Agenda. 1. Call to Order/Roll Call. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Approval of Minutes May 2, 2018 Minutes

1. Call to Order/Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Approval of Minutes May 2, 2018 Minutes Village of Lincolnwood Plan Commission Meeting Wednesday, June 6, 2018 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers Room Lincolnwood Village Hall - 6900 North Lincoln Avenue Agenda 4. Case #PC-07-18: 6739 North Longmeadow Avenue Review of a Preliminary Plat of Subdivision and a Subdivision Variation Request: Consideration of a request by John Pikarski, Petitioner, on behalf of Willis Jones, Executor of the Estate of Mary M. McDonald as property owner of existing Lot 7, and Chicago Title Land Trust, Trustee, for existing Lot 8 under the Trust Agreement #121437 dated 12/29/97 to approve: 1) a Consolidation and Resubdivision of existing Lots 7 and 8 (two parcels currently making up the lot commonly known as 6739 North Longmeadow Avenue) into two new parcels in the R-1, Residential Zoning District; and 2) a Subdivision Variation that would allow the lot line of the proposed Lot 8 fronting on a cul-de-sac to be less than fifty feet in length. 5. Case #PC-08-18: 6636 North Leroy Avenue Review of a Final Plat of Subdivision Request: Consideration of a request by Erik Tibu, Petitioner, on behalf of Mihai Mike Smalberger, property owner, to approve a Final Plat of Subdivision that would result in two parcels being created from one existing parcel in the R-1, Residential Zoning District at the property commonly known as 6636 North Leroy Avenue. 6. Case #PC-06-18: Zoning Code Text Amendment Sign Regulations for Large-Scale Developments, Freestanding Sign Location, Portable Sign Requirements, and Temporary Signage 7. (Continued from May 2, 2018) Request: Village Board Referral of Zoning Code Text Amendments to consider modifying the permissibility and requirements for certain signage including: 1) Permitting Electronic Message Signs, with specific regulations, for properties and/or developments deemed to be large-scale ; 2) Amending existing regulations related to Temporary Signs for Special Events and Grand Openings; 3) Permitting Temporary Sign Coverings/Panels on Freestanding Signs; 4) Amending required setbacks for Temporary and Permanent Freestanding Signs; and 5) Amending existing regulations related to specific design limitations for Portable Signs. 8. Next Meeting 9. Public Comment 10. Adjournment POSTED: June 1, 2018

MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Mark Yohanna Sue Auerbach Steven Jakubowski Adi Kohn Henry Novoselsky Don Sampen DRAFT MEETING MINUTES OF THE PLAN COMMISSION MAY 2, 2018 7:00 P.M. LINCOLNWOOD VILLAGE HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6900 NORTH LINCOLN AVENUE LINCOLNWOOD, ILLINOIS 60712 STAFF PRESENT: Steve McNellis, Community Development Director Kathryn Kasprzyk, Community Development Coordinator I. Call to Order MEMBERS ABSENT: Anthony Pauletto Chairman Yohanna noted a quorum of six members and called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. II. Pledge of Allegiance III. Approval of Minutes Motion to recommend approval of the April 4, 2018 Plan Commission Minutes was made by Commissioner Sampen and seconded by Commissioner Novoselsky. Aye: Sampen, Novoselsky, Jakubowski, Kohn, and Yohanna Nay: None Abstained: Auerbach Motion Approved: 5-0, with one abstention IV. Case #PC-05-18: 6755 North Cicero Avenue Amendment to Ordinance No. 2017-3625 Related to Previously-Granted Variation Related to Parking Quantity Chairman Yohanna announced Case #PC-05-18 for consideration of a request by property owner Phil Stefani, Managing Member of Stefani Restaurant Group, to amend the approved relief previously granted in Ordinance No. 2017-3265 to permit a Variation to further decrease the

Village of Lincolnwood Plan Commission Minutes May 2, 2018 minimum number of required off-street parking spaces, from the previously-approved 51 spaces to 43 spaces, to permit installation of an outdoor seating area and enclosure. Development Director McNellis summarized the requested actions for the property located at 6755 North Cicero Avenue which is in the B-2 General Business Zoning District. The Village Board granted zoning relief for the restaurant redevelopment in May 2017. Additional zoning relief was approved in August 2017 for a revised screening wall along the east property line. Stefani s is proposing an outdoor seating area on the southwest side of the building to remain year-round. This seating area will further reduce, by eight spaces, on-site parking to 43 spaces from the previously-approved 51 spaces. Mr. Stefani has also provided proof of an agreement to provide off-site parking at the Carter Westminster United Presbyterian Church, 4950 West Pratt Avenue, Skokie; Johnson Goldberg & Brown, 6703 North Cicero Avenue; and an informal agreement with the BP gas station at the corner of Pratt and Cicero Avenues after 8:00 p.m. for a total of 106 off-site parking spaces (with the space numbers at the gas station being unknown at this time). The previous proposal was for 51 on-site spaces and 34 spaces off site for a total of 85 spaces. The Requested Action is for a Variation to amend the relief previously granted in Ordinance No. 2017-3625 to further permit a decrease to the minimum number of required off-street parking spaces, from 51 spaces to 43 spaces, for the installation of an outdoor seating area with a staffrecommended condition that the Petitioner will have all employees park at the church off-site parking lot. Chairman Yohanna swore in the witnesses. Attorney Lawrence M. Freedman of Ash, Anos, Freedman & Logan, 77 West Washington Street, Chicago, representative for Mr. Stefani, is aware that employees parking on the streets has caused some discomfort for some of the neighbors and believes this proposal addresses their concerns. A change of administration at the Korean Bethany Church, 4707 West Pratt Avenue, meant that they were no longer inclined to let Stefani s use their parking lot. Mr. Stefani does have a written agreement with the Carter Westminster United Presbyterian Church and an accountant s office at Cicero & North Shore for the use of their parking lots. He noted it would be Stefani s obligation to provide alternative off-site parking if they lose any of their current parking arrangements. Customers currently do not park their own cars in the Stefani s lot. All lot parking is valet only. The valets are instructed not to park any cars on the street, but to use the off-site parking areas. Mr. Stefani has been made aware that some employees are parking on the street until late in the evening. It is his intention to mandate all employees park at the church lot. Commissioner Novoselsky asked Mr. Freedman if Mr. Stefani would agree, as a condition of any Variation approval, and as a condition of employment, for employees to only park at the Carter Westminster United Presbyterian Church. The Petitioner agreed with this condition. Phil Stefani said in the five weeks the restaurant has been open, Saturday nights are the busiest between 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., where they typically park about 160 cars. The valets stack vehicles on the restaurant lot first before utilizing any of the off-site parking spaces, with the Accountant s office and gas station being parked first. He reiterated that he is aware of the Page 2 of 6

Village of Lincolnwood Plan Commission Minutes May 2, 2018 employee parking issue and will deal with any problems expeditiously. A nominal number of customers do not utilize valet parking and will park their own cars on the street, or, with the upcoming nice weather, customers will be able to walk to the restaurant. Mr. Stefani said customers have told him they are excited about the proposed outdoor patio. Chairman Yohanna asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to address the Plan Commission on this matter. The witnesses were instructed to limit their comments to three minutes. Leslie Lund, 6735 North Keating Avenue, said employees are still parking on Keating Avenue, as she sees the same cars. Ms. Lund also stated there has been an increase in trash. Vehicles are encroaching on her driveway making it difficult to enter and exit her property. Mr. Stefani answered that (based o0n her description) the trash she spoke of is not from his establishment. Art Lovering, 4667 West Pratt Avenue, also stated the same cars are parked in front of his house, and asked if Stefani s would mandate the employees to not park on the street. He also mentioned line of sight issues while pulling out of his driveway. Mr. Lovering asked where the cars would park if the parking agreements were rescinded. Jon Shimabukuro, 6730 North Keating Avenue, is glad for a fine dining establishment in the Village and thanked Mr. Stefani for being a man of his word that they would be a good neighbor. However, residents and visitors need to park blocks away as there is no parking available. Mr. Shimabukuro did mention that the parking situation has recently been better. David Weiss, 6521 North Kilbourn Avenue, does not believe Stefani s has proven the hardship standards, but is willing to wait and see what happens. Scott Anderson, 6916 North Kilpatrick Avenue, referenced an April 23, 2018 Chicago Tribune article which stated Mr. Stefani had already received approval for the outdoor dining request. Based on this, he wondered if the Village had already made a decision to allow this outdoor use, prior to this meeting. Mr. Stefani replied the article was not correct, and that he has always stated to customers that he is interested in outdoor seating and is going through the Village s process. Eric Jeong, 4707 West Pratt Avenue, said cars are parked too close to the entrance of the Korean Bethany Church. Mr. Jeong asked if No-parking striping could be implemented on either side of the Church s Pratt Avenue driveway to provide better visibility when using that driveway. Development Director McNellis replied that the striping request has already been made to the Public Works Department, and the Village will follow-up on that request. The Police Department is also aware of the parking concerns in this area. Police Chief Parrot, who was in attendance, replied they are monitoring the situation. Abbas Kanji, 6726 North Keating Avenue, is delighted with the new business and wished them the best of luck. Mr. Kanji said with parking on both sides of the street, Keating Avenue is basically a one-way street. Mr. Kanji agreed with his neighbors the parking situation has been better, which is appreciated, but, if the off-site parking is reduced, the parking situation on Keating Avenue will return. Maria Gligor, 6731 North Keating Avenue, showed the Plan Commissioners pictures of how many cars were parked on Keating Avenue on Thursday, April 5, 2018 at 4:00 p.m. Ms. Gligor Page 3 of 6

Village of Lincolnwood Plan Commission Minutes May 2, 2018 had the same concerns if the off-street parking spaces were eliminated, and inquired about the possibility of permit parking. Chairman Yohanna asked Mr. Stefani what he would propose to do if his petition was granted, but at some point in the future he no longer had a parking agreement with the Carter Westminster United Presbyterian Church and could not find replacement parking. Mr. Stefani assured the Plan Commission that he would provide alternative off-site parking if the current arrangements were no longer valid. Commissioner Sampen inquired if resident-only parking signs on Keating Avenue could be forwarded to the Traffic Commission for review. Director McNellis noted there is a process for considering permit-only parking and that a resident in the area has already spoken with Police and requested an application. Commissioner Auerbach suggested speed bumps or a stop sign could be installed at North Shore and Keating Avenues to slow down traffic, as this concern was raised by a member of the public. Commissioner Auerbach asked Mr. Stefani if the striping for the eight spots will remain. Mr. Stefani replied their plan is to build a deck over these eight spots due to the slope of the lot. The deck will be constructed of high-quality materials. Mr. Freedman said the eight spots will no longer be available, on a permanent basis. Chairman Yohanna asked if an annual letter from the Carter Westminster United Presbyterian Church and the accounting office of Johnson Goldberg & Brown to continue to use their lots should be a condition of approval. The Petitioner agreed to this request. Commissioner Auerbach asked if removal of the deck could be a condition of approval if unable to procure off-site parking. Commissioner Novoselsky reiterated his request that off-site employee parking is to be a condition of Variation approval. Mr. Stefani replied if the church parking lot was no longer available, the employees would park on the restaurant s lot. Mr. Ivo Cozzini, 6566 North Sauganash Avenue, said Mr. Stefani is a man of his word. There are a number of businesses in the Village with parking issues, and this is no different. Chairman Yohanna asked if there was anyone from the audience who would like to address the Plan Commission on this matter. Let the record state that no one additional came forward. Motion to recommend approval for a Variation to amend the approved relief previously granted in Ordinance No. 2017-3265 to further decrease the minimum number of required offstreet parking spaces, from the previously-approved 51 spaces to 43 spaces, to permit installation of an outdoor seating area and enclosure, with the following conditions, was made by Commissioner Jakubowski and seconded by Commissioner Novoselsky: 1) No parking for Employees or Valet shall be permitted on Village streets; 2) Provide an annual letter from the Carter Westminster United Presbyterian Church and Johnson Goldberg & Brown, as well as a verbal approval from the gas station, to provide off-site parking; 3) the Petitioner will provide valet parking for all hours of operation; and 4) At no time will less than 85 parking spaces be available off Village streets. Chairman Yohanna asked the Village s new Police Chief, Jay Parrot, his recommendations or thoughts regarding enforcement of the parking situation. Chief Parrot recognizes the resident s Page 4 of 6

Village of Lincolnwood Plan Commission Minutes May 2, 2018 concerns about excessive parking on the streets by the restaurant, and if cars are blocking fire hydrants or driveways, then the Police Department will address that. Aye: Jakubowski, Novoselsky, Auerbach, Kohn, Sampen, and Yohanna Nay: None Motion Approved: 6-0 Case #PC-05-18 will be heard at the May 15, 2018 meeting of the Village Board. V. Case #PC-06-18: Zoning Code Text Amendment Sign Regulations for Large-Scale Developments, Freestanding Sign Location, Portable Sign Requirements, and Temporary Signage Chairman Yohanna announced Case #PC-04-18 for consideration of a Village Board Referral of Zoning Code Text Amendments to consider modifying the permissibility and requirements for certain signage including: 1) permitting Electronic Message Signs, with specific regulations, for properties and/or developments deemed to be large-scale ; 2) amending existing regulations related to Temporary Signs for Special Events and Grand Openings; 3) permitting Temporary Sign Coverings/Panels on Freestanding Signs; 4) amending required setbacks for Temporary and Permanent Freestanding Signs; and 5) amending existing regulations related to specific design limitations for Portable Signs. Staff requested the opportunity to complete research on these requests, incorporate new information received less than a week ago at a Planning Conference, and provide additional notification to local businesses of this proposal Chairman Yohanna asked if there was anyone from the audience who would like to address the Plan Commission on this matter. Let the record state that no one came forward. Motion to continue, without discussion, to the June 6, 2018 Plan Commission meeting, was made by Commissioner Auerbach and seconded by Commissioner Novoselsky. Aye: Auerbach, Novoselsky, Jakubowski, Kohn, Sampen, and Yohanna Nay: None Motion Approved: 6-0 VI. Next Meeting The next meeting of the Plan Commission is scheduled for Wednesday, June 6, 2018. VII. Public Comment Chairman Yohanna asked if there was anyone from the audience who would like to address the Plan Commission. Let the record state that no one came forward. VIII. Adjournment Page 5 of 6

Village of Lincolnwood Plan Commission Minutes May 2, 2018 Motion to recommend adjournment was made by Commissioner Auerbach and seconded by Commissioner Kohn. Meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Aye: Auerbach, Kohn, Jakubowski, Novoselsky, Sampen, and Yohanna Nay: None Motion Approved: 6-0 Respectfully submitted, Kathryn Kasprzyk Community Development Coordinator Page 6 of 6

Plan Commission Staff Report Case # PC-07-18 June 6, 2018 Subject Property: 6739 North Longmeadow Avenue Zoning District: R-1 Residential Petitioner: John Pikarski, on behalf of behalf of Willis Jones, Executor of the Estate of Mary M. McDonald as property owner of existing Lot 7, and Chicago Title Land Trust, Trustee for existing Lot 8 under the Trust Agreement #121437 Nature of Request: Review of Preliminary Plat of Subdivision and a Request for a Subdivision Variation Notification: Notice was published in the Lincolnwood Review on May 10, 2018, Public Hearing Signs were installed at 6739 North Longmeadow Avenue, and mailed legal notices dated May 9, 2018 were provided to properties within 250 feet. Background The property commonly known as 6739 North Longmeadow Avenue is currently made up of two parcels and hosts one single-family home. The total area of the zoning lot is approximately 37,200-square feet (.85 acres). The single-family home overlaps the parcel line delineating the two parcels on the overall zoning lot.

6739 North Longmeadow Avenue Subdivision June 6, 2018 The Petitioner is requesting approval of consolidation and resubdivision of the two existing parcels. The proposed resubdivision would result in a new lot line located to the east of the existing lot line that bisects the zoning lot. This is necessary in order to create a new vacant lot on the east, and a new lot on the west that provides a compliant side yard setback for the existing single-family home. Required Approvals The proposed Subdivision requires the following approvals: Proposed Lot Width (X) Existing Lot Line Existing SF Home Proposed Lot Line Required Side Yard Setback (10% of X) Approval of a Preliminary Plat of Subdivision Diagram of Proposed Subdivision As explained in additional detail below, the proposed Subdivision includes a characteristic that requires a Variation from the Subdivision Ordinance. This Variation does not allow the proposed Subdivision to be considered a Minor Subdivision, meaning it must go through both Preliminary and Final Plat review. At this point in the process, the proposed Subdivision requires Plan Commission approval of the Preliminary Plat of Subdivision. Approval of a Subdivision Variation The proposed eastern lot includes an arcshaped lot line along the Longmeadow culde-sac right-of-way. As per Section 16-5- 2(C)2 of the Subdivision Ordinance, all lots located on the radius of a cul-desac shall have a minimum front lot line of 50 feet. The Subdivision Ordinance defines the front lot line as the line separating the lot from the street. The proposed eastern lot has a front line with a length of 38.66 feet. Therefore, the proposed Subdivision requires a Variation from Section 16-5-2(C)2 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Non-Compliant Front Lot Line Location of Non-Compliant Lot Line 2

6739 North Longmeadow Avenue Subdivision June 6, 2018 Considerations The following may be considered by the Plan Commission when discussing the proposed Subdivision: Staff Review of the Draft Plat of Subdivision The Village Engineer conducted a review of the draft Preliminary Plat of Subdivision submitted by the Petitioner with his application. (See Attachment 2) During that review, the Village Engineer noted the following required revisions: Show building setback lines per the current Zoning of the property; Add a School District Certificate to the plat; Label the existing eight-foot easement as to the type of easement it is; and The County Clerk & County Recorder Certificates can be removed from the plat. Cook County Recorder & Clerk uses their own stamps to certify plats. As of the drafting of this report, Village Staff has not received a revised Plat of Subdivision addressing these comments. The Plan Commission may consider recommendation of a conditional approval of the Preliminary Plat of Subdivision, with these comments to be addressed prior to Village Board consideration of the Preliminary Plat. Public Input Village Staff received no public input regarding the requested Subdivision. Subdivision Design Standards Chapter 16, Article 5 of the Subdivision Regulations identifies design standards against which a proposed Subdivision should be assessed. (See Attachment 3) Staff has found the proposed Subdivision to be in compliance with all the design standards, with the exception of the non-compliant lot line that would be addressed by the requested Subdivision Variation. Requested Action The Petitioner seeks approval of a Preliminary Plat of Subdivision that would result in the creation of two parcels in the R-1 Residential Zoning District. The length of the arc abutting the public right-of-way for the proposed eastern lot requires a Variation from Section 16-5- 2(C)2 of the Subdivision Ordinance. If the Plan Commission recommends approval of the requested Variation and Preliminary Plat, staff recommends that the approval include the condition that comments provided by the Village Engineer be addressed and that a revised Preliminary Plat of Subdivision be submitted prior to the Village Board consideration of the Preliminary Plat. Documents Attached 1. Subdivision Application 2. Preliminary Plat of Subdivision 3. Relevant Code Sections 3

Attachment #3: Relevant Subdivision Ordinance Sections Chapter 16, Article 5: Subdivision Design Standards 16-5-1 Consistency with Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan; technical standards. The proposed subdivision shall conform to all applicable requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan goals include maintaining the existing environmental assets of the Village, preserving and protecting mature trees and existing landscaping, and guiding, controlling, and encouraging development that is consistent with the Village's character. 16-5-2 Lots. (A) General. All lots shall be designed and subdivided in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance, including, without limitation, compliance with the lot area requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Outside the corporate limits, the minimum area of each proposed lot shall be not less than the minimum lot area required by the zoning regulations of the County of Cook for the district in which the proposed lot is located. (B) Lot shapes. Every lot shall have four sides. Exceptions may be approved when the applicant demonstrates that a four-sided lot is not feasible because of peculiar topographical conditions, abutting lots of record or abutting parcels, or preexisting parcels not owned directly or indirectly by the applicant. A lot of other than four sides will not be approved if it appears that it has been formed solely to comply with the minimum area, depth and width requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. As nearly as practicable, intersecting lot lines shall form right angles with each other. (C) Lot width. (1) Residential districts. All lots located in residential districts shall be of a minimum width in accordance with the applicable standards set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. (2) Culs-de-sac. All lots located on the radius of a cul-de-sac shall have a minimum front lot line of 50 feet.

(D) Consolidations. (1) Two lots. For the consolidation of two lots into one lot, the total side yard setbacks for the new lot shall comply with the setbacks required by the Zoning Ordinance for the district in which the lot is located, and the individual side yard setbacks shall be subject to the review and approval of the Plan Commission. (2) More than two lots. No consolidation of more than two lots shall be permitted unless a variation is granted pursuant to Article 9 of this Chapter 16. In granting any such variation, the Board of Trustees may, pursuant to Section 16-9-3 of this Code, impose certain conditions, including, without limitation, any one or more of the following conditions: (E) Street frontage. (a) The installation of additional landscaping on the lot; (b) An increase in the width of any required yard or yards on such lot beyond what is required by the Zoning Ordinance; (c) A restriction on the gross floor area for the lot that is less than what is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance; and (d) A restriction on the maximum impervious surface on the lot. (1) Required. All lots shall front on a public street; provided, however, that a lot may front on a private street if such private street has been or is to be approved as part of a planned unit development. (2) Prohibited. Unless in existence as of the effective date hereof, no lot shall have access to a street solely across another property or through any portion of such property by means of an easement. (3) Single-family residential districts. Unless in existence as of the effective date hereof, the following shall be prohibited in single-family residential districts of the Village: (F) Through lots. (a) Lots oriented in a front-to-rear, front-to-side, or rear-to-rear pattern; and (b) Through lots. (1) A multifamily residential use located on a through lot shall contain only one curb or access point to the street. (2) A landscaped berm or uniform masonry wall, to be designed and constructed with materials, and in a manner, to be approved by the Community Development Department, shall be located

on each through lot along the lot line fronting along the street on which there is no curb cut or access point to the property. (G) Design. A subdivision, and the lots therein, shall not be designed as to render an existing permanent structure in violation of this Chapter 16 or of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. 16-5-3 Tree preservation and protection. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes that trees and mature landscaping, as well as the ecology of the community, are important characteristics of the Village and should be preserved and protected. In furtherance thereof, the Village has enacted tree preservation regulations in Chapter 14, Article 16 of this Code. All subdivisions shall comply with the Village's tree preservation regulations in Chapter 14, Article 16 of this Code. 16-5-4 Landscaping. Street trees shall be installed along all parkways in the subdivision, in accordance with Section 16-6-1(G) of this Code. In addition, when the Village determines that additional landscaping is desirable or necessary to mitigate the impact of any new buildings or structures on any lot to be created within a subdivision, the subdivision approval may be conditioned upon the installation of additional landscaping on such lot to screen any new buildings or structures on that lot from an adjacent lot or from the street, or both. If such additional landscaping is required, the applicant shall submit, for the review and approval of the Village, a detailed landscaping plan depicting the additional landscaping. In addition, the Village may require the applicant to provide performance security and guaranty security for the landscaping, which security shall be submitted in accordance with the provisions of Article 6 of this Chapter 16. 16-5-5 Grading and stormwater drainage. The subdivision shall be developed in strict accordance with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, and regulations related to grading and stormwater retention, detention, and drainage, including, without limitation, Chapter 12, Article 6, of this Code, as well as in strict accordance with the grading plans and profiles approved as part of the approved engineering plans. No grade change shall be permitted that would: (a) modify stormwater drainage on the property or an adjacent lot; (b) adversely impact the capacity or operation of the Village's stormwater system; or (c) affect the structural stability of an adjacent lot, unless the Village Engineer, in his or her sole determination, approves in writing an alternative means that will adequately provide for the collection and diversion of stormwater. No grading plan shall be approved that, in the Village Engineer's determination, poses potential adverse impacts to the environment, including, without limitation, significant change to the rate of stormwater runoff, rate or volume of sedimentation, or location of discharge. 16-5-6 Utilities and utility lines. (A) General. All utilities necessary for the subdivision shall be constructed in accordance with Article 6 of this Chapter 16, and shall be installed underground, except as expressly provided in this Section 16-5-6 or if approved by the Village Engineer upon payment of a fee to the Village in an amount equal to the costs of burying the utilities underground, as determined by the Village Engineer. When the Village Engineer determines that a storm sewer, sanitary sewer, or water supply system should be designed and

constructed larger than is immediately required to serve the subdivision, the applicant may be reimbursed for the additional costs of such oversizing, as determined by the Village Engineer, pursuant to a recapture agreement in accordance with applicable state statutes. (B) Burial of utility lines. (1) Except as otherwise provided, all utility lines to be newly installed, or, for major subdivisions, to be reinstalled from existing overhead facilities, shall be placed underground within easements or dedicated public rights-of-way. Specifically, and without limitation of the foregoing, all existing overhead utility lines located on property that is the subject of an application for approval of a major subdivision pursuant to this Chapter 16, or on a public rightof-way adjacent to such property, shall, as a condition of such approval, be placed underground within a dedicated easement or a public right-of-way. No utility lines shall be constructed within a storm or sanitary sewer easement, except for crossings, without the advance written approval of the Village Engineer. (2) The Village Engineer may, upon receipt of a written request therefor, waive the burial requirement for electric distribution transformers, switch gear, meter pedestals, and telephone pedestals, in accordance with accepted utility practices for underground distribution. Such facilities and equipment shall be screened from public view wherever possible and shall be placed in locations to be approved by the Village Engineer. (3) Notwithstanding any provision of this Chapter 16 to the contrary, no applicant shall be required to place the following utilities or utility lines underground. (a) Temporary overhead utility lines used in connection with construction, but only during periods of construction; and (b) Service connections, meters, and similar equipment normally attached to the outside wall of the premises that they serve. 16-5-7 Easements and dedications. (A) Easements shall be provided where necessary for the provision of sanitary sewer, water, storm drainage, gas lines, electric lines, telephone, cable television, streets, pathways, sidewalks and other necessary public or private purposes in order to adequately serve the proposed subdivision. (B) The easements shall be depicted on the preliminary and final plats of subdivision in accordance with Sections 16-3-2 and 16-3-4 of this Code. (C) The size and location of all such easements shall be subject to the approval of the Village Engineer, and the terms of all such easements shall be subject to the approval of the Village Engineer and Village Attorney. (D) Easements for Village utilities, including, without limitation, sewer, stormwater or water utilities, shall be no less than 20 feet in width, and shall, to the extent practicable, be located at the rear of each

lot and along such other lot lines so as to provide continuity of alignment of such easements from block to block. (E) The final plat shall provide for dedications of rights-of-way easements of land necessary for any bicycle paths, greenways, storm- or floodwater runoff channels and basins, ways for public facilities, parks, playgrounds, school grounds, and other public grounds, as may be required by the Plan Commission or Board of Trustees in order to conform with the Comprehensive Plan. Any public lands so designated within the Comprehensive Plan and lying within the proposed subdivision shall be dedicated for the use designated by the Comprehensive Plan. 16-5-8 Lot access and circulation. All subdivisions shall be designed to provide appropriate public street access to all lots in the subdivision, which access shall be designated on the preliminary and final plats of subdivision. 16-5-9 Survey monuments. Permanent survey monuments constructed of iron pipe not less than one inch in diameter and 30 inches long, or as otherwise approved by the Village Engineer, shall be installed at all street corners, at all points where street lines intersect the exterior boundaries of the proposed subdivision, and at angle points and points of curve in each street. Chapter 16, Article 9: Variations 16-9-1 Application. Upon application to the Village Director of Community Development, variations from the provisions of this Chapter 16 may be authorized by the Board of Trustees in accordance with the provisions of this Article 9. In applying for a variation from the provisions of this Chapter 16, the applicant shall demonstrate, in writing, that each of the following criteria is satisfied. (A) The requested variation is in keeping with the overall purpose and intent of this Chapter 16; (B) The grant of the requested variation will not impair the public health, safety, or general welfare and will not contravene the goals of the Comprehensive Plan nor the intent of this Chapter 16; (C) The grant of the variation will not adversely impact adjacent properties; and (D) The situation of the applicant is not of a general or recurring nature for similarly situated properties within the Village or within its jurisdiction.

Plan Commission Staff Report Case # PC-08-18 June 6, 2018 Subject Property: 6636 North Leroy Avenue Zoning District: R-1 Residential Petitioner: Erik Tibu, on behalf of Mihai Smalberger, Property Owner Nature of Request: Review of Final Plat of Subdivision Notification: Notice was published in the Lincolnwood Review on May 10, 2018, Public Hearing Signs were installed at 6636 North Leroy Avenue, and mailed legal notices dated May 9, 2018 were provided to properties within 250 feet. Background The property commonly known as 6636 North Leroy Avenue is currently comprised of one parcel with an area of approximately 19,140-square feet (.44 acres). The property is zoned as R-1 Residential and has a single-family home located on it. All adjacent properties are also zoned as R-1 Residential. The Petitioner is requesting permission to subdivide the existing parcel into two parcels. The northern proposed parcel would have a lot width of 75 feet and a lot area of 9,903- square feet. The southern proposed lot would have a lot width of 70 feet and a lot area of 9,243-square feet.

6636 North Leroy Avenue Subdivision June 6, 2018 Required Approvals The proposed Subdivision meets the definition of a Minor Subdivision. Therefore, the requirement for review of a Preliminary Plat of Approval is waived. The proposed Subdivision requires Plan Commission approval of the Final Plat of Subdivision as per Section 16-4-2 of the Subdivision Ordinance. (A Subdivision is considered a Minor Subdivision if it (a) is located in a residential zoning district; (b) will not contain more than two lots upon approval by the Village; (c) fronts on an existing improved street; (d) does not involve any new right-of-way or the extension or installation of any public improvements; (e) does not adversely affect the development of Lot 1: 9,903 SF Lot 2: 9,243 SF Proposed Subdivision the remainder of the parcel or adjoining property; (f) does not require a Variation from any provision of this Chapter 16; and (g) is not in conflict with any provision or portion of the Zoning Ordinance or this Chapter 16. The proposed Subdivision meets all of these standards.) Considerations The following may be considered by the Plan Commission when discussing the proposed Subdivision: Staff Review of the Draft Plat of Subdivision The Village Engineer conducted a review of the draft Plat of Subdivision submitted by the Petitioner with his application. All comments were addressed by the Petitioner, and the resulting Plat of Subdivision is attached to this report. (See Attachment 3) Public Input Village Staff received one email correspondence from a nearby property owner expressing concerns regarding the potential impact on the character of the neighborhood if the subject lot is permitted to subdivide and two new homes are built. (See Attachment 5) Subdivision Design Standards Chapter 16, Article 5 of the Subdivision Regulations identifies design standards against which a proposed Subdivision should be assessed. (See Attachment 6) Staff has found the proposed Subdivision to be in compliance with all the design standards. 2

6636 North Leroy Avenue Subdivision June 6, 2018 Requested Action The Petitioner seeks approval of a Final Plat of Subdivision that would result in the creation of two compliant parcels in the R-1 Residential Zoning District. Should the Plan Commission take action on this request during its first hearing, the Village Board would consider the recommendation of the Plan Commission at the June 19, 2018 Village Board meeting. Documents Attached 1. Subdivision Application 2. Current Plat of Survey 3. Final Plat of Subdivision 4. Plat of Topography 5. Public Input 6. Relevant Code Sections 3

Hammel.Douglas From: Sent: To: Subject: Lee Harris <havatoy@aol.com> Monday, May 14, 2018 1:10 PM Hammel.Douglas Plan commission hearing-june 6, 7 pm-6636 Leroy subdivision request Hi I ve owned my home at 6635 N. Leroy for about 20 years. I regret to say this, as I ve watched my investment shrink to 50% of what I ve invested in the home, as I ve watched the real estate taxes soar. I ve tried to sell the home over the past 12 years since I ve moved out without any success. But still, I continue to pour money into the home maintaining it beautifully. I grew up only 2 miles away (Edgebrook), and for 64 years have loved the Towers. I ve seen many poor decisions by the past Mayor & Council which contributed to the current market state, and outrageous residential real estate taxes (once diversified with thriving Commercial & Retail income). For the builder/developer who purchased 6636 N. Leroy, which has a nice lot but applying to divide it into TWO homesis not in the conformity of the streets wide, tasteful & stately lots. It will destroy the unique character of this beautiful core Lincolnwood Tower street. I see it as yet another nail in the coffin of the most beautiful street in the Towers...once a prestigious address. This application to divide into 2 homes is simply a strategy to maximize profits, at the cost of maintaining a quality block of beautiful homes on beautiful lots. Every neighbor should be vocalizing outrage against this application. With the aging housing stock, lack of new homes Mr. Smallberger will certainly do fine, renovating the stone home, or building ONE single new home on this lot. Real Estate Investment & Building has been my expertise for almost 40 years (as well as real estate broker from 1979 1995), I know what I m speaking about. Dividing & jamming 2 homes onto 1 nice (but not large) lot will push values lower. Thank you, Lee Harris Harris Properties 773 742 0100 Owner 6635 N. LEROY Sent from my iphone Sent from my iphone 1

Attachment #6: Relevant Code Sections Section 16-1-2: Definitions SUBDIVISION, MINOR: A subdivision that: (a) is located in a residential zoning district; (b) will not contain more than two lots upon approval by the Village; (c) fronts on an existing improved street; (d) does not involve any new right-of-way or the extension or installation of any public improvements; (e) does not adversely affect the development of the remainder of the parcel or adjoining property; (f) does not require a variation from any provision of this Chapter 16; and (g) is not in conflict with any provision or portion of the Zoning Ordinance or this Chapter 16. 16-4-2: Review of minor subdivisions. If the proposed subdivision is a minor subdivision, the proposed subdivision shall be reviewed solely in accordance with and pursuant to the final plat review process set forth in Section 16-4-5 of this Code. The application for review of a minor subdivision shall be filed in accordance with the final plat application set forth in Section 16-3-3 of this Code. No development agreement shall be required for a minor subdivision. Chapter 16, Article 5: Subdivision Design Standards 16-5-1 Consistency with Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan; technical standards. The proposed subdivision shall conform to all applicable requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan goals include maintaining the existing environmental assets of the Village, preserving and protecting mature trees and existing landscaping, and guiding, controlling, and encouraging development that is consistent with the Village's character. 16-5-2 Lots. (A) General. All lots shall be designed and subdivided in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance, including, without limitation, compliance with the lot area requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Outside the corporate limits, the minimum area of each proposed lot shall be not less than the minimum lot area required by the zoning regulations of the County of Cook for the district in which the proposed lot is located. (B) Lot shapes. Every lot shall have four sides. Exceptions may be approved when the applicant demonstrates that a four-sided lot is not feasible because of peculiar topographical conditions, abutting lots of record or abutting parcels, or preexisting parcels not owned directly or indirectly by the applicant. A lot of other than four sides will not be approved if it appears that it has been formed solely to comply with the minimum area, depth and width requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. As nearly as practicable, intersecting lot lines shall form right angles with each other.

(C) Lot width. (1) Residential districts. All lots located in residential districts shall be of a minimum width in accordance with the applicable standards set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. (2) Culs-de-sac. All lots located on the radius of a cul-de-sac shall have a minimum front lot line of 50 feet. (D) Consolidations. (1) Two lots. For the consolidation of two lots into one lot, the total side yard setbacks for the new lot shall comply with the setbacks required by the Zoning Ordinance for the district in which the lot is located, and the individual side yard setbacks shall be subject to the review and approval of the Plan Commission. (2) More than two lots. No consolidation of more than two lots shall be permitted unless a variation is granted pursuant to Article 9 of this Chapter 16. In granting any such variation, the Board of Trustees may, pursuant to Section 16-9-3 of this Code, impose certain conditions, including, without limitation, any one or more of the following conditions: (E) Street frontage. (a) The installation of additional landscaping on the lot; (b) An increase in the width of any required yard or yards on such lot beyond what is required by the Zoning Ordinance; (c) A restriction on the gross floor area for the lot that is less than what is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance; and (d) A restriction on the maximum impervious surface on the lot. (1) Required. All lots shall front on a public street; provided, however, that a lot may front on a private street if such private street has been or is to be approved as part of a planned unit development. (2) Prohibited. Unless in existence as of the effective date hereof, no lot shall have access to a street solely across another property or through any portion of such property by means of an easement. (3) Single-family residential districts. Unless in existence as of the effective date hereof, the following shall be prohibited in single-family residential districts of the Village: (a) Lots oriented in a front-to-rear, front-to-side, or rear-to-rear pattern; and (b) Through lots.

(F) Through lots. (1) A multifamily residential use located on a through lot shall contain only one curb or access point to the street. (2) A landscaped berm or uniform masonry wall, to be designed and constructed with materials, and in a manner, to be approved by the Community Development Department, shall be located on each through lot along the lot line fronting along the street on which there is no curb cut or access point to the property. (G) Design. A subdivision, and the lots therein, shall not be designed as to render an existing permanent structure in violation of this Chapter 16 or of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. 16-5-3 Tree preservation and protection. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes that trees and mature landscaping, as well as the ecology of the community, are important characteristics of the Village and should be preserved and protected. In furtherance thereof, the Village has enacted tree preservation regulations in Chapter 14, Article 16 of this Code. All subdivisions shall comply with the Village's tree preservation regulations in Chapter 14, Article 16 of this Code. 16-5-4 Landscaping. Street trees shall be installed along all parkways in the subdivision, in accordance with Section 16-6-1(G) of this Code. In addition, when the Village determines that additional landscaping is desirable or necessary to mitigate the impact of any new buildings or structures on any lot to be created within a subdivision, the subdivision approval may be conditioned upon the installation of additional landscaping on such lot to screen any new buildings or structures on that lot from an adjacent lot or from the street, or both. If such additional landscaping is required, the applicant shall submit, for the review and approval of the Village, a detailed landscaping plan depicting the additional landscaping. In addition, the Village may require the applicant to provide performance security and guaranty security for the landscaping, which security shall be submitted in accordance with the provisions of Article 6 of this Chapter 16. 16-5-5 Grading and stormwater drainage. The subdivision shall be developed in strict accordance with all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, and regulations related to grading and stormwater retention, detention, and drainage, including, without limitation, Chapter 12, Article 6, of this Code, as well as in strict accordance with the grading plans and profiles approved as part of the approved engineering plans. No grade change shall be permitted that would: (a) modify stormwater drainage on the property or an adjacent lot; (b) adversely impact the capacity or operation of the Village's stormwater system; or (c) affect the structural stability of an adjacent lot, unless the Village Engineer, in his or her sole determination, approves in writing an alternative means that will adequately provide for the collection and diversion of stormwater. No grading plan shall be approved that, in the Village Engineer's determination, poses potential adverse impacts to the environment, including, without limitation, significant change to the rate of stormwater runoff, rate or volume of sedimentation, or location of discharge.

16-5-6 Utilities and utility lines. (A) General. All utilities necessary for the subdivision shall be constructed in accordance with Article 6 of this Chapter 16, and shall be installed underground, except as expressly provided in this Section 16-5-6 or if approved by the Village Engineer upon payment of a fee to the Village in an amount equal to the costs of burying the utilities underground, as determined by the Village Engineer. When the Village Engineer determines that a storm sewer, sanitary sewer, or water supply system should be designed and constructed larger than is immediately required to serve the subdivision, the applicant may be reimbursed for the additional costs of such oversizing, as determined by the Village Engineer, pursuant to a recapture agreement in accordance with applicable state statutes. (B) Burial of utility lines. (1) Except as otherwise provided, all utility lines to be newly installed, or, for major subdivisions, to be reinstalled from existing overhead facilities, shall be placed underground within easements or dedicated public rights-of-way. Specifically, and without limitation of the foregoing, all existing overhead utility lines located on property that is the subject of an application for approval of a major subdivision pursuant to this Chapter 16, or on a public rightof-way adjacent to such property, shall, as a condition of such approval, be placed underground within a dedicated easement or a public right-of-way. No utility lines shall be constructed within a storm or sanitary sewer easement, except for crossings, without the advance written approval of the Village Engineer. (2) The Village Engineer may, upon receipt of a written request therefor, waive the burial requirement for electric distribution transformers, switch gear, meter pedestals, and telephone pedestals, in accordance with accepted utility practices for underground distribution. Such facilities and equipment shall be screened from public view wherever possible and shall be placed in locations to be approved by the Village Engineer. (3) Notwithstanding any provision of this Chapter 16 to the contrary, no applicant shall be required to place the following utilities or utility lines underground. (a) Temporary overhead utility lines used in connection with construction, but only during periods of construction; and (b) Service connections, meters, and similar equipment normally attached to the outside wall of the premises that they serve. 16-5-7 Easements and dedications. (A) Easements shall be provided where necessary for the provision of sanitary sewer, water, storm drainage, gas lines, electric lines, telephone, cable television, streets, pathways, sidewalks and other necessary public or private purposes in order to adequately serve the proposed subdivision. (B) The easements shall be depicted on the preliminary and final plats of subdivision in accordance with Sections 16-3-2 and 16-3-4 of this Code.

(C) The size and location of all such easements shall be subject to the approval of the Village Engineer, and the terms of all such easements shall be subject to the approval of the Village Engineer and Village Attorney. (D) Easements for Village utilities, including, without limitation, sewer, stormwater or water utilities, shall be no less than 20 feet in width, and shall, to the extent practicable, be located at the rear of each lot and along such other lot lines so as to provide continuity of alignment of such easements from block to block. (E) The final plat shall provide for dedications of rights-of-way easements of land necessary for any bicycle paths, greenways, storm- or floodwater runoff channels and basins, ways for public facilities, parks, playgrounds, school grounds, and other public grounds, as may be required by the Plan Commission or Board of Trustees in order to conform with the Comprehensive Plan. Any public lands so designated within the Comprehensive Plan and lying within the proposed subdivision shall be dedicated for the use designated by the Comprehensive Plan. 16-5-8 Lot access and circulation. All subdivisions shall be designed to provide appropriate public street access to all lots in the subdivision, which access shall be designated on the preliminary and final plats of subdivision. 16-5-9 Survey monuments. Permanent survey monuments constructed of iron pipe not less than one inch in diameter and 30 inches long, or as otherwise approved by the Village Engineer, shall be installed at all street corners, at all points where street lines intersect the exterior boundaries of the proposed subdivision, and at angle points and points of curve in each street.

Plan Commission Staff Report Case # PC-06-18 June 6, 2018 Subject: Consideration of Text Amendments to Modify the Permissibility of Electronic Signs, Certain Temporary Signs, and the Location of Permanent/Temporary Signs on Non- Residential Properties Requested Action: Text Amendments to Article XI, Signs, of the Village Zoning Code to modify the permissibility of Electronic Signs, certain Temporary Signs, and the location of Permanent/ Temporary Signs on Non-Residential Properties. Petitioner: Village Board Summary: At the December 5, 2017 and January 2, 2018 Committee of the Whole meetings, staff presented the Village Board with a series of proposed Sign Code Amendments for consideration in order to reduce unnecessary restrictions and provide more business-friendly regulations. The goal of these Amendments is to: 1) provide appropriate flexibility for commercial signage, especially for larger properties that require a certain level of visibility; and 2) reasonably expand opportunities for commercial businesses to promote their products and services. The Village Board was in agreement that additional consideration and discussion was warranted and referred this matter to the Plan Commission for a Public Hearing. The Plan Commission subsequently held a Workshop at the March 7, 2018 meeting, at which time the topics to be considered were introduced. It was the consensus of the Plan Commission that staff should survey surrounding communities, analyze those areas where existing Village requirements could reasonable be amended, and schedule a Public Hearing for consideration of new and amended Code requirements. The specific Amendments for consideration include the following: 1. Electronic Signs for Large-Scale Developments 2. Temporary Signs for Special Events/Grand Openings 3. Temporary Sign Panels 4. Sign Location 5. Portable Sign Design Staff conducted a survey of our comparison communities in May and have received responses from only four of those eight communities (Des Plaines, Glenview, Skokie, and Wilmette). Given the lower response rate, we have also added Lincolnshire to the list, for a total of five communities. The responses are summarized in the pages ahead, for each of the five proposed amendments.

Permanent/Temporary Electronic Signs Text Amendments June 6, 2018 1. Electronic Signs for Large-Scale Developments Section 11.06 of the Zoning Code (see Attachment #1) specifically prohibits electronic message signs and animated signs. Staff understands that these prohibitions were likely enacted specifically with an older style of digital sign (designed with individual light bulbs programmed to form a message) in mind. These signs were prevalent in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s throughout the country in the form of time/temperature signs and single-color scrolling message signs. As the Plan Commission is aware, the technology behind electronic message board signs has grown exponentially in the past ten years to the point that many of these signs are of the same quality as the high-definition video boards that can be found at major stadiums. Given the overall aesthetic improvement in these types of signs, and the prevalence of this type of messaging in today s commercial environment, it is appropriate to consider permitting electronic message boards (aka Electronic Message Centers), under certain conditions. Survey of Surrounding Communities: The five comparison communities are mixed on their permissibility of these signs types. Three of the five communities allow such signs in some form, with some limitations on zoning district (all allow commercial, one allows residential), setbacks from residential properties (0-250 ), illumination levels (5,000 nits during the day and 500-1,000 nits at night), and size (can be no larger than 50% of the total sign area). Wilmette prohibits all such signs and Skokie is updating their Electronic Message Center code requirements to broaden permissibility. Issues to be Addressed: Following, is a list of issues that can/should be addressed should the Plan Commission wish to consider permitting Electronic Message Center signs: Permissible Zoning Districts (Commercial? Residential? Industrial? Institutional?) Lot size (All lots? Lots of a minimum acreage?) Sign type (Wall Signs? Monument Signs? Both?) Sign area and height (Same as a permissible Monument Sign? Larger?) Minimum distance from a property line (Same as any other Monument Sign? Increased setback from residential uses?) Permit by right or special zoning relief (Special Use) required? Moving images (animated) permitted or static images only? Illumination levels (measured in nits or footcandles)? Hours of operation (24 hours a day? Only during business hours?) Examples of Electronic Message Board Signs for Private and Public Uses 2

Permanent/Temporary Electronic Signs Text Amendments June 6, 2018 Proposed Code Requirements: Staff recommends the following Code requirements, designed to limit the permissibility of signs with Electronic Message Centers (EMC) to large properties with multiple tenants, or significant programming and/or informational needs to be disseminated: Monument Signs incorporating EMC are considered Special Signs, requiring Special Sign Approval; Monument Signs incorporating EMC may be permitted on individual lots, or a unified campus under the same ownership, when said lot/campus has a minimum area of five (5) acres; No more than one Monument Sign incorporating an EMC may be permitted per lot, or unified campus under the same ownership; Monument Signs incorporating EMC are permitted only on lots in the B1, B2, B3, S and PUD Zoning Districts; EMC are permitted only as part of a Monument Sign; Monument Signs incorporating EMC are permitted up to a maximum height of 18 feet from grade, and a maximum area of 72-square feet per sign face, where the electronic message board is no greater than 50 percent of the overall area of the Monument Sign face; Monument Signs incorporating EMC shall be set back a minimum of 10 feet from an exterior property line and 50 feet from an interior property line; Monument Signs incorporating EMC shall be located a minimum of 150 feet from a property line of a lot used for residential purposes; Monument Signs incorporating EMC shall be permitted to be illuminated only during those hours in which the business is open and shall not exceed an illumination level of 5,000 nits during daylight hours and 500 nits between dusk and dawn, with the electronic panels equipped with a light sensor to automatically adjust brightness based on ambient light levels; and Monument Signs incorporating EMC may present static images only. No flashing, moving pictures, or animation is permitted. A minimum time limit/interval of no less than ten seconds between images or text shall be required. 2. Temporary Signs for Special Events/Grand Openings Zoning Code Section 11.04(8) (see Attachment #2) provides specific limitations on the number of events and number of days per event in which a special event temporary sign is permitted. Currently, that limitation is for two nonconsecutive events, for no more than 15 days per event (for a total of 30 days per year). There are no other limitations on the permissible parameters of these signs, which has led to some confusion, both internally and externally. In addition, the current Code requirements have greatly limited the ability of larger properties to not only provide specialized advertising, but also to advertise more than two events/sales per year. Survey of Surrounding Communities: The five comparison communities offer a variety of different regulations for temporary signage. All five permit temporary signage of some sort; however, the time limitation is different in almost every community, ranging from 42 days in Skokie to 56 days in Glenview to 90 days in Lincolnshire and 120 days in Des Plaines and Wilmette. None of the comparison communities limit temporary signage to special events and grand openings, instead permitting any sale, event, or advertising. Most communities limit the number of events to three, four, or five per year. 3

Permanent/Temporary Electronic Signs Text Amendments June 6, 2018 Permissible sign areas range from 20-square feet to 64-square feet, with every community dictating a different size requirement. Issues to be Addressed: Following is a list of issues that can/should be addressed should the Plan Commission wish to consider expanding some permissibility for Temporary Signs, while better defining others: Permissible Zoning Districts (Commercial? Industrial? Institutional?) Eligible events (Special event? Grand opening? Sale? No limitation?) Timeframe (30, 60, 90, or 120 days?) Regulate by number of events per year or minimum number of days per event? Permissible sign area (16 sq. ft.? 20? 32? 64?) Permissible Height? Sign type (Banners? Free-standing signs? Both?) Permissible number of Temporary Signs per property, single-tenant vs. multi-tenant? Minimum distance from a property line (Same as any Monument Sign? Smaller setback?) Proposed Code Requirements: Staff recommends the following Code requirements, designed to expand the opportunities for temporary signage, while defining the parameters for these sign types to insure they are reasonablysized: Temporary signs shall be re-defined as: A sign advertising a temporary event or product/ service that is allowed for a limited period of display and is not intended or designed for permanent display. Temporary Signs shall be permitted on all properties other than those zoned Residential; Temporary Signs shall be permitted for a maximum of sixty (60) days per year, with a minimum of ten (10) days and maximum of twenty (20) days per event; Temporary Signs advertising a grand opening may be secured to a building wall. All other Temporary Signs must be free-standing; Temporary Signs advertising a grand opening or anniversary date are permitted for up to thirty (30) days; Temporary Signs may be a maximum of sixteen (16)-square feet in area, at a height no taller than six feet (6 ) from finished grade; Temporary Signs on single-tenant properties shall be limited to a maximum of one (1) at any one time; Temporary Signs on multi-tenant properties shall be limited to a maximum of two (2) at any one time and shall be spaced a minimum of fifty feet (50) apart; and Temporary Signs shall maintain the same setback from a property line as a Monument Sign, and may not be located in the sight triangle 3. Temporary Sign Panels Temporary Signs that cover existing Monument Sign panels may be appropriate under certain circumstances. Zoning Code Section 11.08(11)(iii) (see Attachment #3) currently does not permit existing monument signs to be covered with a material of a temporary nature. This is regulated primarily through a requirement that signs be designed for permanence. In addition, Temporary Sign coverings/panels are not specifically noted in the Sign section of the Village 4

Permanent/Temporary Electronic Signs Text Amendments June 6, 2018 Code as being permitted, which, by default, prohibits them. Cases in which such signage may be appropriate include: 1) New Tenant Identification; and 2) Properties For Sale/Lease. New tenant identification may be necessary when a company is rebranded but still working on designing new permanent signs. It also could occur when a new company takes over an old space and either remains open or reopens shortly thereafter. In some cases, there may be lag time between opening/reopening and the new permanent sign being manufactured and installed. Rebranded Bank For-Lease Sign Survey of Surrounding Communities: The five comparison communities are again inconsistent on the permissibility of these types of signs. Lincolnshire permits a temporary sign for temporary identification (associated with a new tenant), Wilmette permits such signs on a case-by-case basis, Des Plaines permits only For Sale/Lease signs, Glenview does not permit such signs at all, and Skokie permits both sign types with certain conditions. Issues to be Addressed: Following is a list of issues that can/should be addressed should the Plan Commission wish to consider permitting Temporary Sign panels on permanent Monument Signs: Temporary material coverings permitted for Temporary Identification signs? For Sale/Lease signs? Both? Professional design requirement? Message limitations (Name of Business & logo only? Or permit same information as a permanent Monument Sign?) Material limitations (vinyl, canvas, shrink-wrap)? Permitted time frame for Temporary Identification signs (60 days? 90? 120?) Allow For Sale/Lease signs covering a Monument Sign to be displayed until the property is sold/leased? Proposed Code Requirements: Staff recommends the following Code requirements, designed to permit temporary sign panels, with certain stipulations: Temporary Sign Panels shall be permitted for the purpose of identifying a change in occupancy for a commercial property that results in an immediate need to identify the new occupant; Temporary Sign Panels shall be permitted to advertise a property For Sale or Lease, but shall only be permitted in lieu of any other Code-permitted Real Estate signs; 5

Permanent/Temporary Electronic Signs Text Amendments June 6, 2018 Temporary Sign Panels shall be professionally designed; Temporary Sign Panels identifying a change in occupancy shall be permitted to display only the name of the business and company logo, and are permitted for no more than 120 days; Temporary Sign Panels advertising a property For Sale or Lease shall be permitted until such time as the property is sold/leased; Temporary Sign Panels shall not increase the size of the Monument Sign face they are covering, nor shall they cover an area greater than the existing sign face; Temporary Sign Panels shall be securely and tightly attached to the existing permanent identification Monument Sign, so that they completely cover and conform to the underlying sign shape, to maintain a safe, neat, and orderly condition and appearance; and Temporary Sign Panels may be constructed only of vinyl, canvas, shrink-wrap, or similar material. 4. Sign Location The Village currently regulates the location of certain temporary and permanent signage in relation to a property line. Zoning Code Sections 11.04(1)(v) & 11.05(17)(ii)(1) (see Attachment #4) state that both Monument Signs and Exempt Signs (i.e. Real Estate Signs) are required to be set back a minimum of ten feet from the exterior property line. This can be a difficult setback to meet on the small commercial lots typically found throughout the Village. When a building footprint and required parking are designed for a site, there is often very little room remaining to locate a monument sign with a ten-foot setback. Similarly, Real Estate signs cannot meet the ten-foot setback given the close proximity of parking areas to the street. Variations for the location of these types of signs are not uncommon. Less than 5 setback to place a sign Example of Setback-Challenged Signs Survey of Surrounding Communities: Four of the five comparison communities generally require Monument Signs in commercial zoning districts to be setback a minimum of 5 or less, while one (Lincolnshire) requires a minimum setback of 15. Unlike the other comparison communities, Lincolnshire tends to have significantly larger commercial lots, where a 15 setback is much easier to provide. Issues to be Addressed: Following, is a list of issues that can/should be addressed should the Plan Commission wish to consider reducing the minimum required sign setback: 6

Permanent/Temporary Electronic Signs Text Amendments June 6, 2018 Consistent Sign Setbacks (same setback for all zoning districts or different for commercial versus industrial or other Zoning Districts?) Different Permanent Sign setback than Temporary Sign setback? Sight Triangle requirements. Proposed Code Requirements: Staff recommends the following Code requirements designed to amend sign location requirements: No part of any Free-standing Sign, permanent or temporary, shall be located closer than one foot (1 ) to any property line; and Free-standing signs located in the sight triangle (defined below) must be no taller than 30 inches from grade (the diagram on the right, depicting alleys, will be modified to include driveways). 5. Portable Sign Design Zoning Code Section 11.05(24) (see Attachment #5) requires that portable signs (including A- frame signs and sandwich boards) be professionally printed and not hand written. However, there are a number of portable sign designs available that consist of dry-erase or chalk boards which permit businesses to write specials messages for the day. This provides the opportunity to immediately advertise a daily special, rather than waiting for a professionally-printed sign to be produced. Restaurants often use these dry-erase or chalk boards to advertise their daily specials, as do certain service industries, such as salons. This can provide businesses greater flexibility without the additional cost of having professionally-printed inserts for an A-frame or sandwich board. 7

Permanent/Temporary Electronic Signs Text Amendments June 6, 2018 Changeable Copy Portable Signs Professionally-Printed Portable Signs Survey of Surrounding Communities: Three of the five comparison communities do not permit portable signs. The remaining two (Skokie and Wilmette) permit such signs and also allow hand-written messages, rather than requiring portable signs to be professionally-printed. Issues to be Addressed: The primary issue here is whether or not the professional-printing requirement should be maintained or eliminated. Proposed Code Requirements: Staff recommends the following Code requirement, designed to relax a limited component of portable signs: Portable Signs, or changeable copy board for use in connection with portable signs, may be professionally printed, or written by hand when the sign design (i.e. chalkboard or dry-erase board) permits such media. Public Notification Notification of the meeting was previously provided in the Lincolnwood Review, and has since been provided on the Village Website, the Village s Linked In page, the Lincolnwood Local e- blast and on the Lincolnwood Chamber of Commerce social media platforms. Staff Recommendation Given the volume of Code revision details being proposed, and the necessity to cross-reference these revisions with various requirements throughout the Zoning Code, staff is recommending the Plan Commission first provide direction regarding the specific proposals listed in this memo at Wednesday night s meeting. Staff will then work with the Village Attorney on specific Code language that memorializes the Plan Commission direction, while also ensuring First Amendment rights are not impinged in any way, in light of recent court decisions related to free speech rights as they relate to signage. Documents Attached 1. Pertinent Village Code Sections 8