Planning & Zoning Commission
Regular MeetingDeKalb, IL · August 23, 2017
Minutes
MINUTES
CITY OF DEKALB
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
August 23, 2017
The Planning and Zoning Commission held a Meeting on August 23, 2017 at the City of
DeKalb Municipal Building, 200 S. Fourth St., DeKalb, Illinois. Chair Atherton called the
meeting to order at 6:20 PM.
A. ROLL CALL
Brenda Hart called the roll. Planning and Zoning Commission members present
were Vicki Buckley, David Castro, Jerry Wright and Chair Christian Atherton.
Members absent were Katharina Barbe, Matthew Crull and Deborah Nier.
City staff present were Community Development Director Jo Ellen Charlton,
Principal Planner Dan Olson, and Recording Secretary Brenda Hart.
B. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Chair Atherton requested a motion to approve the August 23, 2017 agenda as
presented. V. Buckley motioned to approve the agenda, D. Castro seconded the
motion, and the motion was approved by unanimous voice vote.
C. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (Open Floor to Anyone Wishing to Speak on Record)
None
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
None
E. NEW BUSINESS
1. Public Hearing on a petition by Central States Tower II, LLC, represented by
Richard Connor Riley, for approval of a Special Use Permit for a 140 foot tall
cellular communications antenna to be located at the southeast portion of the
property at 1300 South Seventh St., DeKalb, Illinois.
PETITIONER PRESENTATION
The applicant, Mr. Richard Riley, representing Central States Tower II, LLC, gave a
detailed accounting of the history from 2014 to present of Verizon’s pursuit of a special
use permit for the proposed Verizon tower at the subject site. He went through the
requirements of the City for cell towers per the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)
and detailed how Central States Tower has met those requirements.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 23, 2017
Page 2 of 10
Mr. Riley said the proposed cell tower is needed to provide Verizon adequate coverage
to the surrounding area as almost everyone uses wireless now instead of landlines.
Wireless systems are sophisticated in that if a call is dropped, it’s recorded which
indicates where a greater need for service is. Mr. Riley displayed a map indicating how
the area of coverage would expand with the new tower. He then discussed other
existing towers and buildings where they have antenna and the possibility of co-locating
on those. With each tower and building discussed there was a reason it wasn’t feasible,
including the coverage isn’t where the need is or it wouldn’t provide the capacity
needed.
Mr. Riley provided affidavits from Trisha H. Bhuyan, a Radio Frequency Engineer and
Ronald J. Pauly, a Principal Construction Engineer, both employed by Verizon Wireless.
The affidavits made statements regarding construction and cost details of the co-
location on the adjacent AT&T Tower and the feasibility of using one of Verizon’s other
towers to increase service coverage to the area along S. 7th St.
Mr. Riley showed a site plan detailing the fall zone for the proposed tower and the
proposed landscape screening. He said the trees along 7th Street would provide
coverage and would block the view of the tower. He showed photo simulations of the
proposed tower from all directions noting the tower is non-obtrusive.
Mr. Riley listed the City’s zoning requirements for cell tower placement noting that 1300
S 7th Street is zoned “LI” Light Industrial District, which allows for more intense uses
than the commercial districts. He said cell towers fit well within the “LI” District. Mr.
Riley read the allowed uses of the “LI” District and noted there is no mention of cell
towers until Article 7 of the UDO, which requires a special use permit for such a use. He
went through the list of considerations and conditions: setbacks, color, height, lighting,
fencing, noise, design and the co-location protocol. He noted they mailed letters to all
the other carriers for possibilities of co-location and sent a second one to AT&T. Mr.
Riley provided copies of the letters to the City. He stated the proposed antenna meets
all requirements and told how costly and time consuming this process has been and
asked the Commission to make a finding that Central States Tower has done their due
diligence in all aspects. He noted the height of the tower will be 140 feet and will hold 3
other carriers. Mr. Riley added the maximum height allowed for the tower per the UDO
is 15’ over the max height allowed which is 75 feet. He noted, however, the UDO allows
increased height of structures for additional setbacks, which they meet.
Mr. Riley noted they submitted plans to AT&T for the colocation at their existing tower at
1500 S. 7th St. after they received their approval from the City. The estimate prepared
by AT&T (dated February 24, 2016) indicated the cost for Verizon to co-locate on their
tower would be $439,897.00, which was cost prohibitive for them. He noted the typical
cost to co-locate on another tower is $100,000 to $125,000. Mr. Riley added the
revisions mentioned by Thomas Wilson of AT&T (e-mailed dated July 20, 2017) would
not result in a big change in costs and still would be over $400,000.00 as indicated on
the provided affidavit from the construction engineer from Verizon. Mr. Riley made note
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 23, 2017
Page 3 of 10
the tower presently to the south at 1500 S 7th Street is an AT&T landline tower saying
he has never seen wireless co-location on a landline based tower.
Mr. Riley noted Central States Tower was very careful in their search of an appropriate
site. In their opinion 1300 S 7th Street is an excellent location and meets the
requirements of a special use per the UDO:
The tower sits 750’ from the street and behind a building.
The tower will increase values of the surrounding area because
connectivity will improve.
The 140’ tower is designed for three additional future co-locates.
The tower is compatible with neighboring uses.
The tower is the least aesthetically intrusive design, a mono-pole.
Traffic into and out of the site will be minimal, approximately once a
month. There will be no staffing, no impact to noise nuisances.
There is no airport in close proximity to the proposed site.
Additional benefits:
Public Safety – Providing good cell coverage supports the general welfare
of the residents of the City of DeKalb.
This tower will ensure good cell service to the area. Businesses won’t
relocate to areas that have poor wireless service.
STAFF REPORT
Dan Olson, Principal Planner, noted the applicant Verizon, and Central States Tower II,
LLC, acting as their agent, requests the approval of a special use permit to construct a
140 foot tall cellular communications antenna to be located at the southeast portion of
the property at 1300 S. 7th St. The proposal will include the construction of an
equipment shelter and access drive on a portion of the 12.93 acre site. The lease area
(4,800 sq. ft.) and tower location will be on the southeast portion of the site. The
property is zoned “LI” Light Industrial District and the property owner is Hovis Light
Industry Park, Inc. Access will be provided from S. 7th St. along the south side of the
site via a 12 foot wide asphalt drive.
Mr. Olson also mentioned the applicant previously applied for a special use permit in
2014 to locate a 140 foot cell tower at the same location on the subject site. An initial
public hearing was held by the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 12,
2014 and continued two additional times until complete supporting information was
provided by the applicant and the possibility of co-locating on the adjacent 300 foot
AT&T tower was concluded. At the April 15, 2015 the Commission voted to deny the
special use request based upon the recommendation from staff that the application was
still incomplete, the applicant did not honestly convey the ability or opportunity to co-
locate on the adjacent AT&T tower and opposition from neighboring residents. The
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 23, 2017
Page 4 of 10
petition was withdrawn by the applicant prior to consideration by the City Council on
May 11, 2015.
Mr. Olson added that in July, 2015 the City received correspondence from Verizon
Wireless that they desired to co-locate on the adjacent AT&T tower. A special use
permit application was subsequently submitted, and on August 26, 2015, the
Commission recommended unanimously to approve a special use permit for Verizon to
co-locate on the adjacent AT&T tower. The City Council approved the special use
permit via Ordinance 2015-038 on September 28, 2015. The applicant submitted plans
for a building permit to co-locate on the AT&T tower in December, 2015 and the permit
was issued for the work in February, 2016. No work was conducted on the project after
issuance of the permit. The applicant met with City staff in May, 2017 and indicated they
are re-applying for a special use permit for a 140 foot tower at 1300 S. 7th St. because
the estimated cost to co-locate at the AT&T tower was extensive and cost prohibitive.
The applicant provided an estimate indicating the cost would be almost $440,000 which
was decided to be too great a cost.
City Attorney Dean Frieders responded to two points made by Mr. Riley. 1.) The
affidavits submitted by Mr. Riley are not too meaningful because the professionals who
wrote the affidavits are not in attendance and cannot be cross-examined. 2.) It was
stated there is not an airport within close proximity to the site. It was noted the DeKalb
Municipal Airport is to the northeast of the site.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Chair Atherton opened the floor for public comment.
Mr. David Lehman - 621 Karen Ave– Mr. Lehman spoke in opposition to placing the
tower at 1300 S 7th Street. He expressed his concern and said his opinion is they have
not provided adequate documentation to co-locate on the AT&T tower nor has Central
States Tower shown a good faith effort by following DeKalb’s Unified Development
Ordinance protocol on co-location. Mr. Lehman reviewed the history of the Planning
and Zoning Commission meetings in which Central States Tower was pursuing a
special use permit. He noted AT&T has shown that it is possible to co-locate on their
tower. Mr. Lehman reiterated his objection to the placement of a new tower considering
it to be unnecessary and undesirable for the surrounding residents. He posed several
questions to Mr. Riley, which were answered. Mr. Riley noted Verizon deals directly with
AT&T on the co-location issue, not Central States Tower. Mr. Lehman requested a
representative from Verizon attend the next PZC meeting.
Patrick Fagan - 3700 Pebblebeach Ct., 4th Ward Alderman – Mr. Fagan said he feels a
responsibility to add to the conversation. He indicated he met with the building owner,
Mr. Hovis, and toured the facility. He added he met with the local residents and there
were three in favor of the new tower. Mr. Fagan mentioned that one of those is the
property owner, one did not give their address and one works in the building. He noted
there are 14 residences in the immediate area that occupy 11 homes. He said he
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 23, 2017
Page 5 of 10
doesn’t understand why the tower can’t be moved to the industrial area on the other
side of the RR tracks to the east. He would like more discussion on that in a continued
public hearing.
Richard Larson - 12284 Fairview Dr. & 1331 Sycamore Rd. Mr. Larson said he is
concerned about representations being made without evidence. Some of those are:
Talk of poor service in the area but no documentation to support that statement.
A picture was shown of a tree along 7th Street with the claim that the tree will
protect residents from the view of tower.
The claim was made that there’s no issue with the airport when in fact there may
be.
It was said that the fee to co-locate would be $439,897 but there is no
documentation of that. Until the invoice is paid, it’s not admissible.
It was stated that real estate property values will go down if there is poor service.
Is there evidence?
It was stated the existing AT&T tower has not adversely impacted the
neighboring properties. He acknowledged if that tower were proposed today it
may not be considered under the current UDO and wouldn’t be placed where it is
presently.
Were told there’s an affidavit from an engineer but this is not evidence. The
person who wrote it is not there to be cross examined.
Said there is a problem with colocation because it’s a landline tower but there is
no competent witness to know what that means.
Mr. Larson asked that these things be explored.
Donna Larkin - 432 Karen Ave. – Ms. Larkin said she drives by the AT&T tower all the
time and would prefer to not see it. She wondered how Central States Tower didn’t
know there was an airport in DeKalb. She said she would prefer they make use of the
tower that’s already there. Ms. Larkin complimented the City for the progress made on
the Protano junkyard cleanup on S. 4th St. and said why take a step back by installing
something unsightly in the neighborhood. She thinks there is no reason to not pursue
the other side of the RR tracks as a location for the tower. She also found it interesting
that the radius of the affected area to mail notices was reduced. Ms. Larkin expressed
she finds it troubling that the conversation continues regarding a Verizon tower but no
one from Verizon has attended a meeting to explain the necessity for one. City staff and
the Commission Chair explained that the radius has not been reduced but rather the
placement of the proposed tower was moved further away from the 7th Street thus
changing the radius for notification.
Michael Welsh - 3122 Fairway Oaks– Mr. Welsh explained he served on the Planning
and Zoning Commission when the Verizon tower was previously proposed and also
helped to create the UDO requirements for co-location which encourages several
carriers on one antenna. Mr. Welsh strongly stated that the Planning & Zoning
Commission’s role is not to suggest a business be placed in a different location other
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 23, 2017
Page 6 of 10
than the one requested. In his opinion it would be wrong to do so. He said we now
have a group that wants to construct a tower that will allow for future co-locations at a
reasonable rate with the mono-pole being designed to hold four carriers. In his opinion,
the goal should be for this community and its citizens to have top-notch service which
he stated is what drives business. He wondered about the person sitting in an office
who can’t get a signal. Mr. Welsh said he hears that people don’t want the antenna
because of the view but wondered if it would really even be noticed. Mr. Welsh’s
opinion is that we need to allow our community to have good cellular service and thinks
Central States Tower is the right company to do it, noting they are willing to make the
investment to bring cellular service to our community and asked what else we want.
Donna Larkin – 432 Karen Dr. – Ms. Larkin wanted to clarify that cell service in that area
is not lacking as several comments have been made to the contrary.
Tarryn Thaden - 115 Andresen Ct – Current Property Manager at 1300 S. 7th St. - Ms.
Thaden said there is presently an AT&T tower on the proposed site, large and looming.
She reported when Central States Tower approached Jim Hovis about the site it was
with the intention of providing the area with better service coverage and not simply
because the site was available. Instead they believed the 1300 S 7th Street location to
be an ideal location. With the existing AT&T tower being a landline tower they may not
be able to easily co-locate. Being sensitive to resident’s concerns she noted using a
monopole is less intrusive. Ms. Thaden said she works within the building at 1300 S 7th
St. and her calls are often dropped within the business. She believes not taking care of
our community’s communication needs will be problematic.
Jim Hovis – 1300 S 7th St. – Mr. Hovis is part of the group that owns the property. Mr.
Hovis said he doesn’t have an office within the building but others who do, say they
don’t have good cell service. Central States Tower approached him indicating this was
a good location. CST made an offer to lease the land and he accepted their first offer.
Mr. Hovis said he wanted them to be in the best location in order to provide good
service for the community. He noted that businesses within the building must use
landlines because service is so poor. He thinks the tower will benefit other neighboring
businesses such as Nestle and Panduit as well.
Linda Liston - 717 Gifford St – Ms. Liston said within the surrounding neighborhood
there is no connectivity problem with Verizon that she is aware of and wonders if the cell
service trouble within the building has something to do with its construction.
William Oleckno - 1622 Sleepy Hollow – Mr. Oleckno said he wants to congratulate the
City of DeKalb on adopting the portion of the UDO that requires and promotes co-
location, which means cooperation. He asked that Central States Tower attempt to
bring an AT&T representative to the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
He said the issue of cost has come up in regard to co-locating on the AT&T tower but
wonders if AT&T may be willing to reconsider some of those costs. Mr. Oleckno thinks
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 23, 2017
Page 7 of 10
that the future is smaller antenna and possibly being placed on a roof of a house with
more efficiency.
D’Ann Hamilton White- 614 Spring Ave – Ms. Hamilton said she is in agreement with
those opposed to the antenna and would also like to see representatives of AT&T and
Verizon at the PZC meetings.
V. Buckley made a motion to extend the meeting until 9:30 p.m. Castro seconded the
motion. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
Chair Atherton repeated the history of the pursuit of a Special Use Permit by Central
States Tower. She said in 2015 approval was given for colocation on the AT&T tower
and in 2016 a permit was issued. Chair Atherton noted the decision by the PZC can’t
be based on financial reasons. She said that some of the industrial buildings in the area
have poor service and recognizes the need for improvement.
V. Buckley asked if other sites had been explored. She asked what the long term
ramifications would be if the tower is not built. Mr. Riley said once there is an existing
tower that will allow for co-location they will do whatever they can to use that site for
other carriers. Colocation is valued because it’s a quick process. He added they looked
at other sites, but this is the only location that works. Mr. Riley noted it will be good to
have an outside engineer review the matter regarding the cost. He mentioned he will
bring a representative from Verizon to the next meeting.
Chair Atherton expressed frustration at the request for an extension of the Public
Hearing. She noted that the previous time this was before the Planning & Zoning
Commission there was displeasure expressed over the many extensions allowed.
J. Wright made a motion, based upon the submitted petition and testimony presented,
to continue the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing to Wednesday,
September 6, 2017 at 6:00 pm so staff can prepare a staff report and recommendation.
In addition, it was recommend the preparation of the staff report be contingent upon the
applicant providing a complete application submittal per Article 7.08 of the UDO, a
revised estimate regarding the co-location on the AT&T Tower and that a Professional
Fee Reimbursement Agreement and the appropriate escrow amount be established to
cover the costs of any third party reviews of the cost estimates/plans for the project.
D. Olson said the hearing should be continued to the September 20th meeting instead.
City Attorney Dean Frieders noted if it’s not ready for a recommendation by the 20th,
City staff will reach out to let the public know. J. Wright amended the motion to change
the date to continue the hearing to September 20th. V. Buckley seconded the motion.
A roll call vote was called. Vicki Buckley - yes, David Castro - yes, Jerry Wright - yes
and Chair Christian Atherton - no. The motion passed 3-1-3.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 23, 2017
Page 8 of 10
F. OLD BUSINESS
1. Continued Public Hearing on City-initiated text amendments to the following
Articles of Chapter 23 “Unified Development Ordinance” of the Municipal
Code: Article 19 “Non-Conforming Situations” to remove the requirement in
Article 19.05 (4) that a legal non-conforming use of a building or structure
must be discontinued if a change in ownership, use or tenancy occurs; and to
Article 19.09 to allow for a change in tenancy, ownership or management of
an existing use of a building or structure, provided there is no change in the
nature or character, extent or intensity of such non-conforming use of the
building or structure.
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Dan Olson, Principal Planner, went over the staff report dated August 18, 2017,
which recommended approval of the amendments to Article 19 as proposed.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Rorry Heide, ReMax Real Estate - Ms. Heide told of a client who bought a residence as
a two unit. The owner is now trying to sell it but had to remove it from the MSL listing
because of the City’s requirement. She described a near impossible situation where the
residence can’t be advertised as a two unit but also can’t be advertised as a one unit
because it has two kitchens, two meters, etc. Ms. Heidi explained how difficult this is for
owners who cannot sell their properties. She mentioned the instances where some are
needing to move into a retirement situation and need the proceeds from their homes but
aren’t able to sell it because of this requirement.
Mike Groark - 1405 S 2nd Street – Real estate attorney - Mr. Groark observed the
people who are affected by this ordinance are not owners of apartment complexes but
rather the small mom and pop or the family who may live in one space and rent out the
other in order to make ends meet. He has 6 different cases right now that are affected
by this ordinance. They are small mom pop operations where the family may live in it
and rent out a unit. He commented that people who own these may be retired and now
trying to sell their house and can’t or are faced with taking 40% less than what they may
have gotten otherwise. He sees another scenario, someone dies and the affairs can’t
be settled because of the inability of selling the house. He sees situations where these
houses have been like this for fifty, sixty or seventy years or more and trying to figure
out when these changes were made and when the rules changed can be difficult if not
impossible. Having to bring the house into conformance in order to sell will hurt many.
He asked the Commission to please consider the recommendation regarding approving
the amendments.
Alex Finke - 1430 DeKalb Ave– Government Affairs representative – Hometown
Association of Realtors – Mr. Finke stated he’s in agreement with the recommendation.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 23, 2017
Page 9 of 10
Will Heinisch – DeKalb Property Owner – Mr. Heinisch stated his support for staff in
removing this wording from the ordinance.
Attorney Frieders explained that the changes proposed in the ordinance granted
protection to uses that were initially established lawfully, but which became
nonconforming uses by virtue of changes in the applicable zoning codes or
standards. He further suggested that the continued protection from loss of legal
nonconforming status should be provided as suggested by the PZC where there is a
change in ownership or tenancy, but not where there is a change in use, as a change in
use would change a nonconforming status.
Bessie Chronopoulos – 423 Gayle Ave – Ms. Chronopoulos gave her agreement with all
other speakers and said she is glad the City is taking a pro-active stance. She thinks
the PZC should be more involved and get out in community more.
Brian Morsch - 404 S 3rd Street – Mr. Morsch replied to Dean’s comments wondering
about residents who bought their properties as a two or three unit without knowing
historically whether permits were obtained and now want to sell. D. Frieders reiterated
that it has to be a legal non-conforming use meaning it had to have been changed
legally with building permits, etc. Dean stated that building codes go back a hundred
years so there would have always been a requirement for permits.
V. Buckley motioned to continue the meeting until 10:00 p.m. Wright seconded the
motion and it was approved unanimously by voice vote.
B. Morsch added DeKalb needs to keep the EAV up noting that allowing property to be
devalued won’t be good or sustainable.
David Jacobson - 802 Edgebrook, #1 – Mr. Jacobson commented that we don’t want to
scare investment out and suggested this change solves present and past problems but
still presents questions for the future. He supports the amendment.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
D. Castro said the proposed amendment seems arbitrary and doesn’t think this will give
people a huge say in bringing things to conformity. He added the proposed change will
not remedy the problem.
V. Buckley motioned to approve the amendment as presented. Wright seconded the
motion. Roll Call vote was taken. Vicki Buckley – yes, David Castro – no, Jerry Wright
– yes, Chair Atherton – yes. The motion passed 3-1-3.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 23, 2017
Page 10 of 10
G. REPORTS / ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
Continued Public Hearing on a petition by Central States Tower II, LLC for approval of a
Special Use Permit for a 140 foot tall cellular communications antenna to be located at
the southeast portion of the property at 1300 South Seventh St., DeKalb, Illinois.
H. ADJOURNMENT
V. Buckley motioned to adjourn, D. Castro seconded the motion, and the motion was
approved by unanimous voice vote. The meeting adjourned at 9:50 PM
Respectfully Submitted,
Brenda Hart, Recording Secretary
Minutes were approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on October 4, 2017.
Agenda
DeKalb Municipal Building
Council Chambers
200 S. Fourth St., 2nd Floor
DeKalb, IL 60115
AGENDA
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 23, 2017
6:00 PM
A. ROLL CALL
B. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (Additions or Deletions)
C. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (Open Floor to Anyone Wishing to Speak on Record)
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
E. NEW BUSINESS
1. Public Hearing on a petition by Central States Tower II, LLC, represented by
Richard Connor Riley, for approval of a Special Use Permit for a 140-foot tall cellular
communications antenna to be located at the southeast portion of the property at 1300
South Seventh Street.
F. OLD BUSINESS
1. Continued Public Hearing on City-initiated text amendments to the following
Articles of Chapter 23 “Unified Development Ordinance” of the Municipal Code: Article
19 “Non-Conforming Situations” to remove the requirement in Article 19.05 (4) that a
legal non-conforming use of a building or structure must be discontinued if a change
in ownership, use or tenancy occurs; and to Article 19.09 to allow for a change in
tenancy, ownership or management of an existing use of a building or structure,
provided there is no change in the nature or character, extent or intensity of such non-
conforming use of the building or structure.
G. REPORTS/ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
H. ADJOURNMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
August 18, 2017
TO: DeKalb Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Jo Ellen Charlton, Community Development Director
Dan Olson, Principal Planner
RE: Special Use Permit for Antenna Equipment (Verizon) – 1300 S. 7th St. (Central
States Tower II, LLC)
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Purpose To obtain a special use permit to construct a 140
foot tall cellular communications antenna to be
located at the southeast portion of the property at
1300 S. 7th St.
B. Location 1300 S. 7th St.
C. Size 12.93 acres; Lease area – 4,800 sq. ft.
D. Existing Zoning “LI” Light Industrial District
E. Existing Land Use Industrial Building
F. Proposed Land Use No change; Construct 140 foot tall cell tower,
associated equipment and access drive
G. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use North: LI; Fire station #2, water treatment plant,
wholesale, church, residential
South: LI; AT&T communications tower,
industrial, park/ball fields
East: PD-I; RR, industrial park
West: SFR2; Single family residences
H. Comprehensive Plan Designation Light Industrial
II. APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant, Verizon, and Central States Tower II, LLC, acting as their agent, requests the
approval of a special use permit to construct a 140 foot tall cellular communications antenna to be
located at the southeast portion of the property at 1300 S. 7th St. The proposal will include the
construction of an equipment shelter and access drive on a portion of the 12.93 acre site. The lease
area (4,800 sq. ft.) and tower location will be on the southeast portion of the site. The property is
zoned “LI” Light Industrial District and the property owner is Hovis Light Industry Park, Inc.
Access will be provided from S. 7th St. along the south side of the site via a 12 foot wide asphalt
drive.
Page 2 of 6
III. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
The applicant, Central States Tower II, LLC, previously applied for a special use permit in 2014
to locate a 140 foot cell tower at the same location on the subject site. An initial public hearing
was held by the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) on November 12, 2014 and continued
two additional times until complete supporting information was provided by the applicant and the
possibility of co-locating on the adjacent 300 foot AT&T tower was concluded. At the April 15,
2015 PZC meeting, the Commission voted to deny the special use request based upon the
recommendation from staff that the application was still incomplete, the applicant did not honestly
convey the ability or opportunity to co-locate on the adjacent AT&T tower and opposition from
neighboring residents. The petition was withdrawn by the applicant prior to consideration by the
City Council on May 11, 2015.
In July, 2015 the City received correspondence from Verizon Wireless that they desired to co-
locate on the adjacent AT&T tower. A special use permit application was subsequently submitted,
and on August 26, 2015, the PZC recommended unanimously to approve a special use permit for
Verizon to co-locate on the adjacent AT&T tower. The City Council approved the special use
permit via Ordinance 2015-038 on September 28, 2015. The applicant submitted plans for a
building permit to co-locate on the AT&T tower in December, 2015 and the permit was issued for
the work in February, 2016. No work was conducted on the project after issuance of the permit.
The applicant met with City staff in May, 2017 and indicated they are re-applying for a special use
permit for a 140 foot tower at 1300 S. 7th St. because the estimated cost to co-locate at the AT&T
tower was extensive and cost prohibitive. The applicant provided an estimate indicating the cost
would be almost $440,000 (estimate provided in packet). The costs are related to site preparation,
tower remediation, electrical upgrades and project oversight by AT&T. The estimate was prepared
by AT&T for Verizon and a representative from AT&T has responded confirming the amount.
AT&T provided a response when they received a notification letter from Verizon required per the
co-location protocol in the UDO. The response from AT&T was submitted by Thomas Wilson,
Project Manager for AT&T Towers – Antenna Solutions Group via e-mail on July 20, 2017 and is
provided in the PZC packet. Mr. Wilson indicated AT&T has revised the drawings showing
changes they believe will significantly reduce the construction cost for Verizon from what was
listed in the estimate. The e-mail indicates the two main changes are going from underground
utilities to overhead and to add a concrete slab with an adjustable raised platform for Verizon’s
equipment shelter instead of removing underground conduit. AT&T could not provide a range on
the percentage the cost would be reduced, however Verizon is responsible for providing the revised
estimate.
The applicant was advised the City would need a revised project estimate regarding the changes
prior to any recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission. As of August 18th, we had
not received the revised estimate. The applicant did provide an e-mail (dated 6-22-17) mentioning
that the typical cost to co-locate on any tower is approximately $35,000 and would be the same for
the usual AT&T tower as well. The e-mail further states Verizon’s costs are amplified in the co-
Page 3 of 6
location on the adjacent AT&T tower because Verizon would have to pay almost $440,000 in
capital costs for tower modifications and a higher monthly rent than normal.
Article 7.08 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), regulates the placement, design and
use of wireless communication equipment. This section of the UDO also stipulates compliance
with certain criteria that needs to be demonstrated by the applicant prior to approval of the special
use. The criteria is listed in the applicant’s submittal along with their responses. Sufficient
evidence supporting a 140 foot tower was not provided. The applicant has also provided photo
simulations indicating how the tower will look from ground level from all directions.
The applicant is indicating there is a need for Verizon wireless service in the area. A summary
provided with the petition indicates the area under consideration is a coverage hole know for
frequent trouble tickets and customer complaints. The summary continues by noting residences
and business in the areas have poor coverage and neighboring cell site currently covering the area
are breaking for capacity. The petition notes the primary objectives for the proposed facility is to
provide reliable in-residence coverage in the area and capacity offload to the neighboring sectors
serving the area. The applicant has provided maps indicating the existing Verizon cell sites in the
DeKalb area and also pre-coverage and post-coverage maps showing how the coverage will be
improved around the subject site with the new tower.
Article 7.08 of the UDO describes the Co-location Protocol for antenna systems and is designed
to increase the likelihood that all reasonable opportunities for co-location have been investigated.
The applicant has contacted other carriers (AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, and Cricket) in the area and
provided mailing receipts. The only copy the City received of one of the letters was the one sent
to AT&T. Staff has requested copies of the letters that were sent to the other carriers in relation to
the co-location protocol in the UDO, but have not received them.
Per the UDO, if a response to a co-location request is received by the applicant indicating an
opportunity for co-location, the applicant shall analyze and investigate the feasibility based upon
criteria listed in the UDO. Those criteria include if service can or cannot be provided by co-location
at the site, evidence that the lessor either agrees or disagrees to co-location on their site and
evidence that adequate access does or does not exist at the possible co-location site. A financial or
cost criteria is not one of the listed criteria in determining if co-location is a possibility.
The City has advised the applicant that a Professional Fee Reimbursement Agreement be submitted
along with the appropriate escrow amount be established per Chapter 9 of the Municipal Code.
The escrow will be used to pay for any third party review of the cost estimates that are provided
for the co-location on the AT&T Tower or the costs for the construction of the Verizon tower at
1300 S. 7th Street. The City also noted the agreement shall be established prior to any consideration
by the Planning and Zoning Commission. As of August 18th, the City had not received an
agreement.
Page 4 of 6
IV. CITIZEN INPUT
To date, there have been 9 correspondence from surrounding property owners/residents indicating
their opposition to the proposal and 3 correspondence noting their support for the proposal have
been received and are made part of the record. The correspondence are provided in the PZC packet.
VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Due to the past history of the request to place a 140 foot tall tower at this location and the amount
of public interest and opposition regarding the request, it would be appropriate for staff to not
make a recommendation until all testimony and information regarding the request has been heard
and the public hearing was concluded. Staff would recommend after conclusion of the petitioner’s
presentation, resident input and PZC questions and comments, the public hearing be continued to
the next PZC meeting so staff can prepare a full staff report and recommendation. In addition, staff
would recommend the preparation of the staff report be contingent upon the applicant providing a
complete application, a revised estimate regarding the co-location on the AT&T Tower and that a
Professional Fee Reimbursement Agreement and the appropriate escrow amount be established to
cover the costs of any third party reviews of the cost estimates/plans for the project.
Sample Motion:
Based upon the submitted petition and testimony presented, I move the Planning and Zoning
Commission continue the public hearing to Wednesday, September 6, 2017 at 6:00 pm so staff
can prepare a staff report and recommendation. In addition, I recommend the preparation of the
staff report be contingent upon the applicant providing a complete application submittal per
Article 7.08 of the UDO, a revised estimate regarding the co-location on the AT&T Tower and
that a Professional Fee Reimbursement Agreement and the appropriate escrow amount be
established to cover the costs of any third party reviews of the cost estimates/plans for the
project.
Page 5 of 6
Page 6 of 6
July 26, 2017
Dear Property Owner:
You may have recently received a letter and several associated documents via certified mail from
Richard Connor Riley, representing Central States Tower II, LLC, regarding the application for a
special use permit to construct a cellular communications antenna at the property located at 1300
S. 7th St. The documents also included a letter from the City of DeKalb to surrounding residents
indicating there will be a public hearing in front of the City of DeKalb Planning and Zoning
Commission regarding the request on Wednesday, August 9, 2017. Although the public hearing
notice for August 9th was published in the newspaper, the means by which the applicant (Central
States Tower II, LLC) provided notice to surrounding residents was not clear regarding the
process, hearing date and contact information.
Therefore, in order to ensure the surrounding residents receive proper notice regarding the
request, the public hearing originally scheduled for August 9th will not be held. The City
will republish the public hearing notice for an August 23rd hearing in front of the Planning and
Zoning Commission. Attached is a revised letter and hearing notice indicating the public hearing
will be held on August 23, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. in the DeKalb Municipal Building, 200 South
Fourth Street, DeKalb, Illinois.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me or the Community Development
Department at (815) 748-2060.
Sincerely,
Dan Olson
Principal Planner
Enclosures
CC: Jo Ellen Charlton, Community Development Director
Planning and Zoning Commission
Applicant – Central States Tower II, LLC
July 26, 2017
Dear Property Owner:
The DeKalb Planning and Zoning Commission will consider a request on a petition by Central
States Tower II, LLC, represented by Richard Connor Riley for approval of a Special Use Permit
for a 140 foot tall cellular communications antenna to be located at the southeast portion of the
property at 1300 S. 7th St., DeKalb, IL. The subject property is located along the east side of S.
7th Street, across from Karen Ave., zoned “LI” Light Industrial District, 12.93 acres in size and
has a Parcel Identification Number (PIN) of 08-26-326-001.
The DeKalb Planning and Zoning Commission will review the request and hold a public hearing
at its regular meeting on Wednesday, August 23, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. The meeting will be at
the DeKalb Municipal Building, 200 South Fourth Street, DeKalb, Illinois. As a property
owner within 250 feet of the above-mentioned property, you are encouraged to attend this
meeting to learn about and comment on the proposal.
You are also welcome to submit any written comments you may have on the proposal no later than
Wednesday, August 16, 2017. You may submit written comments regarding the request on
the enclosed comment sheet by mail to the address listed above, or by e-mail to
dan.olson@cityofdekalb.com. All comments will be shared with the Commission and included in
the public record.
If you have any questions about this request, please feel free to contact the Community
Development Department at (815) 748-2060.
Sincerely,
Dan Olson
Principal Planner
Enclosures
CC: Mayor
City Council
City Manager
Planning and Zoning Commission
Applicant
1300 S. 7th St. – Special Use Permit
Page 2 of 4
LEGAL NOTICE
NOTICE is hereby given that a public hearing will be held before the DeKalb Planning and Zoning
Commission at its regular meeting on Wednesday, August 23, 2017, at 6:00 p.m. in the DeKalb
Municipal Building, 200 South Fourth Street, DeKalb, Illinois, on the petition by Central States Tower
II, LLC, represented by Richard Connor Riley for approval of a Special Use Permit for a 140 foot tall
cellular communications antenna to be located at the southeast portion of the property at 1300 S. 7th
St., DeKalb, IL. The subject property is located along the east side of S. 7th Street, across from Karen
Ave., zoned “LI” Light Industrial District, 12.93 acres in size and has a Parcel Identification Number
(PIN) of 08-26-326-001.
All interested persons are invited to appear and be heard at the time and place listed above. Interested
persons are also encouraged to submit written comments on these proposals to the City of DeKalb,
Community Development Department, 200 South Fourth Street, DeKalb, Illinois, 60115 by 5:00 p.m.
on Wednesday, August 16, 2017.
Further information is available from the Community Development Department, (815) 748-2060.
Christina Atherton, Chairman
DeKalb Planning and Zoning Commission
Page 4 of 4
From: Richard Connor Riley
To: Olson, Dan
Cc: Brian Meier (brianm@centralstatestower.com); Mike Douchant (mdouchant@dolanrealtyadvisors.com)
Subject: RE: 1300 S. 7th Street - Verizon Tower
Date: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:02:06 PM
Attachments: PROJECT APROVAL LETTER PAL (State Hwy 23 & Fairview Ave) 1500 7th St. , Dekalb, IL.pdf
Dan,
It is the cost to Verizon that needs to be examined, and not the cost to Central
States Tower.
Normally Verizon’s costs to co-locate on any tower are approximately
$35,000.00. This cost
would be the same for the usual existing AT&T tower as well. Verizon’s costs
are amplified in the colocation on this Central Office AT&T
tower because Verizon would have to pay $439,897.00 in capital costs for
the tower modification (See attached estimate) as well as
a higher monthly rent than what Central States Tower would charge.
CST’s proposed tower is 145’ with Verizon at 125’, which provides opportunity
for 2 colocations above and one below. This
co-location capacity is an important benefit to the City as it should eliminate
some future towers. Allowing that Every site
is slightly different CST typically budgets about $180,000 for a monopole in the
150’ range, of which approximately $60,000
represents the cost of the monopole itself, which CST could reuse if necessary.
These costs are Central States Tower’s cost
and not Verizon’s.
It should be noted that it is the impossibility of the wireless carrier (Verizon) to
co-locate on other structures that Section 7.08.09
Co-location Protocol mandates; CST believes therefore, that the real
comparison should be the normal cost to Verizon to co-locate on an
existing tower versus the cost to locate on the AT&T central office Tower. This
cost increase is approximately thirteen (13) times higher
and is therefore not feasible.
Should you have any questions please call me.
Thanks,
Richard
Richard Connor Riley
LAW OFFICE OF
RICHARD CONNOR RILEY
123 North 4th Street
Chesterton, Indiana* 46304
(312) 244-3792 (O)
(312) 276-5123 (F)
*LICENSED IN ILLINOIS
From: Olson, Dan [mailto:Dan.Olson@CITYOFDEKALB.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 2:09 PM
To: Richard Connor Riley <rcriley@siting-advisors.com>
Cc: Charlton, Jo Ellen <Joellen.Charlton@CITYOFDEKALB.com>; Dean Frieders <dean@frieders.com>
Subject: FW: 1300 S. 7th Street - Verizon Tower
Richard,
Were you able to obtain the cost for the new tower?
Dan Olson
From: Olson, Dan
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 3:07 PM
To: 'Richard Connor Riley' <rcriley@siting-advisors.com>
Cc: Dean Frieders <dean@frieders.com>; Charlton, Jo Ellen (Joellen.Charlton@CITYOFDEKALB.com)
<Joellen.Charlton@CITYOFDEKALB.com>
Subject: RE: 1300 S. 7th Street - Verizon Tower
Richard,
Thanks. What is the overall cost for the construction of the tower so we can compare to the
construction estimate you provided for the co-locate on the AT&T Tower?
From: WILSON, THOMAS
To: Richard Connor Riley
Cc: Olson, Dan; Brian Meier (brianm@centralstatestower.com)
Subject: RE: City of DeKalb IL. co-location notification
Date: Thursday, July 20, 2017 12:22:21 PM
Attachments: Scan from a Xerox WorkCentre.msg
Good afternoon Gentlemen, thank you for contacting me regarding this issue. AT&T does have an
existing tower approximately 290’ in height located at 1500 S. 7th St. DeKalb, IL 60115. When we
MapQuest our address to the proposed address of 1300 S. 7th Street, DeKalb, Illinois 60115 they are
0.1 miles apart which is well below the 5,280 LF. We have taken the current drawings and value
engineered them making a couple of small changes (see attached); changes we believe will
significantly reduce the construction cost in the PAL letter that we sent to Verizon that was part of
your attachment. The two main changes is going from underground utilities to overhead and the
second is to extend the existing driveway with a concrete slab with an adjustable raised platform on
top that will accommodate all of Verizon’s equipment. Just these two changes would totally redesign
sheets C1 and C2 and would eliminate sheets C3 and C4. It would be up to Verizon to redesign their
drawings with these changes in order for AT&T to get revised pricing. If you have any questions
regarding the redlines and where we feel the cost will be reduced please feel free to contact me. In
regards to my contact information please see my signature box below, we have changed offices
some time ago. Thank you and have a great day.
Thomas R. Wilson | Project Manager – CBRE for AT&T Towers – Antenna Solutions Group
5600 Glenridge Drive, 6E-94B
Atlanta, GA 30342
(C) 678.602.2779 (O) 678.567.5462
Email - tw292v@att.com
NOTE: New application is now available on the website
To download the application, please go to www.atttowers.com/towers/files/ATT_Towers_Application.xls
To access the AT&T Towers inventory, please go to www.atttowers.com
Download the NEW AT&T site lease application (Version 10.3)
From: Richard Connor Riley [mailto:rcriley@siting-advisors.com]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 12:44 PM
To: WILSON, THOMAS <tw292v@att.com>
Cc: Olson, Dan <Dan.Olson@CITYOFDEKALB.com>; Brian Meier (brianm@centralstatestower.com)
<brianm@centralstatestower.com>
Subject: City of DeKalb IL. co-location notification
Mr. Wilson,
Please see the attached notification letter which Dan Olsen, Principal Planner
for the City of DeKalb, asked that I e-mail you regarding Verizon’s Application
to build a new Cellular facility at the referenced location in the attached letter. I
had previously mailed a notification pursuant to City Ordinances to the Inbound
Colocation Manager, located at 4016 Watson Blvd, in Warner Robins, GA
31093. (Also Attached)
Additionally I have attached the Invoice / Project Approval letter (PAL) for the
existing AT&T tower; please advise if the amount of this Invoice has changed.
Please call if you have any questions.
Richard
Richard Connor Riley
LAW OFFICE OF
RICHARD CONNOR RILEY
123 North 4th Street
Chesterton, Indiana* 46304
(312) 244-3792 (O)
(312) 276-5123 (F)
*LICENSED IN ILLINOIS
City of DeKalb
Planning and Zoning Commission
Staff Report
DATE: August 18, 2017
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission Members
FROM: Jo Ellen Charlton, Community Development Director
Dan Olson, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: Text Amendments to the Unified Development
Ordinance – Article 19 “Non-Conforming Situations”
GENERAL INFORMATION:
At the June 21, 2017 Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) meeting, the Commission
recommended approval of various miscellaneous text amendment to the Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO), including amendments to Article 19 “Non-Conforming
Situations”. Article 19.05 provides regulations for non-conforming uses located in
buildings and structures. One of the regulations state “When a non-conforming use of a
building or structure changes ownership, use or tenancy, the legal non-conforming use
must be discontinued”.
The PZC recommended to amend Article 19 by keeping the requirement that a legal non-
conforming use of a building or structure must be discontinued if a change of ownership,
use or tenancy occurs, but to exempt residential properties where there are no more than
four (4) dwellings. The City receives many inquiries regarding non-conforming situations
as it relates to residential properties with four (4) units or less and we do not have a good
way to track changes of ownership of property if nothing else changes on the site. The
PZC also recommended an amendment to Article 19.03 that when changes in the
ownership, use or tenancy of a non-conforming use of a parcel, on which no building exist,
the site would have to be brought into compliance with the UDO.
Prior to consideration of the amendments by the City Council at their July 10, 2017
meeting, questions and concerns were raised regarding the language that still required a
non-conforming use of a building or structure (except for residential properties with four
units or less) be brought into compliance if there is a change of ownership, use or tenancy.
Prior to action by the City Council, the Ordinance was amended to remove any proposed
changes to Article 19, in order to provide time for additional dialogue based on questions
and concerns raised.
At the July 19th PZC meeting, local business owner, landlord, and property owner, Will
Heinisch, voiced concern regarding the PZC’s recommendation to approve amendments
to Article 19. He asked why stakeholder groups were not offered an opportunity to provide
input on the proposed amendments. He said he found the language in Article 19 unclear.
He asked the PZC to rescind its recommendation to approve the proposed amendments
and to allow stakeholder groups to participate in discussions regarding Article 19. It was
noted to Mr. Heinisch that the City Council had removed the proposed amendments to
Article 19 prior to their vote on July 10th.
At the July 21st Business Coordination Group Meeting, City staff discussed the proposed
amendments to Article 19 and solicited feedback. The group appreciated the PZC’s
recommendation regarding residential properties with four units or less being exempt from
the requirements, however they noted a concern regarding the current language requiring
any non-conforming use of a building to be brought into compliance with a change of
ownership, use or tenancy. Based upon input from the group, a public hearing notice was
prepared for August 9th removing the requirement from Article 19.05 that a non-
conforming use of a building must be discontinued if a change of ownership, use or
tenancy occurs.
At the August 9th PZC meeting the Commission discussed the proposed amendments.
Some members had concerns regarding losing the ability to bring non-conforming
properties into compliance and having the proper tools in the UDO. There was a
consensus that the City needed a vision for these properties and the neighborhoods they
are in. The PZC recommended to table the item to their next meeting in order to further
analyze the language in Article 19 and to review the non-conforming provisions of other
communities.
Staff gathered the non-conforming regulations of 12 other communities (see table on
following page). None of the other communities require a legal non-conforming use or
structure be brought into compliance with a change of ownership, use (same use) or
tenancy. The other regulations regarding non-conforming lots, buildings, and uses are
very similar to the City’s. In addition, restrictions regarding the repair and maintenance to
non-conforming structures and the provisions related to the discontinuation and
abandonment of non-conforming uses are also similar (see table). Some communities
did require that non-conforming structures under a certain value ($1,000 - $10,000) be
brought into compliance within a certain timeframe. As suggested by the PZC, the City
needs to take a look at the areas where the non-conforming situations are arising and
evaluate the future of those areas and determine if any zoning changes need to be made.
This could be accomplished in a separate study or in conjunction with an update to the
Comprehensive Plan. Staff would recommend that the PZC go forward with
recommending approval of the proposed amendments to remove the change of
ownership, use and tenancy language for the reasons as stated previously in this report.
It should be noted that requiring compliance with an ownership change is not forcing non-
conforming situations into compliance. People are either not going forward with
purchasing a property because they learn it’s not in compliance or the real estate transfer
is occurring and the City is not aware of it. The City needs to make sure we are not
hindering real estate sales in residential areas as that may have an effect on property
values in the long term.
Discontinuation or
Conformance with
abandonment of non-
Municipality change in ownership,
conforming use -
use or tenancy
timeframe
DeKalb Yes 6 months
30 days – use of land
Sycamore No
60 days - use of building
Geneva No 6 months
St. Charles No 6 months
Champaign No Mitigation Plan
Urbana No 6 months
Normal No 6 months
Evanston No 1 year
Bloomington No 6 months
Only for Home
Carbondale 6 months
Occupations
Lemont No 6 months
1 year – use of building
Lockport No
2 months – use of land
Itasca No 6 months
PUBLIC INPUT:
As noted above, the proposed amendments were discussed by the Business
Coordination Group on July 21st. We also received a letter from Rick Pryor (received
date of August 1, 2017) indicating support of the amendment that non-conforming
residential properties with four units or less are exempt from bringing their property into
compliance with a change of ownership, use or tenancy. The letter was provided in the
PZC packet for the August 9th meeting.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff would recommend approval of the amendments to Article 19 as proposed.
LEGAL NOTICE
NOTICE is hereby given that a public hearing will be held before the DeKalb Planning
and Zoning Commission at its regular meeting on Wednesday, August 9, 2017 at 6:00
p.m. in the DeKalb Municipal Building, 200 South Fourth Street, DeKalb, Illinois, on City
initiated text amendments to the following Articles of Chapter 23 “Unified Development
Ordinance” of the Municipal Code: Article 19 “Non-Conforming Situations” to remove the
requirement in Article 19.05 (4) that a legal non-conforming use of a building or structure
must be discontinued if a change in ownership, use or tenancy occurs; and to Article
19.09 to allow for a change in tenancy, ownership or management of an existing use of a
building or structure, provided there is no change in the nature or character, extent or
intensity of such non-conforming use of the building or structure.
All interested persons are encouraged to submit written comments on this proposal to the
City of DeKalb by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, August 2, 2017, and are invited to appear
and be heard at the time and place listed above. Further information is available from the
Community Development Department, 815-748-2060.
Christina Atherton, Chair
DeKalb Planning and Zoning Commission
City of DeKalb