OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Joliet Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting – September 18, 2025

Meeting Portal — Thursday, September 18, 2025
BodyJoliet, Illinois
SessionMeeting Portal
DateThursday, September 18, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:00:50

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

Meeting will please come to order.

0:03

This is a duly advertised meeting of the Joliet Zoning Board of Appeals.

0:08

In our capacity, we hear petitions for relief from the strict provisions of our city ordinance.

0:15

In matters of this type, the decision of this board is final and respect it does not go to the mayor or the city council for any further action.

0:25

If you disagree with our decision, you do have recourse in a court of record.

0:30

We also hear petitions for variations of land use in matters of this type.

0:36

We act as an advisory committee to the mayor and city council.

0:40

Making the recommendation either for or against it.

0:43

The final decision on land use is made by the mayor and the city council.

0:49

Secretary, please call the roll.

0:53

Mr.

0:53

Bias is absent.

0:55

Mr.

0:56

Noctriebe.

0:57

He's here.

0:58

Miss Radakovich.

1:00

Here.

1:02

Miss Rohr is absent.

1:05

Miss McGrath Schmig is absent.

1:08

Mr.

1:09

Stiff here.

1:11

Chairman Hennessy.

1:13

He's here.

1:19

Um before we get started, I do want to make an announcement.

1:23

We we only have four members of the zoning board here today, which is does meet quorum.

1:29

However, if you have a case on the agenda that is for a variance or a special use permit that stops at the zoning board of appeals level and does not go on to council, um the vote would require a either all four or a three-one vote for your uh request to be approved.

1:49

And if so, if you don't like those odds for a 3-1 or a 4-0 vote in favor, um then you know we would entertain um a tabling at your request to a different uh month.

2:02

So it's up to you.

2:04

Um you can make that decision as your case is um called as well.

2:09

So with that we will move on to the agenda.

2:14

The first on the agenda is sit or excuse me, is approval of minutes.

2:19

Motion would be in order.

2:21

Second, we need it first.

2:24

We need it first, yeah.

2:25

Oh you seconded it, I first it'll third it.

2:31

Clause roll.

2:34

Mr.

2:34

Noctriebe here.

2:36

Aye.

2:37

All right, Mr.

2:38

Radokovich.

2:40

I Mr.

2:42

Stiff.

2:42

Aye, Chairman Hennessy.

2:44

Aye.

2:45

Motion carries.

2:47

All right.

2:48

Next on the agenda is citizens to be heard on agenda items.

2:52

This section is for anyone wanting to speak regarding agenda items and are allowed a maximum of four minutes.

2:58

It is not a question and answer period, and staff in the zoning board of appeals members do not generally respond to public comments.

3:06

So I want to note here that everything on the agenda today is a public hearing.

3:11

So you are welcome to talk now if you're here for a specific agenda item, but you are also welcome to talk during the public hearing during which your um speaking will be entered in as testimony.

3:22

So is there anyone who would like to speak now?

3:26

Okay.

3:35

Board.

3:35

I swear you in, sir.

3:37

Do you swear the evidence you're about to present to be the truth under penalty of law?

3:41

I do.

3:41

Your name and address.

3:42

Anthony J.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████64%
Public Engagement███████████15%
Public Safety█████7%
Procedural████6%
Noise Pollution Control████6%
Parking Issues█2%
Summary of Proceedings

Joliet Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting – September 18, 2025

On September 18, 2025, the Joliet Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) met at 2:00 PM in City Hall Council Chambers. With only four of seven members present (Ed Hennessy, Bob Nachtrieb, Debbie Radakovich, and Jesse Stiff; Ralph Bias, Brigette Roehr, and Jane McGrath Schmig absent), the Board proceeded under quorum. Planning Director Jayne Bernhard advised that petitions requiring a final decision by the ZBA (variances and special use permits not going to City Council) would need at least three affirmative votes to pass. All five petitions on the agenda were approved by unanimous 4-0 votes.

Approval of Minutes

  • The minutes of the August 21, 2025 meeting were approved unanimously (4-0).

Public Comments & Testimony (on Agenda Items)

  • Anthony Raminak (600 Springwood Drive) spoke in opposition to Petition 2025-36 (signage), citing concerns about 24-hour illumination of existing signs (e.g., Dollar General) and potential glare into bedrooms during winter. He requested a time limit on sign lighting, stating the neighborhood has been “good neighbors” and that commerce should not come at the expense of residents’ sleep.
  • Rebecca Studer (3623 Forest View Drive) asked for clarification on the location and nature of the proposed sign for Petition 2025-36, noting she received a notice but wanted exact placement.
  • Toni Raminak (600 Springwood Drive) questioned why not all nearby residents received mailed notices and why the meeting was not more widely advertised; Ms. Bernhard explained the city’s 600-foot notification radius, the requirement for the applicant to post a sign on site, and publication in a legal newspaper.

Discussion Items

Petition 2025-35 – Variation of Use for Mixed-Use Structure (616 Williamson Avenue)

  • Request: Allow a dwelling unit in a former church (main level for personal storage, basement for one-bedroom rental) in an R-3 (one- and two-family residential) zone. The ZBA acts as an advisory body to City Council for this land-use variation.
  • Proponent: Dennis Karr, property manager for owner B. Pincharma. He stated the basement apartment existed at purchase and has been upgraded; the main floor will be used for storage of files, tools, and inventory from the owner’s other businesses.
  • Public Testimony: Rebecca Studer asked whether the owner might later operate a business from the main level; Ms. Bernhard clarified that any non-residential use beyond storage would require additional approvals.
  • Outcome: Approved 4-0 with conditions: enrollment in rental inspection program, provision of two off-street parking spaces, no expansion of use, and potential revocation if declared a public nuisance. Recommendation forwarded to City Council, tentatively set for October 21, 2025.

Petition 2025-36 – Variation for Wall Sign Not Facing a Public Way (480 Houbolt Road)

  • Request: Allow a wall sign on the south side of a new Starbucks building (facing a detention pond, not a public street) in a B-1 (neighborhood business) zone. Total sign area would remain within 120 sq. ft. limit.
  • Proponent: Austin Davis, Integrity Sign Company. He noted the sign will be illuminated and offered to add a timer or dimmer switch to address resident concerns.
  • Public Testimony: Anthony Raminak (Springwood HOA director) stated the HOA would not oppose the sign if it were turned off at the end of business (9 PM). He expressed concern about ongoing bright lighting affecting residents. Mary Adams (553 Silverleaf Drive) asked if the sign would be higher than the building; Davis confirmed it would be on the building face, not above roofline.
  • Outcome: Approved 4-0 without additional conditions, as staff found the sign would not detrimentally alter the area. The Board noted that nuisance complaints could be brought later.

Petition 2025-37 – Variation for Fence Height (18 Woodlawn Avenue)

  • Request: Increase fence height from 6 ft. to 7 ft. and 8 ft. along east and south sides of Queen of Apostles Parish (R-2 residential zone) to prevent trespassing and keep students safe. The south side abuts a McDonald’s (B-1 zone).
  • Proponent: Michael Marchio, Marchio Fence Company. He proposed a black chain-link fence (7 ft. on most of east side, 8 ft. with privacy slats on south and part of east) placed behind an existing concrete wall on the McDonald’s side. He cited vagrancy, litter, and fights in the area.
  • Public Testimony: Mary Brown (president of St. Paul Estates association) asked about fence material, preferring a matching black wrought-iron style. Marchio explained black chain-link is more durable and cost-effective for the church. Brown expressed concern about aesthetics for adjacent homes.
  • Outcome: Approved 4-0.

Petition 2025-38 – Variation for Corner Side Yard Setback (501 Stockton Drive)

  • Request: Reduce the required 20-ft. corner side yard setback to 6 ft. to allow installation of a 10 ft. x 12 ft. shed (peak height 8 ft. 3 in.) at the northeast corner of Stockton Drive and Holland Drive in an R-1B single-family zone.
  • Proponent: Efrain Maldonado, owner. The shed already exists; he requested a variance due to existing trees and a 10-ft. utility easement limiting other placement.
  • Public Testimony: Sonida Bradley (414 Stockton) spoke in favor, noting the neighbor maintains the property well and the shed looks appropriate.
  • Outcome: Approved 4-0. The Board noted practical difficulty due to trees and easement, even if exceptional hardship was not strictly met.

Petition 2025-39 – Variation for Parking Space Size (NEC Gateway Boulevard and Sandstone Drive)

  • Request: Allow 9 ft. x 18 ft. parking stalls (162 sq. ft.) instead of the required 9 ft. x 20 ft. (180 sq. ft.) for a future hotel in the Rock Run Collection Planned Unit Development.
  • Proponent: Jack Shelton, Drury Development Corporation. He noted Drury operates 150 hotels with 24,000 spaces all at 9x18 ft. without issues.
  • Public Testimony: None.
  • Outcome: Approved 4-0. Staff found the proposed size common in commercial locations and not detrimental to the area.

Key Outcomes

  • All five petitions (2025-35 through 2025-39) were approved by unanimous 4-0 votes.
  • Petition 2025-35 (mixed-use variation) will go to the City Council with a recommendation for approval.
  • Petitions 2025-36, 2025-37, 2025-38, and 2025-39 are final ZBA decisions (not requiring Council action).
  • The Board introduced new City Planner Francisco Jimenez.
  • Meeting adjourned after approximately one hour.

Meeting Transcript

Meeting will please come to order. This is a duly advertised meeting of the Joliet Zoning Board of Appeals. In our capacity, we hear petitions for relief from the strict provisions of our city ordinance. In matters of this type, the decision of this board is final and respect it does not go to the mayor or the city council for any further action. If you disagree with our decision, you do have recourse in a court of record. We also hear petitions for variations of land use in matters of this type. We act as an advisory committee to the mayor and city council. Making the recommendation either for or against it. The final decision on land use is made by the mayor and the city council. Secretary, please call the roll. Mr. Bias is absent. Mr. Noctriebe. He's here. Miss Radakovich. Here. Miss Rohr is absent. Miss McGrath Schmig is absent. Mr. Stiff here. Chairman Hennessy. He's here. Um before we get started, I do want to make an announcement. We we only have four members of the zoning board here today, which is does meet quorum. However, if you have a case on the agenda that is for a variance or a special use permit that stops at the zoning board of appeals level and does not go on to council, um the vote would require a either all four or a three-one vote for your uh request to be approved. And if so, if you don't like those odds for a 3-1 or a 4-0 vote in favor, um then you know we would entertain um a tabling at your request to a different uh month. So it's up to you. Um you can make that decision as your case is um called as well. So with that we will move on to the agenda. The first on the agenda is sit or excuse me, is approval of minutes. Motion would be in order. Second, we need it first. We need it first, yeah. Oh you seconded it, I first it'll third it. Clause roll. Mr. Noctriebe here. Aye. All right, Mr. Radokovich. I Mr. Stiff. Aye, Chairman Hennessy. Aye. Motion carries. All right. Next on the agenda is citizens to be heard on agenda items. This section is for anyone wanting to speak regarding agenda items and are allowed a maximum of four minutes. It is not a question and answer period, and staff in the zoning board of appeals members do not generally respond to public comments.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com