Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Holiday Drive topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
LaSalle County board denies two related petitions for storage facility at 1302 Holiday Drive
Summary
The LaSalle County Board rejected a proposed lot split and a special‑use permit for a mini‑storage facility at 1302 Holiday Drive after residents and township officials raised concerns about the comprehensive plan designation and local impact.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Holiday Drive topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The LaSalle County Board on Jan. 8 denied two related land‑use petitions that would have allowed the subdivision of a 10‑acre parcel at 1302 Holiday Drive and construction of a mini‑storage facility. County land‑use presenter Brian Gift described the request from Lake Holiday Development LLC and applicant Let’s Store It LLC to create two buildable lots (about 3.95 acres and 2.04 acres) and to allow mini‑storage in an A‑1 agricultural district. The zoning board of appeals had recommended approval of the split and recommended denial of the storage request.
Board members and members of the public said they were concerned about the project’s fit with the county’s comprehensive plan, township opposition and the appearance of existing unfilled storage units in the area. Board member Reed said many residents in District 4 opposed both the split and the storage use. Another member warned approving the petitions could set a precedent that would lead to more commercial development in agricultural areas.
The motion to approve the lot split and special use for the storage proposal failed on roll call; the chair announced the split motion was denied (recorded tally 2 ayes, 23 nays). The subsequent motion to approve the storage facility also failed at roll call and was denied.
The county’s findings of fact and the presenters’ description noted a prior pre‑annexation agreement with the city of Sandwich that had lapsed, returning zoning jurisdiction to the county. Gift said the comprehensive plan lists the property’s future land use as commercial but the site remains zoned A‑1; he emphasized that a special use would be required to place storage on the property.
The board did not take additional action on either petition; petitioners may choose to refile or pursue other options consistent with county zoning and subdivision rules.

