McHenry Times

City of Harvard Planning & Zoning Commission met July 11

Here are the minutes provided by the commission:

Chairman Carbonetti called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. City Clerk Moller called roll to establish a quorum. Commission members present: Jim Carbonetti, J Albertson, Steve Creviston, Mike Grieshop, Paul Hereley and Ian McCafferty. A quorum was present. Also present were Alderman Gorman, City Administrator Lou Leone, Community Development Director Donovan Day and members of the audience.

Public Comment

Chairman Carbonetti opened the floor to public comment for any item not presently on the agenda. There were no public comments.

Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of November 1, 2022 – Approved

A motion was made by Commissioner Grieshop, seconded by Commissioner Albertson to accept the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of November 1, 2022, as presented. All ayes. Motion carried.

Public Hearing – Chancelight, Inc. and Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church

Chairman Carbonetti opened the hearing in the petition submitted by Chancelight, Inc. and Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church. The City Clerk confirmed that the Notice of Hearing was published per statutory requirements in the Northwest Herald. Certified notices were sent to property owners within 250’ of the subject property. The Certificate of Publication, completed petition and Staff Report were entered into the record.

The petitioners are seeking a conditional use pursuant to Table 8-1 of the Unified Development Ordinance to utilize the second story classrooms of the subject property for an alternative education program for students with emotional and behavior disabilities and challenges. Subject property is located in Chemung Township and commonly known as 505 E. Blackman St., Harvard, IL 60033.

PIN 01-36-157-006; 01-36-156-008

Presentation of Evidence by Petitioners

The parties of interest were present. Upon being sworn in, the following parties reviewed the petition and presented testimony to the Planning and Zoning Commission:

Anthony Stefani, Sr. VP, Information Technology & Facilities, Chancelight Inc., stated the students would be bused to the church and would be on the second story level. A security system would be put in place with alarms on the doors to ensure students wouldn’t be leaving.

Vicki Larson, Asst. Supt. CUSD 50, related the school district’s obligation to serve all students who reside in the community. There are students who struggle in a large setting that need more intensive support in a smaller setting. Currently, some of these students are sent to different school districts that have small programs such as Chancelight; sometimes they are traveling up to 2 hours by bus. The school’s goal is to bring students to Harvard so that they’re part of the Hornet family and they are still participating in the things offered in the school district and getting support in a smaller setting. They will be working to serve up to 40 students in the secondary level supporting them academically, socia emotionally, behaviors and focusing on students who potentially may be on a drop out basis and keeping them in school and getting them a great education here in Harvard.

Discussion/Questions by Planning and Zoning Commissioners

• Commissioner Hereley inquired as to the grade level of the students. Asst. Supt. Larson responded that the students will be secondary starting with high school and potentially middle school but not elementary school at this time.

• Commissioner Grieshop inquired if the students would check in and start out at the high school and be bused to the church and if the program would follow the school calendar. Asst. Supt. Larson responded that the students would be bused directly to the church. The program would follow the school calendar.

• Commissioner Creviston inquired if the program was similar to what’s at St. Paul Lutheran Church. Asst. Supt. Larson related that St. Paul’s is the transition program which is the 18-21 year old program for students who have Individualized Education Plans and transitioning them into the career and workforce.

• Commissioner Albertson asked if there would be one or multiple classrooms and what the facility would look like in the church. Anthony said there would be an eating area like a cafeteria, one office and three classrooms with subdividers in between so if they need breakout sessions, they have the ability to do so.

• Commissioner Grieshop inquired if food would be brought in for the lunchroom. Asst. Supt. Larson indicated that the same food service that serves the school district would deliver there as well.

Public Comment

Chairman Carbonetti opened the floor to public questions/comments either in favor or opposition to the petition.

• Linda Morton, 607 Garfield St., addressed the Commission and indicated her background as a special ed teacher for 18 years working with students with behavior and emotional needs. She objected to the alternative classroom for personal and public safety as well as the possibility of a decline in property values. She felt the students are high risk and could be a danger to themselves, other students as well as the staff and could be a risk to the neighborhood. She recommended the students be situated in a more remote setting away from houses and the general population.

• Upon being sworn in, Bridgette Veronese, 407 Garfield St., stated she didn’t really have any opposition or pros, just a couple questions that really weren’t addressed. Part of the reason kids from District 50 are bused to other areas is because they have appropriate annexed properties, such as Allendale, that are built for these children that are school areas. She inquired why the school was putting them in a church instead of exploring trying to make them their own facility. She inquired if the bathrooms would be rehabbed to handle multiple children. Also, what security and safety measures would be in place and would there be a fenced in area for children to go outside and play should the school be opened up to middle school children.

Planning and Zoning Questions/Comments to Objectors/Supporters

The Commission had no questions or comments.

Petitioner Response to Objectors/Supporters

Asst. Supt. Larson clarified that student ages will be focused on high school at this time. Safety is absolutely their most important thing, so that will be addressed with the same kind of protocol they do in the school district. In regards to Allendale, there are several different outsourcing schools such as that, and there are pros and cons to all of those things. One of the goals is to have all of the students here in the district. The other problem is that facilities are at capacity in all areas. That is why some of the students are driving or being transported over two hours. They are looking at the student population and the needs of students trying to find the best solution to support our current families and students here in Harvard. Bridgette inquired if the district had the teaching population to facilitate another annex area. Chancelight provides recruiting and training of all staff for specialty supports.

Anthony Stefani stated that there are four stalls in the washrooms for boys and girls.

Commissioner McCafferty noted that people still come into the church and there is also an area below the proposed classrooms that serves the community. He inquired as to security measures for the doors and that area. Anthony responded that doors are locked and tied into the fire system. Commissioner McCafferty further asked if there is a single person in the area or is it the responsibility of the teachers to manage their kids. Upon being sworn in, Sue Leuser, Sr. VP Operations, indicated that Ombudsman/Chancelight programs originated in Illinois and have been around since 1975; she has been with the organization 24 years. They have expertise and knowledge working with students who have academic, social/emotional issues and behavioral challenges. She will be overseeing the program in Harvard making sure that the staff has all the training and supports that they need, working with the district in order to ensure all the kids are safe and getting the resources they need, and meeting their obligation to the students, their families and the community.

Additional Comments/Closing Arguments

There were no additional comments or closing arguments.

Vote on Petition

A motion was made by Commissioner Creviston, seconded by Commissioner McCafferty to approve the petition for a conditional use as presented. Roll call vote: Albertson, aye; Creviston, aye; Grieshop, aye; Hereley, aye; McCafferty, aye and Carbonetti, aye. Motion approved six to zero.

The Planning & Zoning Commission’s recommendation will come before Community and Economic Development Committee on July 12, 2023 at 6:30 pm and before the full City Council at their meeting on July 25, 2023 at 7 pm. Both meetings will be held in the Community Hall, 201 W. Diggins St.

A motion was made by Commissioner Grieshop, seconded by Commissioner Creviston to close the hearing. All ayes. Motion carried.

Hearing closed at 7:22 pm.

Public Hearing – Richard Karolczak

Chairman Carbonetti opened the hearing in the petition submitted by Richard Karolczak. The City Clerk confirmed that the Notice of Hearing was published per statutory requirements in the Northwest Herald. Certified notices were sent to property owners within 250’ of the subject property. The Certificate of Publication, completed petition and Staff Report were entered into the record.

The petitioner is seeking a zoning map amendment to rezone property located on Airport Road between Division St. and Marengo Rd. from R-1 Large Lot Residential District to B-2 General Business District. Subject property is a vacant lot located in Dunham Township. PIN 06-02-251-029

Presentation of Evidence by Petitioners

The party of interest in the petition was present. Upon being sworn in, the following parties reviewed the petition and presented testimony to the Planning and Zoning Commission:

Richard Karolczak reviewed his petition to rezone the subject property to B-2 General Business District.

Sabina Ephraim, Real Estate Broker, 16566 County Line Rd., Capron, noted that the subject property is a half-acre lot and there are commercial businesses around the lot. She didn’t think anyone would purchase the lot to build a home, but they certainly would for a small business of some type. The petitioner is requesting rezoning to B-2 which is more suitable for the area.

Staff Report

There was no additional staff report. There were no questions from the Commission to the staff.

Discussion by Planning and Zoning Commissioners

There was no discussion.

Public Comment

Chairman Carbonetti opened the floor to public questions/comments either in favor or opposition to the petition. There was none.

A motion was made by Commissioner Albertson, seconded by Commissioner McCafferty to recommend to the City Council to approve the petition to rezone the subject property from R-1 Large Lot Residential District to B-2 General Business District, as presented. Roll call vote: Creviston, aye; Grieshop, aye; Hereley, aye; McCafferty, aye; Carbonetti, aye and Albertson, aye. Motion approved six to zero.

The Planning & Zoning Commission’s recommendation will come before Community and Economic Development Committee on July 12, 2023 at 6:30 pm and before the full City Council at their meeting on July 25, 2023 at 7 pm. Both meetings will be held in the Community Hall, 201 W. Diggins St.

A motion was made by Commissioner Grieshop, seconded by Commissioner Creviston to close the hearing. All ayes. Motion carried.

Hearing closed at 7:26 pm.

Public Hearing – City of Harvard

Chairman Carbonetti opened the hearing in the petition submitted by the City of Harvard. The City Clerk confirmed that the Notice of Hearing was published per statutory requirements in the Northwest Herald.

The petitioner is seeking various text amendments to the UDO:

• Section 12.9.D.i of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) relating to Homeowner Associations’ responsibilities and requirements for maintaining common areas;

• Sections 2.3, Definition of General Terms, and 8.2, Use Matrix, of the UDO to include cannabis related business;

• Sections 2.3, Definition of General Terms, and 8.2, Use Matrix, of the UDO to include firearms and ammunition sales, indoor and outdoor gun range and gunsmith.

Chairman Carbonetti indicated that the Commission would address the text amendments one at a time.

Upon being sworn in, Community Development Director Donovan Day, reviewed each of the text amendments:

1. Section 12.9.D.i of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) relating to Homeowner Associations’ responsibilities and requirements for maintaining common areas.

Community Development Director Day related that in speaking with City Administrator Lou Leone, they discussed several developments that went under during the 2008 recession. There was no handover of common areas to the HOA’s that were in existence or the HOA’s were never created after the developers walked away. The City has been stuck with maintaining a lot of these common areas where HOA’s should be maintaining them. Staff is seeking an amendment as outlined in the memo that would give the City more teeth and enforcement capability to charge HOA’s with maintaining their common areas. One of the ways to do that would be when a developer comes in and goes through the approval process, they agree to create an SSA over the whole development which would be inactive until such time challenges arise that require the City to enact the SSA and add that additional tax onto the homeowners to pay for maintenance of common areas. Other options would give the City the opportunity to force the common areas to be subdivided. Some of the common areas that we have now back up to existing property owners yards. The property could be subdivided to give them that portion of the common area which they would be required to maintain as part of their property. Other options would be municipal acquisition to either sell the property to adjoining property owners or subdivide the property to create additional lots. The proposed amendment protects the City should a developer walk away or a HOA not be fully formed.

At Commissioner Hereley’s inquiry, City Administrator Leone noted there are currently 3 HOA’s that were originally supposed to be created or just outright failed due to a lack of participation from the residents or the developer leaving before the HOA was fully formed.

At Commissioner Albertson’s inquiry, City Administrator Leone noted that the SSA tax would be the equivalent of the HOA dues. Also, the proposed amendment does not address the current situation, but provides an opportunity moving forward.

Commissioner Grieshop asked staff to expand on the topic of property abutting other property owners and if the City would give them the property even if they didn’t want it. City Administrator Leone explained that if the City were to vacate land or sell the land, the first option is to sell it to the nearest neighbors. All property owners would have to purchase their portion or the City wouldn’t sell the land, so that you wouldn’t have portions of the property in the middle that property owners didn’t want that the City would have a hard time maintaining, similar to what happened in Park Pointe.

A motion was made by Commissioner Creviston, seconded by Commissioner Grieshop to approve the text amendment as presented. Roll call vote: Grieshop, aye; Hereley, aye; McCafferty, aye; Carbonetti, aye; Albertson, aye and Creviston, aye. Motion approved six to zero.

2. Sections 2.3, Definition of General Terms, and 8.2, Use Matrix, of the UDO to include cannabis related business

Community Development Director Day stated that the City already passed an ordinance establishing tax regulations should the City get a dispensary or other cannabis related business. The use was approved but not added to the UDO Use Matrix. His understanding was the impression at that time was businesses would go under retail. Looking into it further, staff felt it would be better to give the Planning and Zoning Commission as well as the City Council more say in where the businesses would go and whether they would be allowed as a permitted use, conditional use or not at all. Staff is recommending adding the following uses to the Use Matrix: Cannabis Dispensary, Cannabis Cultivation Center and Cannabis Craft Grower. Donovan related that state law covers a lot of requirements such as distances from daycares, schools and churches.

Donovan reviewed each of the districts for a Cannabis Dispensary which is proposed as a permitted use. Alderman Grieshop made a motion to approve adding the use as a permitted use. The City Clerk asked for clarification if the motion was for just the dispensary or for the all of the proposed uses. Donovan then went through each of the proposed uses to give the Commission a full picture.

Commissioner Grieshop backed up on his motion and noted that the Commission previously approved a tattoo parlor on Route 14 as a conditional use. Commissioner Albertson further commented that the Body Modification Establishment is a conditional use in the same three zoning districts proposed for the dispensary. City Administrator Leone noted staff suggestion is to make it permitted or conditional. If the Commission’s opinion is to make it conditional, that at least allows the discussion verses what we currently have.

Commissioner Grieshop amended his motion, seconded by Commissioner Albertson to recommend to the City Council to approve the petition with proposed uses be added to Table 8-1 Use Matrix, as conditional uses.

Roll call vote: Hereley, aye; McCafferty, aye; Carbonetti, aye; Albertson, aye; Creviston, aye and Grieshop, aye. All ayes. Motion carried.

3. Sections 2.3, Definition of General Terms, and 8.2, Use Matrix, of the UDO to include firearms and ammunition sales, indoor and outdoor gun range and gunsmith

Chairman Carbonetti noted an addendum to the petition was emailed to the Commission with definitions for Gunsmith and Firearm.

The City has been approached by a firearms retailer expressing interest in opening a retail location in Harvard. This particular use is not listed in Table 8-1 and staff is recommending adding the following uses to the Use Matrix: Firearms Retailer, Indoor Shooting Range, Outdoor Shooting Range and Gun Smith. The staff memo proposes the uses as conditional.

The Commission discussed the proposed uses with some concern expressed over allowing an outdoor gun range. It was further discussed that as a conditional use, a petitioner would still have to come before the Commission to determine if the use would be allowed and what the conditions would be.

A motion was made by Commissioner McCafferty, seconded by Commissioner Albertson to recommend to the City Council that the petition be approved with the proposed uses added to Table 8-1 Use Matrix.

Roll call vote: McCafferty, aye; Carbonetti, aye; Albertson, aye; Creviston, aye; Grieshop, aye and Hereley, aye. All ayes. Motion carried.

A motion was made by Commissioner Grieshop, seconded by Commissioner Creviston to close the hearing. All ayes. Motion carried.

Hearing closed at 7:55 pm.

Clerk’s Report

No report.

Chairman’s Report

No report.

At 7:56 pm, a motion was made by Commissioner McCafferty, seconded by Commissioner Creviston to adjourn the meeting. All ayes. Motion carried.

https://www.cityofharvard.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning_and_zoning_commission/meeting/14718/planningzoningcommmtgminutes2023-07-11.pdf