East Central Reporter

City of Effingham Plan Commission met July 11.

Here are the minutes provided by the commission:

MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian Hayes

Dave Storm

Clint Spruell

Cindy Vogel

Kevin Gouchenouer

MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Thies

Theresa Hillyer

Michael McHugh

Ken Wohltman

OTHERS PRESENT: Tracy Willenborg, City Attorney

Luke Thoele, City Engineer

Greg Koester, City Planner

Greg Sapp, WXEF

Derek Warren, Cromwell Radio Group

Nick Taylor, Effingham Daily News

Kim Gammon, Maninfior Reporting?

See attached list

1. Quorum and Approval of June 13, 2023 Minutes: The July 11, 2023, City Plan Commission Meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. A quorum was present. On motion by Commissioner Storm, seconded by Commissioner Vogel, the minutes for the June 13, 2023 meeting were approved by unanimous vote, as presented.

2. Public Hearing on Petition for Special Use Permit for Construction of Mini-Warehouses in a Class B-2, General Commercial District or Class M-1, Light Industrial District (20), 2400 S. Raney Street, Effingham, Illinois, filed by Petitioner, SHA Properties, LLC:

Shawn Fitzjarrald appeared, on behalf of Petitioner, SHA Properties, LLC, to testify in support of the Petition. The Petitioner is requesting a special use permit for the construction of mini-warehouses in a M-1 Light-Industrial District. Mr. Fitzjarrald testified that they would like to build mini-warehouses on the Subject Property, possibly two depending on location of utilities and space. Mr. Fitzjarrald stated that he believes that there is a need for additional mini warehouses in the community.

In response to questioning by City Attorney, Tracy Willenborg regarding the current use of the Subject Property, Mr. Fitzjarrald testified that the Subject Property is improved with a 7,400 square foot building that is utilized as a machine shop. The Petitioner has it leased out to C&S Machine.

In response to additional questioning by City Attorney Willenborg, Mr. Fitzjarrald testified that the existing building will remain on the Subject Property, and the Petitioner intends to develop one or two mini-warehouses on the Subject Property, as well.

In response to additional questioning by City Attorney Willenborg regarding the uses of the properties surrounding the subject Property, Mr. Fitzjarrald testified that the property east of the Subject Property is developed with Penske’s, the property to the South is developed with a trucking company cross dock. Mr. Fitzjarrald further tesitified that road infrastructure is to the north and east of the Subject Property and that the Subject Property is on the corner of Raney and McGrath.

In response to additional questioning by City Attorney Willenborg, Mr. Fitzjarrald testified that, in his opinion, the proposed special use and development of the property would not be detrimental to and otherwise endanger the general welfare of the surrounding area.

In response to questioning by Chairman Hayes regarding ownership of the Subject Property, Mr. Fitzjarrald advised that he owns the Subject Property.

In response to questioning by Commissioner Storm regarding whether the business, which is currently located on the Subject Property, would remain if the mini warehouses are developed, Mr. Fitzjarrald responded in the affirmative.

In response to questioning by City Attorney Willenborg requesting clarification of ownership of the Sujbect Property, Mr. Fitzjarrald testified that he and his wife own the Petitioner, SHA Properties, LLC, which owns the Subject Property.

No one appeared to testify in opposition to the Petition.

City Planner, Gregory Koester, appeared and testified. In response to questioning by City Attorney Willenborg, Mr. Koester testified that the Subject Property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District and improved with a commercial building previously used as a heavy truck repair facility and is now a machine shop. In response to additional questioning, Mr. Koester testified that the property to the north of the Subject Property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District, and developed with a warehouse that is under construction, the property to the south of the Subject Property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District, and is developed with a trucking company with cross-dock, the property to the east of the Subject Property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District, and is developed with a trucking company with repair and fleet maintenance facilities, and the property to the west of the Subject Property is zoned NU, Non-Urban District, and is utilized for crop agricultural purposes.

In response to questioning, Mr. Koester testified that the present zoning of the Subject Property is sufficient for development of the proposed development if a Special Use Permit is granted. In response to questioning whether the proposed special use and development of the property would be detrimental to or otherwise endanger the general welfare of the surrounding area, Mr. Koester responded that he does not see a negative effect. In response to additional questioning, Mr. Koester testified that the Comprehensive Plan designates the Subject Property for light industrial uses and he is of the opinion that the requested special use is in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan.

The hearing was closed and a discussion was conducted among the Commissioners in open session.

Chairman Hayes stated that the proposed development is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Storm agreed and further stated that he did not believe that there would be any negative effects to the surrounding properties.

After due consideration and the evidence presented, the Commissioners made the following findings and recommendations:

1. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: A portion of the property is developed with a commercial building previously used as a heavy truck repair facility converted to a machine shop.

2. EXISTING USE OF THE PROPERTY IN THE AREA: The property to the north of the Subject Property is developed with a warehouse that is under construction, the properties to the south and east are developed with trucking company facilities, and the property to the west of the Subject Property is utilized for agricultural purposes.

3. PRESENT ZONING IN THE AREA: The Subject Property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District. The properties surrounding the Subject Property to the north, south, and east, are also zoned M-1, Light Industrial District, and the property to the west of the Subject Property is zoned NU, Non-Urban District.

4. SUITABILITY OF PRESENT ZONING: The present zoning is sufficient for development of mini-warehouses if a Special Use Permit is granted.

5. EFFECT ON GENERAL WELFARE: The establishment, maintenance, and operation of the Special Use will not be detrimental to and otherwise endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, development and general welfare of the surrounding area.

6. EFFECT ON SURROUNDING PROPERTY: If the proposed Special Use is granted, the Commission finds that there will not be injury to the use and enjoyment of the surrounding property.

7. CONFORMITY TO REGULATIONS: The Special Use does conform to the regulations of the City of Effingham and the Special Use does conform to the Comprehensive Plan.

On motion by Commissioner Gouchenouer, seconded by Commissioner Vogel, by a 5 to 0 vote, the Plan Commission recommended that the City Council grant the Petition for Special Use Permit, as presented to the Commission.

3. Public Hearing on Petition to Rezone from Class M-1, Light Industrial District and NU, Non-Urban District, to Class R-3C, Multiple Dwelling District, 711 S. Cherry Street, Effingham, Illinois, filed by Petitioner, RLM Assets, LLC and Owner, GLD Holdings, LLC:

Donna Pirkle, appeared on behalf of Petitioner, RLM Assets, LLC, to testify in support of the Petition. The Petitioner is proposing to rezone the Subject Property from M-1, Light Industrial District and NU, Non-Urban District, to R-3C, Multiple Dwelling District.

Ms. Pirkle provided a packet of documents and requested that the documents be made a part of the record.

Ms. Pirkle testified that she and her husband, Quinn, are from Waterloo, Illinois. Ms. Pirkle advised that they own the townhouse complex located at the corner of Merchant and Evergreen in Effingham, which was previously known as the Amber Apartments, but are now known as Whitmoor Place. Ms. Pirkle testified that they have owned the townhouse complex for over 5 years. Ms. Pirkle stated that it has become apparent that Effingham is in dire need of additional upscale rental property. Ms. Pirkle advised that she listed one of the units available in March, the listing lasted three days, and she received 86 inquiries during that period of time. Ms. Pirkle advised that they have four people on a waiting list for an opening. She receives a call almost every day from someone inquiring whether they have any housing availability.

Ms. Pirkle testified that the Petitioner is proposing to build more townhouses identical to the Whitmoor Place townhouses. The Subject Property was for sale three years ago, but the Petitioner did not buy the Subject Property at that time. They later decided that they would like to build the townshouses on the Subject Property. The Subject Property is at the end of Miracle Avenue. They chose the Subject Property because it is kind of secluded, it is flat and cleared. They also like that there are trees on the back side of the Subject Property, which allow for it to seem isolated and secluded.

Ms. Pirkle advised that there are also storage facilities located adjacent to the Subject Property, which would offer tenants the ability to have and store motorcycles, campers, and boats. Ms. Pirkle further advised that they also like that there is a child care facility near the Subject Property. Ms. Pirkle advised that they feel like the Subject Property is ideal for what they are proposing.

Ms. Pirkle testified that they are proposing to build spacious, upscale townhouses on the Subject Property. Each townhouse will be 1,100 square feet and have two bedrooms and one and one-half baths. Each townhouse will have a private patio and will also have washer and dryer hookups inside. Ms. Pirkle further testified that the townhouses will be pet friendly, which most rental properties in Effingham do not offer.

Ms. Pirkle stated that they do require a year lease and the projected rent for each townhouse will be between $1,050 and $1,150 per month. Ms. Pirkle testified that they are proposing to call the development Willow Ridge.

Ms. Pirkle testified that the justification for the requested change in zoning is that Effingham, in their opinion, is in dire need of better rental. They believe the Subject Property is ideal for what they are proposing. Ms. Pirkle stated that they are here, ready and willing, to develop the property. By not changing the zoning, Ms. Pirkle stated that she thinks Effingham will have missed an opportunity to each the housing burden and will exacerbate the problem by waiting for commercial to light industrial to come along to be developed on the Subject Property. Ms. Pirkle testified that, in her opinion, allowing the development of the proposed townhouses will be the highest and best use for the Subject Property.

Ms. Pirkle identified each page within the packet of documents previously provided. Ms. Pirkle stated that the first page depicts the proposed layout of buildings on the Subject Property, the second and third pages are photos of the Whitmoor Place complex, and the fourth through sixth pages depict the interior layout of the proposed development.

In response to questioning by City Attorney, Tracy Willenborg, regarding the number of buildings they are proposing to develop on the Subject Property, Ms. Pirkle testified that they are proposing to build fifteen (15), eight-unit buildings, for a total of 124 units.

In response to questioning by Commissioner Storm requesting that Ms. Pirkle define “upscale”, Ms. Pirkle stated that the proposed townhouses will be nicer than normal rental properties. Their current units have bamboo wooden flooring on the first floor, brushed nickel fixtures, washer and dryer hookups, black appliances, built-in microwave. These units are above income-based housing.

In response to questioning by Commissioner Storm regarding access to the Subject Property, Ms. Pirkle confirmed that the Subject Property is on Miracle Avenue, which is the only way to access the Subject Property. Ms. Pirkle confirmed that Fourth Street has not been extended to come down to the Subject Property. Ms. Pirkle stated that Miracle Avenue will be the only access until the City decides to extend Fourth Street. Ms. Pirkle stated that she has asked the City to include a curb cut to the Subject Property if Fourth Street is extended. Ms. Pirkle confirmed that the drawing of the proposed units, as provided on the first page of the packet, does depict another entrance off of Fourth Street if it is extended in the future.

In response to questioning by Commissioner Storm regarding concerns with the location of the Early Learning Center, Ms. Pirkle advised that she did not have any concerns with the number of individuals living near the center and believes tenants will find the location of the center to be convenient.

Chairman Hayes stated that he commends the Petitioner for looking to develop in Effingham. In response to Chairman Hayes’ inquiry on the size of the Subject Property, Ms. Pirkle testified that the Subject Property is 7 acres in size.

In response to questioning by Chairman Hayes whether the Petitioner’s purchase of the Subject Property is contingent on the rezoning, Ms. Pirkle confirmed that the purchase is contingent on the rezoning.

Chairman Hayes questioned how the Petitioner identified the Subject Property for development and whether the Petitioner had looked at other properties in Effingham to develop the proposed development. Ms. Pirkle stated that the Subject Property was on the market for sale. Ms. Pirkle looked around Effingham to see if there were any other suitable properties since they did want more than 7 acres. They also looked at a 14-acre tract off of Jaycee Avenue, but that property did not work out. Therefore, Ms. Pirkle advised that she looked up the current owners of the Subject Property and offered to purchase the Subject Property.

In response to questioning by the public regarding whether the church owns the Subject Property, Ms. Pirkle responded that the church does not own the Subject Property, but owns the property to the west. In response to additional questioning, Ms. Pirkle stated that the Subject Property is currently planted as a bean field.

In response to questioning by the public regarding the proposed materials to be used on the exterior of the townhouses, Ms. Pirkle testified that the type of material to be utilized depends on cost, but they would like to utilize either a brick veneer on portions of the exterior, or they will have vinyl siding. They may utilize different, but compatible, colors of vinyl to add contour to the front of the building. Ms. Pirkle reiterated that the type of material will be dictated by the cost of materials since they want to ensure that rental prices for the units will stay in the $1,150 range.

In response to questioning by the public regarding whether the units will be two stories, Ms. Pirkle confirmed that they are two-story units. There will be two bedrooms and a full bath on the second floor and the living room, kitchen, laundry closet, and ½ bath will be on the first floor.

No one appeared to testify in opposition to the Petition.

City Planner, Gregory Koester, appeared and testified the Subject Property is two separate tracts. The north tract is 5 acres and currently zoned NU, Non-Urban District (hereinafter referred to as the “North Tract”), and the south tract is 2.17 acres and currently zoned M-1, Light Industrial District (hereinafter referred to as the “South Tract”). Mr. Koester advised that the Subject Property is developed with an agricultural field.

In response to questioning by City Attorney Willenborg, Mr. Koester testified that the property directly north of the Subject Property is the Grand Canal drainage ditch. On the other side of the ditch is property owned by Crossroots Church, and is zoned NU, Non-Urban, and is unimproved. The church site is located to the west of the Subject Property, and is zoned NU, Non-Urban, with a Special Use for a church under paragraph 9 of the City’s special use permit regulations. The special use permit for the church only covers the building portion of the Church’s property, the remaining portion of the Church’s property is just zoned NU, Non-Urban District, and is unimproved.

In response to additional questioning by City Attorney Willenborg, Mr. Koester testified that there are three lots to the south of the South Tract of the Subject Property that are all zoned M-1, Light Industrial District. The east lot is unimproved and the west lot was previously developed with a building that was demolished. Mr. Koester testified that the center lot to the south is utilized by Arch Medical Service and has a special use permit for the helipad.

Mr. Koester further testified that the properties to the west of the Subject Property, lying South of Miracle Avenue have a variety of zoning classifications and uses. 305 Miracle Avenue, the first property to the west, is improved with mini-warehouses, and is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District, with a special use permit for the mini-warehouses. 307 Miracle Avenue is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District. At one time, a special use permit was issued to allow a veterinary hospital, animal clinic, or animal shelter on the property, but later received a special use permit for mini-warehouses. There are mini warehouses developed on that property. 311 Miracle Avenue is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District, with a special use permit (9) authorizing a public or government building or privately owned emergency service operation, as well as special use permit (10) allowing a radio or television broadcasting station, tower and/or antenna. This property is improved with County EMA center and a radio tower utilized for EMA emergency communications. 313 Miracle Avenue is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District, and improved with a pre-owned auto sales facility.

Mr. Koester further testified that the property to the east of the Subject Property is zoned NU, Non-Urban District and utilized for crop agricultural purposes.

In response to further questioning by Attorney Willenborg, Mr. Koester testified that when the future land use map and Comprehensive Plan, provide for the area to be designated for commercial purposes. Mr. Koester further testified that the requested rezoning is not in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan.

In response to Attorney Willenborg’s question seeking the trend of development in the area, Mr. Koester testified that the trend of development has recently been commercial uses or special uses, which are commercial in nature. Mr. Koester stated that there is one residence south of Miracle Avenue, which is tucked back in the trees. Mr. Koester further testified that the Early Learning Center/ Kindergarten Center is also located south of the Subject Property, however, the recent trend of development has been commercial in nature.

In response to questioning by Chairman Hayes regarding the one residence, Mr. Koester stated that it is south of the mini-warehouses, and that you cannot see it on the drawings because of the trees. The house was built in 1970. In response to questioning by City Attorney Willenborg, Mr. Koester testified that the property where the house is located is zoned NU, Non-Urban District. In response to questioning by Chairman Hayes regarding the access point for the residence, Mr. Koester stated that the access goes out to Route 45 through a thin strip of property that splits the Auto Mall properties.

In response to questioning by Commissioner Storm regarding the City’s plans to extend Fourth Street to the Subject Property, Mr. Koester testified that the Comprehensive Plan from 1995, which was updated in 2005, 2010, and 2017, does provide for a future plan to extend Fourth Street. In response to questioning by Attorney Willenborg, Mr. Koester testified that the City is not currently working on a project to extend Fourth Street.

Mr. Koester testified that, with regard to this Subject Property, there are competing goals in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan always has a goal to provide a variety of housing, however, other goals of the Comprehensive Plan are to create transitions between residential and non-residential uses and to maintain compatibility between development. Mr. Koester further testified that there have been some recent inquiries to develop the Subject Property commercially, but no actual development plans have ever been submitted.

The hearing was closed and a discussion was conducted among the Commissioners in open session.

Chairman Hayes stated that the Plan Commission is responsible for keeping uses consistent. Chairman Hayes stated that allowing residential and industrial near each other creates conflict. His biggest concern is possible impacts with allowing multi-family in or near an industrial district. Chairman Hayes stated that he believes that the proposed development is inconsistent with the trend of development.

Commissioner Storm agreed with Chairman Hayes. He did, however, commended the Petitioner for looking to develop in Effingham. Commissioner Storm believed that there would be more negatives than positives with the proposed development. Commissioner Storm expressed concern with the number of vehicles that would utilize Miracle Avenue to access Route 45. Commissioner Storm also stated that the proposed development is not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Storm also expressed concern with the activities and impacts associated with the helipad and adjacent school, which are adjacent to the Subject Property.

Chairman Hayes added that he also commends and encourages the proposed development in Effingham but restated that they have a commitment as a Plan Commission to ensure that residential and industrial uses are not too close together.

Commissioner Spruell stated that he would go the opposite way. He identified the location of the residence and church in the area. Commissioner Spruell stated that Miracle Avenue does not have any existing traffic issues. Commissioner Spruell stated that he believes that if the complex is built, the City will construct Fourth Street.

Commissioner Gouchenouer agreed with Commissioner Spruell’s position.

After due consideration and the evidence presented, the Commissioners made the following findings and recommendations:

1. SUBJECT PROPERTY: The property is utilized for crop agricultural purposes.

2. EXISTING USE OF THE PROPERTY IN THE AREA: The property directly north of the Subject Property is developed with the Grand Canal drainage ditch. The property on the other side of the ditch is owned by Crossroots Church and is unimproved. The church site is located to the west of the Subject Property.

There are three lots to the south of the South Tract of the Subject Property. The east lot is unimproved, and the west lot was previously developed with a building that was demolished. The center lot to the south is utilized by Arch Medical Service.

The properties to the west of the Subject Property, lying South of Miracle Avenue, have a variety of uses. 305 Miracle Avenue, the first property to the west, is improved with mini-warehouses. 307 Miracle Avenue is also developed with mini-warehouses. 311 Miracle Avenue is improved with the County EMA center and a radio tower utilized for EMA emergency communications. 313 Miracle Avenue is improved with a pre-owned auto sales facility.

The property to the east of the Subject Property is utilized for crop agricultural purposes.

3. PRESENT ZONING IN THE AREA: The Subject Property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District.

The property to the north of the Subject Property, located on the other side of the ditch is zoned NU, Non-Urban. The church site is located to the west of the Subject Property, and is zoned NU, Non-Urban, with a Special Use for a church under paragraph 9 of the City’s special use permit regulations. The special use permit for the church only covers the building portion of the Church’s property. The three lots to the south of the South Tract of the Subject Property are all zoned M-1, Light Industrial District, with the center lot having a special use permit for the Arch Medical Service helipad.

The properties to the west of the Subject Property, lying South of Miracle Avenue, have a variety of zoning classifications 305 Miracle Avenue and 307 Miracle Avenue are zoned M-1, Light Industrial District, with a special use permit for the mini-warehouses. 311 Miracle Avenue is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District, with a special use permit (9) authorizing a public or government building or privately owned emergency service operation, as well as special use permit (10) allowing a radio or television broadcasting station, tower and/or antenna. 313 Miracle Avenue is zoned M-1, Light Industrial District.

The property to the east of the Subject Property is zoned NU, Non-Urban District.

4. TREND OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA: The trend of development in the area has been commercial uses or special uses, which are commercial in nature.

5. CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Petition is not in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan.

On motion by Commissioner Storm, seconded by Chairman Hayes, by a 3 to 2 vote, the Plan Commission recommended that the City Council deny the Petition to Rezone as presented to the Commission.

4. Discussion Only: APA- IL Plan Commissioner Training- City Planner, Greg Koester advised the Board about an educational training opportunity through APA IL for both the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals.

5. Public Comment: None.

6. On motion by Commissioner Vogel, seconded by Commissioner Spruell, the meeting was adjourned.

https://go.boarddocs.com/il/voeil/Board.nsf/files/CUCQE76807DA/$file/07-11-2023%20PC%20Minutes.pdf