Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pud Adjustment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kane County committee approves minor PUD adjustment to allow garage addition on St. Charles Township parcel
Summary
The Kane County Development Committee approved a minor PUD adjustment in St. Charles Township to allow garage additions and residential improvements for a parcel owner while retaining limits on converting the residential area to commercial storage.
The Kane County Development Committee on Thursday approved a minor adjustment to a planned‑unit development (PUD) in unincorporated St. Charles Township that allows a parcel owner to add garages and residential improvements to a house within a larger PUD that also includes an established vehicle/RV storage area.
County staff said the request is a "minor adjustment" under the county's combined PUD and subdivision rules because the owner proposes residential‑use garages and patio changes to the approved residential portion of the PUD rather than converting the storage yard area. Staff said any future use of those residential space additions for commercial or expanded storage would require a major adjustment and a new public hearing.
Planning staff explained the parcel is bisected by Illinois Route 25; the portion west of Route 25 includes the PUD area. The applicant, property owner Terry Masterson, told the committee he has owned the property for 25 years and intends to move into the residence once the garage construction is complete. "I've owned the property for 25 years," Masterson said. He said the proposed green‑shaded area on the submitted site plan represents garage additions he intends for personal use.
Neighbors spoke at length about the long history of the storage operation and its visual and noise impacts. Several speakers said that since the storage operation began the parcel has become an "unsightly" presence at the entrance to the neighborhood, and they described traffic, late‑hour activity and tree removal along the street. Matt Johnson, Cecilia Lee and other residents said the storage lot and its operations have diminished neighborhood character and raised safety concerns for children who bike in the area. One resident said semi trucks and machinery have been visible on the site in past years.
The owner and several neighbors who support the application said the residential addition is intended for private use. Theresa Dealey, who lives adjacent to the site, told the committee she and her husband "fully support his continued improvements to his property" and said the owner responds when neighbors raise issues.
Staff and committee members clarified enforcement and future‑use limits. Dale Van Kirkhoff, the county building and zoning director, and other staff explained that the requested adjustments apply to the residential portion of the PUD; converting residential space to commercial or adding storage uses would require a major adjustment, additional notice and a public hearing. Jody Walnick, director of environmental and water resources, told the committee that the site qualifies for the county's fee‑in‑lieu option for stormwater because runoff ultimately flows across Route 25 into floodplain and into the creek and is not causing measurable impacts to adjacent properties.
A motion to approve the PUD minor adjustment (R5N160, Illinois Route 25) was made and seconded; the roll call recorded yes votes from committee members present and the motion passed. The staff summary and the county's plat officer noted that the amendment does not increase residential density or reduce required open space, and that the owner has agreed to meet stormwater requirements either by detention or by fee‑in‑lieu as required by county ordinance.
Why this matters: the decision allows a property owner within an existing PUD to make residential additions for personal use but keeps in place the county's procedural protections against converting those residential improvements into commercial storage without a new approval process. Neighbors who described ongoing operational impacts may pursue code enforcement or permit review if violations of county conditions occur; staff noted ordinary code‑enforcement channels and that any future major adjustment would require a public hearing.
Committee action taken at the meeting was limited to the PUD minor adjustment request and did not change approvals for the adjacent storage operation; any separate change in use for the storage lot would require a separate application and public hearing.
