Terry Ruhland, Board Member - District 13 | Peoria County
Terry Ruhland, Board Member - District 13 | Peoria County
Peoria County Zoning Board of Appeals met June 12.
Here are the minutes provided by the board:
A meeting of the Peoria County Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, June 12, 2025, in Room 403 of the Peoria County Courthouse, 324 Main Street, Peoria, Illinois. The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairperson Rob Asbell at 9:00 a.m.
PRESENT: J. Greg Fletcher – Chairperson, Rob Asbell – Vice Chairperson, Greg Happ, Richard Burns, Stephen Pollack, LaVonne Sammis
ABSENT: Chris Duncan, Steve Schmitt, Justin Brown
STAFF: Andrew Braun – Director
Taylor Armbruster – Planner II
Jennie Cordis Boswell – Civil Assistant State’s Attorney
Sarah Cox – ZBA Administrative Assistant
Approval of Minutes
Mr. Asbell made a motion to approve the minutes from the May 8, 2025 hearing and was seconded by Ms. Sammis. A vote was taken, and the motion passed; (6-0)
Procedural Review
Ms. Cordis Boswell gave a presentation reviewing the duties and procedures of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Some highlights included the purpose of zoning ordinances, number of members and appointment to the board, powers and duties, decision making process, hearing procedures, and types of cases decided by the ZBA.
Zoning Cases
Case No. ZBA-2025-0031 at 9:30 a.m. Hearing to be held in Room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois.
Petition of TIM WAGENBACH, acting on behalf of REX A. STREITMATTER, EMILINE S. STUCKEL, & STREITMATTER FAMILY LIVING TRUST (owners), a REZONING request from “A-1” Agricultural Preservation to “I-1” Light Industrial. The petitioner proposes to rezone 14 acres in order to expand a grain elevator business.
Andrew Braun opened the case. There are 0 consents and 0 objections on file. The case was published in The Peoria Journal Star on May 22, 2025. Staff recommends approval. Taylor Armbruster gave a brief presentation of the countywide map, aerial view of the property, surrounding zoning, and future land use plan designation (Agriculture Preservation). The site plan and two videos of the property were shown. The property is zoned “A-1”.
Tim Wagenbach of 9304 W. Legion Hall Rd., Princeville, IL was sworn in. Mr. Wagenbach stated that the business has been in operation for over 60 years, and it keeps growing. Mr. Wagenbach advised that they had asked the neighboring property owners if they would sell some acres to expand.
Mr. Fletcher asked how many additional bins would be added. Mr. Wagenbach stated that it was to be determined but they were going to start with a fertilizer shed in order to keep up with demand.
Mr. Asbell asked how long the whole development process would take. Mr. Wagenbach stated that they would start this fall on the shed and they hope to start on the bins next fall. He added that an anhydrous tank was also purchased, and the size of the parcel chosen was to accommodate setbacks.
Mr. Fletcher asked if there was anyone that wanted to speak for or against the petition and there was no one.
Mr. Asbell made a motion to close and deliberate and was seconded by Mr. Burns. A vote was taken, and the motion passed; (6-0)
Case No. ZBA-2025-0028 at 9:30 a.m. Hearing to be held in Room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois.
Petition of PAUL LAWRENCE, acting on behalf of PAUL & JESSICA LAWRENCE (owners), a VARIANCE request from Section 20-5.13.3.4 of the Unified Development Ordinance, which requires that for lots and parcels in platted subdivisions not created by tract surveys or in residentially zoned districts, the total floor area of all accessory buildings, attached or detached, shall not exceed the footprint of the principal structure or 1,300 square feet, whichever is less, plus 750 square feet for a private garage. The petitioner proposes to construct a 3,200 square feet accessory structure in the “R-R” Rural Residential Zoning District, on a property which would exceed the allowable total floor area of 902 square feet, resulting in a variance request of 2,210 square feet. The proposed accessory structure will exceed the 1,152 square foot footprint of the principal structure, resulting in a variance request of 2,048 square feet.
Also, a Variance request from Section 20-6.4.2.2.d.2.b of the Unified Development Ordinance, which requires a side setback of not less than thirty (30) feet from the property line for accessory structures 2,000 sq. feet or larger The petitioner proposes to construct an accessory structure at a distance of 5 ft. from the northern side setback, resulting in a variance request of 25 ft.
Also, a Variance request from Section 20-6.4.2.3.d.2.b of the Unified Development Ordinance, which requires a rear setback of not less than thirty (30) feet from the property line for accessory structures 2,000 sq. feet or larger. The petitioner proposes to construct an accessory structure at a distance of 5 ft. from the western rear setback, resulting in a variance request of 25 ft.
Andrew Braun opened the case. There are 4 consents and 0 objections on file. The case was published in The Peoria Journal Star on May 22, 2025. Taylor Armbruster gave a brief presentation of the countywide map, aerial view of the property, surrounding zoning, and future land use plan designation (Rural and Environmental Corridor). The site plan and three videos of the property were shown. The property is zoned “R-R”.
Paul Lawrence of 20209 N. Isaacson Dr., Chillicothe, IL was sworn in. Mr. Lawrence stated that he would like to build an accessory structure to be used as a shop and a place to store equipment. He would like to place the building at the proposed location in order to avoid having a shed in the front of the house. Mr. Lawrence added that he needs to setback variance in order to avoid having to tear down the current garage.
Mr. Fletcher asked if the current driveway would be utilized. Mr. Lawrence stated that he would extend the existing driveway to the new building.
Mr. Asbell asked if there would be water, septic, electric, etc. Mr. Lawrence stated that there would only be electric and gas heat. Mr. Asbell asked how tall the building would be. Mr. Lawrence stated that the current plans are 12 feet, but he would like to go up to 14 feet.
Mr. Sammis asked if the shed that is currently on the property would be moved. Mr. Lawrence stated that it would.
Mr. Happ asked confirmed that the building would be used for storage and a shop. Mr. Lawrence stated that it would before personal storage and to work on personal vehicles. Mr. Lawrence advised that the building would not be used for a business.
Mr. Fletcher asked if Mr. Lawrence owned part of the pond. Mr. Lawrence stated that he did and that the property owner to the north was a long time friend and he had no problems with the setback being moved closer to the property line.
Mr. Fletcher asked if there was anyone that wanted to speak for or against the petition and there was no one.
Mr. Asbell made a motion to close and deliberate and was seconded by Ms. Sammis. A vote was taken, and the motion passed; (6-0)
FINDINGS OF FACT FOR VARIANCES
Section 20-3.7.3
The findings of the ZBA or the Zoning Administrator shall be based on data submitted pertaining to each standard in this Subsection as it relates to the development. A variance shall be granted only if the applicant demonstrates:
1. That the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances;
• The petitioner proposes to construct a 3,200 square feet accessory structure in the “R-R” Rural Residential Zoning District, on a property which would exceed the allowable total floor area of 902 square feet, resulting in a variance request of 2,210 square feet. The proposed accessory structure will exceed the 1,152 square foot footprint of the principal structure, resulting in a variance request of 2,048 square feet. The petitioner recently purchased the property and desires to construct a personal storage building that can store personal items and vehicles, keeping them secure and out of the elements.
2. That the variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality;
• The zoning classification is R-R.
• Surrounding zoning classification is A-2 to the north and west, which would be the adjoining properties which would be encroached by a reduced setback. To the north is a pond, and to the west is an ag field buffered by timber.
• There are 4 consents from neighbors, who have voiced that the proposed location is better suited for the neighborhood rather than the side or front yard.
3. That because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of these regulations were carried out;
• The existing structures are situated in the read 1/3 of the lot. The placement of a structure in the front yard portion of the property would dramatically reduce the usable portion of the front yard.
4. That the conditions upon which the petition for a variation are based are unique to the property for which the variance is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other property;
• Refer to #3.
• The subject property is over two acres with plenty of space to build, however the variance is needed due to the size of structure necessary to house multiple boats and vehicles.
5. That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, comfort, morals, and welfare, or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located, or otherwise be inconsistent with any officially adopted County plan or these regulations;
• The Future Land Use Map designates this area as Agriculture. The proposed development does not take agricultural land out of development, as the house was constructed in ~1960 within an existing subdivision.
6. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood;
• The proposed variation will not impair the supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety.
• The improvements to the property made by the petitioner and the addition of the proposed structure will likely improve property values within the neighborhood.
7. That the variance granted is the minimum adjustment necessary for the reasonable use of the land; and
• The petitioner has stated the variance request is the minimum adjustment necessary for the storage of personal items and vehicles.
8. That aforesaid circumstances or conditions are such that the strict application of the provisions of this Section would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of his or her land.
• Strict application would restrict the size of the accessory structure, not allowing for the safe and secure storage of personal items.
Mr. Burns made a motion to approve the findings of fact and was seconded by Ms. Sammis. A vote was taken, and the motion passed; (6-0)
Mr. Asbell made a motion to approve the request and was seconded by Mr. Happ. A vote was taken, and the motion passed; (6-0)
Case No. ZBA-2025-0029 at 9:30 a.m. Hearing to be held in Room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois.
Petition of BRUCE VINSON, acting on his own behalf, a VARIANCE request from Section 20-5.13.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance, which requiresthat an accessory structure shall not be commenced prior to the commencement of the principal structure. The petitioner proposes to construct an accessory structure on a parcel which does not contain a principal structure in the “R-2” Medium Density Residential Zoning District.
Andrew Braun opened the case. There are 0 consents and 0 objections on file. The case was published in The Peoria Journal Star on May 22, 2025. Taylor Armbruster gave a brief presentation of the countywide map, aerial view of the property, surrounding zoning, and future land use plan designation (Urban). The site plan and two videos of the property were shown. The property is zoned “R-2”.
Bruce Vinson of 1609 N. Wilson St., Chillicothe, IL was sworn in. Mr. Vinson stated that he purchased the subject property, which is located behind his residence, and he would like to build a cold storage shed to house equipment for maintaining the land.
Mr. Fletcher asked if the land was planted currently. Mr. Vinson stated that it was just and empty lot and he did not have plans to plant.
Mr. Asbell asked if it was in any CRP program. Mr. Vinson stated that it was not. Mr. Asbell asked if he had any future plans for the land. Mr. Vinson stated that he didn’t have any real plans, but he thought maybe he would like to raise chickens.
Mr. Fletcher asked if there was anyone that wanted to speak for or against the petition and there was no one.
Mr. Asbell made a motion to close and deliberate and was seconded by Mr. Burns. A vote was taken, and the motion passed; (6-0)
FINDINGS OF FACT FOR VARIANCES
Section 20-3.7.3
The findings of the ZBA or the Zoning Administrator shall be based on data submitted pertaining to each standard in this Subsection as it relates to the development. A variance shall be granted only if the applicant demonstrates:
1. That the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances;
• The Case ZBA-2025-0029: A Variance request from Section 20-5.13.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance, which requires that an accessory structure shall not be commenced prior to the commencement of the principal structure. The petitioner proposes to construct an accessory structure on a parcel which does not contain a principal structure in the “R-2” Medium Density Residential Zoning District.
• The petitioner lives on an adjacent parcel to the east, which does not contain a building envelope large enough to construct the accessory structure needed to store groundskeeping equipment.
2. That the variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; • The zoning classification is Residential, which allows for personal storage buildings.
• There are residential uses adjacent to the east and west, remaining adjacent uses are agriculture and strip mine.
3. That because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of these regulations were carried out;
• Refer to #1.
4. That the conditions upon which the petition for a variation are based are unique to the property for which the variance is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other property;
• The subject property is not actively farmed. The equipment necessary to maintain requires the construction of a new accessory structure.
5. That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare, or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located, or otherwise be inconsistent with any officially adopted County plan or these regulations;
• The Future Land Use Map designates this area as Urban. The proposed development is consistent with the official adopted County Plan.
• There are 0 consents and 0 objections to the petitioner’s request. The subject parcel is immediately adjacent to the City of Chillicothe. The City of Chillicothe has no objection.
6. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood;
• The proposed variation will not impair the supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety.
• The improvements to the property made by the petitioner will likely improve property values within the neighborhood.
7. That the variance granted is the minimum adjustment necessary for the reasonable use of the land; and
• Refer to #1.
8. That aforesaid circumstances or conditions are such that the strict application of the provisions of this Section would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of his or her land.
• Strict application would require the construction of a residence prior to construction.
Mr. Pollack made a motion to approve the findings of fact and was seconded by Mr. Happ. A vote was taken, and the motion passed; (6-0)
Mr. Burns made a motion to approve the request and was seconded by Mr. Pollack. A vote was taken, and the motion passed; (6-0)
Case No. ZBA-2025-0027 at 9:30 a.m. Hearing to be held in Room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois.
Petition of CHAD HERMAN, acting on behalf of JON & JOY BAUMANN (owners), a VARIANCE request from Section 20-5.13.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance, which requires that an accessory structure shall not be commenced prior to the commencement of the principal structure. The petitioner proposes to construct an accessory structure on a parcel which does not contain a principal structure in the “A-2” Agriculture Zoning District.
Mr. Braun stated that the case summary was incorrectly written and did not include the setback request. He advised that it would be staff’s recommendation to continue the case to the July 10, 2025 hearing at 9:00 a.m. so that it could be published correctly.
Mr. Asbell made a motion to continue the case to July 10, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. and was seconded by Mr. Happ. A vote was taken, and the motion passed; (6-0)
The Board took a break from 10:17 a.m. - 10:30 a.m.
Case No. ZBA-2025-0030 at 10:30 a.m. Hearing to be held in Room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois.
Petition of GENSINI PROPERTIES, LLC, acting on its own behalf, a REZONING request from “C-2” General Commercial to “I-2” Heavy Industrial. The petitioner proposes to rezone 8.28 acres in order to operate a concrete recycling business and storage yard.
Andrew Braun opened the case. There are 1 consent and 0 objections on file. The case was published in The Weekly Post and The Peoria Journal Star on May 22, 2025. A staff report dated June 3, 2025 recommended approval. Taylor Armbruster gave a brief presentation of the countywide map, aerial view of the property, surrounding zoning, and future land use plan designation (Interchange). The site plan and two videos of the property were shown. The property is zoned “C-2”.
Ralph “Joe” Gensini of 8144 Urnikis Dr., Hennepin, IL was sworn in. Mr. Gensini stated that he is owner of Gensini Properties, Gensini Excavating, Inc. and KMG Contracting. He advised that they just purchased Iron Hustler Excavating. Mr. Gensini stated that they would like to rezone to Heavy Industrial to continue current operations. There are no plans to expand to any surrounding area. He added that the property is used to bring recyclable aggregates to process. Mr. Gensini advised that they do business with local townships, municipalities, and other like-minded contractors that are looking to reuse old concrete and asphalt products. They would like to have space to store equipment. This site is a good spot to have access to the west side of Peoria County and is in close proximity to the interstate. Eventually they would like to build a building for equipment storage as well as an office and truck scale.
Mr. Happ inquired about the size of the building they would like to build in the future. Mr. Gensini stated they would like to build a 60’ x 80’ building. Mr. Gensini stated that he has heard no complaints from adjacent property owners. Mr. Happ stated that he drives by this area almost every day and he has never heard any loud noise.
Mr. Gensini stated that he has already purchased a truck scale and has EPA permits for air quality and testing for the concrete crushing operations. Mr. Gensini added that the ultimate goal for this site is to keep costs down.
Mr. Fletcher asked if there was anyone that wanted to speak for or against the petition and there was no one.
Mr. Happ made a motion to close and deliberate and was seconded by Mr. Burns. A vote was taken, and the motion passed; (6-0)
Citizens’ Remarks
None.
Miscellaneous
None.
Adjournment
Mr. Happ made a motion to adjourn and was seconded by Mr. Asbell. A vote was taken, and the motion passed; (6-0)
Meeting adjourned at 10:50 a.m.
https://www.peoriacounty.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_06122025-1759
Alerts Sign-up