Okay.

Good morning, everyone.

Today is September 3rd, 2025.

And I call the Lake County Planning, Building, Zoning, and Environment Committee to order.

In addition to being able to attend in person, remote attendance has been made available to the public via Zoom at the link on the agenda.

This meeting is being recorded through Zoom.

Okay.

Umber Frank, can you lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance?

Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Okay.

Can we get a roll call, please?

Yes.

Chair Altonberg?

Here.

Member Compost?

Member Frank?

Here.

Member Kinesek?

Here.

Question Chair Peterson.

Sorry, uh, Member Schlick?

Here.

Member Wasick.

Are there any?

Thank you.

Are there any addenda to the agenda?

No addenda to the agenda.

Do we have public comment today?

No public comment.

Okay, no cheers remarks today.

Any unfinished business?

No unfinished business.

Okay, we're gonna go to our consent agenda.

Can I get a motion for that, please?

Motion by member compo, second by member Frank.

All in favor.

Aye.

Motion passes.

Okay, moving on to the regular agenda.

We're at 8.3.

Resolution to vacate an unimproved portion of a right-of-way located east of Lawson Road in the Fox River Springs subdivision in Antioch Township.

Um we welcome Krista Braun and is this Frank Olsen?

Okay, thank you.

Oh, can I get a do we need a motion for that?

Okay, can I get a motion, please?

Motion by member Frank, second by member Kenijnik.

Okay.

Great.

Morning, members of the committee.

I'm Frank Olson, a senior planner with the planning building development department, and I will be presenting a petition of vacation number PTRL-001061-2025, which is a petition to vacate an unimproved right-of-way east of Lawson Road in Antioch Township.

The subject right-away is 42 and a half feet wide and is located east of Lawson Road and is adjacent to the Fox River.

It is located in the Fox River Springs subdivision in Antioch Township.

The petitioners are Margarita Castro and Timothy T Bond and Kimberley Bott.

The total area to be vacated is 5,227 square feet or 0.12 acres.

And you can also see on the plat of vacation that there is a proposed 15-foot easement for the existing stormwater infrastructure.

This is a view of the subject right away looking east from Lawson Road.

This view is looking north on North Forest Lane at the intersection where North Forest Lane, Lawson Road, and the subject unimproved right-of-way intersect.

Note that the darker pavement is the driveway of the applicant.

At the Board of Vacations hearing, the members of the board determined that there was no current or future public need for the plated right away.

Evident.

An easement has been granted to the Antiac Township Highway Department to maintain the existing stormwater management system.

And there were no objections from the Antioch Township Highway Commissioner, adjacent property owners, or service utility companies.

The Board of Vacations recommends approval of the right-of-action unanimously, finding that a vacation of the subject portion of Lawson Road will have no negative impact on the public.

It will allow the property owners currently maintaining it to continue to do so legally, and it will put the property under the tax rolls.

That concludes the presentation at this time.

Sorry, may I say this right?

Were there any comments?

No.

No.

Thank you.

Okay, good question.

Any other questions?

Okay.

All in favor?

Aye.

Okay.

Motion passes.

Thank you.

Yeah, moving on to 8.4.

Can I get a motion, please?

Motion by member campo, second by member Schlick.

This is an ordinance amending chapter 151 of the Lake County Code of Ordinances relating to posted notice requirements in unincorporated Lake County.

Okay.

And we welcome Melanie Colmer.

Okay.

Go ahead.

Hello.

Hello, members of the committee.

Yeah, we should.

Do we have uh can we pull up the slide presentation?

Is the one attached?

One moment.

Oh, she's saying she's got a lot of okay.

Okay, here you want me to pull it out.

Ruth Ann is checking.

Okay.

Sorry, and well.

Okay.

Um, can you just give us a little background?

Yep.

So we have received requests in the past from members of our department.

Um, we've noticed in the past some issues with current signage requirements, um, signs that we are required to post on applicants' property regarding their hearings for things like vacation or things like variations, um, vacations, conditional use permits, different types of applications like that.

And currently the signage that we have um is a kind of it's 24 by 36, bright yellow, um laminated paper essentially.

It's very thin, it's very flimsy.

Um, and so we thought that a better way to go into having some sturdier material would be by amending the code and the requirements set forth in the code.

Um, the current requirements for the posted signage is that it must state the applicant.

It must state the subject property, the time and date of the hearing, it has to have all of the variation requests that will be happening in that hearing, the contact information for the project manager, um, and so on and so forth.

So that is all required by the language that is currently in the unified development ordinance.

Um, and so it's very prescriptive and requires specific new signs for each hearing that we have.

Um, the zoning board of appeals hears about 30 cases per year.

And for each site, we are required to post two signs, um, or it is at least custom that we post two signs on the site.

So that's about roughly 60 new signs being generated each year by our signage department.

And so by doing such, we have a lot of what we would consider waste from having these new signs be posted.

And instead of doing that, we figured that we would kind of amend the code language so that we could have a more generalized um vision for what our sign would be.

So currently, as I stated, we have this kind of flimsier material that constantly falls off.

Um, it doesn't usually stay connected very well after we post them.

We're required to post them about two weeks before uh the hearing, 15 days approximately.

And so it's expected to last those 15 days up until that hearing date.

And so with the current material, it's very hard to have them last that long.

So what we are proposing is a kind of corrugated plastic that would be on a metal frame as opposed to a wooden stake.

Um, that way it would be reusable and the verbiage on that new corrugated sign as opposed to having all of the requirements that are currently required in our code, which you know, like I said, is the date and time, hearing requests, things like that.

Um, it would just say a hearing is to be held regarding this property for more information.

Um, see below.

There's a website link, um, the phone number of the planning building development department, and also a QR code that links directly to our calendar.

So that way they can see what the request is, what the applicants are stating, um, the exact address, everything like that, and all of that information is posted on our calendar.

So that way we don't have to get very specific signs made for each hearing.

We could bring them out, post them once the hearing is finished.

We can go back out, collect the signs and have them ready for the next hearing.

So it's basically two signs you're creating.

And when they go on the QR code, they can property and they'll know the information.

Yeah.

So we would have probably I'd say maybe 10 at like just to use because we'll have anywhere from you know two to five hearings a month.

Okay.

So it's 10 instead of 60.

Yeah, exactly.

Um they'll be reusable.

So yeah.

And so they can apply to any hearing type, whether that's a CUP, whether that's a variation, a street vacation, anything like that, um, that sign would be reusable and able to be placed on any site.

And so the kind of idea with that is to just reduce overall waste and make it more streamlined so that people, you know, it grabs their attention.

They don't have to read a bunch of small text.

They can go home, actually digest it instead of just kind of standing and staring at a sign that may or may not be there after it's posted.

Um, so that's kind of our direction that we're taking with it.

Okay, no, I I like it.

I think that it's great when whenever we can use digital to streamline things and people can get even more information.

I think that's a wonderful thing.

Okay, we have questions on the last second by membership.

Thank you, Chair.

And and just for clarification, so when they scan the QR code, will it take it take them right to the hearing information or just to your website?

It will take them to the planning building development website.

And on that very front page, there's a calendar that lists zoning board of appeals.

Um, and so it has the hearings uh specifically listed under that.

So it's a question of them clicking on that link and they'll get exactly what they need.

Okay.

There will also we'll also include our department phone number where if people who maybe not tech savvy or don't want to navigate trying to you know find the website, they can just call and say, hey, we were, you know, I'm out, I see a sign, can and then we'll be connected to a planner that can provide them with the information they're looking for.

Okay, thank you.

Member Slick.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, two things.

I I assume in your presentation there was probably a picture of the sign.

There was.

Okay.

Uh as long as we can get that before the board meeting, that'd be great.

Um and then the other thing is I saw V views up in the remains discussion.

And usual discussion, completely changed as part of the ZBA's discussion.

Uh so thank you for bringing that up.

We did have the the here the public hearing on this um just last week.

Um there were um uh nobody we we received no comments from the public.

Um the ZBA is uh very much in support of this.

This is something that they've been um wanting to see occur because they also um sometimes field complaints from um the public regarding, hey, you know, I I can't find the sign or the sign blew away.

Um, you know, you need to do so.

They they're very much in favor of it as well.

And um they did not have any substantive um changes to the amendments as proposed.

Perfect.

No, it sounds like a no-brainer.

I look forward to supporting this.

Thank you.

Okay.

I'm referring.

Yeah, I think most municipalities take this approach.

Um now that you're talking to us about it, I feel like it's gonna be overdue that we've done this.

I mean we have the same couple of signs in our town show up everywhere, and we just know like, okay, that's an indicator we have to look up what's happening here and people are accustomed to it.

So I don't think it's a big change.

I think it's positive.

Great.

Thank you.

Right.

Any other questions, comments?

Okay, all in favor.

Aye.

Okay.

Motion passes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And we're gonna go to 8.5.

Okay, can I get a motion, please?

Motion by member Keniznik, second by member Schlick.

Resolution directing the Lake County Zoning Board of Appeals to conduct a public hearing on a comprehensive packet of proposed text amendments to chapter 151 of the Lake County, Illinois Code of Ordinances.

We welcome Eric Wagner.

And please go ahead.

Good morning, Krista Brown, plan ability and development.

Um, so today we have uh a resolution um to move forward.

Um to move forward with the ZBA um holding a public hearing on the comprehensive packet of proposed text amendment.

So um you may recall at the last meeting we had a series of um smaller um topic specific um uh proposals um that the county that the committee moved forward um with initiation of the ZBA public hearing.

And so um, likewise we are we are here to um discuss moving forward with a comprehensive update.

And so um periodically, not as not as frequently as we're doing these um individual single topic amendments, but periodically our department does conduct a uh uh comprehensive review of of the chapter uh 151, the unified development ordinance as a whole.

Um and this is important to um on on several counts.

We we want to maintain currency, we want to emulate best practices, we want to look at the the chapter in its entirety to see are there are there you know specific things, thematic things throughout that need to be changed, not just looking at a specific section here or there or on a topic-specific basis.

Um the last time that we did a comprehensive update, um, it was approved by the Lake County Board in 2019.

So it's been a few years and and the timing is is right to look more um holistically at the ordinance again.

And so we have already initiated the drafting process.

Um, we are planning to update um uh a couple of of major themes um with substantive changes um that were not part of that 2019 update.

Um, we're looking at topics like planned unit developments, um looking at streamlining um those, the the process associated with those and updating those um requirements, um looking at development uh financial assurances, um, providing some clarity and again, streamlining um the process, the review and administration of of those um assurances when they're required, and also just regulatory streamlining overall.

So providing clarification um in areas where we do or don't have regulatory authority, um, and also other minor clarifications on just uh a uh several different uh miscellaneous topics.

Um also as part of the the comprehensive update, we would be doing our our housekeeping amendments.

Um so that would include things like updating committee names, um, codifying long-standing department policies um and correcting typographical and scriveners errors.

So we are requesting that PBZE take action today to recommend the initiation of the formal hearing process.

Um, and then if approved by the county board, um, staff would complete that drafting process.

We would be working um closely with state's attorney's office on review of of the proposed amendments before bringing them forward um to the ZBA for a public hearing.

Amber Kenijnik.

Thank you.

Uh I appreciate especially the examples of some of the changes that you're recommending.

And um, as I was listening to you describe them, I'm wondering if they have if if you felt the time is that it was very important to make these changes now because of our attempt to address the lack of affordable housing.

So I thought that might be the case.

So would you um mind just elaborating a little bit more on how these changes do you hope will um you hope will make the process of addressing that problem easier?

So one of the one of the the main topical areas that Krista just mentioned was the plan unit development process.

Um that has been a vehicle on rare occasions to facilitate um subdivisions of land for residential purposes.

We've had you can count it on one hand, the number of instances in which a PUD was utilized over the last 20 years for that purpose.

Uh plan unit developments are a mechanism to increase the creativity within which uh land is developed, it also provides for opportunities for the board to uh allow in some cases um bonuses for density um and to otherwise uh attract development.

Um unfortunately, the PUDY process that we've had in place since the inception of the ordinance back in 2000 is uh a very lengthy process with many, many steps.

And we've we've learned that that the length of time that it takes to go through a PUD is one of the one of the impediments to developers actually utilizing it for its intended purpose.

And so one of the things that we're really looking at with the PUD amendments specifically is to dramatically streamline that review process.

So it has fewer steps in this in the sequence, and that will allow developers to move forward more quickly with their projects.

We're not sacrificing public involvement in any way.

We're still accommodating public hearings for plan unit developments, but we are reducing the number of steps to go through the process.

And uh we think that between those changes and some other changes that we've incorporated into um into the ordinance um, we're gonna be in a position to start to utilize that technique more frequently, which could actually incentivize more development of residential within the unincorporated area.

And we we hope that with the change we can use that as one of the things that we can offer to the coalition as an example of where you really dig into the details of a process, there are ways in which it can be tweaked and modified and streamlined.

Any other questions?

Ever slight.

Thank you, Chair.

I'm just for my own ratification here process.

So we approve this, the board approves it.

ZBA, any changes then come back through.

Okay.

I just it to me it seems kind of long of the process, but I understand it now.

So just want so we're just agreeing to now go to the Z, the board to initiate the initiate changes.

ZBA is going to review whatever changes you bring forward, which will then come back to this committee to review.

Okay, perfect.

That was just I was in my head.

I'm like, that seems very circular and long, but I guess actually it's actually part of our our our new um streamlined process.

So a lot longer to stuff done.

It's less terrific.

This is this is streamlined.

Okay, I got it.

Um I no, I understand.

I was just making sure it's like a it seemed not to be very streamlined, but hopefully we get it figured out.

But I look forward to whatever changes come forward.

So I'll support this.

Okay.

Any other questions?

Okay, all in favor.

Aye.

Okay.

Well, we look forward to hearing about all those changes.

Um, we're gonna go on to 8.6.

Can I get a motion, please?

Motion by a member Knishnik, second by member campows.

So we have a resolution directing the Lake County Zoning Board of Appeals to conduct a public hearing on proposed tax amendments to Chapter 151 of the Lake County, Illinois Code of Ordinances relating to enhanced landscaping guidelines for unincorporated Lake County.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

Um so switching gears away from that comprehensive um uh set of amendments.

We're we're back to looking at a very topic-specific um category of amendments.

And so um we're seeking uh committee direction to move forward with um proceeding with the the ZBA public hearing on um landscaping related amendments.

And so you may recall last year we also amended uh chapter 151-167 um following recommendations and suggestions from open lands.

And so we had engaged with um open land staff um and the amendments that were passed last year were very specific around um enhancement and protection of native species and the and the planting of native species.

And so um at that time we had received um uh additional suggestions from open lands, and we sort of put those in a um no pun intended, put those in a parking lot um while we worked on the the native species um specific amendments.

And so what we're proposing now is to come back and and um pick up where we left off a year ago and move forward with the other um suggested amendments that uh that open lands had for us.

And so these are focused on um uh including uh updating the standards uh around parking lots.

Um and so uh making some significant changes in appendix A, incorporating current best practices on landscape management.

And so once once uh projects have completed the installation um those guidelines are are in our code um recommending how to maintain um those those environments uh over the long term.

And so we're we're following looking at um uh in in all cases looking at what open lands is recommending and following best practices and would be including those.

One of the interesting things about the exercise that we did with open lands is that uh in the phase one um process for these amendments, we had consulted with their subject matter experts on the potential cost implications of of incorporating additional natives into the uh landscaping um provisions of the ordinance, and based on a very comprehensive study that they had done last year, they had concluded, and we share this with the committee at the time.

Um, that the inclusion of sort of the native species within this um this uh first phase ordinance change actually either kept the same costs or in some cases reduced costs for developers as as they um as they invested in those uh materials and developing their projects, and then long term obviously natives do better in this environment.

And so they may um provide for a long-term savings in terms of avoiding um what would otherwise be inevitable tree replacements or you know, or shrub replacements as those those materials you know don't survive the the climate here.

And so that same philosophy is permeating this new set of amendments as well.

Or we're we're looking at at ways in which we can continue to improve the sustainability of our um of our county um while not making it um a more expensive undertaking for development.

I think it's wonderful that we're putting a lot of thought into that, and it really goes along with our strategic plan of trying to be more sustainable and more and use more natives.

Um member Wasick.

Thank you.

And it's been a while since we talked about this, but fresh my memory.

Did this also include uh say right-of-ways on county roads, or is it just new development?

So our we we don't have I mean, we don't have jurisdiction over what um uh highway authority would plant in their right-of-way.

We are specifically looking at um property within the unincorporated areas.

Um, and it depends, the threshold depends.

Sometimes it would apply to um existing developments when there's um a change in use or an intensification of that use, and then also as well as new developments.

But but the various regional highway departments are in fact looking, they're leaning into sustainability as well as part of their um operations and the way they they design quarters as well.

If if I may, Chair, if I can drill down a little bit.

So have you talked to Lake Dot about um extending this to their right-of-ways, or are they open to it?

Are they already doing it?

Any idea?

So the the provisions that we're referring to here are more specific to sort of site um site plantings, and so they have a very different approach to highway sure, highway landscaping.

A lot of what goes into sort of an evaluation of of what makes sense in a given right-of-way is okay, it's gotta increase the salt tolerance in some cases of the species.

Um erosion controls is seems to be depending on the topography, seems to be a very big driver for how plantings are designed along rights of way.

So, in some ways, yeah, there's some similarity to what we're attempting to do here, but there's also very we're working at very different purposes with our regulations and and regulations that might be at the division of transportation.

So I I think what you're saying, Eric, is that Lake Dow would have to develop their own ordinances for their right-of-ways, correct?

I mean, they they also have other considerations.

I mean, a lot of times you have um other improvements within their right-of-way that would include bike paths or um, you know, multimodal sidewalks, whatever it is, uh, as well as utilities, whether they're above or below ground, which could present challenges to how those um how landscaping is installed specifically within the right-of-way.

But we do have we do have standards um already.

We're looking at, you know, do if there's any updates that may need to be made, but we have standards for planting um within the setback adjacent to a right-of-way.

So whether it be a collector arterial or a local road, we already do have standards for um properties to plant, um, and in some cases, depending on the situation to buffer um uh to provide that buffer against the right-of-way.

Okay, and one last question, sure.

And did we have a provision that I I don't recall this being in the draft were say if we were going to do native planning, there was some provision to address invasive plants.

Um, because I know a lot of places sometimes they don't do the maintenance and then you know things that we want to get rid of or kind of take over there.

Sure.

We I mean we do have a provision in the ordinance that allows people to remove um when they have invasives on their property, there's they're allowed to remove that.

No, you know, um, but one of the ways we uh I think we addressed that last year with the amendments.

We we did a sort of a comprehensive look at the um allowable species types that people can incorporate into their development, and we did remove several species that um, you know, maybe maybe were considered okay 20, 30 years ago are are now not okay.

Bradford pair being an example.

Um, so we've now removed those from the list of acceptable uh species to plant.

So okay, thank you.

Member Slint.

Thank you, Chair.

Eric, you said something important there with um when you guys looked at it, you actually saw that there's a a chance for some cost savings um for planting natives.

And I think that's something that as this kind of works through and gets out there, we should definitely harp on and make some type of info paper on and say, hey, listen, you know, yes, it's it's better.

And there are cost savings, you know, we're not just looking to.

I think some type people look at text amendment changes and think we're just trying to usually drive up the price that this is an opportunity.

I think we should really drill down on that to show people, hey, this is an opportunity where you can do better for the environment and save money.

So I think I think as this rolls through if you guys can have some type of info paper on that to go with, I think that would be a pretty good PR thing.

We could partner with open lands.

It's their it's their study.

Um, but there I don't think they would have any any concerns about us utilizing that in some sort of um some sort of public informational piece.

I just think that's a tax amendment that comes with a win, and that's we should take wins where we can get them.

So I think that's a good thing.

Thank you.

I couldn't agree more.

Very good point.

Um other questions, comments.

Okay, all in favor.

Aye.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Um, we're moving on to 8.7.

Eric, you have a director's report today.

I do.

I have a brief director's report.

This is a reminder to the members of the committee and the board as a whole that upcoming uh next week on Wednesday, we have our first workshop for the Lake County Housing Coalition.

Uh, this follows the kickoff meeting, a very successful meeting, I should say, uh, that we had in in June.

Um, the September 10th meeting is at the same location at the barn at Timber Point off of Gilmer and Mundaline.

Um, this is the first opportunity to sort of dig into some of the statistical details of that, the degree uh to which we're uh running behind in housing production in the county.

We're gonna be talking a lot about the about the numbers, talking about the trends and getting into some small group discussions about um goals and aspirations for the group.

This workshop uh portion of the series of meetings is going to be where committee uh rather participants on the in the coalition are going to sort of roll up their sleeves and work together jointly on um moving forward the sort of policy um elements of the coalition and some of the best practices of the coalition.

So this first workshop is a sort of an exercise to set the table for that series of more technical oriented um meetings that are going to be taking place over the next four months prior to the the wrap-up summit that we're gonna have in February of 2026.

So look forward to that.

If you haven't RSVP'd already, if you'd like to attend, please do so.

We would like to have a uh good head count by the end of the week.

We're also gonna be asking our board members, as we did last time in advance of the kickoff meeting to assist us with recruiting any uh municipal stragglers that have not yet RSDP'd to the event, and we'll be sending out um a communication to our board members later this week.

Um I believe today is the day that the um the coalition team is going to be sending out a a meeting reminder to all the folks that attended the first meeting, and we had over um a hundred uh participants at this last one, very well attended meeting.

Um, we want to make sure that we can maintain that momentum for meeting two, especially among our municipal counterparts where a lot of the difficult work is going to happen around um regulatory change and so forth in the coming years.

So looking forward to to getting assist from our board members to do that recruitment effort in the coming days.

Yeah, just let us know.

That first meeting, the kickoff meeting was incredible.

The place was packed.

And I'm hoping you know, we continue with this momentum.

And if anybody is able, any of the board members are able to attend, it would be really amazing to see as many board members as we can there and um to really show our support for this effort.

And it's a really important effort, the affordable housing.

And um, you know, we've got to do whatever we can to get municipalities excited to partner with us and to make this a big goal of theirs as well, because it's clear there's an issue.

It's you know, there's lots of data to show that we don't have enough housing.

So we've got to get these partnerships going.

So we're all on the same page trying to get more housing here, which is also gonna help bring more companies here and bring more businesses here.

And it's all part of the same continuum.

So we all should be interested in working on this project.

Member Wasick.

Thank you, Chair.

Real quick question, Eric.

So yesterday uh you advocated for enhancing state uh credits for attainable housing.

Will you be discussing that at this meeting and and just you know, kind of outlining it or that won't be a topic for this particular workshop, but when we get further along in the process and one of the later workshops, we're gonna be talking about other sort of approaches beyond the local to increasing the supply of housing production.

And that's you know, that is certainly one of the areas in which we can see some major benefit to local and regional efforts to increase housing supply by obtaining more incentives for subsidizing housing at the at the local and regional level.

So this is more background session nature.

Right.

Okay.

Great.

Thanks.

Any other comments?

Okay.

Is that your report?

That's my report.

All right.

Thank you very much.

We're really looking forward to September 10th.

And I believe Ruth Ann has a report.

Yes, just a couple quick items on Thursday, August 21st.

Lake County hosted a public listening session for its upcoming urban and community forestry strategic plan.

And this plan was approved by the county board at its meeting in October of 2024.

At the listening session, our forestry consultant Davy Resource Group presented an overview of the plan development, the data analysis on the current state of the urban forest for Lake County, and the first draft of strategic priorities and actions being recommended.

We had 28 residents who attended the meeting, and they provided some written comments for staff to work towards incorporating into the final plan.

And those residents were also given the opportunity to follow up with additional items and ideas by contacting county staff and be notified about the progress on the plan's development.

All this being said, we're hopeful to get a first full draft of that urban and community forestry strategic plan to staff here in early September and bring it back here to the committee in October, early November, um, to get that approved by you so we can move forward to final adoption by the county board this year.

Okay.

And then I also wanted to share a quick update.

Um I know a lot of questions have come in on the land development fee schedule.

Um, the questions for staff.

That is an item that is still on old business.

It was referred back to the committee at the county board meeting on um March 11th.

We did check in with staff, they are continuing to do the research and work on that.

So it's still ongoing, and we'll be coming back at a future meeting when they've completed their research.

Okay.

Thank you for that update.

Is there any executive session?

No need for executive session.

Okay, any member remarks?

Okay.

So I'm going to adjourn our meeting until our next meeting is October 8th, 2025.

And thank you all for coming today.