Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Blue Island councilors debate sign variance, map amendment at 130 Fifth and broader zoning changes
Summary
Blue Island City Council members discussed three planning-and-zoning items drawn from the Planning and Zoning Committee, including a sign-variance request, a zoning map amendment for 130 Fifth and Western, and a draft text amendment to allow industrial outdoor storage as a special use.
Blue Island City Council members discussed three planning-and-zoning items drawn from the city’s Planning and Zoning Committee, including a sign-variance request at a commercial property, a zoning map amendment for 130 Fifth and Western, and a proposed text amendment to allow industrial outdoor storage as a special use.
Council member (unnamed) opened the discussion by saying, “I have concerns on all 3,” and summarized each item for the council. The first item concerns two monument signs at the Haschman Sitko location; staff said the property had begun removing one sign and replacing it without permits. The presenter said the city’s code currently prohibits signs of that size and that the sign work was halted when the owner applied to planning and zoning for relief. The council asked Alderman Rufenburg and Treasurer Reed to review the property and provide input before any vote.
The council’s central debate focused on SMS Emanuel LLC’s application to rezone a single property at 130 Fifth and Western from I-1 (industrial) to UTOD. The applicant intends to convert first-floor commercial space to residential units. Staff and council members noted a potential conflict: an existing ordinance referenced in the packet states that, under UTOD, the conversion of first-floor commercial space to residential uses is not permitted. Staff advised that the proposed map amendment would not achieve the applicant’s stated goal if the ordinance remains in force. Planning and zoning (PTBA) recommended the map change; several council members said they were concerned about creating a precedent that could lead other commercial properties to seek similar conversions.
Council members also raised property-maintenance and frontage issues at nearby parcels tied to the same owner/development: an unmaintained parking lot, overgrown landscaping, an old sign, and truck parking were all listed as concerns to be addressed as part of any approval. One councilor said he did not see evidence of economic hardship in the applicant’s submission, a factor the council said is relevant for some special-use considerations.
Separately, the council discussed a text amendment drafted by the city to allow industrial outdoor storage as a special use in industrial districts. The amendment would require planning-and-zoning review for potential applicants; staff described the change as intended to make the city friendlier to certain industrial businesses while retaining regulatory oversight through the PTBA.
No final votes on these zoning items were recorded in the transcript excerpt. Council members said they expected additional review and that at least some items would be considered further in committee before any ordinance or map change is adopted.
The council flagged related enforcement and maintenance matters — including building and storefront conditions at properties that are the subject of the applications — and asked staff and the aldermen for the ward to inspect affected sites and return with recommendations.
