PLAN COMMISSION 2010/01/13 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest
Plan Commission
Proceedings of the January 13, 2010 Meeting
A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Plan Commission was held on Wednesday, January 13,
2010, at 6:30 p.m., at City Hall, 220 E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois.
Commission members present: Chairman Avery, Commissioners Mark Shaw, Robert Franksen,
Michael Adelman, Tim Newman, Jack Reisenberg and Catherine Waldeck.
Commission members absent: None
Staff present: Peter Coutant, Senior Planner, and Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community
Development
1. Introduction of Commissioners and staff.
Chairman Avery introduced the members of the Commission and City staff.
2. Approval of the minutes from November 11, 2009 Plan Commission meeting.
The minutes of the November 11, 2009 meeting were approved with a correction as requested by
Commissioner Franksen.
3. Presentation and Public Hearing: Preliminary consideration of a request for approval of
the tentative and final plat of subdivision for Settlers’ Green, a 16-unit affordable, rental
housing development. The project is proposed on property located on the northwest corner
of Everett and Telegraph Roads.
Property owner: The City of Lake Forest
Applicants: Lake County Residential Development Corporation, a not for profit agency,
and The DeBruler Company
Chairman Avery introduced the petition and asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest
or Ex Parte contacts.
Commissioner Shaw stated that the DeBruler Company is a client of his firm and recused
himself from consideration of this petition due to the conflict of interest. He left the Council
Chambers.
Commissioner Newman stated that he has a business relationship with Michael Burns, Chairman
of the Housing Trust, he stated that he is not sure that a conflict of interest exists and added that
since the Commission will not be taking action at this meeting, he will listen to the presentation
and public testimony, but not offer comment. He stated that prior to further Commission
consideration of this petition, he will confer with City staff and the City Attorney to determine
whether or not it is appropriate for him to participate in the proceedings on this matter.
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 2 of 22
Chairman Avery clarified that this meeting is an opportunity for the Commission to hear an
initial presentation on this petition and to hear public comments. He stated his expectation that
the Commission will ask questions, many of which will be answered at a future meeting. He
emphasized that the Commission will not take any formal action on this matter at this meeting.
He stated that public notice will be provided to those on the interested parties list prior to any
future Plan Commission meetings on this matter. He swore in all those intending to testify and
invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Michael Burns, Chairman of the Housing Trust, provided some background on the City’s efforts
in support of affordable housing. He stated that in 2003 the City Council passed a Resolution
supporting affordable housing and the Adhoc Housing Committee was appointed. He noted that
in March, 2005, the Affordable Housing Plan was approved by the City Council and in
December, 2005, the City Council adopted the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. He added that
in 2006, the Council put the Demolition Tax in place. He stated that the last two items are
important because they provide funding to support affordable housing efforts in the community.
He commented that in September, 2006, the City Council created the Housing Trust Board and
the trust fund. He stated that he is Chairman of the Housing Trust and that Tom Morsch, 3rd
Ward Alderman, and Debbie Haddad, former 4th Ward Alderman, are also members of the
Housing Trust Board. He continued noting that in March, 2008, the City Council adopted a
Resolution in support of inter-jurisdictional cooperation on affordable housing in northern Lake
County. He provided background on how the proposed Settler’s Green project came about
noting that in April, 2008, the Housing Trust gave the City Council an update and identified
various potential affordable housing sites throughout the City. He explained that from May thru
November, 2008, the Housing Trust worked to evaluate the various potential sites and had
discussions with local institutions about their interest in affordable housing and work force
housing. He stated that in November, 2008 the Housing Trust made another presentation to
update the City Council. He noted that the Housing Trust was again before the City Council in
December, 2008 at which time the Council gave the Housing Trust authority to proceed with
initial planning, due diligence and public discussions in advance of deciding whether to include a
City owned property in a tax credit application. In January and March, 2009 the Housing Trust
and City Council held public meetings to review the site selection and development concepts and
receive public input. He stated that importantly, in March, 2009, the City Council authorized the
inclusion of a City owned property in an application for tax credits. He stated that in September,
2009, the application for tax credits was approved by the Illinois Housing Development
Authority, IDHA. He noted that as a follow up to the award of tax credits, the Settler’s Green
project is now going through the public review processes before the Plan Commission, Building
Review Board and City Council. He explained that the proposed site was recommended by the
Housing Trust because it is consistent with the criteria in the City’s Affordable Housing Plan.
He noted that the property is City owned and available for development. He noted that this
parcel was previously identified by the Council as a potential site for affordable housing. He
added that the parcel allows for a transit oriented development based on its location within
walking distance to the train and to the nearby business district. He stated that the current zoning
on the property is B-1, Neighborhood Commercial, which allows for residential development.
He stated that no zone change or variances are required and that the proposed density is less than
permitted by the B-1 zoning district. He discussed the process the Housing Trust used to select
the developers noting that a request for proposals process was used which included presentations
to the Housing Trust by various interested developers. He stated that the DeBruhler Company
and the Lake County Residential Development Corporation were selected based on the
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 3 of 22
relationship of the two parties as co-developers, a for profit and a not for profit group. He stated
that both parties have extensive experience in developing, owning and maintaining residential
developments in Lake County and have the capacity to manage a high quality affordable housing
development. He added that the selected team includes a local architect who understands the
importance of being sensitive to the neighborhood and community character. He added that the
selected developers have the ability to bring outside funding to the project to assure an
economically viable project. He acknowledged that the economics of this project are outside the
purview of the Plan Commission but explained that the availability of the tax credits to support
this project is viewed as a good opportunity by the Housing Trust since it will allow the Trust to
use its funds for other affordable housing projects. He emphasized that no City funds will be
used for the Settler’s Green development. He noted that the tax credits allow the City to leverage
its assets to support this project. He introduced the developers.
Mary Ellen Tamesy, Executive Director of LCRDC, stated that the agency is a not for profit
group that has developed and managed affordable housing in Lake County for 31 years. She
stated that 75 units, at 22 different sites have been developed and noted that they are both for sale
and rental units. She stated that the units are located in various communities including
Barrington, Gurnee, Grayslake, Libertyville and Lake Bluff. She explained that LCRDC’s
mission is to develop affordable housing in communities where there is none or very little. She
explained that in addition to developing their own units, LCRDC has worked in cooperation with
for profit developers, such as the DeBruhler Company, to develop 750 units.
Bill DeBruhler, DeBruhler Company, stated that he was part of LCRDC for approximately 20
years, serving 10 years as the President of the Board. He stated that he stepped down from the
Board in 2006 to allow him to sell some of his projects to LCRDC and others to his children so
that the projects would remain affordable. He stated that he founded the DeBruhler Company
with his father in 1973 and noted that their first development was a 203-unit elderly development
in Waukegan. He stated that the company developed over 2,500 units and currently owns 1,300
of those units. He commented that today, his sons are involved in the company and that his
father, although retired, is still active in the business. He stated that he grew up in Libertyville
and taught school there. He stated that prior to joining the company, all of his sons worked in
other companies. He provided additional background on his family. He stated that his company
is honored to have the opportunity for do this project in Lake Forest. He commended the City
for its efforts to provide a diversity of housing in the community.
Diana Melichar, project architect, reviewed the design concept for the proposed development.
She noted that the goal of the project is to harmonize with the surrounding neighborhood. She
reviewed the development surrounding the site noting that it is located between the commercial
district along Waukegan Road and the surrounding residential development. She stated that the
Settler’s Green project provides an appropriate transition between the commercial and single
family residential development. She reviewed slides of the streetscapes adjacent to the site. She
noted that the existing streetscape plantings will be preserved and will be augmented as needed.
She stated that the views into the development are limited. She reviewed the proposed site plan
and noted that the units are configured as duplexes of 1,150 to 1,450 square feet, plus garages.
She noted that the front building facades will frame a community green space, 90 x 90 square
feet in size, or about a fifth of an acre. She commented that the distance between the front
facades of the homes, across the green space, street and front yards will be about 190 feet. She
noted that there is currently a dense landscape buffer between the proposed development site and
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 4 of 22
the adjacent residential neighborhood. She stated that the distance between the proposed homes
and the existing homes on Lakewood Drive will be over 300 feet. She noted that as proposed,
the development will consist of 8 two family, attached residences, 7 - two bedroom units and 9 -
three 3 bedroom units. She stated that one of the units will be an accessible unit. She stated that
the intention is to design the units to mitigate the mass. She reviewed a plan illustrating the
location of parking areas and the road noting that driveways are combined and the roadway is
only 21 feet wide to minimize the impervious surface on the site. She discussed parking noting
that a total of 46 dedicated parking spaces will be provided on the site, 26 of which will be inside
garages and 20 dedicated parking spaces. She noted that additional parking could occur in
driveways. She noted that all garage doors face away from the street. She reviewed slides of
homes in the surrounding neighborhoods and of the nearby commercial development. She stated
that there is a mixture of homes styles in this area and commented that although various exterior
building materials are used, there is a predominance of brick. She reviewed homes in other
neighborhoods throughout the City noting areas where homes create an “ensemble” similar to the
concept proposed for Settler’s Square. She described the proposed architectural style as
traditional English Arts and Crafts, resulting in small, simple cottage style homes. She noted that
the homes will be one and a half stories in height with eight foot interior ceiling heights and 26
foot ridge heights sloping down to eight feet above ground at the eaves. She stated that the
buildings will be constructed of high quality materials for appearance and durability noting that
the homes will be brick with clad wood windows, simulated divided lites and 30 year asphalt
shingle roofs.
Tim Christie, Rocco Fiore Landscaping, discussed the three major landscape components, the
middle greensward or common area, the foundation plantings which are governed by the City’s
landscape guidelines, and the perimeter landscape buffer. He highlighted the perimeter plantings
noting that there are some opportunities and some challenges. He stated that existing
landscaping will be preserved and augmented on the west and north sides of the property. He
acknowledged that some of the materials in these areas are not of the best quality. He noted that
on the south, the plant materials are of good quality and that to the extent possible, the existing
vegetation will be maintained. He noted that what really makes landscape screening attractive is
a layering of plantings, rather than just a stand of evergreen trees. He noted that the existing
landscaping along Telegraph Road, on the east, is marginal and will require augmenting. He
stated that the objective of the project is to make the landscaping at the perimeter of the property
as good as, but most likely better than, the existing landscaping. He stated that the overall plan is
guided by two City regulations, the minimum landscape requirements for residential properties
and the tree replacement requirements.
Mike Bleck, Bleck Engineering, discussed the site plan and explained the proposed configuration
of the lot lines. He stated that the City owned parcel totals 13.7 acres and is comprised of a
number of small parcels of land, none of which are part of previous subdivisions. He explained
that the project proposes that a 2.67 acre parcel be created from the larger City owned parcel for
the Settler’s Green development. He noted that the boundaries of the new parcel are set by
Everett Road on the south and by Telegraph Road, providing for full right-of-way dedication, on
the east. He noted that to the south, the property line was established to stay away from the
detention pond and to the west, to allow a significant wooded buffer to remain between the
proposed development and the existing homes on Lakewood Drive. He discussed the drainage
noting that this property is unique in that no adjacent properties drain on to it. He discussed the
drainage flows from the nearby properties noting that drainage from Arbor Ridge, the
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 5 of 22
development to the south, flows south to the detention ponds in that development. He explained
that the train station area drainage is handled by a storm sewer system installed by the City for
that purpose. He explained that the proposed development site will drain to the west to a
depressional area along the west edge of the development. He stated that the Westlake
Subdivision, the single family residential neighborhood to the west, has its own storm sewer
system and as a result, the only drainage that flows toward the proposed development site is a
small amount from the rear portions of a few properties on Lakewood Drive. He stated that a
private road is proposed with curb and gutter and a storm sewer system with inlets along the
road. He stated that the road slopes down from Everett and Telegraph Roads to allow all of the
drainage to be collected on the site and directed to the pond immediately to the north. He noted
that all of the foundations are raised up above the road to allow all of the drainage to flow toward
the new road and into the inlets provided. He emphasized that the entire site is designed to drain
directly to the north and into the detention pond designated for this purpose. He stated that the
detention pond was sized to handle storm drainage from this site after development. He noted
that the calculations used to size the pond anticipated that this site would be developed at a
higher intensity than what is now proposed. He pointed out the berm at the corner of Telegraph
and Everett Roads noting that the site was designed to allow the berm to be preserved.
Mr. DeBruhler thanked the City for the opportunity to develop this property and stated that he is
confident in his team.
Mr. Coutant reviewed the public process for this project noting that as explained by the
Chairman, no decision on this petition is requested at this meeting, only input and questions. He
stated that answers to questions raised will be brought back to the Commission at the February
meeting. He noted that plans for this development have been underway for about a year
beginning with discussions by the City Council and Housing Trust about allowing this property
to be named in an application for tax credits which was then submitted in spring, 2009 by the
developers with the approval of the City Council. He stated that staff has completed a review of
preliminary plans and has identified some issues that need to be addressed and additional
information that is needed. He stated that a preliminary staff review has determined that the
overall design concept and site plan appears to be technically feasible. He noted that detailed
staff comments will be provided to the developer as a follow up to this meeting to allow any
outstanding items to be addressed before further consideration by the Commission. He stated
that the City hired a consultant to conduct a wetlands study of the property which determined
that there are no wetlands that will be impacted by the proposed development. He stated that a
small wetland area was located off of the site of the proposed development. He stated that the
proposed development is in conformance with the requirements of the B-1 zoning district. He
explained that the allowable density for properties in the B-1 district is determined by application
of the zoning setbacks, allowable building heights and lot coverage and the parking
requirements. He added that the City also hired a consultant to conduct a traffic study to look
not only at the impact this project will have on traffic in the area, but also to look more broadly
at traffic patterns and volumes in this area to determine whether measures could be taken to
improve traffic flows. He invited a presentation from the traffic consultant.
Eric Russell, principal, KLOA, stated that his firm was retained by the City to conduct a study of
traffic in the general vicinity of this project and to evaluate and propose possible enhancements
that could offer improved traffic flows. He noted that the study also specifically considered the
impact that the Settler’s Green development would have on traffic in this area as well as the
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 6 of 22
impacts of other anticipated developments including the redevelopment of the southeast corner
of Waukegan and Everett Roads and a new Costco in Mettawa. He described the study process
noting that traffic was observed by the consultants at various times of day, traffic and pedestrian
counts were taken, train activity was quantified, school traffic was considered along with bus
routes and accident data was gathered from both the Lake Forest Police Department and IDOT.
He stated that his firm evaluated the costs and benefits of various improvements and prioritized
alternatives for improving traffic and pedestrian safety in the area. He noted that the area of
study focused on Waukegan, Telegraph and Everett Roads, but also gave some consideration to
Conway and Old Mill Roads since those roads also have at grade railroad crossings. He noted
that computer models of existing traffic conditions were developed and the additional traffic
expected from future development of the area was factored in. He clarified that the
improvements recommended are not contingent upon construction of the Settler’s Green
development or any other new development but are intended to improve existing conditions
while at the same time, accommodate any additional traffic generated by new development. He
stated that Everett Road is identified as a major road and is owned and maintained by the City.
He added that it is designated as a truck route and is a two lane road with turn lanes at some
intersections. He stated that it carries about 7,500 vehicles per day with a posted speed limit of
35 miles per hour. He noted that at the Everett and Telegraph Road intersections, traffic on
Everett Road does not stop and at the Everett and Waukegan Roads intersection there is a traffic
signal control. He stated that on an average week day, 79 to 84 trains cross Everett Road. He
noted that the trains are a major source of the traffic congestion in this area combined with the
short turn lanes, the sequencing of the traffic signals and the limited safety measures for
pedestrians. He stated that the proposed Settler’s Green development will have access to both
Everett and Telegraph Roads and noted the locations of the proposed curb cuts. He stated that
the curb cut on to Everett Road will limit vehicles to right in and right out turning movements to
limit impacts on Everett Road. He discussed vehicle projections for the proposed Settler’s
Green development noting that the impact of the development will be minimal even without the
consideration that some of the residents may rely on Metra for commuting. He stated that the
proposed development is expected to generate less than 15 vehicles per hour during peak
periods, with lower volumes during the off peak hours. He stated that the traffic will be
dispersed over the two driveways and will be imperceptible and will not change the level of
service at the near by intersections. He stated that the various improvements recommended in
the study are intended to improve existing levels of service and also accommodate new
development in this area. He highlighted several of the recommendations:
Modify the traffic signal timing at Waukegan and Everett Roads making the timing more
favorable to Everett Road particularly when trains are in the area. He explained that
more “green time” is needed to allow traffic on Everett Road to clear the intersection
after the railroad crossing gates have been down. He acknowledged that this will require
coordination with IDOT.
Lengthen the turn lane from eastbound Everett Road on to southbound Waukegan Road.
He stated that the lane would be extended to the west, across tracks, allowing more
stacking room for southbound traffic and clearing the thru lane.
Construct a right turn lane on northbound Telegraph Road on to eastbound Everett Road.
He noted that currently, there is only a single lane approaching Everett Road.
Construct a right turn lane on northbound Waukegan Road on to westbound Everett
Road.
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 7 of 22
Improve pedestrian safety by constructing a sidewalk along the east side of Telegraph
Road, south of Everett Road, installing pedestrian crossing signs with flashers and
moving the existing cross walk from mid-block to the intersection of Telegraph and
Everett Roads.
Mr. Coutant noted that the recommendations highlighted by Mr. Russel were the highest priority
improvements in the study as identified by the Public Works Committee. He stated that these
recommendations were presented to the City Council and are included in the draft Capital
Improvement Plan and will be considered by the City Council during its upcoming deliberations
on the FY 2011 budget.
In response to questions from Commissioner Reisenberg, Mr. Coutant confirmed that in
December, 2008, the Housing Trust looked at several sites for affordable housing including the
site located on the southeast corner of Telegraph and Everett Roads. He explained that based on
public input and further review, the selected location was moved to the present site. He
confirmed that the current site is larger than the initial site providing the opportunity for a more
open site plan and a greater buffer around the perimeter of the project. He added that the earlier
site raised concerns about ingress and egress to the site in an area where traffic often backs up on
Telegraph Road, south of Everett Road.
Commissioner Reisenberg confirmed that public commentary was the driver in the selection of
an alternative site.
In response to questions from Commissioner Reisenberg, Mr. Coutant confirmed that appraisals
of the property were completed and agreed to provide the appraisals to the Plan Commission
prior to the next meeting.
Commissioner Reisenberg explained that his reason for the question about the value of the City
land is related to the statement that no City funds will be used for this project. He stated that the
City owned 2.67 acre parcel which is being donated to this project, has value to the City.
Mr. Coutant clarified that the City Council has not yet formally approved the transfer of the
property, but would consider the formal transfer of the property as part of the continuing public
review process for this project.
In response to further questions from Commissioner Reisenberg, Mr. Coutant clarified that to
date; the only affordable housing the City has played a role in developing is the five senior
cottages located on Conway Road. He confirmed that those units are rental units. He stated that
those units were intended to serve an identified need for senior rental units. He stated that
Settler’s Green will be the first project in which the Housing Trust is involved. He noted that the
Housing Trust was involved in discussions about the inclusion of affordable units at Barat
Woods, but that project has not moved forward. He confirmed that although a final decision was
never made, the affordable units at Barat Woods were envisioned as being rental units.
In response to questions from Commissioner Reisenberg, Mr. DeBruhler discussed median
income noting that it is determined by the Federal government and is based on family size. He
stated that currently, the median income for a household of two people is $36,000 in round
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 8 of 22
numbers. He noted that the median income increases by about $4,500 to $5,500 per year based
on the number of people.
Ms. Tamesy clarified that the incomes are based on the Chicago Metropolitan Statistical Area,
not on Lake Forest incomes. She stated that for a family of 4, the median income is about
$82,000 and that to meet the criteria for Settler’s Green, the family could not make more than
60% of that median income.
Commissioner Adelman discussed the change in the site from the southeast corner of Telegraph
and Everett Roads, to the current site, noting that the change in site happened very quickly
leading him to believe that perhaps there was not a significant amount of study that went into the
site initially proposed. He added that he understands that it was the opportunity for tax credits
that drove development of this project. He agreed that he is interested to see the appraisals for
the property, particularly in light of the current economy. He questioned whether there might be
other sites that might be more viable for affordable housing than this site.
In response to a question from Commissioner Adelman, Ms. Czerniak, Ms. confirmed that the
availability of the tax credits was an impetus for moving this project forward.
Commissioner Adelman expressed disappointment that Old Mill Road was not addressed in the
traffic study. He questioned whether a traffic signal at Old Mill and Waukegan Roads would
alleviate some of the traffic on Everett Road. He noted the high number of trains that use the
tracks in this area and commented that the problem is not the number of trains that pass by, but
the number of trains that stop and hold up traffic.
In response to a question from Commissioner Adelman, Mr. Coutant confirmed that the City
Attorney’s opinion is that the City’s Home Rule status exempts the City from State requirements
for affordable housing. He continued noting that despite this exemption, the City Council has
taken a number of actions in support of affordable housing in the community. He noted that the
adopted affordable housing plan allows the City to provide affordable housing under its own
parameters. He clarified that the City became Home Rule prior to the adoption of the affordable
housing plan and the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
Commissioner Adelman questioned whether there is any merit in reserving this site for future
parking for the train station, particularly in light of future expansion of Amtrak service.
In response to questions from Commissioner Adelman, Mr. Coutant confirmed that the density
proposed is 5.6 units per acre, comparable to that proposed at Barat Woods. He acknowledged
that the traffic consultant stated that the proposed development will not add significant traffic to
the area. He confirmed that the traffic consultant identified existing problems in this area and
provided recommendations for improvements.
Commissioner Adelman stated that since problems exist now, the additional development will
not help the situation.
In response to a question from Commissioner Adelman, Mr. DeBruhler confirmed that the lease
will require that all units maintain consistent window treatments.
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 9 of 22
In response to questions from Commissioner Adelman regarding the information in the
addendum to statement of intent, Ms. Tamesy confirmed that the numbers for the various
household sizes reflect 60% of the median income.
In response to questions from Commissioner Adelman, Mr. Coutant confirmed that the Housing
Trust was responsible for interviewing prospective developers and selecting LCRDC and the
DeBruhler Company. He stated that a study was not done to evaluate the potential impact of the
affordable units on the values of the surrounding single family homes. He stated that staff can
review the history of the values of properties near the Senior Cottage development and provide
that information to the Commission.
In response to questions from Commissioner Adelman, Mr. DeBruhler stated that historically,
the landscape architect responsible for the design of the project has been hired to maintain the
property after construction. He confirmed that the leases will prohibit the removal of vegetation
from the site.
Commissioner Adelman commented that he understands that the roads will be private and that
snow removal will be the responsibility of the property owner. He commented that with the
duplex configuration, care should be taken to consider run off from the valleys created as a result
of the long roof ridges.
In response to questions from Commissioner Adelman, Mr. Bleck explained that the detention
pond flows to the east, with an outlet east of Waukegan Road, to the Middlefork branch.
In response to questions from Commissioner Franksen, Mr. Coutant confirmed that no zoning
variances are required. He noted that the B-1 zoning allows a more intense use than is currently
proposed. He confirmed that uses such as those located along Waukegan Road could be located
at this site. He confirmed that a market rate residential development, similar in design to what is
currently proposed, could be proposed for this site in conformance with the current zoning.
In response to questions from Commissioner Franksen, Mr. Bleck addressed drainage concerns
raised in letters received by the Commission. He explained that the water from this development
will be intercepted by inlets so that stormwater will not be permitted to flow to the west. He
stated that the storm sewer has been over sized to accommodate a 100 year storm to avoid the
need for over land flow. He noted that normally, storm sewers are sized to accommodate a 10
year storm with an overland flow route that accommodates storms over that size. He explained
that since this is a small site, it was possible to over size the sewers eliminating the need for an
overflow route on the site. He stated that all of the down spouts will be directed to the storm
sewer system. He added that there are no sump pumps since the construction will be all slab on
grade with no basements.
In response to questions from Commissioner Franksen, Ms. Melichar noted the various
architectural styles and exterior materials used in the surrounding developments. She noted that
many of the surrounding structures are brick and therefore, brick will be used for the Settler’s
Green development for compatibility and for durability.
In response to questions from Commissioner Franksen, Mr. Coutant clarified that there is an
existing pedestrian walkway, on City owned property, located to the west and north of the area
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 10 of 22
proposed for development. He stated that the current proposal eliminates that sidewalk based on
concerns that having the public walkway run along the backyards of the homes may not be
desirable. He stated that staff has informed the developer that if the pedestrian walkway is
removed, a walkway be provided through the proposed development to provide pedestrian access
to the train station.
Commissioner Waldeck observed that based on the materials provided in the Commission’s
packet, it does not appear that there are any units for single people. She noted that in the past,
the City has made efforts to provide affordable opportunities to keep seniors in the community.
She noted that many of the seniors are widows or widowers who can no longer pay the taxes on
their homes. She stated that some of these people are long term residents. She added that others
who would benefit from more affordable housing in the community are teachers, police officers,
fire fighters or nurses. She observed that many of those community employees may make too
much money to meet the criteria to qualify for this development. She questioned who this
development is targeted toward and who is likely to live in the units. She questioned what would
happen if someone living in the units secures a higher paying job? She questioned whether the
family living in the units would then be required to move? She observed that it is probably not
possible to make some or all of the units condominiums which could be sold as affordable units
because that might not meet the IDHA requirements.
In response to questions from Commissioner Waldeck, Mr. Coutant stated that the groups
mentioned by Commissioner Waldeck, seniors and those who work in the community, are the
targets of this development and will be given the highest priority during the tenant selection
process. He stated that the Housing Trust believes that there is a need in the community by these
groups which can be met by this project. He explained that the City will be able to establish
priorities for tenant selection and the highest priority identified is people who live within the
community and people who work in the community as the second priority.
Mr. DeBruhler stated that once someone is a tenant in an affordable housing development, their
income can increase 140 percent before they would be asked to find other housing. He stated
that there is also an annual income adjustment based on a cost of living index that is established
by the Federal government. He stated that one of the reasons the housing is proposed is to allow
people to take advantage of educational opportunities and acquire skills that will allow them to
obtain higher paying jobs and eventually move out of the housing.
In response to questions from Commissioner Waldeck, Ms. Tamesy, stated that in many cases
people who qualify are single heads of households with more than one child. She stated that in
Highland Park, the school nurse was eligible for affordable housing as a single head of
household with children. She reiterated that households headed by a single person and a sole
income, versus double income households, are more often able to qualify. She stated that
prospective tenants will need to meet the income requirements as well as the tenant eligibility
requirements. She stated that every situation needs to be looked at independently to understand
what the needs are and what the prospective tenant can afford.
Commissioner Waldeck acknowledged that the Comprehensive Plan speaks to affordable
housing. She noted that the Plan identifies this property for open space or for a quasi-public use
and stated that she recalled some discussions in the past about this as a potential branch library
site. She stated an understanding that the tax credit opportunity is attractive, but questioned
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 11 of 22
whether this site has been given enough thought or whether the availability of the tax credits is
driving the project.
Mr. Coutant stated that when the City originally acquired this property as part of the Tax
Increment Financing District, consideration was given to locating a branch library on the site.
He noted however that neither the Council, nor the Library Board concluded that a branch library
was warranted. He stated that since that time, the City Council has identified this site as surplus
property and as a potential site for affordable housing. He explained that the Senior Cottages
were not built with tax credits but noted that the City did donate the land. He stated that the
Cottages were developed by a not for profit entity and were financed through conventional
means.
Commissioner Waldeck observed that the passage of Home Rule seemed to be in response to the
State’s passage of affordable housing requirements. She stated that at least from appearances,
there seemed to be a connection in the timing of the two events.
Commissioner Newman passed noting that he will refrain from asking questions or commenting
on the petition until he ascertains whether or not he has a conflict of interest.
In response to questions from Chairman Avery, Mr. Coutant confirmed that the tax credits were
awarded to this specific site and to this specific 16-unit project.
In response to questions from Chairman Avery, Mr. DeBruhler confirmed that the tax credits are
site and plan specific issued for a plan that provides for 16 units with a combination of two and
three bedrooms as presented. He confirmed that it may be possible for the duplexes to be
reconfigured as fourplexes, but stated that a change in the plan may require this project to go
back through the IDHA competition process. He questioned whether going back through that
process would be wise at this point.
In response to questions from Chairman Avery, Ms. Melichar stated that the duplex plan was
initiated by the architects in an effort to find the right number and size of units in order to
develop the best land plan possible. She stated that duplexes help to minimize the number of
driveways and pavement since the driveways are shared. She noted the limitations of the site
given the limited options for curb cuts to the property. She explained that the overall design was
developed around focusing the units internal to the site and providing a common green space.
She stated that the east “loop” of the internal road is needed to provide access to the homes that
back up to Telegraph and Everett Roads. She noted that the buildings form the edge to the
internal outdoor space, the central park.
Chairman Avery challenged whether the green space could be expanded by eliminating the
secondary road.
In response to questions from Chairman Avery, Mr. Russell discussed the stacking of vehicles
that occurs on Telegraph Road at the end of the day, during peak commuter hours, and the
potential of this new road being used as a cut through for traffic. He acknowledged that at times
cars stack up and this development could be used as a cut through. He stated that traffic calming
techniques or signage could be used to discourage cut through traffic.
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 12 of 22
In response to questions from Chairman Avery, Mr. DeBruhler confirmed that a single person
would be permitted to occupy a two bedroom unit if they meet the income eligibility
requirements. He added that a single person may be able to occupy a three bedroom unit.
Chairman Avery asked for further clarification on the permitted occupancy of the various units.
He added that information should be provided on whether the various required fees for permits,
utility connections, impact fees or other fees would be paid or waived, and the dollar amounts
associated with the various fees.
In response to questions from Commissioner Franksen, Ms. Czerniak confirmed that the City
Attorney’s opinion is that the City’s home rule status pre-empts the State affordable housing
requirements. She also confirmed that in 2004 and 2005, under the direction of Mayor
Preschlack, the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance was put in place, after review and support from
the Plan Commission, and that, together with other documents adopted or accepted by the City
Council, constitute the City’s own policies on affordable housing.
Chairman Avery asked that information be provided to the Commission to explain under what
conditions, a senior would qualify for a unit. He added that information should also be provided
on local institutions or businesses that have employees who will qualify for the units and
information on the number of potential qualified and interested tenants from local institutions or
businesses. He noted that one way or another, this project will cost the City something and
based on that fact, it is important to have an understanding of whether the tenants will likely be
Lake Forest residents or employees.
Commissioner Adelman asked that dimensioned floor plans, providing information on both the
units and the garages, be provided to the Commission prior to the next meeting.
In response to questions from Commissioner Adelman, Mr. Coutant stated that based on the
State affordable housing requirements which do not apply to the City given its home rule status,
about 330 affordable units would need to be provided in the City. He noted that a couple months
ago, the City Council and Housing Trust held a joint planning meeting and discussed a goal of
providing about 60 units and then re-evaluating whether there is further need in the community.
Commissioner Adelman observed that with 60 as a target number, this project would fulfill a
significant portion of that goal.
In response to questions from Commissioner Adelman, Mr. DeBruhler stated that this
development will generate property taxes of between $38,000 and $40,000 dollars on a parcel
that is not generating any taxes at all at the present time.
Commissioner Reisenberg asked that when the matter comes back before the Commission the
financing be thoroughly explained. He asked that the value of the tax credits be explained.
Mr. DeBruhler offered that if a tax paying entity makes a donation, the value of that donation can
be taken off of the entity’s taxes. He stated that if a tax paying entity purchases tax credits, the
tax liability is reduced. He stated that currently, the market on the State donation credits is
between 80 and 85 cents on the dollar.
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 13 of 22
Commissioner Reisenberg questioned whether the City would be better off just donating the
property to a developer rather than working through the tax credit process.
Mr. DeBruhler stated that by taking the tax credits, the City gets a development that is
economically viable. He stated that as a result of the tax credits, a developer is able to provide a
project that is better than could happen without that support. He explained that two types of tax
credits were received for this project. 1) A State donation tax credit which is a one time
donation is awarded to who ever buys it at time of closing and 2) Federal tax credits which are
developed on the eligible basis of the project. He noted that construction costs, design costs,
legal fees and every thing else goes into that calculation, except land. He stated that 7.3 million
dollars in tax credits were awarded to this project. He stated that at the end of the day, the State
donation credit will be a function of the value of the land when the transaction occurs. He noted
that at the end of the day, the value could be less given the overall reduction in property values
that has occurred due to the present economic conditions.
Chairman Avery requested that when this matter returns to the Commission, an explanation of
the tax credits be provided in a written form.
Chairman Avery invited public comments noting that at the start of the meeting he swore in
those intending to speak. He stated that he would administer the oath to anyone who came in
after the start of the meeting prior to their testimony. He encouraged that as this project moves
forward, any written correspondence be directed to City staff to be sure that it gets distributed to
the full Plan Commission and included in the record for this petition.
Daniel Jasica, 951 Lakewood Drive, stated that this proposed development is of great concern to
the neighbors and community. He stated that it is important to recognize that the City Council
was acting under time constraints in March, 2009 when asked to decide if the tax credit
application could move forward to meet the deadline. He noted that the City Council was very
forth right at that time, that approval of the project was not being granted but instead that there
was interest in seeing whether the tax credits would be available. He noted that very quickly the
site and density changed from the initial proposal. He stated that it is inappropriate to discuss the
underlying zoning and what could happen if the property were in private ownership. He noted
that since the City has owned the property for several years, there was no reason to consider
rezoning of the parcel. He stated that the Commission should consider the merits of this
development irrespective of underlying zoning and the tax credits. He stated that if this
development is not right for this site, no amount of tax credits can make it right. He discussed
the proposed density noting that 16 units on 2.6 acres, 6 units per acre, is, in his opinion, too
dense for this site since it abuts large lot single family parcels. He noted the 10 acre parcel
owned by Mr. Gandhi located one block to the east and pointed out that a year ago, the City
rejected a proposal for approximately one acre lots on that property finding that is was too dense
because the property abuts large lot single family residential properties. He noted that this
proposal is about six times as dense as the Gandhi proposal which was rejected. He noted that
the City is currently spending money defending itself in Court on this matter because the
proposed density is seen as being too high. He noted that the question should never be what does
the developer need, but what is appropriate for the location. He stated that if this were a market
rate development, he doubted whether the City would be considering the type of density now
proposed. He stated that as a below market rate development, this project should receive even
more scrutiny than a standard development. He stated that this property is not like the Barat or
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 14 of 22
the Laurel Avenue projects where a few affordable units will be incorporated into a market rate
development. He stated that this development will be 95% below market rate units and will be
the only project in the community of its type. He stated that if this project moves, forward
legally enforceable covenants should be considered to make this project an age restricted
development, rather than priority lists. He questioned whether priorities can be given to Lake
Forest residents or employees while trying to play by the State’s rules. He stated that drainage
and traffic are concerns and problems. He noted that the developer is not being asked to fund
any of the traffic improvements being suggested by the study and he questioned whether the
lower budget improvements will make sufficient changes in the current conditions. He stated his
understanding that the City has received appraisals of the property putting the value between 2.3
and 4.1 million dollars. He pointed out that the City is being asked to give up to 4 million dollars
and a valuable City asset to support this development. He stated that the City has the right to be
very particular and very demanding of any developer who wishes to take advantage of the City’s
generosity. He stated that if the project cannot meet the standards and address the concerns
raised, then it should not go forward.
Tim Pier, 989 Lakewood Drive, stated that he lives directly west of the proposed development.
He stated that knows where the stormwater drains because he plays at the rear of his property
with his children because they cannot cross Everett Road to get to the park because it is so busy.
He agreed that this development is not likely to help the employees who are being targeted
because their incomes are too high. He stated that he has lived in the area for 14 years and takes
the train almost every day. He discussed commuter parking commenting that when the price of
gas rose, the train parking lots were almost full. He stated that when gas prices rise in the future,
he expects that the number of commuters will again rise. He stated that the traffic study does
nothing to address traffic at Conway and Waukegan Roads noting that it is a death trap. He
stated that there is nothing in the package presented that describes the economics of the project.
He stated that he does not have information on the total project cost, the tax credits or how much
money the developer is putting into the project. He questioned how much “skin” the developer
has in the game as incentive to maintain the project. He agreed with the previous speaker that
this project has moved forward very quickly in order to get the tax credits. He asked that the tax
credits not drive this project. He stated that he likes the density as it is in the area and stated that
he is against this project.
Kitty Cole, 340 Bluff’s Edge Drive, stated that she supports the project. She stated that she
observed the early discussions of the City Council and the housing committee as a representative
of the League of Women Voters. She stated that under the leadership of former Mayor
Preschlack, a carefully researched plan was developed for creating affordable housing in Lake
Forest. She stated that she is a member of the Affordable Housing Commission of Lake County.
She noted that she was proud when the City, under the leadership of former Mayor Preschlack
supported affordable housing. She stated that the action was a very powerful statement. She
commented that she wants to live in a town that has housing opportunities for people who work
here and seniors who cannot afford housing in the community. She stated that she applauds the
City of Lake Forest for supporting this project and being willing to take criticism.
Chris Toczycki, 1068 Arcady Drive, stated that he lives about three blocks from the proposed
development and has lived in the community for about 15 years. He stated that this site has been
designated for affordable housing without first considering other possible uses which could
benefit residents of the community. He stated that other sites are available for affordable
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 15 of 22
housing that may be less costly and may better meet the need. He stated that no other site has
been presented to the community for consideration noting that the decision to use this site was
reached behind the scenes. He noted that the City appears to have been pushed into donating this
property valued at about 3 million dollars. He stated that since this property belongs to the
residents, this donation is no different than the City writing a check for this amount. He stated
that this donation appears to be ill timed with the City considering service reductions and the
funding issues with the employee pension fund. He stated that the economic value of this
housing project to the City is near zero. He stated that there are more feasible ways to make use
of this land while generating additional revenue. He read a letter written by Alderman Palmer to
IDA at the time the application was made for tax credits noting that the letter is dated September
15, 2009. The letter was submitted into the record. He referenced the affordable housing
legislation on the website commenting that in comparison to the surrounding communities, the
City of Lake Forest currently has the highest percentage of affordable housing in this area at
5.1%. He stated that the City is setting a fine example and recognizes that the even higher goals
have been set. He stated that he has been following this discussion for a year and commented
that it was stated that a portion of the proposed homes would be for seniors, but noted that the
homes are not designed to accommodate seniors. He added that he has learned that the tax
credits awarded to this project may prevent Lake Forest from effectively setting its own priorities
to locate primarily seniors in the development. He reiterated that municipal workers and other
local employees make too much to qualify under the restrictions. He noted that the concentration
of affordable housing can create unintended consequences changing the character of the
community. He stated that better integrated affordable units would create a sense of community
and noted that a less aggressive, but integrated approach, would be more prudent. He concluded
commenting that in his opinion, there are too many risks associated with the proposed project
commenting that once this is built, it is not reversible.
Skip Thompson, 1055 Arcady Drive, commented that the Commissioners have raised good
points and questions and added his own questions asking whether the income level requirements
are based on a W-2 statement or a tax return. He agreed that cars already stack in the area during
peak commuting certain times and suggested that commuters would likely try to cut through the
development to avoid waiting at the corner. He noted that a similar situation exists near St.
Patrick’s Church and noted that the police try to block off the cut through route, but are
unsuccessful. He agreed that the tax credits need to be further explained. He agreed that more
information is needed about drainage, the pedestrian path and the density. He stated that his
concern is not about affordable housing, but about this particular project and the speed at which
it has moved forward. He agreed that the City is being asked to give away an asset. He stated
that his concern is that if the project does not work or the developer goes away, the City will get
the project back. He stated that a profit and loss statement, maintenance standards and any
covenants and restrictions need to be reviewed by the City. He noted that based on the
requirements, Lake Forest residents who will not qualify for this development. He stated that
information should be provided on the members of the LLC. He noted that only one employer
has spoken publicly about this project. He stated that affordable housing in the community,
without the restrictions of the tax credits, might better serve the intended people. He stated
appreciation for the Commission’s time on this matter. He stated that another solution should be
pursued and not necessarily on this site. He stated that a petition with signatures of 800 residents
was submitted to IDA and he provided a copy to the City for the record on this project. He noted
that IDA approval of the tax credits was granted with the understanding that there would be a full
public process on this matter at the local level. He acknowledged that some of the issues
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 16 of 22
presented are not under the purview of the Plan Commission but commented that they are being
presented at this time based on direction received earlier in the process.
Don Battaglia, 1251 Everett Road, stated that he lives across Everett Road and just west of the
project and has been a resident for 30 years. He stated that the City sometimes has a short
memory commenting that he attended many meetings about properties in this area as they were
being developed. He noted that in the 1980’s, the West Lake subdivision was being considered
on property that was zoned for five acre home sites. He stated that at that time, the City stated
that it was going to control the property to the east, the site now being discussed and provided
assurance that it would be preserved as open space or public space. He noted that the
Comprehensive Plan was updated in the 1990’s and the focus was on preserving open space
because it was being lost quickly to development. He stated that at that time, he served on the
Plan Commission for 7 years, chairing the Commission for 4 years. He applauded
Commissioner Waldeck for reading the Comprehensive Plan noting that it is the blueprint for the
community and represents a great deal of work. He stated that this is a very important parcel of
land because it is a gateway to various subdivisions and residences to the west. He noted that to
date, the City has not considered the economic impact of this project on the surrounding property
values. He stated that the Plan Commission’s first duty is to consider the impact of proposed
development on the surrounding neighborhoods. He noted that this project will not just represent
a physical transition with multi-family housing adjacent to single family homes, but also a social
transition by introducing rental units which will have an economic impact on the area. He stated
that the City owns the property and the City has a duty to do what is right. He stated that the
developer estimated property tax in the range of $40,000 as a result of this development. He
questioned how far that amount of money will go to meet the impact on the schools and other
public services as a result of this development. He stated that this project is not ready for
Commission consideration yet.
An acupuncturist and resident of the community for 7 years stated that before he could afford a
house in Lake Forest, he lived in Vernon Hills. He noted that the proposed project is supposed to
help local seniors and single parents with children but noted that in recent years a senior citizen
and a child have been killed in this area. He stated concern for the future residents noting that it
is a dangerous area due to traffic and the trains.
Brian Staunton, 1166 Sir William Lane in Arbor Ridge, stated that he is a member of the
Homeowners’ Association and thanked the Commissioners for their service to the community.
He joined the voices objecting to this development noting that his objections center on density.
He noted that many people moved here because of the distinctive low density which is a very
attractive aspect of this area. He stated that he and others have made trade offs and made
decisions to commute long distances to jobs because of a desire to live in this low density area.
He questioned whether land in the B-1 zoning district can be developed for residential use
without the inclusion of any commercial use at all. He agreed that the Comprehensive Plan does
not appear to support this type of development on this parcel. He noted that the parcel is
identified for landscaped open space in the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that it is not true that
the City will not incur any costs. He noted that the City has already incurred costs related to the
processing and consideration of this project to date. He discussed the dilution of the tax base
particularly with respect to the schools noting that the housing is planned for families. He noted
that up until this meeting, the residents have been frustrated that they have not had any voice. He
stated that this project has moved forward with very little opportunity for resident input or
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 17 of 22
listening by the Council members. He applauded the Plan Commission for the way this meeting
is being conducted noting that this is the first time he feels like the government is listening to the
public on this project.
James Lindquist, 1360 Lakewood, agreed that this is the first time the public has had a
meaningful opportunity to have input on this project. He stated that if this project is intended to
provide housing for City workers, then the City should make sure that it will do that. He stated
concern about the proposed density noting the significant increase in density that has occurred in
this area over the past 10 years with both residential and commercial development. He noted
that Costco is now proposed to the west and expressed concern about increasing traffic in the
area. He noted that the reason he lives in Lake Forest is because of the context and character of
the community and commented that this project will be a change. He noted concern that no
economic impact study has been done to date stating his belief that the value of his property will
be impacted.
.
Greg Amarantos, 1291 Lawrence, stated agreement with other speakers on the various issues, but
noted that there is an emotional aspect to this entire development. He stated that no one wants
this project in their backyards. He stated that logic cannot win out over emotion and concluded
that he and his neighbors do not want this project in their backyards.
Beth Martin, 1162 Lynette Drive, stated that she has lived in Lake Forest for over 20 years and is
strongly in favor of the project and impressed with what is proposed. She stated that she is the
target resident noting that she makes about $40,000 per year, has three children, is a single parent
and works in Lake Forest. She stated that she would be the perfect candidate for this project.
She noted that the proposed development is very compatible with Lake Forest and does not call
itself out as affordable housing. She added that the density does not seem out of line with the
density of other developments in the area. She noted that this site is a good transition site
between commercial and single family neighborhoods. She stated that this site is not a good site
for single family development due to the train to the east, commercial development and Everett
Road to the south. She stated that the proposed development would buffer the existing
neighborhoods from the commercial area and commented that she does not believe that this
development will lower property values in the surrounding neighborhoods.
Steve Rickmeier, 851 Gloucester Crossing, stated that if the City can verify that here are people
in Lake Forest or working in Lake Forest who need this type of development and who would
qualify, then he is supportive of the project. He stated that he would like to be assured that not
just one unit, but all 16 units will be occupied by a Lake Forest residents or employees. He
stated that there will need to be assurance that the tenant priorities can be enforced.
Seeing no further requests to speak, Chairman Avery reiterated that the Commission will hold a
future meeting on this matter before taking any action on the proposed project. He stated that if
people would prefer not to speak in public but have comments or questions on this project,
written correspondence should be directed to the Director of Community Development and all
correspondence received will be included in the record for this matter and will be distributed to
all members of the Commission.
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 18 of 22
Mr. Coutant reviewed a list of issues he heard from the Commission and those who testified
commenting that prior to this matter returning to the Commission for action, these items will be
addressed. He identified the following items:
Further explanation of the findings of the Traffic Study including information on Old
Mill and Conway Roads and opportunities for improving those intersections including the
possibility of installing traffic signals.
Adequacy of the train station parking lot to meet future needs.
Clarification on the City’s policies on affordable housing and the relationship of the
timing of those policies to the City’s decision to become home rule.
Confirmation of the minimum occupancy requirements for the proposed units.
Development of a cost of services study to reflect the ongoing cost of the development to
the City and school districts.
Written explanation of the tax credits.
Explanation of the economics of the land donation and how City fees will be handled to
understand the true cost of the project to the City.
Information on the income levels needed to qualify for the units.
Research on the demand for the units within the community and an explanation of
whether local residents and employees will qualify for the units.
Explanation of the long term ownership of the development and how proper maintenance
will be assured.
Chairman Avery invited rebuttal from the petitioner, hearing none, he invited the Commissioners
to identify additional information that should be brought back to the Commission or any further
questions.
Commissioner Franksen added that he would like further information to explain why this parcel
was selected and why it is the best site for this development. He asked for information on other
locations that were considered and an explanation of what process was used to select this site.
He asked for clarification on tenant eligibility. He noted that in the staff report and in the
affordable housing policy documents, City, hospital and school district employees are identified
as targets. He stated that the Commission needs to see confirmation that employees of those
institutions, and other local businesses, would qualify for units in this proposed development.
Commissioner Reisenberg stated that the Commission needs to understand how the economics of
this project come together. He recognized that this issue is not necessarily under the purview of
the Plan Commission, but noted that the economics of this project are a big issue and need to be
publicly explained and understood by the City Council. He noted that the sooner the information
is provided on the economics, the sooner this project can be better understood by the community.
In response to a question from Commissioner Reisenberg, Ms. Czerniak confirmed that Costco is
proposed in the Village of Mettawa, on Riverwoods Road, between Rt. 60 and Everett Road.
Commissioner Adelman acknowledged that the team has put good information together and he
recognized that considerable efforts have been put into this project to date. He added that the
neighbors have presented good arguments. He stated that it is very important that the City
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 19 of 22
consider this proposal very carefully, looking at all aspects of the project to make sure that all
potential impacts are fully understood before it goes forward.
Chairman Avery stated appreciation for the presentation from the petitioners and for the
comments from the residents. He commented that he heard some concerns that this project was
being considered without due public process and stated that there is a commitment to a full
public review process. He stated that the Commission heard important testimony at this first
meeting and that all information will be considered and that appropriate questions will be asked
and answered as part of the public review process as occurs with all projects that come before the
Commission. He stated that proper public notice will be provided prior to any further public
deliberation by the Plan Commission on this petition.
Commissioner Franksen made a motion to continue deliberation on this petition to a future
meeting.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Reisenberg and was unanimously approved by the
Commission.
4. Public Hearing and Action: Consideration of an amendment to Chapter 46, Article X,
Section 68, Personal Wireless Service Facilities Overlay District, to include a City owned
parcel located on the northeast corner of Westleigh Road and Western Avenue. The
amendment would permit telecommunication antennas and a tower on the site subject to
City approvals.
Chairman Avery introduced this item and asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or
Ex Parte contacts. Hearing none, he opened the public hearing and invited a presentation from
staff.
Ms. Czerniak noted that the City’s Wireless Ordinance was adopted by the City in 1997 and has
served the City well. She noted this item was initiated by staff and with the approval of the City
Council, is brought forward for Plan Commission’s consideration. She noted that amending the
Code as proposed would not approve a specific project, but would be permissive in that it would
include the City parcel in the over lay district and allow it to be considered as an option for a
future telecommunications facility. She noted that the Wireless Ordinance has been amended on
two occasions since its initial adoption to add sites to the overlay district. She explained that this
amendment is proposed in response to wireless service gaps or poor quality in the area noting
that staff often receives complaints from residents as well as requests from service provider to
install facilities that will improve service in the area. She noted that the current ordinance
permits a telecommunication tower on Barat Campus, near the railroad tracks, in the area located
just across from the City parcel. She stated that given the current uncertainty of the future of the
Barat property, some providers have expressed reluctance to construct a tower on the campus.
She added that if a tower were to be constructed on the Barat property, it would not be well
screened as a tower would be on the City property and could hamper the City’s interest in seeing
the property ultimately developed with a high quality residential neighborhood. She stated that
the amendment as proposed would include a City owned parcel located at the northeast corner of
Westleigh Road and Western Avenue, just across the railroad tracks from Barat Campus, in the
overlay district permitting a telecommunications tower to be erected on the site with City
approval. She discussed the site noting that it is heavily wooded, backs up to the railroad tracks,
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 20 of 22
is above the grade of both Westleigh Road and Western Avenue minimizing visibility from the
roads and noted that the site is already the location of some other utilities. She stated that the
City is obligated to provide sites to allow wireless service facilities to serve the area. She noted
that if the City site is identified in the ordinance, the City would be able to pursue a lease with a
telecommunications provider to allow a tower to be constructed on this site. She stated that such
a lease would bring in significant revenue at a time when Lake Forest, like other municipalities,
is looking for new revenue generating opportunities. She stated that any tower proposed for this
site would need to go through the standard review and approval processes and meet all of the
screening requirements that currently exist in the ordinance. She stated that at a maximum
height of 190’, a tower could accommodate 4 to 5 carriers, maximizing the revenue that could be
expected. She explained that if the Commission makes a recommendation in support of this
amendment, it will be forwarded to the City Council. She stated that if this site is built out with a
tower, a future discussion might be appropriate on whether Barat Campus should remain
authorized as a site for a tower.
In response to questions from Chairman Avery, Ms. Czerniak clarified the overlay district
classification for the Barat property and noted that the current ordinance is written tightly to be
site specific within each overlay district. She stated that as currently proposed, the amendment
would allow a tower on the City property of up to 190 feet in height to serve multiple carriers.
She stated that a goal of the ordinance is to allow multiple carriers at one location to minimize
the number of towers. She stated that Old Main is about 75’ in height and confirmed that
antennas for various providers are currently located on the roof.
Chairman Avery noted that an advantage of the proposed site is that the sight lines when
traveling on Western Avenue and Westleigh Road take your eye away from where a tower would
be constructed.
In response to questions from Commissioner Newman, Ms. Czerniak confirmed that there are
currently cellular antennas mounted on roof top structures on Old Main. She explained that if
there were opportunities for existing providers to locate antennas at higher points, for instance,
on a new monopole, there may be interest in moving to the new pole. She stated that in addition
to the roof top antennas, the current overlay district allows a monopole to be constructed on
Barat Campus, near the railroad tracks.
Chairman Avery opened the public hearing and invited public comment.
Richard Riley, an attorney representing SBA, a telecommunications tower company, provided
background information on wireless service within the community. He stated that there is a
strong correlation between signal coverage and the height of the tower. He noted that most
important is the height of the lowest antenna on the tower since it needs to be above the tree line
to be of value. He stated that there are currently 6 active telecommunications carriers in the
Chicago area stated his expectation that they will all stay in business and noted that even if they
do not, the facilities would remain after acquisition by one of the other companies. He stated
that a minimum vertical separation distance of 10‘ between antennas on a pole is required. He
stated that today, the service is in this area is very poor. He explained that given the Lake Forest
approach of carefully limiting the sites for towers, it is very important to maximize the number
of carriers that can locate on each tower by maximizing the height. He noted that SBA is in the
business of building towers and leasing space on the pole to carriers. He stated that the proposed
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 21 of 22
site is unique due to the depression of Westleigh Road and Western Avenue and the higher
elevation of the site. He noted that there will be a far field view of the tower, but from close up,
views of the site will be limited. He stated that electric and telephone service is already available
on site.
Chairman Avery asked for information on the heights of existing telecommunications towers in
Lake Forest.
In response to questions from Commissioner Newman, Mr. Riley, confirmed that equipment
would be needed at the base of the tower but would be screened from view by the trees. He
stated that the aesthetic impact of a 190’ tower compared to a 160’ tower is relatively
insignificant. He stated that the installation process is normally completed very quickly with the
hole bored and concrete poured in a single day. He stated that after the concrete cures, an
enclosure for the ground equipment is constructed.
Commissioner Franksen agreed that cell service in east Lake Forest is poor. He commented that
cell towers are blight on the landscape and noted that a 190 foot pole cannot be hidden. He
acknowledged that the primary reason this request is being presented is likely for the potential
financial benefit to the City. He said that he will have to look at the surroundings more carefully
when driving on Westleigh Road to understand whether the eye would be drawn to the over pass
or to a tower at this location. He stated that without the potential for financial gain, he
questioned whether the City would be considering a tower at this location. He questioned
whether a tower on the Barat property would be better concealed from view.
Chairman Avery noted that a tower could be located on the Barat property today under the
current ordinance. He stated that it would be helpful to know exactly where a tower could be
located on the Barat property. He stated that the downside is that the City would not realize any
financial benefit from a tower on a nearby property, instead of the City property. He noted that
further south on Westleigh Road there are other utilities near the road but commented that a
tower at that location would be much more visible. He stated that the poles without screening
have a significant impact on the landscape.
In response to a question from Commissioner Adelman, Mr. Riley confirmed that transmission
range is based on line of sight. He stated that new sites are meshed with existing sites in an
effort to eliminate gaps. He reiterated that this is a unique site due to the elevation change and
limited sight lines from the ground to the pole. He stated that the height of the bottom antenna is
the most important. He noted that a tower at this location would make a tremendous difference
in coverage.
In response to questions from Commissioner Adelman, Ms. Czerniak stated that at 190’, the
tower would maximize the number of carriers that could be located on a single pole since it
would allow several antennas to be located all above the tree line.
Commissioner Adelman commented that this site is a good one and he questioned whether from
the ground, the difference in height is perceptible.
Commissioner Franksen stated that the consideration before the Plan Commission is whether this
particular site, at the height proposed, would cause a hardship to the residents that live in the
vicinity based on its visual impact. He stated that the impacts need to be balanced with the
Plan Commission Minutes – January 13, 2010
Page 22 of 22
potential for economic benefit to the City. He made a motion to continue the petition to allow
further information to be presented to the Commission.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Reisenberg and was unanimously approved by the
Commission.
5. Public testimony on non-agenda items.
There was no testimony on non-agenda items.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Catherine Czerniak
Director of Community Development