Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals

City of Batavia Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals Wednesday, April 22, 2026 at 7:30 PM City Council Chambers 100 N. Island Ave, Batavia, IL 60510 in the City Council Chambers Questions and comments regarding agenda items can be submitted prior to 5 PM the day of the meeting by emailing Drew Rackow, Planning and Zoning Officer at drackow@bataviail.gov Page 1. Meeting Call to Order 2. Roll Call Tom Gosselin, Chair Amy Moore, Vice Chair Robert Kieckhefer Tom LaLonde Katie Cuneo Doug Eldrenkamp 3. Items Removed, Added or Changed 4. Approval of Minutes 4.1 February 18, 2026 Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes 3 PC 2-18-26.pdf 5. Regular Agenda 5.1 Public Hearing: 417 Carlisle Road Amendment to the Official Zoning Map 11 Brian Hinds of BGH Construction, Applicant – Planning Case 26-017 Staff Report 5.2 Public Hearing: Variances for an attached deck - 26 North Harrison Street 17 Angela Cale, Applicant Planning Case 26-013 Staff Report 5.3 Variations to the Subdivision Regulations (City Code Section 11-2-5) for 644 35 Midway Drive Brad and Christine Mitchell, Applicants Planning Case: 26-008 Staff Report 6. Matters from the Public (for items not on the agenda) 7. Other Business Page 1 of 41 8. Adjournment Individuals with disabilities should notify the City Administrator’s office at 630-454-2053 if they have a disability which will require special assistance or services and, if so, what services are required. This notification should occur as far as possible before the City-sponsored function, program, or meeting. Page 2 of 41  MINUTES February 18, 2026 Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals City of Batavia PLEASE NOTE: These minutes are not a word-for-word transcription of the statements made at the meeting, nor intended to be a comprehensive review of all discussions. They are intended to make an official record of the actions taken by the Commission and to include some description of discussion points as understood by the minute-taker. They may not reference some of the individual attendees’ comments, nor the complete comments if referenced. 1. Meeting Called to Order for the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals Chair Gosselin called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. 2. Roll Call: Members Present: Commissioner Eldrenkamp, Commissioner Cuneo, Commissioner LaLonde, Commissioner Kieckhefer, Vice Chair Moore, Chair Gosselin Members Absent: None Also Present: Zach Ewoldt, Drew Rackow, Sarah Cowan 3. Items to be Removed, Added or Changed: Motion: To allow Vice Chair Moore to participate in the meeting online. Maker: Commissioner Kieckhefer Second: Commissioner Cuneo Voice Vote: Motion Carried 4. Regular Agenda Items 4.1 Public Hearing: Conditional Use for Government Offices and Facilities use in the CC, Community Commercial District Batavia Public School District 101, Applicant Planning Case 26-001 Motion: To open the public hearing. Maker: Commissioner Kieckhefer Second: Commissioner LaLonde Voice Vote: Motion Carried The public hearing was opened at 7:02 PM. Drew Rackow presented the staff report for the proposed use of 812 Main Street, formerly the VanDee manufacturing building. Rackow stated that the Batavia Public School District is proposing to purchase the property, which requires Conditional Use approval. Rackow stated that this property is in TIF 4 and is under the West Town Area Plan. Chair Gosselin invited the applicant to speak. Patrick Miner, an attorney from The Law Firm of Robbins Schwartz, representing the Batavia School District, introduced Tom Kim, Superintendent and Mark Anderson, Director of Operations. Miner Page 3 of 41 Plan Commission February 18, 2026, Page 2 provided a presentation which outlined the request for conditional use approval to operate government offices and facilities at 812 Main Street. Miner stated that Batavia School District is the current owner of 804 Main Street and they would like to purchase the neighboring property, which requires conditional use approval. Miner stated that Batavia Youth Baseball currently occupies the front of the facility, and the Batavia School District intends to continue that lease agreement. Miner stated that the benefits include consolidation of the school district’s operations, utilizing the shared driveway between the property lines of 804 Main Street and 812 Main Street with parking in the rear, and the burden of the fire-sprinkler system for 804 Main Street which runs through 812 Main Street. Miner reviewed factors of a Conditional Use Test including: no additional noise, lighting, odors or other nuisance, no intention to modify the use of the property, maintaining the lease with Batavia Youth Baseball, and the intended weekday school hours. Miner further examined factors including the Land Use redevelopment and reuse of older industrial areas, efficient use of public facilities and services and providing quality municipal services in a cost effect manner, the addition of economic vitality to the area along Main Street, intergovernmental cooperation, and the West Town reinvestment and redevelopment. Miner stated that the district is unaware of any potential zoning code violations, and there would be no interference with the use or enjoyment of neighboring properties. Miner reviewed the proposed conditions of approval. Miner stated that the district has statutory authority and ability to go to the Regional Office of Education for some building permits, therefore Condition 4a is not reasonably related. Miner stated that the district is entitled to rights and privileges as a unit of local government, including real estate exemption status, and Condition 4b is therefore unrelated. Miner stated that Condition 4c is not reasonably related and may be a premature request due to the age of the TIF. Miner stated that the district is unwilling to agree to Condition 4d, exercising the rights and privileges as a local unit of government. Miner stated that the district is willing to construct a 6’ privacy fence along the western edge of the property for 812 Main Street, but not 804 Main Street for Condition 4E. Miner stated that there are no objections to Condition 4f, except the removal of “and in other locations as required by the City Engineer.” Miner stated that Condition 4g is unrelated, but the district will be recording both deeds at the same time. Miner stated that for Condition 5h, the district is willing to comply with the 2034 deadline to install dumpster enclosures. Commissioner LaLonde thanked the applicant for the presentation. Commissioner LaLonde requested clarification on the fire service lines. Miner stated that it runs through 812 Main Street to get to 804 Main Street. Rackow stated that it was previously common ownership and there is little documentation on this issue. Commissioner LaLonde inquired about consolidation, and Miner denied any desire for consolidation at this time. Commissioner LaLonde inquired about the long-term plans for the property. Anderson stated the long-term vision is to operate the facilities and maintenance department from this site, while continuing the relationship with the Batavia Youth Baseball in the front of the building. Commissioner LaLonde requested confirmation that the application is for office and storage use only, and Anderson confirmed. Commissioner Kieckhefer inquired about how this would change the day-to-day operations. Anderson stated that the approval would create more space for storage of technology, computers and chrome books, with a racking system for organization. Commissioner Kieckhefer inquired about the long-term goals of the district with this property. Anderson stated that all inventory currently comes out of 804 Main Street. Page 4 of 41 Plan Commission February 18, 2026, Page 3 Kim stated that under the district’s strategic plan, the building at 804 Main Street is running at maximum capacity, and a central distribution and collection center for storage is essential to long-term planning. Vice Chair Moore requested more information on the fire sprinklers. Miner stated that the district was aware of the fire sprinkler issue when they leased 804 Main Street with the option to buy, but the zoning ordinance requiring a conditional use for the district to operate at 804 and 812 Main Street was not in effect at that time. Rackow stated that most of the work on the TIF was in 2015, and it was established in 2016. Vice Chair Moore inquired about the ratio of storage to offices, and Anderson stated it would be mostly storage. Chair Gosselin inquired about an easement agreement. Miner stated there was unlikely an easement due to the common ownership previously. Chair Gosselin invited the public to speak at 7:58 PM. Raquel Gonzalez-Thomas, a Batavia board member for two years and resident of 1175 Pleasant Court, expressed a desire for this plan to be approved by the commission. Gonzalez-Thomas stressed the importance of government agencies supporting one another and maintaining the current collaborative relationship. Gonzalez-Thomas reminded the audience that the Batavia School District board recently approved the request from the City of Batavia for EV charging stations as an example of the district working with the City. Kristin Gehrels, a twelve-year resident of Batavia, currently residing at 398 Bradford Circle, is a school board member with children in attendance at Batavia public schools. Gehrels encouraged the Plan Commission to have a spirit of collaboration as the school district did with the EV charger request from the City of Batavia. Aaron Kilburg, a resident of 708 Marshall Court, and a resident of Batavia since 2003, has been the Vice President of Board of Education at BPS101 for over five years. Kilburg requested approval, with conditions that are reasonably necessary. Kilburg stated that the BPS101 board meetings are held on the third Tuesday of every month and invited everyone to attend. Beth Taylor, a resident of 153 South Van Nortwick Avenue, inquired about the need for the code changes. Rackow explained that for government facilities or offices to acquire and use this property, a conditional use approval is required, and there are no planned significant changes to the current layout of the property. Taylor noted the garbage schedule at the neighboring food pantry, and the negative effect on the quality of life of the residential neighbors. Taylor also inquired about potential beautification plans. Rackow noted that residents may contact the Batavia Police Department for issues of garbage pickup outside of the approved pickup times under the City’s Ordinance. Ewoldt stated that 6:00 AM is the earliest approved pickup time. Miner agreed that one condition of approval related to trash pickup times would be supported by the district. Ewoldt agreed to convey the concerns about the food pantry trash pickup times to the appropriate City staff. Miner stated that there are currently no major redevelopment plans, but there are staff recommendations to install fencing at the minimum. Taylor inquired about the signage and exterior lighting, Anderson stated that overall, there will be no immediate changes to lights and signage, but the building will be maintained. Taylor also inquired about on-site parking. Miner stated that there is no intention of adding additional parking at the vacant neighboring parcel. Taylor also inquired about additional freight. Rackow reiterated the previous statements of the applicant that there would be no changes to the current activity at the site. Page 5 of 41 Plan Commission February 18, 2026, Page 4 Bill Bohnhoff, a resident of 153 S Van Nortwick Avenue, inquired about the potential for additional employees. Rackow confirmed there are no expected changes to current staff levels or activity levels. Miner also confirmed the number of employees at this location would not change. Bonhnhoff inquired about parking and expressed concerns about overflow/street parking. Bohnhoff highlighted the food pantry traffic and noted that the area is not very well-lit at night. Miner provided closing statements and expressed appreciation for the time and attention from city staff and the Plan Commission. Motion: To close the public hearing. Maker: Commissioner Eldrenkamp Second: Commissioner Cuneo Voice Vote: Motion Carried The public hearing was closed at 8:30 PM. Rackow explained the procedures and stated that if the Plan Commission is unable to meet all the required findings to recommend approval, it shall recommend denial of the application under the requirements of the Zoning Code for Conditional Use approval. Rackow noted that with a negative recommendation, the City Council may approve a conditional use with a majority vote. Vice Chair Moore expressed an understanding that this is in the best interest of the school district but may not be in the best interest of the West Town Plan. Moore noted the lack of intergovernmental cooperation by the denial of multiple proposed conditions by the applicant. Commissioner LaLonde inquired about potential redevelopment related to this TIF district. Rackow expressed that there have been some redevelopment in the TIF, but it has mostly been residential activity. Commissioner LaLonde inquired about the timeline and the effective date for the zoning change which began to require conditional use for governmental offices. Miner stated that 804 Main Street was finalized in 2024, after a ten-year lease with an option to buy began in 2014. Miner confirmed that 804 Main Street is now currently owned, and the TIF became effective in 2016. The conditional use requirement, applicable to multiple commercial districts was in 2018. Miner highlighted the unrelated conditional requests in response to Vice Chair Moore but stated that the district is committing to the six-foot privacy fence, the installation of a gate and the dumpster enclosure installation deadline. Commissioner LaLonde inquired if the district could continue to lease the property, and Rackow confirmed the district should have gone through a conditional use process regardless of lease/ownership status if they are using space in the building. Commissioner LaLonde inquired about the nonconforming zoning issues regarding setbacks, landscape requirements, parking requirements and the impervious lot structure. Rackow stated that the impervious standard in the CC District is ten percent and the property is near zero. Rackow also noted the perimeter setbacks and the building setbacks on the west side. Rackow stated that there is some flexibility in the code for parking, with an opportunity for additional parking at the rear of the property. Commissioner LaLonde stated that the commission should consider addressing Page 6 of 41 Plan Commission February 18, 2026, Page 5 the parking concerns of the public and suggested a condition of approval related to parking. Miner stated that nonconformance was not addressed in the staff report, but the district is willing to work with the city to address zoning issues at the property. Miner stated that Condition 4d is all encompassing, and it may be appropriate to modify this condition to specify large exterior construction projects. Miner stated that they are willing to address the drainage issues with any new site development as it relates to Condition 4A. Commissioner LaLonde expressed a desire to have the property improved however this would not support the goals of a TIF district. Commissioner LaLonde stated that the school district has been great stewards of their properties. Commissioner LaLonde expressed a desire for a commitment to landscaping and front façade improvements over time. Commissioner LaLonde began a conversation on the former railroad segment of Burlington Northern. Rackow stated that it is unlikely that the railroad will resume operation as much of the property has been turned over to adjacent owners. Commissioner LaLonde inquired about consolidation. Miner expressed hesitation for a strict condition of approval requesting consolidation due to the potential for secondary effects. Commissioner Cuneo expressed a desire to approve the application if the conditions are met. Cuneo stated that the school district is a great partner, and they are willing to move into this space immediately as-is, without any major changes. Commissioner Eldrenkamp matched the desire for beautification as noted by Commissioner LaLonde. Vice Chair Moore stated that a condition written requiring ‘working together’ is too vague, and not specific enough to improve the building. Miner stated that the school district would support a condition allowing for a reasonable amount of time to address the painting and landscaping on the front of the building. Chair Gosselin inquired about the procedures for approval. Rackow stated that a tie would be a non- recommendation and would be forwarded on, requiring a majority vote at City Council. Vice Chair Moore requested confirmation that the applicant would not commit to any of the conditions, as originally written. Miner clarified that the objections to the conditions were due to their irrelevance. Miner confirmed the district will provide proof that the deed for the property at 804 Main Street has been recorded. Rackow suggested a deadline for the dumpster enclosure of two construction seasons, or eighteen months. Miner stated that the district would appreciate a deadline of December 31, 2028. Chair Gosselin inquired about the need for a condition requiring the applicant to follow the city ordinance for garbage pickup hours. Rackow confirmed that by adding this as a condition, it allows for possible revocation of the conditional use if there is a violation. Chair Gosselin stated that a vague condition of approval requiring an update to the landscaping may not be appropriate. Commissioner LaLonde asked about the permit process for site modification permits. Rackow stated that the property is one hundred percent impermeable, with a potential to cause draining problems in the area, although there are no specifically identified drainage issues at this time. Commissioner LaLonde suggested elimination of Item A as a condition. Commissioner Kieckhefer, Chair Gosselin, Commissioner LaLonde and Vice Chair Moore supported the inclusion of Item B. Commissioner LaLonde, Page 7 of 41 Plan Commission February 18, 2026, Page 6 Commissioner Kieckhefer, Vice Chair Moore supported Item C. Chair Gosselin suggested the removal of Item D, or the clarification in wording for exterior improvements. Miner stated that the school district interprets the wording as site improvements for redevelopment of the property, which is a condition that the district would support, and the commission later decided to omit Item D entirely. Chair Gosselin stated Item E would be included, with the removal of 804 Main Street from the condition. The Plan Commission supported the condition for Item F, with the removal of “and in other locations as required by the City Engineer.” Chair Gosselin stated Item G would be included and inquired about a deadline. Miner suggested a deadline providing a reasonable amount of time, thirty or sixty days after closing at 812 Main Street. The Plan Commission agreed to include Item G with the modification for sixty days after closing at 812 Main Street, both deeds would be recorded. Chair Gosselin confirmed that Item H would be included with the modification that the dumpster enclosure would be completed by December 31, 2028. Anderson stated that the current building at 804 Main has an on-call dumpster pickup scheduled as needed, typically during the day. Anderson confirmed the smaller trash cans on 812 Main building belong to Batavia Youth Baseball. Rackow confirmed that there are parking conditions on other properties, and that the Plan Commission could add a similar condition to this property. The Commission discussed adding Item I: The city shall work with the school district if parking issues arise on site; the applicant and city will work on finding additional parking on the premise, and if governmental use intensifies the parking demand, the school district and the city will work to address the issue. Miner stated that similarly to painting and exterior improvement concerns, this condition is also vague and therefore unenforceable. Miner stated that there are no expected changes at the property, so new parking concerns should not be an issue. Anderson, who oversees transportation, confirmed that they do not expect any changes to parking at this location. The Plan Commission decided to omit the addition of Item I. Chair Gosselin summarized that the approval would include the conditions B, C, E, F, G and H with the modifications discussed, and the omission of Items A and D. Motion: To adopt the affirmative findings as drafted by staff in the memo. Maker: Commissioner Kieckhefer Second: Commissioner LaLonde Roll Call Vote: Motion Carried Motion: To recommend City Council approval for conditional use permit for government office facilities at 812 Main Street subject to the conditions as modified: Item B, Item C, Item E with the removal of 804, Item F with the removal of the end of the sentence, Item G adding that the deed will be recorded sixty days after closing at 812 Main Street, and Item H with a deadline of December 31, 2028. Maker: Commissioner LaLonde Second: Commissioner Cueno Roll Call Vote: Motion Carried Page 8 of 41 Plan Commission February 18, 2026, Page 7 Rackow stated that this item will be presented to the Community of the Whole on March 10, 2026, and the City Council on March 16, 2026. 4.2 Design Review Building Modifications at 805-821 North Randall Road Tani Estates LLC, Applicant – Planning Case 25-090 Rackow presented the staff report and noted that the applicant is requesting two modifications to the building to the south of Walmart: modification of the architecture to add a tower element for the center unit and stain the exterior of the building white. Rackow stated that the suggested conditions of approval include landscape restoration and that the new lighting would be reviewed and approved prior to installation. The applicant, Param Vijay, provided a presentation of the proposed modernization changes. Commissioner LaLonde requested confirmation that the stain would be added to all four sides, and the applicant confirmed the rear/north side (not shown in the renderings) would also be included. Rackow stated that the interior court to the north serves as a service area for garbage trucks and delivery vehicles. Commissioner LaLonde expressed support for a stain, which is long term solution. Commissioner LaLonde suggested a softer grey color or a less extreme color scheme that better matches the roof. Commissioner LaLonde requested confirmation that the skylights would be on all four sides of the tower. Vijay confirmed. Commissioner LaLonde inquired about changes to the roof. Vijay stated that the roof is metal. Commissioner LaLonde expressed disfavor for painting the metal roof elements. Ewoldt confirmed that staff would echo the concerns of painted metal roofs. Commissioner Cuneo suggested the continuation of this item until the next meeting on March 4, 2026, to allow for the applicant to make the requested changes. Vijay confirmed this would allow enough time to modify the application. Motion: To continue the design review until March 4, 2026. Maker: Commissioner Kieckhefer Second: Commissioner Eldrenkamp Voice Vote: Motion Carried The Plan Commission requested the applicant return with renderings that include the rear of the building, physical samples of less contrasting colors, and updated illustrations. 5. Matters From the Public (Not on the agenda): None 6. Other Business: Rackow stated that the final permit was issued for Winding Creek, wrapping up the project in four years instead of five as the applicant had originally planned. The project at 400 South River Street was approved by City Council, after the addition of a portico/awning over the front doorways. Page 9 of 41 Plan Commission February 18, 2026, Page 8 7. Adjournment: There being no other business to discuss, Chair Gosselin asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting; there was a motion made by Commissioner Kieckhefer and a second by Commissioner Eldrenkamp. By voice vote the motion carried and the meeting was adjourned at 10:01 PM. The minutes were transcribed and respectfully submitted by Sarah Cowan, Recording Secretary. Page 10 of 41  MEMO To: Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals From: Zach Ewoldt AICP, Planner Date: April 17, 2026 Subject: Public Hearing: 417 Carlisle Road Amendment to the Official Zoning Map Brian Hinds of BGH Construction, Applicant Planning Case 26-017 Summary: Brian Hinds of BGH Construction has submitted a zoning map amendment application and is seeking to rezone three (3) parcels from R1-L, Single Family Low Density to R1-M, Single Family. A public hearing is scheduled for the April 22 Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. Background: In the attached application, Mr. Hinds explains that he purchased several parcels in 2025 and is seeking to amend the Official Zoning Map to place the three (3) parcels within the R1-M, Single Family Medium Density Zoning District. Mr. Hinds, within his narrative, notes that the proposed rezoning would allow for the construction of an attached garage onto the existing single-family home located at 417 Carlisle Road. He notes the desire to retain several large, high-quality trees planted and/or cared for by the prior property owner, Frank Saupp (former City of Batavia Arborist and Tree Commission Member), as those add value and character to the property, and that removing those trees for the purpose of installing a detached garage would not align with his goals for the property. Noting this, he feels that allowing this property to be rezoned to R1-M would allow the property to be regulated by setbacks more consistent with neighboring properties to the west and would facilitate reinvestment into the existing home as well as the construction of a new home on the second lot identified as parcel 3 on the plat of survey. Staff Analysis: Mr. Hinds contacted City staff in early 2025 regarding the prospective purchase of the late Frank Saupp’s property holdings along Carlisle Road and South Jefferson Street. During this discussion, it was determined that the property where the home at 417 Carlisle Road resides was historically a combination of three (3) separate parcels, which Kane County had recently merged under a single tax PIN. The northernmost parcel was determined to be a separate development lot platted prior to 2010 and would be subject to the provisions set forth in Chapter 4.6, Nonconforming Uses, Lots, Parcels, Structures, and Signs. More specifically, under Section 4.602.D, a nonconforming or substandard lot that was platted prior to the adoption of the 2010 Zoning Code may be developed so long as it meets 80 percent of the minimum lot area and dimensions. The development lot in question is identified as Parcel 3 on the Plat of Survey included in the staff packet. The proposed rezoning would place the lot (Parcel 3) into a district in which it conforms to minimum lot width and area standards and is more reflective of its existing development pattern, such as its overall lot size, dimensions, and setbacks. The rezoning would also benefit the remaining parcels (Parcels 1 and 2), where the home at 417 Carlisle Road is located, placing the property into a zoning district more reflective of its existing development pattern. Jeffery D. Schielke Government Center ● 100 N. Island Ave ● Batavia, IL 60510 ● 630-454-2000 ● www.BataviaIL.gov Page 11 of 41 Staff finds that the request would benefit the subject properties by facilitating reinvestment and supporting compatible infill development. The proposal also aligns with the Comprehensive Plan’s Land Use Map, which identifies the subject properties, as well as surrounding properties, as Residential >2– 3.5 dwelling units per acre. Staff recommends that the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals recommend approval of the requested Zoning Map Amendment to designate the subject property as R1- M, Single Family Medium Density on the Official Zoning Map. Review of Findings and Conditions: Zoning Map Amendments require that the following findings and conditions be reviewed by the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals. 1. Public Notice. All required public notice has been conducted in accordance with applicable state and local laws. Finding: The applicant executed the notice mailing and posting of the properties pursuant to the City Code on April 2, 2026. The City of Batavia posted signs on the properties on April 2, 2026. Notice was published in the Daily Herald on April 6, 2026. 2. Public Meetings and Hearings. All required public meetings and hearings have been held in accordance with applicable state and local laws. Finding: The Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals, on April 22, 2026, conducted a public hearing in accordance with state and local law. 3. Conformance to the Comprehensive Plan. The extent to which the proposed amendment to the Official Zoning Map conforms generally to the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Finding: The proposed amendment is consistent with the Official Land Use Map, as it already places the subject properties in a residential use classification. It is also consistent with several goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, specifically within the Housing, Neighborhood Conservation, and Historic Preservation Element by maintaining existing housing stock. The change creates opportunities for new infill housing, and places the parcels in a zoning designation compatible with the existing size and design of the parcels. Review of Conditions. 4. Is the proposed Zoning District and the development it allows compatible with the existing uses and zoning of nearby property? Finding: The proposed zoning is consistent with the surrounding uses. The property with the existing home and the future development lot would be placed in the appropriate Zoning District. The proposed zoning district would allow development and redevelopment standards that match the existing zoning districts of the adjoining properties to the west. 5. Is there evidence to suggest that property values will be diminished by the particular zoning restriction changes? Jeffery D. Schielke Government Center ● 100 N. Island Ave ● Batavia, IL 60510 ● 630-454-2000 ● www.BataviaIL.gov Page 12 of 41  Finding: There is no evidence to suggest that property values would be diminished by the particular zoning restriction change. The use of the property already exists, and the value of the property already takes into account the present use of the land for single family residential use. The proposed zoning district would allow development and use of the property in a manner consistent with the surrounding properties. 6. If any property values are diminished, does the diminishment promote the health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the public? Finding: While there is no diminishment, the health, safety, morals, and general welfare will be promoted by placing the properties under a Zoning District that reflects their present use and development. 7. Does the proposed zoning change provide a greater relative gain to the public as compared to the hardship imposed on the individual property owner? Finding: The zoning change will provide greater gain to the public, by placing appropriate use and bulk standards on the properties, allowing for easier administration of building permits and zoning regulations for the property owners. 8. Is the subject property suitable for the zoned purpose? Finding: The properties are presently used for the zoned purpose of single family residential use and are suitable. The proposed district is reflective of the parcels design and configuration. 9. Has the length of time the property has been vacant as zoned been excessive, considering the context of land development in the area in the vicinity of the subject property? Finding: All parcels under the address of 417 Carlisle Road have been developed for their proposed use. The northern most parcel until recently was occupied by a detached garage and has not been vacant for an extended period of time. 10. Is there a community need for the proposed zoning or use? Finding: Rezoning the properties would result in easier administration of building permits and zoning setbacks. The proposed change would also facilitate reinvestment in existing housing stock while also encouraging the construction of additional housing inventory on the northernmost parcel. Jeffery D. Schielke Government Center ● 100 N. Island Ave ● Batavia, IL 60510 ● 630-454-2000 ● www.BataviaIL.gov Page 13 of 41 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals take the following actions: 1. Open and conduct a public hearing for the proposed Zoning Map Amendment. 2. Approve the Findings for Approval of the Zoning Map Amendment. 3. Recommend approval of a Zoning Map Amendment to reclassify the property at 417 Carlisle Road and the adjacent right of way from the R1-L, Single Family Low-Density District to R1-M, Single-Family Medium-Density District. Attachments: Proposed Zoning Map Exhibit C Mayor and City Council Department Heads Media Jeffery D. Schielke Government Center ● 100 N. Island Ave ● Batavia, IL 60510 ● 630-454-2000 ● www.BataviaIL.gov Page 14 of 41  Proposed Zoning Map Amendment 912 Exhibit 1008 922 915 931 922 1018 932 921 1005 1024 928 1008 929 941 1011 1030 1014 934 1017 1005 1034 1020 1019 1040 1026 1001 1031 on S t 1008 1044 1032 1015 rson S 1037 t 1006 S Jacks 10 234 1060 1042 1010 11 1049 1025 S Jeffe 10 617 6 2 3 10 0 9 1 2 10 519 2 9 Av e 511 5 03 SB 616 417 at a 608 411 v ia 534 524 Carlisl e 231 516 Rd 502 11 0 7 11 0 6 111 232 5 11 220 Legend 2 3 111 415 4 2 11 11 Sub j ectPro p erty 3 1 538 528 Batavi aCo rp o rateLi 51 mits Bernad 11 8 50 e tte Ln 2 8 Zoning Classifications 438 8 R- 0-Si ngl eFami l y 111 R1- L-Si ngl eFami l y Lo w Dens i ty 11 11 9 4 3 8 R1- M -Si ngl eFami l y Medi um Dens i ty 7 PFI-Pub l i cFac il ies &I ns ti tuto inal 11 6 1 11 4 4 0 75 150 300 450 112 Feet 600 9 ¯ Map s anddatap ro vi dedb y theCi ty o fBatavi aareno ts urveys o r legaldes cri p to ins o flandareas .GI Sdatao b tai nedf ro m theCtiy o f Batavi a sii ntended o fr rep res entatoinalus eo nl y.Thi s i no frmatoin,i n etiher el ectro ni co r map ofrm,s ip ro vi ded“as si”.No w arranty exp res s edo r i mp lied simaderegardi ngtheaccuracy,ti mel i nes s ,o r co mp letenes s o fthedata,no r s hal ltheacto fds itrib utoinco ns tt iute any s uch w arranty.Thi s dsiclaimer ap p l i es b o th to indi vi dualus eo f So urce:BCED,BatGI S,KaneGI S thedataandaggregateus ew i th o ther data. Page 15 of 41 Date:4/ 17/ 2026 Page 16 of 41  MEMO To: Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals From: Drew Rackow AICP, Planning & Zoning Officer Date: April 17, 2026 Subject: Public Hearing: Variances for an attached deck - 26 North Harrison Street Angela Cale, Applicant Planning Case 26-013 Background & Information Provided by the Applicant: Angela Cale has applied for variances to replace an existing deck between the principal residence and garage at 26 North Harrison Street. Variances would be requested from Table 2.104 of the City of Batavia Zoning Code to address those existing conditions. A public hearing is scheduled for the April 22nd Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to review these requested variances: 1. Table 2.104 to allow the replacement of an existing deck located between the principal residence and an accessory structure garage with an interior side (south) setback of approximately 1.5 feet instead of the 5’ required for a deck attached to the principal structure, a variation of approximately 3.5 feet; and 2. Table 2.104 to allow a deck attached to an existing garage that is approximately 2.4 feet from the rear setback (east), instead of a 25’ rear setback, when the deck and garage area attached to the principal structure a variation of approximately 22.6 feet. Ms. Cale acquired the property in 2005. The deck and its footprint predate her purchase and appears to have been in its present location for a significant period. The deck provides a pedestrian connection between the garage and residence. Contractors applied for a permit on her behalf in January, to reconstruct the deck with composite materials. The existing deck is not in conformance with current Zoning Code requirements. No variances were previously granted for the structure. Staff discussed steps needed to be compliant with current regulations, which would include creating a three-foot separation between the two structures and reducing the proximity of the deck to the south property line. The applicant’s narrative notes the existing safety issues with the deck and that existing fencing provides sufficient privacy for adjoining neighbors. The narrative also notes that the deck is the existing level means of access from the garage and to the residence. The proposed deck would occupy roughly the same footprint as the existing deck, with a small reduction along the north side of the existing deck. Jeffery D. Schielke Government Center ● 100 N. Island Ave ● Batavia, IL 60510 ● 630-454-2000 ● www.BataviaIL.gov Page 17 of 41 Staff Analysis: The property was originally platted as part of John Van Nortwick’s 3rd Addition to Batavia in 1883. Like other older parts of the community there are improvements that are not compliant with current standards. In particular, because of the connection of the deck to both structures, additional zoning standards that were not envisioned or applied when the deck was first constructed are also required. This is as with the connection to the residence; primary structure setbacks do apply. Prior to 2010, the property was zoned R2 (today’s R1-M), in 2010 the property was placed in the R1-H District, which was designed for the smaller lots in the traditional neighborhoods closer to downtown. The age of the deck being replaced is not specifically known. The City did not require permits for decks until the late 1990’s, the deck may have been built either prior to regulations being established, or simply constructed without a permit, but without a review of setbacks. The applicants have requested variations to allow the replacement. This would require two variances from the Zoning Code. Staff is supportive of these two (2) variances and outline each request in detail below. The first variance request is to allow the deck to have an interior side (south) setback of approximately 1.5 feet instead of the 5’ required for a deck attached to the principal structure. As a corner lot, the interior side is reduced to 5 feet, the corner street side is required to be a 10’ setback. The applicant notes the existing privacy fence along the south property line mitigates the potential impact of the close proximity of the deck. 2. Table 2.104 to allow a deck attached to an existing garage that is approximately 2.4 feet from the rear setback (east), instead of a 25’ rear setback, when the deck and garage area attached to the principal structure a variation of approximately 22.6 feet The existing garage, which is non-conforming as a freestanding accessory structure, the setback would otherwise be 3 feet. By connecting the two structures, the rear principal structure would be applicable, creating the additional setback variance. The design of the deck is low and unobtrusive. Creating additional separation for the sake of code compliance would add two additional sets of steps. The applicant notes the request is in part to provide a continuous connection from the two structures, as had existed previously. In staff’s opinion, the two requests appear appropriate to restore the previous condition of the site, and compliance with the Zoning Code would create additional challenges, given the configuration of the site. Review of Findings: The Zoning Board of Appeals is to consider the information submitted by the applicant and provided by staff, together with the information given at the public hearing. Staff has listed each required finding below and a draft of potential Zoning Board of Appeals response to each based on the submitted material and correspondence received to date. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall consider the required findings when making its recommendation to the City Council. Finding A: There are unique circumstances applicable to the property, including its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, (where) strict application of the Zoning Code would Jeffery D. Schielke Government Center ● 100 N. Island Ave ● Batavia, IL 60510 ● 630-454-2000 ● www.BataviaIL.gov Page 18 of 41 create an unnecessary hardship or other practical difficulty, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, and deprive the property owner of property rights enjoyed by other property owners in the same zoning district. Response: A unique circumstance exists with the property. The site was developed and configured prior to the adoption of current zoning regulations and is typical of existing neighborhoods. Compliance with the Zoning Code would diminish the existing amount of private outdoor space, and create practical challenge with the layout of the site. Staff feels this Finding has been met. Finding B: Such unique circumstances were not created by the applicant. Response: The applicant did not create the unique circumstances. The applicant purchased the property in 2005 and did not construct the existing deck in its present configuration, that provides the primary access between the structures. Staff feels this Finding has been met. Finding C: The variance does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is located. Response: The requested variances do not constitute a grant of special privileges. This property has existing non-conforming conditions, like other residences constructed prior to the adoption of zoning regulations. The proposed variances would allow the property at 26 North Harrison Street to continue to be improved and used based on its traditional use and configuration. The action would allow for the reconstruction of an existing deck, that would require significant modification to otherwise replace it. Other properties in the district would have the same right to seek a similar variance for existing conditions being improved. Staff feels this Finding has been met. Finding D: The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance is reflective of existing improvements on the site, with a slight reduction in deck area on the north side of the property. The proposed deck is a replacement for a previously existing deck in the same location, that has not affected the essential character of this area. Staff feels this Finding has been met. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals take the following actions: 1. Open and conduct the Public Hearing 2. After all members of the public that wish to speak have been spoken; and the ZBA has determined no additional information is needed, Close the Public Hearing 3. Review the Findings for Approval of for the requested variances, as drafted by Staff. Staff notes that its opinion on each draft finding is based on the information available prior to the hearing. The Commission may modify them based on information presented at the hearing. Jeffery D. Schielke Government Center ● 100 N. Island Ave ● Batavia, IL 60510 ● 630-454-2000 ● www.BataviaIL.gov Page 19 of 41  4. Make a Motion to recommend approval of the following variances for a deck on property located at 26 North Harrison Street: a. Table 2.104 to allow the replacement of a deck located between the principal residence and an accessory structure garage with an interior side (south) setback of approximately 1.5 feet instead of the 5’ required for a deck attached to the principal structure, a variation of approximately 3.5 feet; and b. Table 2.104 to allow a deck attached to an existing garage that is approximately 2.4 feet from the rear setback (east), instead of a 25’ rear setback, when the deck and garage area attached to the principal structure a variation of approximately 22.6 feet. In general conformance with the plans as reviewed by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Attachments: 1. Variance Application Documents c Mayor and City Council Department Heads Angela Cale, Applicant Randy Murley, Warner Decking Media Jeffery D. Schielke Government Center ● 100 N. Island Ave ● Batavia, IL 60510 ● 630-454-2000 ● www.BataviaIL.gov Page 20 of 41 2/2 /26 Mr. Rackow, I have resided in my home at 26 N Harrison Street for over 20 years. At the time of purchase, there was an existing wooden deck connecting the house and garage measuring approximately 16 x 14 ft. The elevated deck and staircase provide the only means to exit the rear door on the southeast side of my house due to the height of the foundation. In the subsequent years, the wooden deck, which seemed to have been poorly designed so that it would retain rain and ice, started to deteriorate to the point of loose railings, cracked and missing boards. I felt it now presented both a safety hazard and attractive nuisance and had outlived its meaningful life. Particularly as I am aging, I need a stable, level, and low maintenance means to safely exit the rear door of the house and cross to the side door of the garage, where my car is parked, which would be afforded by the submitted plans for the deck. This would serve as both walkway and an area for my outdoor recreation as my corner lot essentially lacks a backyard. The replacement is to be a composite material that will not require maintenance and will offer greater “curb appeal”. As both a practical and cost saving measure, it was actually designed to be somewhat smaller than the prior deck, but the reduction is to the north (street side) of the structure. Both for aesthetic and practical purposes, I am looking to stay in the same footprint of the prior deck on the remaining sides. The south edge of the deck would not meet the 3’ foot setback noted in the zoning code but would still be well within my property lines. Due to the neighbors on the south side of my property having installed their own privacy fence , they have my deck and it would pose no impediment to their own enjoyment of their back yard . The placement of my garage isolates the deck so that it is out of sight to my neighbor on the east. From the , the homeowners on the north side of Houston Street 100 N Island Avenue Batavia IL 60510 Page 21 of 41 would benefit from a newer and nicer outdoor space at my home, should they be inclined to view it from their front doors. I appreciate your consideration in approving this upgrade to my property so that I can continue to happily and safely enjoy the benefits of owning my home in Batavia for many years to come. SINCERELY, ANGELA CALE 2 Page 22 of 41 Page 23 of 41 Page 24 of 41 Page 25 of 41 Page 26 of 41 Page 27 of 41 Page 28 of 41 Page 29 of 41 Page 30 of 41 Page 31 of 41 Page 32 of 41 Page 33 of 41 Page 34 of 41  MEMO To: Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals From: Drew Rackow AICP, Planning & Zoning Officer Date: April 17, 2026 Re: Variations to the Subdivision Regulations (City Code Section 11-2-5) for 644 Midway Drive Brad and Christine Mitchell, Applicants Planning Case: 26-008 Background and Summary of Information from the Applicant: Brad and Christine Mitchell of 644 Midway Drive have made an application for subdivision variation (Subdivision Code 11-2-5) to address a proposed detached garage, that would encroach over a recorded Building Line marked by the surveyor on the plat at 35 feet by approximately 23 feet. The subject property is part of the Colonial Village Unit 2 Subdivision. This subdivision was developed under Kane County jurisdiction and subsequently annexed by Batavia. The residence was constructed in 1961 according to township records. The recorded building line is phrased for buildings and structures however, the application of it may have not been consistently applied. The Colonial Village subdivision plat specifies a setback of 60 feet from all roadway centerlines, creating setbacks of 35 to 30 feet. This may have been to achieve stricter setbacks than those under the County’s requirements at that time. The plat does not make a distinction of the setback line applying to only principal structures and states the building line as “SET BACK for buildings and structures shall be 60 feet minimum from center line of any street”. The property is zoned R1-M Single Family Residential, Medium Density District, which establishes a 12-foot corner side setback for accessory structures. The Mitchell’s propose a garage in a location that is otherwise in conformance with the base zoning district. They note some locations of accessory structures that may not be in conformance with the subdivision line. The applicants also note the impracticality of locating the accessory structure outside of this building line. They also note the practical need for a garage to update the property and provide enclosed space for an electric vehicle. Staff Analysis: The City’s Zoning Code allows a detached garage at the proposed location. However, the presence of the recorded building line otherwise would prevent the issuance of a permit at the proposed location. Improvements must comply with both the recorded building line and zoning setback, leaving the more restrictive to prevail. The Mitchells have provided typical rendering of the garage, but have not yet designed it in full, seeking the approval of the subdivision variation. The design and materials would be consistent with the residence’s architecture. The proposed garage dimensions are typical of a two car garage and would not be an excessive request for variation. As a conforming garage location, it should not have a negative effect on the adjoining properties. As a corner lot, and a narrower right of way Jeffery D. Schielke Government Center ● 100 N. Island Ave ● Batavia, IL 60510 ● 630-454-2000 ● www.BataviaIL.gov Page 35 of 41 width (50’) along Mount Vernon Place, the subdivision building line requirement is particularly restrictive on this property. The Subdivision Regulations allow for a variation where unnecessary hardships result from the application of the Subdivision Regulations. The Code requires that lots otherwise meet the requirements of the Zoning Code, which is applicable here. No zoning relief is requested, and the applicant proposes improvements that conform to the Zoning Code. The proposed location would have a potential conflict with the overhead electric service. The applicant has been in communication with the Electric Division to determine the cost of undergrounding their service. Staff agrees that the proposed improvement will not have impacts on adjoining properties and believes the Commission should support the applicant’s request. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Plan Commission recommend approval of a variation to the Subdivision Regulations to allow an encroachment of a detached garage to be located at a 12 foot setback, a recorded 35 foot building line. An encroachment of approximately 23 feet. Subject to the following conditions: 1. The garage shall be in general conformance of the attached plans. 2. The variation shall expire in one year from City Council approval if permits have not been issued and construction commenced. Attachments: Application Documents C: Mayor and City Council Department Heads Brad and Christine Mitchell, Applicant Jeffery D. Schielke Government Center ● 100 N. Island Ave ● Batavia, IL 60510 ● 630-454-2000 ● www.BataviaIL.gov Page 36 of 41 We are seeking a variance for our property at 644 Midway Drive in Batavia to allow the construction of a two-car garage. Our intention is to build the garage on the southwest corner of our lot. If approved, we would also plan to extend the driveway and install fencing in the backyard. Most homes in our neighborhood have garages; however, due to our current setback requirements and build lines, we are unable to construct one. Adding a garage would modernize our property, increase its value, and allow us to enjoy our home in a manner similar to our neighbors. We also anticipate purchasing electric vehicles in the coming years. A garage would enable us to install the necessary charging equipment, which is not feasible under our current circumstances. Because our home is located on a corner lot, our setback requirements are significantly greater than those of other properties in the neighborhood. Our house was built directly on the front (Midway) and side (Mt. Vernon) build lines, requiring any accessory structure to be located behind the home. This makes it impractical to construct a garage within the existing buildable area. Other corner-lot properties in our neighborhood have structures situated closer to the street and property lines. For example, the home at 641 Midway Drive has an attached garage approximately 23 feet from the street, while our build line is approximately 45 feet from the street (based on Google Maps). Constructing a garage toward the rear of our property will not interfere with neighboring properties or affect driver visibility along Midway or Mt. Vernon. We believe the addition of a well-designed garage would enhance both our property value and the overall character of the neighborhood. We have lived in our home for over 20 years and deeply value our neighborhood and the Batavia community. The opportunity to add a garage would allow us to remain in the home we love and continue investing in our property for years to come. We respectfully request that you grant this variance so we may better utilize our property now and in the future. Page 37 of 41 Projected new garage 26'x26' Page 38 of 41 Walls are 10 foot tall Top of roof (4/12 pitch) is approximately 15 feet Garage door is 8 foot tall. Page 39 of 41 Page 40 of 41 Page 41 of 41