Rock Island Today

City of Kewanee Zoning Board of Appeals met April 16.

Here is the agenda provided by the board:

The Zoning Board of Appeals convened at 5:00 p.m. April 16, 2025, in the Council Chambers at Kewanee City Hall. ZBA members Brackett and Thompson were absent. For business, there was one variance petition application upon which to conduct a public hearing.

CASE ONE:

410 W. Central Blvd., St. John Paul II Parish, A variance to allow the placement of an LED/flashing sign to be constructed/replace the existing Illuminated sign in an R-4 Two-Family Dwelling District.

The Subject Property:

Address: 410 W. Central Blvd.

Legal Description: ALL BLK 7 TENNEYS 1ST ADD CITY OF KEWANEE 87-37-88, County of Henry, State of Illinois.

Location: 400 Block of West Central Blvd.

Zoning: R-4 Two-Family Dwelling District.

Dimensions: 320 feet North to South by 320 feet East to West., 102,400 Sq Ft area.

Existing Buildings or Uses: Church and School.

Existing Land Use Map: Institutional surrounded by High Density Residential.

Proposed Land Use Map: High Density Residential to the Southwest and Northwest and Commercial to the Northeast and East.

The Surrounding Area:

Zoning District(s): Surrounding land is zoned R-4 Two-Family Dwelling District to the South and West, R-5 Multiple-Family Dwelling District to the Northwest and various types of Business Districts the North and East.

Uses of Land:

The surrounding land contains a church and school.

Variance Requested:

A variance to allow the placement of an LED/flashing sign to be constructed/replace the existing illuminated sign in an R-4 Two-Family Dwelling District.

Background Information:

Mark Elbus, representing St. John Paul II Parish, contacted me to inquire about placing an LED sign on the Central Blvd side of the church property. They plan to replace the existing illuminated sign with an LED sign utilizing the existing sign base. He was advised of the need for a variance to the zoning code and filled out the variance petition.

An LED sign has the ability to change its content and colors frequently and is considered a "Flashing sign". The zoning code only allows for non-flashing signs unless a variance is granted. It should be noted that the Zoning Board of Appeals and the City Council have granted several similar requests in the past for schools and churches. Some of these variances included a stipulation that the owner/operator of the sign must adjust the sign operation accordingly should the city receive any complaints from the residents having direct view or are affected by the illumination of the sign. This includes adjusting the brightness, timing of messages, and shutting the sign off after a requested time at night.

The City would recommend a similar stipulation should the variance be recommended to the City Council for approval.

The City of Kewanee Zoning code states the following for signs within Residential Districts:

§ 155.140 PERMITTED SIGNS IN RESIDENCE DISTRICTS.

In all Residence Districts, the following classes of signs are permitted per the regulations set forth hereinafter:

(A) Nonflashing, nonilluminated accessory business signs, as follows:

(1) Nameplates and identification signs, subject to the following:

(a) For one- and two-family dwellings, there shall be not more than one nameplate, not exceeding one square foot in area, for each dwelling unit, indicating the name or address of the occupant or a permitted occupation.

(b) For multiple-family dwellings, for apartment hotels, and for buildings other than dwellings, a single identification sign not exceeding 12 square feet in area and indicating only the name and address of the building and the name of the management thereof may be displayed.

(c) Height. No sign shall project higher than one story, or 20 feet above the curb level, whichever is lower.

(2) "For Sale," "To Rent" Signs, subject to the following:

(a) There shall be not more than one such sign per lot except that on a corner lot, two signs, one facing each street, shall be permitted. No sign shall exceed eight square feet in area nor be closer than eight feet to any other zoning lot. public way.

(b) Projection. No sign shall project beyond the property line into the public way.

(c) Height. No sign shall project higher than one story or 20 feet above curb level, whichever is lower.

(3) Signs accessory to parking areas, subject to the following:

(a) Signs designating entrances or exits to or from a parking area and limited to one sign for each such exit or entrance and to a maximum size of three square feet each shall be permitted. One sign per parking area designating the conditions of use or identity of such parking area and limited to a maximum size of eight square feet shall be permitted, provided that on a corner lot two such signs, one facing each street, shall be permitted.

(b) Height. No sign shall project higher than seven feet above curb level.

(B) Nonflashing, accessory business signs, as follows: Church bulletins, subject to the . following:

(1) There shall be not more than one sign per lot except that on a corner lot, two signs, one facing each street, shall be permitted. No sign shall exceed 18 square feet in area nor be closer than eight feet to any other zoning lot.

(2) Projection. No sign shall project beyond the property line into the public way.

(3) Height. No sign shall project higher than one story or 20 feet above the curb level, whichever is lower.

The Public Hearing:

At 5:00 p.m. January 15, 2025, the hearing on the variance request at 830 Cole St. was held, Troy Currie was present to support the case.

• McIntyre made a motion to hear the case. Ensley made the 2nd.

• Edwards read the background information and suggested that a stipulation be placed on the variance concerning dimming or turning the sign off in the evening hours if complaints are received.

• Peart commented that his mother lives near an LED sign at Lyle School and they make the sign switch to time and temperature after a certain time in the evening and it has not been a problem.

• Martinez asked if all the LED signs in town have the stipulation to dim the sign or turn it off.

• Edwards stated that only those signs located within a residential district have that stipulation.

• Martinez asked how often the city has received complaints about LED signs.

• Edwards stated that he has never received a complaint about the LED signs located in residential districts. The only complaint that has been received is concerning the one located at Central Blvd and South Main St.

• Ensley asked for clarification on the sign location.

• It was verified that the sign face will be towards the South.

• Mark Elbus spoke on behalf of the application. He stated that the sign size has not been agreed upon yet, but it would either be the same as the existing sign or one foot wider. The new sign will use the existing sign base and location. He said they have not decided on a sign company yet but understands that most signs are programable for brightness etc. He added that they do not plan to have anything flashing to draw attention and that it is for informational messages only.

• Deyna Massens, 403 W Central Blvd., spoke in opposition to the sign request stating that the sign is directly across the street from her residence. She expressed concern that the sign would be too bright and flashing colors.

• Edwards stated that the current sign at the church is not dimmable vs the new sign which will be programable to dim etc.

• Elbus added that it would not be a problem to dim the sign or whatever is needed to keep the peace in the neighborhood.

• Peart suggested that they program the sign to go to a static display at night showing only the date, time and temperature if needed.

• Kuffel asked Massen if these suggestions sounded ok to her and reminded her that she can call Edwards if there are any issues.

• Massen stated that the stipulation sounded ok and made her feel better about it.

• Edwards said that when Zion Lutheran Church applied for a variance for their LED sign, there was a resident that was very concerned about the sign and it being too bright etc. Edwards said that he has not received any calls from that resident.

• Adam Massens, 502 W Central Blvd., came forward to speak and said that he had concerns but felt better after hearing the discussion.

Recommendation:

The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends, based on the authority of §33.062 of the City Code, by a vote of five in favor of the application, none opposed, two absent, that the City Council grant a variance to allow the placement of an LED/flashing sign to be constructed/replace the existing illuminated sign in an R-4 Two-Family Dwelling District.

• McIntyre made a motion to add the stipulation that should the City receive a complaint concerning the sign brightness, flashing or other concerns over the sign functionality that the applicant will act appropriately to resolve the complaint. If the complaint is not resolved the case may be brought back for revocation of the variance.

• Martinez 2nd the motion.

The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends, by a vote of five in favor of the application, none opposed, two absent, that the stipulation be added to the variance request.

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:22 p.m.

https://cms5.revize.com/revize/kewaneeillinois/ZBA%20Minutes%20April%2016%202025.pdf