The Planning and Zoning Committee of the DeKalb County Board met on February 22, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the Conference Room East located in the DeKalb County Administration Building. In attendance were Committee Members Roger Steimel, Marlene Allen, Patricia Vary, Vince Faivre, Eileen Dubin, and Steve Slack and staff members Paul Miller and Derek Hiland. Audience members included Robert Mullins, Cheryl ACookie@ Aldis, Kjirsten Frank and County GIS Manager Sheila Santos.

 

Roger Steimel, Committee Chair, called the meeting to order.  Mr. Steimel noted that all members were present except Howard Lyle.

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

 

Ms. Vary moved to approve the minutes of the January 25, 2006 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Committee, seconded by Mrs. Dubin, and the motion carried unanimously.

 

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

 

Mr. Slack moved to approve the agenda, seconded by Mrs. Allen, and the motion carried unanimously.

 

SPECIAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT -- Request of Mullins Grain for an amendment to a Special Use Permit to allow construction of an new grain bin on property located on the south side of Suydam Road in Paw Paw Township, Petition PP-06-01.

 

Mr. Miller stated that Mullins Grain Company has filed a petition for an Amendment to a Special Use Permit for property located at 2386 Suydam Road.  The site is located on the south side of Suydam Road, on the east and west sides of the C.& N. W. railroad, and is zoned A-1, Agricultural District, with a Special Use for the agribusiness.  Mullins Grain is proposing to add a new grain bin to east side of the property, north of the existing grain bins.  Because of the area of the proposed bin, the change requires an Amendment to the Special Use Permit.  Because of the proposed setback of only 29 feet from the Suydam Road right-of-way, the request also required a Variation from the minimum required setback of 50 feet.

 

The required public hearing was conducted on February 9, 2006 by DeKalb County Hearing Officer  Kevin Buick.  Representatives of Mullins Grain explained that the new bin is needed to accommodate the growing business, and that the proposed location of the bin is the only site that works given the existing layout of the property.  The petitioner also indicated that sight lines for traffic on Suydam Road would not be significantly different after construction of the bin than currently are the case, due to existing residential structures that are closer to the road than the grain bin would be if built as proposed.  Six members of the public spoke in opposition to the request, citing sight line, noise and dust concerns, and no member of the public spoke in favor of the request.  The County Engineer and Planning and Zoning staff also raised concerns about sight lines and negative impacts to traffic on Suydam Road.

 

The Hearing Officer submitted his Findings and denied the Variation request, but recommended approval of the Amendment to the Special Use Permit.  As a consequence of the denial of the Variation, Mr. Miller explained that the petitioner may either withdraw the request to approve the Amendment to the Special Use Permit or may continue with this part of the request, in which case the petitioner must be prepared to show the Planning and Zoning Committee where a new grain bin can be located on the subject property in conformance with the minimum required setbacks.  The Planning and Zoning Committee and County Board are required to take action on the Amendment only.

 

Mr. Steimel asked Mr. Mullins to briefly present the Committee with alternate locations for the proposed grain bin.  Mr. Mullins highlighted three different locations for the Committee to consider.  These included: 1). to place a 75-foot-diameter grain bin in the same location as the originally proposed bin.  This would meet the required 50-foot setback from Suydam Road; 2). to place a 105-foot-diameter grain bin on the west side of the railroad tracks; and 3). to construct a 105-foot- diameter grain bin on the east side of the property, south of the existing bins, after Mullins Grain removes an existing building.  Mr. Mullins stated that the alternatives were proposed with consideration being taken toward the safety of site lines regarding the railroad crossing.  He indicated that the ideal location for the new bin would be on the west side of the railroad tracks, but insurance concerns remained and his company had not yet been able to work out an agreement with the railroad to allow an auger to cross above the tracks.

 

Mr. Steimel asked of the other Committee Members if the residents of Rollo need an opportunity to give their opinion to address the changes proposed to the Special Use Amendment.  Mr. Slack noted that the Church in Rollo had objected to the site lines being proposed, and perhaps the 75-foot- diameter grain bin would not be a safe alternative because site lines could still be compromised.  Mr. Mullins responded to the statements of Mr. Steimel and Mr. Slack by suggesting that Mullins Grain remove the option of building in front of the existing grain bins, because the only opposition at the hearing regarded the placement of the bin close to road which would impact the safety of the residents and passerby traffic.  Mr. Mullins stated that if option two or three were chosen, no one should object because the safety issue and inconvenience issues have been resolved.

 

Following further discussion, Mr. Faivre indicated that considering the facts presented (time lines for grain bin installers, mitigation of safety concerns, noise, dust and Abees wings,@ and the simple fact that no one objected to the expansion of the facilities to begin with) he would like the Committee to act.  The Committee agreed that re-opening the hearing would not be necessary so long as the new bin was not to be placed between the existing bin and Suydam Road.

 

Ms. Vary moved to approve the amendment to the Special Use Permit, with the condition that the new bin be in either location #1 or #2, but not be permitted in location #3, as shown on the plan presented to the Committee, seconded by Mrs. Allen, and the motion carried unanimously.

CORTLAND ADDRESS CHANGE -- Request of the Town of Cortland for changes to the addresses of certain properties in unincorporated DeKalb County on Somonauk Road in accordance with the Town numbering system.

 

Mr. Miller explained that the Town of Cortland is changing its system of street addresses.  This change is slated to go into effect in March of this year.  The proposed Town addresses will not match the address system used by the County.  Under ideal circumstances, this would not matter, as a change in address system would indicate where the corporate limits of a municipality meet unincorporated County.  However, there are certain properties along Somonauk Road which are surrounded to the north and south by properties that are within Cortland.  With the proposed change to Town of Cortland street addresses, the numbering system will not be in numeric sequence unless the surrounded properties that remain in unincorporated DeKalb County are changed to match.

 

The County has the authority to establish and to change street addresses for unincorporated properties.  Cheryl Aldis, the Town Clerk for Cortland, has requested that the County consider changing the addresses of specific properties along Somonauk Road to match the proposed Town street address system.   Mr. Miller explained that the Committee may, by motion, direct staff to change the addresses, send the matter to the full County Board for consideration, or deny the request of the Town Clerk.

 

Ms. Aldis used a map provided by the County IMO to illustrate where the potential problems exist with various properties that remain in unincorporated DeKalb County, but that are surrounded by or immediately adjacent to the Town limits.  She stated that approximately 1,200 addresses will change on March 12.  The Town picked a date that did not interfere or conflict with pension checks or Town billings.

 

The Committee members reviewed the map of Cortland and discussed some possible solutions.  Mr. Steimel stated that some of the properties north of Cortland are farms and will eventually be annexed into the Town, therefore this idea of changing some unincorporated properties may be beneficial for everyone=s sake.

 

Ms. Vary inquired whether or not anyone has objected to the proposed changes?  Ms. Aldis stated that those individuals in the unincorporated areas in question had not yet been contacted by the Town.  Ms. Aldis said that no one has expressed objections to the address changes, however some people were a little upset that had to change personal documentation.  In response to this information, Mr. Steimel asked the Committee if they thought that the affected property owners be contacted and invited to the next Planning and Zoning Committee to speak their mind.  Ms. Vary stated that she would like to vote on the address change now because the varying addresses systems could create a safety issue when it comes to the provision of emergency services.