Will County Planning and Zoning Commission met April 5.
Here are the minutes provided by the commission:
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Stipan said we have a gentleman who is on our Board who is calling in by telephone. He can hear but you may not be able to hear him, so, I will relay any questions to and from him.
Chairman Stipan said there are only four Commissioners tonight and one on the phone. So, that’s a fifth Commissioner. There’s normally seven Commissioners and you have to have four votes to pass. For any reason you feel uncomfortable bringing your Case before a shorten Board, you are welcomed to extended it to our next meeting in May. Just to let you know. Thank you.
Chairman Stipan swore in the public present in the gallery and announced to make sure their cell phones do not interrupt the meeting.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chairman Hugh Stipan led the Pledge of Allegiance.
III. ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF QUORUM
Chairman Hugh Stipan called the meeting to order at 6:34 PM
| Attendee Name | Title | Status | Arrived |
| Michael Carruthers | Commissioner | Present | |
| Kimberly Mitchell | Commissioner | Present | |
| Hugh Stipan | Chairman | Present | |
| Barbara Peterson | Commissioner | Absent | |
| John Kiefner | Vice Chairman | Present | |
| Roger Bettenhausen | Commissioner | Present | |
| Matthew Gugala | Commissioner | Absent |
Land Use staff present were Rusha Brooks, Dawn Tomczak, Adrian Diaz, Lisa Napoles, Marguerite Kenny and Brian Radner.
Chris Wise present from the Will County State's Attorney's Office.
Michael Carruthers attended Meeting by telephone.
1. Motion to allow Michael Carruthers to attend the meeting electronically
Chris Wise said Mr. Chairman, I recommend we make a formal Motion to allow Mr. Carruthers to participate electronically. The Open Meeting Act says that majority of the Board has to approve it.
Kim Mitchell made a Motion to allow Michael Carruthers to attend the meeting electronically. John Kiefner seconded the Motion.
Voice Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Kimberly Mitchell, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Kimberly Mitchell said Mr. Chairman, I abstain because I was absent.
Chairman Stipan said to Michael Carruthers via speakerphone, I would like make a correction. Michael it says your were absent for that meeting also, Do want to abstain also?
Michael Carruthers said via speakerphone yes, I'll abstain.
Chairman Stipan said he'll abstain.
Dawn Tomczak said so we do need to bring this back next month then.
Chris Wise said Mr. Chairman, we only have 30 days under the Open Meetings Act to approve the previous minutes. I get it , that people are absent and stuff but at some point somebody is going to have to approve these minutes, whether there are here or not. That isn't a requirement. So, I wouldn't want to go to many more months without approving these minutes.
Kimberly Mitchell said if it isn't a requirement, I will withdrawn my abstain. I read them and the looked to be in order to me. I'll vote yes.
Chairman Stipan said okay, yes. Then I presume we will allow Michael's originals yes to stand. So, that will give us five.
Approval of Minutes February 1, 2022
Motion to Approve Minutes February 1, 2022
Roger Bettenhausen made a Motion approve. Michael Carruthers seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0, with no additions or corrections.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: Michael Carruthers, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Motion to Approve Minutes March 1, 2022
Roger Bettenhausen made a Motion approve. Kimberly Mitchell seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0, with no additions or corrections.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: Kimberly Mitchell, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
1. WILL COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NOTICE OF TEMPORARY USE PERMIT PURSUANT TO SECTION 155-10.20 OF THE WILL COUNTY, ILLINOIS ZONING ORDINANCE Adopted and Approved September 9, 1947 as amended, for Temporary Use Permit , TUP-22-001, Cole Morgan, Owner of Record, Cassie VanTassel of Vintage Faire LLC, Agent ; requesting a temporary use permit for a seasonal outdoor market (Vintage Faire), for Pin # 05-06-33-300-013-0010, 05- 06-33-300-013-0020, 05-06-33-300-006-0000, in Troy Township, commonly known as 24550, 24540, and V (vacant) W. Shepley Rd., Minooka, IL
Chairman Stipan announced the case.
Brian Radner presented the case.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission. I am the Director of Development Services for the Will County Land Use Development. The purpose for of this request is to allow the use of property as a seasonal outdoor market. It will be located on W Shepley Road in Troy Township and is roughly 13 acres in size. The applicant is Cassie VanTassel on behalf of Vintage Faire LLC and Cole Morgan is the property owner. This Temporary Use Permit if approved will operate the months of April through October on Sundays from 9am to 2pm. It's been before this Commission since 2014, making this the ninth time this request has come before you. In all that time, Staff has never received any complaints about the use of this property, from any party or governmental agency. There are roughly 30-50 vendors that will be present on site and maybe 300-500 people in attendance. Of course, last year and the year before, any operation was somewhat limited by Executive Orders from the State of Illinois pertaining to the amount of people that could be gathered in one place. Right now there are no such restrictions.
An aerial map and plat of survey was displayed. The site plan and zoning map was displayed. It's zoned agricultural. Photographs of the subject property were displayed.
Staff is recommending approval this Temporary Use Permit with the nine conditions identified in the Staff Report that this permit would be subject to. It is also possible that additional conditions could be added to this permit if any additional comments are received from the agencies that were notified. We did receive comments from the Health Department, Fire Protection Districts, and the Township Highway Commission.
That concludes Staff analysis, I'd be happy to answer and questions if you have them. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Stipan said I have no questions. Does anyone else?
No Answer
Chairman Stipan said are there any concerned citizens or objectors to this case? No Answer
Chairman Stipan said is the property owner or applicant present? A woman in the gallery raises her hand.
Chairman Stipan said you have choice to come up and speak if you wish to. You have Staff's recommendation of approval and there are no objectors so we can just take a vote.
A woman from the gallery said thank you.
Motion to Approve Temporary Use Permit for Seasonal Outdoor Market (Vintage Faire) (TUP-22-001) with 9 Conditions
John Kiefner made a Motion approve. Kimberly Mitchell seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman SECONDER: Kimberly Mitchell, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Chairman Stipan said there has been a request to postpone the second Case ZC 21-096 to the May 17, 2022 Meeting.
Motion to Postpone Case ZC-21-100 to Next Meeting.
Roger Bettenhausen made a Motion to postpone. John Kiefner seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: TABLED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Chairman Stipan announced the case.
Marguerite Kenny presented the case.
Thank you, Mr Chairman. Zoning Case ZC-21-100 takes place in Joliet Township, on vacant property on Manhattan Road. The owner is Zeelee LLC, where Aleksandras Smirnovas is 100% owner and manager. The Attorney is Nathaniel Washburn of K.G.G. LLC. The applicant owns Express 52 which is an existing truck terminal on the adjacent property to the west. It is looking to expand to the neighboring property which is the subject of tonight's zoning case. The subject property is currently zoned A-1. The applicant is looking to re-zone to I-1 and request a special use for a truck terminal. The applicant is requesting the special use be applied to the entire site as well be transferable to future property owners.
The site plan was displayed. The northern 3.2 acres of the site will be developed for the truck parking and a truck turn around area. Providing roughly 70 parking space for semi trucks and trailers. The applicant is currently seeking to use the adjacent property to west, which is already improved with a truck terminal to provide the ingress and egress to Manhattan Road to the north. Manhattan Road is currently under the jurisdiction of the Illinois Department of Transportation, so it will be IDOT's discretion whether or not they will grant an access directly to the subject property. Or allow the applicant to use the adjacent property and then submit a cross access agreement to the County as part of the site development permit. The bottom portion of the site contains floodplain and flood way associated with the Sugar Creek which runs along the southern property line. Any development on the property would be required to meet the County's Codes and Ordinances, particularly related to the stormwater control, screening, landscaping, and proper access to the public right-of-way.
Some photographs of the subject property were displayed.
With the criteria regarding map amendments, Staff typically looks at the uses occuring within the area. Within a one-mile radius of the subject property, uses include agricultural, residential, public, and institutional, recreational, commercial, and industrial both within the City of Joliet and unincorporated Will County. As I mentioned previously, there are already existing truck terminals immediately east and west of the subject property which are Highland Hauling and Express 52. Within unincorporated Will County we have A-1/A-2 (agricultural), E-2 /R-1/R-2/R 2A, R-3, R-4, R-5 (residential), C-2/C-4 (commercial), I-1/I-2 (industrial) and within those districts we also have special uses for truck terminals along this mile corridor along Manhattan Road. Within the City of Joliet, we have R-1B/R-2/R-3 (residential), R-4 (low density multi-family), R-B (restricted business). B-1 (neighborhood business) and I-1 (light industrial).
With regards to the suitable of the property in question, the property is approximately 5 acres with 271.5 feet of lot frontage and is zoned A-1. The parcel was created at a time A-1 required a minimum of 10-acres with 300 feet of frontage, so this parcel has been deemed to be an illegal lot. Meaning, if this parcel should be improved with any type of structures or development, permits would not be able to be issued, unless there is zoning action. However, it is currently farms and this use does not require permits in the A-1 district. However, the adjacent properties on both sides have been zoned and developed Industrial. The subject property was created in its present configuration in 2017. Since that time the trend has been towards industrial developments. The adjacent property to the west was re-zoned in 2017 for a truck terminal and was also approved for truck sales in 2020. The adjacent property to the east was re-zoned for a truck terminal in 2019. Per the Land Use Management Plan, Freestanding Industry and Office is a permitted development concept. A LESA score was calculated placing it in a Potential Growth and Incorporated Areas.
Moving on to the special use criteria. The request was reviewed based on the criteria outlined on the screen and contained in your Staff Reports. Staff has added conditions to the special use to ensure that the impact of this use would be minimized. So, within a mile long stretch of Manhattan Road, there are three truck terminals within this corridor, along with other industrial uses. So, the proposed use would not be detrimental to or endanger the public's health safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare. The residential properties to the north and south, are buffered by the existing railroad, common utility lines, a pipeline and forest preserve property along Sugar Creek. The properties to the east and west already zoned industrially for the request that is before you tonight. The use in the surrounding areas included manufacturing, truck terminals, construction businesses, vehicle towing and warehousing, so this purposed request falls in line with the similar use category. The site is currently unimproved, so through this site development process, it would be required to provide the necessary utilities, drainage, and facilities for this property. They are not planning any structures at this time, it’s merely an outdoor parking lot for the semis.
A traffic study was completed by KLOA (Kenig, Lindgren, O'Hara, Aboona Inc) and found that the proposed request would not require any additional improvements to Manhattan Road such as dedicated turn lanes. The impact of the public roadways in this area keeps pretty much the existing levels of service at a Class B. Levels of services range from a Class A to F, where Class F is the worse with traffic congestion and things like that. So, it is still relatively suitable for how it was designed. The subject site is requesting I-1 designation. Per that, it would meet the I-1 requirements per the conceptual site plan at this time. It would be held accountable to I-1 if the map amendment were approved.
With regard to agency comments. The Will-South Cook Soil and Water Conservation District voiced some construction concerns due to the soils present on the property. Basically, that adequate consideration for those soils need to be handled at the time of development. The Illinois Department of Natural Resources in there EcoCat repot identified no threatened or endangered species. The Health Department, because no buildings are on this site, has no objection. The Illinois Department of Transportation is requiring a traffic study be submitted as part of their Access Permitting Process. Their sign-off is also required as part of this site development permitting process. The Forest Preserve District commented they shared concerns of the water quality entering Sugar Creek. They do not recommend parking semis in the floodplain and would like to see oil and grit separators installed in the stormwater inlets to help protect the quality and integraty of Sugar Creek. They would also like to review the site development plans. So, Staff has added some conditions you will see regarding the Forest Preserves comments.
Staff is recommending approval of the Map Amendment for A-1 to I-1 and the Special Use Permit with four conditions.
1. Standard site inspections.
2. Limiting the number of semi-truck trailers to 70.
3. Naturalized vegetated basins be required as well as oil and grit separators provided in the stormwater inlets to protect the integrity of Sugar Creek to the south.
4. The Forest Preserve District shall be able to review the site development plans when they are submitted to the County.
That completes Staff's presentation, and I would be happy to answer and questions.
Chairman Stipan said I have no questions. Is there anyone on the Board that has any?
Kimberly Mitchell said I no questions.
Chairman Stipan said okay, thank you.
Chairman Stipan said are there objectors or concerned citizen for this case? No answer.
Chairman Stipan said is the owner or attorney present for this case? Mr. Washburn?
Nathaniel Washburn said I'm present, but I stand behind Staff's comments and have nothing further to add unless there are questions.
Chairman Stipan said okay, thank you sir.
Motion to approve Map Amendment to A-1 to I-1 (M-21-023)
Roger Bettenhausen made a Motion to approve. John Kiefner seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Roger Bettenhausen made a Motion to approve. John Kiefner seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Zoning Case Z-21-103 is a special use permit for a landscaping and lawn maintenance business located on Stuenkel Road in Frankfort Illinois. The owner of the property is Caprio's Inc (Barbara Stark, 55% Interest, Mary Caprio, 45% Interest) The agent applicant for the property is Bill's Lawn Maintenance & Landscaping, Inc. (Ada Krupskiy, 100% Interest). Who are represented by Christian Spesia and Jacob Gancarczyk of Spesia and Taylor, Attorneys at Law.
The zoning map was displayed.
The special use area is limited to a 6.33-acre area at the north end of the property outlined in red. The special use area is improved with two single-story metal buildings and a large, paved area. The subject property has a driveway with access to W. Stuenkel Road to the north. The property was first approved for a special use permit 5615-S for a landscaping and lawn maintenance business in 2007 with 16 conditions. Once of the conditions stipulated that the special use would become null and void when the applicant ceased the landscaping and lawn maintenance use.
The current owner Caprio's Inc. acquired the property in 2016. The applicant for this case if Bill's Lawn Maintenance & Landscaping Inc., the company operating on this property. In November of 2021, the owner divided the current 27.74-acre parcel from the 74.15-acre property through Petition for Division #2021-72. The zoning map has not been updated to show the division. The applicant submitted the application for this zoning case in late December 2021. The applicant has requested the special use permit to re-establish the special use permit for landscaping and lawn maintenance that was nullified when the previous property owner ceased that use. While the property was previously approved for a special use permit for a landscaping and lawn maintenance, that use has discontinued and is now void. This is the first request for the applicant. The applicant has requested that the special use permit be transferable to subsequent property owners.
On February 16, 2022, the Green Garden Township Board voted unanimously to approve the special use permit request, subject to the previous 16 conditions stipulated for approved Special Use Permit #5615-S, including that the special use permit become null and void when the applicant ceased operating the landscaping and lawn maintenance use. A Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) score of 218 (Essential Farmland) was calculated for this property. The LESA system is a tool designed to evaluate the viability of agricultural lands where changes in land use are proposed. The soils on the site have been determined to be prime for farmland. The property is zoned A-1 as are surrounding properties. The property meets the lot standards for the A-1 District and is legal and conforming.
The site plan for the special use permit area and the plat of survey was displayed. Photos of the subject parcel and the adjacent parcels were displayed.
Staff observed three containers (also displayed in the photo) on the site visit in February 2022. Cargo containers are permitted in the A-1 Zoning District if used as a building component per requirements outlined in section 155-10.10. Outdoor storage such as these paving stones displayed on the screen must be screened per Section 155-12.80.
The criteria by which Staff, Commissioners and County Board Member evaluated a special use permit requests are shown on the screen. A detailed analysis is included in your Staff Report packets. 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. The applicant is seeking to establish a similar use to that which was established on the property in 2007, 15 years ago, and was voided when the applicant for the previous special use permit ceased operations.
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 requested special use is similar to that established by a previous owner in 2007 and was voided when the applicant for the previous special use permit ceased operations.
Staff is recommending approval of the request with the 17 conditions displayed on screen.
Of the agencies notified and provided comments. None objected.
On February 16, 2022, the Green Garden Township Board approved the special use permit request, with a 5-0 vote in favor with the comment please note, the approval is subject to the 16 conditions outlined in the prior special use permit and that the approval is only for these owners and will expire when they sell the subject property. To reiterate, this applicant is asking that this special use permit be transferable to future property owners.
And this concludes Staff's presentation.
Chairman Stipan said thank you.
Chairman Stipan said the only thing I noticed is that 7 and 8 almost sound contradictory. One says you can't burn at all and the other one says you can burn nursery trimmings. I think 7 and 8 could be combined but I am going to leave it as is. I wanted to have it noted on record.
Chairman Stipan said has anyone else have any comments or questions? Roger, go ahead.
Roger Bettenhausen said I know Green Garden Board approved unanimously but I know for fact there has been burning on the property recently, that lasted for a couple of days So, that's a major concern. I am surprised the Board approved with these conditions. I think these conditions need to be refined.
Lisa Napoles said to our knowledge, our office has not received any complaints about that. Most of these conditions were adopted from the previous special use request and their focus is based on the concerns of the Resource Recovery and Energy Division. We can go over this with that office and we can refine their conditions.
Roger Bettenhausen said it's just a concern, maybe it was a one-time thing, but it was a violation of the conditions previously set-forth. Maybe something that needs to be watched.
Chairman Stipan said thank you very much. Are there any objectors or concerned citizens for this case?
No one answers.
Chairman Stipan said there are not, okay.
Chairman Stipan said would the owner or legal counsel care to come up and speak? I see we have two lawyers listed.
A woman and two gentlemen approach the podium from the gallery. Chairman Stipan said, please introduce yourselves.
Jake Gancarczyk introduces himself as an attorney with Spesia and Taylor to the Commission. Just a couple quick comments to address the concerns. We actually attended two meetings with Green Garden. The first one was a Planned Commission meeting for Green Garden Township, which we provided notices to all of the property owners who came out and spoke. One of the Planned Commission members is also a neighbor of Bill's Landscape and Maintenance. The burning incident was addressed, and it was a one-time event. That member approved and we had an unanimous approval. We went on to the Township Board and once again we had an unanimous approval. Other than that, we stand by the Staff's recommendation. If you have any further questions, the owners of Bill's Lawn and Maintenance are here. They'd be glad to answer any questions you may have.
Roger Bettenhausen said they answered my question. My only concern was that one incident. It was bad for a couple of days; the whole area was smoked up. I just didn't want that to be a continued issue as we go forward.
A man said we never burn anything on the site, This one time when we had the fire, we were cleaning up the property in the back in the wooded area. So, it was clippings, and we did not realize it was too much. We learned our lesson and it will never happen again. For the landscaping wood we have a container that is hauled away. The grass clippings go into the mulch chip, so it is recycled. We don't have a designated fire spot and we are not going to have it. We are not going to burn anything on the site.
Roger Bettenhausen said that satisfied my concern. I was a little surprise that there wasn't some objection regarding that one issue from the board, but I understand the situation. I appreciate the answer.
Jake Gancarczyk said thank you.
Chairman Stipan said thank you.
Motion to Approve Special Use Permit for a Landscaping and Lawn Maintenance Business in the A-1 Zoning District with 17 Conditions (S-22-026)
Roger Bettenhausen made a Motion to approve. John Kiefner seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Chairman Stipan announced the case.
Adrian Diaz presented the case.
Good evening, thank you Mr. Chairman. ZC-22-004 is located at 3010 State Street in the Lockport Township. The owner of the property is J & C Real Estate Development I, LLC, with John and Carrie Thompson each being 50% owner. The attorney is Nathaniel Washburn of K.G.G LLC. They are requesting a Map Amendment from C-1/R-4 to I-1 and a Special Use Permit for light equipment sales, rentals, and personal storage within an existing building. The intended use of the property will be automobile sales and personal storage. The business was previously located at 2610 S State Street which is zoned C-4. The hours of operation will be Monday through Saturday by appointment. There will be one employee on site which will generate two daily vehicle trips. It is expected to be a minimal increase in noise on the property.
The subject parcel is zoned C-1/R-4 and has 99 feet of frontage on State Street and is approximately 19,200 square feet. It conforms to minimal lot standards of the C 1 District and will conform to the I-1 District which requires the property to be at least 10,000 square feet and have at least 60 feet of frontage. The parcel is improved with a commercial building that received its finally inspection in 2021. Per the building permit application submitted the intended use of the project stated on the application was personal storage. Personal storage is considered warehouse use and is not permitted in the C-1 District. Staff was not able to determine why the building permit was issued with personal storage as it was not permitted under the 2012 Zoning Ordinances.
The current structure was reviewed under the C-1 District setbacks. The C-1 district requires a 30-foot street side setback, a 10-foot side setback, and a 20-foot rear setback. The I-1 District requires a 30-foot street side setback, a 10-foot side setback, and a 10-foot rear setback. If the Map Amendment is approved the structure would conform to I-1 standards because it was constructed 94 feet from the street side setback, 11 feet from each side lot line, and 40 feet from the rear lot line.
The site plan for the property is displayed. The structure shown was completed in November 2021.
Photos of the subject property and adjacent properties were displayed.
Within a one-mile radius, the general uses are agricultural, vacant, single-family residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional within the City of Lockport, City of Crest Hill, City of Joliet, and unincorporated Will County. Within the unincorporated area of Will County, the uses are residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, and agricultural. Within the City of Lockport, the nearest uses are recreational (Dellwood Park) and single-family residential. Within the City of Crest Hill, the nearest use is the City of Crest Hill Wastewater Treatment Plant and vacant land. Within the City of Joliet, the nearest uses are single-family residential. The subject site is near the I & M Canal Trail, which is maintained by the Will County Forest Preserve District and is a quarter mile west of the Fairmont School.
The subject parcel is within a mile and a half of the corporate boundaries of the cities of Joliet, Lockport, and Crest Hill. The City of Lockport is approximately 800 feet west of the property. The site is south of the Lockport Boundary Agreement Line, as shown on the 2021 Lockport Zoning Map., The City of Crest Hill is located half a mile to the west across the Des Plaines River and the Illinois & Michigan Canal. The City of Joliet is three-quarters of a mile to the south. The parcel is within the Joliet Facility Planning Area and is served by City of Joliet water and sewer service.
Within a one-mile radius, the zoning classifications of the properties within the general area include agricultural, residential, commercial, and industrial within the City of Lockport, City of Crest Hill, City of Joliet, and unincorporated Will County. Within Unincorporated Will County, the zoning districts are A-1, E-2, R-2, R-3, R-4, C-1, C-2, C-4, I-1, I-2, and I-3. The most prevalent zoning districts in the unincorporated area are A-1, R-4, and I-2. Within the City of Lockport, the zoning districts are R-1 (Residential Single-family), C-2 (Community Commercial), and M-1 (Limited Manufacturing). Within the City of Joliet, the zoning districts are R-2 (Single-Family Residential), R-3 (One & Two Family Residential), R-4 (Low Density, Multi-Family Residential), and I-2 (General Industrial). Within the City of Crest Hill, the zoning districts are M-2 (General Manufacturing) and B-3 (Business Service). The parcel is suitable for a small retail or service type establishment sought in the C-1 district. Permitted uses in the C-1 district include daycares, religious buildings, restaurants, financial services, offices, and retail sales. The parcel is not suitable for residential use sought in the R-4 district, although the parcel meets the minimum lot standards, the Zoning Ordinance does not allow for split zoned lots.
The Edgecliff Subdivision was originally zoned residential in 1947. Since then, portions of the current lot were the subject of zoning cases that changed the zoning from residential to business zoning. Historically, the Zoning Ordinance allowed for vehicle storage in business districts. However, vehicle-related uses such as auto sales and personal storage are not permitted in the C-1 District under the current Zoning Ordinance. Lots within the subject parcel today were affected at least three (3) times by rezoning from R-1 to B-1, in 1956, 1969, and 1970. The County Zoning Ordinance in effect permitted garage buildings for the repair, servicing, storage, or sale of new or used motor vehicles and vehicle parts. The equivalent zoning classification today would be the I-1. Directly adjacent to the subject parcel to the north, is a restaurant (Norma’s Cafe); to the south, is a motor vehicle repair shop (Trevino’s Transmission & Auto) Single-family homes are east of the property. In examining the State Street Corridor one mile north and south of the subject parcel, single-family residential remains prevalent in the north within the City of Lockport. However, the observed use adjacent to State Street shifts towards light industrial uses in direction of Joliet, with the most prevalent type of use observed being light vehicle repair, auto salvage, and construction services. It is Staff’s professional opinion that this development follows the development trend in the area.
The request is in conformance with the County’s Land Resource Management Plan (LRMP). Per the LRMP, the subject site is identified within the Urban Communities Development Form. Free standing industrial & office (which includes automotive related businesses) is included as a permitted use within the Urban Communities Development Form. The site is south of the City of Lockport’s boundary agreement line and is not referenced in its plans. The site is beyond the scope of the Crest Hill 2014 Comprehensive Plan. The request is not in conformance with the Fairmont Plan adopted in 2012. The recommended land use for the subject site is commercial retail. Light vehicle sales are permitted by right in the C-3 and C 4; however, warehouse uses are not permitted in any Commercial District. The City of Joliet is in the process of updating its comprehensive plan for the first time since 1959. The area of the subject property is located between the residential land use area and the industrial use area in the 1959 City of Joliet Land Use Map. It is Staff’s professional opinion that this request is in conformance with the goal of the 1959 Comprehensive Plan. The area along State Street was intended to serve as a buffer from the more intensive industrial districts to the west along the Des Plaines River and residential areas to the east. A LESA score was not calculated.
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. Light equipment sales and rentals are uses that are less intensive than other vehicle-related uses like auto-salvage or motor-vehicle repair that are well-established and found throughout the State Street Corridor. The applicant previously operated their business from 2620 S State Street which is zoned C-4 located 0.42 miles north of the subject site and wishes to relocate the operation at this new location. The applicant states they do not expect more than one (1) customer per day.
It is Staff’s professional opinion that the special use will have a negligible impact on the surrounding area and 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 proposed special use is within a corridor that maintains several auto-related businesses. The request is on a parcel that is already developed. The subject parcel has pre-existing access to State Street via an asphalt driveway. The property is served by City of Joliet water and sewer services.
Therefore, it is Staff’s professional opinion that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and/or other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. The subject parcel is improved with a parking lot and vehicle ingress/egress to State Street via an asphalt driveway. Light equipment sales and rentals require one (1) space per employee plus two (2) spaces per service stall and bay. The site can accommodate the minimum parking requirements. The special use permit shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the I-1 district in which it is located. Vehicle display must not encroach into required off-street parking areas, drive aisles, fire lanes or loading areas.
Staff is recommending approval of the Map Amendment and the Special Use Permit with five (5) conditions shown on the screen.
1. Upon fourteen (14) days of written notice to the owner of record and/or operator at their last known address, Will County Land Use Department and Will County Sheriff’s Department employees are hereby granted the right of entry in and upon the premises for the purpose of inspecting the premises and uses thereon for compliance with the terms and conditions of this special use permit.
2. Within six (6) months of county board approval, the applicant shall submit a parking plan for review and approval to the Land Use Department and the Lockport Fire District showing conformance with sections 155-11.30 and 155- 14.100 of the Will County Zoning Ordinance.
3. Within six (6) months of county board approval, the applicant shall submit a landscape plan for review and approval to the Land Use Department showing conformance with section 155-12. Landscaping in the form of three (3) planters in the street facing elevation and perennials must be included in this landscape plan.
4. Vehicles that are for sale may not be parked or stored in required parking spaces, drive aisles, fire lanes or loading areas and outdoor storage cannot block drive aisles, fire lanes, or loading area in accordance with section 155-14.100 Outdoor Display and Storage of the Will County Zoning Ordinance.
5. All tires on site shall be covered within a permanent structure to prevent water accumulation until removal off site.
Of all the agencies notified only the City of Lockport provided comments. The City of Lockport stated the applicant is already operating the business and were storing vehicles in the public right-of-way. Since notified, the applicant has removed the storage containers off site and Staff determined it was not necessary to open up a violation request.
This concludes the presentation, and I am available for any questions. Chairman Stipan said, does anyone have any questions?
No one answers.
Chairman Stipan said thank you very much Adrian.
Adrian Diaz said thank you.
Chairman Stipan said are there any objectors or concerned citizens to this case? A man starts walking up.
Chairman Stipan said just wait one second sir. I'm just ascertaining if there are any objectors. Would you please sit down for a second so we can hear from the owner and the legal counsel first and then we will ask you to come up, okay? The owner, the Thompsons, and Attorney Nathaniel Washburn?
The gentleman does not hear Chairman Stipan. He continues to walk up and starts to voice his objections.
Chairman Stipan said you'll have a second to talk in a minute. Please let me hear from them first and I'll call on you.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said are you having trouble hearing us?
The gentleman said, pardon?
Vice Chairman Kiefner said after the applicant speaks, we'll give you a change to address. Thank you.
Nathaniel Washburn introduces himself to the Commission. I'll keep my comments brief. My clients, John and Carrie Thompson as Staff mentioned, operated a similar business with half a mile of the current site up the road on State Street. They have since constructed a new building on this property. Mrs. Thompson (Carrie) has multiple sclerosis, and the new building was constructed so she would have easier access. The prior building was not handicap accessible or suited for their needs going forward. The new building was finalized and approved in late 2021 and unbeknownst to them, the building permit was approved but wasn't properly zoned. We are here to correct the zoning and to request for a special use permit for them to be able to relocate the old building to the new location. Staff recommends approval and we would likewise request that this be approved so they can continue to operate their business. Any questions?
Chairman Stipan said they understand all five of the conditions?
Nathaniel Washburn said yes. We almost have the parking plan completed. As for the landscaping requirements, I would officially ask that be removed but we understand the push to beautify State Street, however the property is in an Industrial Corridor. So, sticking a few potted trees out front seems kind of counter intuitive in my plan but if it is the Commissions wish to include that, we understand.
Chairman Stipan said okay thank you. Would you please take a seat right up there while we have the other objectors or concerned citizens come down? You'll have a chance to respond to them afterwards, okay?
Nathaniel Washburn said absolutely, thank you.
Chairman Stipan said now sir, would you come down? I'm sorry, I stopped you before. I'll speak louder. I want you to come down to the podium to talk. When you get to the podium, give your name and address first.
James Staniszewski introduces himself to the Commission. I own the building south of this building. What my problem is, this owner will apply for what he's telling you what he is going to do but does not do that. Since he has been there, he has cars that are taken a part and left out in front. In the back of the building, he has pickup trucks that are disassembled. Just prior to this zoning, he cleaned up the whole situation. What he does when he gets angry, he put this stone cylinders around his building blocking the view of Trevino Auto Sales causing a loss in business. Norma is here from Norm's Cafe, and she has the same situation. He just does whatever he wants to do. He doesn't follow any rules or regulations. And I wanted to add, across the street he put up a new building up on a garbage dump. I don't know how he ever got permission to do something like that. The building is all sagging and coming apart. That's the type of person he is.
Chairman Stipan said did you call the County Land Use Department and register a complaint?
James Staniszewski said I'm supposed to be meeting with the building inspector to go over things in violation that he did on this new building. So, I'm going to make an appointment.
Chairman Stipan said you can always call the Land Use Department and they will send out inspectors. Not just building inspectors, they'll send out whatever kind of inspectors needed to be sent.
James Staniszewski said oh, very good. That is about all I have to say. Chairman Stipan said okay thank you, sir.
Chairman Stipan said ma'am your next. Please give name and address before you start.
Norma Reyes introduced herself to the Commission. I own Norma's Cafe to the north this building. I had trouble with him back a few years ago parking cars all the way out to the street. I asked him to move them back because you could not see to pull out of the restaurant, and he got kind of snippy about that.
Chairman Stipan said did you call Planning and Zoning?
Norma Reyes said no, I just went over and asked him if he would move them back.
Chairman Stipan said I see, thank you very much. Is there anything else you would like to add?
Norma Reyes said no.
Chairman Stipan said okay thank you. Is there anyone else here as a concerned citizen or objector?
Chairman Stipan said Mr. Washburn would you care to comment or you client?
Nathaniel Washburn said thank you again Mr. Chairman. I'm happy to pass this off to the Commission.
Nathaniel Washburn handed to Commission a letter of non-objections from 11 people in this area.
Nathaniel Washburn said my client had somebody go to many of the neighbors for comment and I have signatures of 11 surrounding property owners, all in favor and not objecting the request. I believe the actual inhabitants of Trevino Auto Sales were contacted and they expressed that while the didn't want to put anything in writing they did not have any objection. I understand Mr. Staniszewski is not the operator of the business just merely the property owner. To Mr. Staniszewski's comments about the client operating a junk yard, this is not a junk yard nor is it zoned to be a junk yard and will not be a junk yard. We put up a brand-new building that was just approved. Nobody is going to invest that kind of money into their property just to immediately let it go. Again, I-1 zoning does not permit a junk yard by rights so we can not operate that, if we did it would be a violation that code enforcement would be able to cite us for.
To the comments about the containers, they have been removed. The site was under construction until late 2021 and some of it is still being cleaned up. The parking lot, I believe is going to be asphalted at some point. It is currently gravel. We are waiting for the weather to break on that. So, the property at the end of the day will be a clean, newly built now industrial site with the building for his personal storage and the use for the occasional sale of classic cars. I am not sure of my client’s history is as far as his interactions with Mr. Staniszewski, but at this time, I believe his concerns are unfounded given the use that we are requesting.
As far as the property owner to the north, again, we're required pursuant to our conditions, to keep all vehicles with out of drive aisles line of sight. That has been part of our parking plan, to make sure everything is meeting code. We would respectfully request that these requests are approved.
Chairman Stipan said thank you. Anyone have any questions?
Vice Chairman Kiefner said Mr. Chairman, if I can go back to Staff about some of the concerns that were raised. So, your item 3, about landscaping, the planters that were asked about, that's required with this zoning, correct? Not just the State Street location? That would apply to any industrial property in the County?
Adrian Diaz said correct, that would apply to any industrial property in the County.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said if I remember right, I did see the concrete barrier walls. I know a landscape plan has to be approved. Would something like that acceptable? It doesn't look all that, I get it's industrial. It does look kind of rough. It does create a privacy and screening, but it doesn't look very hospitable.
Kimberly Mitchell said I agree.
Adrian Diaz said it is located in the rear of the property and we do not give permit for fences.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I guess it's not coming toward the road or blocking the line of sight. That addresses my concerns and question. Thank you.
Chairman Stipan said anyone else?
Roger Bettenhausen said I'd like to comment that job as Commissioner is not to determine if an applicant is going to be a good neighbor or not. Our job is to look at the facts and recommend approval. And if there are violation, those people need to raise those concerns to the proper authorizes so that investigations can take place.
Chairman Stipan said it is always easier if people can get along in the process. Motion to Approve Map Amendment from C-1 & R-4 to I-1 (M-22-001)
Roger Bettenhausen made a Motion to approve. John Kiefner seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Roger Bettenhausen made a Motion to approve. John Kiefner seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Chairman Stipan announced the case.
Lisa Napoles presented the case.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Zoning Case ZC-22-005 is an application for a Map Amendment from R-1 to I-2 with two Special Use Permits for a self-service storage facility and for an outdoor storage yard that takes place in Frankfort Township. The owners are John and Janice Einoder. They are represented by their Attorney Richard Kavanagh of K.G.G., LLC. The applicant is requesting to re-zone a parcel from R-1 to I-2 to continue the operation of a concrete recycling facility and to bring an existing illegally operating outdoor storage yard into compliance. Both special uses apply to the full parcel.
An aerial map was displayed. Photos of the subject and of the adjacent property were displayed.
In June of 2021, Code Enforcement Staff responded to a complaint from the Village of Orland Park regarding the concrete crushing and recycling operation and outdoor storage yard uses on the property. The property had previously received a complaint from the Village of Orland Park in 2014 about the concrete crushing operation. At that time, Land Use Department Staff found that the property was zoned R-1. In response to that complaint (#14LU00950), the applicant produced documentation from the 1990s that Land Use Department Staff had determined that the concrete crushing operation was a legal, nonconforming use of the property and could continue, but must abide by article 155-15 of the Zoning Ordinance. Under said article 155-15, the use was not permitted to be expanded without undergoing zoning action to bring the use into conformance. The applicant was placed in violation (#21LU00362) for operating an outdoor storage yard on an R-1 property.
The applicant attended a pre-application meeting with Staff in late June of 2021 to discuss the storage yard operation and how to resolve the violation and bring the property into conformance. At that time, Staff advised the applicant that outdoor storage is a prohibited use in the R-1 Zoning District. To continue the outdoor storage use, a map amendment from R-1 to I-1 with a special use permit for outdoor storage is required. If approved, the map amendment would nullify the legal, nonconforming status of the concrete crushing use. Per 155-15.30(I), “a nonconforming use may be converted to a special use by the granting of a special use permit, in accordance with the special use permit procedures of section 155- 16.40. The applicant attended a second pre-application meeting with Staff in December of 2021 after retaining an attorney.
The owner submitted the application for this zoning case in January of 2022. The subject property falls on the Orland Park side of the planning boundary agreement between the Villages of Mokena and Orland Park. The Villages of Orland Park and Mokena were both notified of this zoning case. The subject parcel is located in the Hickory Creek Watershed. There are no wetlands or floodplains identified on property. Per the Will County Division of Transportation’s 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan, the construction of a full interchange for Wolf Rd./I-80 is an investment priority for the Illinois Department of Transportation and is an unconstrained project.
The map amendment review criteria used to the proposal was displayed. A LESA (Land Evaluation and Site Assessment) 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 agricultural, residential, institutional, commercial, and industrial in Will County, the Village of Orland Park, and Village of Mokena. These include ARS Trailer Repair, which is adjacent to the subject property to the north, the BP Refinery facility on the east side of Wolf Road opposite the subject parcel, and the Wolf Road Enterprises Business Park south of I-80 on Wolf Road. Within a one-half-mile radius, the districts include A-1, A-2, R-1, R-2, R-2A, R-3, I-1, and I-3 in unincorporated Will County. In the Village of Orland Park, the districts are E-1 (Estate Residential), R-3 (Residential), R-4 (Residential), and ORI (Mixed Use). Due to the location of the parcel at the northwest corner of S. Wolf Road and I-80, and surrounded by commercial and industrial uses, it is not suitable for single-family residential uses permitted under the current R-2 zoning classification. As the parcel’s current use is as a concrete recycling facility, it is suitable for continuing that use. The subject parcel is contiguous to the ORI/mixed use Zoning District to the north and west. The Village’s recommendations for District uses include “light industrial users with moderate amounts of truck and service traffic.”
The parcel was zoned R-1 as part of the County-wide comprehensive re-zoning in 1978 and historic zoning maps show that the parcel had been zoned R-1 prior to 1978. Since that time, the general trend in the area has been from agricultural uses toward residential development north of 183rd Street and south of I-80, and commercial and industrial development immediately surrounding the subject parcel. The residential subdivision south of I-80 in Mokena was developed in the late 1990s and the residential subdivisions to the north and northeast of the subject parcel were established in the early 2000s. The commercial uses between 183rd Street and I-80 west of Wolf Road were developed beginning in the late 1990s and continue to this day. The refinery use east of Wolf Road was established by 1970 and increased to its present configuration by 1997.
The request is in conformance with the County’s Land Resource Management Plan. Per the LRMP, the subject site is identified as the Suburban Community Development Form. The LRMP includes Freestanding Industry and Office uses as appropriate for the Suburban Community Development Form. The applicant is seeking to continue the use previously deemed to be legal, nonconforming, and permitted to operate on the parcel. The LRMP recommends that Freestanding Industries and Offices should located within easy access to an arterial roadway and should be located with easy access to interstate highways. As the subject property is located on Wolf Road near I-80, its location is in conformance with this recommendation.
The Plat of Survey and a zoning map was displayed. The parcel is deficient in lot frontage for the R-1 District, but is deemed legal, nonconforming.
It is Staff’s professional opinion that the continued operation of the concrete recycling facility will not be detrimental to or endanger the public since the development has not proven so since it was established. The Land Use Department has not received any complaints about this use to date. This special use request is required due to the applicant’s request for a map amendment from R-1 to I-2. The continued concrete recycling use will be required to adhere to County Codes and Ordinances. The supplemental use regulations related to landscaping, screening, and outdoor lighting provisions will also mitigate any adverse impact that the continued use may have on adjacent properties (Zoning Ordinance sections 155-9.240, 155-12, and 155- 14).
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, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. There are several industrial uses within a one-half-mile radius of the subject property, including ARS Trailer Repair, which is adjacent to the subject property to the north, the BP Refinery facility on the east side of Wolf Road opposite the subject parcel, and the Wolf Road Enterprises Business Park south of I-80 on Wolf Road. The special use is necessary for the applicant to continue the use deemed legal, nonconforming by the County and is a use that is consistent with the surrounding area. The use has existed on the property since the 1990s and the industrial/commercial subdivision to the north does not appear to have been impacted by this use.
It is Staff’s professional opinion that continuing the outdoor storage use that was established in approximately 2017 (based on GIS aerials) will not be detrimental to or endanger the public’s health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare. This special use request is to bring an existing use into conformance. Continuing the use will require the applicants to adhere to County Codes and Ordinances, including screening of outdoor storage. The ARS Trailer Repair property has existing outdoor storage that does not appear to have impacted the surrounding area. Any outdoor storage on the subject parcel will need to be screened from all sides of the property.
Of the agencies contacted, who provided comments. We received a letter dated February 28, 2022, from Matt Ziska the Community and Economic Development Director of the Village of Mokena. Which reads, This office has received a notification that the owners (John Einoder and Janice Einoder) of the subject property are requesting a Map Amendment from R-1 to I-2, Special Use Permit for Concrete Recycling Facility, and Special Use Permit for Outdoor Storage Yard. Let this letter serve as a formal objection by the Village of Mokena to the proposed Map Amendment and to the proposed Special Use requests for the subject property.”
Staff is recommending approval of the map amendment and special use requests.
And this concludes my presentation.
Chairman Stipan said thank you. I have a question for you if you know the answer. This the Staff of the Village of Mokena, and not the Village Board or their Planning Commission?
Lisa Napoles said that is correct Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stipan said thank you.
Kimberly Mitchell said I have a question. The comment regarding the Village of Homer Glen. The email wasn't provided, is that the only full length comment they made? And are they objecting?
Lisa Napoles said they are not objecting. They only had that question regarding the stormwater concern. Which the proposer would have to conform to the Stormwater Ordinance.
Kimberly Mitchell said okay.
Chairman Stipan said any other questions?
Vice Chairman Kiefner said one more, if you can answer it. So, the concrete crushing started in the 90's. Do we know if it has been running continuously during that whole time?
Lisa Napoles said to our knowledge, yes.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said okay.
Chairman Stipan said any other questions to Staff? Thank you, Lisa.
Chairman Stipan said are there any objectors or concerned citizens for this case? Okay so, please sit down and we will have the owner and the legal counsel come up first. Mr. Einoder and Richard Kavanagh.
Richard Kavanagh introduces himself and John. Einoder to the Commission. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are here to answer any questions. We appreciate the time and effort the Staff put into this report. This is an unusual parcel. It's a parcel that Mr. and Mrs. Einoder bought back in the mid 1980's on an agreement for deed. They final got a deed in 1990. At that point in time Mr. Einoder had a contract with the City of Chicago for snow removal. That contract required him to have equipment in the Wards from October 15th to April 1st. But he needed to store them someplace else in the meantime and he stored them on this site.
Here's a picture of what it looked like in the summer of probably early 90's or something like that. I will give it to Staff so they can put a copy in the file.
Richard Kavanagh hands a picture of the subject property to Dawn Tomczak. Dawn Tomczak said thank you.
Richard Kavanagh said he has also had a IDPA permit to crush concrete going back to the mid-80's. There have been a couple of blips. I know there was one complaint by the Village of Orland Park.
Chairman Stipan said will the first concerned citizen come down. Please state your name and address when you get to the podium.
Ed Lelo introduces himself as the Director of Development Services for the Village of Orland Park to the Commission. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission. And thank you Staff for the presentation. I'd like to address some of the issues that were brought up. There has been several Land Use cases recently that were mentioned in the Staff Report that generally affected the Village of Orland Park. I was sent here on behalf of the Village Manager, the Mayor, and the Village Board to express our opinion. Previously, ARS Trailer Repair that was formally known to me as the Cortis property that pursued a Zoning Special Use Permit with Will County Land Use that the Village of Orland Park filed a formal legal objection to. The reason being, what they were proposing, the truck and trailer repair with associated outdoor storage is something that the way the County's Zoning Ordinance actually defines that use, regulates that use and applies performance standards to it, doesn't reflect what the Village of Orland Park would do for a similar use. As such, it hampers the Village's ability to enforce their regulations on property in and near the same planning boundary. I have some documents that I can share with Staff or make copies of, regarding ARS previously being located in the Village of Mokena. The terms of the original boundary agreement drafted in 1997 has since been amended. I'm speaking for them, but this can be verified. One of the priorities and provisions at that time, was to remove properties that were north of I-80 but still within the jurisdiction of the Village of Mokena. They disconnected from the Village of Mokena to address the boundary agreement that was going to be adjusted. As such, they inquired with Bethany Salmon, a Senior Planner who was a former member of my staff. I have a record of the phone message that was let for her and the response from Mr. Cortis thanking Bethany for the information. Unfortunately, I don't know what information she provided during the phone call. I can assure Bethany did not recommend Mr. Cortis pursue zoning with the County. When someone requests information from the Village of Orland Park, our standard practice is to advise them of what they are requesting and how they can come into compliance with the Zoning Ordinances. Much the same way you guys are doing here. Our regulations and our vision may be different, but the processes are generally the same. As that Zoning Case was being present, I received this letter dated April 3, 2020, from Kavanagh Grumley and Gorbold LLC Attorneys at Law. It indicated in the letter on page 2, Perspective buyers met with the Village of Mokena, and we were advised in regard to the Cortis property. Advised that the use that they were purposing (trailer /trucker repair) was not a use that the Village of Mokena would approve without a Special Use Permit. They highly recommended disconnecting from Mokena and go back into Unincorporated Will County. The same was recommended by the Village of Orland Park to the seller. I believe that letter was referencing the conversation had with Bethany Salmon, the former Planner. I don't think Bethany made that recommendation. Regardless of what happen, the property owner within his rights, pursued a petition with the Will County Land Use and was approved by the County Board for the Special Use Permit for the truck/trailer repair and outdoor storage. I printed off some aerials from the mapping software the Village of Orland Park uses of that site to show what was going on. I can compare timeframes rather easily. You can see how it has changed the built environment. By allowing the outdoor storage, it allows a significant number of trucks and trailers to be parked. I will make my way to the property at hand.
Chairman Stipan said please do.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said I am dying find the connection.
Ed Lelo said just wait. The reason I'm saying that is the reason I am here today. What was depicted to the Plan Commission previously was that the Village of Orland Park said to pursue zoning with the County because we can't accommodate your use. In my opinion, that is incorrect. If they had pursued it with the Village of Orland Park, whether or not the use itself would have been allowed, is not necessarily a question. What that does is give the Village of Orland Park the jurisdiction and authority to monitor and enforce our Codes on that piece of property. Any adjacent properties in this District would have to follow the same rules and they couldn't say, you didn't make them do it. Now that does not matter in a court of law or code enforcement case, but it does give the property owner the opportunity to not follow the Village of Orland Park regulations. But instead give them regulations that are more suited to them, whether is more lenient or more restrictive, whatever. It doesn't matter it gives them the option to not follow the codes we are trying to enforce in that whole business center and village. That property was approved. I have pictures of it, and I will show you the difference between the requirements for Will County vs what the Village of Orland Park requires. We require petitioner has to prove that the screening will be up year-round, and the height of the materials being screened does not exceed the height of the screening. In this instance on that property, it does not because the height of the trailers is taller. Had they pursued zoning with the Village in terms of outdoor storage, they could have enforced that regulation and would have been a consistent theme with the remaining properties located in that area. Since that time, Mr. Einoder's own the property directly adjacent from the subject property. The adjacent property is incorporated and in 2020 trailers started showing up, there was gravel spread across the way, there were light poles, a fence and barbed which are not permitted per the Village of Orland Park's Zoning Ordinance. Also, none of that was requested for approval. When meeting with Mr. Einoder, he said he thought that property was in the Village of Mokena. As such, we pursued Code Enforcement. From that we worked with him and ultimately, he brought the property into compliance. That's not my issued. I have pictures that were taken today that shows he is still complaint. My issue is now we are taking a legal nonconforming use and we are making it legal to the south of that property. So, in my opinion, the decision that have been made are dictating the built environment that are in that barrier. That is what you guys are assigned to do. However, I don't think it is right to recommend approval of a map amendment that does impact the Village's ability to advise, create ordinances and complete a vision according to the principles that the Board passes. Prior to the Cortis property being approved, there were orderly trucks there. Not to say it was any better or worse than it is today but now there are more. When the Village pursued Code Enforcement on the 11347 properties, I believe the outdoor storage was relocated to the adjacent property that is now ARS Truck Repair. In summation, the Village is asking that this request is not approved. So that the Village has the opportunity to work with the property owner on an annexation and annexation agreement that gives the Village jurisdiction of the property in perpetuity. I can't speak to what decisions they will make with regards to the uses that are there onsite. I don't know what conditions they will place on them. But I do know that if the piece of property is under the control of Orland Park, the Village will be better able to execute the vision of the Board.
Chairman Stipan said I have a question for you. Did your Planning and Zoning Board, Village Board or City Board of Orland Park vote on this or is this strictly from the Mayor's Office or your office?
Ed Lelo said I was directed here by the Village Manager.
Chairman Stipan said so it's not voted on by the Board? That's what I'm asking.
Ed Lelo said to answer your question, no. Nothing has been presented to them to vote on.
Chairman Stipan said okay, we're familiar having been sitting on this Board for quite a while with the various back and forth. That is why I asked about the Boards, okay?
Ed Lelo said there are ways to annex the piece of property and it will appear ethically exactly how these conditions dictate. However, in the future if the property were to ever change hands, it would have to come into full compliance with the Village of Orland Park Land Development Code. And that is why I am here to.
Chairman Stipan said okay thank you. Are there any other question? No Answer
Chairman Stipan said I am declaring a two-minute recess.
Chairman Stipan returned to the panel and said do we other concerned citizens or objectors.
A few people in the galley raise their hands.
Chairman Stipan said one at time will you come up, please? Please state your name and address to start.
Michael Cachey introduced himself to the Commission. He said my property is just northwest of this property. My biggest concern is the concrete crushing aspect. There is an animal hospital right next to them to the north, then there's another business, then us. Depending on how the wind blows, there is quite a bit of concrete dust that falls on cars. Our visitors and clients that come out to their cars covered in dust. It is a detrimental factor to my business that we have to constantly wash cars. And it's not a good look for our clients. So, it does affect our businesses.
Chairman Stipan said thank you sir, we appreciate your time. Michael Cachey said thank you.
Chairman Stipan said next concerned citizen please. Please also state your name and address.
James Wirt introduces himself to the Commission. Like my neighbor Mr. Cachey, I am also concerned about the amount of dust that concrete grinding puts off on our businesses. I am bringing in high profile customers. I have the high-level buyers for Corporations such as Target and Walgreens. They are coming into an area where concrete is being ground up, there are fine of particles in the air going into people's lungs. Unfortunately, I don't think its regulated over there. So, the matter at hand, is I don't think it’s right, they are doing that over there. I look out my window every day at my office and see kids and families outside riding bicycles, people walking around, and I don't think it’s healthy for anyone. Under your supposed recommendations there, you are not supposed to allow them to be doing these unsafe practices. So, I don't think you should allow this. Okay? Thank you.
Chairman Stipan said okay thank you very much sir.
Richard Marks introduces himself to the Commission. I have Condo and a home that is less than 1/8 of a mile in that area. I would like to refute a few things I have heard this evening and that is that it is not an industrial area as Mr. Einoder's attorney stated. I think that is anything but false. If you look at the photograph, they (Staff) supplied, within this half mile radius there are 300 homes within one block that nobody bothered to mention. If there is a prevailing south wind, that dust comes into our neighborhood. And that noise is done on the weekends. I have confronted Mr. Einoder on multiple occasions. I do recall one time that I didn't know much about concrete crushing, but apparently if you put water on it, it does keep some of the dust down. I don't think he was running water at this particular time or maybe he doesn't have the adequate supply of water to be putting on this material. I've also confronted his son on a different occasion. I didn't really care that were absolved from any of the local Ordinances. When I went over to confront his son, he told me it was none of my business what they were doing, and he boasted that one time they were able to produce so much dust that is slowed down traffic or caused a traffic jam on I-80. So, I would just like to make sure a comment like that is duly noted here, that it's not just a little bit of dust. I would like to be on record that I am concern about the health hazards of crushing concrete and letting that be disbursed in my neighborhood. I don't understand what silica is but that is a byproduct of crushed concrete. Once that gets into your lungs, it can't come out. I would like to know about my three sons and all of my other neighbors. I think they should have been notified about what is going over there and what is going on here this evening. So, ask that the zoning change not be granted at this time.
Chairman Stipan said okay, thank your sir. Wait one second sir. Richard Marks said certainly.
Michael Carruthers said via speaker phone, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Stipan said to Michael Carruthers via speaker phone, yes sir.
Michael Carruthers said via speaker phone, how long has this plant been there?
Chairman Stipan said to Michael Carruthers via speaker phone, how long has this plant here is your question?
Michael Carruthers said via speaker phone, yes.
Kimberly Mitchell said the 70's.
Chairman Stipan said to Michael Carruthers via speaker phone, from the 70's Mike.
Michael Carruthers said via speaker phone, why is he just complaining now?
Chairman Stipan said the gentleman asked why is your complaint now, if it has been there since the 70's.
Richard Marks said this is the first avenue I've had to say anything to someone.
Chairman Stipan said to Michael Carruthers via speaker phone, he said it's the first opportunity he's had to say something to someone.
Richard Marks said I've confronted Mr. Einoder on several occasions.
Chairman Stipan said yes sir, I understand that. I am talking to a gentleman on the phone and I gotta make sure he understands.
Richard Marks said I understand, I'm just hearing comments in my other ear that are irritating me.
Michael Carruthers said via speaker phone okay I was just wondering why this was his first complaint in front of us. Thank you.
Chairman Stipan said to Michael Carruthers via speaker phone okay sir, thank you.
Chairman Stipan said thank you sir for your presentation.
Richard Marks said thank you.
Chairman Stipan said other people care to speak?
Kimberly Mitchell said I have a question.
Chairman Stipan said of course.
Kimberly Mitchell said has there been complaints from that area regarding this concrete crushing noise and dust?
Lisa Napoles said the known complaints are mentioned in the Staff Report by number.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said if we are open to discussion, I would ask Staff to put the zoning map back up. I would like to see where the Village and County boundaries lines are. And the homes on 183rd happened around 2000? What I am trying to verify is that the other businesses and homes were built during the time that this concrete crushing plant was there crushing concrete. So, the whole reason this Case is before us is due to the non-compliance of outdoor storage which is really what we are trying to address with the Map Amendment. And that's not what anybody is really here complaining about, except I guess the Village of Orland Park who did not get that one piece of property that has outdoor storage that they would like to see screened better. So, if we technically deny this Map Amendment or it never gets approved by the County, the outdoor crushing still continues.
Lisa Napoles said yes.
Chairman Stipan said anymore questions for Staff?
No Answer
Chairman Stipan said Mr. Kavanagh or Mr. Einoder wish to respond?
Richard Kavanagh said I wanted to thank Mr. Kiefner for his questions. Again, with the IEPA approval, this is an appropriate place for a legal non-conforming use for the crushing and recycling of concrete. There was an instance where there was a lot of dust because the spray bar broke. It was fixed within a couple of hours, but the Village of Orland Park still made a complaint.
Richard Kavanagh said to John Einoder, so is the spray bar is always in operation when you're crushing?
John Einoder said yes, all the time, correct. And we never had no dust on I-80. We don't have any dust.
Richard Kavanagh said the spray bar prevents the dust.
Kimberly Mitchell said why are you seeking the Map Amendment if you don't need it to operate?
Richard Kavanagh said if you stop a legal non-conforming use, you can lose it. The map amendment allows them to stop and start again. They stop for 5-6 months out of the year. They get concrete from the Village of Mokena and other Municipalities to crush. From IDOT when they are working on I-80. It’s a good location for it. The property to the south is zoned R-1. We know it will never be zoned R-1 especially with that intersection at Wolf Road and I-80.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said since I am not aware of any of the requirements of the permit from the IEPA, does that require them to inspect you periodically?
John Einoder said we have a lifetime operating permit from the IEPA. Richard Kavanagh said to John Einoder, how often do they come to inspect?
John Einoder said they come at various times, whenever.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said so they come unannounced?
John Einoder said yes, they always come unannounced.
Roger Bettenhausen said how often do they have inspections? When was the last time they were there?
John Einoder said usually when IDOT does an inspection of the product for IDOT specific jobs, the IEPA will come at that time.
Chairman Stipan said anymore questions from anyone?
Someone from the galley raises his hand and asked if he could speak from the galley.
Chairman Stipan said no you can't speak from there. Wait one second. I am going to allow one more question. Normally we don't give anyone a second chance to speak. Since it's important to the Community, so I will allow one more question. But you'll have to come down to the podium and you must question us, not them. Would you please say your name again?
Michael Cachey re-introduces himself to the Commission. Two issues I have is you have on here Special Use Permit for concrete recycling facility, you're giving him a permit for that. And two, I would like to see the permit that says they have a lifetime ability to crush concrete, you should want to see this too. IDOT set-up and move these stone crushing facilities around as needed. So, they would be routinely temporary permits. The whole area has changed dramatically since 1978, so you have to address that. That is the big issue. Thank you.
Chairman Stipan said you care to respond Mr. Kavanagh?
Richard Kavanagh said just very quickly, again, Rezoning to I-2, Special Use Permit for the crushing and recycling of concrete, Special Use Permit for outdoor storage yard with all appropriate screening, etc. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said Mr. Chairman I would like to ask Staff a question. Chairman Stipan said very quickly because I am ready to entertain a Motion. Vice Chairman Kiefner said are they currently in violation?
Lisa Napoles said yes, they are currently in violation for the outdoor storage.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said for the outdoor storage. Kim, this is the whole reason they are doing this.
Kimberly Mitchell said I'm good with that. My issue with all of this is that were doing something that wasn't appropriate and continued to do it with the wrong zoning. As a result of that, a bunch of homes were built near it. And now here they are complaining about the dust and the health of children riding bikes. I guess he is going to keep the ability to crush concrete until he stops doing it. And that fine, I think when he stops doing it, I think there should be more thought for the people living there in the residential setting. Maybe the next occupant of that parcel, shouldn't be a concrete crushing business. Right now, I'm inclined to vote no on the Map Amendment.
Chairman Stipan said do you have a comment, Lisa?
Lisa Napoles said Mr. Chairman, the Map Amendment along with the Special Use Permit is needed to bring the outdoor storage use into compliance. That Map Amendment, if approved, would nullify the legal non-conforming status of the concrete recycling facility. That is why a second Special Use Permit is needed to continue the current use.
Kimberly Mitchell said so if he doesn't get the Map Amendment, he'll have to stop crushing concrete.
Lisa Napoles said no, if he doesn't get the Map Amendment, he can continue crushing concrete. Just no outdoor storage.
Vice Chairman Kiefner said is this non-conforming passable to a new property owner?
Lisa Napoles said it is if it is continuous.
Chairman Stipan said I would like to entertain a Motion on this Case. Please make a Motion.
Richard Kavanagh said Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Stipan said yes sir.
Richard Kavanagh said I just ask my client and son is not interested in continuing the concrete crushing. You could make that Special Use Permit during his ownership only.
Chairman Stipan said would that be satisfactory to you?
Lisa Napoles said so, the Commission would need to add a condition that the Special Use Permit for concrete crushing would cease and null and void upon the discontinuing of that use and is not transferable to the next owner.
Kimberly Mitchell said I would like to consult with Attorney on that to see if that is right.
Chris Wise said yes, a condition can be added to the Special Use Permit.
Lisa Napoles said a future applicant can come forward and ask for the Special Use Permit again.
Robert Bettenhausen said one more comment. Are we aware if the Village of Mokena ever contacted the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to monitor the air quality? I would think if they had a problem with it, they would have contacted the Agency.
Lisa Napoles said to Staff's knowledge, the Village of Mokena has not registered an air quality complaint with the IEPA surrounding this property.
Chairman Stipan said anyone, or any citizen can request the IEPA to come out to inspect.
Motion to Approve Map Amendment from R-1 to I-2 (M-22-003)
Roger Bettenhausen made a Motion to approve. John Kiefner seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
John Kiefner made a Motion to approve. Roger Bettenhausen seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman SECONDER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Roger Bettenhausen made a Motion to approve. John Kiefner seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Roger Bettenhausen made a Motion to approve. John Kiefner seconded the Motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner SECONDER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
NONE.
VII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
None.
VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS
Dawn Tomczak introduced new Land Use Staff member Rusha Brooks to the Commission.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
Motion to Adjourn Meeting
John Kiefner made a Motion to Adjourn the meeting at 8:58 PM. Roger Bettenhausen seconded the Motion.
Voice Vote was taken. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: John Kiefner, Vice Chairman SECONDER: Roger Bettenhausen, Commissioner AYES: Carruthers, Mitchell, Stipan, Kiefner, Bettenhausen ABSENT: Peterson, Gugala |
Alerts Sign-up