Kankakee Times

Kankakee County Planning, Zoning, and Agriculture Committee met Oct. 16.

Here is the minutes provided by the committee:

Members Present

Mr. Fetherling, Mr. Washington, Mr. Payton, Ms. Peters, Mr. Kinzinger, Ms. Polk, Mr. Fairfield, Mr. Smith and Mr. Swanson

Members Absent

Mr. Tholen, Ms. Dunbar and Mr. Dunnill

In Attendance

 Board Members

Mr. Sirois

 Department Heads

Delbert Skimerhorn, Geoff Olson and Ben Wilson

 Media None

1. CalltoOrder/RollCall

The meeting was called to order by the Committee Chairman, Mr. Fetherling, at 9:00 a.m. Quorum present.

2. Public Comment

None

3. Approval of Minutes: September 18, 2019

Ms. Peters made a motion to approve the minutes, and Mr. Smith seconded it. Motion carried with a voice vote.

4. Building

 Building Report – August 2019 and September 2019

Mr. Skimerhorn reviewed both reports for the committee.

Mr. Washington made a motion to combine and approve, Ms. Polk seconded it. Motion carried with a voice vote.

 Stormwater /MS4 Program Discussion

Mr. Skimerhorn asked the committee if there are any stormwater issues that they would like to discuss or make him aware of.

There were no issues to discuss

5. Planning

 Wadleigh “Sears” Barn: request for Local Historic Landmark Statue for Barn at 11553 W 8000 S Road, Herscher, IL 60941 Parcel Number #14-22-09-300-004. Application filed by Gregory & Denise Johanson.

Ms. Sadler reviewed the request with the committee. Ms. Sadler advised that the Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the request on October 8th and the Historic Preservation Commission voted 5-0 to approve the request.

Mr. Washington made a motion to approve, and Mr. Swanson seconded it. Motion carried with a voice vote.

6. Zoning

 ZBA Case#19-13; request for a Text Amendment to County Code Section 121-295 (Siting of Wind Energy Conversion System). The petition is Kankakee County.

Mr. Skimerhorn advised that technology and industry is going to taller towers to create more energy while using less towers. Mr. Skimerhorn advised that they are requesting to change the ordinance to increase the height of the towers from 499 to 699.

The Zoning board of Appeals heard the case on October 7th and voted to recommend the ordinance with a vote of 5-0.

Mr. Sirois asked what would happen if this wasn’t approved today, would windfarms still be allowed in the county.

Mr. Skimerhorn stated that they could, it would just be shorter towers or they could request a variance.

Mr. Sirois asked what the process would be to have an auditorium on this issue. Mr. Sirois stated that he drives to the Southwest every morning and the red flashing lights are of the many. He is concerned with the landscape in the coming years. Mr. Sirois stated that he is not in favor of any windfarm. What benefit are we getting from this if the cost of our energy is still the same, but the windfarms are in our landscape?

Mr. Skimerhorn stated the turbines will be more powerful, but there will be less actual towers.

Mr. Sirois asked about the long sales pitch that was presented at the last PZA meeting and what we are benefiting from it. If this is an industry standard and it the presenter stated that we produce a lot of energy for the East Coast, but why aren’t we putting the wind farms out there, the ocean produces wind. Put the towers out there.

Mr. Skimerhorn stated the reason Mr. Matteson gave the presentation, is because he had asked him to come speak about the industry changes. Mr. Skimerhorn stated that both wind farms have requested to have taller towers. The benefit of taller towers is that you need fewer towers to create the same amount of energy.

Mr. Fetherling asked what the benefit of wind farms are to us and Kankakee County.

Mr. Skimerhorn advised that there are property tax revenue, permit fees and jobs created.

Mr. Kinzinger stated that just because there could be less towers, but what is the density limit? Do we have a limit? Cause if there was a limit, and then I could be more agreeable to this.

Mr. Skimerhorn stated that one tower takes up about an acre of ground and because of the setbacks; you need about 160 acres to have 1 tower, so the land use is not very dense.

Mr. Sirois stated that roads have been widened due to the towers being brought in. There are a whole string of these towers coming in near Fairbury and the sizes of these are enormous. Mr. Sirois stated he is against this.

Mr. Skimerhorn stated that there are not any applications that were turned in. This is only to update the ordinance.

Mr. Sirois asked for other committee members opinions.

Mr. Fetherling stated that he agreed with Mr. Sirois, the more we see them, the more he doesn’t like them. Mr. Fetherling stated that he doesn’t want the growth of the towns to have obstacles. With the fall zones, it can eliminate a lot of area that can’t be developed.

Mr. Skimerhorn stated that this ordinance is not approving a windfarm, and the committee can still approve or deny on a case by case basis.

Mr. Sirois asked if we could table this issue until more research can be done.

Mr. Fetherling agreed.

Mr. Washington stated that we are deliberating on the future of this county yet it is a narrow view on whether we allow things to go. We have need for employment. If we have these companies that work with the alliance or of the sorts to train our citizens and they are first in line for these positions, then we should consider. The number of towers would be reduced. There is a maximum amount of power that can be fed into the grid. This ordinance is just an update.

Ms. Peters stated that we may be off topic and she doesn’t have an issue with updating the ordinance and the wind farms would be brought to us on a case by case basis and we can determine approval at that time. Windfarms may be better to look at than the large warehouses that are being built. I would rather have a wind farm than a big block warehouse with noise.

Ms. Peters added that Mr. Skimerhorn always does his research in presenting these things to the committee.

Mr. Fairfield stated that he would go ahead with the ordinance. He would rather see fewer towers.

Mr. Fetherling also added that updating this ordinance always us to not cut ourselves short and we can still look at each case individually.

Mr. Kinzinger stated that he would like to see some findings of facts and he would like to see this tabled until the next meeting. Mr. Sirois stated that he would second that.

Mr. Kinzinger made a motion to table the issue, and Mr. Sirois seconded it.

Mr. Fetherling advised that this would be a roll call vote.

Mr. Sirois stated that he would like to see specific questions answered.

Mr. Skimerhorn advised that this is a zoning case and the appropriate thing to do would be to send it back to the Zoning Board of Appeals for further discussion.

On the motion by Mr. Kinzinger to table the issue and send back to ZBA, seconded by Mr. Sirois. The motion carried with a roll call vote of 6 ayes and 4 nays. Voting Aye were: Mr. Fetherling, Mr. Payton, Mr. Kinzinger, Mr. Smith, Mr. Swanson and Mr. Sirois. Voting Nay were: Mr. Washington, Ms. Polk, Ms. Peters and Mr. Fairfield.

Mr. Fetherling stated that we would need a motion to send this back to the ZBA with specific reasons to look at.

Mr. Sirois made a motion to send the wind farm case back to the ZBA, and Mr. Kinzinger seconded it.

The specific concerns that were had by the committee included:

How many towers are allowed?

Will Comed provide amenities or free power to the County? 

Can you negotiate with the developer?

Mr. Skimerhorn advised that negotiating power would need to be discussed with the State’s Attorney’s Office and may not be something included in the ordinance.

Mr. Fetherling stated that negotiating power would more be brought up once the wind farm was approved.

Motion carried with a voice vote of 9 ayes and 1 nay. Voting Nay was Mr. Washington.

7. Old Business

Mr. Wilson advised there was an event on October 9th and there was about 40 people there representing multiple communities and discussing funds that are available.

Mr. Wilson advised there are many grant opportunities available to our immediate and surrounding areas and this is a great way to educate.

Mr. Fetherling asked what types of grants are available to the communities, what is the dollar amount.

Mr. Wilson advised that Bourbonnais received a $500,000 grant for a 1.3M project. It is creating jobs and that is what allows the qualification.

8. New Business

Mr. Olson advised that rural transit received a 26 passenger bus recently and he wanted to update the committee on that.

9. Adjournment

Ms. Peters made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:39 a.m., and Mr. Swanson seconded it. Motion carried with a voice vote.

http://www.co.kankakee.il.us/files/committees/pza_101619.pdf