East Central Reporter

City of Effingham Zoning Board of Appeals met May 28.

Here are the minutes provided by the board:

MEMBERS PRESENT: Mike Mumm

Mark Thies

Ken Wohltman

Carrie Rodman

Don Bushue

Brandon Weber

MEMBERS ABSENT: Andy St. John

OTHERS PRESENT: Tracy A. Willenborg, City Attorney

Greg Koester, City Planner

Gary Maninfior, Kessler Reporting, Inc.

1. Quorum: The May 28, 2024 City Zoning Board of Appeals meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. by Chairman Mike Mumm. A quorum was present.

2. Introduction of New Board Members: Chairman Mumm introduced Board Member Don Bushue and Board Member Brandon Weber and welcomed them to the Zoning Board of Appeals.

3. Approval April 23, 2024 Minutes: On motion by Board Member Ken Wohltman, seconded by Board Member Carrie Rodman, the minutes for the April 23, 2024 meeting were approved by unanimous vote, as presented.

4. Location: 2500 S. Veterans Drive, Effingham, Illinois

Requesting: Variance for Accessory Building in an R-3D, Multiple Dwelling District

Petitioner: Daniel J. Dasenbrock

The Petition for Variance was filed by the owner of the Subject Property, Daniel J. Dasenbrock. Petitioner is seeking a variance to (1) allow the construction of another accessory structure on the Subject Property, being a 448 square feet portable shed; (2) allow existing portable buildings, totaling 1,320 square feet in size; and, (3) allow the construction of the accessory structure on property that is not developed with a principal building in an R-3D, Multiple Dwelling District.

Daniel J. Dasenbrock, Petitioner, appeared to testify in support of the Petition. Mr. Dasenbrock testified that he is seeking to develop the Subject Property with a 16 x 28 portable shed. Mr. Dasenbrock advised that the acreage of all of his property, which includes the Subject Property, is 5 acres in size. Mr. Dasenbrock advised that one of the sheds he has on the Subject Property is filled with quite a bit of lawn equipment, which is necessary to maintain his property. Mr. Dasenbrock testified that another shed, on the Subject Property, is utilized to store a horse drawn wagon. Mr. Dasenbrock further testified that 1/3 of the ”big shed” on his property is utilized for a work area, but is also utilized to store a full-size tractor, 8 antique John Deere tractors, pedal tractors, and other equipment. The existing portable sheds are utilized to store antique cars. Mr. Dasenbrock testified that he currently has two cargo trailers used to store antique vehicles. He would like to get rid of the cargo trailers and store the two vehicles in the new shed he proposes to construct on the Subject property. Mr. Dasenbrock testified that two of the existing sheds were originally constructed 43 years ago. The other sheds, currently located on the property, were put on a pad of cement. The runners and floor are made out of 2-inch tongue and groove treated lumber. The sheds are not put on the ground. The frames, siding, and doors are the same as put on the house.

Mr. Dasenbrock advised the Board that all of his neighbors have permanent sheds and also have portable sheds. Mr. Dasenbrock testified that, in his opinion, the planned shed, as well as his existing sheds fit in with the neighborhood. Mr. Dasenbrock advised that the location of the sheds is pretty seclusive due to the woods on three sides of his property.

During his testimony, Mr. Dasenbrock mentioned a need for a variance to allow the proposed building to be located near another shed. City Attorney, Tracy Willenborg, inquired whether a variance was needed for the distance between the buildings. In response City Planner, Greg Koester, advised that since the portable buildings do not have utilities serving the buildings, they can be closer than 10 feet and a variance is not needed for the distance between the buildings.

In response to questioning by City Attorney, Tracy Willenborg, Mr. Dasenbrock advised that there was a variance previously granted for the “big shed”. City Attorney Willenborg further requested clarification on the number of sheds on the property. In response, Mr. Dasenbrock advised that he currently has the big shed and six portable buildings and is looking to construct one more portable building.

Chairman Mumm mentioned that one of the factors that supported the prior variance for the property was vandalism and inquired whether the Petitioner still had issues with vandalism. Mr. Dasenbrock advised that he does not have issues with vandalism, but someone did burn down his prior shed in 1997.

In response to questioning by City Attorney Willenborg regarding the location of the proposed shed, Mr. Dasenbrock advised that it would be on the northwest side of the big shed.

In response to questioning by Board Member Wohltman, Mr. Dasenbrock confirmed that the proposed shed would be built off the existing rock drive.

No one appeared to testify in opposition to the Petition.

The hearing was closed, and a discussion was conducted among the Board members in open session.

The Board Members concurred that the Petitioner needs additional area for storage of investments including antique vehicles, antique tractors, and other personal property, as well as to clean up the aesthetics of the property. The Board Members further concurred that due to the location of the property, and the size of the property, the requested variance will not be detrimental to the area.

On motion by Board Member Ken Wohltman, seconded by Board Member Carrie Rodman, the Zoning Board of Appeals approved, by a 6 to 0 vote, the variance as requested.

5. Location: Evergreen Avenue, Effingham, Illinois

Requesting: Variance for Development Complex Sign with Electronic Message Board in a R-1, Single Family Residence District

Petitioner: Effingham Park District

The Petition for Variance for Off-Premise Development Complex Sign/Billboard – Electronic Message Board was filed by the owner of the Subject Property, Effingham Park District. Petitioner is seeking a variance to allow an Off-Premises Development Complex Sign/Billboard on real estate zoned R-1, Single Family Residence District, which is generally prohibited per Article 24-6.C. Petitioner is also seeking a variance to allow the Off-Premise Development Complex Sign to have a height of 15.5 feet, which exceeds the maximum height of 12 feet per Article 24-6 B. of Appendix B of the Municipal Code of the City of Effingham, and an area of 82.5 square feet, which exceeds the maximum of 72 square feet per Article 24-6 C. of Appendix B of the Municipal Code of the City of Effingham.

Hillary Kopplin appeared on behalf of the Petitioner, the Effingham Park District, to testify in support of the Petition. Ms. Kopplin testified that the Petitioner is seeking to replace the existing sign, the Beckman Annex Sign, which is located on the corner of Maple and Evergreen, with a new sign including an electronic message board. Ms. Kopplin testified that the proposed sign would include a directional sign for Evergreen Ballpark, Workman Sports Complex, and HSHS St. Anthony Physical Rehabilitation and Wellness. This sign would also allow the Petitioner and HSHS St. Anthony to advertise information on events being held by both entities, as well as replace the need for the temporary vinyl and board signs that are typically utilized by the entities to advertise events on the corner and along Evergreen Avenue. Ms. Kopplin testified that the sign would be utilized for advertising for informational purposes only and they will not utilize the sign for monetary advertising purposes.

Ms. Kopplin further testified that she understands that there might be concerns with the light generated from the sign since it is in a residential area, but this sign can be scheduled to be turned off and on or dimmed during the night.

In response to questioning by City Attorney Willenborg, Ms. Kopplin testified that there was a smaller sign in the same location that was damaged, and they are looking to replace the sign with the new proposed sign. They will also utilize the new electronic sign in lieu of the canvas and other temporary signs that they currently utilize to advertise events and sign-ups for programs the park district and other entities offer.

In response to questioning by Board Member Thies, Ms. Kopplin confirmed that there will be movement with the electronic sign, but they will limit the movement.

In response to questioning by Board Member Bushue, Ms. Kopplin testified that the proposed sign will be single-sided and will face southwest. The sign will be directed toward the intersection. In response to further questioning by Board Member Bushue about the possibility of placing a double-sided sign, Ms. Kopplin responded that they cannot afford a double-sided sign.

In response to questioning by Board Member Bushue about the possibility of turning off the sign during night hours, Ms. Kopplin confirmed the willingness to turn off the sign during night hours.

In response to questioning by Board Member Bushue regarding the purpose for which the electronic sign will be utilized, Ms. Kopplin confirmed again that the sign will be utilized by the Park District, HSHS St. Anthony, and the Workman Sports Complex.

In response to questioning by City Attorney Willenborg, Ms. Kopplin testified that the proposed signage will also contain a directional sign for the facilities.

In response to questioning by Chairman Mumm regarding the directional sign, Ms. Kopplin testified that the directional sign will not be lit.

In response to questioning by Board Member Thies regarding the height of the sign, Ms. Kopplin advised that she did not have that information. Ms. Kopplin advised that Jeff Althoff was supposed to appear to testify at the hearing, but he was unable to attend because his daughter is playing in a sectional game.

Board Member Thies questioned why there is a need for time and temperature to be advertised on the sign. City Attorney Willenborg advised that the “time and temperature” is just included as part of a rendering that is normally part of the renderings provided by Double D Signs. Ms. Kopplin testified that the “time and temperature” advertisement is sometimes part of the loop.

In response to questioning by City Attorney Willenborg regarding the existing sign, Ms. Kopplin testified that the existing sign is angled the same way they are proposing to angle the proposed sign.

In response to questioning by Board Member Thies regarding the existing sign, Ms. Kopplin advised that the current sign is not an electronic sign.

In response to questioning by Board Member Weber regarding the difference in cost between the proposed single-sided sign and a double-sided sign, Ms. Kopplin advised that she is not aware of the cost difference.

Board Member Wohltman advised that due to the location of the proposed sign, he does not see the value of a double-sided sign. The only distraction would possibly be coming east and west.

In response to questioning by Board Member Thies regarding the hardship and need for an electrical sign, Ms. Kopplin advised that the electrical sign would eliminate the need for all of the temporary signs and add value to the hospital, who rents space in the Workman Sports Complex. Furthermore, it would allow them to utilize the sign to advertise events and programs for the entities. If they cannot have the electrical sign, they would still have to utilize banners and other temporary signage.

In response to questioning by City Attorney Willenborg regarding the proposed directional signage, Ms. Kopplin confirmed that they are trying to bring attention to the businesses that utilize the Park District properties in the area, including the Sports Complex, HSHS St. Anthony, and the Park District.

No one appeared to testify in opposition to the Petition.

The hearing was closed, and a discussion was conducted among the Board members in open session.

The Board members confirmed that the proposed sign would be beneficial to utilize for advertising of events and programs so that they do not have to utilize all of the temporary signage on the property.

The Board members expressed a concern on possible impacts with lighting in a residential area. After significant discussion, the Board members concurred with placing a condition on the variance, which would require the electric sign to be turned off between 10:00 p.m. and 600 a.m.

On motion by Board Member Brandon Weber, seconded by Board Member Ken Wohltman, the Zoning Board of Appeals approved, by a 6 to 0 vote, the variance as requested, SUBJECT TO AND CONDITIONED UPON: the requirement that the Electronic Message Board portion of the Development Complex Sign must be turned off between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.

6. Discussion Only: None

7. Public Comment: None

8. On motion by Board Member Mark Thies, seconded by Board Member Carrie Rodman, the meeting was adjourned.

https://go.boarddocs.com/il/voeil/Board.nsf/files/D6DLXA58A7DA/$file/05-28-2024%20ZBOA%20Minutes.pdf