Muyni
← Back to Westmont

Planning & Zoning Commission

Regular Meeting

Westmont, IL · July 23, 2025

AgendaPacketMinutes

Minutes

​Village of Westmont​ ​Planning & Zoning Commission​ ​July 23, 2025 - Approved Minutes​ ​The​​Village​​of​​Westmont​​Planning​​and​​Zoning​​Commission​​held​​a​​special​​meeting​​on​​Wednesday,​​July​ ​23,​ ​2025​ ​at​ ​6:00​ ​p.m.​,​ ​at​ t​he​​Westmont​​Village​​Hall​​located​​at​​31​​W.​​Quincy​​Street,​​Westmont,​​Illinois​ ​60559.​ ​1.​ ​Call to Order​ ​Chair Doug Carmichael called the meeting to order​​at​​6:01 PM.​ ​2.​ ​Roll Call​ ​Present:​​5​​-​​Chair​​Doug​​Carmichael,​​Commissioners​​Conor​​Donoghue,​​Thomas​​Sharp,​​John​​F.​ ​Simpson IV, Craig Thomas​ ​Absent: 2 -​ ​Secretary Jill Peterson, Commissioner​​Michael Lynn​ ​A QUORUM WAS PRESENT TO TRANSACT BUSINESS​ ​Staff:​​Scott Williams (Senior Planner), Joseph Hennerfeind​​(Community Development Director),​ ​Adam Walsh (Planner), John Zemenak (Village Attorney)​ ​3.​ ​Pledge of Allegiance​ ​4.​ ​Swearing-in of testifying attendees​ ​5.​ ​Reminder to silence all electronic devices​ ​6.​ ​Reminder to sign-in for any public testimony​ ​7.​ ​Approval of the Minutes of the July 9, 2025 regular meeting.​ ​MOTION​​by​​Donoghue​​to approve the regular meeting​​minutes from July 9, 2025.​ ​Seconded by​​Thomas​.​ ​VOTING:​ ​Ayes: 4 -​​Carmichael, Donoghue, Simpson, Thomas​ ​Nays: 0​ ​Abstain: 1 -​​Sharp​ ​Absent: 2 -​​Lynn, Peterson​ ​Motion Passed​ ​8.​ ​Review of Public Hearing Procedures​ ​9.​ ​Old Business​ ​PUBLIC HEARING PZC 001-2025​ ​Requests from the Village of Westmont regarding Zoning Ordinance text amendments as follows:​ ​1)​ ​Zoning Ordinance text amendments to repeal Appendix A – Zoning, of the Westmont Code of​ ​Ordinances and to establish new Chapter 95 – Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinance, with​ ​comprehensive updates to the entire Zoning Ordinance, including amendments to the zoning​ ​districts, development standards, planning processes, and other zoning regulations.​ ​Presentation:​ ​Scott Williams, Senior Planner, presented a summary of the major revisions to the proposed language.​ ​Williams noted that staff reviewed the commissioner and public comments, and made revisions based on​ ​best practice, feasibility, and the context of the Village’s needs. Adam Walsh, Planner, added that the​ ​presentation and the staff report are not an exhaustive list of the proposed revisions.​ ​Public Comment:​ ​Duane Newton, property owner, questioned what uses were added to the Office/Research-One (O/R-1)​ ​district, horizontal expansions of nonconforming structures, recreational vehicles, tree preservation, and​ ​accessory dwelling units (ADUs).​ ​John Zemenak, Village Attorney, responded to Newton’s questions on nonconforming structure and use​ ​expansions.​ ​Steve Mihelich, architect, commended the work being done on the update and recommended stating that​ ​commercial pools must follow state and other federal regulations, which could help projects navigate the​ ​permitting process.​ ​Christa Stanulis, resident and member of the Environmental Improvement Committee, provided​ ​comments on the proposed outdoor lighting regulations. Stanulis explained outdoor lighting affects​ ​human and animal health, the common practice of regulating outdoor lighting, and that these regulations​ ​would not impede development.​ ​Commissioner Comments:​ ​Chair Carmichael explained that the commissioners will review the revisions on an article-by-article​ ​basis.​ ​Article I: Introductory Provisions​ ​No commissioners provided comments.​ ​Article II: Residential Districts​ ​Commissioner Sharp asked for clarification on the minimum interior side setbacks. Williams explained​ ​that this is carried over from the existing language. Walsh noted that it provides flexibility in home design.​ ​Article III: Business and Employment Districts​ ​No commissioners provided comments.​ ​Article IV: Downtown Districts​ ​Sharp pointed out that for general and row buildings, the text says “upper story height”, but the section​ i​llustrations say it applies to all stories. Williams replied that it can be revised to say “story height”. Walsh​ ​noted that Article I states that if there is a discrepancy between the text and an illustration, the text​ ​governs.​ ​Article V: Special Purpose Zoning​ ​Commissioner Simpson asked if the goal is to have all eligible properties zoned Public/Institutional (P/I)​ ​and what happens to a property zoned P/I after the public or institutional use ceases. Williams responded​ ​that the goal is to rezone Village-owned properties; other eligible uses will have the ability to request a​ ​rezoning at their discretion. Zemenak said that if the use ceases, a new property owner would be​ ​restricted to public and institutional uses, so they would likely need to rezone anyway.​ ​Article VI: Principal Uses​ ​Zemenak suggested that fueling stations be a special use in the Manufacturing (M) district. Carmichael​ ​clarified that this would be for public stations.​ ​Zemenak suggested that minor repair and maintenance should be a special use in the Limited​ ​Manufacturing (M-1) and M districts. Sharp agreed with both suggestions.​ ​Simpson questioned where major repair and maintenance would be classified. Williams said it would​ l​ikely be a manufacturing and industry use category and explained that the Village does not have large​ i​solated manufacturing districts, as they typically border residential districts.​ ​Williams took a straw poll on requiring fueling stations to be a special use in the M district, which the​ ​commissioners present agreed with.​ ​Simpson asked if car washes are classified as minor repair and maintenance, and if special use permits​ ​would be appropriate for this use. Sharp said that having car washes as a special use would make​ ​sense.​ ​Zemenak suggested another alternative that fleet vehicle fueling centers could be reclassified as fueling​ ​centers.​ ​Simpson asked where enclosed truck parking would be allowed. Williams explained the confusion​ ​regarding the current allowance, and said that it has been classified as high-impact manufacturing and​ i​ndustry.​ ​Williams took a straw poll on classifying minor repair and maintenance as a special use in the M-1 and M​ ​districts. The commissioners present agreed with the change.​ ​Williams took a straw poll to amend the fueling station classification to include fleet vehicle fueling​ ​stations. The commissioners present agreed with the change.​ ​Zemenak suggested that data centers should be classified as a special use in the M district. Simpson​ ​and Sharp supported the change because of the potential impacts. The change was agreed to through a​ ​straw poll with the present commissioners.​ ​Article VII: Accessory and Temporary Uses and Structures​ ​Carmichael said that the revisions to business vehicles were satisfactory.​ ​Simpson asked if the regulations for recreational vehicles stated that the trailer must be operable.​ ​Zemenak responded that it is regulated through the nuisance provisions and that amendments may be​ ​made to that section to include trailers. Walsh added that Section 7.21(F)(2) requires that trailers may not​ ​have the wheels removed, be affixed to the ground, or be stored in a way that prevents ready-removal.​ ​Article VIII: Wireless and Telecommunication Facilities​ ​No commissioners provided comments.​ ​Article IX: Parking​ ​Sharp restated that the senior high school parking minimum should be increased. Zemenak suggested​ ​that the requirement may be low to incentivize traveling by other means. Sharp asked if schools charge​ ​students for parking. Walsh replied that they often do.​ ​Simpson and Commissioner Donoghue questioned which grade level the parking requirement applies to.​ ​Williams said it would be for the whole student body.​ ​Joseph Hennerfeind, Community Development Director, stated that the parking requirement for grooming​ ​services is missing “per 1,000”.​ ​Sharp suggested increasing the senior high school minimum to two per seven students. Walsh said that​ ​the requirement is a minimum, so a high school can provide more if they want.​ ​Hennerfeind asked if schools are a special use in the P/I district, which would allow for traffic to be​ ​scrutinized. Walsh replied yes.​ ​Sharp asked what the parking requirement for colleges and universities is. Walsh explained that it allows​ ​for other parking ratios to be established on the basis of data or parking studies that are tailored to the​ ​subject use. Williams suggested adding this permission to the senior high school minimum.​ ​Donoghue said that the minimum in the ordinance may be below what Westmont High School currently​ ​provides.​ ​Walsh added that a variance to the parking requirement can be requested if a senior high school finds​ ​the rate to be too high. Williams explained that the senior high school requirement matches the current​ ​requirement.​ ​Williams took a straw poll on adding “or per Sec. 9.03(G)” to the senior high school requirement, which​ ​the commissioners present agreed with.​ ​Article X: Tree Preservation and Landscaping​ ​No commissioners provided comments.​ ​Article XI: Signs​ ​No commissioners provided comments.​ ​Article XII: General Development Regulations​ ​Sharp asked staff why residential properties were excluded from the outdoor lighting regulations.​ ​Hennerfeind replied that it would be difficult for staff to enforce, and that an applicability section was​ ​added to this section to allow for incremental improvements on commercial properties. Williams added​ ​that a future text amendment to this section could be processed if these regulations do not work as​ i​ntended.​ ​Sharp asked if a 4,000 degrees Kelvin light source is replaced, if it must be reduced to 3,000 degrees​ ​Kelvin. Hennerfeind replied that they would not if they were only replacing light bulbs, but would need to​ i​f significant changes were proposed to the existing lighting structure.​ ​Article XIII: Nonconformities​ ​No commissioners provided comments.​ ​Article XIV: Review and Approval Procedures​ ​No commissioners provided comments.​ ​Article XV: Administration and Enforcement​ ​No commissioners provided comments.​ ​Article XVI: Measurements​ ​Regarding Section 16.11(B), Sharp suggested that penthouses and associated mechanical equipment​ ​should be fully screened. Williams said that the Fire Department may have issues with higher parapet​ ​walls. Sharp clarified that mechanical penthouses are often screened independent of a parapet wall.​ ​Hennerfeind asked for clarification on fully screening the equipment. Sharp replied that in his experience,​ ​he typically fully screens the equipment.​ ​Simpson asked if this regulation applies to residential chimneys. Williams replied that the section in​ ​question is largely unchanged from existing language, and that staff typically recommends fully screening​ ​the equipment and developers do not often object to doing so.​ ​Simpson suggested having the section be applicable to downtown buildings.​ ​Dononghue asked for clarification on screening penthouses. Williams and Sharp replied that penthouses​ i​n this context apply to mechanical equipment, not occupiable spaces.​ ​Hennerfeind explained the purpose of the existing regulations, as screening all of the equipment could be​ ​overly burdensome. Sharp suggested “fully screened; as per the judgement of the zoning administrator”.​ ​Zemenak agreed.​ ​Williams took a straw poll on revising Section 16.11(B) to require that the equipment be fully screened,​ ​which the commissioners present agreed with.​ ​Article XVII: Definitions​ ​Simpson asked for clarification on the definitions for business, commercial, and motor vehicles. Zemenak​ ​explained the definitions come from Chapter 78 of the Municipal Code. Staff and the commission clarified​ ​the regulations for vehicles that carry 15 or less people. Williams noted that public and institutional uses​ ​are exempted from these regulations.​ ​Appendix A: Recommended Trees and Shrubs​ ​Williams pointed out that Ohio Buckeyes are missing an “o” under the street tree column.​ ​Sharp asked if a contractor can use any tree or shrub they want and if the appendix is simply​ ​recommended. Williams replied yes, as long as it is not invasive and that developers often ask for a list.​ ​Hennerfeind added that this list should help quicken the review process for new developments.​ ​Zemenak pointed out a necessary revision to Section 3.05(A)(4) to replace “fleet vehicles” with “business​ ​vehicles”.​ ​MOTION 1​ ​Motion​​by​​Thomas​​to​​recommend​​to​​the​​Village​​Board​​of​​Trustees​​to​​approve​​a​​request​​from​​the​​Village​ ​of​ ​Westmont​ ​regarding​ ​Zoning​ ​Ordinance​ ​text​ ​amendments,​ ​with​ ​the​ ​revisions​ ​discussed​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Planning​ ​&​ ​Zoning​ ​Commission,​ ​to​ ​repeal​ ​Appendix​ ​A​ ​-​ ​Zoning,​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Westmont​ ​Code​ ​of​ ​Ordinance​​and​​to​​establish​​new​​Chapter​​95​​-​​Zoning,​​of​​the​​Westmont​​Code​​of​​Ordinances,​​with​ ​comprehensive​ ​updates​ ​to​ ​the​ ​entire​ ​Zoning​ ​Ordinance,​ ​including​ ​amendments​ ​to​ ​the​ ​zoning​ ​districts, development standards, planning processes, and other zoning regulations.​ ​Seconded by​​Sharp​.​ ​VOTING:​ ​Ayes: 5 -​​Carmichael, Donoghue, Sharp, Simpson,​​Thomas​ ​Nays: 0​ ​Absent: 2 -​​Lynn, Peterson​ ​Motion Passed​ ​Carmichael, Hennerfiend, and Commissioner Thomas thanked staff and the commissioners for their hard​ ​work during the entire update process.​ ​10.​​New Business​ ​None.​ ​11.​​Open Forum​ ​Nobody spoke during the Open Forum.​ ​12.​​Miscellaneous Items​ ​a.​ ​Next regular Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on August 13, 2025.​ ​b.​ ​APA-IL Plan Commissioner training on October 9, 2025​ ​Walsh reminded the commissioners about the upcoming training at the APA-IL State Conference​ i​n October at the Old Post Office. Walsh explained that the commissioners can attend other​ ​sessions if they would like, and to contact staff by August 22, 2025 to sign up. Carmichael​ ​encouraged the commissioners to attend the training.​ ​13.​​Adjourn​ ​Motion by​​Sharp​​to adjourn the meeting.​ ​Second by​​Thomas​.​ ​The motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.​ ​Meeting adjourned at 8:22 p.m.​

Agenda

LEGAL NOTICE / PUBLIC NOTICE VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA The Village of Westmont Planning and Zoning Commission will hold its special meeting on Wednesday, July 23, 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 July 9, 2025 Regular Meeting 8. Review of Public Hearing Procedures 9. Old Business a. PUBLIC HEARING PZC 001-2025 Requests from the Village of Westmont regarding Zoning Ordinance text amendments as follows: 1. Zoning Ordinance text amendments to repeal Appendix A - Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinances and to establish a new Chapter 95 - Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinances, with comprehensive updates to the entire Zoning Ordinance, including amendments to the zoning districts, development standards, planning processes, and other zoning regulations. A copy of the draft Zoning Ordinance text amendments is available for the public on the Village's website at www.westmont.illinois.gov and in person at Westmont Village Hall, 31 W. Quincy St., Westmont, Illinois 60559 during normal operating hours. 10. New Business - None 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. Next Regular PZC 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

Packet

LEGAL NOTICE / PUBLIC NOTICE VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA The Village of Westmont Planning and Zoning Commission will hold its special meeting on Wednesday, July 23, 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 July 9, 2025 Regular Meeting 8. Review of Public Hearing Procedures 9. Old Business a. PUBLIC HEARING PZC 001-2025 Requests from the Village of Westmont regarding Zoning Ordinance text amendments as follows: 1. Zoning Ordinance text amendments to repeal Appendix A - Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinances and to establish a new Chapter 95 - Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinances, with comprehensive updates to the entire Zoning Ordinance, including amendments to the zoning districts, development standards, planning processes, and other zoning regulations. A copy of the draft Zoning Ordinance text amendments is available for the public on the Village's website at www.westmont.illinois.gov and in person at Westmont Village Hall, 31 W. Quincy St., Westmont, Illinois 60559 during normal operating hours. 10. New Business - None Page 1 of 572 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. Next Regular PZC 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 572 Village of Westmont Planning & Zoning Commission July 9, 2025 - Draft Minutes The Village of Westmont Planning and Zoning Commission held its regular meeting on Wednesday, July 9, 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: 5 - Chair Doug Carmichael, Secretary Jill Peterson, Commissioners Conor Donoghue, John F. Simpson IV, Craig Thomas Absent: 2 - Commissioners Michael Lynn, Thomas Sharp A QUORUM WAS PRESENT TO TRANSACT BUSINESS Staff: Scott Williams (Senior Planner), Adam Walsh (Planner), John Zemenak (Village Attorney) 3.​ Pledge of Allegiance 4.​ Swearing-in of testifying attendees 5.​ Reminder to silence all electronic devices 6.​ Reminder to sign-in for any public testimony​ 7.​ Approval of the Minutes of the June 25, 2025 special meeting. MOTION by Simpson to approve the special meeting minutes from June 25, 2025. Seconded by Thomas. VOTING: Ayes: 5 - Carmichael, Peterson, Donoghue, Simpson, Thomas Nays: 0 Absent: 2 - Lynn, Sharp Motion Passed​ 8.​ Review of Public Hearing Procedures 9.​ Old Business None.​ ​ Page 3 of 572 10.​New Business PUBLIC HEARING PZC 008-2025 Request 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. Presentation: Sid Anumalasetty and Pulkit Chauhan, the petitioners, presented their requests. Anumalasetty and Chauhan explained the business model, layout of the space, and explained the reasoning for their special use permit and variance requests. Staff Comment: Scott Williams, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Williams explained how the use classification of “amusement establishment” was determined and clarified the hours of operation. Public Comment: None. Commissioner Comments: Thomas: Commissioner Thomas expressed initial concerns about noise, but his concerns were resolved through the petitioner’s presentation. Peterson: Secretary Peterson was curious how the petitioners advertised their business. Anumalasetty explained that they advertise via social media and canvassing neighboring and complementary businesses. Simpson: Commissioner Simpson asked how many simulator bays will be in the space. Anumalasetty replied two. Simpson asked the maximum number of patrons that could be accommodated in the space. Anumalasetty said that the bays will be capped to four people plus around four people using the gym equipment. Simpson clarified that it could be up to 14 people with employees. Simpson asked if the petitioner could increase the number of simulator bays in the space. Williams replied that they can expand if they are approved. Simpson asked about the parking requirement. Williams explained that as an existing multi-tenant center, the parking provided in the parking lot is conforming. Donoghue: Commissioner Donoghue asked if alcohol will be allowed in the facility. Anumalasetty answered that members can bring their own food and non-alcoholic beverages, and that the membership terms will explicitly prohibit bringing in alcohol or other paraphernalia. Page 4 of 572 Simpson asked for clarification on the hours of operation. Anumalasetty replied that it is to appeal to members that want to practice golf and workout outside of typical operating hours. Carmichael: Chair Carmichael asked if they will have cameras to monitor the space. Anumalasetty answered that there will be cameras pointed at the bays and to the exterior of the unit. Carmichael confirmed that this was not a chain. Carmichael asked if the golf trainers are employees or independent contractors. Anumalasetty explained that they are considered partners and how non-member guests are allowed in the facility. John Zemenak, Village Attorney, explained that the ordinance will have conditions that no alcohol can be consumed or sold on the premises and that the space’s rear door cannot be accessible by the members. MOTION 1 Motion by Simpson to recommend to the Village Board of Trustees to approve a request 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 a Special Use Permit to operate an indoor golf simulator facility amusement establishment in the B-2 General Business District. Seconded by Donoghue. DISCUSSION: Peterson asked if the motion should be amended to include the ordinance conditions. Zemenak replied no, that those conditions will be included in the ordinance and do not need to be included in the commission’s recommendation. VOTING: Ayes: 5 - Carmichael, Peterson, Donoghue, Simpson, Thomas Nays: 0 Absent: 2 - Lynn, Sharp Motion Passed MOTION 2 Motion by Simpson to recommend to the Village Board of Trustees to approve a request 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 a Zoning Ordinance Variance to the special condition that requires a 100 foot distance separation between an amusement establishment and a residence district. Seconded by Thomas. Page 5 of 572 VOTING: Ayes: 5 - Carmichael, Peterson, Donoghue, Simpson, Thomas Nays: 0 Absent: 2 - Lynn, Sharp Motion Passed 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. Presentation: Justin Krone, petitioner, presented the request. Krone explained that he anticipated his property was eligible for administrative approval, but is requesting a formal variance since the property is within a sub-basin area that contains a low depressional area (LDA). Staff Comment: Scott Williams, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Williams explained the purpose of regulating lot coverage, how it is calculated, and the history of amendments to this regulation. He noted that because the property is in a sub-basin area, it is not eligible for administrative approval. Williams also explained the comments from the Village’s consultant engineer, who said that if approved, the impact on stormwater runoff will be minimal, and recommended mitigating the increase through permeable materials or installing a drywell. Public Comment: John Chorney, neighbor to the petitioner, expressed concerns with existing water problems in the area, and stated that the pool will exacerbate the issues. Dan Siebold, neighbor to the petitioner, asked how the Village knows if properties in the downtown area exceed 40% lot coverage, if removing coverage would be better than installing mitigating efforts, and liability if water issues are increased. Williams replied that the downtown area is generally between Naperville Road and 55th Street, where permit applications show if a property exceeds the maximum lot coverage, and that the engineer evaluated both options, and recommended alternatives, which were attached to the staff report. Zemenak replied that neighbors can work out an agreement privately, as the Village would not be liable. Commissioner Comments: Peterson: Peterson asked Chorney if the Village has been able to improve any of the water issues. Chorney replied that efforts have been made, but water still sits in the culvert and his property. Krone explained he has typically seen water pool in the culvert, but large rain storms has seen water go beyond the sidewalk. Peterson asked if the pool cover would be permeable. Krone replied that the cover is not completely Page 6 of 572 impermeable, so some water will go through it and added that he is open to installing a drywell. Simpson: Simpson asked if only the walkway around the pool was installed, if it would meet the 35% maximum. Williams was unsure about the breakdown between the walkway and the pool. Simpson explained that a majority of the increase is the pool, which can hold more water, and supported having a drywell installed. Simpson asked if the pool cover will be above or below grade. Krone replied that it will likely be below grade to allow for the cover to roll up. Simpson expressed that he would like for the variance request to be for the pool only and that it could not be filled in or replaced with a patio. Krone did not object. Donoghue: Donoghue suggested installing a cover that is permeable, and questioned if a minimal increase in runoff will have significant impacts on existing water issues. Thomas: Thomas agreed with Simpson’s recommendation that the variance should be for a pool only and did not find the minimal increase in runoff will have significant negative impacts. Carmichael: Carmichael expressed support for installing a drywell. Krone found that a drywell would be more appropriate than installing permeable pavers. Simpson requested modifying the motion to include conditions that if the pool is filled in or removed that the variance should be extinguished. Williams explained that future property owners would need to be made aware about the condition, and that if a permit was applied for to convert the pool, then it would be denied because of this condition. Simpson suggested adding a condition to install a drywell. MOTION 1 Motion by Simpson to recommend to the Village Board of Trustees to approve a request from Justin and Natalie Krone, for the property at 232 East Des Moines Street, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for a Zoning Ordinance Variance to the maximum lot coverage in the R-3 Single-Family Detached District with the conditions that the owner install a drywell to mitigate against any stormwater impacts; and that if the pool is removed or filled in with an impervious surface at any time, the variance will automatically terminate. Seconded by Donoghue. VOTING: Ayes: 5 - Carmichael, Peterson, Donoghue, Simpson, Thomas Nays: 0 Absent: 2 - Lynn, Sharp Motion Passed​ Page 7 of 572 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. Presentation: Michael Schaefer and Chivon Niziolek, presented their request. Schaefer explained that they purchased the property a few months prior, and there are not any patios or walkways in the rear yard. He added that they are open to installing a drywell to mitigate the increased coverage. Staff Comment: Scott Williams, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Williams explained that this request is similar but different from the previous case. He explained that the existing home exceeds the 35% maximum and the previous owner removed coverage, which reduced the overall coverage. Williams added that the property does not meet the minimum lot width for a corner lot, which contributes to the property being above the 35% maximum. He also noted that the consultant engineer recommended using permeable pavers or installing a drywell. Public Comment: None. Commissioner Comments: Simpson: Simpson asked why the walkways do not connect. Schaefer replied that they chose not to because they were trying to minimize the increase in coverage, but the proposal is still functional. Simpson confirmed that they were open to installing a drywell, to which Schaefer replied yes. Donoghue: Donoghue had no questions or comments. Thomas: Thomas expressed support for the request. Peterson: Peterson found an error in the findings of fact, confirming that stamped concrete will be used instead of permeable pavers. Zemenak confirmed that permeable pavers will not be used. Carmichael: Carmichael supported the request and found that a drywell will help. MOTION 1 Motion by Thomas to recommend to the Village Board of Trustees to approve a request from Michael Schaefer and Chivon Niziolek, for the property at 102 West Naperville Road, Westmont, Illinois, 60559 for a Zoning Ordinance Variance to the maximum lot coverage in the R-3 Single-Family Detached Residence District with the condition that a drywell be installed to mitigate against any stormwater impacts. Page 8 of 572 Seconded by Simpson. DISCUSSION: Simpson and Thomas clarified that they motion will be conditioned to require the installation of a drywell. VOTING: Ayes: 5 - Carmichael, Peterson, Donoghue, Simpson, Thomas Nays: 0 Absent: 2 - Lynn, Sharp Motion Passed​ 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. Presentation: Thaddeus Jedrzejak, Tammy Robinson, and Zack Rees, representing the petitioner, presented the request. They explained the Advocate Outpatient Center business model, the site layout, and the proposed directional signs. Staff Comment: Adam Walsh, Planner, presented the staff report. Walsh clarified that though the directional signs are exempt signage, they still have regulations they must comply with. Public Comment: None. Commissioner Comments: Donoghue: Donoghue acknowledged that though not related to the request, he had concerns about increased traffic on Blackhawk Drive. Thomas: Thomas voiced support for the request. Peterson: Peterson appreciated the clarity from the larger signs. Simpson: Simpson had no questions or comments. Carmichael: Carmichael found the request to be rational. Page 9 of 572 MOTION 1 Motion by Simpson to recommend to the Village Board of Trustees to approve a request from Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation, for the property at 639 Blackhawk Drive, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for a Zoning Ordinance Variance to the maximum height and area of directional signs in the B-2 General Business District. Seconded by Thomas. VOTING: Ayes: 5 - Carmichael, Peterson, Donoghue, Simpson, Thomas Nays: 0 Absent: 2 - Lynn, Sharp Motion Passed​ 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 located at 600 Oakmont Lane, Suite 600, Westmont, Illinois, 60559, for the following: 1)​ Special Use Permit to operate a business office with accessory uses of warehousing, distribution of materials, goods, or products in the O/R Office/Research District. Presentation: Julie Blankenheim, the petitioner, presented the request. Blankenheim explained that they are the go-between between the client and the lighting manufacturer and that the warehouse will store lighting samples. Staff Comment: Adam Walsh, Planner, presented the staff report. Walsh explained that special use permits for accessory warehousing were allowed through a 2022 text amendment, prior to the amendment, the request would not have been allowed. He added that similar requests have been approved at this property. Walsh further explained that the warehouse will store samples for the showroom and for employees to use while meeting with customers, and that sales employees use their own vehicles instead of a company vehicle. Public Comment: None. Commissioner Comments: Thomas: Thomas confirmed that the customers will not be coming to the property to shop for lighting. Blankenheim confirmed that this will typically not be the case, but there may be open houses for clients to visit the showroom. Page 10 of 572 Peterson: Peterson had no comments or questions. Simpson: Simpson expressed support for the request. Donoghue: Donoghue had no questions or comments. Carmichael: Carmichael asked how many of the employees are in sales. Blankenheim replied that around 50% are in sales. Carmichael confirmed that the salesforce takes the samples from the warehouse to meet with clients and returns them after, all in their own car. Blankenheim confirmed that was the case. MOTION 1 Motion by Donoghue to recommend to the Village Board of Trustees to approve a 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 a 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. Seconded by Simpson. VOTING: Ayes: 5 - Carmichael, Peterson, Donoghue, Simpson, Thomas Nays: 0 Absent: 2 - Lynn, Sharp Motion Passed 11.​Open Forum​ Laurel Rugen, resident, questioned if there are requirements for how far a home can be from the side property lines and how tall it can be. Williams replied that there is typically a 6 foot side yard setback for a home and that a driveway can be 3 feet from the side property line. He added that when a permit is submitted for new construction, it must meet the applicable maximums and minimums listed in the zoning ordinance. Brian Schuering, resident, provided comments related to the zoning ordinance update. Schuering recommended increasing the minimum percentage of neighbors required to submit a valid protest petition to a map amendment request. Zemenak explained that this provision comes from Illinois State Statutes, and that it is appropriate to request the state representative to make that change. 12.​Miscellaneous Items a.​ Special meeting on July 23, 2025, continuation of the public hearing of PZC 001-2025, text amendments to the zoning ordinance. Walsh said that commissioners can drop off their empty binder at the Village Office, and staff will Page 11 of 572 insert the updated draft language and return it to them, otherwise they will receive a hole punched and paper clipped copy to insert on their own. b.​ Next regular PZC meeting is on August 13, 2025​ . c.​ APA-IL Plan Commissioner training on October 9, 2025 Williams informed the commission that there will be a half day training session for plan commissioners at the APA-IL State Conference in Chicago. Carmichael highly encouraged them to attend. Williams added that the Village can cover their registration cost. 13.​Adjourn Motion by Simpson to adjourn the meeting. Second by Donoghue. The motion carried on a unanimous vote. Meeting adjourned at 8:17 p.m. Page 12 of 572 TO:​ ​ Planning & Zoning Commission FROM:​ ​ Adam Walsh, Planner DATE:​ ​ April 23, 2025 RE:​ ​ Summary of the Zoning Ordinance Update Discussions Over the course of the last 15 months, Planning & Zoning staff have taken many discussion topics to the Community Development Committee (CDC) and Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC). The purpose of these discussions was to receive direction from elected and appointed officials on how to draft new zoning regulations. Below is a summary of the discussion topics and direction staff received. The staff reports, minutes and/or recordings of the meetings can be found on the Village’s Agenda Center. This memorandum serves as a crash course for this commission and a refresher on various topics in advance of the public hearing. I.​ Community Development Committee Discussions The CDC had four discussions on a wide variety of topics, including lot widths, short-term rentals, the B-1 Development permit, and more. ❖​ February 8, 2024 Meeting Topic #1: Reducing the minimum lot width in the R-3 district from 60 ft to 50 ft In the R-3 district, the minimum required lot width is 60 ft. Generally, most properties meet this minimum. The reason to lower the minimum lot width to 50 ft is to make lot splits (subdivision from one to two lots) easier and to accommodate future annexations from the Liberty Park neighborhood. North of Naperville Road, there are many lots that are 350 ft deep, but are 100-119 ft wide. As such, they would have to request a variance to lot width to subdivide. The reduced lot width would mean they would not need to get a variance to split into two lots. The Liberty Park neighborhood (currently unincorporated in DuPage County) is largely made of 50 ft x 150 ft lots. The reduction means that these lots will meet all minimum requirements for the R-3 district upon annexation, which means they will not be considered nonconforming. Direction received: Concerns regarding stormwater, overbuilding, and the character of neighborhoods were brought up. After subsequent discussions at the May 2 and May 30, 2024 meetings, the committee showed general support for the change. Topic #2: Short-term rentals in the Downtown Short-term rentals are not allowed or prohibited in any of the zoning districts, nor do they have a definition in the current zoning ordinance. Staff proposed short-term rentals be allowed as a permitted use under the “lodging” use category. Page 13 of 572 Direction received: The committee had concerns about inspections, so staff was directed to investigate this further. At the May 30, 2024 meeting, the committee felt that short-term rentals should not be allowed in the downtown due to inspection concerns, but remained open to revisit in the future. ❖​ May 2, 2024 Meeting Topic #1: Creation of a Public & Institutional District This new district, currently drafted as the Public & Institutional (P/I) district, was designed to avoid the problems inherent in treating institutional uses and buildings in residential and commercial districts. The Village, religious institutions, Westmont Park District, the school districts, etc, could elect to rezone to this district, which allows for a more streamlined process and has bulk regulations that better reflect these kinds of uses. Direction received: At this and the May 30, 2024 meetings, committee members had questions about the process and how existing institutions would be affected, but did not direct staff to make substantive changes. Topic #2: Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) There are three types of ADUs: internal (basement/attic conversion), attached (addition to existing home), or detached (separate structure on the same lot). About a dozen communities in the Greater Chicago area allow ADUs as a permitted or special use, some with restrictions on who can live there (the Village of Westmont likely would not be able to place those restrictions). Direction received: This discussion was continued to the May 30, 2024 meeting. The CDC had interest in learning more about ADUs, and directed staff to take the topic to the public hearing as a part of the update. Topic #3: Removing the B-1 Development Permit Any time a new business wants to open in the B-1 district (downtown), they need to obtain a B-1 Development permit, regardless of whether they are a permitted or special use, or the same as the previous user. This adds on time and uncertainty to opening a business in the downtown, which can deter businesses from wanting to take the risk. If removed, special use permits and licensing requirements can ensure appropriate businesses open in the B-1 district. Direction received: The CDC had no objections to retiring the B-1 Development permit. Topic #4: Creation of New Downtown Zoning Districts The idea to split the B-1 district into two was initially called for in the 2013 Comprehensive Plan. The Page 14 of 572 new districts include the B-1(A) Downtown Core, B-1 Downtown Edge, and R-7 Downtown Residential. The properties initially anticipated to be rezoned to these districts match the Comprehensive Plan’s recommendation. The regulations were drafted to create a walkable, mixed-use environment with clear and objective design standards. Direction received: This was continued to the May 30, 2024 meeting. Following the discussion, the committee expressed support in creating these districts, and recommended expanding the B-1(A) one block north to Norfolk Street. ❖​ May 30, 2024 Meeting Discussions at this meeting were a continuation of the May 2, 2024 meeting, as the committee wanted to schedule a special meeting on this date to further discuss the topics. ❖​ August 8, 2024 Meeting Topic #1: Short-term rentals in residential zoning districts At previous meetings, the CDC felt that short-term rentals were not appropriate for the downtown area. Staff returned to discuss allowing them in residential districts so staff can provide clear guidance to those who inquire. Direction received: The committee debated several options on how to regulate short-term rentals. Ultimately, they decided to table the topic, adding that it can be discussed during the public hearing. ❖​ January 23, 2025 Meeting Topic #1: First full draft of the zoning ordinance language At this meeting, staff had received the first full draft language for the update (at the time pending legal review). Based on internal timelines and the impression that only minor changes would need to be made, staff presented the draft to the committee. Direction received: After a presentation on highlights of the proposed changes, the CDC gave staff the greenlight to take the draft to a public hearing, once ready. II.​ Planning & Zoning Commission Discussions At four PZC meetings, there were discussions on a wide variety of topics, including regulations for accessory structures, bicycle parking, approval procedures, expanding allowed uses in the office districts, ADUs, and creating new zoning districts. Page 15 of 572 ❖​ June 12, 2024 Meeting Topic #1: Accessory structure regulations Staff reviews hundreds of permits for accessory structures annually. To inform the update process, staff asked the commission for direction on changes to accessory structure regulations. The structures discussed include detached garages, sheds, lawn buildings, pergolas, gazebos, and fences. Direction received: The commission supported relaxing regulations on accessory structures. General comments related to increasing the height limit, removing individual area limits and replacing it with one aggregate area, and allowing for an additional accessory building. ❖​ July 10, 2024 Meeting Topic #1: Requiring bicycle parking Many neighboring and comparable communities have begun to require bicycle parking. The consultant drafted parking requirements and allowed for vehicle spaces to be reduced if bicycle parking was required. Direction received: Although supportive of bicycling, the commission did not feel that there should be a requirement for every business. They wanted to allow businesses to decide how much to provide to serve their clientele instead of adding on another requirement. Staff removed the requirements from the draft language. ❖​ August 14, 2024 Meeting Topic #1: Approval procedures In the draft language, many changes are largely staying the same. However, site plans are split into two types: major and administrative. Planned development requests will be planned unit developments (PUDs) going forwards. PUDs require a multi-step process. Direction received: The commission did not raise concerns with the procedures. Topic #2: Creation of a Public & Institutional District (P/I) Continuing the discussion from May CDC meetings, staff asked the commission to discuss bulk regulations and the allowed uses proposed for the P/I district. Direction received: The PZC was in favor of creating this new district, as it would likely streamline the approvals process for institutional uses. No suggestions to the allowed uses or bulk regulations were given.​ Page 16 of 572 Topic #3: Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) This discussion built on previous CDC discussions on the topic. The PZC reviewed suggested regulations from staff on bulk, design, and location. Direction received: The commissioners expressed support for allowing ADUs with regulations that made it easier to build. ❖​ October 9, 2024 Meeting Topic #1: Allowed uses in the office districts (O/R & O/R-1) Currently, the office districts are very limited in terms of the allowed uses. Staff often gets inquiries from non-office businesses looking to open these districts, which they are not allowed in. The zoning ordinance update gave an opportunity to add compatible non-office uses to these districts. The uses proposed to be allowed were broadcasting facilities, data centers, financial institutions, fitness facilities, commercial schools, and veterinary offices. Direction received: The commission showed general support for allowing compatible non-office uses into the O/R and O/R-1 districts. Topic #2: Creation of new downtown districts Similar to the May CDC discussions, staff took the drafted regulations for a new B-1(A) Downtown Core, B-1 Downtown Edge, and R-7 Downtown Residential districts for review by the PZC. Substantive changes to the regulations were not made between the CDC & PZC discussions. Direction received: The commissioners were supportive of the proposed changes. Page 17 of 572 Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing April 2025 Page 18 of 572 WHY THE UPDATE? • Last complete overhaul: 1979 • Update called for in Comprehensive Plan Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update Request for Proposals ISSUED: November 21, 2022 RFP SUBMITTAL DEADLINE: January 13, 2023 at 4:00 p.m. CST CONTACT INFORMATION Village of Westmont 31 West Quincy Street Westmont, Illinois 60559 630‐981‐6267 Attention: Bruce Sylvester Director of Community Development Bsylvester@westmont.il.gov 2. Review and Update the Zoning Ordinance… 2 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 19 of 572 GENERAL OBJECTIVES IMPLEMENT MODERNIZE SIMPLIFY IMPLEMENT MODERNIZE SIMPLIFY 1. Aligned with plans and policies IMPLEMENT MODERNIZE SIMPLIFY 2. Modern, well-organized, easy to use/understand 3. Resident- and business-friendly—supportive of investment and economic development 4. Consistent with other village code provisions and law 3 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 20 of 572 PROCESS 2019 | 2020 2020 | 2021 August September October November December January February March August September October November December January February March Listening/Learning Initial Ordinance Draft April May June July Revised Draft(s) Hearings & Adoption S/S 2023 * *We are here PUBLIC INPUT KICK-OFF & PUBLICINPUT WORKGROUP+ COMMUNITY • KICK-OFF MEETING CONSULTANT CONSULTANT/ PUBLIC ADOPTION ADOPTION LISTENING MEETING BRIEFINGS OPENHOUSES STAFF HEARING(S) HEARINGS • SESSIONS PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN MEETINGS • LISTENING SESSIONS Assessment and Project Direction | •GOAL: DIRECTION REPORT Understandthegoalsandobjectives GOAL:Diveinanddevelopfirstdraftsofthe GOAL:Gaincommunityunder- GOAL:Adoptionofthenew tobeachievedbythenewzoningordi- newzoningcodearticlesandnewzoningmap. standingandinputonthenew zoningordinanceandmap. •nance PRESENTATION throughreviewoftherecentcom- Asteeringcommitteeofcommunitymembers zoning ordinance and map prehensiveplanandotherdocuements, willassistintheinitialreviewandstaffwill throughcommunityopenhouses listeningsessionswiththecommunity,and takesectionsofthenewmapanddistrictsout and group meetings. surveyingthephysicalcharacteristicsof toneighborhoods forinformalreviews. Village of Westmont the community. Zoning Ordinance Update Assessment and Project Direction June 2023 PRODUCT:Developmentofashortdiag- PRODUCT:Ready-for-public-reviewcomplete PRODUCT:Reviseddraftordinance PRODUCT:Newzoningor- nosticmemoidentifyingthekeyattributes DRAFT zoning ordinance and map. Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update | Page i andmapwithsolidcommunity dinanceandmap,adopted andoutliningthestructureofofthenew understandingandbacking, into law. zoning code. readyforpublichearingsandthe adoption process. 4 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 21 of 572 DRAFT ORDINANCE Organization General Contents districts Article I Introductory Provisions ........................................................................................ I-1 Article II Residential Districts............................................................................................ II-1 Article III Business and Employment Districts ................................................................... III-1 Article IV Downtown Zoning Districts ............................................................................... IV-1 uses Article V Special Purpose Zoning ...................................................................................... V-1 Article VI Principal Uses .................................................................................................. VI-1 Article VII Accessory and Temporary Uses ....................................................................... VII-1 generally applicable regulations Article VIII Wireless Telecommunications Facilities ......................................................... VIII-1 Article IX Parking ............................................................................................................ IX-1 Article X Tree Preservation and Landscaping ..................................................................... X-1 Article XI Signs ............................................................................................................... XI-1 administration Article XII General Development Regulations .................................................................. XII-1 Article XIII Nonconformities .......................................................................................... XIII-1 Article XIV Review and Approval Procedures .................................................................. XIV-1 interpretation Article XV Administration and Enforcement..................................................................... XV-1 Article XVI Measurements ............................................................................................. XVI-1 Article XVII Definitions ................................................................................................. XVII-1 Appendix A ...................................................................................................................... A-1 Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Page i 5 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 22 of 572 GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS • Complete reorganization User Friendly Features • New tables and Illustrations • Focused articles • Short sentences, sections • Updated page layout/format • Tables, charts • Illustrations/graphics • Strategic revisions to address known issues • Detailed table of contents • Accurate cross-references • Web-ready and hyper-linked • Legally defensible, plain language 6 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 23 of 572 ART. I INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS Article I Introductory Provisions Sec. 1.01 Title ............................................................................................................................................................................I-1 Sec. 1.02 Authority.....................................................................................................................................................................I-1 Sec. 1.03 Effective Date............................................................................................................................................................. I-1 Sec. 1.04 Applicability and Jurisdiction .....................................................................................................................................I-1 Sec. 1.05 Exempt Utilities .......................................................................................................................................................... I-1 Sec. 1.06 Purposes ....................................................................................................................................................................I-1 Sec. 1.07 Minimum Requirements ............................................................................................................................................ I-2 Sec. 1.08 Compliance Required ............................................................................................................................................... I-2 Sec. 1.09 Conflicting Provisions ............................................................................................................................................... I-2 Sec. 1.10 Rules of Language and Construction........................................................................................................................ I-2 Sec. 1.11 One Principal Building per Lot .................................................................................................................................. I-4 Sec. 1.12 Zoning Map ............................................................................................................................................................... I-4 Sec. 1.13 Transitional Provisions .............................................................................................................................................. I-5 Sec. 1.14 Severability ............................................................................................................................................................... I-6 • Largely Title “boilerplate” Sec. 1.01 This Chapter (Chapter 95 of the Village of Westmont Code of Ordinances)1 is officially known and may be • Transitional provisions cited as the “Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance.” For convenience, it is referred to herein as the “zoning ordinance.” S e c . 1 . 0 2 Au t h o r i t y • Update does not affect projects in pipeline; applicant’s option This zoning ordinance is adopted pursuant to the powers granted and limitations imposed by Illinois law. Sec. 1.to 03 have Effectiveprojects Date reviewed under “old” or “new” code The provisions of this zoning ordinance become effective on EFFECTIVE DATE TO BE INSERTED, except as otherwise expressly stated. Sec. 1.04 Applicability and Jurisdiction The provisions of this zoning ordinance apply to all public and private use and development of properties within the corporate limits of the Village of Westmont, except as provided by state or federal law or as otherwise expressly stated in this zoning ordinance. 7 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 24 of 572 ART. II RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Article II Residential Districts Sec. 2.01 Districts Established.................................................................................................................................................. II-1 Sec. 2.02 Purposes ................................................................................................................................................................... II-1 Sec. 2.03 Uses .......................................................................................................................................................................... II-1 Sec. 2.04 Residential Building Types ........................................................................................................................................ II-1 Sec. 2.05 Lot and Building Regulations .................................................................................................................................... II-1 Sec. 2.06 Other Relevant Regulations ..................................................................................................................................... II-3 •SeExisting “R” districts retained c. 2.01 Districts Established The zoning ordinance’s residential zoning districts are listed in Table II-1. When this zoning ordinance refers • Minor adjustments to lot and building (bulk) regulations: to “residential” zoning districts or “R” districts, it is referring to the districts in Table II-1. The districts are presented in order of ascending intensity, from R-1 (least intensive) to R-6 (most intensive). • NewMapmin. lot depth Symbol District Name standardIntensity [125’]—”transferred” from LDC Table II-1: Residential Zoning Districts R-1 Single-Unit Residential Least intensive • Reduced min. lot width for detached R-1(A) R-2 ↓ houses in R-3, R-4, R-5 [6050’] Single-Unit Residential Single-Unit Residential R-3 Single-Unit Residential • Reduced min. side setback for detached houses in R-3 [65’] R-4 R-5 General Residential General Residential R-6 Special Residential Most intensive • Eliminated max. floor area ratio (FAR) Sec. 2.02 Purposes • Increased max. accessory building height [1518’] The village’s residential zoning districts are primarily intended to create, maintain, and promote a variety of housing opportunities for individual households and to maintain and promote the desired physical character of residential neighborhoods in accordance with the comprehensive plan. While the R districts primarily accommodate residential uses, some nonresidential uses are also allowed. The R-1 through R-5 districts are primarily differentiated on the basis of allowed building types and lot and building regulations. The R-6 district is primarily intended to accommodate assisted living communities and may be applied to small areas throughout the village. Sec. 2.03 Uses Uses are allowed in R districts in accordance with the use regulations of Sec. 6.01. 8 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 25 of 572 Sec. 2.04 Residential Building Types ART. III BUSINESS & EMPLOYMENT DISTRICTS Article III Business and Employment Districts Sec. 3.01 Districts Established................................................................................................................................................. III-1 Sec. 3.02 Purposes .................................................................................................................................................................. III-1 Sec. 3.03 Uses ......................................................................................................................................................................... III-1 Sec. 3.04 Lot and Building Regulations ................................................................................................................................... III-1 Sec. 3.05 Other Relevant Regulations .................................................................................................................................... III-2 • B-1 district Sec. 3.01 regulations moved to “Downtown” article Districts Established The zoning ordinance’s business and employment zoning districts are listed in Table III-1. When this zoning ordinance refers to “business and employment” zoning districts, it is referring to the districts in Table III-1. • Minor adjustments to lot and building (bulk) regulations: The districts are presented in order of ascending intensity, from O/R-1 (least intensive) to M (most intensive). Table III-1: Business and Employment Zoning Districts • Increased min. street setback in B-2 and C-1 [1020’] Map Symbol District Name B-1 Limited Business Intensity Least Intensive ↓ (FAR) O/R-1 Limited Office/Research • Eliminated max. floor area ratio O/R B-2 Office/Research General Business C-1 Commercial • Eliminated “supplemental” street setbacks (e.g., 55th, Ogden...) M-1 M Limited Manufacturing Manufacturing Most Intensive Sec. 3.02 Purposes (A) The B-2 district is intended for those portions of the village where highway-oriented retail business establishments are appropriate as well as general business activity. (B) The C-1 district is intended for application in the South Westmont Business District and is created to encourage retail and sales tax generating commercial uses. All business establishments in the various business districts are intended to be retail trade or service establishments dealing directly with consumers. The production of goods on the premises is intended to be limited to those sold on the premises, or clearly incidental and accessory to the principal retail trade or service. (C) The O/R-1 and O/R districts are intended to provide for the establishment of a wide range of office and low-impact commercial activities9 and to govern their operations in a WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 26 of 572 manner that will not have a deleterious effect on residential and business areas. .................................................................................................................................................................IV-1 .................................................................................................................................................................IV-1 ART. IV DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS ypes .......................................................................................................................................................... Article IV Downtown Zoning Districts ilding Regulations .................................................................................................................................. IV-2 IV-1 Sec. 4.01 Districts Established.................................................................................................................................................IV-1 Applicable Regulations ........................................................................................................................... IV-2 Sec. 4.02 Purposes ..................................................................................................................................................................IV-1 vant Sec. Regulations .................................................................................................................................... 4.03 Uses IV-3 .........................................................................................................................................................................IV-1 BuildingsSec. 4.04 Building Types ..........................................................................................................................................................IV-1 ................................................................................................................................................ IV-5 Sec. 4.05 Lot and Building Regulations .................................................................................................................................. IV-2 uildings.................................................................................................................................................... IV-8 Sec. 4.06 Generally Applicable Regulations ........................................................................................................................... IV-2 ngs ........................................................................................................................................................ Sec. 4.07 Other Relevant Regulations IV-11 .................................................................................................................................... IV-3 Sec. 4.08 Storefront Buildings ................................................................................................................................................ IV-5 Houses................................................................................................................................................... IV-14 Sec. 4.09 General Buildings.................................................................................................................................................... IV-8 esign ..................................................................................................................................................... Sec. 4.10 IV-15 Row Buildings ........................................................................................................................................................ IV-11 Sec. 4.11 Detached Houses...................................................................................................................................................IV-14 Sec. 4.12 Building Design ..................................................................................................................................................... IV-15 cts Established DRAFT Lincoln St. Linden Ave. Existing ce’s downtown Se zoning c. 4.01 Di districts stricts Es are tablish ed listed in Table IV-1. When this zoning ordinance ” zoning • Three downtown-specific districts... Thedistricts, it is referring zoning ordinance’s downtown tozoning the districts districts areinlisted Table IV-1.IV-1. When this zoning ordinance in Table refers to “downtown” zoning districts, it is referring to the districts in Table IV-1. Table IV-1: DowntownTable Zoning DistrictsZoning Districts IV-1: Downtown Map Symbol District Map Name Symbol District Name B-1 Norfolk St B-1(A) B-1(A) DowntownB-1 Core Downtown Core Downtown Edge B-1 DowntownR-7 Edge Downtown Residential R-7 Sec. 4.02 Purposes Downtown Residential R-5 ses The village’s downtown zoning districts are intended to support and enhance the compact, vibrant, walkable character of the village’s downtown area. R-5 B-1 own zoning districts are intended to support and enhance the compact, vibrant, Richmond St. (A) The B-1(A) district is intended to maintain and enhance vibrant, main-street, storefront of the village’s downtown area. pattern within the central business district. development Dallas St. (B) The B-1 district is intended to be more flexible, allowing a wider mix of supporting uses The B-1(A) district is intended to maintain and enhance vibrant, main-street, storefront in the downtown area, while still maintaining a high level of walkability. Note: The new zones will be transferred to the zoning map upon adoption and this figure will be removed. development pattern within the central business district. 10 Figure (1) Proposed Downtown Zoning Map WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update DRAFT ZONING UPDATE | April 15, 2025 1 (C) The R-7 district is primarily intended to accommodate residential uses in a variety of Page 27 of 572 ART. IV DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS New/Revised Districts; Available for Future Rezoning CHAPTER 2 WESTMONT DESIGN GUIDELINES 2 CHAPTER DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES Downtown is the heart of the Westmont community. Built around the Burlington Northern train station, it includes several buildings that are more than a century old. The pattern of development and design of buildings create a pedestrian-oriented environment that is distinctly different than other parts of the Village. More recently, new investment in Village Hall, housing, and commercial uses has strengthened the role of the Downtown. As the Downtown area transforms according to the vision expressed in the Comprehensive Plan and other adopted policies, future investment should aim to reinforce positive characteristics of the area, and mitigate the impacts of development that is out of character with the community’s vision. CONCEPT Generally, the guidelines will apply to all areas of the Downtown. However, some guidelines are applicable to a more specific geographic area. For the purposes of these Design Guidelines, the Downtown area is divided into two distinct areas. Where noted, standards will be applied based on the location of development within one of these areas. only DOWNTOWN CORE Norfolk St The Downtown Core includes Cass Grant St Lincoln St Cass Ave Linden Ave Warwick Ave Avenue from Irving Street to Richmond Irving St Street, as well as small segments of Burlington Avenue and Quincy Street. This is the most intact traditional Burlington Ave portion of the Village center, and Burlington Ave development in this area should strive to restore and/or support the unique historic character of the community. Richmond St DOWNTOWN EDGE Cass Ave Grant St Lincoln St Linden St The Downtown Edge includes development extending beyond the Dallas St Downtown Core on Cass Avenue, Burlington Avenue, and Quincy Street. In Downtown Core these areas, development may transition Downtown Edge to and reflect the character of adjacent residential areas, while remaining compatible with the Downtown Core. Village of Westmont 7 11 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 28 of 572 ART. IV DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS • Build on positive characteristics Existing Design “Guidelines” • Reinforce and enhance walkable, “Adequate relationship” between structures and land uses mixed-use development pattern “Adequate space, light, air, use and bulk limitations” • Eliminate “development permit” Avoidance of “substantial injury to the requirement value of other property” Protection of “aesthetics and function of • Replace vague guidelines with clear, the natural environment” objective building design standards • Building materials • Entrances Flexibility/alternative compliance • Roof form allowed at time of site plan review • Windows • Mechanical equipment 12 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 29 of 572 the rear of the building. Buildings vary in height depending on the district, with allowed half stories located within a pitched roof or in a visible basement. (B) Images The images shown in Figure IV-4 are intended to illustrate the general character of the ART. IV DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS building type; the buildings and sites in each image may not fulfill all of the building type regulations. (C) Building Regulations (1) General Regulations Article IV Downtown Zoning Districts | Sec. 4.08 Storefront Buildings See Sec. 4.06 for regulations applicable to all building types. (2) Regulations Specific to General Buildings S e c . 4 . 0 8 St o r e f r o n t B u i l d i n g s The following tables and illustrations establish regulations specific to General General Buildings Buildings. (A) Description The Storefront Building is a mixed-use building intended for shopping and dining Figure IV-4: General Building Examples districts. Oriented to the street with narrow or no side setbacks, storefront building streetwalls help define the public space of the street, and ground-story storefront glass and entrances along the sidewalk make these buildings interesting and inviting to pedestrians. Parking is located in the rear and accessed from the alley. * (B) Images The images shown in Figure IV-1 are intended to illustrate the general character of the Article IV Downtown Zoning Districts | Sec. 4.10 Row Buildings building type; the buildings and sites in each image may not fulfill all of the building type regulations. (C) Building Regulations Sec. 4.10 Row Buildings (1) General Regulations (A) Description See Sec. 4.06 for regulations applicable to all building types. The Row Building is comprised of multiple vertical units with shared side walls. Each unit is typically oriented to the street with an entrance off the public sidewalk. Parking is (2) Regulations Specific to Storefront Buildings located in the rear yard with either detached garages or attached garages entered from The following tables and illustrations establish regulations specific to Storefront the rear of the building. Storefront Buildings Buildings. Figure IV-1: Storefront Building Examples (B) Images The images shown in Figure IV-7 are intended to illustrate the general character of the building type; the buildings and sites in each image may not fulfill all of the building type regulations. (C) Building Regulations (1) General Regulations See Sec. 4.06 for regulations applicable to all building types. (2) Regulations Specific to Row Buildings The following tables and illustrations establish regulations specific to Row Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Row Buildings Buildings. Page IV-8 Figure IV-7: Row Building Examples Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Page IV-5 *R-5 regulations apply to detached houses 13 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 30 of 572 ART. IV DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS 1 Focus on physical form Article IV Downtown Zoning Districts | Sec. 4.08 Storefront Buildings S e c . 4 . 0 8 St o r e f r o n t B u i l d i n g s (A) Description The Storefront Building is a mixed-use building intended for shopping and dining districts. Oriented to the street with narrow or no side setbacks, storefront building streetwalls help define the public space of the street, and ground-story storefront glass and entrances along the sidewalk make these buildings interesting and inviting to 2 Article IV Downtown Zoning Districts | Sec. 4.08 Storefront Buildings Figure IV-2: Storefront Building Siting 3 Article IV Downtown Zoning Districts | Sec. 4.08 Storefront Buildings Figure IV-3: Storefront Building Height and Street Facade pedestrians. Parking is located in the rear and accessed from the alley. (B) Images The images shown in Figure IV-1 are intended to illustrate the general character of the building type; the buildings and sites in each image may not fulfill all of the building type regulations. (C) Building Regulations (1) General Regulations See Sec. 4.06 for regulations applicable to all building types. (2) Regulations Specific to Storefront Buildings The following tables and illustrations establish regulations specific to Storefront Buildings. Districts Districts Figure IV-1: Storefront Building Examples B-1(A) B-1 Additional/References B-1(A) B-1 Building Siting. See Figure IV-2 Roofs. See Figure IV-3 q Minimum Front Streetwall (%) 90 80 See Sec. 16.10(C) for additional 1) Allowed Roof Types Flat, parapet; tower Flat, parapet, pitched; See Sec. 4.12(D) for additional information on courtyards allowed tower allowed information on roof design. abutting the build-to zone. Street Facades. See Figure IV-3 Modifications to these street façade regulations may be approved at the time of site plan w Front Street Build-to Zone (ft.), 0 to 5 0 to 5 approval, provided that the authorized decision-making body (i.e., zoning administrator or board of trustees) determines that the minimum to maximum proposed design is in keeping with the Storefront building description of Sec. 4.08(A). e Minimum Side-Street Setback (ft.) 0 0 1! Minimum Transparency: Ground 70 60 See Sec. 16.11 for transparency Story on Front Facades (%) measurement. No bays, 15 ft. wide sections, or any rectangular r Minimum Side Setback (ft.) abutting R district: 5 areas greater than 30% of a story’s front facade may abutting non-R district: 0 or 5 be without transparency t Minimum Rear Setback (ft.) 20 Ground-story transparency must extend min. 30 ft. Minimum Outdoor Open Space 50 sq. ft. per residential unit Private patio or balcony and/or around the corner down any street-side facades common space for residents. See also Sec. 16.06. 1@ Minimum Transparency: Upper 20 Measured per story, includes Stories on Front Facades and any half stories, visible Height. See Figure IV-3 All Stories on Side-Street Facades No bays or 15 ft. wide sections or any rectangular basement, or towers with full (%) areas greater than 30% of a story’s facade on a front height stories. See Sec. 16.11 for y Overall Height (stories) Min 2 1 Stories measured floor to floor. facade may be without transparency transparency measurements. Max 5 3 See also Sec. 16.13(A)(2) for height measurements. u Ground-Story Height (ft.) Min 12 1# Building Entrance (Min) One per every 60 feet of front facade See Sec. 16.12 for Max 16 Total overall building height measurements. may not exceed 70 feet. i Upper-Story Height (ft.) Min 8.5 1$ Entrance Type Storefront See Sec. 4.12(C) for entrance Max 11 types. h Ground-Story Elevation Within feet of abutting public sidewalk elevation o Top Story Set-Back Additional 7 feet from the façade immediately below Applies only to buildings over 3 stories in height Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Page IV-5 Page IV-6 Page IV-7 Existing Proposed • Increased max. building height = B-1(A) 40 ft. 5 stories reduced need for variances B-1 40 ft. 3/3.5 stories 14 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 31 of 572 ART. V SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS Article V Special Purpose Zoning Sec. 5.01 B-3, Resort District ................................................................................................................................................... V-1 Sec. 5.02 P/I, Public and Institutional District .......................................................................................................................... V-2 Sec. 5.03 PD, Planned Development Overlay (Obsolete District)............................................................................................ V-3 Sec. 5.04 PUD, Planned Unit Developments ........................................................................................................................... V-4 • New “P/I” (Public & Institutional) district Sec. 5.01 B-3, Resort District Tailored for schools, religious institutions, parks, gov’t uses (A) Purpose The B-3 district is primarily intended to accommodate lodging, office, research, and recreational uses in a unified development setting, as well as secondary retail, • New “PUD” (Planned Unit Development) district residential and service uses to serve the overall development. The district is also intended to encourage innovations and variety in type, design and arrangement of uses Multi-step “special use” approval process and buildings. Because of the intensity of development permitted in the B-3 district, it is generally intended to be applied only on sites abutting one or more arterial streets. More (1) flexible than existing PD overlay (B) Uses Principal uses are allowed in the B-3 district in accordance with the use • PD, (2) Planned Development Overlay (Legacy District) regulations of Sec. 6.01. In addition to those principal uses allowed, the following uses (as defined in Sec. 6.02) are expressly permitted as secondary uses in the B-3 district provided they Approved PDs continue; no new PDs approved do not exceed 20% of the gross floor area of the building in which they are located and are accessed only by arterial roads or interior roadways within the • Existing B-3 district retained development: (a) Catering Service; Future B-3 amendments approved as PUDs (b) Community Assembly; (c) Consumer Service; (d) Day Care Center; (e) Eating and Drinking Place; (f) Entertainment, Participant (Indoor); (g) Entertainment, Spectator; 15 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 32 of 572 ART. VI PRINCIPAL USES Article VI Principal Uses Sec. 6.01 Allowed Uses .......................................................................................................................................................... VI-1 Sec. 6.02 Use Classification System .......................................................................................................................................VI-6 Sec. 6.03 Residential Use Group ............................................................................................................................................ VI-7 Sec. 6.04 Commercial Use Group ........................................................................................................................................... VI-8 Sec. 6.05 Warehouse & Distribution ..................................................................................................................................... VI-18 Sec. 6.06 Manufacturing and Industry Use Group................................................................................................................ VI-19 Sec. 6.07 Public and Institutional Use Group ....................................................................................................................... VI-21 Sec. 6.08 Other Use Group ...................................................................................................................................................VI-23 • New use classification system and simplified use table Sec. 6.01 Allowed Uses (A) Table of Allowed Uses Article VI Principal Uses | Sec. 6.01 Allowed Uses Article VI Principal Uses | Sec. 6.01 Allowed Uses Uses are allowed in accordance with Table VI-1. Table VI-1: Table of Allowed Uses Uses Districts Uses Districts USE GROUP Supplemental USE GROUP Supplemental Category Regulations • Maintains existing use Category Subcategory R-1(A) B-1(A) (B) Interpreting the Use Table O/R-1 Regulations Subcategory R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 R-6 R-7 B-1 B-2 B-3 C-1 O/R M-1 R-1(A) B-1(A) P/I O/R-1 M R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 R-6 R-7 B-1 B-2 B-3 C-1 O/R M-1 P/I P = Permitted Use | S = Special Use Approval Required | – = Prohibited Use M P = Permitted Use | S = Special Use Approval Required | – = Prohibited Use Alternative Financial Service Est. – – – – – – – – S S S – – – – – – – permissions RESI DENTI AL Funeral and Mortuary Service – – – – – – – – – S S – – – – – – – Household Living Detached House Semi-detached House P P P P P P – S – – – – P P – – – – – (1) Use Classification System – – – S S – – – – – – – – – – – – Sec. 6.03(A)(2) Lodging Office Business or Professional Office – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – S P – S [10] P P P P P P – S P S P – P – P – – Uses are listed in the first column of Table VI-1. This zoning ordinance classifies Attached House – – – – P P – P – S – S – – – – – – Medical Office – – – – – – – – P P P P P P P – – – Two-unit House – – – – P P – – – – – S – – – – – – Research Service – – – – – – – – – – P P S P P P P – Mixed-Use Residential – – – – – – – – P [2] P – S – – – – – – • New broad categories Parking, Non-Accessory – – – – – – – S – S S – S – – S P – uses into groups, categories, and subcategories, which are defined in this article. Multi-Unit Building – – – – P P – P – P – S – – – – – – Parking, Off-site Nonresidential S S S S S S – S S S – – – – – – – S Sec. 6.04(L) Assisted Living Residence – – – – – – P – – – – – – – – – – – Parking, Off-site Auto Dealer – – – – – – – – – – – – – – S – – – Sec. 6.04(N) Group Living Retail Sales Community Residence, Family P [1] P [1] P [1] P [1] P [1] P [1] P [1] – – – – – – – – – – – Indoor – – – – – – – – P P P – P – – P S – (“buckets”) replace Community Residence, Group S [1] S [1] S [1] S [1] S [1] S [1] S [1] – – – – – – – – – – – Outdoor – – – – – – – – – – S – S – – S S – (2) Pe r m i t t e d U s e s Nursing Home – – – – S [3] S [3] S [3] – – – – – – – – – – – Firearms Sales – – – – – – – – – – P [11] – P [11] – – – S – Sec. 6.04(O)(3) Other Group Living S S S S S S S S – – – S S – – S S S Tobacco and Vape Product Sales – – – – – – – – – – S [8] – – – – – – – COMMERCI AL Used Goods Sales – – – – – – – – S S P – P – – S S – outdated, overly detailed Animal Service Self-service Storage Facility – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – S S – Boarding or Shelter Grooming Service Veterinary – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – S [5] S [5] S [4] – Uses identified with a “P” are permitted as-of-right in the subject zoning district, – S – S [4] S S P – S S S – – S – – – S – – P – – – – – Sexually Oriented Business Vehicle Sales and Service Fueling Station – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – S S [4] – – – S [4] – – – – – – S P – – Sec. 6.04(Q)(3) subject to compliance with all applicable supplemental use regulations (see Sec. use types Other Animal Service – – – – – – – – – – S S S – – P P – Minor Repair and Maintenance – – – – – – – – – S S – S – – P P – Consumer Service Sales or Rentals – – – – – – – – – – S – – – – – S [12] – Business Support Service – – – – – – – – P P P – P – – – P – Body and Paint Shop – – – – – – – – – – S [13] – S – – – S – 6.01(B)(5)). Maintenance and Repair Service – – – – – – – – S P P – P – – – P – WAREHOUSE & DI STRI BUTI ON Personal Improvement Service – – – – – – – – S [10] P P P P – – – P – Warehouse/Logistics – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – P P – Health and Fitness Service – – – – – – – – P P P – P S S S P – Data Center – – – – – – – – – – – – – – S S P – • Technical changes, as Instructional Service – – – – – – – – S P P – – S S – S – MANUFACTURI NG & I NDUSTRY Business Training – – – – – – – – – – S S – S S P P – Building Service – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – S P – Tattoo or Body Piercing Service – – – – – – – – (3) Special Uses – – – – – – – – S – Catering Service – – – – – – – – – – – – P – S S P – Sec. 6.04(B)(3) Other Consumer Service – – – – – – – – S S S S S – – – P Craft Alcoholic Beverage Producer – – – – – – – – – – S – S – – S [7] S [7] – Day Care Center highlighted in text – – – – – – – – S P P – P P P – P – Sec. 6.04(C)(2) Crematorium – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – S – Uses identified with an “S” may be allowed if approved in accordance with the Day Care Home P [6] P [6] P [6] P [6] P [6] P [6] P [6] P [6] P [6] P [6] – – – – – – – – Artisan Manufacturing – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – P P – Eating and Drinking Place Limited Manufacturing – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – P P – Bar or Tavern – – – – – – – – S [8] S [8] – – S – – – – – High-Impact Manufacturing & Industry – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – S – Craft Alcoholic Beverage Dispenser – – – – – – – – S [8] S [8] S [8] – S [8] – – – – – Industrial Service – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – S P – Restaurant Tobacco or Vape Lounge Other Eating and Drinking Place – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – special use procedures of Sec. 14.04. Special use uses are subject to compliance P – – P P – S [8] – – S – – P – S – – – S – S – – – – – – – – – Recyclable Material Drop-off Facility Recyclable Material Processing Junk or Salvage Yard – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – S S – – – – Entertainment, Participant Arcade (non-video gaming) Video Gaming, Accessory – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – with all applicable supplemental use regulations (see Sec. 6.01(B)(5)). – – – S [8] – – P P S P – – – P – – – P – – Sec. 6.04(F)(3)(a) PUBLI C & I NSTI TUTI ONAL Community Garden Governmental Use S S S S S S S S S S S S S S – S – S – S – S – P – S – S – S P P – S P S Video Gaming Cafe – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – Sec. 6.04(F)(3)(b) Hospital S S S S S S – – – – – – – – – – – S Other Participant Ent., Indoor (4) Uses Not Allowed – – – – – – – – – – P P S – – – – – Library or Cultural Exhibit S S S S S S S – S S S – – – – – – S Participant Ent., Outdoor – – – – – – – – – – S P S – – – – – Parks and Recreation Entertainment, Spectator Community Park S S S S S S S – – – – S – – – S – S Indoor – – – – – – – – S S S – S – – – s S Neighborhood Park P P P P P P P – – – – P – – – P – P Uses identified with an “–” are not allowed. Uses that are not listed in the table Outdoor – – – – – – – – – – S [13] – S – – – – s Religious Assembly S S S S S S S – – – – – – – P – – S Financial Service Safety Service S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S P Bank, Credit Union or Savings & Loan – – – – – – – – S S S P S S [9] S – – – School P P P P P P – – – – – S – – – – – S and that cannot be reasonably interpreted (as stated in Sec. 6.02(D)) to fall within Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Page VI-2 Page VI-3 any defined use category are also not allowed. 16 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 33 of 572 ART. VI PRINCIPAL USES Article VI Principal Uses Sec. 6.01 Allowed Uses .......................................................................................................................................................... VI-1 Sec. 6.02 Use Classification System .......................................................................................................................................VI-6 Sec. 6.03 Residential Use Group ............................................................................................................................................ VI-7 Use Group Sec. 6.04 Commercial Use Group ........................................................................................................................................... VI-8 Sec. 6.05 Warehouse & Distribution ..................................................................................................................................... VI-18 Sec. 6.06 Article VI Principal Uses | Sec. 6.02 Use Classification System Manufacturing and Industry Use Group................................................................................................................ VI-19 Use Category Use Subcate Sec. 6.07 Public and Institutional Use Group ....................................................................................................................... VI-21 ec. 6.02 Sec. Use6.08 ClassificOther ationUse SysGroup tem ...................................................................................................................................................VI-23 his section establishes and describes the use classification system used to categorize principal uses in his zoning ordinance. S(Ae) c. U6s.e0G1roupAs llowed Uses This zoning ordinance classifies principal land uses into major groupings (described in Sec. 6.02(D)(1) through Sec. 6.08). These major groupings are referred to as “use (A) Table of Allowed Uses − groups.” The groups are as follows: Uses are allowed in accordance with Table VI-1. (1) Residential. See Sec. 6.03. (2) (B) ISee Commercial. nterSec. pret6.04. ing the Use Table − − − − (3) (1) Distribution. Warehouse and Use ClasSee sificSec. atio6.05. n Sy s t e m − − − (4) Manufacturing and Uses are Industry. listed See Sec. in the first column of Table VI-1. This zoning ordinance− − − 6.06. classifies (5) usesSee Public and Institutional. into groups, Sec. 6.07. categories, and subcategories, which are defined in this article. (6) (2) 6.08. Other. See Sec. Pe r m i t t e d U s e s (B) Use Categories Uses identified with a “P” are permitted as-of-right in the subject zoning district, Each use group is furthersubject divided to into more specific “use compliance categories.” with all Use categories applicable supplemental use regulations (see Sec. classify principal land uses and activities based on common functional, product or 6.01(B)(5)). physical characteristics, such as the type and amount of activity, the type of customers or residents, and how (3) goods Specoriaservices l Uses are sold or delivered, and typical site conditions. Uses identified with an “S” may be allowed if approved in accordance with the (C) Use Subcategories special use procedures of Sec. 14.04. Special use uses are subject to compliance Some use categories are further broken down to identify more specific “use subcategories.” with all applicable supplemental use regulations (see Sec. 6.01(B)(5)). (D) Classification of U(s4e)s Uses Not Allowed (1) General Authority Uses identified with an “–” are not allowed. Uses that are not listed in the table The zoning administrator and thatis authorized cannot tobeclassify uses on interpreted reasonably the basis of the(as usestated in Sec. 6.02(D)) to fall within group, category, and subcategory descriptions of this article. When a use cannot any defined use category are also not allowed. be readily classified into a use group, category, or subcategory, the zoning 17 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 34 of 572 administrator is authorized to determine the most similar and thus most ART. VII ACCESSORY AND TEMPORARY USES Article VII Accessory and Temporary Uses Sec. 7.01 Accessory Uses and Structures Generally ............................................................................................................. VII-1 Sec. 7.02 Residential Accessory Uses and Structures Generally .......................................................................................... VII-2 Sec. 7.03 Nonresidential Accessory Uses and Structures Generally .................................................................................... VII-3 Sec. 7.04 Accessory Structures in Setbacks .......................................................................................................................... VII-3 Sec. 7.05 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) ........................................................................................................................... VII-5 Sec. 7.06 Air Conditioner Compressors and Heat Pumps ..................................................................................................... VII-7 Sec. 7.07 Animals .................................................................................................................................................................. VII-7 Sec. 7.08 Antennas ................................................................................................................................................................ VII-7 Sec. 7.09 Donation Drop Boxes ............................................................................................................................................. VII-8 Sec. 7.10 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations ......................................................................................................................... VII-9 Sec. 7.11 Fences.................................................................................................................................................................. VII-10 Sec. 7.12 Fireplaces, Grills, Kitchens, and Fire Pits (Outdoor) ............................................................................................ VII-12 Sec. 7.13 Flagpoles ............................................................................................................................................................. VII-12 Sec. 7.14 Fleet Vehicle Storage ........................................................................................................................................... VII-12 Sec. 7.15 Garages and Carports .......................................................................................................................................... VII-12 Sec. 7.16 Generators ........................................................................................................................................................... VII-13 New + Sec. 7.17 Geothermal Heat Exchange Systems .................................................................................................................. VII-13 Highlighted changes Sec. 7.18 Home Occupations .............................................................................................................................................. VII-13 Sec. 7.19 Manufacturing Accessory Uses............................................................................................................................ VII-15 throughout Sec. 7.20 Outdoor Accessory Uses...................................................................................................................................... VII-15 Sec. 7.21 Recreational Vehicles .......................................................................................................................................... VII-16 Sec. 7.22 Solar Energy Systems ...........................................................................................................................................VII-17 Sec. 7.23 Swimming Pools and Hot Tubs .............................................................................................................................VII-17 Sec. 7.24 Temporary Storage Units ..................................................................................................................................... VII-18 Sec. 7.25 Tents ..................................................................................................................................................................... VII-18 Sec. 7.26 Vending Machines ............................................................................................................................................... VII-19 Sec. 7.27 Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECSs) ......................................................................................................... VII-19 18 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Sec. 7.01 A c c e s s o r y U s e s a n d St r u c t u r e s G e n e r a l l y Page 35 of 572 ART. VII ACCESSORY AND TEMPORARY USES Residential Accessory Buildings Accessory Structures in Building Setbacks • More resident friendly; reduced need for variances Article VII Accessory and Temporary Uses | Sec. 7.04 Accessory Structures in Setbacks Table VII-1: Allowed Yard and Setback Encroachments and Obstructions • One detached + 2 add’l detached buildings; 1,250 Yard/Setback Obstruction/Encroachment Street Side Rear (1) Accessory dwelling unit, detached (See also Sec. 7.05) No No Yes Awning or canopy (attached to principal building) projecting no more than one foot into Yes Yes Yes (2) interior side setback or 3 feet into any other setback sq. ft. max. coverage; maximum height [1518’] (3) Arbor or trellis (freestanding) No No Yes (4) Arbor or trellis (attached to principal building) Yes Yes Yes Air conditioner compressor, heat pump, or back-up power generator (See also Sec. 7.06, No Yes Yes (5) Sec. 7.16), and Sec. 7.17) (6) Antenna and tower, amateur radio (see also Sec. 7.08) No No Yes (7) Antenna, ground-mounted satellite dish (see also Sec. 7.08) No No Yes (8) Antenna, building-mounted satellite dish (see also Sec. 7.08) No Yes Yes • Up to 2 small sheds (12 sq. ft. max.) exempt Antenna and tower, wireless telecommunications (See for Article VIII for (9) regulations) Balcony, projecting no more than 5 feet into a rear setback and no more than 3.5 feet into a Yes No Yes (10) street setback Bay window, as defined in Sec. 17.06, not exceeding 5020% of the width of the room Yes Yes Yes (11) building façade of which it is a part and projecting no more than 3 feet into setback (12) Chimney (attached to principal building) projecting no more than 1.5 feet into setback Yes Yes Yes (13) Clothesline No Yes Yes Nonresidential Accessory Buildings (14) Deck No No Yes (15) Driveway (see Sec. 9.07(A) for residential driveway regulations) Yes Yes Yes Dumpster enclosure trash bins, liquid petroleum or compressed natural gas containers and No Yes Yes storage facilities not otherwise identified, not exceeding 100 square feet in area, may be (16) permitted if screened or fenced on no less than three sides and the open side not visible from a public street Eave or gutter, projecting no more than 4 feet into a street or rear setback and no more Yes Yes Yes (17) than 2 feet into an interior side setback • Special use approval required Fallout shelter or other type of underground emergency shelter, (attached to principal No No Yes (18) building or freestanding), no closer than 10 feet to any lot line (19) Fence (see also Sec. 7.11) Yes Yes Yes Fire escape, open or enclosed, projecting into a street setback no more than 5 feet and Yes Yes Yes (20) projecting into an interior side setback no more than 3.5 feet (21) Fireplace or grill, freestanding masonry (see also Sec. 7.12) No No Yes Firewood stack storage pile shall not be located in any setback or easement. A firewood No Yes Yes pile shall not to exceed 4 feet in height, shall be neatly stacked, and shall be comprised of • Maximum height: 20 feet (22) raw, untreated lumber. If firewood is stored in an accessory structure, the structure shall not exceed six feet in height at ground level Flagpole, not to exceed the maximum height allowed in the zoning district in which they are Yes Yes Yes (23) located, but in no event greater than 60 feet. (see also Sec. 7.13) Garage or carport (detached, freestanding), not more than 576 square feet in size, nor No Yes Yes (24) larger than 28 feet in length, except when approved by a variance (see also Sec. 7.15) (25) Gazebo No No Yes Greenhouse, hoop house, or similar garden structure customary yard buildings not No No Yes • Subject to foundation landscaping requirements (26) exceeding 144 square feet in area (27) Hen coop No No Yes Kitchen, outdoor (freestanding or attached to principal building) up to 144 square feet in No No Yes (28) area (see also Sec. 7.12) Lawn furniture, such as benches, sundials, birdbaths and similar household yard/landscape Yes Yes Yes (29) features Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Page VII-4 19 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 36 of 572 ART. VII ACCESSORY AND TEMPORARY USES Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) ADU Benefits • Small, secondary housing units on a lot occupied 1. Increase housing stock while helping preserve by single-family, detached house neighborhood character/ • Sometimes referred to as “in-law suites,” scale “backyard cottages,” or “granny flats” 2. Additional housing options; support aging in • Can be built new or converted from existing floor place space. Take many forms: garage apartments, 3. Address affordability, housing diversity and addition to main house, backyard cottage preservation ADU Regulations 1. Allowed only on lots with detached single-family dwelling unit 2. No more than one ADU per lot 3. Size limited to 850 sq. ft. or floor area of principal dwelling 4. Design standards for new buildings and building additions 20 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 37 of 572 ART. VII ACCESSORY AND TEMPORARY USES Electric Vehicle Charging Equipment • Clarifies that equipment is allowed; EV spaces count toward parking minimums Outdoor Fireplaces, Kitchens, Fire Pits • Clarifies that such amenities are allowed; aligned with building/fire codes Fleet Vehicle Storage • Light-duty vehicle storage allowed in commercial and industrial districts; max. 2 vehicles unless approved as special use; screening from streets Generators (backup power) • Expressly allowed; must have sound attenuation and be screened from view Alternative Energy • Express allowance for solar, wind, and geothermal energy devices 21 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 38 of 572 Electric vehicle charging stations may be counted toward satisfying minimum off-street parking space requirements. (C) Equipment ART. VII ACCESSORY AND TEMPORARY USES Vehicle charging equipment must be designed and located to not impede pedestrian, bicycle, or wheelchair movement or the creation of safety hazards on sidewalks. Vehicle charging equipment may not be located within required landscape areas unless expressly approved by the zoning administrator. Donation Drop Boxes Sec. 7.11 Fences Fences are allowed as accessory structures in all districts, subject to compliance with the following regulations. • Limited to B-2, C-1, M-1, M, and P/I districts; permit required; regulations apply (A) General The general regulations of this subsection apply to all fences. Outdoor Accessory Uses (1) Public Safety Fences may not be constructed or maintained in any way that would impair public protection services or impair public safety by obstructing the vision of persons • Display areas—expressly allowed; goods offered as part of principal use using streets, sidewalks or driveways. Fences may not be constructed in a way that would impede the natural flow of storm water (drainage). • Storage areas—limited to M-1 and M; special use ( 2 ) St r u approval ctural Element s required All fences must be constructed so that fence posts and structural elements are • Seating and dining areas—allowed for eatinglocated andondrinking establishments; the side of the fence facing the property being enclosed. setback, fencing, and landscape required “Open-design” fences must be designed and constructed so that at least 50% of (3) Open-Design Fences • Others—special use approval required the fence’s surface area, including posts and cross supports, consists of regularly distributed openings affording direct views through the fence. Figure VII-1: Open-Design Fence (Example) Fences • Clarified regulations (4) Electrified or Barbed Wire Fences Electrified or barbed wire fences are regulated in accordance with section 58-23 of the village code. Fence posts shall be set below grade a minimum of 36 inches. 22 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 39 of 572 ART. VIII WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES Article VIII Wireless Telecommunications Facilities7 Sec. 8.01 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................................. VIII-1 Sec. 8.02 Applicability........................................................................................................................................................... VIII-1 Sec. 8.03 Freestanding Wireless Telecommunications Towers ............................................................................................ VIII-1 Sec. 8.04 Cell Antennas ........................................................................................................................................................ VIII-6 • Reorganized and edited Sec. 8.01 Purpose The regulations of this article provide regulations for wireless telecommunication facilities, including • Adds authorization for “microcell” networks; consistent freestanding wireless telecommunications towers (“cell towers”) and building- and tower-mounted cell antennas. The village recognizes the value of wireless telecommunications and the public's need for its with Chapter 82 of village code (small wireless facilities) safety, convenience and productivity. The village also recognizes the need to comply with the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended from time to time, and recognizes that the village's zoning and other regulations may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting wireless telecommunication facilities within the village and may not unreasonably discriminate among providers or functionally equivalent services. However, the village must weigh the public benefit of wireless telecommunications against the need of the village to protect land uses from the potential adverse impacts, including, but not limited to, adverse visual impacts, of wireless telecommunication facilities. The village desires specifically to keep the erection of new cell towers to a minimum and to maximize the use of existing cell towers. To that end, the village encourages new cell antennas to be located on existing buildings, existing structures, or existing cell towers. Additionally, the village encourages the co-location of cell antennas whenever possible. Sec. 8.02 Applicability The regulations of this article apply to all wireless telecommunications facilities, as defined in Sec. 6.08(E). The regulations do not apply to any of the following: (A) Amateur radio antennas; (B) Receive-only antennas, including satellite dish antennas; or (C) Small wireless facilities, as defined in 50 ILCS 835. Sec. 8.03 Freestanding Wireless Telecommunications Towers (A) Where Allowed 23 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 40 of 572 ART. IX PARKING Article IX Parking Sec. 9.01 General ....................................................................................................................................................................IX-1 Sec. 9.02 Minimum Parking Requirements............................................................................................................................. IX-2 Sec. 9.03 Calculation of Required Parking ............................................................................................................................. IX-4 Sec. 9.04 Parking Exemptions and Reductions ...................................................................................................................... IX-5 Sec. 9.05 Location of Off-Street Parking ................................................................................................................................ IX-7 Sec. 9.06 Use of Required Off-Street Parking Areas .............................................................................................................. IX-8 Sec. 9.07 Parking Area Design ............................................................................................................................................... IX-8 Sec. 9.08 Accessible Parking ................................................................................................................................................ IX-10 Sec. 9.09 Stacking Spaces for Drive-Through Facilities ........................................................................................................ IX-11 Sec. 9.10 Off-Street Loading................................................................................................................................................. IX-12 • Reduced min. requirements for some uses Sec. 9.01 General • Additional reductions allowed based on context (e.g., (A) Purpose The regulations of this article are intended to help ensure provision of off-street motor vehicle parking facilities in rough proportion to the generalized demands of different downtown, multi-tenant centers, small uses (i.e., 3 or land uses. By requiring such facilities, it is the intent of this article to help avoid the negative impacts associated with spillover parking into adjacent areas, while at the fewer spaces) same time avoiding the negative environmental and visual impacts that can result from excessive motor vehicle parking. The provisions are also intended to provide flexible methods of responding to the transportation and access demands of various land uses • New stacking requirements for drive-throughs in different areas of the village. (B) Applicability (1) General Unless otherwise expressly stated, the regulations of this article apply to all zoning districts and uses. (2) New Uses and Development Unless otherwise expressly stated, the parking regulations of this article apply to all new buildings constructed and all new uses established in all zoning districts. 24 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update (3) Enlargements and Expansions Page 41 of 572 Article IX Parking | Sec. 9.07 Parking Area Design ART. IX PARKING Article IX Parking Where parking of a long-term duration (4 hours or more) is expected, the standard dimensions for a parking space may be reduced by up to I foot in width and 2 feet in length. Sec. 9.01 General ....................................................................................................................................................................IX-1 • Integrates existing parking lot design standards with (C) Parking Lot Layout Sec. 9.02 Parking areas containing 4 or more motor vehicle parking spaces must be designed Minimum Parking Requirements............................................................................................................................. IX-2 and marked in accordance with the dimensional standards of Table IX-2, which shows Sec. 9.03 Calculation of Required Parking minimum dimensions for various parking layouts ............................................................................................................................. IX-4 updated stall size [10 x 209 x 18’] (angles). Requirements for layouts or angles not shown in Table IX-2 may be interpolated from the layouts shown, as Sec. 9.04 Parking Exemptions and Reductions ...................................................................................................................... IX-5 approved by the zoning administrator. Sec. 9.05 Location of Off-Street Parking ................................................................................................................................ IX-7 Table IX-2: Parking Lot Layout (Dimensions in Feet) Sec. 9.06 Use of Required Off-Street AParking Areas B .............................................................................................................. C D D Vertical IX-8 Sec. 9.07 Stall Angle Stall Width (ft) Stall Depth (ft) 1-Way Aisle Width (ft) 2-Way Aisle Width (ft) Clearance (ft) Parking Area Design ............................................................................................................................................... IX-8 0° 8.5 22.0 12.0 20.0 7.0 Sec. 9.08 Accessible Parking ................................................................................................................................................ 45° 9.0 18.0 13.0 21.0 7.0 IX-10 60° 9.0 18.0 18.0 23.0 7.0 Sec. 9.09 Stacking Spaces for Drive-Through 9.0 90° Facilities 18.0 ........................................................................................................ 24.0 24.0 7.0 IX-11 Sec. 9.10 Off-Street Loading................................................................................................................................................. Figure IX-1: Parking Lot Layout IX-12 Sec. 9.01 General (A) Purpose The regulations of this article are intended to help ensure provision of off-street motor vehicle parking facilities in rough proportion to the generalized demands of different land uses. By requiring such facilities, it is the intent of this article to help avoid the negative impacts associated with spillover parking into adjacent areas, while at the same time avoiding the negative environmental and visual impacts that can result from excessive motor vehicle parking. The provisions are also intended to provide flexible methods of responding to the transportation and access demands of various land uses in different areas of the village. (B) Applicability (1) General Unless otherwise expressly stated, the regulations of this article apply to all zoning districts and uses. • Other technical (2) New Uses and Dedits evelopmentand updates as indicated in text (D) Curbs Concrete, barrier-type curbs must be provided for all parking lots containing 5 4or more motor vehicle parking spaces. This includes driveways accessing such parking areas. Unless otherwise expressly stated, the parking regulations of this article apply to (E) Surfacing all new buildings constructed and all new uses established in all zoning districts. All off-street parking areas containing 4 or more motor vehicle parking spaces must be surfaced with a dustless, all-weather surface25 unless otherwise expressly stated. WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update (3) Enlargements Pervious and Expavement pansionorspervious pavement systems are allowed subject to approval by Page 42 of 572 ART. X TREE PRESERVATION AND LANDSCAPING Article X Tree Preservation and Landscaping Sec. 10.01 Jurisdiction............................................................................................................................................................... X-1 Sec. 10.02 Required Tree Surveys, Tree Preservation Plans and Landscape Plans.................................................................. X-1 Sec. 10.03 Permit Issuance........................................................................................................................................................ X-1 Sec. 10.04 Tree Preservation and Replacement ....................................................................................................................... X-1 Sec. 10.05 Tree Protection......................................................................................................................................................... X-2 Sec. 10.06 Penalties and Tree Replacement Requirements ...................................................................................................... X-3 Sec. 10.07 Landscape Regulations............................................................................................................................................ X-4 • Mostly existing provisions from Ch. 80 of village code Sec. 10.01 Jurisdiction All construction activity that is subject to the site plan approval procedures of Sec. 14.05 is subject to the • Landscape regulation proposed changes: tree preservation and landscape regulations of this Article X as well as the heritage tree regulations of Chapter 80, Article III of the village code. • Clarifies open space and parking lot landscape requirements Sec. 10.02 Required Tree Surveys, Tree Preservation Plans and Landscape Plans All zoning and permit applications for construction as described in Sec. 10.01 must include the following materials in a form acceptable to the village and as further described herein. The village’s review of the • Landscape islands in large (20+ space) parking lots application may include an inspection of the site and referral of the application to other appropriate administrative departments or agencies for review and recommendation. • (A) Visual screening from R districts and streets Tree Survey Tree surveys must include information on all existing trees with a diameter at breast • Alternative compliance provisions added for flexibility height (DBH) of 4 inches or greater. Information must indicate the location, size, species and condition of each tree, as well as existing and proposed structures, improvements, utilities, driveways, and contours at one-foot intervals. (B) Tree Preservation Plan Tree preservation plans must identify those trees to be protected with a tree protection detail labeled on the tree survey. The plan must indicate the location, size, species and condition of each tree to be protected, as well as proposed structures, improvements, utilities, driveways, and contours at one-foot intervals. The tree preservation plan must also identify all protective measures to be taken to avoid construction damage to protected trees (i.e., pumping concrete, crown or root 26 pruning). WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 43 of 572 (C) La n d s c a p e P l a n ART. XI SIGNS Article XI Signs8 Sec. 11.01 General ................................................................................................................................................................... XI-1 Sec. 11.02 Prohibited Signs ...................................................................................................................................................... XI-2 Sec. 11.03 Sign Exceptions ....................................................................................................................................................... XI-3 Sec. 11.04 Allowed Signs ......................................................................................................................................................... XI-7 Sec. 11.05 Additional Regulations for Specific Sign and Site Types ........................................................................................ XI-8 Sec. 11.06 Construction Standards ......................................................................................................................................... XI-11 Sec. 11.07 Maintenance ......................................................................................................................................................... XI-12 Sec. 11.08 Abandoned Signs .................................................................................................................................................. XI-12 Sec. 11.09 Nonconforming Signs ........................................................................................................................................... XI-12 Sec. 11.10 Permits .................................................................................................................................................................. XI-12 Sec. 11.11 Sign-Related Measurements................................................................................................................................. XI-12 • Existing regulations; edits to address known issues Sec. 11.01 General • Minor substantive changes: (A) Purpose The sign regulations of this section are intended to balance the following differing, and at times, competing goals: • Expanded list ofthe “prohibited (1) To support desired character of thesigns” (e.g.,inflashing, village, as expressed adopted plans, LED window policies, and regulations; borders) (2) To promote an attractive visual environment; • New sign (3) To“exceptions” encourage the effective useadd certainty/flexibility of signs as a means of communication for for merchants (e.g., businesses, organizations, and individuals; fuel pumps, driveways, (4) To provide parking a means of way-finding for visitorslots, grand openings, rear wall signs and residents; for downtown buildings) (5) To provide for reasonable business identification, advertising, and communication; (6) To prohibit signs of such excessive size and number that they obscure one another to the detriment of the economic and social well-being of the village and its residents, property owners and visitors; (7) To protect the safety and welfare of the public by minimizing hazards for 27 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update motorized and nonmotorized traffic; Page 44 of 572 ART. XII GENERAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Article XII General Development Regulations Sec. 12.01 Outdoor Lighting .................................................................................................................................................... XII-1 Sec. 12.02 Underground Utilities............................................................................................................................................. XII-6 Sec. 12.03 Street Access ......................................................................................................................................................... XII-6 Sec. 12.04 Outdoor Storage of Junk and Debris ..................................................................................................................... XII-6 Sec. 12.05 Sight Vision Triangles............................................................................................................................................. XII-6 • Mostly carry over of existing regulations; “performance” Sec. 12.01 Outdoor Lighting10 standards migrating to village code (A) Purposes The outdoor lighting regulations of this section are intended to help ensure safe and adequate lighting; provide for the efficient use of energy; and reduce the impacts of sky • New(Boutdoor lighting regulations apply to new glow, nuisance lighting, and glare on nearby areas. ) Applicability and Exemptions development; aimed at nuisance/spillover lighting The outdoor lighting regulations of this section apply to all outdoor lighting except the following: • Updated (1) intersection visibility provisions Outdoor lighting on lots occupied by detached houses, semi-detached houses, or two-unit houses; (2) Illuminated signs; Visibility Triangles at Alleys and Driveways Full Cutoff Light Fixtures (3) Emergency lighting used by police, fire fighting, or medical personnel; (4) Traffic control devices or streetlights installed by the village or other governmental entity; (5) Aviation safety lights required by the FAA (e.g., warning lights on radio, communication and navigation towers); (6) Spotlighting of official government flags if the spotlighting is contained within the area of the flag; (7) Outdoor lighting used for emergency equipment and work conducted in the interest of law enforcement or for public health, safety or welfare; (8) Outdoor lighting used for a village-approved temporary use or event; 28 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 45 of 572 (9) Lighting fixtures with a light output of no more than 1,500 lumens; and ART. XIII NONCONFORMITIES Article XIII Nonconformities Sec. 13.01 General ................................................................................................................................................................. XIII-1 Sec. 13.02 Nonconforming Lots ............................................................................................................................................. XIII-2 Sec. 13.03 Nonconforming Uses ............................................................................................................................................ XIII-2 Sec. 13.04 Nonconforming Structures .................................................................................................................................... XIII-4 Sec. 13.05 Nonconforming Signs ........................................................................................................................................... XIII-5 Sec. 13.06 Nonconforming Development Features ............................................................................................................... XIII-6 • Editorial changes for clarity (as identified) in text Sec. 13.01 General (A) Purpose The regulations of this article govern nonconforming lots, uses, structures, and signs that were lawfully established but because of the adoption of new or amended regulations no longer comply with one or more requirements of this zoning ordinance. These regulations are intended to ensure that zoning ordinance establishes separate zoning districts, each of which is an appropriate area for the location of the structures and uses in that district. It is necessary and consistent with the establishment of those districts that any nonconformities nonconforming structures and uses which that adversely affect the orderly development and taxable value of other property in the district not be permitted to continue without restriction. This article provides for the regulation of nonconformities of lawfully established nonconforming structures and uses and specifies those circumstances and conditions under which those nonconforming structures and uses shall be such nonconformities are permitted allowed to continue. Nonconforming structures and uses established illegally shall be removed or discontinued immediately and shall be subject to enforcement action by the village for the failure to do so. (B) D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f N o n c o n f o r m i t y St a t u s The burden of establishing the legality of a nonconformity under the provisions of this article proving that a nonconformity exists (as opposed to a violation of this zoning ordinance) is the responsibility of the property owner or the operator of the use. The zoning administrator is authorized to determine whether adequate proof of nonconforming status has been provided by the owner or operator. Such evidence may 29 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update include historical documents, including building permits, lawfully recorded plats, aerial Page 46 of 572 ART. XIV REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES Article XIV Review and Approval Procedures Article XIV Review and Approval Procedures Sec. 14.01 Common Procedures ............................................................................................................................................ XIV-1 Sec. 14.01 Common Procedures ............................................................................................................................................ XIV-1 Sec. 14.02 Zoning Ordinance Text and Zoning Map Amendments ........................................................................................XIV-6 Sec. 14.02 Zoning Ordinance Text and Zoning Map Amendments ........................................................................................XIV-6 Sec. 14.03 Development Sec. 14.03 Plans Development Plans............................................................................................................................................... ...............................................................................................................................................XIV-8 XIV-8 Sec. 14.04 Special Sec. 14.04 UsesUses........................................................................................................................................................ Special ........................................................................................................................................................ XIV-12 XIV-12 Sec. 14.05 Site Plans ............................................................................................................................................................ XIV-15 Sec. 14.05 Site Plans ............................................................................................................................................................ XIV-15 Sec. 14.06 Variances ............................................................................................................................................................ XIV-19 Sec. 14.06 Variances ............................................................................................................................................................ XIV-19 Sec. 14.07 Zoning Verification Letters ..................................................................................................................................XIV-24 Sec. 14.07 ZoningCertificates Sec. 14.08 Verification Letters .................................................................................................................................. of Occupancy ...................................................................................................................................XIV-24 XIV-24 Sec. 14.08 Certificates Sec. 14.09 Appealsof Occupancy ................................................................................................................................... .............................................................................................................................................................. XIV-25 XIV-24 Sec. 14.09 Appeals .............................................................................................................................................................. XIV-25 • Revised to reflect actual practice/state law Sec. 14.01 Common Procedures (A) Applicability Sec. 14.01 CommonThePrcommon oceduprovisions res of this section apply to all the review and approval procedures • New(A“development ) Applicability plan” procedure for PUDs (B) in this article unless otherwise expressly stated. Review and Decision-making Authority (Summary Table) The common provisions of this section apply to all the review and approval procedures • Revised, streamlined “site plan review” procedure Table XIV-1 provides a summary of the review and approval procedures of this article. In in this article the event of unless otherwise conflict between expressly this summary stated. table and the detailed procedures contained elsewhere in this article, the detailed procedures govern. (B) Review and Decision-making Authority (Summary Table) Table XIV-1: Review and Decision-making Authority Summary Table Table XIV-1 provides a summary of the review and approval procedures of this article. In Planning and Procedure Staff the event of conflict between this Zoning summary tableBoard Commission and of Trustees the detailed procedures Zoning Ordinance Text & Map Amendments contained elsewhere in this article, ☐ the<detailed ☑> ■ procedures govern. Planned Unit Developments PUDTable Development XIV-1: Plans Review and Decision-making ☐ <☑> Authority Summary ■ Table Minor Development Plan Amendment ☐ ■Planning and – Procedure PUD Site Plans ■ Staff – – Board of Trustees Special Uses Zoning Commission ☐ <☑> ■ Zoning SiteOrdinance Plans Text & Map Amendments ☐ <☑> ■ Planned Major Unit Site Plans Developments ☐ ☑ ■ PUD Development Plans Administrative Site Plans ■ ☐ – <☑> – ■ Variances ☐ <☑> ■ Minor Development Plan Amendment ☐ ■ – Zoning Certificates ■ – – PUD ZoningSite Plans Letters Verification ■ ■ – – – – Special Uses of Occupancy Certificates ■ ☐ – <☑> – ■ Appeals Site Plans of Administrative Decisions ☐ < ■ > – ☐ = Review | ☑ = Recommendation | ■ = Final Decision | < > = Public hearing Major Site Plans ☐ ☑ ■ (C) Administrative Applications Site and Plans Fees ■ – 30 – WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Variances (1) Owner-initiated Applications ☐ <☑> ■ Page 47 of 572 ART. XIV REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES Development Plan Thresholds Approval Process • Required for new and amended PUDs and B-3 1. Preapplication Meeting (Resort District) requests 2. Concept Plan • Optional for any zoning map amendment 3. Development Plan (rezoning) request PZC Review Board of Trustees Approval 4. Site Plan Review 31 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 48 of 572 ART. XIV REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES Site Plan Review Thresholds Approval Process 1. Three or more dwelling units (DUs) Major (PZC + BoT) • More than 10,000 sq. ft. 2. More than 1,000 sq. ft. of impervious cover on lot of gross floor area (new or occupied by 3+ DUs addition) • Plans referred by the zoning 3. Nonresidential building or 1,000 sq. ft. addition administrator for processing 4. More than 1,000 sq. ft. of impervious cover on lot as a major site plan occupied nonresidential use • Other activities for which major site plan approval is 5. Reconstruction/replacement of more than 50% of expressly required street-facing façade in B-1(A) or B-1 district Minor (Zoning Administrator) • Any site plan not classified 6. Other activities for which site plan approval is as major site plan expressly required under zoning ordinance 32 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 49 of 572 ART. XV ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Article XV Administration and Enforcement Sec. 15.01 Administration ........................................................................................................................................................ XV-1 Sec. 15.02 Enforcement.......................................................................................................................................................... XV-2 • Clarified roles/responsibilities for zoning administrator Sec. 15.01 Administration (A) Generally (community development director) The administration of this zoning ordinance is hereby vested in: (1) The zoning administrator; • Enhanced(2) (3) range of enforcement options The planning and zoning commission; and The board of trustees. (B) Zoning Administrator The community development director serves as the zoning administrator and has the authority to delegate zoning administration duties to other staff within the community development department. The zoning administrator has primary responsibility for administering and carrying out those powers and duties expressly identified in this zoning ordinance or those authorized by law, including the following: (1) Interpreting and administering the provisions of this zoning ordinance; (2) Conducting needed inspections of structures and uses of land to determine compliance with this zoning ordinance; (3) Notifying persons responsible for violating this zoning ordinance; (4) Taking appropriate actions to ensure compliance with this zoning ordinance and remedying violations of its provisions, including but not limited to: (a) Ordering discontinuance of any illegal use of land or structures; (b) Ordering removal of illegal structures and additions or alterations thereto; (c) Ordering discontinuation of work being done in violation of zoning ordinance provisions; (5) Maintaining permanent and current records related to this zoning ordinance, 33 unit developments, special uses, including all zoning maps, amendments, planned WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update Page 50 of 572 and variances; ART. XVI MEASUREMENTS Article XVI Measurements Sec. 16.01 Lot Area ................................................................................................................................................................. XVI-1 Sec. 16.02 Lot Area per Dwelling Unit .................................................................................................................................... XVI-1 Sec. 16.03 Lot Width ............................................................................................................................................................... XVI-1 Sec. 16.04 Building Width ....................................................................................................................................................... XVI-1 Sec. 16.05 Build-to Zone ........................................................................................................................................................ XVI-1 Sec. 16.06 Outdoor Open Space ............................................................................................................................................ XVI-1 Sec. 16.07 Setbacks .............................................................................................................................................................. XVI-2 Sec. 16.08 Lot Coverage......................................................................................................................................................... XVI-7 Sec. 16.09 Lot Depth .............................................................................................................................................................. XVI-7 Sec. 16.10 Streetwall Width .................................................................................................................................................... XVI-7 Sec. 16.11 Transparency........................................................................................................................................................ XVI-9 Sec. 16.12 Building Entrances .............................................................................................................................................. XVI-10 Sec. 16.13 Height ................................................................................................................................................................. XVI-10 • Measurement rules for lot and building Article XVI Measurements | Sec. 16.07 Setbacks Figure XVI-8: Contextual Setbacks (3) S e c . 1 6 . 0 1 Lo t A r e a and design-related regulations Lot area is measured as the total ground-level surface area contained within the property lines of a lot. S e c . 1 6 . 0 2 Lo t A r e a p e r D w e l l i n g U n i t • New “contextual” setback regulations Lot area per dwelling unit is a measure of residential density. It governs the amount of lot area required for each dwelling unit on a lot. To determine the number of dwelling units allowed on a lot, divide the lot area by the minimum lot-area-per-unit requirement, and round any fractional result down to a whole number. If, • Added illustrations (5) When the subject lot is a corner lot, the average street yard depth must be for example, a minimum lot-area-per-unit requirement of 1,750 feet is applied to a 10,000 square foot lot, a computed on the basis of the nearest 2 lots with frontage on the same street as the subject lot. See Figure XVI-9. Figure XVI-9: Contextual Setbacks (4) maximum of 5 units would be allowed on that lot (5.71 rounded down to 5). S e c . 1 6 . 0 3 Lo t W i d t h Lot width is measured as the horizontal distance between the side lot lines of a lot measured at the narrowest width between the front yard line minimum front setback and a point 30 feet to the rear of the (6) When the subject lot abuts a corner lot with frontage on the same street, the average street yard depth must be computed on the basis of the abutting corner lot and the nearest 2 lots with frontage on the same street as the subject lot. See minimum front yard linesetback. On cul-de-sac lots and similarly shaped lots, the lot width shall be is Figure XVI-10. measured along a line tangent to and at the midpoint of the minimum front yard setback line. On lots Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Page XVI-6 located along an opposite shaped curve (i.e., pie-shaped lots or those narrowing toward the rear of the lot), 34 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update the lot width shall be is measured along a line parallel to and 30 feet to the rear of a chord drawn between Page 51 of 572 ART. XVII DEFINITIONS Article XVII Definitions Sec. 17.01 General ................................................................................................................................................................ XVII-1 Sec. 17.02 Abbreviations ....................................................................................................................................................... XVII-1 Sec. 17.03 General Rules of Language and Ordinance Construction ................................................................................... XVII-1 Sec. 17.04 Use Definitions ..................................................................................................................................................... XVII-1 Sec. 17.05 Measurement-Related Terms ............................................................................................................................... XVII-1 Sec. 17.06 Definition of Words and Terms............................................................................................................................. XVII-1 • Edits and additions Sec. 17.01 General Article XVII Definitions | Sec. 17.06 Definition of Words and Terms Figure XVII-5: Reversed Corner Lot Words and terms expressly defined in this zoning ordinance have the meanings assigned unless the • Deleted unused terms context clearly indicates another meaning. Words and terms that are not expressly defined in this zoning ordinance have their ordinary dictionary meaning. • Added illustrations Sec. 17.02 Abbreviations Abbreviations used in this zoning ordinance have the following meanings: Lot Width See Sec. 16.03. Table XVII-1: Abbreviations Marquee or Canopy A roof-like structure of a permanent nature that projects from the wall of a building. Abbreviation Meaning Motor Home A vehicle that can be driven and that is designed and constructed for dwelling purposes and that may % Percent contain cooking, sanitary and electrical facilities. Multi-Tenant Commercial BuildingCenter DU Dwelling Unit A single building, containing on one lot, under unified control that is occupied by 2 or more commercial uses. in a horizontal configuration in designated units/spaces within such building. Office buildings are excluded from this definition. ft. Feet (or foot) Nonconforming Building or Structure ILCS Illinois Compiled Statutes See Sec. 13.04.Any building or structure lawfully established that: (a) Does not comply with all the regulations of this ordinance or of any amendment hereto governing In. Inches (or inch) bulk of the district in which such building or structure is located; or (b) Is designed or intended for a nonconforming use. max. Maximum Nonconforming Use See Sec. 13.03(A).Any building or structure and the use thereof or the use of land that does not conform min. Minimum with the regulations of this ordinance or any amendment thereto governing use in the district in which it is located but conformed with all of the codes, ordinances and other legal requirements applicable at the no. Number time such building or structure was erected, enlarged or altered, and the use thereof or the use of land was established. NA (or N/A) Not applicable (no requirement) Occupied (or Occupiable) Building Space Interior building space occupiable by people, not including storage, mechanical, utility, or garage or parking space. sq. ft. Square feet Open Sales Lot Land used or occupied for the purpose of buying, selling or renting merchandise stored or displayed out- S e c . 1 7 . 0 3 G e n e r a l R u l e s o f La n g u a g e a n d O r d i n a n c e C o n s t r u c t i o n of-doors before sale. Such merchandise includes automobiles, trucks, motor scooters, motorcycles, boats or similar commodities. See Sec. 1.10 for general rules for interpreting the general language of this zoning ordinance. Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Page XVII-12 Sec. 17.04 Use Definitions See Article VI for an explanation of the use categorization system used in this zoning ordinance and for use 35 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update type definitions. Page 52 of 572 APPENDIX A. RECOMMENDED TREES AND SHRUBS Article XVII Definitions Sec. 17.01 General ................................................................................................................................................................ XVII-1 Sec. 17.02 Abbreviations ....................................................................................................................................................... XVII-1 Sec. 17.03 General Rules of Language and Ordinance Construction ................................................................................... XVII-1 Sec. 17.04 Use Definitions ..................................................................................................................................................... XVII-1 Sec. 17.05 Measurement-Related Terms ............................................................................................................................... XVII-1 Sec. 17.06 Definition of Words and Terms............................................................................................................................. XVII-1 • List of trees/shrubs that satisfy landscape requirements Sec. 17.01 General Words and terms expressly defined in this zoning ordinance have the meanings assigned unless the (zoning administrator authorized to permit other non-invasive species) context clearly indicates another meaning. Words and terms that are not expressly defined in this zoning ordinance have their ordinary dictionary meaning. • Native and non-native species appropriate for NE Illinois Sec. 17.02 Abbreviations Abbreviations used in this zoning ordinance have the following meanings: Table XVII-1: Abbreviations Appendix A: Recommended Trees and Shrubs Appendix A Abbreviation Meaning Botanical Name Common Name Street Tree Parking Lot Transition Area Non-Native Evergreen Trees Recommended Trees and Shrubs Picea abies Norway Spruce No Yes Yes Picea omorika Serbian Spruce No Yes Yes % Percent Botanical Name Common Name Street Tree Parking Lot Transition Area Picea pungens Colorado Spruce No Yes Yes CANOPY TREES Thuja shandishii x plicata Green Giant Arborvitae No No Yes Native Canopy Trees UNDERSTORY TREES DU Dwelling Unit Acer saccharum Sugar Maple No No Yes Native Understory Trees Aesculus glabra Ohio Buckeye N No Yes Amelanchier arborea Serviceberry No No Yes Carya cordiformis Bitternut hickory Yes No Yes Amelanchier interior Inland shadblow No No Yes Carya glabra Pignut hickory Yes No Yes Amelanchier laevis Alleghany serviceberry Yes No Yes ft. Feet (or foot) Carya ovata Shagbark hickory Yes No Yes Asimina triloba Pawpaw No No No Carya tomentosa Mockernut hickory Yes No Yes Betula alleghaniensis Yellow Birch No No No Celtis occidentalis Hackberry Yes Yes Yes Betula nigra River Birch No No No ILCS Illinois Compiled Statutes Fagus grandifolia American Beech No No Yes Carpinus caroliniana Blue beech or musclewood No No Yes Gymocladus dioicus Kentucky Coffeetree Yes No Yes Cercis canadensis Eastern Redbud No No Yes Juglans nigra Black walnut No No Yes Cornus alternifolia Pagoda dogwood No No Yes Larix laricina Tamarack No No Yes Crataegus coccinea Scarlet hawthorn No Yes Yes In. Inches (or inch) Nyssa sylvatica Black Tupelo or sour gum Yes No Yes Crataegus crus-galli Cockspur hawthorn No Yes Yes Platanus occidentalis American Sycamore Yes Yes Yes Crataegus mollis Downy hawthorn No Yes Yes Populus deltoides Eastern cottonwood No No Yes Euonymus atropurpureus Wahoo No No Yes max. Maximum Quercus alba White Oak No No No Hamamelis virginiana Common Witchhazel No No Yes Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oak Yes Yes Yes Malus ioensis Prairie Crab No No Yes Quercus coccinea Scarlet Oak No No Yes Ostrya virginiana Hophornbeam or ironwood Yes Yes Yes Quercus imbricaria Shingle Oak Yes Yes Yes min. Minimum Ptelea trifoliata Wafer Ash No No Yes Quercus macrocarpa Bur Oak Yes Yes Yes Sassafras albidum Sassafras No No Yes Quercus muehlenbergii Chinquapin Oak Yes Yes Yes Non-Native Understory Trees Quercus palustris Pin Oak No No Yes Larix decidua Larch No No Yes no. Number Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak No No Yes Magnolia species Magnolia No Yes Yes Quercus velutina Black Oak Yes Yes Yes SHRUBS Tilia americana American Basswood or linden Yes Yes Yes Native Shrubs Non-Native Canopy Trees NA (or N/A) Not applicable (no requirement) Amorpha canescens Lead plant NA NA No Acer nigrum Black Maple No Yes Yes Amorpha fruticosa False Indigo Bush NA Yes No Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Maple No No Yes Aronia melanocarpa Black Chokeberry NA No Yes Acer miyabei Miyabe Maple Yes No Yes Cephalanthus americanus New Jersey tea NA No Yes sq. ft. Square feet Acer rubrum Red Maple Varieties Yes Yes Yes Cephalanthus occidentalis Buttonbush NA No Yes Aesculus hippocastanum Horsechestnut No No Yes Cornus obliqua Blue-fruited dogwood NA No Yes Cladrastis lutea Yellowwood No No Yes Cornus stolonifera Red osier dogwood NA No Yes Fagus sylvatica European Beech No No Yes Corylus americana American Filbert or hazelnut NA No Yes Ginkgo biloba (male) Ginkgo Yes No Yes Diervilla lonicera Dwarf honeysuckle NA Yes No S e c . 1 7 . 0 3 G e n e r a l R u l e s o f La n g u a g e a n d O r d i n a n c e C o n s t r u c t i o n Liquidambar styraciflua Sweetgum No No Yes Euonymus atropurpureus Wahoo NA Yes Yes Liriodendron tulipifera Tuliptree No Yes Yes Hamamelis viginiana Common Witchhazel NA Yes Yes Metasequoia glyptostroboides Dawn Redwood No No Yes Hydrangea arborescens Wild Hydrangea NA No Yes Platanus acerifolia Planetree Yes Yes Yes Hypericum kalmianum Kalm's St. John's wort NA Yes Yes Quercus prinus Chestnut Oak Yes Yes Yes Hypericum prolificum Shrubby St. John's wort NA Yes Yes See Sec. 1.10 for general rules for interpreting the general language of this zoning ordinance. Quercus robur English Oak Yes Yes Yes Ilex verticillate Winterberry NA No Yes Taxodium distichum Bald Cypress No No Yes Lindera benzoin Spicebush NA No Yes Tilia cordata Little Leaf Linden Yes Yes Yes Physocarpus opulifolius Common Ninebark NA Yes Yes EVERGREEN TREES Potentilla fruticosa Bush/shrubby Cinquefoil NA Yes Yes Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: April 2025 Draft Sec. 17.04 Use Definitions Page A-1 Page A-2 See Article VI for an explanation of the use categorization system used in this zoning ordinance and for use 36 WESTMONT Zoning Ordinance Update type definitions. Page 53 of 572 Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing April 2025 Page 54 of 572 Page 55 of 572 Page 56 of 572 Page 57 of 572 Page 58 of 572 Page 59 of 572 Page 60 of 572 Page 61 of 572 Page 62 of 572 Page 63 of 572 Page 64 of 572 Page 65 of 572 Page 66 of 572 Page 67 of 572 Page 68 of 572 Page 69 of 572 Page 70 of 572 Page 71 of 572 Page 72 of 572 Page 73 of 572 Page 74 of 572 Page 75 of 572 Page 76 of 572 Page 77 of 572 Page 78 of 572 Page 79 of 572 Page 80 of 572 Page 81 of 572 Page 82 of 572 Page 83 of 572 Page 84 of 572 q w e r t y u i o Page 85 of 572 1) 1! 1@ 1# 1$ h 1^ 1& Page 86 of 572 Page 87 of 572 q w e r t y u o Page 88 of 572 1) 1# 1$ h 1^ 1& Page 89 of 572 Page 90 of 572 q w e r t y u o Page 91 of 572 1) 1# 1$ h 1^ 1& Page 92 of 572 Page 93 of 572 Page 94 of 572 Page 95 of 572 A B C D E F G H I J Page 96 of 572 Page 97 of 572 Page 98 of 572 Page 99 of 572 q w e r t y u i o u i o o Page 100 of 572 Page 101 of 572 Page 102 of 572 Page 103 of 572 Page 104 of 572 Page 105 of 572 Page 106 of 572 Page 107 of 572 Page 108 of 572 Page 109 of 572 Page 110 of 572 Page 111 of 572 Page 112 of 572 Table V-2 Notes: [1] Buildings occupied by public or institutional uses Public, semipublic or public service buildings, hospitals, institutions or schools, when permitted in a district, may be erected to a height not exceeding 60 feet, and churches and temples may be erected to a height not exceeding 75 feet if the building is set back from each yard minimum setback line at least one foot for each one foot of additional building height above the maximum height limit otherwise provided applicable in the subject zoning district in which the building is located. Page 113 of 572 Page 114 of 572 Page 115 of 572 Page 116 of 572 Page 117 of 572 Page 118 of 572 Page 119 of 572 Page 120 of 572 Page 121 of 572 Page 122 of 572 Page 123 of 572 Page 124 of 572 Page 125 of 572 Page 126 of 572 Page 127 of 572 Page 128 of 572 Page 129 of 572 Page 130 of 572 Page 131 of 572 Page 132 of 572 Page 133 of 572 Page 134 of 572 Page 135 of 572 Page 136 of 572 Page 137 of 572 Page 138 of 572 Page 139 of 572 Page 140 of 572 Page 141 of 572 Page 142 of 572 Page 143 of 572 Page 144 of 572 Page 145 of 572 Page 146 of 572 Page 147 of 572 Page 148 of 572 . Page 149 of 572 Page 150 of 572 Page 151 of 572 Page 152 of 572 Page 153 of 572 Page 154 of 572 Page 155 of 572 Page 156 of 572 Page 157 of 572 Page 158 of 572 Page 159 of 572 Page 160 of 572 Page 161 of 572 Page 162 of 572 Page 163 of 572 Page 164 of 572 Page 165 of 572 Page 166 of 572 Page 167 of 572 Page 168 of 572 Page 169 of 572 Page 170 of 572 Page 171 of 572 Page 172 of 572 Page 173 of 572 Page 174 of 572 Page 175 of 572 A B C D D Page 176 of 572 Page 177 of 572 Page 178 of 572 Page 179 of 572 Page 180 of 572 Page 181 of 572 Page 182 of 572 Page 183 of 572 Page 184 of 572 Page 185 of 572 Page 186 of 572 Page 187 of 572 Page 188 of 572 Page 189 of 572 Page 190 of 572 Page 191 of 572 Page 192 of 572 Page 193 of 572 Page 194 of 572 Page 195 of 572 Page 196 of 572 Page 197 of 572 Page 198 of 572 Page 199 of 572 Page 200 of 572 Page 201 of 572 Page 202 of 572 Page 203 of 572 Page 204 of 572 Page 205 of 572 Page 206 of 572 Page 207 of 572 Page 208 of 572 Page 209 of 572 Page 210 of 572 Page 211 of 572 Page 212 of 572 Page 213 of 572 Page 214 of 572 Page 215 of 572 Page 216 of 572 Page 217 of 572 Page 218 of 572 Page 219 of 572 Page 220 of 572 – – – – – – – – – – – – Page 221 of 572 Page 222 of 572 Page 223 of 572 Page 224 of 572 Page 225 of 572 Hearing & Recommendation: Review: zoning administrator Decision: board of trustees planning and zoning commission Page 226 of 572 Page 227 of 572 Preapplication Meeting: Application Filing: with zoning Hearing & Recommendation: schedule with zoning administrator planning and zoning administrator commission •(Optional) Concept Plan •Concurrent PUD Special Use •Final Decision: board of Review: PZC/CDC Application trustees •Site Plan Approval: within 12 months* Page 228 of 572 Page 229 of 572 Page 230 of 572 Page 231 of 572 Hearing & Recommendation: Review: zoning administrator Decision: board of trustees planning and zoning commission Page 232 of 572 Page 233 of 572 Page 234 of 572 Page 235 of 572 Review & Recommendation: Review: zoning administrator Decision: board of trustees planning and zoning commission Page 236 of 572 Review: zoning Review: other departments Decision: zoning administrator and agencies (as required) administrator Page 237 of 572 Page 238 of 572 Review: community Review and Hearing: planning Decision: development director and zoning commission board of trustees Page 239 of 572 Page 240 of 572 Page 241 of 572 Page 242 of 572 Zoning Administrator: Application Filing: within Decision: planning and decision 45 days of decision zoning commission Page 243 of 572 Page 244 of 572 Page 245 of 572 Page 246 of 572 Page 247 of 572 Page 248 of 572 Page 249 of 572 Page 250 of 572 Page 251 of 572 Page 252 of 572 Page 253 of 572 Page 254 of 572 Page 255 of 572 Page 256 of 572 Page 257 of 572 Page 258 of 572 Page 259 of 572 Page 260 of 572 Page 261 of 572 Page 262 of 572 Page 263 of 572 Page 264 of 572 Page 265 of 572 Page 266 of 572 Page 267 of 572 Page 268 of 572 Page 269 of 572 Page 270 of 572 Page 271 of 572 Page 272 of 572 Page 273 of 572 Page 274 of 572 Page 275 of 572 Page 276 of 572 Page 277 of 572 Page 278 of 572 Page 279 of 572 Page 280 of 572 Page 281 of 572 Page 282 of 572 Page 283 of 572 VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: April 23, 2025​ PZC 001-2025 TITLE: ​Requests from the Village of Westmont regarding Zoning Ordinance text amendments as follows: 1. Zoning Ordinance text amendments to repeal Appendix A – Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinances and to establish new Chapter 95 – Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinances, with comprehensive updates to the entire Zoning Ordinance, including amendments to the zoning districts, development standards, planning processes, and other zoning regulations. I. BACKGROUND OF ITEM A. Background: The Village of Westmont initiated a Zoning Ordinance update in Spring 2023 with the passage of Ordinance #23-049. This ordinance contracted Duncan Associates for consulting services. Community input was gathered in Summer 2023 through a public listening session, and Duncan Associates prepared an Assessment and Project Direction Report. By Spring 2024, staff completed reviews of four installments of the draft zoning ordinance text. Village staff then held discussions with elected and appointed officials on various topics at Community Development Committee (CDC) and Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) meetings throughout Spring and Fall 2024. Meeting details were made available to the public on the Village's Agenda Center and on a webpage specific to the update. Additional summaries of these discussions are attached as supplemental memo. At its CDC meeting on January 23rd, 2025, the first full draft was presented to the Committee, with the next step being a Public Hearing at a Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The committee agreed that, after incorporating final staff comments, staff should proceed to this stage. This public hearing initiates the final adoption process, with approval dependent on the number of meetings necessary for the PZC to provide staff with comments and provide the Village Board with a final recommendation. Final action on the Zoning Ordinance Update will then occur at a future Village Board meeting, alongside any necessary municipal text amendments. If approved, rezonings to the newly-created districts will follow at a later date. Required noticing for the potential rezoning and required public hearing will be provided to property owners and the public. Page 284 of 572 B.​ Proposed Chapter 95 - Zoning Structure and Content Summary This list of proposed changes is not intended to be comprehensive. Instead, it aims to provide an overview of the more significant amendments being suggested to the updated ordinance. Additional changes, clarifications, or adjustments are included in the complete documentation, which is attached for further review. Readers are encouraged to consider this list as a summary of the key highlights rather than an exhaustive account of all proposed updates. Article I Introductory Provisions: Article I lays the foundation for the zoning and development regulations. It establishes the purpose, scope, and guiding principles that inform the rules throughout the document. These provisions ensure consistency in interpretation and application while setting the framework for achieving the community’s development goals. ●​ Inclusion of Transitional Provisions for Planning and Zoning Cases that are currently under review. These provisions give applicants the option to select which zoning ordinance will govern their case. ●​ Provides guidance for interpreting words and terms not expressly defined in Article XVII of the zoning ordinance. It directs users to consult A Planner's Dictionary (American Planning Association) as the primary reference, and, if no suitable definition is available, to refer to the latest edition of Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. Article II Residential Districts: Article II revises and reorganizes zoning regulations for residential districts, including R-1, R-1(A), R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5, and R-6. These districts are designed to foster diverse housing options and support compatible nonresidential uses, ensuring alignment with the comprehensive plan's envisioned physical characteristics. ●​ Inclusion of minimum lot depth standard of 125 feet transferred from Appendix B - Land Development Ordinance for ease of access. ●​ Reduced minimum lot width for detached houses in the R-3, R-4, and R-5 zoning districts from 60 feet to 50 feet to be more consistent with surrounding communities and allow for lots with large depths to be subdivided while still maintaining the minimum lot area for the district. ●​ Reduced minimum side setback for detached houses in R-3 zoning district to better align with the required 5 foot easements and to cohesively integrate into the reduced lot widths. ●​ Eliminated maximum Floor Area Ration (F.A.R.) from residential properties to improve land use efficiency while maintaining other mechanisms to reduce overdevelopment such as Lot Coverage. ●​ Increased the maximum accessory building height for residential properties from 15 feet to 18 feet to allow for usable space in detached buildings. ●​ Changes to the method in which density is calculated by utilizing dwelling units per square footage of a property rather than the outdated method of utilizing the number of bedrooms for each dwelling. This is more consistent with neighboring communities and how developers normally operate. ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ Page 2 of 9 Page 285 of 572 Article III Business and Employment Districts: Article III revises and reorganizes the zoning regulations for business and employment districts, including the B-2, C-1, M, M-1, O/R, and O/R-1 districts. While the purposes of these districts differ, consolidating their regulations into a single article improves public accessibility to all relevant information. ●​ B-1 Limited Business District provisions moved to a separate Article specific to the Downtown Area to provide more specific regulations. ●​ Elimination of supplemental street setbacks, as these regulations are out of date and would eliminate the nonconformity for many properties ●​ Increase the minimum street setback in the B-2 General Business and C-1 Commercial District from 10 feet to 20 feet to accommodate the removal of supplemental setbacks ●​ Elimination of Maximum Floor Area Ration (F.A.R.) for Business and Employment Districts to be less restrictive towards future development of commercial properties and maintain other bulks and development standards. Article IV Downtown Zoning Districts: Article IV provides detailed regulations tailored to the Village’s distinctive downtown and transition areas, encompassing the B-1(A) Downtown Core, B-1 Downtown Edge, and R-7 Downtown Residential districts. Many of these regulations are newly introduced, offering a more structured framework by establishing two proposed zoning districts. These districts are designed to reinforce and enhance the downtown's compact, vibrant, and walkable character while recognizing the adjacent single-family and limited manufacturing districts. ●​ Substantial changes are being proposed to aid in redevelopment, align with existing plans, and to allow the Village to be more competitive with surrounding municipalities’ development patterns. ●​ Proposed redistricting of the existing B-1 Limited Business and R-5 General Residence districts into three distinct zoning districts: B-1(A), B-1, and R-7. However, no formal rezonings will take place until after adoptions of these comprehensive text amendments. If approved, additional public hearings and noticing will be required. ●​ Allowed building types are broken down into four categories: storefront building, general buildings, row buildings, and detached houses. The new bulk regulations provide greater clarity for new and existing development throughout the downtown and recognize the character of the existing downtown. The draft regulations also reflect recommendations from the Comprehensive Plan and follow the general framework of the Village’s existing Downtown Design Guidelines. ●​ Increased maximum building height in the B-1(A) to allow buildings up to 5 stories while the B-1 will remain at 3 stories. This recognizes the needs of existing businesses and promotes more intense mixed-use development near the Village’s center. ●​ In the proposed R-7 District, redevelopment of row homes and general buildings are meant to accommodate a transition into single family homes but still support compact development and walkability adjacent to the railroad. However, existing single family homes will be able to continue and be regulated within the R-5 regulations. New single family homes that are proposed in the R-7 district will be required to obtain a special use permit prior to construction. ●​ Removal of the B-1 Development Permit to allow for less hurdles for allowable uses and business owners that want to invest in the community. ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ Page 3 of 9 Page 286 of 572 Article V Special Purpose Zoning: Article V governs the newly proposed P/I district, and proposed PUDs, existing PDs, and the existing B-3 District. These unique zoning regulations are consolidated into a single article due to their distinct processes and their misalignment with the structure of other zoning district regulations or procedures. ●​ Creation of the P/I Public & Institutional zoning district to allow greater flexibility for the unique needs of institutional and governmental uses.Institutional districts are common in surrounding municipalities, as they allow for institutions to be scattered across the Village and benefit from regulations that address the institution's needs. These uses include but are not limited to safety services, schools, religious institutions, etc. In addition, the draft regulations also reflect recommendations from the Comprehensive Plan land use maps. However, no formal rezonings will take place until after adoptions of these comprehensive text amendments. If approved, additional public hearings and noticing will be required. ●​ Introduction of Planned Unit Developments (PUD) as a multi-step special use that allows for greater flexibility including uses and bulk standards. The special use process aligns with neighboring municipalities practices and provides greater clarity, while ensuring compliance with state regulations. Further information regarding PUDs processes can be found in Article XIV: Review and Approval Procedures. ●​ The Planned Development (PD) overlay district will become a legacy district, meaning future developments may not be processed as a PD, instead as a PUD. As a legacy district, existing PDs will not be changed nor allow for altering of previously approved plans or agreements. ●​ The existing B-3 District is retained and any large future developments in the B-3 District shall be required to be approved as PUD. However, no major changes regarding bulk and uses are being proposed. Article VI Principal Uses Article VI regulates and addresses principal uses on private property. It defines land usage within specific zoning districts by listing allowable uses as either permitted or special, or not allowed at all. These uses are classified into groups, categories, and subcategories, with supplemental regulations and special conditions for specific uses. ●​ A new classification system as detailed above, with these changes, the goal is to maintain the existing permissions under the current zoning ordinance while providing more discretion when determining a use. ●​ Replacement of outdated, and overly detailed uses to be better aligned with industry standards. ●​ Enhancing the use table to be easily readable for all users by listing all categories and zoning districts in a single color-coated table. Article VII Accessory and Temporary Uses: Article VII regulates accessory and temporary uses including accessory structures and buildings. Accessory uses are generally secondary or subordinate uses, buildings, and structures that occur in conjunction with an allowed principal use. These accessory uses generally regulate the size, location, and design of accessory structures to ensure they complement the principal use and comply with safety and aesthetic standards. ●​ Residential properties may now have one detached garage and two additional detached buildings at a max coverage of 1,250 square feet and at a max height of 18 feet to better ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ Page 4 of 9 Page 287 of 572 serve the needs of residents. (currently, properties may only have one detached garage and one other accessory building). ●​ A proposed exemption for up to two small sheds, each 12 square feet or less from both the maximum building footprint and lot coverage calculations. ●​ Non-residential properties may have accessory building through the special use approval process at a height of 20 feet and compliance with the foundation landscaping requirements. This specific language allows for clearer regulations regarding commercial properties where current code is unclear or silent. ●​ The introduction of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) for lots occupied by a single detached house to aid in the adaptation of the changing needs of residents. ADUs are smaller, independent living spaces located on the same property as a single-family home and are often used for rental income, housing extended family, or creating affordable housing options. The proposed ADU regulations allow for conversions from existing floor space within a detached home or garage, or as a separate structure. Each lot is limited to one ADU, which cannot exceed 850 square feet and must comply with design standards that ensure compatibility with existing neighborhood character. ●​ Introduction of electric vehicle charging equipment regulations to comply with state regulations and adapt with technological advancements. ●​ Introduction of clarifying language for outdoor fireplaces, kitchens, and fire pits that align better with building and fire regulations. ●​ Introduction of allowance for fleet vehicles such as light-duty vehicles for commercial and industrial districts at a maximum of two vehicles that are screened from the street. This allowance aids in providing business owners with the support needed in an ever changing economy while maintaining a high visual aesthetic for commercial properties. ●​ Introduction of regulations that allow for alternative/renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and geothermal devices as required by state regulations. ●​ Clarifying and relaxing regulations related to garages and carports to aid residents that commonly request this information. ●​ Relaxing and clarifying regulations for fences within setbacks/yards to better align with the needs of residents. ●​ Clarifying regulations related to swimming pools and hot tubs that align with building code regulations. ●​ Allowance for generators to encroach into certain setbacks to more effectively meet the needs of residents. ●​ Introduction of regulations that clarify allowances for donation drop boxes on commercial properties where current code is silent. ●​ Introduction of regulations for exterior vending machines where current code is silent. ●​ Inclusion of regulations explicitly allowing some outdoor uses including outdoor display areas, outdoor storage areas, outdoor seating and dining areas, and other outdoor areas. These regulations serve to provide allowances for commercial businesses while maintaining the aesthetic character and mitigating impacts on surrounding properties. Article VIII Wireless Telecommunications Facilities: Article VIII outlines rules for wireless telecommunication facilities like towers and antennas. Wireless telecommunications are valuable for public safety, convenience, and productivity, and the village balances the benefits of wireless technology with the need to minimize any negative effects, such as visual impacts, on the surrounding area. No substantial changes to these provisions are being proposed other than the inclusion of microcell networks. ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ Page 5 of 9 Page 288 of 572 Article IX Parking: Article IX outlines parking regulations. Parking is essential for ensuring accessibility, safety, and convenience for residents and visitors. By regulating parking spaces, the goal is to meet public needs while minimizing potential negative impacts, such as congestion or aesthetic concerns, on the surrounding area. ●​ Updated out of date parking minimums for most uses by generally reducing the minimum parking requirement, which would allow for development of more lots and outlots where parking is underutilized. ●​ Reductions in parking requirements for multi-unit residential properties to be more in line with surrounding communities. ●​ Additional reductions allowed based on the environmental context including the Village’s downtown, multitenant centers, and other minimal impact uses. ●​ Integrating parking lot design standards from engineering specification sheets to the zoning ordinance and reducing the minimum standard parking stall size from 10 by 20 feet to 9 by 18 feet to better accommodate industry trends and needs of businesses. ●​ Introduction of stacking requirements for drive-through establishments to regulate the evolving business trends. ●​ Inclusion of minimum landscape islands to reduce environmental concerns such as heat island effects and stormwater. Article X Tree Preservation and Landscaping: Article X provides regulations for tree preservation and landscaping standards on private property. Trees and landscaping play a vital role in enhancing the natural beauty, ecological health, and overall character of the community. These provisions aim to ensure that the Village's greenery is preserved and enhanced so negative impacts on the environment are minimized while accommodating developmental growth and aesthetic harmony with its surroundings. ●​ Inclusion of provisions from the existing Article IV of Chapter 80 of the municipal code. ●​ Updated landscape regulations to require a portion of a proposed development’s open space to be landscaped. ●​ Updated parking lot landscape requirements, including landscape islands for parking lots larger than 20 spaces, requirements for visual screening from residential districts, and enhanced street facing landscaping. ●​ Zoning Administrator is authorized to permit alternative compliance measures for landscaping but all landscaping must be of a non-invasive species. Article XI Signs: Article XI establishes minimum standards for signs, recognizing their importance in communication, navigation, and supporting local businesses. These regulations aim to balance effective signage with visual appeal and safety by regulating design, placement, and size to reduce clutter. ●​ No major changes being proposed to sign standards and allowances, rather clarification of existing code that better aligns with internal policies and provides greater clarity for business owners while maintaining the rights of the people. ●​ Expanded list of “prohibited signs” to include flashing LED window borders, among others that generally have a negative impact on surrounding properties or pose a safety risk to pedestrians and motorists. ●​ Updated how measurements are taken ●​ New sign exceptions and allowances for business grand openings to be more business ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ Page 6 of 9 Page 289 of 572 friendly and that recognize the needs for new businesses. ●​ New sign allowances for the rear of downtown buildings, as alley enhancements have made business owners want to provide secondary access from the rear of their business Article XII General Development Regulations: Article XII provides general development regulations, covering outdoor lighting, underground utilities, street access, outdoor storage of junk and debris, and sight vision triangles. These rules aim to support environmental objectives, improve safety, and maintain the community’s aesthetic and functional quality. ●​ New outdoor lighting regulations to replace minimal vague existing language and to better align with the environmental goals of the Village. These regulations address light temperature and light shielding with the goal of reducing light ‘spillage’ on neighboring properties for new commercial properties. ●​ Updated requirements for photometric plans and alternative compliance methods to verify compliance with outdoor lighting regulations. ●​ Updated intersection visibility provisions to include alleys and streets to provide safety to pedestrians and motorists. Article XIII Nonconformities: Article XII addresses nonconformities, including uses, structures, lots, signs, and development features. The regulations aim to manage and mitigate discrepancies between existing conditions and current standards, ensuring gradual alignment with updated codes while respecting established properties. These guidelines support orderly development and promote consistency within the community. While at the same time, they acknowledge and protect property owners' rights, ensuring fairness and allowing for reasonable use and enjoyment of their properties within the scope of the regulations. ●​ General changes for clarity regarding nonconformities such as uses and structures. ●​ The proposed language for nonconforming development features, such as undersized parking lots, will allow for the maintenance and improvement of these features. Due to historical development patterns, these features are unable to comply with current regulations. Article XIV Review and Approval Procedures: Article XIV provides procedures for review and approval, encompassing common processes, map and text amendments, development plans, special uses, site plans, variances, zoning verification letters, and appeals. These guidelines are designed to ensure consistency, transparency, and fairness throughout the review and approval process. At the same time, they protect the rights of property owners and applicants, allowing for equitable consideration and due process in all matters. ●​ Procedural changes and clarifying processes are being proposed for Development Plans, Site/Landscape Plan approvals. Zoning certificates and certificates of occupancy are being removed from the zoning ordinance, as some of these processes are not clear or are categorized elsewhere in the Village’s Municipal Code. ●​ The purpose of a Development Plan is to present a property owner's general plan for the type, scale, and physical characteristics of the proposed development on the property. By offering greater clarity and certainty regarding development proposals, development plans equip review and decision-making bodies with valuable information to support rezoning and related decisions. ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ Page 7 of 9 Page 290 of 572 ○​ Development Plans are required for new and amended PUDs and B-3 Zoning District requests, but are options for any zoning map amendment request. Development plans must ultimately be approved by PZC and the Village Board. ●​ Site Plans are being broken into two categories: Major and Administrative Site Plans. ○​ Major site plans include the construction or enlargement of a building that is more than 10,000 square feet in floor area, plans that are referred to the planning and zoning commission due to potential adverse impacts on neighboring properties, or noncompliance with applicable zoning or other Village regulations. These site plans must be reviewed by the PZC and Village Board prior to being constructed. ○​ Administrative site plans are any site plans that are not classified as a major site plan and are not accompanied by other zoning entitlements/requests. These site plans may be approved at the staff level without a public meeting. ●​ Site Plan amendments are also categorized into major and minor, with major amendments requiring a new site plan and minor being approved at the staff level administratively. Minor amendments include additional accessory uses and structures customarily found in conjunction with the principal use and changes to the development site or structures due to unforeseen circumstances. Article XV Administration and Enforcement: Article XV outlines regulations for administration and enforcement, detailing the roles, responsibilities, and processes involved in overseeing and upholding zoning and development standards. ●​ Clarification of the roles and responsibilities of the zoning administrator, noting that the community development director serves as the zoning administrator but has the authority to delegate zoning administration duties to other staff members. ●​ Enhanced, restated, and updated enforcement processes including violations, remedies, and penalties to provide better transparency. Article XVI Measurements: Article XVI defines regulations for measurements, detailing the methods and standards used to determine compliance with zoning and development requirements. It specifies how various dimensions, such as height, area, and setbacks should be measured to ensure consistency and accuracy in applying the regulations. ●​ This is a newly-created article meant to clarify in greater detail how measurements are taken in a way that is not intertwined with definitions ●​ Inclusion of infographics and clarifying language regarding uncommon scenarios. Article XVII Definitions: Article XVII provides definitions to ensure clarity and consistency in the interpretation and application of zoning and development regulations. It includes precise explanations of terms and concepts used throughout the document, establishing a common understanding for property owners, developers, and officials. These definitions help prevent ambiguity and ensure uniform compliance with the standards. ●​ A list of all relevant definitions including but not limited to building, structures, signs, etc… ●​ Some definitions have been modified for clarity or removed due to outdated terms or redundant definitions. ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ Page 8 of 9 Page 291 of 572 Appendix A Recommended Tree and Shrubs: ●​ A list of largely native landscaping plants including canopy trees, evergreen trees, understory trees, and shrubs that are recommended to be implemented in landscaping plans and throughout the Village on private property. II.​ SUMMARY The Village of Westmont requests approval for text amendments to repeal Appendix A – Zoning from the Westmont Code of Ordinances and establish a new Chapter 95 – Zoning. This comprehensive update modernizes the Zoning Ordinance, including revisions to zoning districts, development standards, planning processes, and other regulations. The proposed changes aim to streamline and enhance zoning practices across the Village. Pending final approval by the Village Board of Trustees, staff will proceed with any necessary rezonings, ensuring proper notice and community involvement through public hearings. III.​ LEGAL A.​ Notification: A legal notice was published in Westmont Suburban Life on April 3, 2025. B.​ Code References: Appendix A C.​ Other Actions: The recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission will be referred to the Village Board for a final decision at a date to be determined. IV.​ DOCUMENTS ATTACHED: 1.​ Legal notice was published in Westmont Suburban Life on April 3, 2025 2.​ Planning and Zoning Application received February 4, 2025 3.​ Memo Summary of the Zoning Ordinance Update Discussions dated April 23, 2025 4.​ Proposed Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update April 2025 Redlined DRAFT 5.​ Proposed Text Amendment Additions & Strikethroughs 6.​ Petitioner Presentation ____________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ Page 9 of 9 Page 292 of 572 Page 293 of 572 Page 294 of 572 Page 295 of 572 Page 296 of 572 TO:​ ​ Planning and Zoning Commission FROM:​ Scott Williams, Senior Planner DATE:​​ June 6, 2025 RE:​ ​ Zoning Ordinance Update Planning & Zoning Commission Meetings Recap This memo summarizes the special Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) meetings on April 23, 2025, and May 7, 2025. At these meetings, the public hearing for comprehensive text amendments to the Village's Zoning Ordinance took place (PZC 001-2025). To allow for more public input and commissioner deliberation, the hearing from April 23, 2025 was extended to a special session on May 7, 2025. Further discussion and public comments led to another continuation of the hearing to June 11, 2025. Written public comments were also accepted via email before a June 6th deadline, and these comments have been attached. Detailed minutes and video recordings are accessible on the Village’s website. At the April 23rd meeting, Kirk Bishop of Duncan Associates, the Village’s consultant, presented an overview of the background, objectives, and goals for the zoning ordinance update. Staff presented a summary of the staff report, explaining the purpose of the zoning ordinance, the identified issues with the current ordinance, and the many discussions that have informed the proposed changes. Following the presentations, the public was invited to share their comments during a public comment period. During this period, residents, business representatives, and other members of the public voiced a range of feedback and concerns. The May 7th meeting allowed for additional comments from the public at the start. The Commissioners then had an opportunity to provide comments article by article. The commission made it to Article VII: Accessory and Temporary Uses before voting to continue the public hearing to June 11th to continue commissioner feedback on the remaining articles. The June 11, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting at 6:00 PM will resume with the commissioner review of the remaining articles. If time permits, there will be an additional opportunity for public comments. No revised language has been proposed since the May 7th meeting. DOCUMENTS ATTACHED: 1.​ Public comments received by June 6, 2025, 9:00AM 2.​ Staff Report dated April 23, 2025 3.​ Legal notice was published in Westmont Suburban Life on April 3, 2025 4.​ Planning and Zoning Application received February 4, 2025 5.​ Memo Summary of the Zoning Ordinance Update Discussions dated April 23, 2025 6.​ Proposed Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update April 2025 Redlined DRAFT 7.​ Proposed Text Amendment Additions & Strikethroughs 8.​ Petitioner Presentation Page 297 of 572 Scott Williams <swilliams@westmont.il.gov> PUDs vs bike trails Brian Schuering Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 12:39 PM To: Scott Williams <swilliams@westmont.il.gov> That's great to hear, Scott! I definitely wish they'd thought of that back when platting our neighborhood. Here are the suggestions that I plan to cover in greater detail during next Wednesday's meetings. I figured I'd enter them into the record via email just to be safe: 1. I urge the village to commission a parking study at the earliest opportunity, and make the results of that study public on the village website. Our current minimums may prove to be sensible in many instances, but we need to be sure how much (and how little) we actually need — and we need to prove it to the community 2. Sec. 9.02, Table IX-1: Add a column for maximum parking entitlements and place a cap on any business types whose maximum capacity and staffing can be easily calculated. Restaurants, office/research zones, and doctor’s offices are three immediate examples I can think of. 3. Sec. 9.04(C): As with car-share services, each curbside pickup space should reduce the number of required spaces by 4. 4. Sec. 9.05: Or wherever the best placement in the ordinance would be. Require the construction of a parking garage if the square footage of a surface lot meeting the minimum parking requirement would exceed the footprint of the building by a factor of 2.5-3 (again, a parking study would help determine the optimal ratio). If nothing else, include this stipulation in O/R and M zones, where it's most commonly an issue. See you next Wednesday, Brian [Quoted text hidden] Page 298 of 572 Page 299 of 572 Scott Williams <swilliams@westmont.il.gov> EIC questions about Outdoor Lighting Ordinance Christa Stanulis <cstanulis@westmont.il.gov> Wed, May 7, 2025 at 4:51 PM To: Scott Williams <swilliams@westmont.il.gov> Cc: Bruce Barker <bbarker@westmont.il.gov>, Larry McIntyre <lmcintyre@westmont.il.gov> Hi Scott, Thank you for coming to speak with the EIC last month and for the opportunity to review the proposed Village of Westmont ordinance changes. We’re so happy to see that section 12.01 “Outdoor Lighting” has been created to regulate the direction and color temperature of proposed outdoor lights. This is a great step to minimize the impacts that light pollution has on Westmont’s citizens and our environment. There are a couple of exclusions to the proposed ordinance that I wanted to ask about. Section 12.01(B)(9) states that the lighting regulations do not apply to “Light fixtures with a light output of no more than 1,500 lumens.” As 1,500 lumens can be produced by a single 13-18 watt LED bulb (equivalent to a 70 - 100 watt incandescent bulb), it seems this would exclude a large number of lights from compliance with the ordinance, and in these instances provide no recourse for nuisance lighting where multi-family, business, mercantile, office, or manufacturing districts border residential districts. The prescriptive method for demonstrating compliance (Sec. 12.01(H)(2)), only regulates the mounting height of fixtures relative to a lot line. For instance, fixtures less than 50 feet from a lot line may have a mounting height of no more than 16 ft. When using the prescriptive method, this would not be sufficient to prevent nuisance lighting from fixtures that fall under the 1,500 max. lumen exception. Is there a reason this exception was included? Eliminating this 1,500 max. lumen exception would ensure that all lights must meet the requirements for both color temperature and cut-off angle, and that variances can be addressed on a case by case basis in the building permit process. Section 12.01(F)(1) states that “All lighting fixtures, except motion detector-activated lighting, must be fully shielded so that the lighting element is not visible to an observer at any property line, as measured 5 feet above grade.” Again, nuisance lighting, even when intermittent, can still be problematic to neighboring properties and the environment. When using the prescriptive method to demonstrate compliance, it would be difficult to determine whether a proposed non-shielded motion activated fixture would comply with the requirements of Sec. 12.01(G) Light Trespass, and this would have to be regulated post-construction by code enforcement using a light meter. What is the benefit to exempting motion activated lighting from meeting the shielding requirements? Thank you for your consideration of these items and thank you to all Village staff who have worked hard to incorporate lighting regulations into the revised ordinance. This is a great environmental step for the Village of Westmont! Christa Stanulis Westmont EIC Member Page 300 of 572 MARK W. DANIEL May 7, 2025 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT 31 W. Quincy Street Westmont, IL 60559 Re: Westmont Zoning Ordinance Rewrite/Replacement PZC 001-2025 Dear Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission: As noted at the last hearing, I have a binder full of comments concerning the rewrite or replacement of the zoning ordinance. The following are provided as a reflection of some of the comments I would have made if provided more time at the last meeting and was able to attend the May 7, 2025 meeting. As indicated it is best that I submit these in writing as thoughts the Village should consider during this process. The information below is submitted by me personally, as someone who spends a lot of time in Westmont and attempts to steer development in the Village’s directions. Although I have many clients in Westmont, this is not submitted on behalf of any of them even though you may understand that one of more of the comments below might arise from experiences in prior or pending zoning matters. As noted at hearing, I have been municipal counsel, represented developers and those defending allegations of zoning violations, and, occasionally, objectors to development over thirty years of practice. My experience includes all types of zoning relief from single-family lot development to a one billion dollar lifestyle shopping center. My hope is that you will accept this correspondence and enter it into the record at hearing while asking staff to consider the matters raised before you proceed with a recommendation. Whatever the course of action taken by the Village will be, there are several meaningful areas in the posted draft of the zoning ordinance that require significant attention. In largest part, the zoning ordinance sets the expectations of landowners and their tenants. It also defines the parameters of code enforcement, zoning and development review and issuance of building permits. The ordinance should be clear, with well-defined terms, and it should avoid delegation except where necessary and lawful. If staff discretion or enforcement discretion could be exercised in a variety of ways on an issue, the ordinance is not in proper form or substance. In general, I offer only limited comment on matters of building design and construction. The reasons for this are that it is unclear whether the “rules” and tables and figures are intended to be aspirational or mandated. I also do not know that now is the appropriate time to be Page 301 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 2 importing so much regulation into the zoning ordinance when I am unaware of building or façade surveys and can only reasonably advise that certain of the protocols in the proposed detailed regulations are not attainable as to existing construction and even as to new construction. Also, from a general perspective, over the course of the last fifteen years, I have seen a lot of development pass Westmont by. I represent the owners of many hotels, office buildings, shopping centers, restaurants, transportation facilities, gas stations and car washes, religious uses, non-governmental institutional uses, and residential developments (the latter from a single-lot perspective up to multi-unit subdivisions). I have steered many of them to Westmont only to find that the zoning ordinance is simply not up to par or that they can only find out following the costly and burdensome process of amendments, variations or special uses—and only then will the application of code be clear. This amendment does not solve many of the issues that have caused folks to pass on Westmont, whether the issues lie in higher density residential districts, downtown districts, business districts or manufacturing and office/research districts. While staff perceives the zoning ordinance as a means to make things easier for businesses, I do not see it that way for several reasons. I acknowledge that some of your best projects will require planned development approval or variations or special uses. However, there is too much regulation and too much staff involvement (which the past has shown will eventually lead to your involvement and that of the Village Board. I am not ignoring the solid steps this proposed ordinance takes, but there are other steps to consider. Re-orientation on special uses should proceed before you make a recommendation. Special uses are not matters of convenience to staff in learning what is going on with a parcel. A special use classification should only apply with a public or private use has special impacts that, though generally acceptable, should proceed through a hearing process because of off-site impacts that could arise. Some of the Village’s special uses have zero off-site impacts. In other instances, the use lists ignore on-the- ground realities of availability of land and the legal ability to carry out a use due to regulations in footnotes or tables or in other provisions. Before diving into detailed comments, I also note that there are so many people in Westmont who work at, or operate, a business the Village has historically allowed, yet these uses are the subject of the Village’s massive realignment to use locations. With respect to the manufacturing and limited manufacturing districts, the Village is still imposing process and burdens for no reason, rather than allowing for screening and filtering of use through fencing or other mechanisms in areas where the residential use developed after the industrial type of use. I also note that the B-2 district regulations leave few or no meaningful use opportunities in today’s climate while ignoring the workforce in Westmont includes contractors, mechanics, and the like who have thrived in the B-2 district while homes near them have continued to develop and be appropriately maintained. As a result, there is a significant substantive component to the evaluation of Page 302 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 3 this draft of the ordinance that involves a paradigm shift and reconsideration of whether the Village will, or will not, continue to remember those who have lived and worked in Westmont, or whether Westmont is striving to become another community and its future fabric will be quite different than over the past fifty years. General Procedural Structure There is a serious concern that the work on the zoning ordinance is intended as a complete replacement and an enactment of a new zoning ordinance. The Village is migrating the zoning ordinance into the Village Code and considering a sea change in several respects, including from the perspective of Section 1-10(7), new districts, new regulations in each chapter, and a completely revised use table that replaces use lists that have been relied on for nearly 50 years (possibly more, but no one actually has verifiable copies of the zoning ordinance of October 1, 1979 or the ordinance before that). The Village may be approaching this from an improper procedural perspective. 65 ILCS 5/11-13-2 requires the appointment of a zoning commission to hold hearings and recommend a new zoning ordinance. Unless the Village board has previously appointed the Planning & Zoning Commission as this zoning commission to adopt a new ordinance, this concern will remain. In 1989, Hinsdale adopted a new zoning ordinance after having zoning commission meetings on a chapter-by-chapter basis. Here, with a similarly in-depth rewriting of the zoning ordinance, Westmont may only have two hearings, and as an attorney who specializes in this field, I find it difficult to digest the terms, let alone the basis and implications of the terms, after only one short hearing on the entirety of the change. I would not find it much easier after a second hearing. Indications that the Village is adopting a new ordinance appear throughout the voluminous changes to the substance of the zoning ordinance, in section 1.03 where the effective date is not indicated as October 1, 1979, but rather as a date to be inserted, and in the elimination of the historical notes of amendments (which, though incomplete, allow some historical perspective). Since the remainder of this letter was dictated and no proofed meaningfully before I left town, you will likely note a number of typos after the discussion of parking. The several notes on the hundreds of pages were not something I could simply turn over as I had hoped. Section 1.01 In the section, the Village indicates that the zoning ordinance will become part of the Village Code, and it will no longer remain a distinct appendix. The Village has previously taken care to avoid the use of its general regulations to amend the zoning ordinance under section 1- 10(7), but the incorporation of the zoning ordinance into the code of ordinances as Chapter 95 presents a risk of inconsistency in the Village’s past treatment of the zoning ordinance as a distinct body of law that is not to be affected by the terms of the code of ordinances under Section 1-10(7). Page 303 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 4 This codifies a practice by Village staff to apply portions of the Village Code when it should not have done so. Village Code amendments follow one procedural path, and the only similarities between an ordinance adopting or amending a Village Code section is the “NOW BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED” language and the reflections of the vote and approvals. Several years ago, the Village angered dozens of residents and business owners when it used nuisance regulations to essentially place zoning regulations on various uses that relied on trailers or parking of trailers that soon became known by staff as the storage of trailers even if the vehicles were present on property only to be parked overnight or for an even shorter period depending on emergency calls. It seems that the Village has not resolved the container or trailer issue for manufacturers in town or addressed staff’s continued blur of the distinctions between parking and storage of vehicles. (This latter issue is a major problem within the proposed zoning ordinance.) In each of these important instances, staff has imported portions of the general Village Code into the zoning ordinance and done so without legislative authority (see Sec. 1- 10(7). Several provisions of the zoning ordinance now stand to be amended by process that is less formal and less informative that a zoning amendment. In dealing with vested property rights, Westmont residents and business owners are entitled to more. There should be more clarity on the import of having the zoning ordinance restated as a chapter of the Village Code as well as the impact of incorporating Village Code terms into the zoning ordinance (the latter from a procedural and substantive perspective). Section 1.02 This section should refer to the powers granted under the 1970 Illinois Constitution and by the Illinois General Assembly. I submit that the ordinance is not being adopted pursuant to such powers. I disagree that reference to the “limitations imposed by law“ is necessary, but I do not believe this component of Section 1.01 is an accurate statement in this case. Section 1.03 The effective date should remain October 1, 1979 unless this is a complete replacement of the former zoning ordinance with a new zoning ordinance. (See note above regarding 65 ILCS 5/11-13-2.) This ordinance is so different from the current ordinance that it should be considered a new zoning ordinance. Section 1.05 The Village should consider whether reference to the Illinois Commerce Commission is adequate. In practical application, there seem to be utilities that are not regulated by the ICC. Further, municipally-owned utilities, should be those owned by the Village of Westmont. Otherwise, the Village runs a risk that a county or another municipality may find provision of utility services in its corporate limits difficult and Page 304 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 5 decide to operate one of its utilities from a location within the Village (and not be subject to the zoning ordinance). This dispute recently occurred when the DuPage Water Commission acquired land in a remote municipality for operation of its utility system. Finally, the last sentence of Section 1.05 exempts electrical substations or similar above ground structures, which are undefined terms and used broadly enough such that the Village’s ability to control the number of above ground electrical structures could be placed into question. (See also Section 7.17(B) (2)). Section 1.09(A) In the first of several provisions within the proposed zoning ordinance that indicate that the Village is adopting a more aggressive approach to regulating the use of land than is necessary or appropriate within its corporate limits, upon a finding of mere consistency between the zoning ordinance and state or federal law, the Village elects to impose the most restrictive of the laws in every instance. This eliminates the possibility that the local use may continue even in the face of more restrictive state or federal regulation, or at best, creates confusion and uncertainty as to which regulation applies. Perhaps the most recent example arises in land uses available under the Smoke Free Illinois Act, wherein state law allowed for grandfathering of certain uses. Applying the Smoke-Free Illinois Act to a smoking lounge, for example, could lead to the determination that the grandfathering for prior uses contained in the Smoke Free Illinois Act is not available in the Village despite being available in multiple other surrounding communities. Section 1.09(a) causes concern inasmuch as the Village zoning enforcement officers have recently adopted the path of least resistance in code enforcement efforts in their various and several interpretations of useless regulatory terms – with the ultimate burden impermissibly falling on the landowners and businesses that have invested in the Village of Westmont. Section 1.09(B) This provision is illegal and likely to lead to litigation. In particular, the Village’s use of nuisance regulations is possibly the best example of general code amendments that were adopted in a fashion to regulate the use of land as it would under a zoning ordinance. Section 1-10(7) of the Village Code, prohibits the language in Section 1.09(b), and, as a subsidiary commission within the Village, the Commission should not recommend regulations in the absence of compliance with the structural Village code requirements, including Section 1-10(7). Lastly, the use of prior plats or plans approved by the Village to impose zoning regulations is reckless and illegal. Countless plats and plans reflect then-existing regulatory setbacks for convenience and not for the purpose of imposing a binding setback. Setting aside the ambiguity and breath of the pool of records from which the Village may adapt independent, more restrictive, regulatory terms, I suggest that the commission eliminate any possibility that prior plats or plans could lead to a more restrictive regulatory control. The provision is simply impractical and, indeed, would have the eventual effect of undermining efforts to insure title. Page 305 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 6 Section 1.09(c) I never understood how the Village could enforce the second sentence of this paragraph. If the zoning ordinance imposes a provision, different than an agreement, easement, covenant or deed restriction, the Village cannot simply declare that the provision of the private party agreement no longer applies, and that the terms of the zoning ordinance are applicable. This violates at least two provisions of the 1970 Illinois Constitution (ex post facto and due process). Section 1.10(a) The Village cannot lawfully adopt all of the definitions in a planning dictionary that does not operate as anything more than a collection of definitions of various zoning terms from various municipalities throughout the nation that offers no indication of how these terms applied within the ordinance from which they were taken. Further, some terms have as many as ten definitions, and, if any one of these definitions could apply under the facts, the use of the term in the zoning ordinance will be unconstitutionally vague. The zoning ordinance is supposed to be a clear set of regulations and definitions that are not only binding on landowners and occupants, but which also binds staff in the application of law to each collection of circumstances. The dictionary must be one that is generally publicly available and kept on file in the office of the Village clerk and in the building and zoning office. If the dictionary is not generally available, how am I to advise a client or how is staff to explain terms to anyone? There are numerous terms in the zoning ordinance that require definitions. More than a few will not have ready dictionary definitions. Section 1.10(b) The Village should simply follow the Statute on Statutes and protocols for counting time. In regard to the computation of time, since regular Village working days change from time to time, reference should be had to federal or state holidays. The end of the period should exclude weekends and holidays for the last day counted. But, what if the Village hall is closed on a normal business day for many needing to act for required action such as an appeal to be filed on Good Friday? What if the Village Hall is closed on Martin Luther King Day but the Village still has night meetings? Section 1.10(D) The term “or“ should not include any interpretation or application of this term as “and.“ As written, this possibility remains, and recent uncertainties and interpretations by staff lead to a concern that the language “or in combination” could allow staff to require all matters listed in terms connected by “or” to exist in their entirety and not alternatively. Page 306 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 7 Section 1.10(E) The disclaimer that illustrations do not define or limit the scope of any provision in the zoning ordinance should be deleted because it is inaccurate. In some instances, figures or illustrations are the only place where regulations appear. Specific language relating to the application of illustrations should be presented in each regulation referencing the illustration and at the beginning of the illustration. The use of illustrations poses risk to the Village and landowners in as much as the Village cannot possibly illustrate all applicable ranges of regulatory impact in its illustrations. With respect to each illustration, the Village should consider whether the illustration imposes a regulation or merely reflects the application of a regulation in one circumstance but not in all circumstances. As I noted during the last hearing, there were significant gaps in the calculation and determination of height while using illustrations intended for that purpose. In the absence of a specific regulation governing the issue, there would be a gap in the Villages regulatory scheme. This leaves it to the zoning process or the creativity of staff and applicants to determine the substance of the gap area. Section 1.10(f) One of the rationales behind section 1–10(7) was that amending the Village code is not governed by the same notice and hearing process or by the municipal code terms governing the rights of landowners to object to amendments. Amendments to the general code were viewed as historically distinct from the zoning ordinance. Only in recent times has the Village regularly and aggressively applied general Village code provisions in their efforts to enforce disowning ordinance—to the prejudice of landowners and tenants who had no notice of the shift in regulatory enforcement. If a term of the general code operates as a zoning provision, it should be part of the zoning ordinance. Recently, the Village has utilized nuisance regulation in a fashion that conflicts with it zoning ordinance, and it has also applied various road weight regulations in a fashion that contradicted the terms of the zoning ordinance concerning the length of time certain vehicles could be parked on a zoning lot. Both of these occurred in circumstances of zoning enforcement and the Village’s prerogatives severely disappointed vested owners. Section 1.10(J) If this is not a new zoning ordinance, I respectfully request that you re-insert legislative history and return to using legislative authority notes. In particular, since the Village does not have a copy of the 1979 zoning ordinance that is capable of being certified by the Village Clerk, the Village is in the precarious position of regulating non-conforming uses, but having no basis upon which to proceed in this respect. Indeed, there is an email from planning management staff that blatantly acknowledged that the Village had no power to evaluate nonconforming uses and simply directed code violation actions to put the burden on the landowner. Without the legislative histories, there will be no document from which one can determine when particular provisions of an ordinance amended over nearly 50 years applied. The Village’s selective, uneven, and ad hoc recognition of nonconforming uses has caused numerous problems over the years and it is Page 307 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 8 strongly encouraged to establish a registry of non-conforming uses and structures, whether or not this will be a new zoning ordinance or an amendment to the existing 1979 zoning ordinance. Section 1.12(D) If the Village intends a pro-business approach to zoning, the boundaries of residential and institutional districts should be the property line of the residential or institutional lot. It should not be treated as the centerline of a street or some other boundary. This would assist in the measurement of separation requirements in the zoning ordinance. For example, the ordinance could provide: “In all instances, the boundary of the lower classification zoning district shall be the property line of the land in the lower classification district, whether or not shown on the map.” Section 1.12(E) The last sentence should provide that annexed land may concurrently be rezoned. Due to the circumstance that the entirety of Section 14.02 may not apply to all annexations and it necessarily applies to post-annexation zoning decisions, reference to this section is unnecessary. As written, this portends annexation followed by a distinct proceeding to amend the classification (adding to the time required to process a development matter when annexation is involved). Section 1.12(F) Subsection 2 is a subdivision regulation and not a zoning regulation. The term “subdivision“ is not defined. The identification of parcels utilizing permanent index numbers is not a zoning process. An aggregation of permanent index numbers may comprise a single zoning lot under the definition of “zoning lot.” The Village should eliminate inconsistent usage of the terms “parcel” and “zoning lot” and it should consider that the proposed amendments essentially down zone all parcels that are smaller than 20,000 square feet. This essentially leaves the owners of lots smaller than 20,000 square feet to negotiate zoning processes that are burdensome and costly in situations where smaller lot development is already difficult and a substantial amount of development in the Village will involve infill development. The Village should consider elimination of inconsistencies in the use of “setback” and “building setback” because setbacks apply to structures other than buildings. If the Village intends to specifically regulate split-zoned lots and exempt setbacks to buildings, then it should define “building setback” distinctly. Before adopting regulations of this type, the planning and zoning commission should have at least some understanding of how many zoning lots are split-zoned and how many future zoning lots could be split zoned following subdivision in compliance with the Illinois Plat Act. Page 308 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 9 Section 1.13 The current 1979 zoning ordinance legislatively authorized several special uses that have continued since October 1, 1979. If a use was operating as of 1979, and the 1979 ordinance designated it as a special use, the use operating in 1979 was automatically granted a special use. The legislative authorization of these special uses remains effective today. A substantial number of questions arises from subsection (A)(4). Legislative special uses exist along Chicago Avenue and at other locations in the Village, and it is presumed under subsection (A)(4) that the Village will not eliminate rights to these special uses in existence since October 1, 1979. However, the ordinance is less clear in referring to “approved” special uses as if some approval is required when the legislative special uses required no subsequent approval. Table II-2 There appear to be mathematical errors in the recitation of interior side regulations for detached houses. Footnote 6 contains an improper delegation in as much as it creates discretion to approve lot coverage up to 40% rather than allowing lot coverage up to 40% as of right. The terms “drainage problem area” and “drainage subbasin area” are undefined other than by the Village Engineer, and, next, staff may or may not allow 40% lot coverage. Section 3.02 After the first sentence in subsection B, all terms should be cut and pasted to an earlier general section concerning the business and employment districts because these terms apply to all such districts. There is no zoning map contained within the amended zoning ordinance. At hearing, it appeared that the Village was relying on future action by the Village board to adopt zoning map amendments. There has been insufficient time to allow consideration of Article 3 deletions and the B-1/B-1A concerns. Table III-2 Use of a general R zoning classification as causing transitional setbacks on non- residential lots creates issues. Throughout much of the Village, residential uses nearby non- residential corridors or districts have either gained value at their location or developed after the non-residential use, in each instance, taking their character from the nonresidential use. Transitional setbacks should not be required on non-residential lots where this occurred. Only R- zoned lots of R-3 classifications or lower and used for single-family detached residential purposes might require a transitional setback. Transitional setbacks should only apply to the placement of buildings closer to the lot line than they exist at the time of construction. New construction on non-residential lots should be able to retain the existing setback, notwithstanding complete demolition or removal and replacement of the wall of the building that is within the Page 309 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 10 existing setback. The commission should be aware of lots in the B-2 district that will face under-utilization as a result of footnote 4. Section 3.05 The Village has engaged in arbitrary and inconsistent application of regulations requiring the enclosure of operations—fully disregarding that parking and loading are not “operations” that are the subject of indoor operations requirements. Parking and loading are not “business, servicing, storage, processing, or other operations.” Yet there are dozens of uses that park vehicles or load vehicle vehicles that have been placed at risk due to the Village’s election to pursue code violations for conducting alleged outdoor business operations by merely parking or loading. To the extent this has occurred, it is incumbent on the Commission to understand how it occurred, where it has occurred, in which districts, and to address the issue in this amendment. The exception for fleet vehicle storage cannot be viewed as a step in the right direction until the Village properly addresses the distinction between parking and loading, on one hand, and storage, on the other. The fleet vehicles regulation and the merging of parking and loading with outdoor operations is entirely shortsighted and ignores historic use, contractors uses, fitness and youth program uses, and the circumstance that each trailer and commercial or passenger vehicle is defined as a vehicle. Utilizing the same Section 7.14 in order to regulate fleet vehicles in the B-2 district win this regulation was developed in light of some contractor uses in the B-1 downtown core district fails to recognize that several B-2 zoning lots are amenable to a higher number of fleet vehicles. The same rationale should be considered in relation to any more intense zoning districts such as the O/R, M-1 or M districts. Also, one must consider why outdoor dining on public sidewalks is exempted when there are businesses in the Village that provide outdoor dining opportunity on private property and this use should be encouraged where a possible. Section 7.14 relies on undefined terms and ignores the standards and practices of public and private agencies and entities within the Village that have existed for decades. The first challenge to any regulation under Section 7.14 will a rise in relation to staff’s over-expansive view of the term “storage” as encompassing parking and/or loading. Storage is not parking or loading. Figure IV-2 Where is the regulation pertaining to storefront building side setbacks abutting a non-R district? Zero or five is not an appropriate regulation. If the Village has adopted a zoning map, intending to place a high density, R district adjacent to core district in a fashion that aligns side yards of the core district with the residential district, this is a mistake. Particularly in the core district, owners should be encouraged to develop property to the lot lines. The maximum outdoor open space regulation should apply on the basis of 50 square feet per residential unit up to a maximum of a percentage of lot area that is reasonable in the relevant districts, including the core districts. Due to the lack of lot depth in the core districts, it is highly likely that the absence of a cap based on Page 310 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 11 percentage of lot area will lead to several variations or deviations because there is always a point where the amount of rooftop space available is limited by the dimensions of the property being developed. This will conflict with the Village’s intent that core district development extend to the lot lines and may lead to arbitrary reservations of unattractive or non-beneficial grade level open spaces in areas where the Village prefers buildings or in areas where business use may extend to outdoor areas in a fashion conflicting with abutting uses. Table IV-3 The term parapet is not defined. As written, item 11 could prohibit all bays. It seems that the 30% figure should appear before the term transparency. With respect to item 13, the minimum number of building entrances is nonspecific as to common vs. emergency entrances. Is this an averaging that applies so two doors within 120 feet but more than 60 apart could work? When do these regulations apply (new building, existing storefront or new building behind or relying on existing storefront)? Re-use of existing storefronts becomes burdensome if the rule applies to new and existing storefronts. In item 15, a specific dimension from the abutting sidewalk is missing. Figure IV-5, 6 Sec 16.13(a)(2) Each Commissioner should know coping in construction. Coping covers the top of a wall to prevent water infiltration. Where the wall ends and parapet begins is an issue to be determined in any height regulation. The parapet is different than the roof, and under circumstances where height is measured to the highest point of coping of the flat roof (if coping is being used as a roof covering), it seems that the parapet is excluded from the height measurement. This is probably a best practice because parapet height may vary based on rooftop mechanical equipment, rooftop open areas or signage. If coping is the covering of the parapet, then the regulation is not one that could be viewed as best practice without substantial attention to those items above the roof that are excluded from height. Section 16.13(B) contains the exclusions from height which include parapet walls, but the diagrams do not seem to reflect the exclusion. Another indication of increased regulatory burdens appears when one compares the existing 15-foot exclusion of parapets from height to Table IV-5 which indicates parapets should have a maximum height of 6 feet—a height known to be too short to buffer noise from several rooftop mechanical units. The diagrams in Section 16.13 do not mention coping and do not seem to allow a distinction between the flat roof or coping and the parapet. This should be clarified. Like many other diagrams, they content is not friendly to those with vision issues and these diagrams should be available in the printed and online versions of the ordinance in a larger format to allow viewing without difficulty (presumably, the Village intends to comply with applicable federal law when it publishes or posts its ordinances). In relation to residential uses in the core districts, the Village should consider reviewing Hinsdale‘s regulations or the regulations of another municipality to determine how a half story is treated in the establishment of height. To encourage architectural variety and still allow the utilization of interior space inside a half story within the Page 311 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 12 roof, the Village might consider the percentage of usable floor area under the roof above the half story. The definition of grade in article 17 refers to section 16.13 a, but section 16.13 a does not contain a clear definition of grade. First, in relation to a new building, grade at the setback line could change. Second, the use of the term “existing or established” begs the question of whether the predevelopment grade or the post development grade applies. Third, the provision relies on “building setback“ rather than “setback“ and either of these terms, under section 17.06, applies from all lot lines. The Village should determine the lot line from which grade will be established for the purposes of measuring height. Based on the figures and tables, it can be implied that the Village intends to regulate grade utilizing a measurement from the front lot line or front building set back, depending on the applicable core district. Due to the railroad and elevation changes near downtown, it is important to specify the elevation along which the height determination is made. Although the Village is generally dealing with lots of limited depth, there are locations where lots with more than adequate depth will encounter elevation changes that lead to consternation over the determination of grade and the reasonable expectation of development on particular parcels. There will also be occasions when an owner of a lot on cast, Burlington, or Quincy might be able to increase the depth of the lot by acquiring land behind it, so the determination of height might be considered in this context as well. Section 4.12 In general, the Village is embarking on an extensive regulatory scheme. The circumstance that reflective, glass or glass block are prohibited on street facing building façades generally is an indication that these regulations have not been fully vetted. What is the public interest in avoiding glass block or fake windows above the first floor of a building in a suburb and the second floor of a building in Chicago? If mixed use or residential use above commercial is one of the goals of the downtown core districts, the Village needs to consider that glass block is often used for bathroom privacy, and that fake windows can often be used to allow the appearance of continued vertical orientation of windows in a residential setting when planning for interior storage or utility rooms or for diversification of units within residential floors of a mixed use building. Also, has the Village considered the conflict between its balcony regulations and the intent to pursue construction to or nearly to the street side lot line? Balconies should be allowed to project over the public right of way if the Village is going to enforce a minimum balcony depth. Alternatively, the Village should consider defining the term balcony so that it does not prevent a builder from installing opening doors or sliding glass doors on a partial balcony. If the definition of balcony is as broad as provided for in section 17.06, the question is whether a partial balcony that allows for the placement of planters outside such a door or a window constitutes a balcony or a Juliet balcony or a false balcony. Technically, a platform projecting from the wall of a building, enclosed by Page 312 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 13 a railing appears to be a false balcony at any time the balcony has a depth less than the 4 feet required in Section 4.12. In other words, there is no measurable standard, which leads to the question of whether a minimum depth for balconies is even required— particularly if the Village wants developers to build to the street lot line. Figure IV-17 I believe I mentioned this figure in my testimony. Appropriate scaling of windows and shutters is a design question and not a zoning question. In the top figure, the Village prohibits, the articulation of what appears to be the entrance to an office building with an articulated overhang below a window and shutters that are smaller than their counterparts on each side. Frankly, there is nothing objectionable about this type of design and it is common to residential structures and multitenant non-residential buildings with a central stairwell. Setting aside my personal view, the question is whether within applicable maximum height regulations, the Village wishes to mandate purely flat canopies or overhangs over entries. On the next page in the lower left portion of figure IV-18, the Village uses an example of a principal entryway feature, nestled between window features that would be nonconforming according to the immediately preceding figure on the prior page. Considering this level of regulation from the perspective of the private owner and designer perspective, the plan commission will hopefully recognize that over-regulation will lead to excessive uniformity if the Village is not careful. Further, such over- regulation is a disincentive to new development and to rehabilitation of existing development. The mechanical equipment regulations in paragraph G consider the screening of rooftop mechanical equipment from a visual perspective. In stating that rooftop, mechanical equipment must be concealed from view at street level (particularly five feet above street level), the Village ignores that most persons are taller than five feet and omits definition of the location at street level (such as the nearest or furthest point in the right of way or intersection of rights of way). Additionally, screening of mechanical equipment, serves the additional purpose of reducing ambient noise in a neighborhood. The Village should consider whether to require the screening of mechanical equipment for purposes relating to noise as well as visual concerns. The straight line of sight regulation to an undefined five-foot eyelevel does not account for most of the sound cone generated with the emission of noise. Another sign that these regulations have not been fully vetted appears in regard to the location of utility appurtenances on streets (noted as front street). Can the utility box be situated in the side street more easily? Can the utility box in the street right of way be placed below grade? A similar question arises in relation to the utility structures that are not located in the right of way but is located in the required setback. Has the Village considered the impact of its utility appurtenance regulations on façades when the façades are on a building situated on a corner or through lot? The extent of these regulations could impact the redevelopment of properties as well as the reuse of properties, and some consideration must be given to reuse of existing buildings to avoid excessive administration of a vast number of zoning regulations appearing in Section 4.12. Page 313 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 14 The regulations in Section 4.12 could serve as a substantial disincentive to the reuse of existing downtown buildings by viable and desired businesses. Section 5.01 Considering the effort to diversify uses within the B-3 resort district several years ago, the Village should utilize this amendment to expand the available uses to include new principal uses and additional secondary uses since it was abundantly clear that, prior to a lawsuit brought by Oak Brook residents, the uses would supplement the demand for hotel rooms in the resort district and elsewhere. Previously, there was an attempt to utilize some of the excessive parking in the B-3 district to allow for development of a substantial swimming facility. Clearly, the development of a smaller, focused sports complex, could serve to benefit the hotel operator in the sales of rooms and other items in the resort district. Why would the Village not allow indoor or outdoor spectator entertainment in the B-3 resort district? An arcade, for example, is common in resort districts but it is not permitted in the B-3 district. Accessory video gaming frequently arises at or in relation to hotels, and this video gaming is frequently operated by the hotel operator, not in conjunction with a restaurant or bar. In the instance of a hotel operating in the B-3 district, it may be in the Village’s best interest to allow a distinct standalone area within which video gaming can be allowed, not accessory to a restaurant or bar. It appears under Section 6.0 4F3a that such a use would be permissible. However, there is concern over the use of the term “video gaming café” and the omission of this use anywhere within the Village. The regulations in section 5.01 are overly burdensome to owners within the B-3 zoning district. Every change to plans should not require a map amendment. In fact, no map amendment should be required even for a change in use. The Village learned a difficult lesson in this respect already, and there is no justifiable basis to require a zoning map amendment ever. The Village of Oak Brook’s injection of attached single-family residential use adjacent to the B-3 district should be considered by the Commission. Each of these owners, all of whom are Oak Brook residents, can forever impede development and adaptations of use in the B-3 district by filing protests. Further, a map amendment is unnecessarily burdensome. Even a planned development is excessively burdensome for “amending previously approved plans“ and there should be a clearly defined range within which the owner will understand that an amendment is required. At this point, every amendment, including changes in storage areas, the location of sod farm areas, the orientation of golf, fairways, and tee boxes, and changes in use within the hotel require a planting development. This is plainly over-regulation, unfriendly to investors in the Village and not conducive to a proper business friendly approach to zoning and development. Finally, as written, Section 5.01D appears to be inapplicable under the legislative and development history of the B-3 district. I believe there have been changes to the B-3 district development after the date the Village established B-3 zoning, but staff would have to clarify this. Page 314 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 15 The entirety of Section 5.01 leads me to wonder whether anyone consulted with the owner/owners of land in the B-3 district. I also wonder why one Villag of Oak Brook trustee stands to gain significant benefits from the proposed zoning ordinance (Michael Manzo opposed changes in the B-3 district and he also has a history of being related to at least one gaming café in the Village that will now have a monopolistic advantage.) The Village’s classification of uses in Section 5.01 refers to principal uses and secondary uses. The reference to secondary uses appears to require that the uses must be affiliated with or part of the principal use. Westmont should allow the development of independent principal uses that include uses in addition to those permitted by right under the Section 6.02 table in order to allow sufficient adaptation by the hotel operator to changing demands and economies. Indeed, the history in relation to the B-3 resort district clearly shows that the land in the district is being underutilized and could be put to better use that strengthens the Villages tax base from a hotel, sales, food and beverage, and real estate tax perspective. Sections 5.03 and 5.04 At the last hearing, I mentioned to staff that it should not include existing planned developments or future planned unit developments as a distinct zoning classification. This appears to have already been considered, but in the absence of further review of draft regulations, I cannot comment further. Article VI Preliminary, I could not provide input on article 6, without commenting on the profound disappointment in the administration of the Village’s current and past use lists. Village staff has abandoned the rule that general categories encompass all uses within that category unless the use is specifically provided for elsewhere. This has led to impossible situations in the B-1, B-2 and O/R districts. It has also led to problems in the M1 and M districts. I mentioned development passing over the Village of Westmont based upon uncertainties, and I mentioned the Village’s failure to provide for uses common to every municipality which are necessary and beneficial. If these uses are not provided for in the Village on a reasonable basis they become taxes or burdens on the Village’s residents because residents must pay for mileage or time to reach a Westmont address requiring services or goods. In my experience, 100% of the people that have recommended Westmont to have considered other communities before Westmont because of a lack of certainty in the code or over-regulation. Of these, 50-60% of these prospective new businesses or new developments pass on Westmont due to anticipated or perceived misinterpretation or misapplication of use lists by staff. Unfortunately, this leads to a negative perception of qualified staff members who could serve well when tooled with a good ordinance and properly trained. But today’s perception is that the Village is unreasonable. So, as a preliminary note, I have great concern over any regulations that allow staff flexibility in determining which uses are available, great concern over omitted Page 315 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 16 definitions, and great concerns over the use of general categories given the past 10 years within which I have seen staff ignore common interpretive rules relating to use lists. Staff should have specific instruction under Section 6.01 or Section 6.02 that they shall apply broad categories of use as inclusive of all uses reasonably fitting within the category unless a more particular use within that category exists. There should be no further searching once a use falls within the general category unless such more specific use exists and only that specific use is exempted from the category and not all other possible uses in the category. With the minimal amount of time that Table VI has been discussed at a public zoning hearing, I have significant doubt that the Commission will have had opportunity to consider the reinvention of the existing use lists in the proposed table of uses. Perhaps most offensive to me, given my recent experiences with matters on Cass Avenue and along Chicago Avenue, is the creation of a building service category and relegation of this category of use to the M1 district as a special use and the M district as a permitted use while eliminating these uses from the B-2 district. This reflects ignorance of the history of Westmont, the importance of these uses to Westmont and its surrounding areas as well as the importance of these uses in Westmont to residents of Westmont who own or are employed by businesses operating these uses. There is no reason that a building service use (many uses of which have existed on Cass Avenue, Blackhawk Avenue, and Chicago Avenue for longer than 50 years) should ever be a special use in either of the M districts. Indeed, before relegating building service uses to the M districts, this Commission should have a full understanding of the number of such uses and the availability of existing tenant spaces or existing land available in reasonable configurations for development of new tenant space for these uses in the Village. State law requires that the Village consider the past 50 years of land use along Chicago Avenue and Cass Avenue. If the Village has determined, and I do not believe it has, that building service uses are inappropriate in the B-2 district, I would be surprised. I would also be surprised if the Village would classify them as special uses in the B-2 district. Building service uses might rely on outdoor storage (not the type of storage staff views as arising from parking or loading), so outdoor storage could be a special use in the B-2 district, but permitted as of right in both the M1 district and the M district. Indeed, the same requirements for outdoor storage could be made applicable across these three districts so as to avoid unduly burdensome regulation. In no instance, does the need to know what is being stored outside, justify the planning burdens of a special use in the B-2, M1 and M districts. In these districts, fence heights should be adaptable up to eight feet in order to screen outdoor storage. However, there should be no requirement that outdoor storage be limited to a height, not to exceed that of the fence. Most land in the B-2, M and M1 districts was developed prior to nearby residential land uses. Within the past two years, staff has testified to having to drive by Page 316 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 17 areas with alleged outdoor storage screened by a fence as if this were a problem. To the contrary, building service uses are appropriate on arterial roads and most collector roads because their very essence is that they go out into the community and serve the consumer or end user at an offsite location even if they engaged in sales from the zoning lot at issue. The answer to the concern expressed by staff in recent sworn testimony should be addressed with plantings and right of way improvements if the Village has determined that a stretch of roadway in Westmont requires them, but, again, there is no evaluation, reflected in the proposed zoning ordinance that reflects that the Village has even given this consideration. Whether the storage is of pallets, equipment that is not a vehicle, goods or stockpiles, the storage should be allowed at all locations in the B-2, M and M1 districts subject to clear screening requirements (which frankly already exist for the B-2 district). If this Commission intends to reinforce Village staff’s incorrect characterization of overnight parking of vehicles as storage, or if this Commission intends to segregate commercial vehicles or the undefined class of fleet vehicles, all of these uses should be permitted as of right in the B-2, M and M1 districts. Storage of vehicles (even if it is mere parking and even if the vehicles are oversized), could be a special use in the B-2 district. However, these activities in the B-2 district have been commonplace, continuous, and ongoing since the 1950s. Recent pressures brought on owners of businesses, even as they are improving the property from its prior condition and proceeding with a better use of land than previously, have been unreasonable, and this Commission should consider each of the building services businesses and determine the impact of the new regulations on these uses. The Illinois Municipal Code requires the Commission to recommend a zoning ordinance that considers existing conditions in the Village when planning. The use lists as it relates to building services providers does not do this. The B-2 district regulations abandon the Village’s obligation to consider its history and existing uses, and the obligation to retain a reasonable collection of land uses available to landowners in the B-2 district. These considerations are both legal (is there a reasonable collection of listed uses available?) and practical (if a use is listed, is it reasonably likely to be in the B2 district?). Several questions arise that affect these considerations. Even though tobacco and vape lounges are ordinarily considered as allowable uses in multiple districts in several communities, the Village only allows tobacco and vape lounges in the B2 district if they are more than 1000 feet away from a school. Why would the Village have an interest in this particular separation distance? Why would it matter if the use does not front on the same street as the school or one of its playgrounds? Does this apply to public and private schools, and what type of schools are within the category of schools? Has the Village considered the Smoke Free Illinois Act? Although the Village views the twice a day going and coming of building service vehicles as problematic in the B-2 district, it appears to have no problem with lodging in the B-2 district. The intensity of use in the B-2 district is much greater for a lodging use. The frequency of Page 317 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 18 foreign visitors, unfamiliar with a neighborhood is much greater for a lodging use. And the Village simply does not have practical B-2 development tracts available for lodging use. A craft alcoholic beverage dispenser should be a permitted use in the B-2 district, and outdoor service possible to a certain hour without a special use permit. The same concerns related to distancing from schools exist. The use may not be desired on the same frontage or opposite the frontage of a school, but a distance requirement could irrationally prevent the operation of this use in the B-1 or B-2 district when there is no visual connectivity with the school. A catering establishment should be a permitted use in the B-2 zoning district. Is catering allowed as a secondary or accessory used to a restaurant? Business training should be a permitted use in the B-2 district. Substantial questions exist as to why business training would be a special use in any district. The Village might consider allowing tattoos or body piercing services in the B-2 district. Under its current posture, the Village’s allowance of these uses in the M district conflicts with what will be a high demand for M and M1 zoned properties otherwise. The only places where automobile maintenance and repair is available as of right are in the M1 and M districts. Although these uses are not recommended in the B-1 district, the B-2 district has historically hosted, and can in the future host, auto maintenance and repair uses. Vehicle sales should be permitted in the B-2 district. Although the allowance of body and paint shops as a special use in the B-2 district creates the impression that these uses have an envelope for their operations within the Village, the distance requirement eliminates these locations along Chicago Avenue where they have historically operated without problems. In general, the treatment of the B-2 district leaves multiple landowners left carrying real estate with minimal optimism for future redevelopment of new uses, and with skepticism that the Village will allow the continuation of existing, longstanding uses. The Village should consider exempting lots along certain corridors from the distance requirements from R zoned lots. These corridors would include Cass Avenue, 63rd St., Ogden Ave., Burlington, and Quincy. There is a question whether the Village is regulation of gun and ammunition sales is legal. Requiring at least 45,000 square feet to sell guns and ammunition in some districts could be viewed as unconstitutional. In any event, the Village’s classification system for gun and ammunition sales ignores recent trends that also passed over the Village whereby a firing range could locate in the B-2 district or in another district and engage in substantial sales of taxable items. If the Village were approached by a gun Page 318 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 19 range that offers accessory sales of firearms, the Village may wish to extend its hours of operation for firearm sales to a later hour. The Villages floor area regulation substantially limits firearms retailers to establishments with a floor area of approximately 20,000 square feet. This is not friendly to small business in a Village that once permitted firearm sales from a residence. Financial institutions are allowed by right only in the B-3 district, which may be the least likely of districts for a bank. With the Village’s core district regulations, the Village should be able to allow financial institutions downtown because they are convenient. Drive-throughs for financial institutions obviously should not be permitted in the downtown core under the Village’s current direction. Drive-throughs for financial institutions should be special uses in all districts otherwise. Because financial institutions can provide valuable tenants to owners of land in all business and commercial districts, they should be permitted uses except when they have drive- through operations. If the Village has a concern with service uses such as financial institutions, it needs to consider whether, in the downtown core, service uses should be permitted at all. However, service uses such as small fitness centers, banks, cleaners, salons and the like can all provide valuable foot traffic for retail uses in the core district. The Village is electing to prohibit any new video gaming cafés while apparently grandfathering existing video gaming cafés. If video gaming cafés are deemed by the Village to cause a negative impact, the Village should amortize these uses and not allow special benefit to existing café operators only. The Village can achieve proper spacing and locations of new video gaming cafés, using distance requirements, but it seems not to be headed in the direction of amortizing the existing uses. The acknowledgment of the existing uses as beneficial to the Village should extend to appropriate inclusion of these uses in new or reused buildings in the various zoning districts—which is the purpose of Illinois Gaming Board laws in the first place. The screening requirements for daycare centers should not apply to properties that are not adjacent to residential land use. Such uses adjacent to residential land use could be screened by fence up to 6 feet tall, but what is the value in establishing an additional evergreen planting requirement? The definition of bar or tavern under 6.04 E2 a is vague. Is DJ’s a bar or Tavern? What determines the principal use, design or receipts? What happens if a restaurant decides to convert to a bar after a certain time? The definition of non-accessory parking in 6.04L seems only to apply to parking lots available to the general public. If there is any intention to apply non-accessory parking regulations to parking provided on one zoning lot for the particular use of another zoning lot or its tenants, section 6.04L requires more work. The Village should use caution in evaluating use of the term retail sales. Historically the Village has recognized that retail sales can apply to the sales of services and goods, but it is Page 319 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 20 departing from this practice by separately classifying retail sales and assigning sales of services to different districts based upon the service. This runs the risk of substantial upheaval to expectations of existing land owners and tenants. Section 7.04 The new zoning ordinance appears to include a substantial reduction of the accessory uses available (compare the accessory use portion of Section 7.03 in the current code). Section 7.04 governs accessory structures and setbacks, but how does a building mounted accessory use find itself in the setback? If the building is allowable (such as a detached garage), why would you want to attach solar panels to the detached garage rather than the principal residence? It appears that the Village would not allow the freestanding book sharing stands that are prevalent in so many suburbs. Section 7.10 Why would the Village allow public EV charging stations in residential districts even if the use is nonresidential in character? The use seems inappropriate since there is nowhere for the owner of the vehicle to wander other than through residential streets. Section 7.11 If I owned an interior lot on a block face, I would find it offensive to have a 6-foot fence, extending on my neighbor’s corner lot in front of the front elevation of my house. The exhibit used at the first zoning hearing reflected only the conditions on the lot that hosted the fence. No consideration was given to the neighboring interior lot, which would then have a 6-foot fence in its front yard. This is so even though the zoning ordinance found it offensive to have a 6 foot fence in front of the home on the lot hosting the fence. This inconsistency should be resolved. If a corner lot desires privacy, that corner a lot can operate with a 3 foot fence and arborvitae. Section 7.14 Fleet vehicle storage is undefined. The entire section, including subparagraph B ignores that parking is not storage. It is unreasonable to limit storage of vehicles to the size that can ordinarily fit into a 9 x 18 space and to prohibit heavy duty vehicles. These terms are also undefined as the Village has learned through recent zoning enforcement proceedings. The limitation to 2 vehicles is unworkable in the M and M1 district. Storage of additional fleet vehicles should be allowed in the M and M1 districts. In the B-2 district, special use allowances for vehicles greater than two should or for oversized vehicles and heavy duty vehicles could apply, but this restriction is untenable in the M and M1 districts. The requirement that fleet vehicles be parked in stalls should apply only when the parking is not screened by a fence. The combining of considerations of storage Page 320 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 21 and parking in Section 7.14 continues to disregard the Village’s past and ongoing difficulties with these terms. Section 7.18 Particularly in relation to prohibited uses in subparagraph E, there should be defined terms. There must be 15 to 20 uses that will be prohibited by subparagraph E1. Catering is undefined and should be allowed to a limited extent in residential districts as a common home occupation. Gig operators may or may not fall within subparagraph E5. Definitions should apply to animal care, grooming, or boarding with a reasonable number of animals attached since so many people engage in home-based pet daycare or pet training. Paragraph E12 raises questions about neighbors with large gardens. As the home occupation regulations are structured, do they prevent hobbyists and people who simply like to do good things for others from doing their work for no pay? If this is not the intent, subparagraph E12 is not one the Village should raise against an individual homeowner who is not doing this as work, a job, or an occupation. Does the Village have an adequate definition of passenger automobiles? Section 7.20 The regulations pertaining to outdoor seating and dining areas are unworkable for these accessory uses on private property or on public property. They present operational problems, impracticability, and problems with the Americans With Disabilities Act. There is no reason to require foundation plantings or even plantings around the outdoor dining area. In certain instances, it is advisable to plan for a fence screen or a landscape screen, but these are typically in instances where the dining area is adjacent to a residential district. To the extent that anyone believes that a dining area in the B-1 or B-2 district should be screened from office use, the Village has ample office zoning district land available for office users who do not want to be located near an establishment engaged in B-1 or B-2 district outdoor dining. Section 7.22 Has anyone reviewed Section 7.22B1? If this section is intended to restrict the location of roof mounted solar systems to the street side of the property, this is an unfair and ill-advised regulation. In essence, planning for the maximization of solar energy is reserved for only one side of the street since there is obviously a preference for having solar panels within the same block areas planned in likely a very similar fashion. Section 7.24 The Village’s handling of trailer storage has been a long-standing problem for businesses in town. Nothing in the temporary storage unit section eases the burdens on businesses for Page 321 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 22 temporary storage, some of whom may need storage for the winter months or storage enrolling periods that exceed 30 days. Although the Village staff seems to have considered the need for a dwelling unit owner to have temporary storage, nothing in this regulation indicates follow through on the temporary storage needs of businesses in the business, commercial and manufacturing districts. Section 7.26 Does this section authorize outdoor vending machines in relation to every non- residential use in every zoning district? Section 9.01 In sub paragraph a, please consider adding: “where flexibility is provided, this article recognizes that business owners, upon presentation of a proper parking study, also know their demands for parking.” In Paragraph B, consider inserting the term “applicable“ or “relevant” before “units of measurement.” Section 9.02 Although Village staff sold the zoning ordinance on the basis that it was becoming more business friendly, the employment-based parking requirements are likely becoming more stringent in many respects, even though the values in Table IX-1 may not be changing. It is imperative that the Commission understand that staff will surely undertake determination of the number of employees based upon occupancy under the building code. My law office had no more than five employees over fifteen years, but its occupancy is designed for more than twelve due to staging areas, conference room space, a gym, and storage. It is unfair, unwarranted, and ill-advised to take the business planning away from the owner of the business. This is an overreach by staff and the Commission should reject it except in individual cases when the business owner’s calculation of employees is not credible. There is no legal, practical, or efficient means through which staff can decide the number of employees. Determination of employees required for any number of uses, including, but not limited to animal boarding or shelters, community residences, craft alcohol distributors, auto repair, or any of the warehousing and distribution or manufacturing industry employee types. Several businesses may have more storage areas, more floor area dedicated to treating rooms or housing animals, or common use space for customers. A building code occupancy decision for employees makes no sense. Why does the Village require no parking for single-family residential use? It seems that the Village might well consider off street parking requirements for homes with a minimum number of bedrooms or lots with a minimum area. Page 322 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 23 If the Village were to adopt an effective TIF district or special service area, the Village might consider core districts and a reduction in parking in these areas to account for ample parking and structured parking. The animal boarding or shelter parking requirement does not contemplate visitors. It seems difficult to accept that the parking ratio for a veterinary clinic is more stringent than the parking ratio for service or goods retail. The business training parking ratio of one per seven students plus one per employee assumes a significant use of public transportation. If 28 people attend business training, only five parking spaces will be required. Even if those engaged in business training are under 21, they are likely to drive (and not carpool). General business training is not the type of activity that leads to a rise in average occupancy per vehicle. The Village should seriously consider using only the dining area of a restaurant building considered for parking purposes (meaning the actual floor area of the customer seating). Unless it does so, restaurants will continue to view the Village as too demanding and they will be continued hurdles to the opening of new restaurants in town. Lombard recently evaluated and redesignated parking requirements for restaurant and other uses, including banquets, utilizing KLOA (a respected consultant in the field), and its parking requirements and flexibility are more inviting to businesses across the board except where Westmont has elected to reduce parking demands for retail uses. The craft alcoholic beverage distributor parking requirement should limit its per employee requirement to those that are not engaged in direct customer service or else employees will be double counted. The Village should evaluate whether the bar or tavern parking ratio is excessively high. This may impose a greater burden on businesses, particularly in a multitenant situation. The ratios for arcades, video gaming, and video gaming cafés are too restrictive. Arcades generally do not draw 10 vehicles per 1,000 square feet. Video gaming would often be accessory to a restaurant use or, potentially a retail use. In most instances video gaming in a restaurant will be accessory and the parking will not be for additional gaming participants, but rather for restaurant guests that game. Independent video gaming cafés are highly unlikely to draw more than 10 users at one time, let alone 10 users per 1,000 square feet of floor area. There is no reason to impose a greater requirement an alternative financial service establishments. These establishments require parking no different than banks, credit unions or savings and loans. The additional parking is merely a penalty for that part of the population in Westmont. This group is underserved by traditional banking options, and lack access to credit. Having represented national payday loan operations and title lenders throughout Illinois, I have never seen a situation where a payday loan provider or other alternative financial service Page 323 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 24 establishment requires more parking (much more, 30% more parking) than a bank or a retail facility. This is discrimination given the members of the class of people generally served by alternative financial service establishments. In the lodging category, the parking requirement reflects outdated methodology. First, one parking space per guestroom can be reduced by approximately 20% in nearly all instances—with or without cooperative or shared parking. Second hotel, occupancies generally are not 100%, and the requirement of parking for 100% of the use of the hotel is excessive and leads to an appearance of obsolescence such as what the Village attempted to solve and its R-3 district. Third, the separate calculation of parking for a restaurant or a bar is excessive in most instances. Most hotels offer food only for guests that stay overnight (breakfast, happy hour, or evening snack provided on site), but a hotel offering breakfast lunch, dinner or drinks to guess only is still just a hotel and it should not have to face a duplicative parking requirement for restaurant purposes. In addition, hotels never require 100% of their parking between 10 AM and 9 PM. There is no occasion where a restaurant in a hotel will peak outside of these hours. The Village’s parking requirement for sexually oriented businesses is four times the requirement for retail sales. In the event that the Village faces litigation under the First Amendment relating to any sexually oriented business application, the claimant in the litigation will surely raise the parking requirement as unconstitutional discrimination. The Village’s parking regulation for fueling stations is excessive. Convenience stores accessory to fueling stations do not require the full allotment of retail parking because 70% of retail sales other than gasoline are made to individuals that parked in the pump island spaces. The Village should consider whether the parking requirement for minor repair and maintenance forces every quick service oil change or tire service to provide excessive parking. Certainly, Jiffy Lube is a stacking operation that can get by with halve of the required 12 parking spaces for a three bay, six employee operation. The commission has a lot of work ahead of it relating to calculation of required parking for warehousing and distribution and for manufacturing and industry. As the commission is certainly aware, these large facilities can have only a fraction of the employees that would arise from an occupancy-based calculation. The Village should not eliminate the business owners’ well informed judgment concerning the number of employees that will be present during the maximum shift. Since Westmont has multiple locations for religious assembly that do not engage in purely seated worship, the ratio for members of the Islamic faith or other religions that do not or may not engage in seated or standing prayer should be retained at 0.2 spaces for every area of prayer reserved for a single occupant. Imposing Christian forms of worship Page 324 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 25 on members of the Islamic faith leads to excessive parking requirements and ignores that the prayer space per occupant is larger for those in the Islamic faith. An adjustment to Section 9.03(D) and this table could help to avoid a claim of religious discrimination. The parking requirement for a college university should be more stringent than the parking requirement for a senior high school. Section 9.03 Initially, the Commission should be aware that indications that the Village would consider collaborative or cooperative parking seem to have been forgotten in this draft of the ordinance. Shared parking requires that all of the parking for each use be provided. Collaborative or cooperative parking requires sufficient parking to allow uses to coexist without requiring parking based on an inaccurate assumption that all parking will be required for both uses at any single time. The Commission should evaluate collaborative or cooperative parking before it provides a recommendation to the Village Board. The failure to consider collaborative or cooperative parking indicates less than thorough consideration of improving the business-friendly components of the zoning ordinance. Section 9.03C requires calculation of parking for storage areas of retail facilities. Storage areas, utility rooms, stairs, elevators, and other similar locations within a business could be excluded from the floor area measurement. The Village is including these areas which significantly waters down the promise that parking calculations were more business friendly. Section 9.03D could be revised with a heading uses with alternatives to seating. The existing language can remain, but the Village should add that each area of prayer designated for non-seated religious assembly will be treated as one seat for the purposes of calculating seating- based parking requirements. Section 9.03E is the section that needs to be revised so that business owners can determine their peak shift and provide the Village of the calculation of the number of employees during the peak shift rather than face a design rated occupancy under the building code, which is highly likely to ignore local business practices And prejudice operators who have a larger floor area to employee ratio. Section 9.03F should also allow the owner or applicant to submit a parking study by qualified professional. This study proves more valuable 99% of the time compared to the ad hoc selection of the most similar use for which a parking ratio has been assigned. If the ordinance was truly more business friendly, Section 9.03G would authorize the establishment by staff of other parking ratios in relation to uses other than parks and public safety (government uses). Staff could even do so on the basis of a report to the Commission without a public hearing if there is enough definition in the parking regulations. Page 325 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 26 Section 9.04 Subparagraph A2d contains a mistake. This paragraph is not consistent with the intent of the parking regulations in Section 9.01B3 and 9.01B4. It appears that this section is in addition to the base parking requirements and not a substitution of the base parking requirements in Section 9.02. An existing multi-tenant center may have sufficient off street parking to allow the addition or expansion, and in such event, it should not be required to provide minimum additional parking. This is a complete disincentive to expansion of commercial activity. The Commission should have a study of downtown parking that it has reviewed along with the proposed regulations in Section 9.04b. The regulations in this section will necessarily force parking into commuter lots and neighborhoods surrounding the B-1 and B-1A districts if the Village has not planned for sufficient public parking. The requirement of 1.1 parking spaces per residential dwelling unit also threatens to impose significant burdens on the public at a time when the Village seems not to have sufficient accessible public parking to expand its downtown business or residential offerings. Section 9.04B3 is certainly a problem for existing landowners who do not need all of their existing off-street parking. It is unfair to mandate continued use of off-street parking when this is not required to serve the business on the property. Does the Village have a study reflecting the efficiency of car share services to reduce requirements for offsite parking? Essentially, any use can avoid four parking spaces by giving up one parking space to a carshare program. As a result, the Village should have plenty of confidence in its carshare program. Shared parking in section 9.04D should be expanded to cover collaborative and collaborative parking. Shared parking is defined improperly (in subsection Section 9.04D1). If it were truly collaborative, shared parking would refer to two or more uses who need parking at the same time but at varying levels throughout the day. Collaborative and cooperative parking also recognizes that shopping centers and uses therein or on outlets can be multiple stop shops with one space utilized for two or three stops. Villa Park has a base collaborative parking schedule and it accepts parking studies if it may deviate from the base collaborative parking schedule. Section 9.05 In Section 9.05B1, the Commission should recommend deletion of “zoning administrator is authorized to allow.” There appears to be a conflict between Section 9.05B3 and the special use authorization for non-accessory parking. Page 326 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 27 Section 9.05B4 should be amended to insert “and parking” after “guaranteeing access.” Section 9.06B should open with “Other than when a special event, permit issues, required…” Does the authorization section 9.06C extend to electric vehicle charging for people who are not invited to businesses located on the property? Section 9.07 In Section 9.07B3, the Village should allow a reduction install depth to 16.5 feet where stalls are headed into a landscape island or a landscape yard. In Section 9.07H the Commission should recommend the extension of tandem parking allowances to businesses, parking business vehicles, and fleet vehicles. In Section 9.09, the stacking for drive-through operations at banks is excessive. Today, bank drive-through uses are minimal unless there is an automated teller machine, which is provided for in a separate drive-through category. Typically, two or three bank teller drive- through spaces are sufficient. The drugstore drive-through stacking requirement falls short of typical drugstore drive-through uses—often leading to blocked access aisles and frustration for those who are required to enter or leave a parking space through a drive through queue. Stacking for car washes does not contemplate modern form tunnel, car washes. Section 9.09B is incomplete. The lane should not be 8 feet in width and 18 feet in length. Staff is attempting to require planning to contemplate the size of each stacked vehicle. The lane should contemplate stacking for vehicles at a length of 20 feet per vehicle in most circumstances and a width of 9 or 10 feet since the lane has at least one radius. The Village should reconsider the setback from R zoned properties for a drive-through. A 10 foot setback, hardly avoids the impact of the drive-through operation. While most national operators can easily comply with this, small businesses and franchisees such as for beef shops or ice cream will have issues if the parcel is not large enough to insert a drive aisle between the drive through and the lot line. There should be some reference to noise and speaker direction or volume so as to protect lots use for residential purposes. The question of the type of R use to be protected should be considered on a district by district basis since this requirement offers no benefit to an R5 through R7 use, but helps an R3 use. The prohibitions of pedestrian routes across drive throughs in Section 9.09D will create obstructions to development. No fewer than three shopping centers that I’ve been involved in Page 327 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 28 over the past year plan for building access from the public sidewalk across a drive- through lane is operated either by fast food burger, businesses, Starbucks, and coffee and bakery shops. The pedestrian access prohibition assumes that customers are not educated enough to watch for vehicles or to be seen as they cross the drive-through. Section 9.04 Presumably, Table 9-4 continues to evaluate off-street loading on the basis of individual commercial units. Remainder I have several comments about the remaining articles of the proposed zoning ordinance. I will wait to provide these since I lacked the time to report more than what appears in this letter. Highlights of these comments include: 1. 20% is a rather low threshold for landscape compliance in light of the burdens involved for zoning process and/or construction (removal of pavement and walks, etc.); 2. Screening requirements should only apply to the lower density R lots, and a fence plus plantings is burdensome compared to other communities; 3. I do not agree that the owner and the tenant are jointly and severally liable for maintenance and protection of landscaping inasmuch as this is a matter of private leasing and the Village likely lacks authority to simply declare joint and several liability; 4. Variances should not be the only means through which the Village adjusts its landscape regulations since these can be adjusted through a PUD or through conditions imposed in a special use permit (this is particularly so in a Village that allows the existence of a street tree to upend plans for development); 5. The Village still seems not to have provided for digital window signs for either gas stations or downtown businesses (consider the window sign problems at the southwest corner of 63rd & Cass where the owner could not advertise that he had milk or soda on sale or the customary downtown business from a brokerage to a retail store that may benefit from a digital sign); 6. I do not believe your sign ordinance is supported by adequate definitions, and the first indication of a problem is that window signs include “open” signs—again, an indication of overly aggressive regulation; 7. Window signs should be allowed up to 40%, and staff deviations for more if the overall balance of window signs is 40% or less; 8. The timing of a grand opening sign is not business friendly since businesses typically advertise their grand openings a week prior; 9. Although I have not had time to drill down to sign areas (individual and gross), it appears that the Village is not accounting for depths of storefronts from the most proximate frontage; Page 328 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 29 10. The 0.5 footcandle regulations should not apply to core residential districts or to the highest density residential districts; 11. Please take a look at Lombard’s new sight vision triangle regulations which were intended to avoid excessive hardscape or unplanted areas near driveways, including on major arterials; 12. I continue to disagree with the Village’s regulation of nonconforming uses (the Village should reinstate the equivalent of Section 12.02(G)(2) concerning nonconforming accessory structures; 13. The Village should establish a registry of nonconforming uses and nonconforming structures since this is the least it could do after disposing of permit records and plans and also losing a copy of the 1979 zoning ordinance; 14. When it adopts this amendment, the Village should allow all nonconforming uses, whether or not lawfully established, since the Village Clerk does not have a copy of the 1979 zoning ordinance that she can certify and because the Village disposed of far too many records; 15. Pre-application meetings should only be encouraged, post-application intake meetings avoid a compelled speech problem; 16. The Village should include a provision that encourages a pre-hearing informational meeting for neighbors; 17. I believe the language concerning the actions of review and decision bodies is too restricted; 18. The zoning administrator should be required to review all applications for zoning, whether or not complete, since the completeness analysis imposes a gatekeeper function on the constitutional right to petition; 19. I do not believe the Village has the authority to place limitations on the right to protest under 65 ILCS 5/11-13-14 (form, timing); 20. There is no transitional requirement for PD’s so that they are able to more readily and efficiently meet the requirements for PUD review, and this PUD process will be incredibly burdensome on landowners from residential PD’s up to and including resort PDs; 21. The function of a special use is misstated in Section 14.04 since the use is deemed compatible subject to review of circumstances of use that, at this location, cause impacts not otherwise common throughout the district (special use review is not intended to determine compatibility since the Village has already legislated this subject to a more thorough review); 22. Please clear up the concern over “approved special uses” and “legislatively-granted special uses;” 23. The special use will often not be established within six months given recent IDOT practices, EPA permitting or special management area planning; please consider using the start of construction within one year of approval of a special use; 24. If a developer hits a snag at the end of a season, the extended six months may not be enough; Page 329 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 30 25. The termination provisions for nonconforming uses and special use or authorized development are not consistent with Illinois law: (a) the Village should hold a hearing before declaring a special use or nonconforming use forfeited or terminated; (b) intent to abandon should be recognized in the ordinance; and (c) allowing an appeal after the administrator delivers notice is an inadequate post-deprivation remedy since there are valuable and substantial vested rights at issue and, often, the rights of lenders and contractors to deal with; 26. I always wonder why municipalities believe that they need to limit their authority to grant variations, which are constitutional relief valves in their very essence; 27. The Village’s new variation standards narrow the availability of this form of zoning relief and impose standards that offend the sense of fairness in the process (see (H)(3) for example); 28. Section 15.02 is offensive and simply does not support staff’s indications that the zoning ordinance was friendlier to anyone in the Village—be it a business or residential: a. The Village has no right to require a posted notice remain posted—none—and I will gladly establish that the purpose of posting notice is to give the owner of occupant notice (at least of a zoning violation); b. Section 15.02(A)(8) contradicts state law which requires that the order be entered and sent in the same form as the notice of violation and ticket; c. Section 15.02(A)(9) imports non-zoning regulations and should not be recommended; d. Section 15.02(A)(10) is an illegal attempt to shift the Village’s burden of proof in violation cases. 29. In general, the violation section invites gross errors by staff and the hearing officer since these terms do not comport with state law concerning administrative hearings and the process after these hearings; 30. It seems counterproductive for the Village to withhold permits on the site where the violation occurred and retaliatory to deny permits for projects on other sites than the one involved in the violation, and I challenge any Commissioner to explain the practicality of this, the legality of this, or the business friendliness of this; 31. Revocation of permits upon deviations from plans is not business friendly and there is no reason for this permit authority which is not zoning other than to allow staff not to exercise as to those they love and to bury those that annoy them; and 32. As noted periodically throughout this, the measurements and definitions sections are incomplete works and appear to ignore state law at various locations, including but not limited to the Plat Act. I wish you the best in your efforts here. It may seem that I oppose progress, but I am simply informing the Commission that I do not believe its members have been empowered to make an informed decision to recommend. This is not a matter where the Commission defers to staff in making law. The Commission recommends law that the Village Board approves and staff enforces. Only then does the Commission really give staff discretion. Page 330 of 572 Hon. Doug Carmichael, Chairperson, and Members of the Planning & Zoning Commission VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PZC 001-2025 May 7, 2025 Page 31 The tail end of this correspondence got rather sharp. I do not believe several of the terms are remotely appropriate in Westmont or in general. Any client is already advised of the tenor of staff review and this alone will cause a hesitation. Imagine the impact of laying our the Village’s lack of respect for vested rights and its view that the Village not only owns a project in violation, but also owns related projects. All of you have common sense, and I do hope you will understand that the basis for my belief that you are a long way away lies in the incompleteness of the ordinance as well as in the insertion of egregious provisions that have not even seen light at public hearing. If I am able, I will attend a future hearing on this. As noted above, I have no horse in this race, though I do prefer that Westmont clean up its reputation for being impossible for developers and landowners and intolerant for homeowners. Causes of this reputation arise from more than the terms of the ordinance, but this proposed ordinance reflects that the Village is considering the codification of personalities on staff who believe they can igrnore nonconforming use rights, thrust unreasonable development schedules on developers and with the swipe of a pen eradicate vested rights. In addition, the violation provisions reflect staff perception that if you are in Westmont, staff owns you. Yours very truly, [s]Mark W. Daniel Mark W. Daniel Page 331 of 572 Scott Williams <swilliams@westmont.il.gov> Suggestion RE: ADU max height | Zoning Ordinance update Brian Schuering Thu, May 1, 2025 at 4:18 PM To: swilliams@westmont.il.gov Hi, Scott. My name is Brian Schuering. I spoke at the last hearing, where I suggested eliminating the parking mandate, creating express permitting for ADUs, and lowering the minimum lot sizes to conform with the minimum lot dimensions. Regrettably, I won’t be able to make the next meeting but in addition to my earlier suggestions, I had one more: increase the maximum height of ADUs from 18 feet to either 20 or 22 feet. I wanted to test my express permitting idea, so I used SmartDraw to design six ADU layouts that would suit a wide range of Westmont lot sizes and needs. A slightly higher max would allow for a two-floor design with a 20x20 base, which would work well for smaller lots. My concern is that if ceilings have to be a minimum of 8 feet, 18 feet would not be quite enough for two stories, the floor between them, and the roof. ADUs are like solar panels; people understand the benefits in the abstract but won’t take the plunge until they can ask a neighbor how it went. If we want ADUs to take off in Westmont, we need to make it as easy as possible for the early adopters. Thanks for listening, Brian Schuering Sent from AT&T Yahoo Mail for iPhone Page 332 of 572 Adam Walsh <awalsh@westmont.il.gov> Westmont Lilly Kovacevic Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 6:06 PM To: Adam Walsh <awalsh@westmont.il.gov> Dear Adam Walsh, My name is Lilly Kovacevic and I reside at , Westont IL 60559. The reason I am writing to you today is to ask you if you can please share this email with Planning and Zoning Commissioners. I have a corner property, and I've been having a 6 ft old wood fence that I would like to replace with a new composite material. My fence is 22 feet away from the front property line. I understand that current zoning code allows only a certain distance away from the front property line. I would like to ask you if possible for Commissioners to discuss new zoning code and regulations. As always, I really appreciate your help with this matter. Thank you Lilly Kovacevic Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 333 of 572 Page 334 of 572 Page 335 of 572 Page 336 of 572 Page 337 of 572 Page 338 of 572 Page 339 of 572 Page 340 of 572 Page 341 of 572 Page 342 of 572 Page 343 of 572 Page 344 of 572 Page 345 of 572 Page 346 of 572 Article I Introductory Provisions I Sec. 1.07 Minimum Requirements Sec. 1.07 Minimum Requirements (A) The provisions of this zoning ordinance are deemed to be the minimum requirements necessary to carry out the ordinance's stated purposes. (B) In addition to the requirements of this zoning ordinance, all uses, buildings and structures must comply with all other applicable ordinances, laws, and regulations. (C) All references in this zoning ordinance to other governmental regulations are for informational purposes only and do not constitute a complete list of such regulations. These references do not imply any responsibility for the village to administer or enforce regulations imposed by other government authorities. Sec. 1.08 Compliance Required (A) Land may not be used for any purpose other than one that is allowed by the provisions of this zoning ordinance. (B) Buildings, structures, and land may be used and occupied only in conformance with the provisions of this zoning ordinance. (C) A building or structure may not be erected, located, moved, reconstructed, extended, or structurally altered except in conformance with this zoning ordinance. (D) All lots created or modified must comply with all applicable provisions of this zoning ordinance. Sec. 1.09 Conflicting Provisions (A) Conflict with State or Federal Regulations If ffie-§..IJY...provisions of this zoning ordinance are inconsistent or conflict with state or federal law, the provisions of this zoning ordinance govern, unless the subject matter o� such provision is exclusively regulated by state or federal law, in which case the state on �ederal law governs the subject matter of the provision.more restrictive P.rovision governs, to the e><tent allowed by law. The more restrictive provision is the one that (B) Conflict with Other Village Regulations If the provisions of this zoning ordinance are inconsistent with one another or if they conflict with provisions found in other adopted ordinances or regulations of the village or with restrictions shown on plats or plans approved by the village, the more restrictive provision governs unless otherwise expressly stated. The more restrictive provision is the one that imposes more stringent controls. If the provisions of this zoning ordinance] are inconsistent with or conflict with provisions found elsewhere in village codes and regulations, the provisions of this zoning ordinance govern. (C) Conflict with Private Agreements and Covenants This zoning ordinance does not interfere with, abrogate, or annul any easement, covenant, deed restriction or other agreement between private parties. If the provisions of this zoning ordinance impose a greater restriction than imposed by an agreement or covenant among private parties, the provisions of this zoning ordinance govern. The village is not responsible for monitoring or enforcing agreements or covenants among private parties. Sec. 1.10 Rules of Language and Construction (A) Meanings and Intent Words and terms expressly defined in this zoning ordinance including those defined in Article XVII. have the specific meanings assigned unless the context indicates another meaning. Words that are not expressly defined in this zoning ordinance have the meaning given in the latest edition of A Planner's Dictionary (American Planning Association). If no definition is provided in A Planner's Dictionary, the undefined word Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update: July 2025 Draft Page 1-2 Page 347 of 572 Page 348 of 572 Page 349 of 572 Page 350 of 572 Page 351 of 572 Page 352 of 572 Page 353 of 572 Page 354 of 572 Page 355 of 572 Page 356 of 572 Page 357 of 572 Page 358 of 572 Page 359 of 572 Page 360 of 572 Page 361 of 572 Page 362 of 572 Page 363 of 572 q w e r t y u i o Page 364 of 572 1) 1! 1@ 1# 1$ h 1^ 1& Page 365 of 572 Page 366 of 572 q w e r t y u o Page 367 of 572 1) 1# 1$ h 1^ 1& Page 368 of 572 Page 369 of 572 q w e r t y u o Page 370 of 572 1) 1# 1$ h 1^ 1& Page 371 of 572 Page 372 of 572 Page 373 of 572 Page 374 of 572 A B C D E F G H I J Page 375 of 572 Page 376 of 572 Page 377 of 572 Page 378 of 572 q w e r t y u i o u i o o Page 379 of 572 Page 380 of 572 Page 381 of 572 Page 382 of 572 Page 383 of 572 Page 384 of 572 Page 385 of 572 Page 386 of 572 Page 387 of 572 Page 388 of 572 Page 389 of 572 Page 390 of 572 Page 391 of 572 Table V-2 Notes: [1] Buildings occupied by public or institutional uses Public, semipublic or public service buildings, hospitals, institutions or schools, when permitted in a district, may be erected to a height not exceeding 60 feet, and churches and temples may be erected to a height not exceeding 75 feet if the building is set back from each yard minimum setback line at least one foot for each one foot of additional building height above the maximum height limit otherwise provided applicable in the subject zoning district in which the building is located. Page 392 of 572 Page 393 of 572 Page 394 of 572 Page 395 of 572 Page 396 of 572 Page 397 of 572 Page 398 of 572 Page 399 of 572 Page 400 of 572 Page 401 of 572 Page 402 of 572 Page 403 of 572 Page 404 of 572 Page 405 of 572 Page 406 of 572 Page 407 of 572 Page 408 of 572 Page 409 of 572 Page 410 of 572 Page 411 of 572 Page 412 of 572 Page 413 of 572 Page 414 of 572 Page 415 of 572 Page 416 of 572 Page 417 of 572 Page 418 of 572 Page 419 of 572 Page 420 of 572 Page 421 of 572 Page 422 of 572 Page 423 of 572 Page 424 of 572 Page 425 of 572 Page 426 of 572 Page 427 of 572 . Page 428 of 572 Page 429 of 572 Page 430 of 572 Page 431 of 572 Page 432 of 572 Page 433 of 572 Page 434 of 572 Page 435 of 572 Page 436 of 572 Page 437 of 572 Page 438 of 572 Page 439 of 572 Page 440 of 572 Page 441 of 572 Page 442 of 572 Page 443 of 572 Page 444 of 572 Page 445 of 572 Page 446 of 572 Page 447 of 572 Page 448 of 572 Page 449 of 572 Page 450 of 572 Page 451 of 572 Page 452 of 572 Page 453 of 572 Page 454 of 572 Page 455 of 572 Page 456 of 572 A B C D D Page 457 of 572 Page 458 of 572 Page 459 of 572 Page 460 of 572 Page 461 of 572 Page 462 of 572 Page 463 of 572 Page 464 of 572 Page 465 of 572 Page 466 of 572 Page 467 of 572 Page 468 of 572 Page 469 of 572 Page 470 of 572 Page 471 of 572 Page 472 of 572 Page 473 of 572 Page 474 of 572 Page 475 of 572 Page 476 of 572 Page 477 of 572 Page 478 of 572 Page 479 of 572 Page 480 of 572 Page 481 of 572 Page 482 of 572 Page 483 of 572 Page 484 of 572 Page 485 of 572 Page 486 of 572 Page 487 of 572 Page 488 of 572 Page 489 of 572 Page 490 of 572 Page 491 of 572 Page 492 of 572 Page 493 of 572 Page 494 of 572 Page 495 of 572 Page 496 of 572 Page 497 of 572 Page 498 of 572 Page 499 of 572 Page 500 of 572 Page 501 of 572 – – – – – – – – – – – – Page 502 of 572 Page 503 of 572 Page 504 of 572 Page 505 of 572 Page 506 of 572 Hearing & Recommendation: Review: zoning administrator Decision: board of trustees planning and zoning commission Page 507 of 572 Page 508 of 572 Preapplication Meeting: Application Filing: with zoning Hearing & Recommendation: schedule with zoning administrator planning and zoning administrator commission •(Optional) Concept Plan •Concurrent PUD Special Use •Final Decision: board of Review: PZC/CDC Application trustees •Site Plan Approval: within 12 months* Page 509 of 572 Page 510 of 572 Page 511 of 572 Page 512 of 572 Hearing & Recommendation: Review: zoning administrator Decision: board of trustees planning and zoning commission Page 513 of 572 Page 514 of 572 Page 515 of 572 Page 516 of 572 Review & Recommendation: Review: zoning administrator Decision: board of trustees planning and zoning commission Page 517 of 572 Review: zoning Review: other departments Decision: zoning administrator and agencies (as required) administrator Page 518 of 572 Page 519 of 572 Review: community Review and Hearing: planning Decision: development director and zoning commission board of trustees Page 520 of 572 Page 521 of 572 Page 522 of 572 Page 523 of 572 Zoning Administrator: Application Filing: within Decision: planning and decision 45 days of decision zoning commission Page 524 of 572 Page 525 of 572 Page 526 of 572 Page 527 of 572 Page 528 of 572 Page 529 of 572 Page 530 of 572 Page 531 of 572 Page 532 of 572 Page 533 of 572 Page 534 of 572 Page 535 of 572 Page 536 of 572 Page 537 of 572 Page 538 of 572 Page 539 of 572 Page 540 of 572 Page 541 of 572 Page 542 of 572 Page 543 of 572 Page 544 of 572 Page 545 of 572 Page 546 of 572 Page 547 of 572 Page 548 of 572 Page 549 of 572 Page 550 of 572 Page 551 of 572 Page 552 of 572 Page 553 of 572 Page 554 of 572 Page 555 of 572 Page 556 of 572 Page 557 of 572 Page 558 of 572 Page 559 of 572 Page 560 of 572 Page 561 of 572 Page 562 of 572 Page 563 of 572 Page 564 of 572 VILLAGE OF WESTMONT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: July 23, 2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ PZC 001-2025 TITLE: Requests from the Village of Westmont regarding Zoning Ordinance text amendments as follows: 1)​ Zoning Ordinance text amendments to repeal Appendix A – Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinances and to establish new Chapter 95 – Zoning, of the Westmont Code of Ordinances, with comprehensive updates to the entire Zoning Ordinance, including amendments to the zoning districts, development standards, planning processes, and other zoning regulations. I.​ BACKGROUND OF ITEM A.​ Background: This staff report briefly recaps the previous public hearings on the proposed comprehensive text amendments to the Village’s zoning ordinance, and summarizes the revisions that have been made since the June 25, 2025 special meeting. The first public hearing on PZC 001-2025 was held on April 23, 2025. At this meeting, the Village’s consultant and staff presented the proposed changes, and the public began commenting on the draft language. The second public hearing was on May 7, 2025, where more members of the public provided comments and the commissioners were able to begin their article-by-article discussion on the updates. The third and fourth hearings, on June 11 and June 25, 2025, respectively, were focused on continuing the commissioners’ review of the updates. At each meeting, an opportunity for public comments to be provided was offered. At the June 25 public hearing, the commissioners were able to complete their discussion on the draft language initially presented to them on April 23rd. Since that meeting, staff has been working with the consultant to synthesize the comments provided by the public and direction received from this commission. After the culmination of almost 14 hours of public hearings, the fifth public hearing, to be held on July 23, 2025, staff will propose revised language for the update. This is the first time that revised language has been provided to both the Planning & Zoning Commission and the public. The revisions were largely informed by the discussions at the four previous public hearings from the commission and public comments. Although staff discussed and Page 565 of 572 contemplated all comments received by the public and from the commissioners during the public hearings, not all comments were incorporated as revisions in the latest draft. Instead, staff directed the consultant to make certain revisions after internal discussion based on best practices, feasibility, and the context of the Village’s needs. B.​ Proposed Chapter 95 - Summary of Revisions from the April 2025 Draft This list of revisions is not intended to be comprehensive. Instead, it aims to provide an overview of the more significant revisions being suggested to the updated ordinance. Additional changes, clarifications, or adjustments are included in the complete documentation, which is attached for further review. Readers are encouraged to consider this list as a summary of the key highlights rather than an exhaustive account of all proposed updates. The changes between the April 2025 draft and the attached draft are shown in red text highlighted in yellow, and strikeouts when necessary. Article I Introductory Provisions: Article I lays the foundation for the zoning and development regulations. It establishes the purpose, scope, and guiding principles that inform the rules throughout the document. These provisions ensure consistency in interpretation and application. ●​ Sec. 1.03 Effective Date: Updated to clarify the zoning ordinance is being comprehensively updated but is based on the zoning ordinance that came into effect October 1, 1979. ●​ Sec. 1.05 Exempt Utilities: Rephrased for clarity regarding types of public utility. ●​ Sec. 1.09(A-B) Conflicting Provisions: To enhance clarity, the text has been rephrased to specifically address State, Federal, and Village municipal code regulations. ●​ Sec 1.13 Transitional Provisions: Regulations regarding building permits and zoning applications were clarified and expanded upon, detailing the process and authority for determinations based on specific circumstances. Additionally, clarified violations during the transitional period. Article II Residential Districts: Article II revises and reorganizes zoning regulations for residential districts, including R-1, R-1(A), R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5, and R-6. ●​ Sec. 2.05, Lot and Building Regulations, Footnote [5]: Following a discussion with home builders unrelated to this update and discussion with this commission, footnote [5] has been revised to reduce the minimum street side setback to 15 feet for a buildable width of 40 feet for detached houses on corner lots. Article III Business and Employment Districts: Article III revises and reorganizes the zoning regulations for business and employment districts, including the B-2, C-1, M, M-1, O/R, and O/R-1 districts. ●​ Sec. 3.04 Lot and Building Regulations: Since supplemental setbacks are __________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Page 2 of 8 Page 566 of 572 proposed to be removed, staff initially suggested increasing the front yard setback in the B-2 and C-1 districts from 10 feet to 20 feet. Staff is proposing to return to a 10 foot setback with the footnote that this setback may be used as long as the required foundation landscaping is provided. Article IV Downtown Zoning Districts: Article IV provides detailed regulations tailored to the Village’s distinctive downtown and transition areas, encompassing the B-1(A) Downtown Core, B-1 Downtown Edge, and R-7 Downtown Residential districts. Many of these regulations are newly introduced, offering a more structured framework by establishing two proposed zoning districts. These districts are designed to reinforce and enhance the downtown's compact, vibrant, and walkable character while recognizing the adjacent single-family and limited manufacturing districts. ●​ Sec. 4.04 Building Types: Clarified that the Zoning Administrator determines the applicable building type classification. ●​ Sec. 4.04 Table IV-2 Allowed Building Types: Per commissioner discussion, Row Building Types were removed as an allowable use in the Downtown Edge (B-1) Zoning District. ●​ Sec. 4.08 Storefront Buildings Table (8) Building Height: The upper-story height maximum was increased from 11 feet to 15 feet due to real world applicability. ●​ Sec. 4.08 Storefront Buildings Table (17) Vertical Division with Shadow Lines: The design criteria for vertical division shadow lines included 30 feet to 60 feet. ●​ Sec. 4.12(2)(c) Side and Rear Facades: Added language specifying that side and rear facing facades may use minor facade materials. ●​ Sec 4.12 Table IV-4 Allowed Minor Facade Materials (G): “Glass curtain wall" was revised to “Glass System” per commissioner direction. ●​ Sec. 4.12 (E)(1)(d) Visibility Through Glass: Revised “transmission factor” to “visible light transmittance” per commissioner direction. Article V Special Purpose Zoning: Article V governs the newly proposed P/I district, and proposed PUDs, existing PDs, and the existing B-3 District. These unique zoning regulations are consolidated into a single article due to their distinct processes and their misalignment with the structure of other zoning district regulations or procedures. ●​ Sec. 5.02(C) Lot and Building Regulations & Table V-2 (P/I district): Revisions have been proposed to make the Public/Institutional district more tailored to governmental uses like the Village, Park District, etc. ●​ Sec. 5.04(A-B) (PUDs): The scope and objectives for Planned Unit Developments have been broadened. PUDs are now considered appropriate for properties facing substantial economic hurdles, including infrastructure enhancements, remediation projects, or challenging market dynamics. __________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Page 3 of 8 Page 567 of 572 Article VI Principal Uses Article VI regulates and addresses principal uses on private property. It defines land usage within specific zoning districts by listing allowable uses as either permitted or special, or not allowed at all. These uses are classified into groups, categories, and subcategories, with supplemental regulations and special conditions for specific uses. ●​ Table VI-1: Table of Allowed Uses: ○​ Recategorized multiple consumer service, eating and drinking place, entertainment, office, and retail sales permissions in the B-1(A) and B-1 districts after reevaluating the appropriateness of requiring special use permits. ○​ Reinserted where colleges/universities are allowed. Article VII Accessory and Temporary Uses: Article VII regulates accessory and temporary uses including accessory structures and buildings. Accessory uses are generally secondary or subordinate uses, buildings, and structures that occur in conjunction with an allowed principal use. ●​ Sec. 7.02(A)(2) Small Building Exemption: Amended this section to remove the building limit and allow for an aggregate of 50 square feet to be exempted. ●​ Sec. 7.04, Table VII-1: Allowed Setback Encroachments and Obstructions: Amendments are proposed to bay windows and raised landings to match existing permissions. Easement language regarding window wells is also proposed to be removed. ●​ Sec. 7.05 Accessory Dwelling Units: Clarifications are proposed to the street setbacks and heights for detached ADUs. ●​ Sec. 7.09 Donation Drop Boxes: Edits are proposed to the maximum number and area, how drop boxes are allowed, and that these rules are for drop boxes managed by off-site organizations. ●​ Sec. 7.11(B) Fences (Residential and Downtown Districts): Changes to the maximum encroachment into the front yard is proposed. Additional regulations for reverse corner lot fences are included. ●​ Sec. 7.12 Fireplaces, Grills, Kitchens, and Fire Pits (Outdoor): Regulations are amended to be applicable to permanent features and removed mentions of manufacturer recommendations. ●​ Sec. 7.14 Business Vehicles: Formerly called “fleet vehicle storage”, this section has been significantly re-worked in response to public and commissioner comments. ●​ Sec. 7.20(C) Outdoor Accessory Uses (Outdoor Seating and Dining Areas): Proposed changes are made to clarify that these rules are applicable to new or expanded areas and be more flexible in terms of the perimeter barriers. ●​ Sec. 7.21 Recreational Vehicles and Equipment: This section was completely rewritten to be clearer and more accommodating. ●​ Sec. 7.23 Swimming Pools and Hot Tubs. The barrier requirement is suggested to be removed, as it is better regulated by the building codes. __________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Page 4 of 8 Page 568 of 572 Article VIII Wireless Telecommunications Facilities: Article VIII outlines rules for wireless telecommunication facilities like towers and antennas. No revisions are proposed to this article. Article IX Parking: Article IX outlines parking regulations. Parking is essential for ensuring accessibility, safety, and convenience for residents and visitors. By regulating parking spaces, the goal is to meet public needs while minimizing potential negative impacts, such as congestion or aesthetic concerns, on the surrounding area. ●​ Table IX-1: Minimum Motor Vehicle Parking Requirements: significant revisions are proposed to this table, largely consolidating it where subcategories have the same requirement. Changes also include departing from employee/occupancy based requirements where practical. ●​ Sec. 9.03(C) Area Measurements: Clarified that many areas of a building not dedicated to the principal use of the building are exempt from the parking requirement calculation. ●​ Sec. 9.04(A)(2)(d-e) Multi-Tenant Centers: Confirms that existing mult-tenant centers that get expanded must only provide additional off-street parking stalls if the existing parking lot does not comply with the new minimum. Also added that new multi-tenant centers must provide off-street parking at a rate of 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet. ●​ Sec. 9.05(B)(1) Off-site Parking, When Allowed: Allows for off-site parking for uses in the downtown districts. ●​ Sec. 9.07(H) Tandem Parking: Allows for tandem parking in the downtown districts to only serve residents and employees of the same business. ●​ Table IX-3: Drive-through Stacking Space Requirements: Increased the minimum stacking requirement for automated car washes and drug stores. Article X Tree Preservation and Landscaping: Article X provides regulations for tree preservation and landscaping standards on private property. ●​ The changes in this article were clarifications to the applicability of landscaping regulations and to match a Chapter 80 (municipal code) text amendment from earlier this year. Article XI Signs: Article XI establishes minimum standards for signs, recognizing their importance in communication, navigation, and supporting local businesses. These regulations aim to balance effective signage with visual appeal and safety by regulating design, placement, and size to reduce clutter. ●​ This article’s revisions are largely resolving a typo, clarifying the purpose of prohibited signage, and how sign measurements are taken __________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Page 5 of 8 Page 569 of 572 Article XII General Development Regulations: Article XII provides general development regulations covering outdoor lighting, underground utilities, street access, outdoor storage of junk and debris, and sight vision triangles. These rules aim to support environmental objectives, improve safety, and maintain the community’s aesthetic and functional quality. ●​ Sec. 12.01(B) Applicability: Created two conditions for when the Outdoor Lighting provision applied: One is for new construction activity that is subject to the site plan approval procedures. The second is for all other instances for existing fixtures on nonresidential properties, in which the zoning administrator may require incremental improvements based on the scope of works and context. ●​ Sec. 12.01(C) Exemptions: Rephrased for clarity and added exemption (11) for properties with an already approved site plan. ●​ Sec. 12.01(D) Prohibited Lighting: Added prohibited lighting for lighting of unauthorized architectural elements of a building or structure that did not receive prior approval. ●​ Sec. 12.01(H) Light Trespass: An additional exemption for properties in the B-1(A) and B-1 zoning districts specific to light trespassing due to the proposed reduced building setbacks. ●​ Sec. 12.05(C) Exemptions: An added exemption for sight visibility triangles to allow open-design fences to be erected. Article XIII Nonconformities: Article XII addresses nonconformities, including uses, structures, lots, signs, and development features. The regulations aim to manage and mitigate discrepancies between existing conditions and current standards, ensuring gradual alignment with updated codes while respecting established properties. These guidelines support orderly development and promote consistency within the community. At the same time, they acknowledge and protect property owners' rights, ensuring fairness and allowing for reasonable use and enjoyment of their properties within the scope of the regulations. ●​ 13.04(C) Nonconforming Structures: Added that residential dwelling units with a nonconforming street side setback may be expanded vertically if it matches the building’s original footprint. This is in addition to existing permissions to the front street setback. Article XIV Review and Approval Procedures: Article XIV provides procedures for review and approval, encompassing common processes, map and text amendments, development plans, special uses, site plans, variances, zoning verification letters, and appeals. No revisions are proposed to this article. __________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Page 6 of 8 Page 570 of 572 Article XV Administration and Enforcement: Article XV outlines regulations for administration and enforcement, detailing the roles, responsibilities, and processes involved in overseeing and upholding zoning and development standards. No revisions are proposed to this article. Article XVI Measurements: Article XVI defines regulations for measurements, detailing the methods and standards used to determine compliance with zoning and development requirements. ●​ 16.07(C) Contextual Setbacks: These revisions limited the maximum reduction of the street setback to 10 feet less than what the district requires, clarified that the minimum required setback is used in the calculation when adjacent properties have a greater setback, and that attached accessory structures may not be included when calculating the contextual setback. ●​ 16.08 Lot Coverage: This section was edited to match the proposed changes to the small building exemption of Sec. 7.02(A)(2). Article XVII Definitions: Article XVII provides definitions to ensure clarity and consistency in the interpretation and application of zoning and development regulations. ●​ Definitions of lighting intensity, recreational vehicles and equipment, and business vehicles were added to match the amended regulations in Articles XI and VII, respectively. Appendix A Recommended Tree and Shrubs: A list of largely native landscaping plants including canopy trees, evergreen trees, understory trees, and shrubs that are recommended to be implemented in landscaping plans and throughout the Village on private property. No revisions are proposed to this appendix. II.​ SUMMARY The Village of Westmont requests approval for text amendments to repeal Appendix A – Zoning from the Westmont Code of Ordinances and establish a new Chapter 95 – Zoning. This comprehensive update modernizes the Zoning Ordinance, including revisions to zoning districts, development standards, planning processes, and other regulations. The proposed changes aim to streamline and enhance zoning practices across the Village. Pending final approval by the Village Board of Trustees, staff will proceed with any necessary rezonings, ensuring proper notice and community involvement through public hearings. Again, readers are encouraged to consider the previous list as a summary of the key revisions rather than an exhaustive account of all proposed changes. III.​ LEGAL A.​ Notification: A legal notice was published in Westmont Suburban Life on April 3, 2025. B.​ Code References: Appendix A __________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Page 7 of 8 Page 571 of 572 C.​ Other Actions: The recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission will be referred to the Village Board for a final decision at a date to be determined. IV.​ DOCUMENTS ATTACHED: 1.​ Village of Westmont Zoning Ordinance Update July 2025 Redlined Revised DRAFT __________________________________________________________________________________ PZC 001-2025​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Page 8 of 8 Page 572 of 572