Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Unilock topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
McHenry County ZBA backs Unilock rezoning and two variations to house taller equipment, citing wetlands constraints
Summary
The Zoning Board of Appeals unanimously recommended approval of Unilock, Inc.'s request to rezone its Marengo site to I‑2 and grant two variations (height to 75 ft, setbacks to 60 ft) to allow modern, enclosed conveyors and silos; board and staff cited site wetlands and planner found no objections.
The McHenry County Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously to forward a positive recommendation to the County Board on Unilock, Inc.’s petition to rezone 8302 S. Illinois Route 23 in Marengo from A‑1 (with a conditional use permit) to I‑2 heavy industrial and to grant two variations: increase maximum building height from 40 feet to 75 feet and reduce required side/rear setbacks from 100 feet to 60 feet.
Attorney Christina Green and Unilock U.S. construction manager Jay Lemiere told the board the company has operated at the site since acquiring the former PaveLock facility in 2011 and that rezoning would avoid recurring conditional‑use amendments the company currently must pursue to expand. "Rezoning to a district where the use is permitted by right is a more practical and better aligns the property with its long‑standing operations," Green said. Lemiere added the company seeks to enclose taller conveyors and newer silos inside the building to reduce dust and noise.
Unilock’s team said the site contains wetlands and lies in a sensitive aquifer recharge (SARA) area, which limits buildable area and pushes new construction north and east; that constraint, together with impermeability limits (the applicant’s preliminary plans show roughly 43–44% impervious coverage), was presented as justification for reduced setbacks and added height. The applicant described a near‑term plan to repair and enclose existing aggregate bins and conveyors; examples from other recent Unilock plants were cited where 75‑foot‑high components exist.
Resident Devon Daniels asked why the company sought I‑2 rather than the less intensive I‑1 district, noting I‑2’s allowance for flammable or hazardous operations and expressing concern those allowances would remain with the property if ownership changed. The applicant said it considered I‑1 but that the proposed processing and equipment patterns align with I‑2 and that the materials currently handled at the plant (Portland cement and aggregates with iron‑oxide pigments) are inert and not classified as hazardous.
Neighbors raised noise and vibration concerns from the plant’s 24‑hour cycle. Lemiere and the plant manager said consolidating taller equipment indoors and replacing thin exterior panels with insulated metal panels should reduce off‑site noise; the company cited recent perimeter noise surveys that met county standards. County staff reminded the board that rezoning is a map amendment and that site‑level requirements, stormwater permitting, and building permits would still apply and be enforced.
During deliberations board members noted Unilock’s long history at the site, the lack of reported violations in recent years, and the economic benefits of stabilizing operations. A motion to approve the rezoning and conjoined variations passed unanimously and will be forwarded to the County Board with a positive recommendation.
Next steps: the matter will be placed on the County Board agenda for final action; if the rezone is approved the existing CUP would be withdrawn, and the company said it would continue the neighbor accommodations imposed under the CUP even if those conditions were no longer legally required.
