Planning & Zoning Commission

LEGAL NOTICE / PUBLIC NOTICE VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA The Village of Westmont Planning and Zoning Commission will hold its regular meeting on Wednesday, July 9, 2025 at 6:00 PM, at the Village of Westmont, 31 W. Quincy St., Westmont, IL 60559. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 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 Minutes a. Approval of the Minutes of the June 25, 2025 Special Meeting 8. Review of Public Hearing Procedures 9. Old Business - None 10. New Business a. PUBLIC HEARING PZC 008-2025 Requests from TGP Innovations LLC, d/b/a That Golf Place (Petitioner), and Pranno Corporation (Owner), for the property at 212 East Chicago Avenue, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for the following: 1. Special Use Permit to operate an indoor golf simulator facility amusement establishment in the B-2 General Business District. 2. Zoning Ordinance Variance to the special condition that requires a 100- foot distance separation between an amusement establishment and a residence district. b. PUBLIC HEARING PZC 009-2025 Request from Justin and Natalie Krone, for the property at 232 East Des Moines Street, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for the following: 1. Zoning Ordinance Variance to the maximum lot coverage in the R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence District for a residential pool. Page 1 of 120  c. PUBLIC HEARING PZC 010-2025 Request from Michael Schaefer and Chivon Niziolek, for the property at 102 West Naperville Road, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for the following: 1. Zoning Ordinance Variance to the maximum lot coverage in the R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence District, for a patio and walkways. d. PUBLIC HEARING PZC 012-2025 Request from Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation, for the property at 639 Blackhawk Drive, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for the following: 1. Zoning Ordinance Variance to the maximum height and area of directional signs in the B-2 General Business District. e. PUBLIC HEARING PZC 013-2025 Request from Chicago Lightworks LLC, d/b/a Chicago Lightworks (Petitioner) and 1133 Cleveland Properties, LLC, d/b/a Oakmont Tech Center (Owner) for the property at 600 Oakmont Lane, Suite 600, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for the following: 1. Special Use Permit to operate business offices with accessory uses of warehousing, distribution of materials, goods, or products in the O/R Office/Research District. 11. Open Forum The public comment rules and procedures are set forth in Chapter 2, Section 2-66 of the Westmont Code of Ordinances. Public comment is allowed for matters of public concern that are not on the agenda. Public comment is limited to 3 minutes per speaker. 12. Miscellaneous a. General Updates 1. Special PZC Meeting on July 23, 2025 continuation Public Hearing of PZC 001-2025 Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments 2. Next Regular PZC meeting on August 13, 2025 13. Adjourn Note: Any person who has a disability requiring a reasonable accommodation to participate in the meeting should contact the ADA Compliance Officer, 9:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. Monday through Friday, Village of Westmont, Illinois, 60559; or telephone (630) 981-6210 voice, within a reasonable time before the meeting. Listen Everywhere, an assistive listening, mobile app, is now available to visitors attending Board and Commission Meetings held in the Village Hall Board Room. https://westmont.illinois.gov/581/ADA-Listen-Everywhere Page 2 of 120  Village of Westmont Planning & Zoning Commission June 25, 2025 - Draft Minutes The Village of Westmont Planning and Zoning Commission held a special meeting on Wednesday, June 25, 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 6:00 PM. 2.​ Roll Call Present: 6 - Chair Doug Carmichael, Secretary Jill Peterson, Commissioners Conor Donoghue, Michael Lynn, Thomas Sharp, John F. Simpson IV Absent: 1 - Commissioner Craig Thomas A QUORUM WAS PRESENT TO TRANSACT BUSINESS Staff: Scott Williams (Senior Planner), Joseph Hennerfiend (Community Development Director), 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 June 11, 2025 regular meeting. MOTION by Simpson to approve the regular meeting minutes from June 11, 2025. Seconded by Sharp. VOTING: Ayes: 5 - Carmichael, Peterson, Lynn, Sharp, Simpson Nays: 0 Abstain: 1 - Donoghue Absent: 1 - Thomas 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 Page 3 of 120  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. Article IX: Parking Scott Williams, Senior Planner, gave a brief overview of the Article’s drafted language. Secretary Peterson questioned if when the minimum parking requirement results in a fraction, whether the number is rounded up or down. Williams answered that when the fraction results in 0.5 or more, the requirement is rounded up. If it is less than 0.5, it gets rounded down. Commissioner Lynn asked if it makes sense to change the warehousing parking requirement to be derived from the floor area instead of the number of employees. Williams replied that many neighboring communities regulate it based on the floor area, noting that it is hard to verify the number of employees. Joseph Hennerfeind, Community Development Director, explained that the parking requirement is dependent on the user of the building, which can vary widely from tenant to tenant, and that staff is looking to refine the numbers to be simpler to calculate. Commissioner Sharp clarified how the parking requirement changes when the use changes. Staff further explained scenarios when the existing parking is scrutinized. Peterson recommended increasing the minimum parking requirement for health and fitness services, which Sharp agreed with. Chair Carmichael expressed that a veterinarian should not have a higher parking requirement than a service or retail use. Commissioner Donoghue asked if parking in other businesses’ parking spaces was allowed. Peterson replied that in multi-tenant centers, they can park anywhere in the parking lot. Hennerfeind asked how the parking requirement is determined for a new multi-tenant center when the future tenants are not known. Williams replied that he believes it is a flat rate determined by the center’s floor area. Carmichael questioned the parking requirement for video gaming cafes. Hennerfeind replied that new video gaming cafes are not allowed. Williams added that accessory video gaming in restaurants uses the restaurant parking requirement. Commissioner Simpson asked why craft alcoholic beverage distributors have a parking requirement for both the seating area and per employees. Williams said it is likely a carry-over from the existing language. Simpson recommended splitting the parking requirement for health and fitness services into gymnasiums and studio classes, with studio classes having a higher minimum. Hennerfeind explained the trend of removing parking minimums and letting the market decide how much Page 4 of 120 parking to provide, which the Village of Westmont is ill-prepared for. Sharp asked for the parking requirement for medical offices. Sharp found that one parking space per seven students is too low for colleges and business training services. Sharp questioned how the parking requirement for hotels changes if it has a conference center. Hennerfeind replied that the hotel would need to provide spaces for the guest rooms and the conference center. Sharp pointed out that “other retail, outdoor” is missing a parking requirement. Referencing public comment, Sharp advocated for removing the “per seat” calculation for religious uses. Williams replied that the other option would be to regulate based on maximum occupancy, which Sharp said would likely result in an excessive requirement. Carmichael asked why financial services have different parking requirements. Williams explained that it is due to carry-over from existing language and from what similar communities require. Donoghue clarified that the parking requirements will be for the proposed smaller parking stall sizes. Williams answered yes, and that the parking stall size is being lowered because of the many waiver requests that are made and approved by the Village Board. Simpson questioned if hotels should have a lower parking requirement for guest rooms, but explicitly say that they need to provide parking for employees, banquet facilities, and other accessory uses. Lynn asked how often the requirements are reviewed. Hennerfeind answered that text amendment can be requested at any time, but staff usually waits until a trend shows that an amendment is warranted. Simpson recommended having the parking requirement determined by the floor area dedicated to serving the use and not including spaces like storage areas and requiring parking for all seating areas, not just interior seating. Hennerfeind expressed that parking minimums are designed to ensure enough parking is provided to serve the users, but not so much that the requirement is excessive. Donoghue added that it is up to the business owner to ensure they open a business in a space with enough parking. Sharp said that building codes exempt spaces like stairwells and facility rooms for occupancy counts. Referencing Sec. 9.04(A)(D), Sharp asked why existing multi-tenant centers are required to provide extra parking if the building is expanded, especially if a center may already provide excess parking. Williams answered that the section is carry-over, and can be cleaned up. Sharp referenced a public comment recommending “collaborative parking”, asking how it is different from “shared parking” in Sec. 9.04(D). John Zemenak, Village Attorney, replied that he is not aware of a difference between the two terms. Sharp asked staff to clarify the difference between multi-tenant center parking (Sec. 9.04(A)(2)) and Page 5 of 120 shared parking (Sec. 9.04(C)). Simpson asked if the parking requirement is reduced if rideshare services are provided. Williams explained the difference between shared parking agreements and shared-car parking. Williams said that off-site parking in Sec. 9.05 would be allowed for nonresidential districts instead of nonresidential uses. Sharp expressed that it may be appropriate to reduce the aisle width for 90° parking spaces when it is a one-way drive aisle. Simpson said that tandem parking should be allowed for employees of a business, but not for patrons. Zemenak added that it could be hard to enforce, but could work. Sharp disagreed allowing employees to tandem park, but it would make sense for fleet vehicles. Peterson expressed that tandem parking is common in the Downtown. Williams said that tandem parking for employees could be allowed in the Downtown districts, which Simpson supported. Simpson asked if car-share parking reduces the parking requirement for those taking rideshare services. Williams clarified that car-share parking is when a car is provided on-site, like Zipcar, but it is not applicable to rideshare. Sharp found the minimum stacking requirements for car washes and drug stores to be too low. Williams explained that this is a new regulation to the Village, and that staff and the consultant looked at other communities to see what the best minimum is. Article X:Tree Preservation and Landscaping Williams explained that most of the language comes from the existing Chapter 80 of the Municipal Code, as it fits better in the zoning ordinance. He explained that many of the provisions from Chapter 80 were amended within the last few years. Sharp confirmed that the tree measurement is based on the caliper size, not the diameter at breast height (DBH). Sharp asked how it is determined that a property can accommodate replacement trees. Williams responded that it is determined by the Village Forester and dependent on the size of the tree being removed. Sharp asked for the applicability of landscaping regulations in 10.07(C-D) be clarified as it relates to multi-unit residential developments. Lynn asked if there were restrictions on a property owner cutting down a tree on their property. Hennerfeind explained regulations on removing heritage trees, which is outside of the zoning ordinance. Sharp voiced concerns on regulating tree pruning in accordance with ANSI A300. Williams replied that the regulation is applicable to properties with approved landscaping plans, not single-family detached homes. Article XI: Signs Williams explained that there were not many changes to signage regulations, as a significant text Page 6 of 120 amendment updated the regulations a few years prior. Sharp raised concerns with the prohibition on lighting around window borders and architectural elements. Williams replied that the prohibition is to avoid directing light towards large sign elements, and gave an example of an ice cream shop having a large ice cream cone with lights directed at it. Sharp requested it be clarified to meet what the Village is attempting to prohibit. Simpson added that it should be clarified that this regulation is applicable to commercial properties. Carmichael asked if an inflatable rat would be considered a sign. Zemenak replied that if it has lettering on it, directs attention to the business, and is permanently outside, it would likely be a sign. Sharp found a grammar mistake in Sec. 11.03(E). Staff explained that many of the regulations were amended to be content-neutral. Sharp recommended allowing grand opening signs to be up before the business opens. Hennerfeind replied that a new business can request a temporary banner before they open, but the grand opening signage regulations were designed specifically for after a business begins operating. Peterson asked for clarification on how the maximum sign area is determined for businesses that are allowed wall signs on the front and back of the building. Williams explained that using only the front facade is an existing regulation. Carmichael and Lynn asked why not use both frontages to determine the maximum sign area. Hennerfeind replied that it is to avoid having large signs directed to a residential district, and that the previous sign text amendment allowed for more signage than neighboring communities. Williams explained that the temporary sign fee would likely be removed in the revisions presented at a future meeting. Staff clarified how sign measurements are taken. Sharp said that “smallest rectangle” should be replaced with “smallest polygon” in Sec. 11.11(A)(2). Article XII: General Development Regulations Williams explained that the outdoor lighting regulations are applicable to commercial properties so an undue burden is not placed on residents. Hennerfeind further explained the changes in outdoor lighting regulations, adding that these regulations will be applicable to new commercial development, not existing. Zemenak asked if there were outdoor lighting regulations on detached, semi-detached, and two-unit houses. Williams replied there are not. Zemenak recommended adding a lumen limit, which he has seen be an issue in other communities who do not have a limit. Simpson asked if it is better regulated as a nuisance. Hennerfeind voiced concerns about code enforcement processes related to outdoor lighting limits on residential properties. Carmichael referenced a public comment on Sec. 12.01(F)(1) that recommended intermittent lighting not be exempt from the regulations of the subsection. Simpson asked for the clarification of the scope of the regulation. Williams explained that for new developments, all lighting except for intermittent lighting would Page 7 of 120 need to be shielded. Sharp found that it is a good lighting design to have it shielded. Lynn and Simpson asked when an existing development would need to comply with the outdoor lighting regulations. Williams replied that if it was a new lightpost in a new area, it would need to meet the requirements, but not when a fixture is switched out. Hennerfeind recommended stating what the trigger is in the section. Lynn questioned light spillage over property lines along Ogden Avenue. Zemenak responded that the standard has been to have zero footcandles at the property line, and that businesses can request a variance to the limit. Williams added that light trespass at lot lines is limited by the abutting zoning district. Zemenak asked when measuring footcandles at the lot line, if it takes into account street lighting or ambient lighting. Williams believed it is regulated in Article XVI Measurements. Zemenak asked if lighting overhanging the right-of-way in the downtown exceeding the light trespass limit is a concern. Hennerfeind replied yes, and that measurement tools would need to be acquired. Simpson asked what types of businesses could have issues with outdoor lighting regulations. Williams replied that banks have specific standards. Lynn indicated that the lighting standards seem too restrictive. Donoghue found that there will be complaints either way, but said that there should be standards. Zemenak added that the standards are more relaxed than what the zoning ordinance currently allows. Simpson found the regulations well-intended, but would be difficult to comply with. Sharp expressed support for the options for lighting plans in Sec. 12.01(H). Sharp asked where the 10 foot sight vision triangle for driveways is similar to other communities and if a fence would be allowed there. Williams replied the consultant likely found this to be consistent with other communities and that solid fences would not be allowed in the triangle. Lynn referenced a project of his in the Village where a solid fence was installed to be outside of a sight vision triangle at the intersection of an alley and a street, noting that the end result looked nice. Article XIII: Nonconformities Williams and Zemenak explained that most of the changes were clarifications, as there was a text amendment in 2023 that amended many of the regulations. Lynn asked if this article’s regulations would trigger the need for a fire sprinkler system in a residential home that does not have one. Williams responded that the fire sprinkler system requirement is in the fire or building codes, not the zoning ordinance. Simpson asked if the decision of whether a nonconforming use can be expanded or not can be appealed. Williams said that appeals to administrative decisions are allowed. Lynn asked if nonconforming setbacks can be maintained for second floor additions. Williams replied that Page 8 of 120 there is an allowance for that scenario in Article II Residential Districts. Zemenak added that an addition can be made as long as the nonconforming setback is not increased. Article XIV: Review and Approval Procedures Williams gave an overview of the changes to the review and approval procedures. Lynn asked if civil drawings are required for site plans. Williams said he believes so, but it is not a zoning requirement. Simpson recommended showing when a pre-application meeting is needed in a table. Williams replied that staff can look into the best way to display that information. Lynn asked staff to clarify the ability to expand nonconforming setbacks vertically. Hennerfeind replied that the intent is to allow it for street yards because the effect is not as intense as a nonconforming interior side yard setback. Sharp asked how commissioners can receive their packets sooner. Williams explained that the publishing of meeting materials depends on the public noticing requirements. Simpson voiced concerns about having the public hearing notice requirements be the applicant’s responsibility. Williams responded that the language is vague to give staff the flexibility to do the notice on applicants’ behalf for residents, but to require projects with large staff and legal teams to do their own notice. Hennerfeind explained the business-friendly features of administrative approvals. Lynn asked a question about the permitting process. Williams explained that zoning does not control permitting requirements, but added that zoning applications are rejected if they are incomplete. Article XV: Administration and Enforcement Sharp asked if withholding permits or other forms of authorization on other land owned by an owner with a violation on a separate property is common. Zemenak explained that it is discretionary, but can curb repeat offenders. Zemenak also explained that the Village has similar processes for withholding non-zoning approvals. Article XVI: Measurements Williams explained that this is a new article to the zoning ordinance, and largely consolidates measurement regulations into one article instead of being scattered across the zoning ordinance. Peterson questioned the contextual setbacks, asking if nonconforming properties are included. Williams replied yes. Lynn and Sharp asked if a home can use the district’s minimum front setback or take advantage of the contextual setbacks. Williams replied yes. Simpson asked what the goal of the contextual setbacks is. Williams replied that this provision applies to Page 9 of 120 residential properties. Peterson asked how contextual setbacks will affect homes in the R-3 district. Williams replied that currently, a property can reduce the minimum front yard setback to as low as 25 feet, depending on the location of the home on adjacent properties. Lynn asked if the 25 foot limit is being dropped. Williams replied yes. Lynn explained that contextual setbacks create a visual harmony to a neighborhood from the street. Lynn asked if most of the R-3 zoned properties near the downtown use the 35 foot minimum front yard setback or do they use the contextual setbacks. Williams said that it is more common for those homes to be 25 feet or closer. Lynn asked how homes that have a front yard setback larger than the minimum required play into the calculation, noting that homes setback far from the front property line would skew the result. Staff replied that in those scenarios, it can be added that the number used is the minimum required setback instead. Sharp asked if the commission is comfortable with homes getting closer to the street over time. Peterson did not like allowing contextual setbacks, but she liked the variety of front setbacks currently in the Village. Williams explained that the contextual setbacks allow for more variety, as requiring homes to use the minimum setback creates a more uniform look over time. Zemenak explained that contextual setbacks would reduce the number of variance requests, when the petitioner would point to their neighbor’s setback. Sharp said contextual setbacks should be limited on how much they can reduce the setback. Lynn said that 25 feet could be an appropriate limit. The commission generally supported a limit on the contextual setbacks. Lynn revisited vertical additions to properties with nonconforming interior side yard setbacks in estate-like districts. Hennerfeind replied that the zoning ordinance would not allow that by-right, but the owner could request a variance. Sharp said in Sec. 16.13(B), that the section should apply to screen walls or parapets. Article XVII: Definitions Peterson asked why “bedrooms” was no longer defined. Staff replied that other codes that have regulations on bedrooms are better suited to define the term. Sharp questioned if “diameter at breast height” was supposed to be defined. Sharp asked if donation drop boxes were to have a maximum area, if it would be in the definition or in the accessory use article. Williams said it would be in the accessory use article. Zemenak asked where the definition for “family community residence” and “group community residence” is. Williams replied that it is likely defined in the principal use article. Zemenak voiced issues with the definition of trailers. Page 10 of 120 Lynn found that the definition of “building height” references the incorrect section, and asked for clarification on where the measurement is taken from. Simpson asked if the revised definition for “fleet vehicles” will be presented at the next meeting. Williams replied yes. Sharp recommended clarifying the regulations applicable to boats, as a definition may address his concerns. Simpson expressed issues with the definition of a “trailer”. Sharp asked if removing the definition for “open air and tent sales” means that these businesses will not be allowed. Williams explained that other sections of the municipal code regulate these temporary uses. Public Comment: Carmichael reopened the public comment. No members of the public were present to provide comments. MOTION 1 Motion by Simpson to continue the public hearing to a special meeting on July 23, 2025 at 6:00 p.m. Seconded by Sharp. VOTING: Ayes: 6 - Carmichael, Peterson, Donoghue, Lynn, Sharp, Simpson, Nays: 0 Absent: 1 - Thomas Motion Passed 10.​New Business None.​ 11.​Open Forum​ Nobody spoke during the Open Forum.​ 12.​Miscellaneous Items a.​ Next regular PZC on July 9, 2025 at 6:00 pm. b.​ APA-IL Plan Commissioner Training​ Carmichael informed the commission that the American Planners’ Association Illinois Chapter is hosting a training for plan commissioners at their state conference in Chicago this October, and encouraged them to attend. Williams added that it is a half day session, and more information is coming. c.​ Zemenak expressed his appreciation for the commissioners’ hard work throughout the update process.​ Page 11 of 120 13.​Adjourn Motion by Sharp to adjourn the meeting. Second by Simpson. The Motion Passed on a unanimous voice vote. Meeting adjourned at 10:13 p.m. Page 12 of 120  ​ ​ ​ VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: July 9, 2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ PZC 008-2025 TITLE: Request from TGP Innovations LLC. d/b/a That Golf Place (Petitioner), and Pranno Corporation (Owner) at 212 East Chicago Avenue, Westmont, Illinois, 60559 for the following: 1.​ Special Use Permit to operate an amusement establishment in the B-2 General Business District 2.​ Zoning Ordinance Variance to the special condition that requires 100 foot distance separation between an amusement establishment and a residence district. I.​ BACKGROUND OF ITEM A.​ Location: 212 East Chicago Avenue is located between Wilmette Avenue and Blackhawk Drive. The subject unit is within the multi-tenant commercial center at 204-218 East Chicago Avenue. This center hosts a restaurant, interior decorating shop, retail copy shop, and a tutoring business. The property is 355 feet by 225 feet, for an area of 79,875 square feet, or 1.83 acres. Aerial Map - 212 East Chicago Avenue (source: DuPage County Parcel Viewer) Page 13 of 120  Zoning Map - 212 East Chicago Avenue B.​ Zoning Designations: SUBJECT PROPERTY​ B-2 General Business District NORTH​ ​ ​ R-4 General Residence District SOUTH​ ​ ​ Village of Clarendon Hills (R-1 Single Family Residential District) EAST​ ​ ​ B-2 General Business District WEST​ ​ ​ B-2 General Business District C.​ Neighborhood Characteristics The lot is located in the A.T. McIntosh & Co.’s Resubdivision, Warren-Keeney 2nd Addition subdivision, which was recorded in 1921. It is on the eastern edge of the Village, bordering the Village of Clarendon Hills to the south. The Chicago Avenue corridor hosts many uses, including restaurants, offices, animal services, and a wide range of housing types. The surrounding properties in the Village of Clarendon Hills are single-family homes. Street View - 212 East Chicago Avenue (source: Google) ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 008-2025​ ​ Page 2 of 5 Page 14 of 120 II.​ PETITIONER REQUEST: The petitioner has requested a Special Use Permit to operate That Golf Place, an electronic golf simulator amusement establishment, in the B-2 General Business District. The petitioner is also requesting a variance to the special condition that requires a 100 foot separation distance between an amusement establishment and the residential district to the north due to the existing building being constructed within 100 feet of the rear property line. III.​ ZONING ANALYSIS A.​ Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designations The current zoning district of the property is B-2 General Business District, which allows for a wide variety of retail, restaurant, and service uses. The subject property is a multi-tenant center with multiple commercial businesses. The Comprehensive Plan designates the future land use in this area as General Commercial, which describes the designation as an area “...intended to accommodate less intense commercial uses to primarily cater to the day-to-day needs of Westmont residents.” The Plan also advises that commercial uses “...should be generally compatible with nearby residential areas.” More specifically, the Comprehensive Plan identifies this property in the Naperville & Cass Subarea, which is described as having “...a unique mix of commercial, residential, and light industrial uses….” and “...enhancements are needed to ensure compatibility between differing uses and create a more unified appearance within the subarea.” The Plan further identifies the property as suitable for residential transition, which should “...transition from concentrated commercial activity to a mix of commercial and residential uses.” The concentrated commercial area is in reference to the intersection of Naperville Road and Cass Avenue, where traffic generating uses are more appropriate. B.​ Entitlement Request The petitioner has provided a project narrative and supporting documentation for the following requests, including the necessary responses to the Variance and Special Use Standards and special conditions. Any corresponding standards for entitlement approval consideration can be referenced in item V(B) below. ●​ Special Use Permit request to operate an amusement establishment in the B-2 General Business District Appendix A, Section 7.03(A)(1) requires that all amusement establishments obtain a Special Use Permit in B-2 District to assess impacts like traffic, activities, number of employees, and operating hours. In addition to the Special Use Standards (Sec. 13.09), amusement establishments have the following Special Condition, as listed in Sec. 7.04(1): 1.​ “Such special use may be permitted provided that no buildings or outdoor portions of the lot containing such use are located within 100 feet of a residence district/” The petitioner has provided the necessary responses to the special use standards and is requesting a variance to the special condition due to the existing building and unit being approximately 25 feet from the north property line, which borders a residential district. The petitioner describes the business as a members-only indoor golf and training facility with fitness ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 008-2025​ ​ Page 3 of 5 Page 15 of 120  components. The proposed hours of operations are 4:00AM to 11:00AM on weekdays and 4:00am to 12:00AM on weekends. The petitioner expects peak customer activity to be between 9:00 AM and 9:00 PM, accounting for approximately 90% of facility foot traffic. A manager or designated team member will be on-site daily for routine cleaning, sanitization, merchandise organization, maintenance, and preparation of simulator and fitness areas. Staffing levels will align with member usage and seasonal trends; however, periods without on-site staff may occur based on operational considerations. Additional coverage will be scheduled as required for oversight and service quality. Access is restricted to members who complete a facility orientation and membership overview. Members must reserve simulator or training bay time in advance; walk-in access would not be permitted.. Entry is permitted only during reserved sessions, establishing an appointment-only operational model. Remote security and camera systems provide active monitoring during off-peak times. Appendix A, Section 10.06(B)(3)(b) states that the existing parking in multi-tenant commercial buildings, like the subject property, is deemed conforming. The use must be considered to the Special Use standards, which are noted below: Standards for Special Uses Sec. 13.09(D): A proposed special use shall substantially meet the following standards in order to obtain the recommendation of the planning and zoning commission and approval of the board of trustees: 1)​ That the establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare. 2)​ That the special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 3)​ That the establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. 4)​ That adequate utilities, access ways, drainage and/or other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. 5)​ That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. 6)​ That the special use shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located, except as such regulations may in each instance be modified by the village board pursuant to the recommendation of the plan commission.​ ●​ Zoning Ordinance Variance request to the special condition that requires 100 foot distance separation between an amusement establishment and a residence district. As previously stated, the subject unit and existing building is within 25 feet of a residence district (R-4 General Residence), meaning it does not meet Special Condition #1. In order to operate, the petitioner is requesting a variance to this condition. The petitioner has provided the necessary responses to the variance standards. Additionally, the petitioner has indicated all activities would be indoors within a sound-dampened, professionally managed setting. No outdoor programming, amplified sound, or late-night gatherings will occur. ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 008-2025​ ​ Page 4 of 5 Page 16 of 120  Simulator bays will be acoustically treated to reduce noise transmission. As noted prior the user will utilize a membership and reservation model to better predict and control access. The use must be considered to the Variance standards, which are noted below: Standards for Variations Sec. 13.07(D) The planning and zoning commission shall not recommend a variation to the regulations of this comprehensive amendment as authorized herein unless it shall have made findings of fact based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case that: (a)​ The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in the district in which it is located; (b)​ The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances; and (c)​ The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. IV.​ SUMMARY The petitioner has requested a Special Use Permit to operate That Golf Place, an amusement establishment, in the B-2 General Business District. The petitioner is also requesting a variance to the special condition that requires a 100 foot separation distance between an amusement establishment and the residential district to the north due to being 25 feet from a residentially-zoned property. The request is subject to the standards of a special use permit approval and the variance request. V.​ LEGAL A.​ Notification: A legal notice was published in Westmont Suburban Life on June 19, 2025. B.​ Code References: Appendix A: Section 7.03(A)(1); 7.04; 13.07; 13.09 C.​ Other Action: The recommendation made by the Planning and Zoning Commission will be referred to the Village Board for a final decision, which is anticipated to be on July 24, 2025. VI.​ DOCUMENTS ATTACHED: 1.​ Publication notice appearing in the June 19, 2025 Westmont Suburban Life. 2.​ Petitioner Attachments received May 8, 2025 (Edited for PZC): a.​ Planning and Zoning Development Application b.​ Project Narrative c.​ Responses to the Special Use Standards and Variance Standards d.​ Floor Plans e.​ Site Plans f.​ Legal Description g.​ Signed Lease Agreement ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 008-2025​ ​ Page 5 of 5 Page 17 of 120 Page 18 of 120  Village of Westmont Planning and Zoning Application and Instructions Community Development Department 31 West Quincy Street Westmont, Illinois 60559 630-981-6260 That Golf Place PROJECT NAME: ___________________________________________________________________ 212 E Chicago Ave, Westmont, IL 60559 Subject Property Street Address: _____________________________________________________ 09-03-313-010 PIN Number(s): ___________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ PETITIONER / BILLING CONTACT (Agent and Project Manager for the Petition): TGP Innovations LLC Attn Pulkit Chauhan and Petitioner (and corporation if applicable):_________________________________________ Sidhardha Anumalasetty 425 W Naperville Rd Westmont IL 60559 Address: ___________________________________________________________________ 630-362-2289 Phone:_____________________________________________________________________ thatgolfplace.corporate@gmail.com Email: _____________________________________________________________________ Relationship of Petitioner to Property Owner: Tenants and Business Owners _____________________________________ Page 19 of 120 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ____________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ That Golf Place is a modern indoor golf performance and fitness facility that will occupy a _________________________________________________________________________________ 2,200 square foot unit within an established multi-tenant commercial center in Westmont, _________________________________________________________________________________ Illinois. The space will feature advanced golf simulators, mobility and stretching zones, and _________________________________________________________________________________ app-based secure entry for approved members only. All activities will take place indoors, _________________________________________________________________________________ with acoustic treatments installed to ensure a quiet and contained environment. The facility _________________________________________________________________________________ is designed for small-group and individual use, with no walk-in traffic and no disruption to _________________________________________________________________________________ surrounding businesses. By activating a long-vacant storefront with a clean, technology- _________________________________________________________________________________ driven concept, That Golf Place adds value to the center while maintaining compatibility _________________________________________________________________________________ with neighboring commercial and residential uses. _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ ___________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION (IF DIFFERENT THAN PETITIONER): Property owner(s): Pranno Corp attn Jeff Pranno __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ 6N230 Wheaton rd Roselle IL 60172. Address: ___________________________________________________________________ 630-217-9205 Phone:_____________________________________________________________________ fisinred1@live.com Email: _____________________________________________________________________ BUSINESS OWNER INFORMATION (IF DIFFERENT THAN PETITIONER and PROPERTY OWNER): Property owner(s): __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Address: ___________________________________________________________________ Phone:_____________________________________________________________________ Email: _____________________________________________________________________ Form last modified 05/13/2024 Village of Westmont Planning and Zoning Application Page 4 Page 20 of 120 Page 21 of 120 Village of Westmont Community Development Department 31 W Quincy Street Westmont, IL, 60559 RE: Special Use Permit & Variance Request – That Golf Place 212 East Chicago Avenue, Westmont, IL (PIN: 0903313010) To the Village of Westmont Planning & Zoning Commission and Community Development Staff: TGP Innovations LLC (“Applicant”) proposes the operation of a members-only indoor golf and training facility with fitness components at 212 East Chicago Avenue, Westmont, Illinois (the “Property”), located within the B-2 General Business District. The business model focuses on scheduled reservations, noise-reducing features, controlled capacity, as well as fitness and instructional-oriented offerings. The proposed use initially includes two enclosed simulator bays, with an option to expand to four, for golf training and skill development, a stretching and fitness zone, and a reception area with incidental retail (e.g., branded merchandise or training aids). Interior soundproofing and minimal non-structural renovations will be completed to ensure a quiet, professional atmosphere appropriate for instructional use. This modern, fitness-driven concept introduces a fresh, forward-looking business to Westmont, contributing to the continued revitalization of the center and supporting its evolution as a hub for fitness and professional services. The nature of the facility—where members schedule visits and remain on-site for extended, appointment-only sessions—naturally supports surrounding businesses by increasing visibility and encouraging patronage of nearby establishments. Members may visit neighboring businesses before or after appointments, including food and beverage options such as the adjacent restaurant or bar and grill, and may benefit from complementary services offered by other health, wellness, or lifestyle providers in the area. It is important to note that all activities will take place entirely indoors within a sound-dampened, professionally managed setting. There will be no outdoor programming, amplified sound, or late-night gatherings, and the nature of the membership-based model ensures a quiet, predictable user flow. Simulator bays will be acoustically treated with industry-standard materials to reduce noise transmission. Access to the facility is controlled by secured and automated entry, further minimizing disruption concerns. As such, the use poses no threat to the comfort, quiet enjoyment, or property values of adjacent residences or businesses. Rather, the proposed use complements the low-intensity commercial character of the block and aligns with existing precedent for instructional and fitness-oriented operations in this center. To operate this facility in accordance with Village code, the Applicant respectfully seeks a special use permit and variance to allow the proposed use within the B-2 zoning designation. Page 22 of 120 ITEMIZATION OF RELIEF The following zoning relief is respectfully requested by the Applicant: • Special Use Permit – Pursuant to Appendix A, Section 7.03(A)(1) of the Westmont Zoning Ordinance, to allow the operation of an indoor amusement or recreation establishment—including simulator-based golf training—as a special use within the B-2 General Business District. The proposed facility will operate as a members-only fitness-focused training center that integrates indoor golf with wellness and performance-enhancing programs. This includes simulator-based instruction, stretching and mobility space, and incidental retail related to the training use. No structural or exterior modifications are proposed to the Property, and the use will function entirely within the existing commercial footprint. • Variation from Residential Separation Requirement – Pursuant to Appendix A, Section 7.03(A)(1) and Appendix A, Section 7.04(1) of the Westmont Zoning Ordinance, and evaluated under the standards set forth in Appendix A, Section 13.07(D), to permit a special use (amusement establishments) “provided that no buildings or outdoor portions of the lot containing such use are located within 100 feet of a residence district.” The Property lies adjacent to an R-district to the north and cannot meet the 100-foot separation due to existing site and zoning conditions. No other variances for signage, parking, landscaping, or setbacks are requested at this time. Should minor clarifications or additional relief be identified during the hearing process, the Applicant remains willing to coordinate with Village staff to address such matters. The Applicant also respectfully seeks such other and further relief as may be deemed necessary or appropriate. The application consists of the following materials with folder names: ● Cover Letter (this document) ● Planning and Zoning PDF Application - (TGP_SUP_APPLICATION) ● Property Description - (TGP_PROPERTY_DESCRIPTION) ● Surrounding Zoning and Land Use - (TGP_SURROUNDING_ZONING_AND_LAND_USE) ● Standards for Special Use - (TGP_STANDARDS_FOR_SPECIAL_USE) ● Special Use Standards - Special Condition - (TGP_SPECIAL_USE_STANDARDS_SPECIAL_CONDITION) ● Findings of Fact for Variance - (TGP_FINDINGS_OF_FACT_FOR_VARIANCE) ● Hours of Operation and Employee Overview - (TGP_Hours_of _Operation_and_Employee_Overview) ● Floor Plans w/ Dimensions - (TGP_Dimesions_Floor_Plan.pdf) ● Operational Layout - (TGP_Layout_FloorPlan) ● Site Plans - (TGP_SITE_PLAN) ● Proof of Ownership w/ signed lease - (TGP_NOTARIZED_LEASE_LAST_PAGE) Sincerely, Sidhardha Anumalasetty & Pulkit Chauhan (Westmont Resident) Founders TGP Innovations LLC thatgolfplace.corporate@gmail.com Page 23 of 120 HOURS OF OPERATION AND EMPLOYEE OVERVIEW Business Name: That Golf Place Business Address: 212 East Chicago Avenue, Westmont, Illinois 60559 Business Type: Indoor Golf Performance and Fitness Facility Hours of Operation: That Golf Place will operate daily from 4:00 AM to 11:00 PM on weekdays and from 4:00 AM to 12:00 AM on weekends. The primary hours of customer activity are expected to occur between 9:00 AM and 9:00 PM, during which approximately 90 percent of the facility’s traffic is anticipated. Employee and Facility Oversight: A manager or designated team member will be on-site daily to perform essential duties. These responsibilities include routine cleaning and sanitization, merchandise organization, light maintenance, and the preparation or resetting of simulator and fitness areas. This regular presence ensures the facility remains clean, safe, and professionally maintained, reflecting the business’s commitment to high operational standards and seamless integration within the surrounding commercial and residential properties. While staffing will be responsive to member usage patterns and seasonal trends, there may be strategically determined periods during the day when staff are not present on-site, based on timing, demand, and other operational considerations. Additional coverage will be scheduled as needed to ensure continued oversight and service quality. Membership Access and Booking Requirements: All prospective members are required to schedule and complete a facility orientation and membership overview prior to receiving access credentials. Once approved, members must reserve their simulator or training bay time in advance of each visit. Walk-in access is strictly prohibited, and entry is only permitted during reserved sessions. This controlled, appointment-only model is a foundational principle of the business, allowing ownership and management to closely regulate facility use, maintain predictable traffic patterns, and ensure safety and accountability at all times. In addition to on-site oversight during peak hours, the facility is actively monitored through a remote security and camera system, enabling owners and designated personnel to observe and manage member activity during off-peak times. This approach provides a high level of operational control and safety even when staff are not physically present. Additional Notes: Facility maintenance, cleaning, and equipment sanitization will occur routinely to uphold cleanliness and hygiene standards. Staffing schedules will remain flexible and responsive to fluctuations in demand, ensuring continued oversight and minimal external impact throughout the year. Page 24 of 120 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Property is located at 212 East Chicago Avenue, Westmont, Illinois, on the north side of Chicago Avenue, east of Wilmette and west of Blackhawk Drive, and is identified by PERMANENT INDEX NO.: 09-03-313-010. It comprises approximately 2,200 square feet of leasable area within an established multi-tenant commercial strip center zoned B-2 General Business District. The unit is currently vacant and was recently occupied by a retail space and dance studio, with past uses also including instructional and retail operations. The interior layout includes a front reception area with incidental retail potential, two restrooms, a service/storage room, and two partitioned studio zones. The Applicant proposes only minor interior renovations—including installation of acoustic treatments, simulator and fitness equipment, and minor layout enhancements to facilitate designated simulator bays and mobility/stretching areas. No exterior construction, signage changes (beyond standard wall-mounted signage), or structural modifications are planned. The Property features a dedicated private entrance and is surrounded by compatible neighborhood-serving commercial uses, including food service and retail tenants. The shared parking lot provides ample off- street parking for customer use. There are no trees, landscaping, or exterior site features that will be altered by the proposed use. Critically, all activities will be conducted indoors, with member access controlled through secure, app- based keyless entry. The nature of the business—quiet, low-volume, reservation-based training sessions— ensures no spillover noise, light, or foot traffic affecting neighboring properties. Professionally designed soundproofing within the simulator bays will further limit sound transmission. Unlike higher-traffic commercial uses or entertainment venues, That Golf Place is intentionally designed to operate discreetly and respectfully within its environment. Given the Property’s location within a transitional zone buffering commercial and residential uses, its limited footprint, and lack of exterior disruption, the proposed use represents an ideal fit. It aligns with both the zoning and the practical context of the area, activating a long-vacant storefront with a modern, community-oriented wellness concept that supports the vitality of the center while fully preserving the character and quality of adjacent residential areas. PROJECT DESCRIPTION That Golf Place is a modern indoor golf performance and fitness facility that will occupy a 2,200 square foot unit within an established multi-tenant commercial center in Westmont, Illinois. The space will feature advanced golf simulators, mobility and stretching zones, and app-based secure entry for approved members only. All activities will take place indoors, with acoustic treatments installed to ensure a quiet and contained environment. The facility is designed for small-group and individual use, with no walk-in traffic and minimal disruption to surrounding businesses. By activating a long-vacant storefront with a clean, technology-driven concept, That Golf Place adds value to the center while maintaining compatibility with neighboring commercial and residential uses. Page 25 of 120 STANDARDS FOR VARIATION In addition to the submitted Findings of Fact for the requested variation, the Applicant is providing supplemental information addressing the Standards for Variance. In accordance with the Village's requirements, and for the purpose of implementing the applicable rules, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider whether practical difficulties or particular hardships exist. In making its recommendation, the Commission is directed to take into consideration the extent to which the following facts, favorable to the Applicant, have been established by the evidence presented. In accordance with Appendix A, Section 13.07(D)(2)(a-f) of the Westmont Zoning Ordinance, the following standards apply in cases of practical difficulty or particular hardship. The Applicant respectfully submits that the requested variance satisfies each of these criteria, as set forth below: (A) The particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical features of the specific property involved would result in a particular hardship upon the owner, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out. Response: The hardship in this case results from the specific physical location and layout of the Property, not from a mere inconvenience or business preference. The subject unit is situated at the rear of an existing commercial strip center and directly abuts a residential zoning district across a narrow alley. This fixed configuration makes it impossible to achieve the 100-foot separation required for amusement-classified uses. No alternative unit within the center offers both sufficient setback and the necessary visibility or functionality for a training-based business. Absent the requested variance, the property cannot be reasonably used for a low-impact amusement use like That Golf Place, despite otherwise conforming to the character and intensity of allowable commercial uses in the district. (B) The conditions upon which the petition for variation is based would not be applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. Response:​ While multiple units within the commercial center may be located within 100 feet of a residential zoning district, the requested variance is specific to the proposed use and the location of the Applicant’s unit. That Golf Place is classified as an “amusement establishment,” which uniquely triggers the 100-foot separation requirement—unlike many other retail or service uses within the center. The combination of this use classification and the unit’s placement at the rear of the property, where no compliant separation exists, creates a distinct circumstance. This request is therefore not broadly applicable to other B-2 properties, but arises from the intersection of the use type and the physical location of the space. (C) The purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to make more money out of the property. Response: The purpose of the requested variation is not based exclusively on a desire to increase profitability. Rather, it is necessary to enable the reasonable use of the space for a low-impact, fitness-oriented training facility that would otherwise be barred solely due to its use classification. The Applicant has intentionally limited occupancy and capped membership to ensure quiet operation and compatibility with the surrounding area. The requested relief is not intended to maximize revenue, but to allow the business to Page 26 of 120 function within the constraints of the site while adhering to sound planning principles and community standards. (D) The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by the owner of the property. Response:​ The hardship was not created by the Applicant. The physical configuration of the site and its proximity to a residential zoning district are longstanding conditions that predate the Applicant’s involvement. These constraints were in place at the time the lease was contemplated, and the Applicant has acted in good faith to comply with Village expectations for low-impact commercial operations. The need for relief arises from zoning provisions that unintentionally restrict reasonable use of the space based on use classification—not from any modification, development decision, or action taken by the Applicant. The request is consistent with the Village’s criteria for granting zoning variations under Appendix A, Section 13.07. (E) The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. Response:​ Granting the requested variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property or improvements. The proposed use will operate entirely indoors, with no exterior noise, amplified sound, lighting changes, or disruptive signage. Traffic and parking impacts will be minimal due to the reservation-only model, which staggers member visits and limits peak activity. The simulator bays will be soundproofed to prevent noise transfer to adjacent tenants or nearby residences. Access to the facility is controlled through secure digital entry and scheduling systems, ensuring occupancy limits are enforced and unauthorized entry is prevented. In addition to minimizing impact, the business will provide a public benefit by offering free or discounted simulator time and lessons to youth from underserved households—supporting wellness, mentorship, and equitable access to the game of golf. (F) The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair the property values within the neighborhood. Response:​ The proposed variation will not impair access to light or air for adjacent properties, as no exterior construction, vertical expansion, or structural modifications are planned. The use will not increase congestion in public streets, as the facility operates on a low-traffic, reservation-only model that staggers member arrivals and limits peak demand. There is no impact to fire access, as the space will remain fully compliant with existing fire code requirements, including egress, alarms, and sprinkler systems. The facility’s secure, member-only entry and limited occupancy promote a safe and controlled environment, with no risks to public safety. Finally, the business is expected to maintain or enhance surrounding property values by modernizing the space and contributing to the overall appeal and vitality of the commercial center. Page 27 of 120 FINDINGS OF FACT FOR VARIANCE Requested Relief: A variation from Appendix A, Section 13.07(D)(1)(a-c) of the Westmont Zoning Ordinance, which requires a minimum 100-foot separation between special uses classified as indoor amusement or recreation and adjacent residential zoning districts. (A) The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in the district in which it is located.​ Response:​ The property cannot yield a reasonable return if limited solely to uses permitted by right within the B-2 District. While the site supports retail and service uses in theory, the building’s configuration and proximity to a residential district restrict its appeal to modern tenants, particularly those requiring flexible space for amusement or fitness-based activity. Uses classified as “amusement establishments,” such as That Golf Place, are effectively barred due to the 100-foot separation requirement, despite being low-impact and commercially appropriate for the site. Without the requested special use and variance, the space remains difficult to lease or adapt for viable long-term tenancy, impairing its economic utility and return potential. (B) The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances.​ Response:​ The plight of the owner arises from unique circumstances related to the Property’s physical location and regulatory context. The subject site is part of a longstanding commercial strip center that predates current zoning standards and directly abuts a residential district across a narrow alley. On a logistical level, this proximity makes it physically impossible to meet the 100-foot separation requirement for amusement-classified uses without altering parcel boundaries or displacing neighboring land uses. This hardship is not self-created, nor is it a result of the proposed use’s character, but rather stems from the site’s placement within a transitional zoning area that unintentionally limits reasonable use under current regulations. (C) The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.​ Response:​ The requested variation will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed use will operate entirely indoors, without amplified sound, exterior activity, or prominent signage that might affect nearby residences. The business is limited to small-group, reservation-only sessions, and additional soundproofing will be installed to ensure all activity remains contained. Compared to other approved special uses in the same center—such as a dance academy—That Golf Place represents a lower-impact, quieter operation. The facility is consistent with the area's transitional commercial-residential character and will not negatively affect the use, enjoyment, or value of surrounding properties. Page 28 of 120 STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL USE In accordance with Appendix A, Section 13.09(D)(1-6) of the Westmont Zoning Ordinance, the following standards must be met for the Village to grant a special use permit. The Applicant submits that the proposed use at 212 East Chicago Avenue satisfies each of these criteria, as demonstrated below: (1) Public Health, Safety, and Welfare That the establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare. The establishment and operation of this members-only facility will not be detrimental to public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare. From a public health standpoint, the facility promotes physical wellness through golf-focused fitness training and stretching programs. It does not involve any hazardous materials or activities. Regarding safety, access is controlled through a secure, keyless entry system, with use limited to verified members and monitored by interior and exterior security cameras. Morals are upheld by the private, appointment-only nature of the business—no alcohol, gambling, or public entertainment is offered, ensuring a respectful and professional atmosphere. Comfort is preserved through soundproofed simulator bays, capped membership, and a maximum occupancy of eight users at any given time. These constraints also support the general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood by limiting traffic, noise, and disruptions, while enhancing community wellness by offering youth clinics and instructional programming. (2) Impact on Adjacent Properties That the special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The proposed special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of neighboring properties, nor will it substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. That Golf Place will operate as a low-impact, appointment-only training facility, with no public events, late-night gatherings, or amplified music—minimizing disruptions to nearby tenants. The simulator bays will be individually soundproofed with acoustic materials designed for indoor sports use, ensuring that noise does not extend beyond the leased premises. The surrounding businesses, including a restaurant and bar, operate at similar or higher intensity levels, making this use compatible with the existing commercial environment. Additionally, the introduction of a modern, well-maintained facility is likely to strengthen the center’s overall appeal and marketability, supporting stable or increased property values and benefiting adjacent tenants through additional customer exposure. (3) Orderly Development and Use of Nearby Properties That the establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. The proposed use will not impede the normal and orderly development or improvement of surrounding properties for uses permitted in the B-2 District. That Golf Place will occupy an existing commercial unit with no exterior construction, expansion, or changes that would restrict access, visibility, or functionality for neighboring tenants. The members-only, appointment-based model generates low traffic and minimal noise, ensuring compatibility with adjacent uses and preserving a conducive environment for new or Page 29 of 120 continued development. Furthermore, the business contributes to the revitalization and active use of the center, encouraging foot traffic and investment that supports the broader goals of the Village’s Comprehensive Plan. (4) Adequacy of Utilities and Infrastructure That adequate utilities, access ways, drainage and/or other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate utilities, access ways, drainage, and other necessary facilities have been provided to support the proposed use. The subject space is located within an existing commercial strip center that is already served by fully operational infrastructure, including water, electricity, HVAC, telecommunications, and sanitary services. No upgrades to core systems are required. The site includes shared paved parking with direct access to Chicago Avenue, as well as established pedestrian access routes. Existing stormwater drainage systems are in place and sufficient to accommodate the low-impact nature of the proposed use, which does not involve exterior modifications or increased runoff. (5) Traffic Congestion and Access That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. The existing site layout provides safe and sufficient ingress and egress, minimizing traffic congestion on public streets. The property is accessed via established curb cuts along Chicago Avenue and is served by an internal circulation system and a shared parking lot designed to accommodate multiple commercial tenants. That Golf Place’s reservation-only model naturally limits traffic volume and staggers arrival times, reducing the potential for congestion. With capped membership and a maximum occupancy of eight users at a time, the facility is expected to generate significantly less traffic than other permitted uses in the B-2 District, such as restaurants or retail, and will not burden surrounding roadways. (6) Compliance with Zoning Regulations That the special use shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located, except as such regulations may in each instance be modified by the village board pursuant to the recommendation of the plan commission. The proposed use conforms to all applicable regulations of the B-2 General Business District, with the exception of the special use designation required for operation and the associated relief related to the site's proximity to a residential zoning district to the north. No additional variances are being sought for signage, landscaping, building setbacks, lot coverage, or other development standards. The facility will operate entirely within the existing building footprint and comply with all remaining zoning and building code requirements as administered by the Village. Page 30 of 120 SPECIAL USE STANDARDS - SPECIAL CONDITION (1) Such Special use may be permitted provided that no buildings or outdoor portions of the lot containing such use are located within 100 ft of a residence district. The Applicant acknowledges that the proposed use falls within 100 feet of a residential zoning district, and therefore requires both a Special Use Permit and a Variance to operate in accordance with Village requirements. All business activity will occur entirely indoors within the existing building footprint, with no exterior entertainment, amplified sound, or late-night outdoor operations. Outdoor use is limited to standard customer parking and ingress/egress. To further mitigate potential impacts on nearby residences, the simulator bays will be soundproofed with acoustic treatments, and access will be limited to vetted members using keyless entry and a reservation-only system. These safeguards ensure the use is quiet, controlled, and respectful of the surrounding area, consistent with the Village’s intent in establishing this special condition. Page 31 of 120 SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USE The subject property is located within the B-2 General Business District on the north side of East Chicago Avenue, positioned between Wilmette and Blackhawk Drive within a multi-tenant commercial strip center. This corridor forms part of the Village’s transitional buffer zone between Westmont’s concentrated commercial activity near Cass Avenue and its adjacent residential neighborhoods to the north and south. Properties immediately east and west of the site are similarly zoned B-2 and are occupied by compatible commercial tenants, including retail, personal services, and instructional or activity-based businesses such as salons, fitness studios, tutoring centers, and light medical offices. These uses share a similar operational footprint and customer volume with That Golf Place, reinforcing the compatibility of the proposed business within the tenant mix and zoning context. To the north, directly behind the subject property, lies a residential district zoned R-4, separated by an alley and rear buffer. This adjacency is a longstanding characteristic of this commercial block and has been previously acknowledged and managed through successful special use approvals for businesses with similar or greater operational intensity. The proposed golf training facility is entirely contained within the existing building envelope and introduces no exterior operations, amplified sound, or late-night traffic that might disrupt the residential character of nearby homes. Additionally, professionally installed soundproofing treatments within the simulator bays will ensure that all activity remains acoustically contained. To the south, across Chicago Avenue, lies the Village boundary with Clarendon Hills, where single- family residential homes dominate the land use pattern. The subject site benefits from its strategic placement within a commercial corridor that is set back from residential frontages, and all member access and parking is confined to the shared surface lot located on the commercial side of the street. There will be no overflow, glare, or acoustic spillover affecting homes across the avenue. Importantly, the property is also part of the Village’s Central Business District TIF arnd is identified within the Naperville & Cass Subarea Plan of the Comprehensive Plan as a “Residential Transition” zone. This designation anticipates the evolution of the area into a blend of low-impact commercial and residential uses that soften the edge between Westmont’s downtown core and its surrounding neighborhoods. The proposed use fully supports this policy vision by activating a vacant commercial space with a quiet, fitness-focused facility that generates minimal traffic, no exterior disruptions, and aligns with the area's intended character. Operationally, the business will function on a strict reservation-only model, with secure access limited to members, and no walk-ins or group events. This inherently controls customer flow and prevents clustering or congestion. Typical sessions last 60–90 minutes, with small parties and staggered arrival times. Combined with the absence of exterior signage beyond that permitted by code, and the absence of any outdoor music, lighting, or noise, the use will not alter the visual or acoustic character of the neighborhood. Page 32 of 120 In terms of intensity and compatibility, the indoor golf and training facility closely mirrors other previously approved special uses within this same center—such as the Irish dance studio previously located in this very unit—but with a notably lower operational footprint. That Golf Place offers a more structured, member-controlled format, with fewer participants on-site at any given time and longer average session durations. In summary, the proposed use is fully compatible with surrounding zoning and land uses, and poses no adverse impact on the continued enjoyment, value, or development of adjacent residential or commercial properties. Instead, it introduces a stable, forward-looking business that enhances the commercial corridor while preserving the peace, character, and quality of the neighborhood. Page 33 of 120 Page 34 of 120 Page 35 of 120 Page 36 of 120 Page 37 of 120 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Abbreviated Legal Description (as provided): A T MC INTOSH & COS RESUB OF WARREN KEENEY & COS 2ND ADD ALL & E 1/2 VAC HIAWATHA DR LYG W & ADJ Unabbreviated Legal Description: All of the property located in A.T. McIntosh and Company's Resubdivision of Warren Keeney and Company's Second Addition, together with the east one-half of vacated Hiawatha Drive lying west of and adjacent to said property. Page 38 of 120 Page 39 of 120 Page 40 of 120 Page 41 of 120 Page 42 of 120 232 East Des Moines St Pool Installation – Variance Request Cover Letter Your Name Justin and Natalie Krone May 15, 2025 Westmont Planning and Zoning Commission, We are writing to request a variance at our property which is a single family home located in Westmont IL. We have resided in Westmont for over 16 years and have owned two homes in the municipality. We have been in this residence for nearly 7 years. Over the course of that time, we have maintained our property and continue to invest in the property as we plan to live here for the foreseeable future. We have two children that attend the Westmont Schools and we all take pride in being Westmont residents. We both volunteer to help Westmont Schools and the Park District (Natalie has been the Manning and Miller PTO President for two terms and Justin has been an Executive member of the Westmont Youth Baseball Association Board for four years.) Our request for variance is specific to Village Code Article VI – Residence Districts Section 06.04 – Bulk and Development Standards in Residence Districts, which states that in the R-3 District, the maximum lot coverage is 35%. There is a footnote to that rule that states ”When the application of the lot coverage regulations specified herein results in proposed lot coverage between 35—40 percent, a permit may be eligible for administrative approval (in lieu of a variance) provided that the property is not identified within any building moratorium area, known drainage problem area, or within any identifiable drainage sub basin area.” Since our permit was not eligible for administrative approval due to some low depression area nearby, we would like to request a variance to building code 06.04. We have already engaged a contractor and have detailed site plans which include the proposed lot coverage which is at 39%. Included in this application are all necessary documents for your review including: - Signed Planning and Zoning Application - Signed Escrow Form - Updated Plat of Survey (current property plat) - Original Deed to verify ownership of the property - Quitclaim Deed (House is in a Trust with Justin and Natalie as Trustees) - Full Site Plan of proposed project - Engineering Plans - Findings of Facts on the Variance Standards Thank you for your consideration, Justin and Natalie Krone Page 43 of 120  232 East Des Moines St Pool Installation – Variance Request Findings of Facts A) The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in the district in which it is located. • As a property owner, we are attempting to make improvements to our property that would allow for fuller enjoyment of our property; namely to enjoy a backyard swimming pool. There is no other return expected from this other to enjoy our property to its fullest potential. B) The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances. • The lot sizes in our locality vary significantly. For instance, our neighbor to the north has a lot size that is more than double ours (though it is not considered a double lot). The village regulations permit a 35% lot coverage, and in some cases, up to 40%. Our project would bring us to approximately 39% coverage due to our current property footprint and the proposed project. While many homeowners in Westmont are permitted up to 40% coverage, we were not granted this allowance due to the specific location of our lot in relation to others. C) The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. • 232 East Des Moines is located in a neighborhood with a mixture of mid size (15,000 sq ft) to large (30,000 sq ft) lots. Our lot backs up to a very large lot that has less than 20% coverage. We also live roughly a block and a half away from a significant retention pond. We plan to add roughly 800 square feet of “coverage” by installing this pool. With the size of the lots in our neighborhood, particularly to the east of us (water is shown to run east oU of our property per a topographical survey done by an independent engineer), this should have an insignificant impact to the overall locality. Furthermore, with this pool being in ground, it would be able to retain some water if there were significant rain as opposed to adding a driveway or paved patio which would not. Page 44 of 120 Page 45 of 120 Page 46 of 120 Page 47 of 120 Page 48 of 120 Page 49 of 120  SURVEY INFORMATION: 1. LOT DIMENSIONS TAKEN FROM ORIGINAL SURVEY. ALL LOT LINES, SETB UTILITY EASEMENT, ARE TO BE LOCATED ON THE SITE BEFORE WORK STAR 2. CONTRACTOR IS SOLE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SETBACKS EASEMENTS. 3. CONTRACTOR AGREES TO COMPLY WITH THIS DIRECTIVE AND FURTHER TO HOLD ENGINEER HARMLESS FOR REMEDIAL ACTION DUE TO HIS FAILU COMPLY. Temporary Soil Stockpile 4. THE ENGINEER SHALL NOT HAVE CONTROL OVER OR CHARGE OF AND Install Perimeter Coir Roll BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEMOLITION OR CONSTRUCTION MEANS, METHOD TECHNIQUES, SEQUENCES OR PROCEDURES, OR FOR SAFETY PRECAUTION PROGRAMS IN CONNECTION WITH THE WORK, SINCE THESE ARE SOLELY T CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY UNDER THE CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCT 5. THE ENGINEER SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTRACTOR'S SC OR FAILURE TO CARRY OUT THE WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONT DOCUMENTS. 6. THE ENGINEER SHALL NOT HAVE CONTROL OVER OR CHARGE OF ACTS OMISSIONS OF THE CONTRACTOR, SUBCONTRACTORS, OR THEIR AGENTS EMPLOYEES, OR OF ANY OTHER PERSONS PERFORMING PORTIONS OF TH FIELD WORK ON 03-27-2025 TREE PROTECTION NOTES 1. Install Tree Protection Fence and perform root pruning per plan for all protected trees prior to any construction activity. Brick Patio 2. Fence the public portion (parkways) of the entire Tree Protection Zone(s) with a 6' chain link fence to prevent wounds to the parkway tree(s) as well as soil compaction. Post the fence with a sign stating "Tree Protection Zone-Keep 856.02 S.F. Out". 3. No trenching should be done within the Tree Protection Zones for any construction activity unless pre-approved by Building Department and Forestry staff. 4. No grade changes should be done within the Tree Protection Zones of parkway trees for any construction activity. 5. Should it be necessary to trench within the TPZ for utilities, including disconnection or capping of existing utilities, all trenches shall be hand dug. No roots larger than two (2") shall be cut unless no other alternative is feasible. All smaller roots that require cutting shall be cut with pruning saws. Cuts shall be made flush with the side of the trench. If at any time twenty-five (25%) of the area within the TPZ is being separated from the tree by a trench, then the line shall be either relocated or installed using trench-less methods. 6. At no time shall any equipment, materials, supplies or fill soil be allowed in the Tree Protection Zone(s). Do not store excavated soil or the dumpster within the drip-line (TPZ) of the parkway tree(s). GENERAL 1. All work shall be performed in accordance with the Village of Westmont Public Works Construction Standards. 2. The contractor shall adhere to the Construction noise restrictions as found in the Village Code. Generally, residential areas are restricted to between construction noise is regulated between the hours of 8:00PM AND .7:00AM Overhang 3. The contractor shall contact J.U.L.I.E. and the Village of Westmont a minimum of 48 hours prior to any excavation work. 4. The contractor shall provide protective fencing around all parkway trees. Protective fencing shall be snow fence installed under the drip line of each tree. There shall be no construction materials, debris, or equipment stored within the limits of the fencing. The protective fencing shall be maintained throughout the entire construction phase. 5. Any areas disturbed by construction outside the limits of the site shall be restored to the pre-construction condition. The contractor shall be responsible for taking photographs or videos of the pre-construction condition. EROSION CONTROL 1. All sediment and erosion control devices shall be functional before land is otherwise disturbed on the site. Soil disturbance shall be conducted in such a manner as to minimize erosion. Soil stabilization measures shall consider the time of year, site conditions and the use of temporary or permanent measures. 2. The surface of stripped areas shall be permanently or temporarily protected from soil erosion within 15 days after final grade is reached. Stripped areas not at final grade that will remain undisturbed for man than 15 days after initial disturbance shall be protected from erosion. If a stockpile is to remain in place for more than 3 days, then sediment and erosion control devices shall be provided for said stockpile. 3. Storm sewer inlets shall be protected with sediment trapping or filter control devices during construction. Pumping sediment-laden water into any stormwater facility not designated to be a sediment trap, drainageway, or offsite area either directly or indirectly without filtration is prohibited. 4. Any soil, mud or debris washed, tracked, or deposited onto the street shall be removed immediately. 5. Vehicle access to the site shall be restricted to a existing brick drive. Said drive shall be cleaned periodically to prevent sediment from being tracked onto the street. 6. Temporary erosion and sediment control measures shall be functional and inspected by the Village prior to land disturbance activities. 7. All temporary soil erosion and sediment control measures shall be removed within thirty (30) days after final stabilization is achieved. Trapped sediment and other disturbed soils resulting from temporary measures shall be properly disposed of prior to permanent stabilization. 8. Stockpiles to remain in place more than three (3) days shall be provided with soil erosion and sediment control measures. Soil stockpiles shall not be left overnight in ditches. Install Construction Fence with silt fence on inside 490 LF (Scope of work within fence limits) Construction Path Overhang Install Dumpster Conc. Sidewalk/Entry Asphalt 214.80 S.F. Driveway 486.32 S.F. Concrete Wash-Out Portable WC Install Site Location Inlet Filter (Typ.) Use Existing Driveway CB (Stabilized Construction RIM 737.92 Entrance) INV 6" PVC W 736.62 INV 6" PVC E 736.82 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: EMERGENCY CONTACT: CALL JULIE LOT 2 IN BARTEL'S RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 5 IN ARTHUR T. MCINTOSH AND COMPANY'S DAVID WILLER CALL 48 HOURS BEFORE YOU DIG 0' 5' 10' 25' RESUBDIVISION OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE ASURENET LLC. (EXCLUDING SAT., SUN. & HOLIDAYS) SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 38 NOTH, RANGE 11, EAST OF THE THIRD 630-730-1458 PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF SAID BARTEL'S RESUBDIVISION RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1985 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER ADMIN@ASURENET.COM 1-800-892-0123 R85-110618, IN DUPAGE COUNTY ILLINOIS. COMMONLY KNOWN AS: 232 E DES MOINES STREET, WESTMONT, ILLINOIS 60559 Brian Gould br@brdesignarchitecture.com 708-508-7281 Page 50 of 120  DRAINAGE STATEMENT To the best ofmy knowledge, th e proposed work qualifies as best practice by conveying roof and surface stormwater into drywells and public storm sewers for the purpose of minimizing stormwater discharge and providing recharge for the ground water. R easonable provision has been made for overflowof such surface waters into public areas and that such surface waters are planned for in accordance with generally accepted engineering practices so as to reduce the likelihood of damage to adjoining properties because of the implementationof thiswork. Prop. Walkway 348 S.F. Proposed In-Ground Pool 555 S.F. CONCRETE NOTES: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 1. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE MINIMUM 5" PCC. Brick Patio 2. AGGREGATE BASE COURSE SHALL CONSIST OF MINIMUM 4" CA-6 856.02 S.F. LOT 2 IN BARTEL'S RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 5 IN ARTHUR T. MCINTOSH AND COMPANY'S COMPACTED TO 95% STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY. RESUBDIVISION OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE 3. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE OF AN IDOT APPROVED MIX DESIGN AND SHALL SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 38 NOTH, RANGE 11, EAST OF THE THIRD OBTAIN A COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH RATING OF 3,500 PSI WITHIN A Prop. PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF SAID FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD. Equip. Pad BARTEL'S RESUBDIVISION RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1985 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 4. ALL CONCRETE PAVEMENT AND BASE COURSE SHALL BE IN 18 S.F. R85-110618, IN DUPAGE COUNTY ILLINOIS. ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 420 IDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATION. 5. A 3/4" FIBER EXPANSION JOINT SHALL BE INSTALLED WHEN THE NEW Overhang PAVEMENT ABUTS A SIDEWALK OR ANY BUILDING. COMMONLY KNOWN AS: 232 E DES MOINES STREET, WESTMONT, ILLINOIS 60559 6. CONTRACTION JOINTS SHOULD BE SAWCUT A MINIMUM OF TWO INCHES DEEP WITHIN 4-12 HOURS OF CONCRETE PLACEMENT, BUT NO LATER THAN 24 HOURS AFTER CONCRETE PLACEMENT, SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 420.10(D) IDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. 15' MAXIMUM Notes: INTERVAL BETWEEN JOINTS. 1. MAINTAIN POSITIVE GRADES AWAY FROM THE ADDITION. 2. GRADING AND PAVING SHALL PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AND SHALL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES 3. SIDEYARDS ARE NOT TO BE PITCHED TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. 4. SOD OR SEED/BLANKET WITH TOPSOIL TO BE INSTALLED IN DISTURBED AREAS. 5. ANY DEVIATION FROM THIS APPROVED PLAN SHALL REQUIRE PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE VILLAGE OF WESTMONT. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE VILLAGE OF WESTMONT DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AT 630-981-6250 A MINIMUM OF 24-HOURS IN ADVANCE TO SCHEDULE THE FOLLOWING REQUIRED ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS: · SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL (SESC) INSPECTION Prop. · FINAL GRADING INSPECTION 4' Tall Aluminum Fence · FINAL ENGINEERING INSPECTION W/ Outswing Gates (See Arch Plans) 7.POOL MUST BE INSTALLED IN A SAFE MANNER THAT COMPLIES WITH THE VILLAGE OF WESTMONT ZONING ORDINANCE AND DOES NOT CREATE A NUISANCE. 8.CONSTRUCTION NOISE IS REGULATED BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 8:00PM AND 7:00AM. ANY DEVIATION FROM THIS APPROVED PLAN SHALL REQUIRE PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE VILLAGE OF WESTMONT. Overhang Conc. Sidewalk/Entry 214.80 S.F. Asphalt Driveway 486.32 S.F. CB RIM 737.92 INV 6" PVC W 736.62 INV 6" PVC E 736.82 EMERGENCY CONTACT: DAVID WILLER ASURENET LLC. CALL JULIE 0' 5' 10' 25' CALL 48 HOURS BEFORE YOU DIG 630-730-1458 (EXCLUDING SAT., SUN. & HOLIDAYS) ADMIN@ASURENET.COM 1-800-892-0123 Brian Gould br@brdesignarchitecture.com 708-508-7281 Page 51 of 120  WOODENSLATORCHAINLINK TREEPROTECTIONDETAIL DATE REVISIONS 04-30-20 RevisedNotes VillageofNorthbrook 4-1-21 AddedPlanNote STANDARDDETAIL PublicWorksDepartment G-3(01) (Sheet1of1) 0' 5' 10' 25' Brian Gould br@brdesignarchitecture.com 708-508-7281 Page 52 of 120 Page 53 of 120 Page 54 of 120 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 232 E DES MOINES STREET, WESTMONT, ILLINOIS 60559 SURVEY NUMBER: 2503.3099 2503.3099 1.2' OFF PLAT OF SURVEY ON LINE LOT 4 DUPAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS 110.00' (R) WF N 87°48'54" E 110.03' (M) FIP // // // // // // // // ON LINE FIP 10' D.E. & P.U.E. VF LOT 2 15713 SQ.FT.± S 1°44'17" E 142.83' (M) 15.9' 28.8' 142.55' (R) 0.7' OFF N 1°37'27" W 142.43' (M) CONC. PATIO LOT 1 LOT 3 142.60' (R) 45.0' 47.9' 24.3' 5' D.E. & P.U.E. 24.2' 0.8' OFF 5' D.E. & P.U.E. // 16.3' 4.0' O/H 48.6' 19.4' // SPLIT LEVEL // 27.3' BRICK & FRAME 3.0' RES. #232 // 1.0' 1.0' 55.1' WF W LINE OF 10.3' // 20.5' O/H C/P 25' S.B.L. // ASPHALT D/W CONC. 30.0' 30.0' OAK AVENUE // 110.00' (R) // ON LINE FIR 0.34' S FIP S 88°01'20" W 110.31' (M) CONC. WALK 110.00' (R) EDGE OF PAVEMENT E DES MOINES STREET (66' R/W) CL GRAPHIC SCALE (In Feet) 1 inch = 30' ft. POINTS OF INTEREST: NONE VISIBLE DATE OF SURVEY: 03/18/25 FIELD WORK DATE: 3/17/2025 SEE PAGE 2 OF 2 FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION PAGE 1 OF 2 - NOT VALID WITHOUT ALL PAGES REVISION DATE(S): (REV.0 3/18/2025) Page 55 of 120 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 232 E DES MOINES STREET, WESTMONT, ILLINOIS 60559 SURVEY NUMBER: 2503.3099 JOB SPECIFIC SURVEYOR NOTES: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 2 IN BARTEL'S RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 5 IN ARTHUR T. MCINTOSH AND COMPANY'S RESUBDIVISION OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 38 NOTH, RANGE 11, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF SAID BARTEL'S RESUBDIVISION RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1985 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER R85-110618, IN DUPAGE COUNTY ILLINOIS. GENERAL SURVEYOR NOTES: 1. The Legal Description used to perform this survey was supplied 7. Any FEMA flood zone data contained on this survey is for 13. Due to varying construction standards, building dimensions by others. This survey does not determine nor imply ownership informational purposes only. Research to obtain said data was are approximate and are not intended to be used for new of the lands or any fences shown hereon. Unless the Title performed at www.fema.gov and may not reflect the most construction or planning. Commitment Number and Date is referenced on this survey, an recent information. 14. Surveyor bearings are used for angular reference and are used examination of the abstract of title was NOT performed by the 8. Unless otherwise noted “SIR” indicates a set iron rebar, 5/8 to show angular relationships of lines only and are not related signing surveyor to determine which instruments, if any, are or orientated to true or magnetic north. Bearings are shown as inch in diameter and twenty-four inches long. affecting this property. surveyor bearings, and when shown as matching those on the 9. The symbols reflected in the legend and on this survey may 2. The purpose of this survey is to establish the boundary of the subdivision plats on which this survey is based, they are to be have been enlarged or reduced for clarity. The symbols have lands described by the legal description provided and to deemed no more accurate as the determination of a north been plotted at the approximate center of the field location depict the visible improvements thereon for a pending financial orientation made on and for those original subdivision plats. and may not represent the actual shape or size of the feature. transaction. Underground footings, utilities, or other service North 00 degrees East is assumed and upon preparation of this lines, including roof eave overhangs were not located as part of 10. Points of Interest (POI’s) are select above-ground plat, the resulting bearing between found points as shown on this survey. Unless specifically stated otherwise the purpose and improvements, which may appear in conflict with boundary, this survey is the basis of said surveyor bearings as defined and intent of this survey is not for any construction activities or building setback or easement lines, as defined by the required to be noted by Illinois Administrative Code Title 68, future planning. parameters of this survey. These POI’s may not represent Chapter VII, Sub-Chapter B, Part 1270, Section 1270.56, 3. If there is a septic tank or drain field shown on this survey, the all items of interest to the viewer. There may be additional Paragraph B, Sub-Paragraph 6, Item k. location depicted hereon was either shown to the surveyor by a POI’s which are not shown or called-out as POI’s, or which are otherwise unknown to the surveyor. 15. THIS SURVEY IS A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IN COMPLIANCE third party or it was estimated by visual above ground WITH THE MINIMUM STANDARDS OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. inspection. No excavation was performed to determine its 11. Utilities shown on the subject property may or may not NO IMPROVEMENTS SHOULD BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF THIS location. indicate the existence of recorded or unrecorded utility PLAT ALONE. PLEASE REFER ALSO TO YOUR DEED, TITLE POLICY 4. This survey is exclusively for a pending financial transaction and easements. AND LOCAL ORDINANCES. THIS DOCUMENT MAY ONLY BE only to be used by the parties to whom it is certified. 12. The information contained on this survey has been performed USED BY THE PARTIES TO WHICH IT IS CERTIFIED. 5. Alterations to this survey map and report by other than the exclusively by and is the sole responsibility of Exacta Land signing surveyor are prohibited. Surveyors, LLC. Additional logos or references to third party firms are for informational purposes only. 6. Dimensions are in feet and decimals thereof. SURVEYOR’S LEGEND C/P - Covered Porch FIR - Found Iron Rod ORB - Official Records Book S/W - Sidewalk LINETYPES Elevation C/S - Concrete Slab FIRC - Found Iron Rod & Cap ORV - Official Record Volume SBL - Setback Line Boundary Line Fire Hydrant CATV - Cable TV Riser FN - Found Nail O/A - Overall SCL - Survey Closure Line Center Line Find or Set CB - Concrete Block FN&D - Found Nail & Disc O/S - Offset SCR - Screen Monument Chain Link or Wire CH - Chord Bearing FRRSPK - Found Rail Road OFF - Outside Subject Property SEC - Section Fence Guywire or Anchor Spike CHIM - Chimney OH - Overhang SEP - Septic Tank Easement Manhole CLF - Chain Link Fence GAR - Garage OHL - Overhead Utility Lines SEW - Sewer Edge of Water Tree CME - Canal Maintenance GM - Gas Meter OHWL - Ordinary High Water SIRC - Set Iron Rod & Cap Iron Fence Utility or Light Pole Easement ID - Identification Line SMWE - Storm Water CO - Clean Out IE/EE - Ingress/Egress Easement ON - Inside Subject Property Management Easement Overhead Lines Well CONC - Concrete ILL - Illegible P/E - Pool Equipment SN&D - Set Nail and Disc Structure ABBREVIATIONS COR - Corner INST - Instrument PB - Plat Book SQFT - Square Feet Survey Tie Line (C) - Calculated CS/W - Concrete Sidewalk INT - Intersection PC - Point of Curvature STL - Survey Tie Line Vinyl Fence (D) - Deed CUE - Control Utility Easement IRRE - Irrigation Easement PCC - Point of Compound STY - Story (F) - Field CVG - Concrete Valley Gutter L - Length Curvature SV - Sewer Valve Wall or Party Wall (M) - Measured D/W - Driveway LAE - Limited Access Easement PCP - Permanent Control Point SWE - Sidewalk Easement Wood Fence (P) - Plat DE - Drainage Easement LB# - License No. (Business) PI - Point of Intersection TBM - Temporary Bench Mark SURFACE TYPES PLS - Professional Land (R) - Record DF - Drain Field LBE - Limited Buffer Easement TEL - Telephone Facilities Asphalt Surveyor (S) - Survey DH - Drill Hole LE - Landscape Easement TOB - Top of Bank PLT - Planter Brick or Tile A/C - Air Conditioning DUE - Drainage & Utility LME - Lake/Landscape TUE - Technological Utility Easement Maintenance Easement POB - Point of Beginning Easement Concrete AE - Access Easement ELEV - Elevation LS# - License No. (Surveyor) POC - Point of Commencement TWP - Township Covered Area ANE - Anchor Easement EM - Electric Meter MB - Map Book PRC - Point of Reverse TX - Transformer ASBL - Accessory Setback Line Curvature Water B/W - Bay/Box Window ENCL - Enclosure ME - Maintenance Easement TYP - Typical Wood PRM - Permanent Reference BC - Block Corner ENT - Entrance MES - Mitered End Section Monument UE - Utility Easement SYMBOLS BFP - Backflow Preventer EOP - Edge of Pavement MF - Metal Fence PSM - Professional Surveyor UG - Underground Benchmark BLDG - Building EOW - Edge of Water MH - Manhole & Mapper UP - Utility Pole Center Line BLK - Block ESMT - Easement MHWL - Mean High Water Line PT - Point of Tangency UR - Utility Riser BM - Benchmark EUB - Electric Utility Box NR - Non-Radial PUE - Public Utility Easement VF - Vinyl Fence Central Angle or Delta BR - Bearing Reference F/DH - Found Drill Hole NTS - Not to Scale R - Radius or Radial W/C - Witness Corner Common BRL - Building Restriction Line FCM - Found Concrete NAVD88 - North American R/W - Right of Way W/F - Water Filter Ownership Monument Vertical Datum 1988 RES - Residential WF - Wood Fence BSMT - Basement FF - Finished Floor NGVD29 - National Geodetic RGE - Range WM - Water Meter/Valve Box Control Point C - Curve FIP - Found Iron Pipe Vertical Datum 1929 Catch Basin C/L - Center Line ROE - Roof Overhang Easement WV - Water valve FIPC - Found Iron Pipe & Cap OG - On Ground RP - Radius Point CERTIFIED TO: FLOOD ZONE INFORMATION: NATALIE KRONE; DATE SIGNED: 03/18/25 BUYER: NATALIE KRONE LENDER: TITLE COMPANY: COMMITMENT DATE: CLIENT FILE NO: SEE PAGE 1 OF 2 FOR MAP OF PROPERTY PAGE 2 OF 2 - NOT VALID WITHOUT ALL PAGES Page 56 of 120  ​ ​ ​ VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: July 9, 2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ PZC 009-2025 TITLE: ​Request from Justin and Natalie Krone regarding the property at 232 East Des Moines Street, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for the following: 1.​ Zoning Ordinance Variance to the maximum lot coverage in the R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence District. I.​ BACKGROUND OF ITEM A.​ Location: 232 East Des Moines Street is located near the intersection of East Des Moines Street and South Oak Avenue. The property is improved with a split-level single-family detached residence initially constructed in the 1980s. Subsequent additions were constructed in 2005 and 2020. The lot is approximately 110’ by 142.6’, with a total area of approximately 15,713 square feet. Aerial Map - 232 East Des Moines Street (source: DuPage County Parcel Viewer) Page 57 of 120  Zoning Map - 232 East Des Moines Street B.​ Zoning Designations: SUBJECT PROPERTY​ R-3 Single Family Detached Residence NORTH​ ​ ​ R-3 Single Family Detached Residence SOUTH​ ​ ​ R-3 Single Family Detached Residence EAST​ ​ ​ R-3 Single Family Detached Residence WEST​ ​ ​ R-3 Single Family Detached Residence​ C.​ Neighborhood Characteristics The property is located in Bartel’s Resubdivision, approximately three blocks southeast of the Village’s Downtown. The surrounding properties largely consist of single-family detached homes that are generally single-story or split-level, with two-story homes a few lots away. The lot sizes in this area vary greatly, ranging from 7,800 square feet to almost 30,000 square feet. II.​ PETITIONER REQUEST: The petitioners are proposing to construct an in-ground pool, which would increase the property’s lot coverage to 39%, which is 4% above the 35% maximum lot coverage for the R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence district. To exceed the maximum, the petitioners are requesting a variance. Aerial View - 232 East Des Moines Street (source: DuPage County Parcel Viewer) ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 009-2025​ ​ Page 2 of 5 Page 58 of 120 III.​ ZONING ANALYSIS A.​ Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designations The Comprehensive Plan designates the current and future land use in this area as single family detached residential, with an appropriate zoning designation of R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence District. Additionally, the Plan states the following: “Single-family residential areas should consist of one detached single household per lot, organized into neighborhoods or subdivisions. The design and construction of new homes should take into consideration the established character of surrounding single-family areas.” This variance request does not directly conflict with either the land use plan or overall vision of the Comprehensive Plan. B.​ Entitlement Requests The petitioners have provided project narratives and supporting documentation for the following request, including the necessary responses to the Variance Standards. Any corresponding standards for entitlement approval consideration can be referenced in item V(B). ●​ Zoning Ordinance Variance request to exceed the maximum lot coverage in the R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence District Lot coverage is defined as the following per Appendix A, Article XIV: Lot coverage: The percentage of a zoning lot's area covered by any and all buildings, structures and permanent hardscape improvements. Total lot coverage is calculated by taking the total combined footprint of these improvements, dividing it by the total lot area, and then multiplying the result by 100 to express it as a percentage. Appendix A, Section 6.04(D) states that single-family detached residences in the R-3 district have a 35% lot coverage maximum. Additionally, if a proposed project results in lot coverage between 35% and 40%, it may qualify for administrative approval rather than requiring a formal variance—so long as the property is not located within a designated building moratorium area, a known drainage problem zone, or a defined drainage sub-basin. However, the property is ineligible for administrative approval due to the property being located within an identifiable sub-basin area, as noted in the attached comment letter from the Village's Engineering consultant. The proposed swimming pool adheres to all zoning bulk and development regulations outlined in Appendix A, with the exception of the total lot coverage. Appendix A, Section 6.04 - Bulk and Development Standards Proposed Lot (D) Maximum Lot Coverage Difference Existing Coverage 35% ~ 39% ~ 4% ~ 33.87% The petitioners are proposing to install a 555 square foot in ground swimming pool with a 3 foot wide walkway around its perimeter. Totalling approximately 903 square feet in additional lot coverage. Built in the 1980s, the single-family home saw a major addition in 2005, expanding its living space. Further improvements in 2020 included an attached pavilion and paver patio. Per the attached comments from the Village's engineering consultant, the petitioner's request, if ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 009-2025​ ​ Page 3 of 5 Page 59 of 120  approved, would result in a minimal impact on stormwater runoff, with an anticipated 3% increase in the peak runoff rate. This is based on the provided RBD engineering plans, which are also attached for reference. The consultant further recommends mitigating improvements, such as installing a dry well or converting other improved areas, like the driveway or walkways, to permeable pavers. The use must be considered to the Variance Standards, which are noted below: Standards for Variations Sec. 13.07(D): (1)​ The planning and zoning commission shall not recommend a variation to the regulations of this comprehensive amendment as authorized herein unless it shall have made findings of fact based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case that: (a)​ The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in the district in which it is located; (b)​ The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances; and (c)​ The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. (2)​ For the purpose of implementing the above rules, the planning and zoning commission shall also, in making its recommendations whether there are practical difficulties or particular hardships, take into consideration the extent to which the following facts, favorable to the applicant, have been established by the evidence: (a)​ The particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical features of the specific property involved would result in a particular hardship upon the owner, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out. (b)​ The conditions upon which the petition for variation is based would not be applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. (c)​ The purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to make more money out of the property. (d)​ The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by the owner of the property. (e)​ The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. (f)​ The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair the property values within the neighborhood. IV.​ SUMMARY The Petitioners are requesting a variance to exceed the maximum lot coverage. They seek this variance to construct an in-ground pool, which would increase the property's lot coverage to 39%. This 4% increase surpasses the R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence district's 35% maximum lot coverage. V.​ LEGAL A.​ Notification: A legal notice was published in Westmont Suburban Life on June 19, 2025 B.​ Code References: Appendix A, Sections 6.04(D); 13.07 C.​ Other Actions: The recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission will be referred to the Village Board for a final decision, which is anticipated to be at the August 7, 2025 meeting. ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 009-2025​ ​ Page 4 of 5 Page 60 of 120 VI.​ DOCUMENTS ATTACHED: 1.​ Publication notice appearing in the June 19, 2025 Westmont Suburban Life 2.​ Engineering PZC Review comments from EZA Engineering, dated July 1, 2025 3.​ Petitioner Attachments: a.​ Planning and Zoning Development Application, received May 14, 2025 (Edited for PZC) b.​ Narrative including responses to the Variance Standards c.​ Architectural Plans prepared by BR Design & Architects, dated April 13, 2025 d.​ Engineering Plans prepared by RBD, dated April 18, 2025 e.​ Play of Survey prepared by Exactca, dated March 18, 2025 ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 009-2025​ ​ Page 5 of 5 Page 61 of 120 Page 62 of 120 July 1, 2025 VILLAGE OF WESTMONT – ENGINEERING PZC REVIEW PROJECT CASE NO. REVIEW NO. STATUS 232 E. Des Moines Street – Lot Coverage Variance PZC 009 2025 PZC 2 - EZA Engineering received the following permit submittal documents on May 19, 2025: DOCUMENT PREPARED BY SHEETS DATE PZC Application Krone 56 5-15-25 Engineering Plans RBD Associates 3 4-18-25 Plat of Survey Exacta Land Surveyors 2 3-18-25 The above documents have been preliminarily reviewed for compliance with the Village of Westmont Code of Ordinances (Village Code) and the DuPage Countywide Stormwater and Flood Plain Ordinance (DCSFPO). Please consider the following comments: GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Sec. 6.04 (footnote 11) of the Village Code allows for administrative approval for lot coverage between 35-40% (in lieu of a variance), unless the proposed is within a known drainage problem area or within an identifiable drainage sub-basin. This property is located within sub-basin CH- P14-2, which contains a Low Depressional Area (LDA; a known drainage problem area). This LDA is concentrated around the intersection of Des Moines Street and Oak Avenue and approaches multiple residences near the intersection. The associated Base Flood Elevation is 738.0. Based on County topography, it appears a small portion (approximately 190 SF) of the southeast corner of the property is located within the LDA. This LDA is the reason the 35-40% lot coverage administrative approval was not granted. 2. If a variance is granted, the impact on stormwater runoff would be minimal. Engineering anticipates a 3% increase in the peak runoff rate generated by the proposed pool. 3. Based on the RBD engineering plans, the proposed impervious area of 6,091 SF results in 38.8% impervious area. A reduction of 591 SF to 5,500 SF is needed for 35.0% impervious area. If a variance is granted, we recommend the applicant considers the conversion of the asphalt driveway and concrete front walk to permeable pavers to avoid an adverse drainage impact on the LDA. Another alternative could be construction of a dry well to assist in mitigating the runoff generated by the 591 SF overage. EZA Engineering PLLC | 318 W. Half Day Road, #253 | Buffalo Grove, Illinois 60089 | 847 257 5414 | jamie@ezaeng.com Page 63 of 120  ​ ​ ​ VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: July 9, 2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ PZC 010-2025 TITLE: ​Request from Michael Schaefer and Chivon Niziolek, for the property at 102 West Naperville Road, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for the following: 1.​ Zoning Ordinance Variance to the maximum lot coverage in the R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence District. I.​ BACKGROUND OF ITEM A.​ Location: 102 West Naperville Road is located at the intersection of West Naperville Road and North Grant Street. The property is improved with a split-level single-family detached residence. There is not a record of when the home was constructed, but there are records of an addition constructed in 1993. The lot is approximately 65’ by 144’ at its deepest, with a total area of approximately 8,529 square feet. Aerial Map - 102 West Naperville Road (source: DuPage County Parcel Viewer) Page 64 of 120  Zoning Map - 102 West Naperville Road B.​ Zoning Designations: SUBJECT PROPERTY​ R-3 Single Family Detached Residence NORTH​ ​ ​ R-3 Single Family Detached Residence SOUTH​ ​ ​ R-3 Single Family Detached Residence EAST​ ​ ​ B-2 General Business WEST​ ​ ​ R-3 Single Family Detached Residence​ C.​ Neighborhood Characteristics The property is located in A.T. Macintosh & Co.’s Fairmont Gardens subdivision, which was recorded in 1920. It is approximately two blocks west of the Village’s Downtown. To the east, there are automotive businesses and multiple-family residences. To the west, the surrounding properties are generally improved with single-family homes on lots between 7,000 and 10,000 square feet in area. II.​ PETITIONER REQUEST: Petitioners propose to construct an 18-foot by 14-foot stamped concrete patio and two 3-foot-wide walkways. This construction would raise the property's lot coverage to 43.85%, exceeding the R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence district's 35% maximum by 8.85%. Therefore, the petitioners are requesting a variance. III.​ ZONING ANALYSIS A.​ Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designations The Comprehensive Plan designates the current and future land use in this area as single family detached residential, with an appropriate zoning designation of R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence District. Additionally, the Plan states the following: “Single-family residential areas should consist of one detached single household per lot, organized into neighborhoods or subdivisions. The design and construction of new homes should take into consideration the established character of surrounding single-family areas.” This variance request does not directly conflict with either the land use plan or overall vision of the Comprehensive Plan. ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 010-2025​ ​ Page 2 of 4 Page 65 of 120 B.​ Entitlement Requests The petitioners have provided project narratives and supporting documentation for the following request, including the necessary responses to the Variance Standards. Any corresponding standards for entitlement approval consideration can be referenced in item V(B). ●​ Zoning Ordinance Variance request to exceed the maximum lot coverage in the R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence District Lot coverage is defined as the following per Appendix A, Article XIV: Lot coverage: The percentage of a zoning lot's area covered by any and all buildings, structures and permanent hardscape improvements. Total lot coverage is calculated by taking the total combined footprint of these improvements, dividing it by the total lot area, and then multiplying the result by 100 to express it as a percentage. Appendix "A" Section 6.04 - Bulk and Development Standards (D) Maximum Lot Proposed Lot Existing Lot Difference Coverage Permitting Coverage Coverage 35% ~ 43.85% ~ 8.85% ~ 39.83% Appendix A, Section 6.04(D) states that single-family detached residences in the R-3 district have a 35% lot coverage maximum. Additionally, if a proposed project results in lot coverage between 35% and 40%, it may qualify for administrative approval rather than requiring a formal variance—so long as the property is not located within a designated building moratorium area, a known drainage problem zone, or a defined drainage sub-basin. The property is ineligible for administrative approval due to two factors: the total lot coverage exceeds the maximum allowed for administrative approval, and the property is located within an identifiable sub-basin area, as noted in the attached comment letter from the Village's Engineering consultant. The sub-basin location alone would prevent administrative approval, even if the lot coverage were between 35% and 40%. The proposed patio and walkways adhere to all zoning bulk and development regulations outlined in Appendix A, with the exception of the total lot coverage. The petitioners purchased the property after significant site alterations by the previous, including the removal of walkways, which reduced the total lot coverage of the property to 39.83%. Furthermore, while the property is a lot of record, its width is non-conforming to the minimum standards of Appendix B, Land Development (Sec. 4.04(a)(2)) regulations. This regulation requires corner lot width to be 20 percent greater than typical interior lots. The lot's measurable width is approximately 64.95 feet, whereas the land development code typically requires a minimum width of 72 feet. Due to this non-conforming width, the lot's area is reduced from a typical corner lot. Should the variance be approved, the Village's engineering consultant advises that construction enhancements incorporate runoff mitigation materials, such as permeable pavers or construction of a dry well. The consultant's comments are attached for reference. The use must be considered to the Variance Standards, which are noted below: ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 010-2025​ ​ Page 3 of 4 Page 66 of 120  Standards for Variations Sec. 13.07(D): (1)​ The planning and zoning commission shall not recommend a variation to the regulations of this comprehensive amendment as authorized herein unless it shall have made findings of fact based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case that: (a)​ The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in the district in which it is located; (b)​ The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances; and (c)​ The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. (2)​ For the purpose of implementing the above rules, the planning and zoning commission shall also, in making its recommendations whether there are practical difficulties or particular hardships, take into consideration the extent to which the following facts, favorable to the applicant, have been established by the evidence: (a)​ The particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical features of the specific property involved would result in a particular hardship upon the owner, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out. (b)​ The conditions upon which the petition for variation is based would not be applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. (c)​ The purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to make more money out of the property. (d)​ The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by the owner of the property. (e)​ The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. (f)​ The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair the property values within the neighborhood. IV.​ SUMMARY Petitioners propose to construct an 18-foot by 14-foot stamped concrete patio and two 3-foot-wide walkways. This construction would raise the property's lot coverage to 43.85%, exceeding the R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence district's 35% maximum by 8.85%. Therefore, the petitioners are requesting a variance. V.​ LEGAL A.​ Notification: A legal notice was published in Westmont Suburban Life on June 19, 2025 B.​ Code References: Appendix A, Sections 6.04(D); 13.07 C.​ Other Actions: The recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission will be referred to the Village Board for a final decision, which is anticipated to be at the July 24, 2025 meeting. VI.​ DOCUMENTS ATTACHED: 1.​ Publication notice appearing in the June 19, 2025 Westmont Suburban Life. 2.​ Engineering PZC Review comments from EZA Engineering, dated June 22, 2025 3.​ Petitioner Attachments: a.​ Planning and Zoning Development Application, received May 15, 2025 (Edited for PZC) b.​ Narrative including responses to the Variance Standards c.​ Supplemental Material Details d.​ Petitioners Findings of Fact Responses e.​ Site Plan f.​ Plat of Survey g.​ Copy of Warranty Deed ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 010-2025​ ​ Page 4 of 4 Page 67 of 120 Page 68 of 120 June 22, 2025 VILLAGE OF WESTMONT – ENGINEERING PZC REVIEW PROJECT CASE NO. REVIEW NO. STATUS 102 W. Naperville Road – Lot Coverage Variance PZC 010 2025 PZC 2 - EZA Engineering received the following permit submittal documents on June 2, 2025: DOCUMENT PREPARED BY SHEETS DATE PZC Application Schaefer 26 5-15-25 The above documents have been preliminarily reviewed for compliance with the Village of Westmont Code of Ordinances (Village Code) and the DuPage Countywide Stormwater and Flood Plain Ordinance (DCSFPO). Please consider the following comments: GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Sec. 6.04 (footnote 11) of the Village Code allows for administrative approval for lot coverage between 35-40% (in lieu of a variance), unless the property is within an identifiable drainage sub- basin. This property is located within sub-basin B-P6-2, and therefore, is not eligible for administrative approval. Please note the following:  Sub-basin B-P6-2 does not contain a Low Depressional Area (LDA).  It appears the existing lot coverage of the site exceeds 40%. 2. If a variance is granted, the impact on stormwater runoff would be minimal. Engineering anticipates a 3% increase in the peak runoff rate generated by the additional patio and walk. 3. If a variance is granted, we recommend the applicant be required to construct the patio and walks using permeable pavers (or equivalent permeable pavement), as to not exacerbate any existing drainage issues within the sub-basin. Another alternative could be the construction of a dry well to assist in mitigating the runoff generated by the amount of impervious area over the 35% maximum. EZA Engineering PLLC | 318 W. Half Day Road, #253 | Buffalo Grove, Illinois 60089 | 847 257 5414 | jamie@ezaeng.com Page 69 of 120 Page 70 of 120 Page 71 of 120 Page 72 of 120 Page 73 of 120 Page 74 of 120 Page 75 of 120 Page 76 of 120 Page 77 of 120 Page 78 of 120 Page 79 of 120 Page 80 of 120 Page 81 of 120  ​ ​ ​ VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: July 9, 2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ PZC 012-2025 TITLE: ​Requests by ADVOCATE HEALTH & HOSPITALS CORPORATION, for 639 Blackhawk Drive, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for the following: 1.​ Zoning Ordinance Variance to increase the maximum sign area and height of directional signage in the B-2 General Business District. I.​ BACKGROUND OF ITEM A.​ Location: The subject site is located on the north side of Ogden Avenue and on the east side of Blackhawk Drive. In 2024, the petitioner received approvals to consolidate the property into one lot and redevelop it as Advocate Outpatient Center, a medical office. The total area of the site is approximately 145,490 square feet or 3.34 acres of land. Aerial Map - 639 Blackhawk Drive and 330 East Ogden Avenue (prior to redevelopment) (source: DuPage County Parcel Viewer) Page 82 of 120  Zoning Map - 639 Blackhawk Drive SUBJECT PROPERTY​ ​ B-2 General Business District NORTH​ ​ ​ ​ M Manufacturing District SOUTH​ ​ ​ ​ B-2 General Business District EAST​ ​ ​ ​ M Manufacturing & B-2 General Business District WEST​ ​ ​ ​ M Manufacturing & B-2 General Business District B.​ Neighborhood Characteristics The surrounding area has a variety of uses that include restaurants, offices, parks/recreation, light manufacturing, and retail. The site is one of three properties that has dual access along Blackhawk Drive and Ogden Avenue. Primary access to the site is taken off Blackhawk Drive, as the Ogden Avenue access point is restricted for emergency vehicles only. Street View from Ogden Avenue (under construction) - 639 Blackhawk Drive (source: Google) II.​ PETITIONER REQUEST: The petitioner is requesting a variance to the maximum area and maximum height of directional signage for an outpatient medical center in the B-2 General Business District. ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 012-2025​ ​ Page 2 of 4 Page 83 of 120 III.​ ZONING ANALYSIS A.​ Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designations The subject site is located in the B-2 General Business District, which allows for a wide variety of commercial uses, including medical clinics as a permitted use. The Comprehensive Plan locates this property in the Ogden Avenue Subarea, which is described as having “ …retail, service, and office uses. The subarea is surrounded by strong industrial uses, office parks, and stable single family and multifamily residential neighborhoods.” The Plan further designates the subject property within the Auto Mile Character District, which has the goal of creating “...a more attractive environment in which patrons can easily access auto dealerships through a coordinated network of access points and linkages. It should also strive to minimize the impact of commercial activities on nearby residential neighborhoods.“ Though the petitioner is not an auto dealer, the goal to create an attractive environment for patrons that is easily accessible is still applicable. B.​ Entitlement Requests The petitioners have provided project narratives and supporting documentation for the following request, including the necessary responses to the Variance Standards. Any corresponding standards for entitlement approval consideration can be referenced in item V(B). ●​ Zoning Ordinance Variance request to exceed the maximum area and height for directional signs Directional signs are a type of exempt signage, meaning they do not count towards the maximum number of signs or gross area of signage for a property. Directional signs are most commonly found at businesses offering drive-through services such as restaurants, coffee shops, and banks. Though it is exempt, all directional signage in the B-2 district must comply with the below regulations: Appendix A, Section 11.11(D)(4) - Directional Signs Regulation Permitted Proposed Maximum Area 5 square feet per side 4.8 to 9 square feet per side Maximum Height 3 feet 6 feet 6 inches Advocate Outpatient Center is a medical office, which is also allowed in the Office/Research district (O/R). In the O/R district, larger directional signs are permitted to assist in the navigation of large office complexes. However, since the petitioner is located in the B-2 district, directional signage must comply with the regulations listed in the table above. The petitioner explained in their project narrative that the requested variance would enhance both the operational efficiency and safety for both patients, visitors, staff, and service vehicles. The petitioner is proposing three designs of directional signage, which are attached to this report. Designs #1 and #2 are 6 feet 6 inches tall, and 9 square feet in area, variances are required to both the height and area. Design #3 is also 6 feet 6 inches tall, but is 4.8 square feet in area. Only a variance to the height is required for this design. ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 012-2025​ ​ Page 3 of 4 Page 84 of 120  The request must be considered with the Variance Standards, which are listed below: Standards for Variations Sec. 13.07(D): (1)​ The planning and zoning commission shall not recommend a variation to the regulations of this comprehensive amendment as authorized herein unless it shall have made findings of fact based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case that: (a)​ The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in the district in which it is located; (b)​ The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances; and (c)​ The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. (2)​ For the purpose of implementing the above rules, the planning and zoning commission shall also, in making its recommendations whether there are practical difficulties or particular hardships, take into consideration the extent to which the following facts, favorable to the applicant, have been established by the evidence: (a)​ The particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical features of the specific property involved would result in a particular hardship upon the owner, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out. (b)​ The conditions upon which the petition for variation is based would not be applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. (c)​ The purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to make more money out of the property. (d)​ The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by the owner of the property. (e)​ The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. (f)​ The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair the property values within the neighborhood. (3)​ The planning and zoning commission may recommend such conditions and restrictions upon the premises benefited by a variation as may be necessary to comply with the standards set forth in this subsection to reduce or minimize the injurious effect of such variation upon other property in the neighborhood, and better to carry out the general intent of this comprehensive amendment. IV.​ SUMMARY The petitioner is requesting a variance to the maximum area and maximum height of directional signage to allow for three signs to be 6 feet 6 inches tall and two signs to be 9 square feet in area for an outpatient medical center in the B-2 General Business District. V.​ LEGAL A.​ Notification: Publication notice appearing in the June 19, 2025 Westmont Suburban Life. B.​ Code References: ​Appendix A, Sections 11.11(D)(4); 13.07 C.​ Other Actions: The recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission is anticipated to be referred to the Village Board for a final decision on July 24, 2025. VI.​ DOCUMENTS ATTACHED: A.​ Publication notice appearing in the June 19, 2025 Westmont Suburban Life. B.​ Petitioner Attachments: 1.​ Planning and Zoning Application received on June 4, 2025 (Edited for PZC); 2.​ Cover Letter including responses to the Variance Standards; 3.​ Proposed Directional Signage; 4.​ Warranty Deed (for two properties prior to the consolidation); 5.​ ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey (prior to consolidation) 6.​ Final Site Plan ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 012-2025​ ​ Page 4 of 4 Page 85 of 120 Page 86 of 120  1.1 Completed Application Form Village of Westmont Planning and Zoning Application and Instruction S PZc o\X - aoa' Comm u n ity Development Depa rtment trte Un Only 31 West Quincy Street Oete Received- 8y Westmont, lllinois 60559 530-98 L-6260 ,ROJE.T NAME: Advocate Outpatient Center (AOC) Blackhawk Dr Subject Property Street Address: 639 Blackhawk Drive, Westmont, lllinois 60559 PIN Number(s): 09-03-1 06-020, 09-03-1 06-022 PETITIoNER / BILLING coNTAcr (Agent and project Manager for the petition): Petitioner (and corporation if applicable) Peter [Vessina Address: 2025 Windsor Drive, Oak Brook, lllinois 60523 Phone 773.780.9759 Email: peter.messina@aah.org Vice President Relationship of Petitioner to Property Owner: Operations Ambulatory & Non Clinical Design and Construction Page 2 of Page 87 35 of 120  1.1 Gompleted Application Form PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Sion Variance for directional sionaoe Aooe ix A Section 11 11 Fxemntions (D) The Advocate 42 0SF facili with 215 surface rki The new site includes for an ex nsion to the south The program consists of Primary Care, Obstetrics, Ortho/Sports N/edicine, ICC and lmaging Rooms. The clinic will provide a hybrid on/off stage clinic module to be used for operational flexibility and many of the room standards will be deployed with modulaTprefab opportunities. The exterior materials and interior environments will identify as a branded Advocate tacility PROPERW OWNER TNFORMATION (lF DIFFERENT THAN PETITIONER): Property owner(s) . Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation 2025 Windsor Drive, Oak Brook, lL 60523 Address: Phone Peter [/essina (agent) peter.messina@aah.org / Cell'. 77 3.780.9759 Email: BUSINESS OWNER INFORMATION (IF DIFFERENT THAN PETITIONER ANd PROPERTY OWNER}: Property owner(s) . See above: Address See above Phone See above Email: See above Form last modified 05t1312O24 Village of Westmont Planning and Zoning Application Page 4 Page885ofof120 Page 35  1.1 Completed Application Form PROJECT STAFF: Peter [Messina Developer: Advocate Health & Hospitals Corp. Company Name Phone 773.780.9759 peter. messina@aah.org Email: James Slinkman Attorney Company Name: Advocate Health Care 630.9829.8155 Phone: james.slinkman@aah.org Email: Engineer: Spencer Craig Company Name Eriksson Engineering Associates, LTD Phone 414.930.7221 Email: scraig@eea-ltd.com Architect: Chris Martin Company Name HDR, INC 312.307.8739 Phone: Email: ch ristopher. marti n@hd ri nc.com Landscape Architect: Zack Rees Company Name: HDR, INC Phone: 312.470.9517 Email: zack.rees@hdrinc.com Form last modified 0511312024 Village of westmont planning and Zoning Application Page 5 Page 6 of Page 89 35 of 120  1.1 Completed Application Form 8y signing belorv, the applicant and/or property owner acknowledge that lhe Appllcolon fees ore non-refundoDte and that filling out this fot nr is not a guarantee that the item wilt appear before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The applicant and/or property owner further acknowtedge that all items recommended by Village plannirtg staff for consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission must have received technical approvals from the Consulting Engineer, the Consulting Landscape Architect, the Consulting Architect, the Village Forester anrllor other Village slatf, as deemed appropriate by the Conrnrunily Developnront Department, before being recommendedfor consideration by the Planning and Zortirrg Cornrnission. For this reason, while this is not a requirement, it is higlrly recontnrerrded ttrat the applicant/property owner hire licensed professional engineers or architects when preparing their application materials. PETITIONER SIGNATURE: Peler Messrrta Vrce Presrderrl Type or print name Operatrons Anrtrulatory & Non Chnrcal-Desrgn and Conslruction Signature SUBSCRI ED AND SWORN BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF ,20 ?{ a-d Notary Public Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation OWNER SIGNATURE: Peter Messrna. Vrce Presrdent (Agent) Type or print name: Operatrons Ambulatory & Non Chnrcal-Design and Construclion -/: Signature SUESCRr AND S BEFORE ME 2( R THIS DAY ,20 sFrcutS€ r tL h.* d lllrnO6 Notary Public Form lasl modrfred Og1tnu24 Vrllrge ot l/Veslmonl Plannrng and Zonrng Applrc.t,on Pogo 7 Page90 Page of120 8 of 35  1.4 Cover Letter F)? PZC Application Request Cover Letter Date Tuesday,May 30,2025 Project Advocate Outpatient Center (AOC)Westmont Blackhawk Dr To Village of Westmont Community Development Department From HDR Advocate Outpatient Center (AOC)639 Blackhawk PZC Application Subject Signage Variance: Directional Signage Advocate Health Care respectfully submits this PZC Application, along with the accompanying materials, to formally request a variance for maximum height and area allowances for directional signage at the Advocate Outpatient Center (AOC), located at 639 Blackhawk Drive. Please refer to the table below for a detailed, numbered list of the submitted materials, organized in accordance with the numbering and order outlined in the application checklist. We appreciate the opportunity to collaborate with the Village and look fonruard to working together to bring this important project to fruition. PZC Application Materials Ghecklist Application Checklist Material Material Page Numbers Number Name Description 2-13 1 1 Completed Completed application form with notes Application from Mr. Scott Williams Form 14-15 1.2 Completed Fee Completed fee schedule with notes from Schedule Mr. Scott Williams 16-19 1.4 Cover Letter Cover letter with numbered listing and description of items 20 1.5 Legal Legal description per the Deeds on file with Description DuPage County N/A 1.6 Non-refundable Filing Fees 21 1.7 Plat of Survey Plat of Survey hdrinc.com 225 West Wacker, Suite 2750, Chicago, lL 60606-1228 (31 2) 470-9501 Page Page 16 of120 91 of 35  1.4 Cover Letter F)? 22 1.8 PIN Numbers PIN numbers per the Deeds on file with DuPage County 23-27 1.11 Proof of Proof of ownership per the Deeds on file Ownership with DuPage County 28 3.4 Site Plan, Final Final PZC Submission site geometry plan 29 3.4 Site Plan, Final Final Permit Submission site geometry plan 30 N/A Signage Proposed location of the signage on a site Location Plan plan 31-33 N/A Signage Proposed rendering of signage with all Rendering dimensions including height and installation depth 34-35 10.8 Plat of Final plat of subdivision Subdivision, Final 18 13.'1 Signage Letter indicating the requested signage Variance variance Request Letter 19 13.2 Response to Response to each of the Variance Variance Standards Standards Project Name Advocate Outpatient Center (AOC) Blackhawk Dr Subject Property Street Address 639 Blackhawk Drive, Westmont, lllinois 60559 PIN Numbers(s) 09-03-1 06-020, 09-03-1 06-022 Project Description The Advocate Outpatient Center in Westmont will be a two-story,42,000-square-foot facility featuring 215 surface parking spaces. The site is designed to accommodate a future expansion to the south. The facility will house a range of services, including Primary Care, Obstetrics, Orthopedics/Sports Medicine, lCC, and lmaging Rooms. The clinic will utilize a hybrid on-stage/off-stage module to support operational flexibility, with many room standards incorporating modular and prefabricated construction methods. Both the exterior materials and interior design will reflect Advocate's branded identity, creating a cohesive and recognizable patient experience. hdrinc.com 225 West Wacker, Suite 2750, Chicago, lL 60606-1228 (312) 470-9501 Page 17 ofof120 Page 92 35  13.1 Signage Variance Request Letter F)? Variance Request (13.1, 13.21 Appendix A Zoning, Article X/. - Signs, Sec. 11.11. - Exemptions (D)(4) Description: The Advocate Health Care Design Team respectfully requests a variance for three signs from the maximum height (three feet) and area (five square feet) limitations for directional signage, as outlined in Appendix A - Zoning, Article Xl - Signs, Section 11.11 - Exemptions (D)(4), for parcels located within the B-2 General Business District. The requested variance seeks approval for a maximum directional signage height of six feet six inches and a maximum sign area of nine square feet per side. Reason: The current maximum signage height and area permitted by the Code of Ordinances-three feet and five square feet respectively-is insufficient for effective visibility from passenger and service vehicles within a healthcare setting. ln contrast to simpler environments like fast food establishments, which often feature linear and intuitive circulation patterns, healthcare facilities require more visible wayfinding to accommodate diverse user needs and vehicle types. Allowing increased directional signage height and area would significantly enhance safety and navigation for patients, staff, and visitors. lt would improve traffic flow, reduce confusion, and contribute to a more organized and less stressful experience on site. Consideration ltems: The Advocate Outpatient Center is located within a general business corridor, surrounded primarily by automotive dealerships and fast-food establishments, and adjacent to a manufacturing district. With no nearby residential zoning, the proposed size of the directional signage is appropriate and consistent with the surrounding context. The signage design prioritizes wayfinding over advertising, incorporating only a small, wordless logo in the upper corner as a subtle identifying mark. The Office/Research (O/R) District, which permits healthcare-related facilities like this outpatient center, allows directional signage to be a maximum height of six feet and a maximum area of nine square feet per side. hdrinc.com 225 West Wacker, Suite 2750, Chicago, lL 60606-1228 (312) 470-9501 Page Page 18 of120 93 of 35  13.2 Response to Variance Standards F)? Standard for Variation: a (a) The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in the district in which it is located; I The current district guidelines for directional signage hinder the outpatient center's ability to provide effective wayfinding for patients, staff, and service vehicles. This results in reduced operational efficiency, increased safety risks, and a compromised patient experience, ultimately impairing the facility's performance and limiting its ability to achieve a reasonable return on investment. a (b)The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances; and I The owner's request for a variance is driven by site-specific operational requirements, the unique wayfinding demands of healthcare facilities, and a misalignment between the signage size limits intended for general business use and the functional needs of healthcare use at an outpatient medical center. Granting the variance would align the property's use with signage standards already considered reasonable n similar healthca re-permitted districts. i a (c)The variation, if granted, will not alter the essenfia/ character of the locality. The proposed signage variance maintains the visual and functional character of the surrounding business corridor and manufacturing district. lt introduces no new or disruptive elements and aligns with the commercial context of the area, meeting the operational needs of the outpatient center while remaining strictly functional rather than promotional. hdrinc.com 225 West Wacker, Suite 2750, Chicago, lL 60606-1228 (312) 470-9501 Page of120 19 of Page 94 35  Signage Location Plan + N .G3;\ z}rGh. 6 I d. o Y IET 1- w (@ 3 rY o J @ OGDEN AVE. va[Bluggg!! 5!EII5 OcoPYBnhr 2@! ;u...'"ur I34O1 SOUTHWEST HWY ft. rnae'!! n tE..d!.& ror.ilf .l Y.. tru.. Sit.., 1..., ADVOCNE MEDICAL GROUN WEgTMONT - 5/28/25 l92s - 2025 ORLAND PARK ILLINOIS 704.444.OA26 ri . .orD.nlrroi r.. or tlm vbsign.com Page 30 of 3l Page 95 of 120  Signage Rendering $ 6. N lT2.oo" di 1- I,VH]TE HEADER IVIT; -r "RO <27 -ECfVE CRO59 ?EAI JRE N EM5 2@' l . ev1 26b5 - M700327 9AT|N FrNigH Main Entrance + RlE.ECTYE $/I]TE VINYL COry ) Deliveries d f,f Parkins s $ Deliveries A 7/t 2"v2' lUbL ?O5' 'A NTLp PRo WHt-t - MP 6987t gAT:N :l\t311 o d N ! x2" 5J?PORr 705f5 l I erDE (A) SIDE stDE (O) VIEW (x1) erGN 1 - 9IGN TYTE L . ALUMINUM FABRICATION - NON-ILLUMINATEP ,1___l VENBIUgggU 5IE[I5 I34OI SOUTHWEST HWY @co"YRhHr 2o25 r u .*n u., r frr ria.ri[ it rh! .rd6to tnr.{y .t Y.r 6.rI.. lig.r, 1..., ADVOCNE MEDICAL GROUNWE?TMONT . 5/2b/25 r925 - 2025 ORLAND PARK, ILLINOIS 7o,4.44a.o'8.26 3/4"=1''O" vbsign.com Page 31 ol 3l Page 96 of 120  Signage Rendering $ N lr2'oo' 6 rRO WHIIE HEADER M1}I 1 LECI I\/ E CRC55 F EATURE N'M5 2655 1' IF I "EF l ?M5 2 tu - MPCOSZT 9AtN flNrgts Deliveries a RFFI FCl[f '/,fitrr VINYI Coft PEFLEC T['E <ED VINYL ,YV5O';3 Authorized o STOP Vehicles Only ?'x2" floE ?o5I rArNrE, rRo wHrrE - M? 69bv 9A-tN Ft\15t1 d tr- 2'XZ 5U?eO<T ?(815 erDE (A) SIDE stDE (b) VIEW (x1) erGN 2 - SIGN ryTE L - ALUMINUM FADKICATION - NON.ILLUMINAIED 0 0 a nn,,l---] BrusggnSIE[r5 134OI SOUTHWEST HWY OGDYBnHT 2e5 r h. ..",G. .6i h ffr Era.ri{ h tr .r.lrd. rrcr.ilr.l Yr. lrr[o ligr., 1..., AOVOCNE MEDICAL GROUN WE9TMONT .5/28/25 I925 - 2025 ORLAND PARX, ILLINOIS 708,444.0826 t. t,u.rn Si..., hc 314"=1'-O" vbsign.com Page 32 of 3l Page 97 of 120  Signage Rendering PRO YVHIlE HEADER wliH fT2.oo" 265 -21.oo"---1 RaFLEC]TyE C<O55 FEATV"E lN ?Mg ?M5 ?.605 - M"COSln 5ATt\ j N 5-1 MATIT 141.1-r V Nwl COPw ) Deliveries B 2A2" rtbL?O5r PAINTES rRo M l.'l E - MP 69471 5N tN Fi!l5l: 7, t- FRONT StoE BACK YIEW (x1) erGN 3 ')IGNTYTE|z - ALUMINUM FAERICATION - NON.ILLUN/INAIED 6.0r.,) I vE[EIUggen sIEIlls I34OI SOUTHWEST HWY OcoPYBoHT 2o2s rr n" mp, rra,, r n. tria.int a. rh. .rdBiE r.or.(, cl V.. 3.r[.. ti!r, l.!., ADVOCNE M EDICAL GKOU 7, WE?TMONT . 5/28 /25 1925 - 2025 lotu.i I. .r M c'@ d -t!t ORLAND PARK, ILL]NOIS 7@.444.o,a26 ^ry 3/4"=1''O" vbsign.com Page 33 of 3l Page 98 of 120  1.11 Proof of Ownership WARRANTY DEED KATHLEEN V. CARRIER, RECORDER DUPAGE COUNTY ILLINOIS t,ronertv: o4/L2/2023 02:o1. PM RHSP 330 E. Ogden Avenue Westmont,lL 60559 J PIN: 09-03-106-020 l* Grantee Address & DOCUMENT # R2023-O2t8t2 Subsequent Tax Bills to: $ Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation 3075 Highland Parkway, Suite 600 Dorvners Grove, IL 6051 5 lt I Attn: H. James Slinkman d 330 E. OGDEN, LLC, an Illinois limited tiability company, in $ CRAN'IOR, consideration of Ten Dollars in hand paid and other good and valuable consideration, hereby CONVEYS and WARRANTS to $ CRAN'I'EE, ADVOCATE I[EALTH AND HOSPITALS CORPORATION, a tax-exempt \ Illinois not-for-profit corporation, the above-referenced comrnercial Property located in DuPage County, \ Illinois, legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto, Exempl from TransferTaxcs per Par. ( b 3 ) of Section 3I-I5, lL Propcrty Tnr Code. ilttbo,t Ilate DATED this 1lu' day of April,2023 330 E. OGDEN, LLC, an Illinois limited liability company By= Holdings, LLC, a Florida LLC, Manager By: C. PRIEST, Manager State of lllinois, County of DuPage ) ss. The undersigned Notary Public hereby certifies that, VINCENT C. PRIEST, norv of Hinsdale, lllinois, personally known to rne to be the same person whose narne is subscribed to the foregoing instrument on behalf of 331) E. OGDEN, LLC, an Illinois limited liability company (or having produced sufficient identification), appeared before me this day in person and acknowledged signing the said instrurnent as a free and voluntary act, and as the free and voluntary act of said LLC, for the uses and purposes therein set forth. Given under my hand and official Notary seal this I lrh day of April,2023. Public SEAL BRIAN J MUIHERN NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE OF ILLINOIS Prepared by: Brian J. Mulhem, l5 Salt Creek [-ane, Suite 200, l{insdale, IL 60521 (630) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 3/112026 Unon Recordingr,Mail To: H. James SIinkman, Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation 3075 Highland Parkrvay, Suite 600 Downers Crove, IL 60515 Page 23ofof Page 99 35 120  1.11 Proof of Ownership KATHLEEN V. CARRIER, RECORDER WARRANTY DEEI) DUPAGE COUNTY ILLINOIS 04/t2/2aD 11:26 AM RHSP J couNTY TAX STAMP FEE 1,312.50 STATE TAX STAMP FEE 2,625.00 /.. d DoCUMENT # R2023-A2L74T WARRANTY DEED (rLLrNOrS) q_ .J l" v t^ tl \9 ftl Fl (Space Above For This Warranty Deed (this "pgg{") is dated this 1f}day of Allh e 2023, belween MAGNET-SCHULTZ AMERICA HOLDING, LLC, an Illinois limited liability corporation having a principal place of business located at40l Plaza Drive, Westmont, Illinois 60559-1233 ("GIg@I") and ADVOCATE HEALTH AND HOSPITALS CORPORATION, an Iltinois not for profit corporation having a principal place of business located at 3075 Highland Parkway, Suite 600, Downeru Grove, IL 60515 ("Grantce"). WTTNESSETH, that Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of $10.00 and other valuable consideration, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged by Grantor, has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm unto Grantee, all of that certain real property, situated, lying and being in the City of Westmont, County of DuPage, Srate of lllinois, and more'particularly legally described on EbiE!!4 attaohed hercto (the "b3lsf1["), and having: Parcel ID or Permanent lndex Number: 09-03-106'022-0000 Common Addrrss: 639 Blackhawk Drive, Westmont, lllinois 60559 TOGETHER WITH all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and rtversions, remainder and remainders; and all the estate, rights, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever, of Grantor, either in laworequity, o[, in and to the Property, in each case, if any; SUBJECT TO the "Permitted Exgeptions" attached hereto as $.!![i!E, and incorporated herein by this reference; 24ot Page100 Page 35 of 120  1.11 Proof of Ownership TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the Property above bargained and described unto Grantee forever; AND Grantor, for itself, and its successors, does covenant, promise and agree, to and with the Grantee, its successors and assigns, that it has not done or suffered to be done, anything whereby the said premises hereby gmnted are, or may be, in any manner encumbered or charged, except as herein recited; and that Grantor shall wanant and defend the quiet and peaceable possession of the Properfy, by Grantee, against all persons claiming the Property or any part thereof, by, through or under Grantor, and no other, subject. to the Permitted Exceptions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Warranty Deed as of the day and year first written above. GRANTOR: MAGNET.SCHULTZ AMERI LLC Print Name: Greg Roskuszka Title: -Ma0gge.f .. STATE oF I LT r n,*r, s ) OFFICIAL SEAL DOROTA DZIABA Norany Publc. Siale of llltflois ) ss. Commissron 2023 COI.JNTY OF r Doe-or,a 5z IWLL a Notary Public in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby CERTIFY THAT Greg Roskuszka, personally knorvn to me to be the same person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, appeared before me this day in person, and acknorvledged that he signed, sealed and delivered the said instrument as his free and voluntary act, by and for the uses and purposes therein set forth. Given under rny hand and notarial seal, this lO day of 2023 $Y P P,E?Aft(r DAv,D.r r{.,rerey My commission expires, .7a (,'I h Ol , 2oZ> ENeLAlur-, )efl au. Shtut; 915 I't fi At e.(t c Sr, u j(,o I Notary Public c,hc,l'l $i r.- GdG6, 1 After Recording, Mail To: Name & Address of Taxpayer Advocate Aurom Health Advocate Aurora Health c/ol H. James Slinkman, Senior Vice President, cio: H. James Slinkman, Senior Vice President Associate General Counsel Associate General Counsel 3075 Highland Parkway, Suite 600 3075 Highland Parkway, Suite 600 Downers Grove, IL 60515 Downers Grove, II-, 60515 Page101 Page of120 25 of 35  1.7 Plat of Su rvey, Original Survey, Dated { l,llll= : rl!l.l I B;. : { !i: ,-Ifu t6 i I !1!li I i;!; r dg! ,-E : tgfi,ii: rf{ l; i \o qnJal 3E;: i: lfld:i;li: ii €ltn lEii:!: tb r El* 1: srl tl3 e8i 9s # iTH Brlflll i;:: ii s.6 E; E*3 T i!i'l5l i!ii :i I 8' ..J1 e'g i Er! :o-: :; /r ! 5qE i!:i:i ni l gt :! o: i; E , I I 5jril I !l f,r is ^\J I t Ei:i ii s r ;{ rf :n-! I !:5;i 5l I_) i -"* iE 3 E I,iE! EJE 6 I{ii;:iBi,iiq ]U o + tr s i l rI i*1 a ii ::! iiiiiiiiiiiEi llJ : .'i,, ; t', ta$ : p Ei.' J I 4 I ti' at t,' tl :iEti F :3. .t: g;g!! lliEiliitEE;liii tr .i., flIs O '.' Z" e : { a L 9: -^E. i; ti ii J a, 5E n- I ld L E \ E fi a. L E I 6 ! tl at $ a -t E I z: :r:l gt s -^! 9- !668t ! I 5r- F I J I ! t ? i ! -t ; i { 3t .E:z ,E a !;iE l q I EIil l;li" I Ei;: #Et: t8 a t rl iEItu;E:ss i \E !l E A PUBLIC e:-'tx b;:i? \Ejl;l 3iEff 6:'F{E ri! dli!fiE;E iiett ;r;5E ,?6 trl 32zu d*+ dEdtT Er Iit ,ilsiE ie:Ei iil EiliF! 'lsa F 'I? E '; Page 21 3l Page 102 of 120  3.4 Site Plan, Final Permit Submission, Dated 09-1 =i I il N \ F)? J tEtEt--E-- "6" iil ,H ScoJe ,.?o' LESEND a '' :' a @ -F q, 6 BO1DT a I I o OIMEG q rY s A*m ADVOCATE HEALTH CARE AdvMte Outpatient +l Conter Weslmont .ra-6 l- ll ":-".9' .i := +fr Blackhawk Drive ffiB&lfrw wEMr 11ffi59 I I 9 9: :9 9: I D I I l-r .t I '! GENERAL NOTES to. ao, tl L PROPOSED BUILOING EEoMETFYNoTEa FFE 740 25 l' __-_____!l!!IR l{t; t.i AOJOININE PROFERIY OWNERSHIF IN'ORMATION ,lit 1o.* -l x" ,",1 9 9l tr 1 ?i e 3r i tj A I I I BUFVEY PFOVIDEO BY! ' la9!!glE!g!!t!5!- )'za* SITE GEOMETRY PLAN I I e* *--*.""** i t :" E:- ::*-.*" i U .s. 3 4Pdvio. (OGDEN AVENUE) M.monol HighroY, J.U_L.t.a. c-201 p:uAUC PONwlv Page of 3l Page 103 of 120 ​ ​ VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: July 9, 2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ PZC 013-2025 TITLE: ​Request by Chicago Lightworks LLC, d/b/a Chicago Lightworks (Petitioner) and 1133 Cleveland Properties, LLC d/b/a Oakmont Tech Center (Owner), regarding the property at 600 Oakmont Lane, Suite 600, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for the following: 1)​ Special Use Permit to operate business offices with accessory uses of warehousing, distribution of materials, goods, or products in the O/R Office/Research District. I.​ BACKGROUND OF ITEM A.​ Location: The subject site is located on the north side of Oakmont Lane. The site contains separate suites serving many individual office tenants, and a few of the suites have been designed with docks and include space for storage. The subject unit is located on the east side of the building, and has a drive-in door on the north side of the unit. The lot has an area of approximately 295,772 square feet or 6.79 acres of land. Aerial Map - 600 Oakmont Lane (source: DuPage County Parcel Viewer) Page 104 of 120  B.​ Zoning Designation SUBJECT PROPERTY​O/R Office Research NORTH​ ​ R-5 General Residence/Planned Development & R-6 Special Residence SOUTH​​ ​ O/R Office Research EAST​ ​ ​ O/R Office Research WEST​ ​ ​ O/R Office Research Zoning Map - 600 Oakmont Lane C.​ Neighborhood Characteristics: Located in the northeastern portion of the Village, Oakmont Lane is home to one of the Village's largest office parks. As such, the property is surrounded by similar office buildings and complexes. Beyond employment uses, to the north is Mayslake Village Retirement Community and the Tartan Lakes Subdivision, a single-family attached residential development. View of the Unit from the North Side - 600 Oakmont Lane, Suite 600 (source: Google) (stars mark access points to the subject unit) ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 013-2025​ ​ Page 2 of 5 Page 105 of 120 II. PETITIONER REQUEST: The petitioner, Chicago Lightworks, is requesting a Special Use Permit for 600 Oakmont Lane, Suite 600, to operate an administrative office for lighting sales with accessory warehousing for the storage of lighting samples. III. ZONING ANALYSIS A.​ Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designations The purpose of the O/R district is stated in Section 8.10 as “restricted to the establishment of professional and administrative offices and research laboratories. Development within this district shall be in accord with approved plans for overall development. Plans shall relate favorably to primary thoroughfare accessibility.” Similarly, the Comprehensive Plan has designated this area as Light Industrial/Business Bark. The zoning designation of O/R district maintains uses that are centered on business offices. Although the proposed office is a permitted use in the O/R district, the proposed accessory warehousing is a special use and must obtain a Special Use Permit prior to operating. To facilitate improved occupancy of atypical buildings in the O/R district, the Village approved a text amendment in 2022. The text amendment gave building owners the ability to solicit users that may utilize already existing atypical features such as loading docks or storage areas subject to an approved Special Use Permit. This unit features a drive-in door for loading, which is accessed through the northern parking lot. Similar requests have been made and approved at this property for Midwest Mechanical in Suite 650 (2023) and 1440 Event Design in Suite LL (2024). B.​ Entitlement Request The petitioner has provided a project narrative and supporting documentation for the following requests. The accessory special use requirements noted in Section 8.13(H), which address operation limitations, parking, and accommodation of vehicles, must be considered with the Special Use Standards listed in Section 13.09(D), both of which can be referenced in item V(B). ●​ Special Use Permit for accessory warehousing Chicago Lightworks intends to use the subject unit as their headquarters for their lighting sales agency. Day-to-day operations include general office functions, meeting spaces, a training center for employees, a showroom for lighting fixtures, and the warehouse to store lighting samples. The hours of operation will be from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm on weekdays, with a maximum of 70 employees. The petitioner anticipates roughly 35% of the employees to be working in sales, and not present in the office every day. The proposed warehousing will be used to store lighting samples that support the in-house showroom. The provided floor plan shows that the warehouse will be located where the drive-in door is, and will be walled off to separate it from the business offices. In addition to supporting the showroom, the lighting samples kept in the warehouse will be loaded into sales employees’ personal vehicles to use while on sales calls. Suite 600 is 23,463 square feet and the warehouse is proposed to be roughly 4,200 square feet. This is only 17.84% of the entire unit, which is compliant with the 25% maximum stipulated by Sec. 8.13(H)(2). The petitioner does not have fleet vehicles and receives their lighting samples through mail ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 013-2025​ ​ Page 3 of 5 Page 106 of 120  carries like the United Postal Service and FedEx. No outdoor storage of materials is proposed, nor would it be allowed. ​ IV. SUMMARY The petitioner seeks approval of a Special Use Permit to operate warehousing accessory to a lighting business office in the O/R Office/Research District. The request complies with both the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, specifically the standards of Sec. 8.13(H), and the recommendations from the Comprehensive Plan, and is subject to the standards of a special use permit approval and special conditions.​ V. LEGAL A.​ Notification: A legal notice was published in Westmont Suburban Life on June 19, 2025, B.​ Code References: Appendix A, Sections 8.13(H); 13.09​ Sec. 8.13. - Special uses in the office/research district.​ Special uses in the office/research district shall include the following: (H) Accessory uses limited to fabricating, processing, assembling, warehousing, or distributing of materials, goods, or products, subject to the following requirements: (1)​ The accessory use promotes the purpose and intent of the O/R District as an office and business center, and the accessory use utilizes secondary spaces not initially constructed as offices; (2)​ Accessory operations cannot exceed more than 25 percent of total floor area of the permitted business use; (3)​ Existing building construction must support the accessory use as designed without substantial alterations; building cannot be altered beyond specific building and fire code requirements to accommodate the accessory use. All building improvements must be disclosed with the special use permit application; (4)​ Outdoor storage is prohibited. Material and/or equipment, or other vehicles unrelated to the primary business operating from the property are prohibited. (5)​ Automotive and/or vehicle assembly, repair, maintenance and service are prohibited; (6)​ Refuse must be property contained in appropriate dumpsters which are enclosed by a trash enclosure and buffered with landscape screening; (7)​ Such accessory use shall not reduce required off-street parking below minimum standards for any other use which may occupy the property; (8)​ Accessory use does not involve the assembly of large equipment and machinery and has limited external impacts in terms of noise, vibration, odor, hours of operation and truck and commercial vehicle traffic; (9)​ Operations must comply with the performances standards found in section 8.02(C); (10)​Commercial vehicles used for business operations and stored on-site when not in use shall be as authorized in special use approval, including, but not limited to: (a)​ Vehicles shall be stored in a designated area; (b)​ Vehicle count shall not be increased by more than 20 percent without an amendment to special approval; (c)​ Vehicles shall be operable with current registration; (d)​ Vehicles shall not be used to store/warehouse products or materials for a period longer than 72 hours; (e)​ Vehicles shall be parked in standard parking stalls and cannot encroach other stalls or required drives and aisles; oversized vehicles prohibited; (f)​ Vehicles shall not be stored in view of the right-of-way of any street with a supplement setback line as established in art. IV, section 4.16 ​ Standards for Special Uses Sec. 13.09(D): A proposed special use shall substantially meet the following standards in order to obtain the recommendation of the planning and zoning commission and approval of the board of trustees: (1)​ That the establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare. (2)​ That the special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish or impair property ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 013-2025​ ​ Page 4 of 5 Page 107 of 120  values within the neighborhood. (3)​ That the establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. (4)​ That adequate utilities, access ways, drainage and/or other necessary facilities have been or are being provided. (5)​ That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. (6)​ That the special use shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located, except as such regulations may in each instance be modified by the village board pursuant to the recommendation of the plan commission.​ C.​ Other Action: The recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission will be referred to the Village Board for a final decision, which is anticipated to be at the July 24, 2025 meeting. VI. DOCUMENTS ATTACHED: A.​ Publication notice appearing in the June 19, 2025 Westmont Suburban Life. B.​ Petitioner Attachments: 1.​ Planning and Zoning Application received on June 11, 2025 (Edited for PZC), including responses to the Special Use Standards; 2.​ Cover Letter; 3.​ Proposed Floor Plan; 4.​ Last Page of a Lease Agreement; 5.​ ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey. ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 013-2025​ ​ Page 5 of 5 Page 108 of 120 Page 109 of 120 Page 110 of 120 Page 111 of 120 Page 112 of 120 Page 113 of 120 Page 114 of 120 Page 115 of 120 Page 116 of 120  Page 117 of 120 NOTES 1. ALL FINISHES TO BE SELECTED BY THE INTERIOR DESIGN GROUP, LTD. AND APPROVED BY CLIENT, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. PROVIDE POLISHED CONCRETE FLOOR, 3. PROVIDE NEW PLASTIC LAMINATE BASE CABINETS AND PLASTIC LAMINATE COUNTERTOP WITH 4" BACKSPLASH AND A.D.A. COMPLIANT SINK AND FAUCET. PROVIDE OPENING BELOW FOR TENANT'S A.D.A. COMPLIANT DISHWASHER AND MICROWAVE. 4. RELOCATE EXISTING MILLWORK, WHERE SHOWN ON PLAN. MILLWORK TO BE CLEANED INSIDE AND OUT. RE-ADJUST CABINET DOORS, IF NECESSARY. 5. EXISTING MILLWORK TO REMAIN AND BE CLEANED INSIDE AND OUT. RE-ADJUST CABINET DOORS, IF NECESSARY. 6. PROVIDE GLASS DOOR AND SIDELIGHT IN TOP AND BOTTOM RAIL. THE INTERIOR DESIGN GROUP LTD. 7. PROVIDE WOOD DOOR WITH 2'-0" WIDE INTEGRATED GLASS SIDELIGHT TO MATCH DOOR HEIGHT. 750 WARRENVILLE ROAD | SUITE 103 LISLE, ILLINOIS 60532 SALES / MKTG 8. PROVIDE SLIDING GLASS DOOR WITH SIDELIGHTS ON EACH SIDE. VESTIBULE 6'-11" X 5'-1" SHOWROOM PHONE 630 | 348 | 0400 61'-1" X 72'-3" 9. PROVIDE NEW PLASTIC LAMINATE BASE CABINETS AND PLASTIC LAMINATE COUNTERTOP WITH 4" BACKSPLASH. PROVIDE OPENING BELOW FOR TENANT'S FAX 630 | 348 | 0388 16 A.D.A. COMPLIANT UNDER COUNTER REFRIGERATOR. www.idgltd.com 10. REPLACE WASHROOM COUNTERTOP AND SINKS. EXACT SPECIFICATION TO BE 2 DETERMINED. 11. PAINT EXISTING WASHROOM PARTITIONS. EXACT SPECIFICATION TO BE DETERMINED. PROJECT DESIGN TEAM: 12. PROVIDE NEW CERAMIC FLOOR IN MEN'S WASHROOM. EXACT SPECIFICATION ARCHITECT: JESSICA LIES TO BE DETERMINED. PROJECT MANAGER: MARIA DIORIO 13. PROVIDE DROP CEILING IN ALL HUDDLE ROOMS, CONFERENCE ROOMS, PRIVATE OFFICES, PHONE ROOMS AND TRAINING ROOM. REVIEWER: TIM LIES 14. PROVIDE OPEN CEILING IN BREAK ROOM, AMENITY SPACE, SHOWROOM AND DRAWN BY: ALLYSIA JAQUES SAMPLE ROOM. REVISED BY: 15. PROVIDE OPEN CEILING WITH ACOUSTIC CLOUDS ABOVE OPEN OFFICE AREA. EXACT DESIGN AND SPECIFICATION TO BE DETERMINED. 16. EXISTING ENTRY/EGRESS DOOR. 17. PROVIDE NEW PLASTIC LAMINATE BASE CABINETS WITH PLASTIC LAMINATE COUNTERTOP AND 4" BACKSPLASH. TELEVISION MONITOR HUDDLE ROOM HUDDLE ROOM SAMPLE STORAGE 9'-0" X 11'-5" 9'-6" X 11'-5" 29'-10" X 66'-7" (EXISTING) (EXISTING) DRIVE-IN DOOR (EXISTING) MOTHERS TELEVISION ROOM MONITOR 9'-1" (TYP.) X 7'-8" GOLF SIMULATOR AMENITY SPACE ± 30'-6" X 35'-11" SAMPLE STORAGE 59'-7" X 36'-11" OFFICE KEY PLAN: IT 11'-0" X 13'-11" 10'-11" X 13'-11" 4 (EXISTING) (EXISTING) 6 TRAINING ROOM TELEVISION 30'-1" X 67'-7" MONITOR (TYP.) TENANT: 5 MENS WASHROOM 17 16'-8" X 9'-6" 12 3 11 10 MATCHLINE OAKMONT TECH CENTER NOTE: DUE TO THE FACT THAT IDG HAS NOT VERIFIED THE 600 OAKMONT LANE 9 10 BREAK ROOM EXISTING SPACE, PLAN IS SUBJECT TO FIELD VERIFICATION SUITE #600 ± 25'-11" X 47'-5" AND CHANGE. WESTMONT, ILLINOIS 60559 11 WOMENS WASHROOM 27'-9" X 9'-6" NOTE: ROOM AND WORKSTATION SIZES DIMENSIONED ARE APPROXIMATE ±. ALL FURNITURE, WORKSTATIONS, AND EQUIPMENT ILLUSTRATED ARE BY TENANT. PROJ. NO. 26120-24 R.S.F. 23,463 SUBMITTED: DATE: LOUNGE DRAWN: 11|15|2024 16'-4" X 15'-8" EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL: 11|15|2024 NEW CONSTRUCTION PHONE PHONE SHEET TITLE: NOTE: NORTH SPACE PLAN #1 ALL AREAS ILLUSTRATED WITH THIS HATCH ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS CONTRACT. NORTH SPACE PLAN #1 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" SHEET NO.: North 1 OF 2 Page 118 of 120 Page 119 of 120 Page 120 of 120