County be allowed an access to be put in on Haviland?
Lisa Napoles said it’s not the County’s jurisdiction. Haviland Rd is the Township jurisdiction. So, it would be the Township who would provide the road access permit if it was requested. The County will not be reviewing that. It is Township on one side and State Road on the other. In my uninformed opinion, as mentioned there are weight limits and it appears unlikely that there would be access granted onto a residential street for this purpose.
Chairman Stipan said the Township Highway Commissioner may demand a curb lane.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said would the County be able to help with the design the actual entrance?
Lisa Napoles said no, the requirements of any road authority would have to be executed by the engineer as part of the site development plan. And has to pass. The Township Highway Commissioner and/or IDOT would have to approve the site plan for road access.
Chairman Stipan said especially on a major road. Okay, thank you.
Nate Washburn said if I may real quick make a parting comment. I understand this has been a long meeting and I do not want to take up too much more of your time. I would say the following two closing comments. 1) I understand there some concerns from citizens and it’s clear there are questions from this Board. I would be happy if it please the Board to table this matter for a month to get more engineering information and to answer some of these questions and to work with the neighbors. If that is not the direction the Board would like to go, I would say, what we are trying to do is to make the site safer, better and cleaning going forward and we would appreciate your consideration and assistance in allowing us to do this. Mr. Tire will continue to be Mr. Tire, it’s already zoned. Business operations will continue and without this additional space I don’t know that there is going to be good solution for some of these problems. We are trying to fix and existing problem. Thank you.
Chairman Stipan said thank you. Discussion amongst the Board.
Chairman Stipan said what happens to it after is it zoned is what determines whether or not they can build. Before that nothing can happen one way or the other. So, it’s my opinion to go forward with it. I request all of your opinions.
Kim Mitchell said my opinion, I look at the zoning maps and I have a hard time understanding how Mr. Tire wound up where it’s at, number 1. Number 2, my uninformed opinion, you really can’t control these semis. You see them all over. They’re in places they are not supposed to be. Everyone complains about them. What really concerns me the most is the number of children in this neighborhood that are playing and running around. It’s just not right. I can’t vote, not today. I feel it’s a real danger to kids with this type of business.
Barbara Peterson said when the School’s Transportation gave testimony. That made my decision right there.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I think both of you are missing the point. The expansion of this will get the trucks off Zurich.
Barbara Peterson said I don’t believe that.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said if they have flat tires, and they are in a place they don’t know. They look at their GPS says there’s Mr. Tires is right here. All of a sudden, they’re sitting there, and the school bus is wondering how they are going to pull out when they’re backed up all the way to the train.
Barbara Peterson said maybe they should have never been placed there to begin with.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said well, we can’t go back.
Barbara Peterson said common sense says looking at this they shouldn’t have been placed there.
Kim Mitchell said what you’re talking about is expanding the use. You think there are trucks there now. Give them a little more space. That’s what I think.
Chairman Stipan said I have 3 opinions. I need 2 more.
Roger Bettenhausen said I’d like to take the Attorneys offer to gather a little more information because if this property is a wetland or flood plain it becomes an issue anyhow. I think that would be an important piece of information to have.
Chairman Stipan said that’s a good point. I agree with you.
Kim Mitchell said are there wetlands on the property?
Roger Bettenhausen said we don’t know.
Kim Mitchell said they will get the opportunity to provide.
Chairman Stipan said so are we going go forward with the case or wait a month and gather more information.
Roger Bettenhausen said I'll make a motion to table the case to the April meeting. Chairman Stipan said okay so it was defeated.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said will there be minutes of this meeting forwarded to Land Use so they will know what was discussed here?
Dawn Tomczak said not the minutes, but a statement of facts will be forwarded to our Land Use. They will know what concerned citizens have said. They will know what of the problematic issues with the trucks, tires, parking and the township roadways commissioner.
12. Motion To Table Map Amendment from R-3 to C-4 (M-21-022) Roll Call Vote was taken to table. Motion Denied 2-4.
| RESULT: DEFEATED [2 TO 4]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: Michael Carruthers, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Bettenhausen NAYS: Mitchell, Stipan, Peterson, Kiefner ABSENT: Gugala |
Dawn Tomczak said this case will forward to the Land Use Development Committee on March 8th in this room. If it is held via Webex and not in person, please check the Will County website. Will follow for final determination by County Board on March 17th. The Land Use Development Committee consists of 7 Committee Members (made up of County Board Members) at which time they’ll hear the case as we have sighted tonight.
| RESULT: DEFEATED [2 TO 4]
MOVER: Kimberly Mitchell, Commissioner SECONDER: Barbara Peterson, Commissioner AYES: Stipan, Kiefner NAYS: Carruthers, Mitchell, Peterson, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Gugala |
Marguerite Kenny presented Zoning Case ZC-21-095, which takes place in New Lenox Township.
Last case for the night. The owner is Ronald D Schabes Trust #11383 dated 8/14/1990 where Ronald D Schabes is 100% beneficiary, and the agents are Kyle Isek and Michael Fazio.
The subject property lies at Howell Drive in New Lenox.
The applicant is seeking is a special use permit for an outdoor storage yard to use the property for a swimming pool installation and construction business storage yard. The outdoor storage shall contain storage equipment, vehicles, and materials. So, a 1-ton dump truck, trailers, skid steer and backhoe are some of the equipment that would be kept onsite.
The outdoor storage yard requires a special use permit in I-1. The property is zoned I-1. The special use has been indicated to be transferable to the subsequent property owners as well as the applicable to the entire site.
The applicant did state the hours of operation will be Monday through Saturday, 6am to 5pm. The site will not be open to the public. Will only be allowed for employees to come pick up the materials, equipment, vehicles that are needed for each job that are needed to go to the job sites located off site. It’s estimated that the average daily vehicle trips generated would be 4 per day.
As the site will have trucks entering and leaving the site in the morning and afternoons, there will be a minimal increase in noise occurring from the property.
The property is currently unimproved and vacant.
Looking at this property on the screen it is outlined in red. It is Lot 29 in the Airport Industrial Park Unit 2 subdivision which was platted as recorded document R90-023785 on May 3, 1990. And you can see there are two other unimproved lots directly south and southeast of the subject property.
Looking at the zoning map of the property, it is zoned I-1 as is the entire industrial subdivision. The parcel is deemed to be a legal conforming I-1 lot. It meets the minimum lot standard requirements. Looking at the proposed site concept plan. Again, this is just conceptual, adherent to the County’s adopted stormwater management ordinances. Zoning would come forward with a site development permit process.
The applicant is planning on having a gravel parking lot driveway for the storage and parking of the vehicles, two cargo containers to be onsite to secure some of the smaller equipment. There will be concrete bins to store bulk materials and the property would be secured by an 8 feet tall chain-link fence improved with slats. There is some concern regarding the Village of New Lenox with the chain-link with slats. That I will address later on in my presentation. The two cargo containers would be permitted in I-1 as accessory storage of goods and materials with an associated principal use. If the special use gets approved for outdoor storage, that becomes the principal use.
The applicant is requesting a variance for the fence height along Howell Drive. Mainly to allow the fence to be located within the street setback. I-1 has a 30-foot street setback measured from the right of way line. Their intent is to maximize the use of their property. They would like to see a fence located on the property line to screen their outdoor storage yard.
Looking at some photos. So, looking at the subject property. This looking northwest. This image is looking east along Howell Drive, subject property is on your left. Looking at the adjacent property on the west side. And then looking south at the adjacent properties.
The criteria by which special uses are evaluated, are contained in your Staff Reports to provide a condensed summary. The purposed special use will be located within an industrial park subdivision were many lots also have outdoor storage, although most of them have a principle building associated with that outdoor storage.
The storage yard will need to conform to the County’s codes and ordinances. Which require landscaping and screening requirements, especially along the road frontage. If the exceed a certain square footage, their gonna have general site landscaping requirements. They are purposing to screen with a solid fence. The applicant is requesting a variance for an 8-foot fence along the right of way, along Howell Street so that there is the screening provided along the street. There is a condition of the special use that would require a solid PVC fence instead of the chain-link. That was something the Village of New Lenox was looking to include. There are other conditions added that would be typical for outdoor storage yards to bring the property into compliance with IDPA regulations.
The purposed special use will be located in an established area. There are only two lots that remain vacant unimproved, and they are directly south along Howell Drive. The existing uses in this industrial area are motor vehicle repair, landscaping businesses, cabinetry shops, warehousing, and light manufacturing. This type of use is compatible to what’s existing. The outdoor storage would be required to be screened from all sides of the property and the purposed 8-foot fence would be closer to screen. I will get into the variance request shortly.
Operating as an outdoor storage yard does not require typical utilities that having a building on the property would require, so property is adhering to the existing utilities, there are adequate access. They will have to contact the Road District to get an entrance permit. Aside from that there are not a lot of utilities that would have to be brought in unless they want some type of security system or lighting that might require an electrical permit and some utilities regarding electric brought to the site.
In terms of the special use, it shall adhere to I-1 District requirements aside from requesting that variance for the fence. With regards to the variance, Staff finds that the plight of the owner is not due to unique circumstances. Fences are a common way to secure your site from trespassers as well as provide screening. The applicant can install an 8-foot fence outside of the 30-foot building line setback and not need the variance. The applicant would have to adhere to the County’s vision clearance requirements. This would push that fence to be located outside of that vision clearance triangle. That is more in line with the existing building line. 30-feet, back they could have a certain height and meet the vision clearance while also permitted by rights to have an 8-foot-tall fence they desire. Given the surrounding area, there is a lot directly to the east that has a fence that looks it was built along the 30-foot building line setback.
The applicant on this subject property is purposing to be closer to the road. So, it would be slightly altering the character of the area where most of the buildings were developed based on that 30-line building setback. Even the fence’s screening is built to that standard. Staff finds that if the variance if granted, may alter essential characteristic just based on where the fence is going and the height.
Aside from that, with regards to the agency’s comments. There was an identified endangered bat in the area, but the Illinois Department of Natural Resources further reviewed the request and concluded that adverse effects are unlikely.
The Soil and Water Conservation District found that there was little to no effect on the existing lands. Maybe because it is already zoned industrial. The Health Department objection because no buildings are be proposed.
The Village of New Lenox, on Monday January 24, 2022, the Village Board voted not to object the special use. They had some concerns and some of these concerns were reflected in conditions. So, landscaping needs to more closely resemble the Village’s requirements and be installed with a 15-foot interior parkway along Howell Drive the berm and landscaping shall not be located with the right-of-way. A minimum 6-foot-tall PVC fence shall be installed around the perimeter of the outdoor storage area rather than the chain-link fence. Cargo containers and concrete blocks with outside storage material shall not be located within any public utility and or drainage easement. That’s typically standard for the County’s requirement as well. We do not usually want to see any development in an easement unless there is approval from those companies that have control of the easements. If it’s a drainage easement we do not allow any type of structures. The concerns for the drainage problems in the industrial park, the Village encourages the County to pay attention to storm water practices. That’s something we will get at the site development phase. Our major Enforcement Water Resource Ordinance is the water created from the development be contained onsite which is why most properties must have some type of detention.
Staff recommends the approval of the use special use permits for outdoor storage with nine conditions. The first one is a standard site inspection. Conditions 2 through 4 address the concerns with the Village of New Lenox. Although the Village of New Lenox cannot approve the landscaping, a condition was added to allow them to review it. There is a chance for the permits to have conflicting provisions with the County. Since the County is using the permit, we will do our best to work with the Village. Conditions 5 through 9 address the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency regulations that would pertain to any outdoor storage that are enforced by our Resource Recovery and Energy Division. That’s no burning of waste on the property, no open dumping, all tires from trucks must be stored inside a building and vehicle maintenance must occur inside a building.
Staff is recommending denial of the fence height from street setback from 4 feet to 8 feet, mainly because of the purposed location is the property line. The adjacent property is meeting the 30-foot building line setback. It will change the character of the neighborhood. The commission could potentially reduce the height of the variance request if you so choose. If you think an 8-foot fence is too tall but a 6-foot is more appropriate in street setback, you’ll just have to amend the request.
And I am happy to answer any questions.
Chairman Stipan said okay, thank you. Does anyone have any questions?
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I would like to ask one. What is the difference in this fence? From the 30-foot setback, how much closer are they going to be? Is it 1- foot? 10-foot?
Marguerite Kenny said they are requesting to be up to their property line with the fence. If they were granted to variance for 8-feet, they could be anywhere within 30-feet from the right-of-way line.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said out in my area, we only do from the center of the road. So, what is the right-of-way line?
Marguerite Kenny said the right-of-way line is usually 33-feet from the center line. It really comes down to what is required within the subdivision or what the Road District wanted for the size of the road to be able to make improvements to the drainage along the roadway.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said so, our ordinance is calling for at least 63-feet from the center of the road, 30 plus 33?
Marguerite Kenny said roughly.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said thank you.
Chairman Stipan said are there any other questions?
No one answers
Chairman Stipan said are there any objectors in this case or concerned citizens? No one answers
Chairman Stipan said is the owner or the owner’s agent here?
Chairman Stipan said there are no objectors to his case gentlemen. You don’t have come down if you don’t want to, but you’re welcomed to come down if you want to make a statement.
A gentleman in the galley says I do.
Chairman Stipan said please come down to the podium.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said here’s your chance to plead your case. The gentleman said there’s some incorrect statements being made.
Chairman Stipan said go ahead sir, please speak your name, and address and go from there.
Michael Busin introduces himself to the Commission. So, we occupy that property, I just mentioned the address at. We are looking to purchase this property. We have a contract to purchase it. We’ve already met with the Village, and they’ve approved it. They keep on saying an 8-foot fence. It supposed to be a 6-foot fence. The question was whether it was going to be chain-linked on the back two sides. The Carefree Lawn Sprinklers has a 6-foot with slats. So, that is what we proposed doing to match them. The only thing we’re requesting is to move it forward of the property line a little bit so that we have more room for snow removal and all of that stuff. I don’t think the paper we have over there is all correct with the final revisions that were made that the Village agreed to.
Chairman Stipan said it says a minimum of 6-foot-tall PVC fence.
Michael Busin said right.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said so, you’d like us to make a correction that the variance is for 4-foot to 6-foot and strike the 8. We can make that.
Michael Busin said we never wanted an 8-foot fence. It was always supposed to be a 6-foot.
Chairman Stipan said it says 6-foot.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said on the very front it says 8.
Chairman Stipan said and what else sir.
Michael Busin said well, I guess, what else are the objections, if the Village already said they are okay with it. I’m here to answer any other questions you guys might have. It seems like some of the stuff is inconsistent.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said if I understand this right, if we approve it with their conditions, you will have to construct a PVC fence and not a chain-link fence.
Michael Busin said we are not opposed to the PVC fence in the front. We were under the impression that it would be chain-linked with the slats on the backside of the building with the same on the side like most other people have.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said dress up the front but more security in the back.
Michael Busin said we’ve already done the modifications to the property at 1955 and I’m sure everybody’s seen the improvements there. It has a white PVC fence in front, and I’ve landscaped everything. That’s what we proposed to the street for view but on the sides, we proposed make it match Carefree Lawns Sprinklers exact fence with the slats. If it has to be solid PVC, to me that’s not industrial and does not hold up well and it’s not a commercial product. But for decorative purposes I agree to have in the front. We also did the same on Schoolhouse Road. We improved that whole site. Basically, we’re duplicating what we did on Schoolhouse Road.
A gentleman from the galley said you want to tell them why we want the fence farther forward to the property line?
Michael Busin said yeah, we want the fence closer to property line, for snow removal within the yard.
The gentleman from the galley said otherwise, we’re going to push it to the back of the property.
Michael Busin said the water flows to the back of the property. Barbara Peterson said he should be up here.
The gentleman from the galley said I’m sorry.
Michael Busin said there’s three of us.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said my question here would be, this conceptual drawing must not be very well to scale because if you would bring that fence up and only be 33-feet from the center of the road, you’re really not going to have much room for landscaping.
Associate of Michael Busin said It would be 15-feet off the curb sir.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said looking at this drawing here, it’s about ¼ of the whole depth of your lot. It is confusing. Am I missing numbers?
The gentleman from the galley said correct, we did the best we could with google mapping.
Chairman Stipan said so, what you want to work with is a 6-foot fence. Michael Busin and two men from the galley said in unison, yes. Chairman Stipan said all three of you?
Michael Busin and two men from the galley said in unison, yes sir.
Barbara Peterson said, Marguerite asked if we wanted to amend it. This the place to do it right now. But she also had concerns with you pushing up further towards the road.
Chairman Stipan said that’s what he just said because of snow removal. Barbara Peterson said well, what do the others do regarding snow removal?
Gentleman from the galley said they’re pushing it out into the two vacant lots across the street.
Barbara Peterson said Ohh.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said fence makes a barrier for you?
Gentleman from the galley said the problem we’re having now at the location we’re at currently, even though we didn’t get a lot of snow this year, we have a mound of snow.
Barbara Peterson said would you come up here with your name? Chairman Stipan said name and address please.
Barbara Peterson said and identify yourself.
Michael Fazio introduces himself to the Commission.
Barbara Peterson said oh, you’re Fazio.
Michael Fazio said the reason would be, the problem we have now where we are at, when we get a little bit of snow it turns into a big, gigantic mound. All it does is impedes a visual scene, where we trying to pullout into traffic and so on. We’re trying to move the fence farther so in the wintertime when we’re trying to get out and move everything around, we’re not shrinking our lot down to where we have no parking. Or avoid having to shove it across the street. Eventually somebody is going to build on those lots, and we’ll have nowhere to push the snow.
Chairman Stipan said sure.
Barbara Peterson calls Marguerite Kenny’s name.
Marguerite Kenny said I’m going to stand by my analysis about having it closer to the street, but it really comes down to this commission. It’s a variance request, you can see within the Staff analysis and their points. It’s your decision.
Chairman Stipan said your analysis is based on what?
Marguerite Kenny said my analysis is based on the criteria of the Zoning Ordinance. In terms of the fence line, it does not appear with the existing developments within the subdivision that any fences within that 30-foot building line setback that the subdivision had. Putting one could potentially cause an alteration the character of the neighborhood that has been developed prior with a 30-foot line setback. If you start adding fences encroaching closer to the street, it could impact property values and future developments within that industrial park.
Kim Mitchell said it’s an esthetic issue.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said not that it’s a very busy street, but technically whoever’s leaving gotta to close the gate. They can’t even park to close the gate without pulling on the road. Unless they did an indent for the gates.
Marguerite Kenny said correct and the other thing you can vary is the vision clearance concern. The entrance is where the vision clearance comes into play, so there may have to be a fence designed to go back into the property slightly to accommodate the gate. So, you will actually have a line of site coming onto the street from the property.
Michael Fazio said if you look along that road, there are trees sticking out to right about the spot we will put the fence at. Most people don’t have fences. There are a few fences if you go around the other block that are only 2-feet off the curb. They do vary in some places but as far as the consistency of the room, there’ll be 15-feet, and then the gates swing. They also have it as gravel entrance and it’s going to be concrete. So, there are somethings aren’t 100% accurate on that.
Barbara Peterson said I don’t mind amending 8-feet to the 6-feet but without New Lenox input here, I have a problem going forward with what you want to do.
Michael Busin said New Lenox didn’t have a problem with the fence line. Barbara Peterson said I know that’s what you’re saying.
Michael Busin said you can call them and ask them.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said let me clarify, why are we in New Lenox? Because we are a mile and a half from their village limits?
Marguerite Kenny said correct, the Village of New Lenox did not object to the special use request or variance. They just wanted to see a couple of things added to help take a look where it’s compatible for future developments in this area.
Barbara Peterson said well, they’re important.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I will concur that just about every tree that is planted in the road right-a-way would mess up the site triangle for anyone trying to pull out of any of the business on the road. That might even be the road where there was drag racing incident the resulted in death.
Michael Fazio said that was on the other side of the street.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said if it pleases the Chairman, I would like to make a motion to amend condition # 2 (V-21-131) to say a minimum 6-foot-tall PVC fence shall be installed along Howell Drive on the outdoor storage area.
15. Motion to Approve Amended Variance for Fence Height Within Street Setback from 4 Feet to 6 Feet (V-21-131)
Through discussion it was concluded with Staff and property owner that a 6-foot fence as per condition number 2 would be sufficient for the property.
Voice Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman SECONDER: Kimberly Mitchell, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Peterson, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Gugala |
Voice Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman SECONDER: Barbara Peterson, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Peterson, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Gugala |
None.
VII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
None.
VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS
IX. ADJOURNMENT
John Kiefner made a Motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 pm. Voice Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
RESULT: Approved (unanimous)
MOVER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman
SECONDER: Kim Mitchell, Commissioner
AYES: Roger Bettenhausen, Kim Mitchell, Barb Peterson, Mike Carruthers, John Kiefner and Hugh Stipan
ABSENT: Matthew Gugala
https://willcountyil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=4266&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up