South Cook News

VILLAGE OF TINLEY PARK, COOK AND WILL COUNTIES, ILLINOIS

January 5, 2017

The Regular Meeting of the Plan Commission was held in the Council Chambers of the Village Hall, Tinley Park, Illinois on January 5, 2017 at 7:30 p.m.

ROLL CALL

Plan Commissioners: Kevin Bergthold

John Domina Anthony Janowski Lori Kappel Peter Kroner Mark Moylan, Acting Chairman Ken Shaw Tim Stanton

Absent: Edward Matushek III, Chairman

Village Officials and Staff: Paula Wallrich, Interim Community Development Director Stephanie Kisler, Planner I Walter Smart, Zoning Administrator Patricia Meagher, Commission Secretary

CALL TO ORDER

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN called to order the Regular Meeting of the Plan Commission for January 5, 2017 at 7:30 p.m.

ROLL CALL

COMMUNICATIONS

There were none.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked for a Motion to approve the Minutes of the December 1, 2016 Regular Meeting. Motion was made by COMMISSIOR JANOWSKI, seconded by COMMISSIONER STANTON; all in favor.

TO: VILLAGE OF TINLEY PARK PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

FROM: VILLAGE OF TINLEY PARK PLAN COMMISSION

SUBJECT: MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 5, 2017 MEETING

ITEM #1: PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPTION OF OFFICIAL 2016 ZONING MAP

Consider recommending approval of the Village’s Official Zoning Map reflecting Map Amendments through December 31, 2016.

Present were the following:

Plan Commissioners: Kevin Bergthold

John Domina Anthony Janowski Lori Kappel Peter Kroner Mark Moylan, Acting Chairman Ken Shaw Tim Stanton

Absent: Edward Matushek III, Chairman

Village Officials and Staff: Paula Wallrich, Interim Community Development Director Stephanie Kisler, Planner I Walter Smart, Zoning Administrator Patricia Meagher, Commission Secretary

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked for a Motion to open the Public Hearing. COMMISSIONER KRONER made the Motion, seconded by COMMISSIONER DOMINA; all in favor.

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked if there was anyone from the Public that would like to speak or oppose this matter. None were present to swear in.

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN stated that proper notification was published in accordance with State law and Village Code.

STEPHANIE KISLER, Planner I, presented the Staff Report. The Village’s Official Zoning Map represents all of the map amendments/rezonings and annexation boundaries within the last year. Any map amendments/rezonings or changes to annexations up to December 31, 2016 are represented on the proposed Official Zoning Map for 2016. State statutes require adoption of an official Zoning Map by March 31st of each year. MS. KISLER presented a printed version for the COMMISSIONERS to review. The larger changes made to the Zoning Map represent projects that were updated such as the Aetna project, the Speedway project, as well as miscellaneous items that were corrected over time. Staff works with the GIS Department over the year to make corrections and Staff has ordinances and approvals to reflect all changes. Also represented on the Zoning Map were all overlay districts. PAULA WALLRICH, Interim Community Development Director, stated that this is a statutory requirement that a Zoning Map is adopted each year. The map will be considered the ‘Official Zoning Map’, although it will be kept up-to-date throughout the upcoming year and placed on the website for public view.

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked the Commissioners for any questions regarding the Village’s Official Zoning Map. COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI asked how the Zoning Map will be updated. MS. KISLER stated that they would provide the GIS Department all map amendments as they are approved so there will always be an accurate map; however, at the end of each year the Zoning Map would be presented for adoption. ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked the remaining Commissioners for any questions; none were asked.

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked if there were any questions for the Public Body; none were asked.

Final Staff statements were asked for by ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN. MS. KISLER stated that once the Zoning Map is recommended for approval by the Commissioners it will be presented to the Village Board for final adoption.

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked for a Motion to close the Public Hearing. COMMISSIONER KRONER made the Motion, seconded by COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI; all in favor.

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked Staff for any Findings of Fact. MS. KISLER stated there were none.

COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI addressed ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN requested that the Minutes reflect all Aye’s and Nay’s. ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked that the record show there were no Nay’s.

A Motion was made by COMMISSIONER KRONER to recommend to the Village Board approval of the Village’s Official Zoning Map for 2016, which reflects map amendments through December 31, 2016. The Motion was seconded by COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI.

AYE: Plan Commissioners Tim Stanton, John Domina, Anthony Janowski, Peter

Kroner, Ken Shaw, Lori Kappel, Kevin Bergthold, and Mark Moylan

NAY: None

ABSENT: Chairman Ed Matushek

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN declared the Motion approved.

TO: VILLAGE OF TINLEY PARK PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

FROM: VILLAGE OF TINLEY PARK PLAN COMMISSION

SUBJECT: MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 5, 2017 MEETING

ITEM #2 WORKSHOP: VERIZON WIRELESS – 7850 183RD STREET – SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR NEW GROUND EQUIPMENT FOR A CELLULAR CO- LOCATION.

Consider a request for Site Plan Approval from the Applicants, Margie Oliver and Dennis Paul of Dolan Realty Advisors, LLC, for new ground equipment accessory to a cellular co-location to be installed at the Village of Tinley Park Police Department’s existing personal wireless service facility (cellular tower) at 7850 183rd Street within the ORI (Office and Restricted Industrial) Zoning District. The proposed co-location includes a new set of antennas to be mounted at eighty feet (80’), related ground equipment, and a new privacy fence that surrounds the lease area. The proposed co-location will provide improvements to cellular service within the vicinity.

Present were the following:

Plan Commissioners: Kevin Bergthold

John Domina Anthony Janowski Lori Kappel Peter Kroner Mark Moylan, Acting Chairman Ken Shaw Tim Stanton

Absent: Edward Matushek III, Chairman

Village Officials and Staff: Paula Wallrich, Interim Community Development Director Stephanie Kisler, Planner I Walter Smart, Zoning Administrator Patricia Meagher, Commission Secretary

Guest(s): Dennis Paul, Dolan Realty Advisors, LLC

STEPHANIE KISLER, Planner I, began the presentation of the Staff Report with slides and diagrams of the existing site as well as the proposed Site Plan request. The site is located on 183rd Street between the Tinley Park Police Station and the fire training tower. MS. KISLER stated that DENNIS PAUL is present as the Petitioner representing Verizon Wireless. MR. PAUL is with Dolan Realty Advisors. This project involves new ground equipment placed around the existing equipment. The Site Plan approval is required due to the changes to the footprint. MS. KISLER presented images of the existing cell tower. She noted that it is screened by an existing storage garage and the Petitioner will be erecting a vinyl privacy fence around the equipment area. MS. KISLER presented a diagram that illustrated the the proposed changes to the site.

COMMISSIONER KRONER asked why the change to the site was moving from the footprint and not equal to the building. MR. PAUL explained that Ground Council had a Lease Amendment from 2011 allowing up to 750 square feet. This will shift the area a couple of feet within the lease area to allow for the new Verizon equipment. COMMISSIONER SHAW asked for clarification regarding where the lines would be shifted and if that would be a minor movement. MR. PAUL stated that it is two feet (2’) from the existing to the western edge of the building plus one half of a foot more to the east in order to fit the equipment. MS. KISLER stated that because this is a somewhat minor project the Plan Commission can choose to take action on the Site Plan approval tonight rather than require two meetings.

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked the Petitioner if there was any further information he would like to add. MR. PAUL stated that due to the large increase in cell phone usage this project is more of a capacity issue rather than a coverage issue.

COMMISSIONER SHAW asked if there are security cameras in place. MR. PAUL state that there are not. COMMISSIONER STANTON asked if there have ever been issues with security in the past at other locations. MR. PAUL stated that there have not been any problems at this site. COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI inquired about the security on a vinyl fence. The chain link fence is easier to secure. MR. PAUL stated that it is an industrial vinyl fence as well as having combination locks.

COMMISSIONER KRONER expressed concern regarding the current maintenance of the site and requested that something be included in the lease regarding the maintenance of the area. Lastly, he requested two meetings on this to allow for a Public Hearing. MS. KISLER stated that because it is just a Site Plan Approval it does not require a Public Hearing.

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked if there are any plans for additional towers within the Village. MR. PAUL stated that no, there he had no plans for additional towers. PAULA. WALLRICH, Interim Community Development Director, stated that there are two additional sites that cell towers may be considered to be built in the future. ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN inquired if those would require a Public Hearing. MS. WALLRICH stated they require a Public Hearing since they are new towers; this proposal is a co-location on a Village property and therefore is a permitted use and only requires a Site Plan Approval.

COMMISSIONER SHAW inquired about the height of the current tower. MS. KISLER stated that it is 103 feet tall. COMMISSIONER SHAW inquired whether the tower is at capacity or if other carriers could locate on the tower. MR. PAUL stated that carrier antennas can be installed as low as sixty (60) or seventy (70) feet, so there is probably room for another one, although the lease area would need to be expanded for a future antenna co-location. COMMISSIONER SHAW inquired if there has been any type of study or analysis regarding future needs of different carriers. MS. WALLRICH stated that would be a very difficult exercise due to the large number of variables (i.e., number of carriers, type of antenna, capacity and coverage ratios of the provider and the speed of technology). She stated that as soon as a master siting plan would be completed it would be outdated.

COMMISSIONER STANTON discussed again the lack of security cameras when there are so many carriers and such high volume usage of cell phones. MS. KISLER stated that she will take these comments, as well as COMMISSIONER KRONER’s comments about maintenance to STEVE TILTON, Assistant Village Manager, for advisement.

COMMISSIONER SHAW stated that as this project moves forward he would like this to be a single meeting. COMMISSIONER KAPPEL stated the same.

COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI addressed his concerns about the fencing. Due to the height of the fencing, eight feet (8’), he requested there be a cross rail supporting the gates as well as a barrel bolt going into the slab. MS. WALLRICH stated that this can be added to the comments in the Plan Review in the Building Department. COMMISSIONER KRONER stated that he would like to see this written in the lease. COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI stated he would be comfortable with leaving these decisions with the Certified Plan Reviewer. ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI to put his recommendations in writing to assist the Plan Reviewer with their review.

The following recommendations were presented to the Commission Secretary by COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI to be presented to the Building Department/Permit Reviewer:

• Security latch: Needs a backer plate in addition to carriage bolts on equipment side of gates for reinforcement.

• Posts: Install aluminum backing insert sleeves inside vinyl post.

• Swinging gates: Install aluminum cross rails to keep gate plumb, level and square.

• Inactive leaf gate: Should have barrel bolts installed on gate that drops into the concrete pad.

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked Staff for their Findings of Fact. MS. KISLER stated that there are no Findings for this request since it is only a Site Plan Review. She noted that the proposed Site Plan meets the Standards of the Site Plan Approval.

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked for a Motion. COMMISSIONER KRONER made a motion to grant the Applicants, Margie Oliver and Dennis Paul of Dolan Realty Advisors, LLC, on behalf of Verizon Wireless, Site Plan Approval for new ground equipment accessory to a cellular co-location to be installed at the Village of Tinley Park Police Department’s existing personal wireless service facility (cellular tower) at 7850 183rd Street within the ORI (Office and Restricted Industrial) Zoning District. The proposed co-location includes a new set of antennas to be mounted at eighty feet (80’), related ground equipment, and a new fence that surrounds the revised lease area, in accordance with plans (included in this meeting packet) prepared by Terra Consulting Group, Ltd. with a revision date of 12/12/2016, conditioned upon modification to the lease agreement that will include maintenance of the site on a bi- annual basis. COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI seconded the Motion.

There was discussion regarding whether the motion could be amended to exclude the reference to requiring maintenance in the lease agreement. COMMISSIONER SHAW questioned the motion and requested the reference to the lease agreement be stricken from the motion. MS. WALLRICH noted that the Village has a Property Maintenance Code and inspectors that will monitor the condition of the fence and would be more successful in addressing maintenance than including language in a lease. COMMISSIONER BERGTHOLD asked what the consequence to the lease holder if they do not comply. MS. WALLRICH stated that the Property Maintenance Code allows fines up to $750 per day until in property is in compliance. COMMISSIONER SHAW requested the condition be withdrawn stating that he believed the Commission would be overstepping their jurisdiction if they make that a condition. He stated that he felt the Village had the appropriate Code and enforcement staff in place and that it would be an additional burden to administer maintenance through a lease agreement instead of using the existing system of code enforcement.. He does not feel that this is in the best interest of the Village to make these types of conditions. He noted that he does not want Tinley Park to be a Village that is difficult to deal with. ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN noted there was a motion on the floor that was seconded and therefore requested the Secretary to record the vote.

AYE: Plan Commissioners Tim Stanton, John Domina, Anthony Janowski, Peter

Kroner, Ken Shaw, Lori Kappel, Kevin Bergthold, and Mark Moylan

NAY: None

ABSENT: Chairman Ed Matushek

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN declared the Motion approved.

MS. KISLER explained to MR. PAUL that the Site Plan has been approved. The next step is to work on the plans for a Building Permit, noting the concerns expressed by COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI. The Lease Agreement portion of the project will be handled by the Assistant Village Manager, STEVE TILTON, which will require approval by the Village Board.

TO: VILLAGE OF TINLEY PARK PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES

FROM: VILLAGE OF TINLEY PARK PLAN COMMISSION

SUBJECT: MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 5, 2017 MEETING

ITEM #3 WORKSHOP: TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE VILLAGE OF TINLEY PARK ZONING ORDINANCE (SECTION II AND SECTION IX) RELATED TO SIGN REGULATINOS – TEMPORARY SIGNS

Continue from previous meetings. Discuss proposed Text Amendments to the Village’s Sign Regulations specifically related to temporary signage. Other sections of the Sign Regulations will be discussed in subsequent workshops.

Present were the following:

Plan Commissioners: Kevin Bergthold

John Domina Anthony Janowski Lori Kappel Peter Kroner Mark Moylan, Acting Chairman Ken Shaw Tim Stanton

Absent: Edward Matushek III, Chairman

Village Officials and Staff: Paula Wallrich, Interim Community Development Director Stephanie Kisler, Planner I Walter Smart, Zoning Administrator Patricia Meagher, Commission Secretary

STEPHANIE KISLER, Planner I, began by stating that the workshop this evening will be only for temporary sign regulations. MS. KISLER presented the Staff Report, which included comparison information about temporary signage from the Village’s current code, Orland Park, Frankfort, and New Lenox. Also included in this presentation was proposed verbiage for a possible Text Amendment for temporary sign regulations. She asked that the Commissioners note that anything in red text in the handout are items needing further discussion as well as further clarification.

PAULA WALLRICH, Interim Community Development Director, stated that changes to temporary signage regulations were necessary. She introduced WALTER SMART, Zoning Administrator, who reviews all temporary signage and can answer any questions regarding difficulties and ease of enforcing the current Code.

MS. KISLER stated that the current Code allows sixteen (16) square feet of sign face area per side of a temporary sign. The Zoning Administrator has the authority to allow the number of signs permitted as he sees fit in proportion to the site. The duration of the display of a temporary sign is currently limited to one (1) month. She discussed issues with requests for special events or seasonal signs, such as a Halloween store or the Odyssey Corn Maize wanting their signs for a longer period of time than thirty (30) days.

MS. WALLRICH pointed out that location of temporary signage is important as well. MS. KISLER stated that the most substantial change proposed for consideration is a matrix of size and duration of display, where as a larger sign would have a shorter duration of display versus a smaller sign. Current Code allows the same amount of weeks in a one (1) year period of time that is being proposed, which is one (1) month, every six (6) months, totaling eight (8) weeks per year. She stated that in reference to size of signage she would like to have a discussion about a little more flexibility with this regulation. Also incorporated is allowing a letter to be submitted for requesting extra time and the Zoning Administrator would have the authority to review those requests on a case-by-case basis.

MS. WALLRICH asked if one aspect at a time can be discussed starting with size. MS. KISLER presented photos showing signs noting that currently there is not a height limitation for temporary signs. Size requirements have been an issue for since some people purchase their signs before obtaining permits or finding out what the regulations are. MS. WALLRICH is suggesting a height size of twenty-five feet (25’) maximum.

COMMISSIONER STANTON asked how often the Village is in communication with business owners (e.g., receive communication on a monthly basis reminding them of Code). MS. WALLRICH stated that the Zoning Administrator keeps a spreadsheet of permitted temporary signs that has a start date and an end date and then he follows up to make sure that the sign is removed by the appropriate end date. COMMISSIONER STANTON wanted to know if these business owners receive an email regarding their end date. MS. WALLRICH stated that that would be quite labor intensive. COMMISSIONER STANTON wanted to know what new businesses do if they are not aware of the Code. MS. KISLER stated that when a Change of Use is applied for by each new business, they are informed of Codes. MS. WALLRICH also stated that information is dispersed in the Village quarterly newsletter as well.

ACTING COMMISSIONER MOYLAN asked about dimensions of an inflatable sign. MS. KISLER stated that it is difficult to measure dimensions on an inflatable but typically there is a banner on the inflatable in addition to the inflatable itself. The height can be regulated more easily.

COMMISSIONER KAPPEL inquired about content. MS. KISLER stated that content cannot be regulated due to the First Amendment laws.

COMMISSIONER KRONER asked if there could be a height regulation on a banner sign at six feet (6’). COMMISSIONER BERGTHOLD stated the height should also consider how close the sign is to its intended audience. MS. WALLRICH stated that they will need to make distinctions and come back to the Commissioners with those examples and information, but noted that it is possible to regulate a maximum height and a setback requirement.

MR. SMART shared information about the types of banner signs that have been used. For example, the Tin Fish restaurant and Muscle Max put a freestanding banner sign at the corner of 183rd Street and Harlem Avenue. Muscle Max cannot be seen from 183rd Street or Harlem Avenue, so that is why they wanted the banner on the corner. COMMISSIONER SHAW asked if the sign was on the right-of-way or the property line. MR. SMART stated that it is in the right-of-way but he has made sure those signs go onto the private property. He also stated that if this banner sign was ten feet (10’) in height it would be blocking the bank. COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI pointed out that most banner signs are three foot by six foot (3’ x 6’).

MS. WALLRICH asked for a consensus of dimensions for the freestanding banner signs and other temporary signs. COMMISSIONER KRONER asked to consider the verbiage that based on duration and/or size of building for banner signs. MR. SMART stated he would like to have a fair and consistent

Code he can apply. COMMISSIONER SHAW stated that he felt that a temporary sign should never exceed the allowable size of a permanent sign.

MS. WALLRICH addressed MR. SMART asking if the twenty-five (25) square foot signs would be viable for most people seeking temporary signs. MR. SMART agreed that they would. MS. KISLER stated that one hundred (100) square feet may be too large. She reviewed the matrix of size and duration of display. MS. WALLRICH felt that the Commissioners should decide on size while the Zoning Administrator can decide on length of display.

COMMISSIONER DOMINA asked how often fines are given for temporary signs. MS. WALLRICH stated that the fine is $750 per day of violation and the judge can adjust the fine dependent upon the person’s defense and willingness to correct the situation.

COMMISSIONER STANTON recommended working with the local schools having a team of students sending out a monthly newsletter to businesses with constant reminders of signage Code, Regulations and sizes.

COMMISSIONER KRONER asked to refer back to sign size and suggested they approve seventy-two (72) square feet for two (2) weeks and stop there. MS. KISLER asked the Commissioners if they would be comfortable with a seventy-five (75) square foot for the maximum sign face area of temporary signs. The Commissioners were in agreement.

COMMISSIONER BERGTHOLD felt the location should also be considered with this size. MS. KISLER stated that in the draft regulations a setback requirement is also up for discussion. MS. WALLRICH referred to New Lenox’s Code in that the signage must be setback ten feet (10’), a balloon cannot be on the roof and has to be placed twenty feet (20’) back from property lines. Naperville and Frankfort also require a ten foot (10’) setback.

COMMISSIONER SHAW stated that he liked keeping the square footage lower and adding a setback. He felt that the goal is to minimize the use of temporary signs in general, preferring permanent signage. MS. KISLER stated that it is also important to stay business friendly. MS. WALLRICH stated that we could have verbiage such as “the purpose of a temporary sign is to advertise a special event,” but noted that we can’t regulate content but could make an intent statement.

MS. KISLER referred to her verbiage in the draft regulations stating that a temporary sign can be used for eight (8) weeks every year. ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN stated that he likes issuing a permit for example fifteen (15) days paying a permit fee every fifteen (15) days. MS. WALLRICH asked the Commissioners if they had a preference of splitting the eight (8) weeks to using four (4) the first six months of the year then using the second four (4) weeks in the second half of the year. The Commissioners felt that the eight (8) weeks could be used anytime through one year (1) without a split.

COMMISSIONER SHAW mentioned a tier structure meaning permit fee based on size. Right now it is a flat fee. MS. WALLRICH stated that per this discussion we would be getting rid of a maximum size of one hundred (100) square foot sign and instead allow a maximum of seventy-five (75) square feet.

COMMISSIONER SHAW asked how Staff keeps track of signage and time allowed for display. MS. WALLRICH stated that it is kept track of by address at the discretion of the Zoning Administrator.

COMMISSIONER KRONER inquired about having times of display based on sign size. MS. KISLER stated that having the verbiage state that signs of a specific size cannot be displayed for consecutive periods would help alleviate the concern of having large signs displayed for a longer duration. MS.

WALLRICH raised the thought that the longer the business owner wants signage displayed they have to have sign size that goes along with that duration. There has to be some flexibility to the businesses that have no visibility.

COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI recommended capping the size at fifty square feet (50’) and one flat fee so that the burden of monitoring is less on Staff. COMMISSIONER JANOWSKI asked what the most requested size of sign is requested. MR. SMART stated that normally it is about twenty to twenty-five (20-25) square feet. MS. WALLRICH stated that the feather flags are very popular right now.

ACTING COMMISSIONER MOYLAN asked about the signs that are pulled inside daily if those are considered temporary signs; MS. WALLRICH stated yes. COMMISSIONER KRONER referred back to the Staff Report regarding location of temporary signs. Orland and Naperville’s verbiage of location are well-written as well as New Lenox’s setback conditions, and we should consider adopting that verbiage. MS. KISLER noted the request to reference those codes.

STAFF noted the following recommendations from the Plan Commission:

1. Sandwich boards need to be brought in at the conclusion of the business day. 2. The location section should take notes from the codes for New Lenox and Naperville. 3. Existing lighting can be used for temporary signs. 4. Freestanding banners can be a maximum height of six feet (6’). 5. The maximum sign face area shall be seventy-five (75) square feet without further review by the

Zoning Administrator.

GOOD OF THE ORDER

Staff reminded the Commissioners that the adoption of the Official Zoning Map for 2016 will require Village Board approval.

RECEIVE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN asked if there were comments from the public; there were none.

ADJOURN MEETING

A Motion was made by COMMISSIONER SHAW, seconded by COMMISSIONER BERGTHOLD, to adjourn the Regular Meeting of the Plan Commission of January 5, 2017 at 10:10 p.m. The Motion was approved by voice call. ACTING CHAIRMAN MOYLAN declared the Meeting adjourned.