Kendall County Zoning Board of Appeals met March 27.
Here are the minutes provided by the board:
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Randy Mohr called the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Scott Cherry (Arrived at 7:06 p.m.), Cliff Fox, Tom LeCuyer, Randy Mohr, Jillian Prodehl, and Dick Thompson
Members Absent: Dick Whitfield
Staff Present: Matthew Asselmeier, AICP, CFM, Senior Planner
Others Present: Emma Tajchman and Dan Nagel
MINUTES:
Member LeCuyer made a motion, seconded by Member Fox, to approve the minutes of the February 27, 2023, meeting.
With a voice vote of five (5) ayes, the motion carried.
PETITIONS
Without objection, Chairman Mohr amended the agenda to move Petition 23-12 to the first item for consideration.
The Zoning Board of Appeals started their review of Petition 23-12 at 7:01 p.m.
Petition 23 – 12 – Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee
Request: Text Amendments to the Kendall County Zoning Ordinance By Amending Kendall County’s Zoning Regulations Pertaining to Commercial Solar Energy Facilities, Commercial Wind Energy Facilities, Test Solar Energy Facilities, Test Wind Towers, Small Wind Energy Systems, Private Solar Energy Systems, Commercial Wind Farms, Solar Gardens, and Solar Farms
Mr. Asselmeier summarized the request.
In January 2023, the Illinois General Assembly approved and the Governor signed House Bill 4412 pertaining to commercial wind and solar energy systems. The new law requires that the County update its solar and wind regulations by May 27, 2023, in order to be able to have regulations governing commercial solar energy facilities and commercial wind energy facilities.
The proposed amendments are attached. For reference, items in red are proposed changes and changes in bolded black are items that need to be discussed due to potential conflicts with State law.
General proposed changes are as follows:
1. Various definitions related to solar and wind energy facilities are proposed to be amended, added, and deleted. Many terms are defined in State law and were referenced as such. The definitions of solar farm and solar gardens were removed. The definitions of solar energy system, private and wind energy system, small were adjusted to reflect State law. Onsite consumption would include energy generated within a subdivision, planned development, or business park and consumed within the development.
2. Small wind energy systems would become permitted accessory uses. They would be added to the list of uses in the R-3 in addition to their existing allowance in the A-1, R-1, R-2, RPD, Business, and Manufacturing Districts. Solar energy system, private would become permitted uses in all zoning districts.
3. Commercial solar energy facilities, test solar energy systems, commercial energy wind facilities and test wind towers would become special uses in the A-1, R-1, RPD Districts, and Manufacturing Districts.
4. Adding a statement that the regulations do not apply to commercial wind energy facilities within one point five (1.5) miles of a municipality, unless the County has an Intergovernmental Agreement with the municipality to provide zoning services to the municipality. Staff added a requirement that solar and wind energy facilities within one point five (1.5) miles of a municipality must either annex to the municipality or enter into a pre-annexation agreement with the municipality using the Chatham annexation rules.
5. Add a requirement that the County Board shall make its decision on the application not more than thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the public hearing.
6. As proposed, the new setbacks would follow State law.
Member Cherry arrived at this time (7:06 p.m.).
7. As proposed changes in setbacks, certain height requirements for solar, and fencing requirements would be allowed if nonparticipating property owners consent to these requirements. As proposed, the changes would be allowed to occur if documentation was provided at the time of application submittal.
8. As proposed, sound regulations would follow State law.
9. As proposed, agricultural impact mitigation agreements have to be submitted with the application instead of prior to the hearing.
10. The County’s landscaping requirements were adjusted to reflect the law.
11. Statements requiring compliance with EcoCat reports, Fish and Wildlife Service reports, and Illinois State Historic Preservation consultations were added to the Zoning Ordinance.
12. Statements regarding road use agreements were adjusted to reflect the law.
13. Language was added related to the enforcement of damaged drain systems. The new law was provided.
A map showing the one point five (1.5) mile planning boundaries was provided.
At their meeting on February 9, 2023, the Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee voted to initiate these amendments.
The proposal was emailed to the townships on February 15, 2023. To date, no comments have been received.
ZPAC met on the proposals on February 28, 2023. Discussion occurred regarding wind and solar projects on Forest Preserve property; uses within the confines of the Downstate Forest Preserve Act are exempt from zoning. Discussion occurred regarding requiring properties to be annexed to municipalities; municipalities could choose to enter into annexation agreements without annexing the property. If a property owner was not agreeable to an annexation or annexation agreement, litigation could arise. Discussion occurred regarding some counties choosing not to regulate these uses or to have the uses as permitted uses because the county may not want to have zoning hearings that cannot alter a project. Discussion occurred regarding the precedence of the State taking away a county’s zoning authority. The State’s Attorney’s Office has not reviewed the proposal. ZPAC voted to issue a neutral recommendation by a vote of nine (9) in favor and zero (0) in opposition with one (1) member absent. The minutes of the meeting were provided.
The Kendall County Regional Planning Commission reviewed this proposal on March 22, 2023. It was noted that the Illinois Farm Bureau was working on a proposal to restore some local control on these types of petitions. Greg Vander Kamp, Savion expressed concerns regarding the language related to vegetative screening and the requirement that properties either annex to municipalities or enter into annexation agreements. It was noted that the term “vegetative screening” was not defined and could be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Discussion occurred regarding vegetative management plans. Discussion occurred regarding the timing of executing road use agreements; Mr. Vander Kamp felt such agreements should occur closer to construction. Dan Nagel asked about notification requirements to townships for proposals; townships have to be notified of special use applications per State law. Mr. Nagel also asked about bonding requirements; the language regarding agricultural impact mitigation agreements was referenced. The Kendall County Regional Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposal by a vote of eight (8) in favor and zero (0) in opposition with two (2) members absent. The minutes of the meeting were provided.
The County has intergovernmental agreements for zoning services for Millbrook and Plattville only.
Member Fox asked what happens if a proposal came up within one point five (1.5) miles of Newark. Mr. Asselmeier responded that the proposal will be sent to Newark to either negotiate a pre-annexation agreement or annex the property. The municipality is not bound to annex the property.
Chairman Mohr asked if the proposal follows the State’s guidelines. Mr. Asselmeier noted the annexation or pre-annexation requirement was not in State law. The written consent of non participating properties has to be submitted with the application submittal; the State law does not say when the written consent has to be submitted. The agricultural impact mitigation agreement has to be submitted with the application materials; State law requires submittal prior to the public hearing. The decommissioning bond was set as part of the agricultural impact mitigation agreement. The timeline to repair damages to drain tiles would be set by the special use permit; State law did not specify a timeline for repairs to drain tiles.
Mr. Asselmeier noted that the requirements for vegetative ground covering have not been set by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources.
Chairman Mohr asked if non-participating properties waiving setback or fencing height requirements signaled their approval. Mr. Asselmeier responded that the language was copied and pasted from State law. Waiving certain requirements did not mean approval of the plan by a neighboring property owner.
Member Prodehl asked if the State’s Attorney had reviewed the proposal. Mr. Asselmeier responded no.
Member Prodehl asked if the fence requirement could be waived by a homeowners’ association. Mr. Asselmeier responded that the waiver had to be signed by impacted non-participating property owners. A homeowners’ association could sign a waiver if they were the impacted property owner.
Chairman Mohr opened the public hearing at 7:17 p.m.
Chairman Mohr swore in Emma Tajchman at Dan Nagel.
Emma Tajchman, Savion, expressed concerns regarding the vegetative screening requirement. She felt the requirements could require screening around an entire project. There could be situations, like if a project touched a creek or forest, where screening would not be necessary. She would like to see screening evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Mr. Asselmeier noted that a project might be in the middle of the country when approved and, at some point in the future, the neighboring properties are developed and screening becomes necessary. Mr. Asselmeier also noted that “vegetative screening” was not defined in the proposal or State law. This lack of definition would allow some subjectivity when evaluating individual projects.
Ms. Tajchman expressed concerns about the pre-annexation and annexation requirement. She felt that instances could arise where a municipality or property owners between the project site and the municipality did not favor annexation. Mr. Asselmeier said the annexation or pre-annexation requirement was not in State law. He also noted that property owners between project sites and municipalities would not be bound by or party to pre-annexation agreements. It was noted that annexations would not occur until the property touches the municipality. Pre-annexation agreements were only valid for twenty (20) years per State law. Mr. Asselmeier noted that the County did not want renewable energy projects to physically block municipalities from growing geographically. Mr. Asselmeier also noted the importance of securing easement for public facilities at the beginning of a project. No municipality in Kendall County, to date, has opposed the annexation or pre-annexation agreement requirement. Mr. Asselmeier explained the requirements for pre-annexation agreements where properties were greater than one point five (1.5) miles from a municipality; he used the Troy Fire Protection District special use permit on Jones Road as an example. The requirement to enter into a pre-annexation agreement at the beginning also ensures that projects do not have duplicative public hearings and meetings.
Chairman Mohr felt that a vegetative screening was relative and urged petitioners to submit landscaping plans.
Discussion occurred regarding the State law related to vegetative screening and earthen berms. Some counties might require berms because of the language in the State law. Discussion occurred regarding vegetation placed on earthen berms and the importance of shielding developments from neighboring properties and/or roads.
A pre-annexation could define a vegetative screening; everything is negotiable in pre-annexation agreements.
Dan Nagel asked how road districts are informed of projects and the time involved to go through the County Highway Department. Mr. Asselmeier responded that townships have to be notified of special use permit applications per State law.
Mr. Nagel also expressed concerns about parties crossing drainage districts without permits. Mr. Asselmeier read from the State law the rules related to drain tile repair. Discussion occurred regarding the term “reasonable time”. Facility owners must be given time to repair or pay for the repairs to drain tile. The County was proposing to set a time in individual special use permits; it was questionable that
the County could have a time requirement. Drain tile information would be submitted at the time of application submittal. Illinois Drainage Law would still allow neighbors to file a lawsuit against someone that damaged tile. Discussion occurred regarding the bond paying for the damage. Mr. Asselmeier explained the County’s enforcement procedures. It was noted that drainage districts lacked funds to sue entities. Ms. Tajchman said that her company maps drain tile and they coordinate with drainage districts. In cases where damage occurs, her company works to repair the drain tiles. The consensus of the Board was to add a requirement that applicants of commercial renewable energy projects notify drainage districts by certified return receipt and provide proof of such at the time of application submittal. It was noted that drain tile has to be repaired for onsite renewable energy projects. It was noted the infrequency of drainage district meetings.
Chairman Mohr closed the public hearing at 7:59 p.m.
Member Prodehl made a motion, seconded by Member LeCuyer, to recommend approval of the text amendments with an additional condition for commercial wind and solar projects that, if a project is located within a drainage district, the drainage district shall be notified of the project by certified return receipt mail and proof of notification shall be submitted with the special use permit application.
The votes were as follows:
Ayes (6): Cherry, Fox, LeCuyer, Mohr, Prodehl, and Thompson
Nays (0): None
Abstain (0): None
Absent (1): Whitfield
The motion passed.
The townships will be notified of the results of the public hearing.
The proposal goes to the Planning, Building and Zoning Committee on May 8, 2023.
The Zoning Board of Appeals completed their review of Petition 23-12 at 8:01 p.m. Without objection, Petitions 23-05, 23-06, 23-07, 23-08, 23-09, 23-10, and 23-11 were combined.
The Zoning Board of Appeals started their review of Petitions 23-05, 23-06, 23-07, 23-08, 23-09, 23-10, and 23-11 at 8:01 p.m.
Petition 23 – 05 – Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee
Request: Text Amendments to Appendix 7 of the Kendall County Subdivision Control Ordinance by Removing Phone Numbers and Related Text Adjustments
Petition 23 – 06 – Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee
Request: Text Amendments to Appendix 7 of the Kendall County Subdivision Control Ordinance by Removing References to Specific Engineering Companies, Engineers, and Related Text Adjustments
Petition 23 – 07 – Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee
Request: Text Amendments to Appendix 9 A and Appendix 9 B of the Kendall County Subdivision Control Ordinance by Removing Dead Website Links and Related Text Adjustments
Petition 23 – 08 – Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee
Request: Text Amendments to Section 3:02 of the Kendall County Zoning Ordinance by Amending the Definitions of Brew Pub and Microbrewery
Petition 23 – 09 – Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee
ZBA Meeting Minutes 3.27.23 Page 6 of 11
Request: Text Amendments to Section 3:02 of the Kendall County Zoning Ordinance by Amending the Definitions of Tent
Petition 23 – 10 – Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee
Request: Text Amendment to Section 11:05 of the Kendall County Zoning Ordinance by Amending the Permitting Requirements of Occupied Recreational Trailers and Mobile Homes (Specifically Deleting the Reference to the Illinois Mobile Home Safety Act)
Petition 23 – 11 – Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee
Request: Repealing Ordinance 1998-10 and Text Amendment to Section 13:01 of the Kendall County Zoning Ordinance by Establishing Procedures to Close Inactive Zoning Related Petitions
Mr. Asselmeier summarized the requests.
For the past several months, Staff has been working with the codifiers to get all of the Kendall County’s regulations into one (1) code. The codifiers recommended several changes to the Kendal County Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Control Ordinance. During the review, Staff also identified several changes to these regulations. The codifiers recommended that these changes occur prior to adoption of the new code. Below please find the proposed changes:
1. Petition 23-05 Subdivision Control Ordinance-Appendix 7
Several phone numbers are listed in the Appendix. The accuracy of these phone numbers is unknown. Staff would like to list the organization only and not the phone numbers.
2. Petition 23-06 Subdivision Control Ordinance-Appendix 7
Greg Chismark and WBK Engineering are listed by name. Staff would like to have a general statement regarding stormwater engineering contact information.
3. Petition 23-07 Subdivision Control Ordinance-Appendix 9 A
In the Performance Criteria Section, there is a dead link to information about invasive species. Staff would like a general statement instead of a website link.
Subdivision Control Ordinance-Appendix 9 B
In the Native Plan Resources Section, there are several dead links. Staff would like general references instead of website links.
4. Petition 23-08 Zoning Ordinance Section 3:02
The definitions of Brew Pub and Microbrewery should be amended to correspond to State law.
5. Petition 23-09 Zoning Ordinance Section 3:02
The definition of Tent should be expanded to include tents outside of campgrounds.
6. Petition 23-10 Zoning Ordinance Section 11:05.D.2
This section references a State law that does not exist.
7. Petition 23-11 Ordinance 1998-10
This Ordinance established procedures for closing inactive petitions. This Ordinance is outdated and now only applies to the Zoning Ordinance and Stormwater Management Ordinance. Staff is working with the State to incorporate the language in the Stormwater Ordinance; the Zoning Ordinance should be changed prior to adoption of the new code.
Redlined versions of the proposed changes were provided.
At their meeting on February 9, 2023, the Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee voted to initiate these amendments.
The proposals were emailed to the townships on February 23, 2023. To date, no comments have been received.
ZPAC met on the proposals on February 28, 2023, and recommended approval of the proposal by a vote of nine (9) in favor and zero (0) in opposition with one (1) member absent. The minutes of the meeting were provided.
The Kendall County Regional Planning Commission reviewed the proposals on March 22, 2023. Mr. Asselmeier explained the codification process. The phone numbers referenced in Petitions 23-05 and 23-06 would remain on the County’s website. Greg Chismark and WBK Engineering were notified of Petition 23-06. Those entities that had special use permits for microbreweries and related brewery uses were notified of Petition 23-08. The entities that had special use permits for campgrounds and banquet facilities were notified of Petition 23-09. The entities that had special use permits for campgrounds were notified of Petition 23-10. The parties that had open special use permit applications from 2018 and 2022 were notified of Petition 23-11. The proposed definition of tent would not impact the permitting requirements contained in the Zoning Ordinance. The Kendall County Regional Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposals by a vote of eight (8) in favor and zero (0) in opposition and with two (2) members absent. The minutes of the meeting are attached.
Chairman Mohr opened the public hearing at 8:07 p.m.
Nobody from the public was present for the hearing.
Chairman Mohr closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m.
Member Prodehl asked if tents could be up permanently. Mr. Asselmeier said the proposal impacts the definition of tent; permitting requirements would remain unchanged.
Member Prodehl made a motion, seconded by Member Thompson, to recommend approval of the text amendments.
The votes were as follows:
Ayes (6): Cherry, Fox, LeCuyer, Mohr, Prodehl, and Thompson
Nays (0): None
Abstain (0): None
Absent (1): Whitfield
The motion passed.
The townships will be notified of the results of the public hearing.
The proposal goes to the Planning, Building and Zoning Committee on May 8, 2023.
The Zoning Board of Appeals completed their review of Petitions 23-05, 23-06, 23-07, 23-08, 23-09, 23- 10, and 23-11 at 8:09 p.m.
The Zoning Board of Appeals started their review of Petition 23-13 at 8:09 p.m.
Petition 23 – 13 – Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee
Request: Text Amendments to the Kendall County Zoning Ordinance by Amending Kendall County’s Kennel Regulations
Mr. Asselmeier summarized the request.
In response to the special use permit amendments for the kennel at the northeast corner of Ridge and Bell Roads, Staff prepared the following proposed amendments to kennel regulations.
In summary, the proposed changes are as follows:
1. Allow pets outdoors until 10:00 p.m. for the purposes of allowing owners to pick-up and drop off pets and to allow for normal bathroom breaks.
2. Establish uniform kennel regulations throughout the County.
3. Minor text alterations.
Redlined versions of the proposed changes were provided.
As of the date of this memo, there are six (6) active special use permits for kennels in the unincorporated area.
At their meeting on February 9, 2023, the Kendall County Planning, Building and Zoning Committee voted to initiate these amendments.
The proposals were emailed to the townships on February 23, 2023. To date, no comments have been received.
ZPAC met on the proposals on February 28, 2023. ZPAC recommended approval of the proposal by a vote of nine (9) in favor and zero (0) in opposition with one (1) member absent. The minutes of meeting were provided.
The Kendall County Regional Planning Commission reviewed this proposal on March 22, 2023. The Kendall County Regional Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposal by a vote of eight (8) in favor and zero (0) in opposition with two (2) members absent. The minutes of the meeting were provided.
Chairman Mohr opened the public hearing at 8:10 p.m.
Nobody from the public was present at the public hearing.
Chairman Mohr closed the public hearing at 8:10 p.m.
The proposal applies to all kennels.
Member Fox made a motion, seconded by Member Thompson, to recommend approval of the text amendments.
The votes were as follows:
Ayes (6): Cherry, Fox, LeCuyer, Mohr, Prodehl, and Thompson
Nays (0): None
Abstain (0): None
Absent (1): Whitfield
The motion passed.
The townships will be notified of the results of the public hearing.
The proposal goes to the Planning, Building and Zoning Committee on May 8, 2023.
The Zoning Board of Appeals completed their review of Petition 23-13 at 8:11 p.m.
NEW BUSINESS/OLD BUSINESS
None
REVIEW OF PETITIONS THAT WENT TO THE COUNTY BOARD
None
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mr. Asselmeier reported that the proposed text amendment related to chickens on residentially zoned and used properties will be on the agenda for the May 1, 2023, meeting. There will also be a petition for a special use permit for a landscaping business and related variances at the property located at the southwest corner of Route 126 and Grove Road.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Member LeCuyer made a motion, seconded by Member Cherry to adjourn.
With a voice vote of six (6) ayes, the motion carried.
The Zoning Board of Appeals meeting adjourned at 8:12 p.m.
https://www.kendallcountyil.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/27018/638186229598353244
Alerts Sign-up