HomeMy WebLinkAbout220215 P&Z minutesPage 1 of 3
MINUTES
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF GALESBURG CITY HALL
Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 5:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Johnson, Ardennia Leahy (arrived 5:38pm), Mark Lee (left 5:49 pm),
Neil Thomas, David Uhlmann, 5.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve McKelvie, Amy Tropp, 2.
OTHERS PRESENT: Stephen Gugliotta AICP‐Director of Community Development and Brad
Nolden – City Attorney/Administrative Services Director.
Chairman declared quorum present.
Approve Minutes of the January 11, 2022 meeting
Member Lee moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Member Thomas.
Minutes were approved by voice vote.
Update Past Planning and Zoning Commission items
The Commission approved variances of setback, fence height and variance duration for Blackberry
Solar, LLC, located in the 1400 block of South Farnham Street.
Receive Citizen Comment
None Received.
Member Lee moved, seconded by Member Thomas to discuss item PZ‐22‐0202 ahead of PZ‐22‐0201.
Roll Call #1
Ayes: Johnson, Lee, Thomas, Uhlmann, 4.
Nays: None.
Abstentions: None.
Absent: Leahy, McKelvie, Tropp, 3.
Chairperson declared the motion approved
PZ‐22‐0202 Public Hearing Zoning amendment to go from R3A, Multi‐Family to B3 Central
Business District for KXZ Properties, LLC, located at 239 S Cherry
Street 99‐15‐233‐013.
The petitioner was KXZ Properties, LLC.
The Commission members considered the following items:
The proposed amendment will allow development that is compatible with existing uses and zoning of
nearby property;
The city and other service providers will be able to provide adequate public facilities and services to
the subject property, while maintaining adequate levels of service to existing development;
Page 2 of 3
The proposed amendment will not result in significant adverse impacts on other property in the
vicinity of the subject tract or on the environment, including air, water, noise, stormwater
management, wildlife and natural resources; and
The subject property is suitable for the proposed zoning classification.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the proposed zoning amendment at their February 2,
2022 meeting and recommend approval.
Member Thomas moved, seconded by Member Uhlmann to recommend the approval of the zoning amendment.
Roll Call #2
Ayes: Johnson, Thomas, Uhlmann, 3.
Nays: None.
Abstentions: Lee, 1.
Absent: Leahy, McKelvie, Tropp, 3.
Chairperson declared the motion approved.
PZ‐22‐0201 Public Hearing Ordinance amendment regarding fencing & landscaping on
residential properties adjacent to Lake Storey.
The petitioner was the City of Galesburg.
Staff introduced the item and explained a modification was suggested to the proposed ordinance. Instead of
properties abutting Lake Storey, it would apply to fences and landscaping on areas of properties within 90 feet of
the normal pool elevation of Lake Storey. Staff also let the Commission know that 6 phone calls were received on
the topic and 4 of them were opposed to any ordinance amendment, even if the change to 90 feet removed their
property from having to comply with the proposed ordinance. The proposed amendment would protect, enhance
and perpetuate the unique views of Lake Storey available to property owner and visitors in a manner which is
harmonious and maintains the character of the neighborhoods adjacent to Lake Storey. The Development Review
Committee reviewed the proposed zoning amendment at their February 2, 2022 meeting and recommend
approval.
Linda Delawder, 1721 Lake Storey Rd spoke in opposition of the ordinance and felt it was taking away the property
owner’s rights.
Mark McLaughlin, 3308 Lakeside Ct spoke in opposition of the ordinance. He has lived at his property for 25 years
and has spent at least $15,000 maintaining the property behind his hous owned by the city without a thank you
or reimbursment. He does not feel an ordinance that only affects a few people is legal. He pays property taxes
and does not believe the city has overlayed his street in the 25 years he has lived there. He would like a larger
shed, but does not believe he can do so.
Debbie Moreno, 1909 S Lake Storey Rd said she does enjoy being able to see the Lake from her home. It is her
understanding the initial reason for the fence was to contain a dog and keep neighboring dogs separated. A tall
privacy fence would be intrusive and wall off neighbors. Some of the neighbors involved in the initial fence issue
only live at their homes part time and she has lived in her home for 25 years.
Nicole Sopko, 1939 S Lake Storey Rd feels the ordinance seems like an extreme escalation for what is a dispute
between neighbors. She said a new owner had hired an attorney and sent her a letter about proposed fencing
Page 3 of 3
before even talking to her. She said the fence is already permitted to be constructed and the neighbor with the
initial dispute agreed to it and even paid for a portion of the fencing to be installed. She said the city takes no
responsibility for maintenance of the shoreline and they have a dead willow tree that needs to be removed.
Luke Raymond, 1943 S Lake Storey Rd, said we have a community and the Lake is an important part of that
community, but he feels there is overreaching language in the proposed ordinance. Maybe this is better resolved
through mediation or creating a homeowners association. It seems like there is a way to compromise without
legislation.
Jen Rutledge, 3314 Lakeside Ct is opposed to the ordinance. She purchased her home in 2020 because of the Lake
and that it was not a homeowners association. They built a fence on their property because of their dog and pool
for security and privacy.
Scott Delawder, 1749 S Lake Storey Rd is opposed to the ordinance just because two neighbors have a dispute.
People should do research before they buy a property and know that fences are allowed.
Linda Rice, 3303 Lakeside Ct, is opposed to the ordinance because it infringes on their rights. If it is two neighbors
in a dispute, the rest of the owners should not be penalized.
Roger Eickman, 1861 S Lake Storey Rd spends half of his summers here and likes that the yards are open and does
not like high fences.
Nicole Sopko, 1939 S Lake Storey Rd came back up and noted that the owner who initially had the concern was
not in attendance tonight. The fence issue was resolved and she also worked out something with the neighbor on
the other side to make sure their view would be preserved.
Having listened to all public comment, Member Uhlmann called the question.
Member Thomas moved, seconded by Member Leahy to recommend denial of the proposed ordinance
amendment.
Roll Call #3
Ayes: Johnson, Leahy, Thomas, Uhlmann, 4.
Nays: None.
Abstentions: None.
Absent: Lee, McKelvie, Tropp, 3.
Chairperson declared the motion approved.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m.
________________________
Steve Gugliotta, AICP