Kane County panel approves rezoning for Elburn landscaping business with conditions after neighbors raise drainage and parking concerns

The Kane County Development Committee voted to approve zoning petition 4682 to rezone portions of a property at 3S 480 Harder Road in unincorporated Elburn so part of the site can operate as a landscape business with an on-site growing area.

Staff said the request splits part of the parcel to F1 (rural residential) and F2 (special‑use agricultural/landscape business) to allow growing, equipment storage and vehicle parking. The petitioners, Jose Barajas and Anahi Tipax, were represented by attorney Scott Richmond, who told the committee his clients began the rezoning process after county staff notified them and have already removed nonfunctional vehicles and dead trees.

The committee attached multiple stipulations to the approval. Staff required a stormwater permit and a drain‑tile investigation, preservation of an existing flood route with no storage or fill in that corridor, continuous landscape screening along the western property line where materials and equipment are stored, and a requirement that any existing unpermitted structures be placed under building-permit review within three months of zoning approval. Staff also noted that F2 status is permitted only while a growing component is maintained; if the operation ceases to include growing, the special-use authorization would no longer apply. Under county rules the special use lapses if required improvements are not established within one year of approval.

Neighbors urged tighter timing and stronger assurances. Gerald Long, who said he lives about a mile away and serves as a township trustee, called the property "an eyesore" and said he had observed 15–20 vehicles in the yard. Long asked whether the access would move and pressed for faster progress on parking and clean‑up. Mike Bains, owner of the adjacent Greenscape business, said drainage and water management were his primary concerns and told the committee he has spent "in excess of $30,000 in engineering" to address water issues on his property.

Richmond said the petitioners plan to retain engineering firm Hampton Lenzini & Renwick to conduct the drain‑tile study and design stormwater controls and that the proposed parking would be gravel, not asphalt. "There is very little traffic impact, to be honest with you," Richmond said in response to questions about road safety and customer trips, noting the business is primarily off‑site landscaping operations and not retail.

Committee members debated whether the county's one‑year implementation window was adequate and whether the parking area could be required sooner. Staff estimated roughly 90–150 days for initial engineering, field surveys and a first submittal for a parking permit and spoke of a back‑and‑forth review schedule before issuance. The committee discussed a 90‑day construction window after permit issuance for a gravel parking area but noted permit timing and seasonal constraints could affect that schedule.

The motion to approve the petition was moved by Paul and seconded by Arroyo. A roll‑call vote recorded approval with a single recorded 'no' vote by Leonard; the motion carried. Staff said it will monitor compliance and can pursue enforcement if the petitioners fail to follow the conditions attached to the special use.

What happens next: the petitioners must complete the required engineering and permitting steps, obtain any stormwater permits, and follow the zoning stipulations. Staff noted that failure to implement the special‑use improvements within the one‑year window will render the special use null and void under county code.