Kankakee Times

Westmont Village Planning & Zoning Commission met July 23.

Here are the minutes provided by the commission:

The Village of Westmont Planning and Zoning Commission held a special meeting on Wednesday, July 23, 2025 at 6:00 p.m., at the Westmont Village Hall located at 31 W. Quincy Street, Westmont, Illinois 60559.

1. Call to Order

Chair Doug Carmichael called the meeting to order at 6:01 PM.

2. Roll Call

Present: 5 - Chair Doug Carmichael, Commissioners Conor Donoghue, Thomas Sharp, John F. Simpson IV, Craig Thomas

Absent: 2 - Secretary Jill Peterson, Commissioner Michael Lynn

A QUORUM WAS PRESENT TO TRANSACT BUSINESS

Staff: Scott Williams (Senior Planner), Joseph Hennerfeind (Community Development Director), Adam Walsh (Planner), John Zemenak (Village Attorney)

3. Pledge of Allegiance

4. Swearing-in of testifying attendees

5. Reminder to silence all electronic devices

6. Reminder to sign-in for any public testimony

7. Approval of the Minutes of the July 9, 2025 regular meeting.

MOTION by Donoghue to approve the regular meeting minutes from July 9, 2025. Seconded by Thomas.

VOTING:

Ayes: 4 - Carmichael, Donoghue, Simpson, Thomas

Nays: 0

Abstain: 1 - Sharp

Absent: 2 - Lynn, Peterson

Motion Passed

8. Review of Public Hearing Procedures

9. Old Business

PUBLIC HEARING PZC 001-2025

Requests from the Village of Westmont regarding Zoning Ordinance text amendments as follows:

1) Zoning Ordinance text amendments to repeal Appendix A – Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinances and to establish new Chapter 95 – Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinance, with comprehensive updates to the entire Zoning Ordinance, including amendments to the zoning districts, development standards, planning processes, and other zoning regulations.

Presentation:

Scott Williams, Senior Planner, presented a summary of the major revisions to the proposed language. Williams noted that staff reviewed the commissioner and public comments, and made revisions based on best practice, feasibility, and the context of the Village’s needs. Adam Walsh, Planner, added that the presentation and the staff report are not an exhaustive list of the proposed revisions.

Public Comment:

Duane Newton, property owner, questioned what uses were added to the Office/Research-One (O/R-1) district, horizontal expansions of nonconforming structures, recreational vehicles, tree preservation, and accessory dwelling units (ADUs).

John Zemenak, Village Attorney, responded to Newton’s questions on nonconforming structure and use expansions.

Steve Mihelich, architect, commended the work being done on the update and recommended stating that commercial pools must follow state and other federal regulations, which could help projects navigate the permitting process.

Christa Stanulis, resident and member of the Environmental Improvement Committee, provided comments on the proposed outdoor lighting regulations. Stanulis explained outdoor lighting affects human and animal health, the common practice of regulating outdoor lighting, and that these regulations would not impede development.

Commissioner Comments:

Chair Carmichael explained that the commissioners will review the revisions on an article-by-article basis.

Article I: Introductory Provisions

No commissioners provided comments.

Article II: Residential Districts

Commissioner Sharp asked for clarification on the minimum interior side setbacks. Williams explained that this is carried over from the existing language. Walsh noted that it provides flexibility in home design.

Article III: Business and Employment Districts

No commissioners provided comments.

Article IV: Downtown Districts

Sharp pointed out that for general and row buildings, the text says “upper story height”, but the section illustrations say it applies to all stories. Williams replied that it can be revised to say “story height”. Walsh noted that Article I states that if there is a discrepancy between the text and an illustration, the text governs.

Article V: Special Purpose Zoning

Commissioner Simpson asked if the goal is to have all eligible properties zoned Public/Institutional (P/I) and what happens to a property zoned P/I after the public or institutional use ceases. Williams responded that the goal is to rezone Village-owned properties; other eligible uses will have the ability to request a rezoning at their discretion. Zemenak said that if the use ceases, a new property owner would be restricted to public and institutional uses, so they would likely need to rezone anyway.

Article VI: Principal Uses

Zemenak suggested that fueling stations be a special use in the Manufacturing (M) district. Carmichael clarified that this would be for public stations.

Zemenak suggested that minor repair and maintenance should be a special use in the Limited Manufacturing (M-1) and M districts. Sharp agreed with both suggestions.

Simpson questioned where major repair and maintenance would be classified. Williams said it would likely be a manufacturing and industry use category and explained that the Village does not have large isolated manufacturing districts, as they typically border residential districts.

Williams took a straw poll on requiring fueling stations to be a special use in the M district, which the commissioners present agreed with.

Simpson asked if car washes are classified as minor repair and maintenance, and if special use permits would be appropriate for this use. Sharp said that having car washes as a special use would make sense.

Zemenak suggested another alternative that fleet vehicle fueling centers could be reclassified as fueling centers.

Simpson asked where enclosed truck parking would be allowed. Williams explained the confusion regarding the current allowance, and said that it has been classified as high-impact manufacturing and industry.

Williams took a straw poll on classifying minor repair and maintenance as a special use in the M-1 and M districts. The commissioners present agreed with the change.

Williams took a straw poll to amend the fueling station classification to include fleet vehicle fueling stations. The commissioners present agreed with the change.

Zemenak suggested that data centers should be classified as a special use in the M district. Simpson and Sharp supported the change because of the potential impacts. The change was agreed to through a straw poll with the present commissioners.

Article VII: Accessory and Temporary Uses and Structures

Carmichael said that the revisions to business vehicles were satisfactory.

Simpson asked if the regulations for recreational vehicles stated that the trailer must be operable. Zemenak responded that it is regulated through the nuisance provisions and that amendments may be made to that section to include trailers. Walsh added that Section 7.21(F)(2) requires that trailers may not have the wheels removed, be affixed to the ground, or be stored in a way that prevents ready-removal.

Article VIII: Wireless and Telecommunication Facilities

No commissioners provided comments.

Article IX: Parking

Sharp restated that the senior high school parking minimum should be increased. Zemenak suggested that the requirement may be low to incentivize traveling by other means. Sharp asked if schools charge students for parking. Walsh replied that they often do.

Simpson and Commissioner Donoghue questioned which grade level the parking requirement applies to. Williams said it would be for the whole student body.

Joseph Hennerfeind, Community Development Director, stated that the parking requirement for grooming services is missing “per 1,000”.

Sharp suggested increasing the senior high school minimum to two per seven students. Walsh said that the requirement is a minimum, so a high school can provide more if they want.

Hennerfeind asked if schools are a special use in the P/I district, which would allow for traffic to be scrutinized. Walsh replied yes.

Sharp asked what the parking requirement for colleges and universities is. Walsh explained that it allows for other parking ratios to be established on the basis of data or parking studies that are tailored to the subject use. Williams suggested adding this permission to the senior high school minimum.

Donoghue said that the minimum in the ordinance may be below what Westmont High School currently provides.

Walsh added that a variance to the parking requirement can be requested if a senior high school finds the rate to be too high. Williams explained that the senior high school requirement matches the current requirement.

Williams took a straw poll on adding “or per Sec. 9.03(G)” to the senior high school requirement, which the commissioners present agreed with.

Article X: Tree Preservation and Landscaping

No commissioners provided comments.

Article XI: Signs

No commissioners provided comments.

Article XII: General Development Regulations

Sharp asked staff why residential properties were excluded from the outdoor lighting regulations. Hennerfeind replied that it would be difficult for staff to enforce, and that an applicability section was added to this section to allow for incremental improvements on commercial properties. Williams added that a future text amendment to this section could be processed if these regulations do not work as intended.

Sharp asked if a 4,000 degrees Kelvin light source is replaced, if it must be reduced to 3,000 degrees Kelvin. Hennerfeind replied that they would not if they were only replacing light bulbs, but would need to if significant changes were proposed to the existing lighting structure.

Article XIII: Nonconformities

No commissioners provided comments.

Article XIV: Review and Approval Procedures

No commissioners provided comments.

Article XV: Administration and Enforcement

No commissioners provided comments.

Article XVI: Measurements

Regarding Section 16.11(B), Sharp suggested that penthouses and associated mechanical equipment should be fully screened. Williams said that the Fire Department may have issues with higher parapet walls. Sharp clarified that mechanical penthouses are often screened independent of a parapet wall.

Hennerfeind asked for clarification on fully screening the equipment. Sharp replied that in his experience, he typically fully screens the equipment.

Simpson asked if this regulation applies to residential chimneys. Williams replied that the section in question is largely unchanged from existing language, and that staff typically recommends fully screening the equipment and developers do not often object to doing so.

Simpson suggested having the section be applicable to downtown buildings.

Dononghue asked for clarification on screening penthouses. Williams and Sharp replied that penthouses in this context apply to mechanical equipment, not occupiable spaces.

Hennerfeind explained the purpose of the existing regulations, as screening all of the equipment could be overly burdensome. Sharp suggested “fully screened; as per the judgement of the zoning administrator”. Zemenak agreed.

Williams took a straw poll on revising Section 16.11(B) to require that the equipment be fully screened, which the commissioners present agreed with.

Article XVII: Definitions

Simpson asked for clarification on the definitions for business, commercial, and motor vehicles. Zemenak explained the definitions come from Chapter 78 of the Municipal Code. Staff and the commission clarified the regulations for vehicles that carry 15 or less people. Williams noted that public and institutional uses are exempted from these regulations.

Appendix A: Recommended Trees and Shrubs

Williams pointed out that Ohio Buckeyes are missing an “o” under the street tree column.

Sharp asked if a contractor can use any tree or shrub they want and if the appendix is simply recommended. Williams replied yes, as long as it is not invasive and that developers often ask for a list. Hennerfeind added that this list should help quicken the review process for new developments.

Zemenak pointed out a necessary revision to Section 3.05(A)(4) to replace “fleet vehicles” with “business vehicles”.

MOTION 1

Motion by Thomas to recommend to the Village Board of Trustees to approve a request from the Village of Westmont regarding Zoning Ordinance text amendments, with the revisions discussed by the Planning & Zoning Commission, to repeal Appendix A - Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinance and to establish new Chapter 95 - Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinances, with comprehensive updates to the entire Zoning Ordinance, including amendments to the zoning districts, development standards, planning processes, and other zoning regulations.

Seconded by Sharp.

VOTING:

Ayes: 5 - Carmichael, Donoghue, Sharp, Simpson, Thomas

Nays: 0

Absent: 2 - Lynn, Peterson

Motion Passed

Carmichael, Hennerfiend, and Commissioner Thomas thanked staff and the commissioners for their hard work during the entire update process.

10. New Business

None.

11. Open Forum

Nobody spoke during the Open Forum.

12. Miscellaneous Items

a. Next regular Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on August 13, 2025.

b. APA-IL Plan Commissioner training on October 9, 2025

Walsh reminded the commissioners about the upcoming training at the APA-IL State Conference in October at the Old Post Office. Walsh explained that the commissioners can attend other sessions if they would like, and to contact staff by August 22, 2025 to sign up. Carmichael encouraged the commissioners to attend the training.

13. Adjourn

Motion by Sharp to adjourn the meeting.

Second by Thomas.

The motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.

Meeting adjourned at 8:22 p.m.

https://westmontil.portal.civicclerk.com/