PLAN COMMISSION 2010/10/13 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest
Plan Commission
Proceedings of the October 13, 2010 Meeting
A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Plan Commission was held on Wednesday, October 13,
2010, at 6:30 p.m., at City Hall, 220 E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois.
Commission members present: Chairman Jack Reisenberg, Commissioners Tim Newman,
Catherine Waldeck, Mike Adelman and Jeff Kuchman.
Commission members absent: Commissioners Beth Miller and Mark Shaw
Staff present: Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development
1. Introduction of Commissioners and staff.
Chairman Reisenberg introduced the members of the Commission and staff.
2. Approval of the minutes from the September 15, 2010 Plan Commission meeting.
The minutes of the September 15, 2010 meeting were approved as submitted.
3. Public Hearing and Action: Continued consideration of amendments to Chapter 38 of
the City Code, Subdivisions. This is part of an ongoing effort by the Plan Commission
to update and clarify various sections of the City Code pertaining to development.
Chairman Reisenberg asked the Commission to identify any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of
interest. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from staff.
Ms. Czerniak introduced this item noting that this is a continuation of the Commission’s work on
the update of the Subdivision Chapter of the Code. She noted that from time to time Boards and
Commissions review and update various chapters and sections of the Code and noted that the
Commission has been reviewing the Subdivision Chapter for several months now. She stated
that the Subdivision Chapter of the Code has not been updated in its entirety since 1946. She
stated that based on the Commission’s review and comments on the proposed amendments to
date, the Chapter has been revised to reflect the Commission’s discussions including
modifications to wording and some re-ordering of some sections. She reminded the
Commission that the overall amendments as proposed do not make substantive changes to the
City’s subdivision process but instead, provides clarification, additional detail and expanded
information in some areas where technical requirements have changed. She noted that in
particular, clarification is provided on the process for requesting variances, the definition section
is enhanced and the application requirements are included in the Code. She stated that adding
application requirements to the Code is consistent with the approach taken by other Boards and
Commissions. She stated that in other cases, this has worked well to set realistic expectations for
petitioners and members of the public with to the materials required for subdivision of property.
She pointed out that in response to several situations that have occurred in recent years, an
amendment to allow the opportunity for a second extension of tentative approval is proposed.
She pointed out that the public notice requirements are detailed in the Chapter and that the
standards for subdivisions have been updated. She noted that the County requirements for
wetlands and storm water management regulations did not exist when the Chapter was last
Plan Commission Minutes – October 13, 2010
Page 2 of 4
amended and are now called out in the Chapter for clarification. She invited questions and
comments from the Commissioners.
In response to a question from Commissioner Newman, Ms. Czerniak confirmed that staff from
various departments and sections was consulted in drafting the amendments and in responding to
the previous comments and suggestions from the Commission. She confirmed that the City
Engineer and City Attorney were both involved in the process. She stated that the update is
overdue and that although the Chapter may not be perfect, staff is comfortable with moving the
current draft forward for final approval. She noted that with a wholesale update of the Chapter,
it is likely that there may be some items that are missed or others that need to be tweaked once
the Chapter is used a few times. She stated that future minor amendments to one or two sections
can easily be brought before the Commission for review and public hearing as needed. She
stated that the Chapter cannot be written to address every imaginable situation and reminded the
Commission that the variance process is intended to allow the Plan Commission and City
Council to approve variances if unique situations arise and if a proposed project is consistent
with the intent of the overall City Code and applicable polices, and if the Commission and
Council determine that a variance is in the best interest of the overall City.
In response to a question from Commissioner Adelman, Ms. Czerniak explained that once a
tentative plat of subdivision is approved by the City Council, it is valid for 12-months. She
noted that during that time, a final plat of subdivision and any other appropriate documentation
needs to be presented to the Plan Commission for final consideration. She stated that with the
proposed opportunity for an additional extension of tentative approval, a petitioner could request
a 12-month extension of tentative approval from the City Council, twice. As a result, she
explained that with Council approval, tentative approval of a subdivision could be extended for a
period of up to 36 months before the tentative plat approval expires.
Commissioner Adelman noted that he was not present at the last meeting and may have missed
some previous discussion but questioned whether requests for extension of tentative approvals
should come back before the Commission for discussion to allow the Commission to make a
recommendation to the City Council on the request. He noted that there may be some changes
that take place in the world that could affect a previous approval.
In response to questions from the Commission, Ms. Czerniak confirmed that if any changes are
proposed by the petitioner after tentative plat approval, then an extension could not be requested,
that matter would need to be brought back to the Commission for further review and public
hearing. She explained that as part of the tentative approval process, the hard questions are
asked and issues are resolved and usually no substantive changes occur between tentative
approval and presentation of a final plat for consideration. She added that the final phase of the
subdivision process provides the opportunity for confirmation that the final plans reflect the
approvals granted during the tentative phase of the approvals. She confirmed that the
subdivision plat and overall development as recommended by the Plan Commission, whether
tentative or final, is presented to the City Council for action.
Commissioner Adelman noted his experience that the changes to the stormwater management
requirements impacted a previous project he was involved with over time requiring changes to
the plat.
Plan Commission Minutes – October 13, 2010
Page 3 of 4
Ms. Czerniak clarified that as written, a request for an extension of tentative approval could not
involve any modifications to the plat. She noted that if modifications are requested, the plat
would need to be reconsidered by the Plan Commission and could not simply be considered
through a tentative approval extension request.
In response to a question from Commissioner Adelman, Ms. Czerniak stated that most requests
for extensions are due to the need for time to align finances or due to current market conditions.
She confirmed that the Letter of Credit and other financial guarantees are received after approval
of the final plat of subdivision and before the City records the plat of subdivision. She confirmed
that the financial guarantees are reviewed by the City Engineer and City Attorney.
In response to a question from Commissioner Adelman, Commissioner Newman noted that the
regulators will work to find a bank to take over Letters of Credit is a bank fails.
In response to a question from Commissioner Adelman, Ms. Czerniak confirmed that impact fees
are addressed in a separate section of the Code.
The Commission pointed out some typos and formatting errors.
Chairman Reisenberg invited public comment. Hearing none he invited a motion from the
Commission.
Commissioner Newman made a motion to recommend approval of amendments to Chapter 38,
Subdivisions, to the City Council.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Waldeck and was unanimously approved by the
Commission.
4. Public testimony on non-agenda items.
Richard Rielly, representing SBA Towers, requested that the Commission continue discussion of
modifications to the City’s Wireless Ordinance. He stated that service in the area is decreasing
and relief is needed to service the southeast quadrant of the city. He stated that the current
Ordinance identifies the Barat property as an acceptable location for a new cell tower, but stated
that other alternative locations should be considered.
Ms. Czerniak stated that within the last 30 days the Ad Hoc Barat Advisory Committee met with
Harris Bank. She stated that Harris Bank has not yet taken a position on whether or not they
wish to retain the current designation on the site or have it removed. She explained that at this
time, the City has received no applications either from a tower provider or from Harris Bank to
amend the Wireless Ordinance. She confirmed that the City has contacted independent
consultants to assist the City in review of any such requests once they are submitted. She
recommended that Mr. Reilly submit a complete request for consideration of an amendment and
all applicable fees it SBA desires consideration of an amendment to the City’s current Code
requirements. She confirmed that the cost of the independent consultant’s review will be
covered by the petitioner requesting an amendment.
In response to questions from Chairman Reisenberg, Ms. Czerniak stated that the independent
consultant will review the petition and provide input on various aspects of each request
Plan Commission Minutes – October 13, 2010
Page 4 of 4
including, but not limited to, the need for additional coverage in the area, the opportunity for
stealth installations, minimum height requirements, the state of the technology and how to
achieve maximize coverage with minimal infrastructure if in fact a new installation is needed.
She stated that when a request for amendment is filed, a deposit is required from the petitioner
and then held in escrow and used to cover the costs of the consultants. She stated that any
money remaining after the review is completed is returned to the petition. She confirmed that
the consultant would be working under contract with the City.
In response to a question from Commissioner Newman, Ms. Czerniak stated that the consultant
will prepare a report which would be presented to the Commission. She stated that staff would
base any recommendations on the report. She acknowledged that the consultant will bring a
level of expertise to the review that the City does not have on staff. She added that during earlier
discussions, the Plan Commission requested that an independent consultant be used for review of
these types of requests.
Dennis Meulemans, 1100 Sir William Lane, questioned what role the Plan Commission and City
Council will play in the ongoing discussions of affordable housing and the Settler’s Green
development. He stated that he thought those items would be discussed at this meeting.
Chairman Reisenberg stated that the City Council is scheduled to have a discussion on affordable
housing November 18th. He stated that the matter will be referred to the Plan Commission at the
appropriate time.
Ms. Czerniak stated that as of now, the City Council is scheduled to take action on the proposed
financial term sheet for the Settler’s Green project at the next Council meeting. She explained
that if the term sheet is approved, the matter will be forwarded to the Plan Commission for
review of the technical issues of the proposed development and for consistency with zoning
requirements. She stated that if the term sheet is not approved, the matter will not move forward
to Plan Commission.
In response to a question from Mr. Meulemans, Ms. Czerniak stated that written testimony can
be provided to Community Development staff in advance of the Council meeting or public
testimony can be presented to the Council at the meeting.
In response to a question from Commissioner Adelman, Ms. Czerniak stated that the Council
agendas and packets are available from City Hall and noted that the packets are available on the
website the Friday before the meeting.
5. Additional information from staff.
Ms. Czerniak noted that at this time, there are no items scheduled for the November Plan
Commission meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Catherine Czerniak
Director of Community Development