Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

7 o'clock and 35 seconds. Calling the September 2nd Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order. Let's open with a roll call. Looks like we have perfect attendance. Robert Tantillo, Cat Hatkkey, Anthony Balena, present. Witch Manshaw here. Diane Gormley Barnes here. Barb Lucenti here and chairman Greg Scovich present. If everybody could stand for a pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Uh, next item of business is to approve last month's meeting minutes. Andreas, thanks a ton for sending those out early for everybody's review. I'm assuming everybody received it. And to the extent anybody has any questions, comments, suggested improvements, speak now or after you've reviewed it. I take the whole thing and after we've reviewed it, I'd entertain a motion.

I move to approve the August 2025 minutes. And uh Mr. Mshaw motioned to approve the August meeting minutes for the plan commission hearing. Do I have a second? I'll second. I'm going to give it to Diane Gormley Barnes as the second. All in favor of approving in its current form the August meeting minutes say I. I. All

opposed. Motion carries. Uh no public hearings tonight. Although thanks everybody for coming out for the uh public comments. I suspect I have a sense of what we're here for. Thank you uh plan commissioners for also being here for this allimp important subject. Um, I think what we're going to do now is move to new business, which should sound very familiar as it is something that we heard uh last month regarding the uh conversion of a garage in acacia to a living space. Um, and now we have the actual papered up ordinance that uh we will review, consider, and determine whether or not it's in a form that we can motion for approval and subsequently send it to the village board for final approval and adoption. So everybody take a look at the ordinance and do you feel that it appropriately covers what we discussed and in spirit approved last month

Andreas, how did you uh how did you arrive at a method with which we can monitor this for the uh change of title and the potential of reverting it back to a garage and it doesn't carry with the land. It only carries with the uh petitioner.

Um I haven't had a chance to research into that a little further. Um so the the methods currently um as I stated before would would be so anytime with the water bills out there, we'll flag it in BSNA, but also uh will you know if Acacia of course will have it and the owners will have it um as well. So, trying to keep that in the loop. I said, I'll I'll reach out to our attorney about it to see if we can if there is something to do a lean or recording it uh in the so it shows up in a title search on that. But I'm not currently, like I said, I I haven't had experience with that before. So, I don't really want to pine on whether or not that's something that can be done or something that can be I research into it, but I don't know if it's something that is generally recorded like that. Does Aaca do anything when you sell a house? There's, hey, you got to check in with the association. The association has to approve you or anything along those lines.

I don't know, but Ashbrook does. I believe that I believe does do something of that sort. um just because uh we've talked to him before like um about you know dues and that type of sort. So I think they do some sort of like check out at the end but I once again I'm not severely confident about that. Right. Okay.

I think everything has gone through the board. by the time it gets to village if that's what's necessary that's also approved so to revert back for some exception um that part I don't know I'm just trying to prevent any surprises with the next property owner

I think what we do with fences that are temporarily up or grandfathered in we created some type of provision that they would have to come down after the property was sold and the real estate agent would then be somewhat aware of through some communication that we would provide. Okay. I mean, I see we do have restoration in black and white in the ordinance, which is good.

Yeah, cor that's and that's just copied straight out of our municipal code as well with it. And I said, um, I know Indian Ridge, um, previously had a reasonable accommodation for a ramp and that when that, um, person was no longer in residence there, then it was removed and restored as well.

Got it. Any questions of Andre or any question or any uh suggestions to improve this ordinance as it's written? If not, I'd entertain a motion to approve it in its form for recommendation to the board for formal approval.

So move note that Commissioner Mshaw motion to approve the ordinance in its current form. Any second? I second. Miss Hatley uh second the motion. Um I think we'll do a voice. Voice or yay nay? You could do a voice and if then there's any naysay or if you would like to do a roll call, we could do a roll call. But it's up to you. Up to you.

Um, let's see how we do with the yays and the nays. Uh, all in favor of approving ordinance number 205-13 granting a reasonable combination variation to allow for the conversion of an enclosed garage into a family room at 147 Cascadia Drive. Say I. I. All opposed? Nay. Nay. Okay. All right. Well, let's do roll call. Okay. Commissioner Tantillo. Yes.

Commissioner Hotkey. Yes. Commissioner Bilina. No. Commissioner Mshaw. Yes. Commissioner Gormley Barnes. No. Commissioner Lucenti. Yes. Chairman Greg Kovich, do I vote even though we have a majority? Yes, you you you're a voting member, so you vote and passing is majority. Yes, passing is majority.

Chairman votes yes in favor of recommending for approval ordinance number 2015-13. Then I five five to two. The motion carries. My math is good. Has been bad the last couple times. Think you're good. Uh and now moving on. No other new business.

All right. Now, let's continue into our old business in which we will continue our discussion of residential fence regulations from last month. Andreas, if I could pose upon you to open the discussion. Um, after that, we'll do a zoning code items to review from safe build. So, that'll likely just be an update from you. And then finally, uh, anything that's on our minds. But uh if you want to set the stage for what we're here doing tonight and what we're doing in future meetings.

Okay. Um as discussed previously, we are going to be looking at any other follow-ups from August. Um and then also discussing any possible survey in instrument that we might be sending out um for the you know getting additional public comment besides just a public hearing. So that would be our that's our tenative schedule uh tonight. Now um I'll address the would you like to do the follow-up questions first because there was some information I was I was providing that would be true.

Okay. All right. So, um there was some there was some information that I was asked to provide. I was not able to get all of it in time, unfortunately. Um but I will uh if you look at page, what page was that on? Page two, um I put a handy agenda and packet summary in there so we can all follow along on the page numbers. Um, uh, Commissioner Grommy Barnes had asked if they could get a list of all the pools which would then have fences in the village and then any special uses fences. Um, these are strictly for those fences that have special uses. So, the fences along Juliet and um, behind Brookside are not included, nor are commercial fences. Um, and then any other special use fences, so like the ones in uh Bartlett Estates are included and that's on page, what page was that? 29. So you can see the the information that is there. Um, I I listed them out. So there's a number. Now, if you look at the if you look at the table on page 29 to kind of run through it, those with permit numbers or have permit numbers, those that don't have permit numbers are those we didn't find that had them. um if they have a special use, that is what the ordinance number is. Um and then we tried putting in a v a date so you can see when they were approved. This combines both special uses for fences and pools at the same time, which is what the last uh column is. It says types, different types of things of those sort. Um so there's that information for that. You can see where they're spread out in the village there. If someone has a pool and it's not on this list, please don't send it to me. I assume that it's good. Um, I can see that already. Some be like, well, my neighbor has a pool. Well, yeah. Um, additionally, on page 31 in

this very, I don't know how it came out pretty well. Luckily, I'm printing. Um, it cut I think I cut off a little bit. Uh Diane had also asked for those properties that would touch uh roads that are not controlled by the village which in the village of Indian Park that is Planefield Road, Wolf Road, Joliet Road, and the tiny little bit of Willow Springs Road. Notably, if you look at page 31, that has the most properties that are um touching it. I excluded the HOA properties because the fact that the properties that well except for the one accidentally I clicked on in Edgebrook. Um the the properties that are in the HOA any fences put up would be on HOA common area property. So it's not the individual parcel owners. Um so you can see that those are the ones uh Diane had also asked for th separating them between front yard and side and or rear yard. Um I was not able to get to that. The person who was working on that who's has our Jill who is our front office assistant who's also a graphic designer. Unfortunately um we've been very busy but also the fact that she um fell ill um today well last started last night and today so I wasn't able to finish the graphic. So that beautiful blue and yellow is what Cook County looks like when you take a screenshot of it. That's Cook County GIS. Um, luckily enough for Cook County GIS, if you keep going in the following pages, you can see all the pin numbers and all the addresses that are, um, as part of that.

And there's several on there, right?

Um, so um, and then the following couple of screenshots, I just took them because if I put them all on the same map, it would be very hard to read, but you can see um, the ones on Willow Springs Road on page 34. There's two properties there on 65th place that would have sideyards and then the the same exactly and um on page 35 you'd see the ones off Arrowhead Trail which would also have sideyards uh on there. Um part of discussion also was asked is is uh sorry page page you should go to page 37 before you go to page 3 uh6. Page 37 is a um very pretty rendering and when I say that I'm being sarcastic of of what I threw together at one point in time of the HOAs in the village for um our own edification on there. Uh so you can see the different colors of HOAs. If you're wondering what the kind of green color is that's not pastel, that's actually our parks. I was using that for references for our new uh members. Um, but this this illust is to illustrate which ones are fall under HOAs and which ones of those would not fall under HOAs. And then if you go back up to page 36, you'll also see that I have it's a there are two PUDs that are not HOAs. That is Timber Ridge Court, which is a PUD. Um, and some of it on Sequoia Lane, and then also um on 45 acres is also a PUD. though neither of those are controlled by HOAs or any type of association. So those would also hypothetically be allowed for them on there. So that is the the extra information we have to kind of that was requested to kind of looking at outlining the where I'm my assumption is where they possibly

could go but also give a better picture of of the landscape for lack of a better pun of where they the fences could go in the village. I thought it was a terrific pun. Thank you

Diane. Thanks for the questions. There are there are some there are a few things also um I apologize. There was one question you'd asked about dog runs um where they allowed in the village. We wouldn't normally permit those, but dog runs would be considered a structure and we wouldn't we don't allow unpermitted un we don't allow structures that are not put in specifically in the village code to be in rear yards. Um so a dog run is not one of the listed structures. Therefore, it is would not be allowed in the rear yard.

Okay. I I recall when we were addressing this issue the last time, there's somewhere somewhere in the zoning code, there's the ability to fence off a limited space adjacent to your home or I mean, it's it's foggy to me now. I haven't read it for years, but there's something like that, right? There there was something in the code we were when we were discussing about fences uh the fence variation um a few was it a few months ago whenever we were doing it um there is allowed for uh enclosures for animals not exceeding 75 square ft but it also must I'm just doing off of this memory but it also must be attached to the rear the rear uh side of the home

right

so it's essentially a a dog kennel for lack a better term. Um, you know, 75 square feet is not very large either. So, um, but there's nothing about dog runs. Now, if we're talking about a a line, you know, a line run between two trees, not really a structure. But if you were to put up a two poles, that would be more considered a structure. And we would not allow those. It's considered an accessory structure, which would not be allowed in any of the rear yards. Um because our code is currently very restrictive about what we allow. Hence the whole garden box, garden fences, trellis debates from uh yester years. So that was that was the information that was requested that I was able to provide. Um so far I'm going to keep working on better maps of sorts. So that's more it's a better graphic than else-wise. Oh, um my apologies. One last thing. Uh Diane had also requested where fences would be when they where residential would intersect non-residential, so the commercials. So that would be Brookside where there is a fence. Um that would also be uh Joliet Road because it does abut um zoning wise to the triangle which is not commercial. Um, and the other ones we were looking at were would be um Heritage Center. Um, it's zoned residential, but there's actually a fence currently there. Um, and then also and in the new zoning code, if we can if we do adopt it and the village hall becomes what we considered institutional or governmental. Um, then it would would also not be a it would be a non-residential that would abuted. So, hypothetically speaking, there could be a fence here. Um, also hypothetically speaking, it could be in our open spaces as well. So, Sacriia Park, Arrowhead

Point and uh, Blackhawk Park could technically have fences as well. Um, and going off of memory, the gentleman who is at the black back of Blackhawk Park off of Howard. Yeah. Um he has a fence and part of the discussion and when they've been doing uh at 6500 Howard uh is that it is Yep. Thank you. Uh part of the discussions when they were talking about um that uh location and using part of his property for water man. Um part of the discussions was to allow him to have that fence to separate Blackhawk Park. Also to never put a use it for a sidewalk. Um, so, uh, I'm still working on getting that background information all to you in a manner that's not, um, that's easily digestible, I should say. So, is there any question on any of those? I'm more than happy to answer them. Or there's anything else that now you're looking at that going, you know, I would like to know that information like is there some, you know, something jumps out? Um, let me know now and I'm take notes or, uh, feel free to message me later. the uh I got hopefully a softball, but the uh improvements that they're contemplating for Wolf Road, are they able to do that within the current rightway? Are they expanding beyond the limits of the current right away? There would be some when they when they're doing Wolf Road, if they do Wolf Road, um they would be using they'd be expanding upon the current right of way at least as much to for um construction. there needed some construction to put equipment and drive-thru and that I believe in some areas um having looked at the previous strand maps that are actually back there. Um that they are taking some right of way on either side

of the road. I don't remember how much. Uh so and it's not been final finalized yet. Um but I believe that there was some footage that would be taken. I can always look it up at wolfroadstudy.com if you want me to. Thanks. Cool.

I just one point of clarification. I recall when we were talking about um the fence issue years ago, one of the reasons why there is a fence at the former Heritage Center property was because the village had put an off- streetet parking lot there, I believe. Right. I mean that the explanation we heard at the time was that was a public property that actually had an off- streetet parking lot and that was why that fence was there to kind of protect the adjacent homeowners from you know headlights and car activity and things like that versus you know in other like Saka Ja Park or other parks where there isn't a fence boundary between the park and the adjacent home but the heritage center was because of that parking not. So, I suppose whatever the future plan for that property is might affect, you know, the appropriateness of the fence staying there. But, um, I I really appreciate you pulling all this information together. I know I peppered you with all kinds of questions. Um, my thought in being able to sort of visualize where there are currently fences, you know, and where the code might currently allow fences or where we might want to consider allowing them was just to be able to support people being able to look at a map like that before they make, you know, before they enter their responses in a survey. you know, understanding like if I were to say I'm, you know, strongly approving or sort of approving or neutral or whatever about a particular proposal, where would it actually be applicable? If if we allowed it, where where would that potentially occur? um rather than asking people to respond without really understanding the extent, you know, like if we allow

people to put a fence, you know, along a rear property that faces a busy street, you know, how many houses would it be? you know, and based on this, it's like, yeah, you know, there's 25 or 30 or something homes in the village where that condition exists. And we would consider, you know, if we were to do that, that those are the homeowners that it would potentially impact just to be able to kind of let people see the the wear and the the level of impact it might have. But it would it would be helpful as well I think for even for basic things like you know being able to say the village currently allows fences around pools

and that exists on you know 25 homes in the village and here's where they are you know and and if someone were to put in a pool they could put in a fence like that's allowed now. Um but to ask some if we're going to ask people how they feel about that we just need to be able to show them a visual of where that occurs. I

think it's an excellent idea. Sorry to interrupt, but I think it's an excellent idea to remind everybody of the baseline, how it exists today. You're right. If you have a pool, you can have a fence. If you have if your yard backs up against a commercial um commercially zoned district, you have access to a rear yard fence. So I think that uh you know for the survey perhaps a a tutorial on what we are allowed to do today to set the baseline um because if you ask somebody do you think we should change the code well 95% of people don't know what the what they are allowed to do today. That's true. And that's why I think it's relevant

it's relevant too to be able to say currently you could you could enclose a 75 square foot space off your back door you know if if you wanted to that's allowed under the code is that enough you know I mean maybe we think about making it a little bigger like I don't know I mean that there there's this whole continuum of potential solutions that we could think about and we have to gauge people's level of interest or level of, you know, opposition to things like that before we could really make a decision. Can I ask you a question? Uh, since you brought up the Sacka Park, um, I assume that's a

I assume that Sackagea Park is a wood fence. Like, do you remember how you arrived at that uh material? Like, how did the fence come about? Oh, I think at the her at the Heritage at the Heritage Center property. I don't know how long that Do you even recall, Bob? How long that fence has been there? As long as the parking lot's been there. I remember it being grandfathered in. That's the only thing. Like it came up for a discussion point, but then it was grandfathered in because it existed before we took steps to validate it.

Okay. from the April, excuse me, from the February 14th, 2014 meeting minutes. I was I was looking through our my slap together uh stuff that's not pretty enough to be publicly out there. Um when discussing it about the Heritage Center fence, uh Commissioner Omali stated that when the village installed a fence on the backside and along the side of the Heritage Center and it was so close to Wolf Road, we had to take a second. He asked why there was ever a fence installed in a residential area. It was noted because there is an asphalt circular driveway around the building and a home behind the Heritage Center. The fence was installed to provide screening and for safety. Now, that's not when it wasn't installed, but that was 11 years ago. Um, was the reasoning given screening. Okay.

And I I do remember I actually have spoken to the gentleman that house is right there. And then, you know, part of that was was that was what it was said for is because it's his house is also very close to the lot line just because the topography of of how that lot is. it's very narrow and then widens out um on that. So, uh I do remember in 2018 they thought about taking that fence down and then um that decision was very quickly reversed. Andress, talk to me about pages 38 through 46 of our packet.

Pages 38 through 46 of our packet was provided by Commissioner Anthony Bolina as possible questions for a survey. Um, I included them in here uh because I think they were, you know, looking at them. They're very good. Um my personal opinion in looking at and looking at these would be to uh narrow it down or as kind of the headings here um are in there uh maybe split it up into multiple different types of of surveys about it. Um you know some of this is cost and implementation and these types of things which are more technical questions we wouldn't really survey people on. Um but definitely for you know looking at you know aesthetic and design I think that would be uh a a nice a nice discussion point possibly other forms to get input but if we're looking at general opinion on fences those first kind of five questions on there are very very are I think are good as to gauge whether or not the the decision should be to go forward for offenses or not because if that we don't want to ask somebody the question about what should fences look like if the the uh commission's recommendation is well we shouldn't add fences it wouldn't cart before the horse essentially um so I I said uh commissioner Bina had provided these I think they're they're good they're good uh questions um you know in general some of these questions are things that I hadn't even thought about um and so I included them in there to also help prompt discussion out there is that um most generally speaking for surveying you don't want to add more than um 10 questions and you don't want 10 questions that have like four subp parts either. You want to keep it very short, very very clear and it really comes down

to is how hard is the question for you to answer. If it's 30 questions but they're uh rank it one to four, those are pretty easy. If you start o asking open-ended questions then it's a little bit more a little more difficult then people will stop taking the survey after that. So um you know that this this five this these first five questions um you know some of them like I said we could tweak some of them um but like you know definitely some of them were are very good about opinions about opinions of whether or not we should allow them or not allow them. Thanks, Anthony. This is great. I'm going to go a little bit farther and this is really good stuff. I do agree it probably needs to be trimmed a little bit so we keep people focused, but

sure is a great start. And you're certainly thinking of things that taken for granted. They're they're great. Like I said, they're great if nothing else um to provoke thought. You know, what are what are these types of things? You know, are we you know, question number 42 was something that I had never heard of, but you know, was actually uh discussed a couple times here was, you know, is there a maintenance clause that keeps it in good condition? Well, most of us most of the time or I think someone who was it mentioned a bond. Was it someone mentioned a bond last time? Like a maintenance bomb. Was that you, Bob? Okay. I could probably check my minutes if I wanted to. Um,

who's this guy here? Oh, so so uh but I mean that was something I've never thought of because most time we just handle things the property maintenance code. That's that's a good question and you know these are these are good not just for us to look at I think and you know provoke thought on it but also for the public as a whole.

So conceptually the surveys great job. I think the way they're designed if we were to have 10 abbreviated questions one of them if not the first question do you want to fence or not? Um kind of dictates how far we need to go and drill down. Um, so I I understand the attention span of a typical person doing a survey abbreviated. I I get all that, but I think if we're going to consolidate, we should really consider question one. Do you want offense or not? And then if we're supposed to be soliciting opinions of the population, then we could look at further delineation. But um I this in of itself is an outline of further discussion if we get approval from the population that they want fences. So but great job. Well, and several of these could be structured more as sort of a declarative statement and then you could respond I strongly agree. I agree. I you know don't have any opinion or I Yeah. I know Andreas will be the one who has to summarize all of the responses and that could get more complicated, but to to be able to determine whether there's any kind of nuance and how people feel about certain things versus just a yes or no. We we talked about that last time too that difficult it is to answer the question

as an absolute yes or no. So there there's 45 questions here and if we get down to some of the the good ones that you offered, we could actually create some type of narrative

that we're about to discuss this. This is what this means. So we have no vagueness on the definition of a particular term. But if we're going to amongst ourselves discuss and determine eventually what the top 10 questions are, if that's the number we're going after, one of them being do you want to fence or not? So there's nine left over. What other opinions do we need based on the directive that the board has commissioned us to do? And then leave all these they're they're not throwaway. They're

if we get approval then everyone wants a fence. Then we really got to dive into these questions and put narrative before we ask a question in my opinion.

Just glancing at something else that I'm I'm working on. um looking at the old responses and I I don't have the 20 I think we asked in 2020 the mo most recent uh community survey but there was this community survey in 2019 about about fences that 282 people or as part of the community survey that 28 282 people answered and in during and in that they asked should residents with homes along Wolf Road be allowed to fence their yards and then actually not very pleased how this question was worded But it's kind of a leading question, but cuz it said for the safety of their children and pets. It's a bit of a leading question. However, the point of it was is that 70% of the people answered yes. The next question was should all should all Indian head park residents be allowed to fence their yard should they wish to do so? You know, excluding those covered by HOAs. And then with that one, 58% had said no. So that's a kind of a good example of what you're talking about is is we can look at we can look at it as as help almost delineating is would you be in favor of fences everywhere? Would you be in favor of fences in this particular case or in this particular case? And that might be something we look at for a a the first survey on it because we can then pull out more nuances of it. Um you know

that we would want to drill down and find out the causals on that.

Right. The other thing that we talked about which when you're analyzing data the the segmentation I think is necessary when you look at page 37 the I you know the the map that's very colorful which is the HOA map. I think we would want to understand somehow some way and I think there's opposition because I'm looking at his facial expression now. Um just the segmentation of who's answering the question. For instance, we were going and uh using Ashbrook as an example. Ashbrook would let's say not allow offense at all. Do we need to survey them was a yes or no question that we had to struggle with at our last meeting. or do we only survey those individuals that don't have an HOA? However it's done, I'm in favor of the segmentation protecting the person that's answering the survey, but in a general area where the where are the answers coming from so we can make a more educated decision.

And yeah, as we discussed last time, I don't see a way of with it with this public opinion. We we have to take the entire public's opinion. That's that's just in a surveying manner that's how we have to do it. Um but to your point once again looking at this response on here um in the previous one out of the 282 people that responded 231 of the responses were from west of Wolf Road might skew the answers a little bit. Um but also to respond to the Ashbook comment is is we we could you know for Ashbrook homes states I forget what the HOA is called. um the Ashbrook single family homes, we would we would want to survey for them because yes, Ashbrook does not allow it currently, but if we were allowed fences there, you know, the board could hypothetically in the future amend the covenants to do such.

Yeah, that's my point. I think is we we discussed something about skipping certain areas and we wanted to get to the the core need of individuals that would want a fence, but I think every just to be fair and equal, everyone has to have opportunities for the survey, but I still love the segmentation side of it all if If I'm understanding that right, you're looking for kind of to start a yes or no kind of approach and

right to get it started, right? Do you want fences? Yes or no?

Well, well, I think there's I think there's more give me the information maybe out there, right? wouldn't want would wouldn't everyone want to see all of this data first or these questions or whatever that is to come to the I I don't know this is the this is like the the debacle that we come across right like wouldn't they want to see that information first and then make the decision or you know we're we're kind of our job is to kind of handhold them a little bit through this process, right? So, um

I think if there the 45 questions are absolutely spoton, but if the attention span of those that created surveys for their previous careers, 45 questions, as you're saying, is way too many. So, how do we abbreviate and get to the core 10 if that's the threshold limit and then get to your point? So, this is broken down into processes, right? So you first evaluate all of the residents and get a how what is your feeling on fences? Yes or no? And then based on that, the next part of the process is to dig deeper. Well, answer these questions.

I think there's a couple scenarios. There's do you want to fence? Yes or no. And if the population says no. But those that said yes, why are they saying yes? and understand that there may be some core needs that are getting washed out because of the u the overwhelming nose, but maybe there's a need that as a board we could investigate and we might come up with some areas that are truly justified to have some type of potential amendments. Well, and I think it also comes down to education because we're talking about we were talking about a survey plus a little bit more information um on the front end. So maybe it's more of a little information packet to summarize where we are, who what the lay of the land is currently, who's allowed to have fences, who we would be um who would have serious consideration for have fence for having fences because of these special conditions. Um, and then lay that out there and then ask start asking the questions like is it, you know, do you find that acceptable or or are there other conditions that you would that you would impose. So

I think it's kind of a handinhand tactics now that you're caught up to speed,

right? And the caveats that we also mentioned from a utility standpoint, you know, drain tile utilities, you know, can't have a fence here and there. I think we have to manage by exception at that point. Um, so we did discuss that at the last meeting. And what is the timing of this versus the timing of the potential selective reszonings of some of the parcels in the village? You've mentioned something about how the zoning code update might create like a public use category or a parks and open space category and we might actually reszone some parcels to new things that would impact then if we're writing a code about fences and where where fences are allowed. if if that's going to be an impact, we almost have to do that first, right? Versus I I don't know how we have the two things happening in parallel if they might impact one another.

So the uh potential zoning code um changes uh would be the deliverable about December to in adoption in January. What I will say with that is that looking at all the zoning code changes is residentials are generally going to stay the same. The only kind of tweak that might happen is they might flip R3A and R3B because R3B is less dense than R3A and that's just not usually how it it works. Um but uh to overall speaking most of what it's doing is just condensing the current zoning classifications we have. So B1, B2, and B3 um are all very similar. Well, we so similar the fact that we don't have a B1 or a B2. And so it's basically condensing those all into a one general type um one general type uh classification, which is like a general business classification. And then for the ones that are B5, B6, which are more the industrials, it's more of a light industrial classification. I think currently speaking um with that kind of uh interplay I don't think I think our current if if we if we write the codes the same way we do it currently which are how is we basically have a a differentiation between residential and non-residential the only ones that might be affected would be any place that there is governmental use properties which would then just be um village hall yeah you have here heritage center and then poss possibly our parks as well. Well, but that but parks are se are separate from are separate from the governmental uses, but it's still a different it's still a non-commercial still a non-residential use. But if we only write the code to say like you could have a fence when your residential

areas abuing either a commercial or non-residential use um or commercial commercial use then it wouldn't change anything because it's still the code is still written in such a way or we can you know we can tweak things a little bit here and there as we go along. If we come down a decision in December and it needs to be tweaked in January, then we can just tweak it in January to make sure it all clarifies itself out. But yeah, we're not changing massive amounts of structure of anything um as coming through. It's all going to be looking the same. It's just we're getting a lot of we're just making things for the zoning code. We're just we're just streamlining and simplifying the process. The town's pretty much going to look exactly the same. Um, just the colors on the maps will be a little bit different.

Excellent. And we'll have tables. Yeah. Forgive me. We're here to talk about fences. Let's talk about fences. We talk about zoning. I I appreciate how they are related, but um it doesn't sound like based on what you described. There's much in which the fencing will influence the the the zoning. Yeah. The the new zoning that we're suggesting. So from 2019, we I vaguely remember the the survey. How many questions were on that survey?

There were five questions on that survey. One of the questions was location. Um so the questions on the the five questions on that that fence survey in 2019 was should res question one was should residents with homes along Wolf Road be allowed to fence their yards for the safety of their children and pets. Question, forgive me, can you give me the results of the survey?

70% said yes. 30% said no. I will note once again it's a very leading question though with how it's phrased. Um sorry that's my professionalism I have to tell you I give you that opinion on that. Um question number two was should all should all Indian HUD park residents be allowed to fence their yards should they wish to do so with within parenthesis note that those homes covered by HOAs may have additional restrictions. Um that question result was 58% no 42% yes. So, Wolf Road overwhelmingly in favor, everywhere else not. A majority said no. Question three was, would you like to have an option to fence your property? 41% yes. 59% no. Question four was, if fencing were permitted, would you prefer restrictions as to heightened materials? 80% said yes, 20% said no. And the last one of course was in what area of IHP do you reside and the answers were 5% acacia 3 and a half% Ashbrook 82% west of Wolf Road

and 10% I'm rounding here so please don't excuse me and 10% were other. So looking at that survey um and then question oh sorry question six was was an open-ended question basically said share your thoughts and there was 170 answers I have not looked through all 170 answers um but there was 170 answers uh on that question so

so cutting or looking forward if you believe from your expertise that 10 questions would be the limit do we look at some collaboration between Anthony and yourself to get to the 10 or do you have enough to go on in a consolidated form to get to the the top 10? I definitely think that you know with what's provided and listening to you that we that I could make a very succinct uh survey um with the thought being that we are going to find out if people would like fences broadly and then possibly using the next few questions to drill down into maybe they would prefer to would they allow fences in in more specific cases specifically Wolf Road or you know Planefield Joliet um backing up, you know, to residential areas or uh you know, backing up to Flag Creek, these types of things. I I think we could I think I could do that and then have the allimp important question of which in this three areas do are you located in west of Wolf Road, east of Wolf Road, or south of Juliet Road?

Um and then have an open-ended question at the end which would basically say, "Tell me your thoughts." Okay. So then is it from a timing standpoint, is it fair given your work schedule and the to-do list that you have to think that we could come to the next meeting with your top 10 survey questions? Or do you need help, which I'm volunteering Anthony for?

Uh, I definitely could come to the October meeting, which is October meeting, sorry. um new and and looking at that with those questions out there. The only concern I would have is then um if we are trying to stick to our original time frame um yeah October 7th I think someone was saying uh if we were trying to stick to our original time frame of providing a recommendation by November that means we'd have less than 30 days in that survey. Um I will say having been working on this project. I do feel like we we we should have a little bit more time on that. Um just because the fact that um there are still, as I said, I'm pulling information out of places that I still have to sort and do. And and it's not just me bearing the load by myself. As I've I stated earlier, I've been using our front office assistant, Jill. Um, I've been torturing our brand new intern by looking making him go through every single minutes and everything else as well um to do it. And if we're looking at providing I guess I guess the caveat here is if we're looking at providing more education for it, more background for it, we we I think I feel like we would need more time. If we are looking at the background that I provided is adequate um for that then I do not feel like we we would need more time and I can either way I can come to the next meeting with with those questions or or perhaps if the committee wishes commission wishes that I could also turn those questions around and have you um you know all give me a thumbs up and thumbs down and look at going sooner.

I think that we all need to take a step back. the the the the schedule that we laid out was a goal and if we hit it, we hit it. If we don't, we don't. Uh this is a very sensitive subject. We want to make sure we get it right. We want to make sure the recommendation we give to the board is something we can stand behind collectively. Um so if we need more time, we just need to take the time. Uh we we also have holiday season on uh coming up. So, we want to make sure that we're doing this right, getting the community engaged, and uh making the right recommendation. So, but that that that was a generic statement. I said a whole lot of nothing right there. But, um that being said, what is reasonable? When would make sense for us to launch on a survey um beyond what the content of a survey is? after we after going back to what Cat had mentioned after we educate the public right that that's the first step sending out something in the newsletter this is happening this is what we're considering that needs to be presented that's u hot month two months to let everyone absorb that information and then launch a survey from there.

Yeah, if you think of the timeline given the fact that there's the 10 questions, you would need four weeks at best to come up with your consolidated question list and then we'd have to launch from there. But the concurrent to that from a project management standpoint, we could do the PR campaign and then they could all coincide and then we all all talked about that the timeline is a bit it's a goal but doing it thoroughly and right I think is the right approach and if we go beyond our target date then at least we're doing it the right way. So, back to you. Are you gonna is by next meeting having the questions available to us for review? Is that too much to ask? I think I could have the question I I know I can have the questions to you for review. Um, how much of the this material that includes education? Um, that would be that would be hard. I'd still be I'm still continuing working on all of that. um as well. Uh but I definitely could have a set of 10 questions, you know, between myself and Gavin and workshopping it and yeah

and getting something together. I definitely could get that back to you by by next meeting because I I'm thinking of the timeline here. If if four weeks from now is is a reality, the PR campaign that runs concurrent to that might have eight weeks to create itself because then you would launch the survey with the content that explains what things are potentially. Yeah. And and survey, you know, the the window survey window also can be longer than shorter. It doesn't have to just only be a month. It could be two months. It could be correct, you know, that type of sort depending on what it looks like. Can we put this in the parking lot for a minute? I see we have a lot of folks from the public that are here. I doubt they're here to watch us talk. Um, so

ask, you know, to the extent you guys have anything, I'd like to open it up for any comment or if you guys are just here to listen the banter, feel free to stay. I don't want to lose anybody else because he paid good money to sit here. But if anybody has anything they'd like to contribute, please join in the conversation.

Give me one moment. Uh, we need to grab you a mic real quick. Um, my name is Sandy. Just one second. One moment. I got to get you a mic so we can get you on uh recorded on TV. The The nice The nice gentleman's coming up behind you. He's He's got you. Test one. You want to hold it? No, you can put it in there.

Sandy Hayes, 6634 Coochis Drive. We have a fence because we're Wolf and Joliet. That fence was there when we first built when we first came here. Um, what is the main reason people want these fences? I think that's partly why we're engaging in the public.

Yeah. I mean, we moved in here 50 years ago. Fences were not allowed. I like my next door neighbors. I like to be able to go back and forth through the yards to my neighbor's house. They come back and forth to our house. Our kids used to play back there back and forth. I am so opposed to anyone blocking off that access to the beautiful landscape of the village. totally opposed to fences, let it be known. Um, on page 31, it shows the yellow. Those are the fences that would be on the west side of Wolf Road.

Those those are the those are the properties that are adjacent to those to to Planefield and Wolf. Not that it and if we're allowed. I mean, that's okay. What about the Acacia side though? Do they get fences too? Acacia is a planned unit development and HOA. So the acacia HOA would have to uh approach us and it would be actually for a completely different thing would be a subdivision fence. So maybe but not not through the same path that a normal resident would go through. Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Hello. Uh Jim Gaza 6520 Wolf, even though we don't need to say it, uh board member, I I guess I don't understand, I guess, Sandy, why people want fences because they want fences. They're paying a lot of property taxes. I feel bad for the people between you and I that have young kids that back up to Wolf with the Wolf expansion, Planefield Road, etc. Everybody's got a reason, some economic. I think uh the gentleman that was here last time, a realtor, you know, which I'm sure he will appear again and he's probably watching on TV right now, but people have different opinions. But in terms of the education part, I think kind of Bob, you kind of hit it right on the head. Fence, no fence. I think that's a pretty easy question. If no, why not? Well, it's just no. You don't really need to. If yes, what are the reasons? The reasons are protection, safety, economics, use of property. Now, there's million plus dollar homes. I'm sure people would like the opportunity to use that home as they would like. Uh, you know, I'm on Wolf Road. I don't know, fence, no fence, fence in the back. Uh, we do Indian Head Park is called Indian Head Park for a reason, but I guess I don't know what the education necessarily does for us. I think it's it's it's not an issue that that is that complicated. Um, when when the when the commission says education, the education process, I think getting the survey completed, I believe you could complete a 10 to 12 question survey by the end of tonight if you really wanted to. Again, fence, no offense, the comment at the end and the nine questions in the middle. You know, you know, where would we allow him? What would they look like? Um, you don't have to figure it all out to get the survey out. I think I think that timeline October is pretty good. A couple public hearings gets you on schedule to near that that data point. you shouldn't feel rushed or pressured, but we do want to get the data in, but again, we have the data from 2019. I don't think the data will look that much different, maybe a

little bit than it does now. I think probably 60 40 50 plus or minus 5 or 10%. Uh, the people that care about it are West Wolf Road. So, um, you know, I guess I would encourage the committee to be mindful. Um, again, the education, I guess I from Diane and Bob, I don't know what that necessarily means. I think people are have a pretty strong opinion. I think probably there's 40 or 50% 45% that feel one way, the other 40 the other survey it's those 20 in the middle of that. Now with the advent of Wolf Road widening, Planefield Road, etc. property values on those particular areas being significantly impacted. Even Sandy anti-fence but has a fence because you are on a very busy intersection and it is a safety and protection issue. She'd have semis driving in her backyard. So, um, I think the timeline sounds to me as a as a public resident on the Wolf Road, I think the questions are, you know, I think 10 10 to 12 is adequate. I believe that my three minutes are probably up. I believe that Andre and Anthony, you guys could craft those, maybe put your top 12 or 15 and have, you know, survivor, you know, kick out five. And obviously the catchall is the last question. uh the public hearings are going to flush out some of those issues, but we're probably 4040 and what's the 20 in the middle with the expansion of Planefield and Wolf and you know that is kind of an unknown as well. So, um again, that's kind of where I'm at. I don't think the issue is that complicated. That requires more education. I think we just got to get a fresh look from the community and it's probably going to look fairly similar to, you know, what it looked in 2019. Thank you. Lori Davis, 6482 Apache. I've spoken before and I do want to reiterate the

differences in the size of the lot in the 45 acres. Um there's one lot that I looked up on Mohawk Court that's 7737 square feet. Um mine is 9800. Greg, I think you're right under 10,000. So, I looked up, you know, a couple of houses in the neighborhood, but that one is really small. To put a fence around that yard or other yards with around where that house is would really be pretty disastrous. So, I'd like you to take that in consideration because the gentleman who was looking for a fence last time, he had a huge, huge lot. That makes a difference. Thank you. I think the um Diane the discussion about education if in the question there were any terms that needed defined I think that's probably where the education would come from and any type of background why are we doing this why are you being asked which is typical of any issuance of a survey I don't think it's to that point. It's not too complicated there. It's like, do you want a fence or not? And then the questions beyond that. But if there's a concurrent process like I talked about of an education, it it probably would only be fueled by some of the terminology that might be used that would cause confusion of someone answering a question. I guess my concern would be in looking and not not particularly the survey. The survey is is like I said is is we can get pretty straightforward and put that my concern would be if you're looking once again you know part of the reason why we asked about um what properties could be impacted as we've discussed before that you know these

fences are not going to be going in in drainage areas. Um, pretty much all the entirety of the east side of Timber Ridge Court is a drainage easement. In fact, part of the drainage easement runs through buildable property on one of the houses if you look at it. So, when we're looking at these types of things, my concern would only be the fact that if we said, okay, we can have fences here, but we're not allowing them in drainage ements or utility easements. Now, you start looking at and we're not allowing them one or two feet off the property line or whatever. My concern would be would my bigger concern would be the fact that that someone goes, "Oh, I want to vote for this. I'm gonna have a fence only to find out that then they're not going to have a fence or their fence would be, you know, as large as that table, for instance." Um, and and that that would be I said that's a longer term concern on that one. Um that would partly be part of the education of it would say okay well you know the whole not putting in a drainage or public utility easement that is something that even if we allow fences that's generally not negotiable because you don't want to impede storm water runoff because we have enough flooding in the village and you don't want to be putting 42in posts where water manes sewer mains storm water storm sewer electrical AT&T Comcast is. So these are all the types of things that I said my longer term concern is would be that fact that if if they feel that they are going to be able to put a fence anywhere and then when they find out they do not that they're they're you know it almost would feel like that we are pulling a rug out from underneath them. However, that is just I said a longer term con concern on it. um education wise uh you know I said these packets are online. I've been trying to put them online um as well as possible. So they're having a lot of the information the same information they can watch

these the minutes for these meetings as you noticed have gotten very long um due to the fact that now I have access to the transcript and I can use chat GBT to run it through there. So it is not like if they read these minutes they're going to miss anything. So um that also could be if the commission feels that is sufficient that is also could be the form of education that goes out as well. In the end I guess to put a an emphasis on it in the end it is what the commission feels is the is commission feels is appropriate for education and the process and the speed is not staff's role. I hate to dominate the discussions here, but I think we need to get to the 10 questions if that's our limit and develop those as quick as possible. We could determine at any given point in time how we need to educate the population. So, I'm in favor of expediting the questions.

Well, and knowing what questions we really want informed answers from the residents about would would help us understand are there key pieces of data that they need to have access to? Even if it's something that says, you know, click here if you want need more information before you answer or something, you know, and it just takes them to the website. But something to understand what's currently allowed um and what's you know some of those limitations would be that that are going to govern whether a particular homeowner would ever be allowed to have a fence anyway um regardless of what the decision is for the code that those kind of things just are allow people to make a reasoned response and yeah and then like to your point not be surprised later when if there's any kind of code modification and they come in, they find out, well, you know, well, I'm looking at your lot and you will not actually be able to have one for for the, you know, these reasons.

So, if if you have the data and you have the segmentation, you could extract out those that can't have fences and then get to a more scientific number. Correct? Yes, but no. No. Come on now.

The answer to the question is yes, I could. However, to to look at the information, even if I were to say, okay, the HOAs can't have any. Um, and then I would have to look at the PUDS, but then I'd have to look at every single lot in the PUDS because all the lots I'd have to look at the plat of surveys for all the lots to see where the drainage and utility easements are on every single parcel, which that's why it comes down to is the yes, hypothetically I could do it, but in in actuality and no, because I'd have to look at every single lot that's not covered under HOA, which is something like 689 or something like that. That's good reality check there. Y

I I can't help but think anytime Jim comes up I think about our our mission in this thing, right? Our job is to present information for the board to review, right? So I do agree like the questions we could just formulate these questions. this will give us that information and then we present it to them or we decide is this the information that we want to present to them. Um, the simplicity of it though is kind of where I draw some issues. Like for such a hot topic in our town, we want to give it five questions or 10 questions when everyone keeps saying there's a lot to consider, but then it's it comes down to just like the five 10 questions to make some decisions off of. seems uh I don't know. I don't know what it seems. It seems too small to me. So, I don't want to like prop myself up on my my questions here. I don't mean to do that. But, um I guess I simply want to say we do have to be more thoughtful about these questions that we present to everyone. And um as simply put, yeah,

Lori Davis, 6482 Apache. Last time, John Corkran had a an incredible thought. What if somebody has a tree where he wants a fence? Are we going to allow people to take trees down to put in their fence? That was a really good point. John's not here tonight. It's something to think about, too. Thank you. any any tree that is taken down in the village requires a tree permit and for our um for our arborist/public works director to review to be removed. Um and he also as per tree ordinance can recommend replacement of trees. So uh if the tree is not diseased or if it is not crowded out or some other reason for for that for it he would not recommend taking the tree down. And in the village if you take a tree down without without a permit it is against the municipal code and if it's against municipal code it's a fine minimally. So, um, in reviewing in reviewing these types of permits, um, we could all, like I said, we would also be looking at whether or not there is a, you know, a tree that isn't currently in the way. That's that's a technical question we can always review to see if they have anything in it. Most people I've seen in putting in trees tend to go around or putting in fences tend to go around trees. Um, but cuz I mean you got to think about taking a tree down is how many tens of thousands of dollars. You're not just popping out there with a chainsaw and having, you know, some beers with friends. Um, especially most of these trees. Most of these trees you're going to have to call arborists or landscapers or someone to come out and it's 8, 10, $15,000. Now you're doubling the cost of putting in a fence because you're taking a tree down. It's much easier to add an extra

panel and go around your tree. So, picking up on Anony's comment and if we consider our board member in the audience, um, if the survey comes back with Oh, I'm sorry. Multiple board members. Sorry, I won't look at you anymore. Um, is does that satisfy I mean, if the survey comes back, no, I don't want fences. Are we is the the thought that we would stop and recommend or move forward with additional work?

Um Jim Gaz is board member along with Daniellea as well. Um sorry

the commission it you're you're tasked to get this information and and make sure the public is aware. I think again last month things go on in the small municipalities and people say we didn't know that was going on and again part of the education I think a lot of it the devil's in the details regarding how we would implement essentially a code now that says no fences except for these variances to expanding that leaving it the same or expanding the variances or full-blown the other way which I don't believe the community has uh that desire. Uh again, that said, gathering the information, the commission doesn't have to make all the decisions. You're going to gather the information, have the public hearings, hear the public comments, make a recommendation based on that information to Danielle, myself, and the rest of the board. Then the board has to make a decision in terms of, you know, what do we do with that information? What do we do with that recommendation? Follow the recommendation, change recommendations, send it back to the planning commission for further review, etc. But really, it's going to be in the in like you know, Andre, like you were saying, it's going to be in the execution of whatever direction the commission recommends and the board eventually decides to go that that education will come in. It will be in the code. They will come the permit for a fence and then, you know, again, Don Morris or somebody else could do a lot of those, you know, that the easements, the rightways, uh the sewer, the you know, the the water flow, all those type of things that are big issues in the community. And again, I think uh Lori made a great point the other one of the other residences. How do we tell somebody, you know, those smaller houses, those smaller lots, it would be difficult to fence in a 67,000 foot lot versus somebody some that have 60,000 10 times larger. But how do we tell resident A, they're both, let's say they're both on Planefield Road or they're both whatever. You can have one, you cannot. Or you know what, you can have one because you have dogs and kids, but you don't, so you cannot. So again,

we have to have some uniformity there. But I don't I don't know that again the complexity in the education is in the implementation. I don't think that that's your job at this level. It's going to be probably Andreas's job if and when you know a year from now in getting all those permits and whatever. So uh not to again Anthony makes a good point. This huge decision why are we why are we whittling it down to five or 10 questions. All right, maybe it should be 15 or whatever and and the wise and the wherefors, but everybody's going to have their own opinion as to, you know, uh the variance that they would want or what they and and a lot of it will be based on what their situation is. So, I believe the commission is tasked with gathering the information, making that recommendation. The education, the implementation is going to be on staff and on the community once, you know, this changes or if it gets tweaked a little bit. So, um I don't know if that answers your question, Bob.

Yeah, that's it. I just want to make sure that Danielle anything. Are you sure?

Danielle Shaska 11235 Hiwa also a board member. Um I second sorry I second everything Jim just said. Um, I think one thing to think about, right, and I know Jim said it and I'm sorry I'm repeating myself, but I think the board wants a a baseline to go from and then we'll take the next steps to see whatever that baseline directs us in. So, just like any other ordinance that you guys get, you can review it. You can formulate your recommendation to the board. The board will get it. We will probably have many of these conversations at the board level. um probably come back to you with questions, but I think really right now what we are desiring to get from the community through you all as a commission is what is the temperature rating on this or do we feel the way in 2025 that we did in 2018? Okay, cool. Have we changed? Do we need to look at things differently? So, I think that's kind of the ask. And I think the quicker that we can get to acquiring that data from the public, the better off we will be to position ourselves to have intelligent conversations about what to do next.

Is the board just getting inundated with fence inquiries? Is that why all of a sudden we're having a

Well, I mean, I think I mean, you guys, right, you see it too. I think it comes around every so often. It's kind of like a cyclical thing, but we have seen more people come asking questions about it. Um I think Andreas has said that he's actually gotten a number of questions and my opinion which absolutely means nothing here is that our community is changing right so we are getting people moving in um that are at different walks of life different scales of where they're at and they probably want to investigate you know what options they might have in the community so I do know that the new homes on Sequoia that were built Um, third-hand non-sufficient information is that one of the people that just moved in there was very upset because the realtor told her that she absolutely could put up a fence and found out that she could not, which is on her absolutely for, you know, not investigating ordinances before you move in. But I just think that some people might not be thinking that way when they move in. So, I think we're seeing an influx of of changes in the community. And I think it's our role and responsibility to kind of evolve as the community evolves. So that's all I got. Thanks.

So,

hi everyone. I'm Carol Rosen Tredder. I live on Pontiac. I've been here about 25 years. We're in our second home there. And we have a great big yard. At one time, I would have been like, gosh, no fences, please. It's it's so beautiful. We moved from a smaller property where I grew up in Western Springs and loved the open, beautiful. We have natural fences at the two homes we've been in. It's very private, very green. Um, however, I'm also a realtor and uh agree that some people want fences and I understand that. Um, so jumping around a little here, the survey, uh, by the way, now I'm more neutral on fences. I've had, uh, my 50PB dog attacked by two coyotes, broke my back door. Um, so I thought I got to move somewhere where there's a fence, you know. Um, or I do go out with her all the time now. I was I was right at the door, but I couldn't get out. Um, so, you know, I have a mixed feeling now. I'm on the fence as they say, but um I I love the beauty of our town. So, jumping to the survey, I just ran through, checked it off. It took seconds. I know five or 10 questions would be great. I had no problem answering more because they impacted the way I think about a fence. You know, an open row iron. I'm still not saying I'm for fences or not yet. I'm not sure, but I understand um where people are coming from, but I also understand the beauty of this town. And I think that's really important to preserve no matter what happens, whatever decision is made. Privacy-wise or or safety wise along the busy streets. To me, that's a no-brainer.

Those people should be allowed to have safety um and have that fencing behind them. But for the rest of the yards, um, personally, I feel if a fence ordinance came into play, there'd have to be uniformity or we're going to have a hodgepodge mess. So, um, anyway, that's about it. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, I know that.

Who are you gonna ask a question to? Um, so in doing my re I I apologize. I was reminded of something. Um, in doing my research, one of the things that we continually get brought up is safety. Safety of pets, safety of of children, these types of things. Um, and particularly I always get I hear about traffic incident like versus traffic. I have not been able to find any information on any sort of traffic incidents with pets and or you know vehicles with with um vehicles striking pedestrians or vehicles striking uh pets on uh any of Indian Head Parks Road. And to clarify, I mean Indian Head Park as in not Wolf Road, not Planefield Road, not Juliet or Willow Springs. Um however when discussing it with our police department um they said that most often these things well one most of our data is in in police if they would be there being in police reports that we'd have to go through by hand um and if we still maintain them and then the other one is that uh you know especially with pets they're often not there often is no police report. So I would ask the public, members of commission, everyone here, board members of course, if you do have knowledge of any of those incidents, please email them to me because this is me part of my reporting of data is when we're looking at safety information is I want to know this information if it does exist that it does exist because these are also, you know, going to the question of safety. So that was my information gathering question of the day where I could use some assistance. I I do recall in the first phase of the Wolf Road study back when they were looking at several alternatives, it was at least a couple years ago now, there was a traffic, you know, study done that researched the rates of

accidents and things like that along along the stretch that they were studying. And I I was honestly surprised how few um reports there were of incidents, even even vehicle accidents. It was sort of like a very very small number of uh traffic incidents that occurred on Wolf. I would have expected more to be honest than they than they reported, but that that report is probably what maybe three years old now, but that's got to be somewhere in the in the archives. Um

I know which report you're talking about. We had to do it when we were doing um for C our cap grant. We Oh, sorry. For the business district and tiff district stuff, we had to provide that traffic report. Um as I said, these are one of those things that I I don't know. Um, for instance, um, you know, the only vehicle versus pedestrianesque incident I know of was a gentleman who was in in Oldtown who was riding his uh, riding lawnmower, got hit by a car. Um, but they said that wasn't uh that wasn't brought that it was something we were talking about speeding on Blackhawk Trail, I think it was. um that he was on his lawn mower and there was nobody was injured and it was it was everyone was fine. It was just these are things that don't make police reports and even if they don't make police reports I would like we'd like to know them because this will be part of the discussion. Thank you very much. So for old business number five A, do we have enough to go on that we could talk about the zoning code items on the agenda or do we need to talk about more about the survey?

I feel I feel I have sufficient direction information to provide a list of questions for the survey. Okay, good. So, Greg, do we go on to the next item?

Well, um, I mean, as much spent time as we spent talking about the idea of a survey, we probably could have come up with a survey, but it's neither here nor there. We can't go back in time. Um, Andreas, can you provide us with some guidance on where you think the survey would go for our next meeting? I believe I'd be able to bring you 10 questions that as I kind of stated earlier um would not only uh get get over temperature. Yeah.

Excellent. Um and I'd like to offer Anthony as a resource uh to help you. And if it's 12 questions, 15 questions, three questions, I don't care. Let's uh have something we can beat up next next session. And then can we in the meantime be advertising, you know, I've seen a handful of emails go out, hey, uh, as a result of the fence survey, we'll be issuing a survey in the coming weeks. Um, and then we'll have the survey available for two weeks time so that in November we can see the results of the survey. Is that Am I being too egg?

I guess I'm a little confused in the time frame of it, but I could would definitely be able to have a survey ready for you next next meeting, October 7th, but also we could start telling people we could start telling people that we will be to be on the lookout for a survey.

Excellent. So then when we all leave next meeting, we have agreed on what specific questions will be on that survey. The balance of that week, you'll polish it up and you'll launch it to the survey masters and by November we'll have the results of the survey just in time for a public hearing. Yes. Unless you wish to have the public hearing next month. Well, you had two public hearings. Was that two public hearings or we could have it either of these two months?

It we just have to hold by by the resolution passed with the board, we just have to hold a singular one. I was budgeting perhaps having two in there, but um we could have it in November. I think we'd be all the more informed if we had the results of the survey for the public hearing. Anybody have any objections to that path forward? I'd like to go back to new business and look at the ordinance for a second. Just kidding. I'm kidding. Uh zoning code items to review from safe bill. What you got?

Uh the remainder of the packet, which would be pages um 49 to the end. Uh we did I say 49? It must have been 47. You were right, Cat. Sorry. Um and there you can see uh this was the agenda we discussed on um a well it wasn't August 13th but um looking at the different types of the authorities and the changes to to that you'll see these old things that say in there say homework assignments those were homework assignments for us and I'm going to ask you to also review those homework assignments for me um share you to share in all that and to look at those types of tables that we have provided. it in there and and um review those. If you have any comments, questions, concerns, ideas, please send them to me. Um essentially, this is this is we're starting now getting into the very we're going from conceptual now. We're starting to get more into the brass tax of the zoning code uh update and you can see as as certain comments in there from our contractor as well of of certain types of things. Um the biggest one in here too is uh the noticing with a lot of the uses um because some of our uses were most of our uses in the residential districts were eventually just created for a specific PUD. The uses didn't continue on. So you'd have something like clustered residential being allowed in R3 and R3 and R3A but not allowed in R3B or R4 but then it's still a special use in R5 and R six which you know should they be carried through? Probably. but because they're not explicitly in the code, the the contractor wants us to make sure that those are specifically in there. So, if you see a question mark in the residential or excuse me, in the uses table, it's specifically because should those uses still be allowed in there? Um, and you can start seeing, I said, these tables that you are starting

to see in there are will or what's going to be eventually in the zoning code to make everybody's life a lot easier. If you have any questions, I'm more than happy to try to answer them. So, so we are still keeping the R1 through R six, correct? And as I'm I mean, I'm just looking at the map like there are there are four residential parcels that are zoned R2. Mhm. In the whole village. Correct.

Do we know why that is? Why don't we just make them R1's like their neighbors? You know what I mean? That's the kind of thing where like They're too small. The the two R2s down by Howard Avenue are because that properties that those two properties were one property, but subdividing them would be too small. However, they subdivided it to make it so that it was the buildable lot. And I think that was part of the reason why we got an easement in it. The other R2R2s that are up next to the PUD were actually originally part of the Timber Ridge PUD. Um then that didn't happen for reasons I'm not quite sure. So they were basically orphaned and so they became so they became R2s. Okay.

I just I I guess this is pointing out the things that aren't really coherent in the code. But I I don't I was kind of struggling with what what feedback we're supposed to provide versus Safeuilt recommending to us how to make this less random and more complicated than it needs to be. Like I thought that was what they were going to be recommending to us.

They are they're streamlining a lot of things. The table, for instance, is is is going to streamline so many pages worth of of work. Um but really for the most part the Rs most of the R is is continually just a most of it's PUD so we can't just nullify a lot of it. Um you know when we start looking at making those R2s R1's well then we started running into arrowhead trail issues where arrowhead trail nothing actually is meets R1. It's all its own very unique that I mean same thing with kind of Sequoia and Hayawa as well too. They're just I mean we could we could make you are too Diane if that's what you

Well I mean I guess I thought when we had them taking a comprehensive look at this they were going to look at areas like that like Arrowhead and Sequoia and Hayawa and say you know if we zone those with appropriate setbacks and lot coverages and things that actually you know fit the actual footprint that they have, then we wouldn't have to be having all these variances coming. I mean, that the impetus was that we get these variances because people come in to try to build something and they realize that the lot they have doesn't make any sense as an R1 lot, for example. So, we're we're going through all this, but there's still going to be R1 lots.

Yeah, it the same issues that they had before. Yeah. So, a lot of the a lot of the zoning code update was to to make it more functional. Um it's definitely something we could look at and since safe built will be continuing to be our you know they're not they're not a one and done. They're they're right now we've just kind of overloaded them with every big pro you know the big project on them. Um but they'll be continuing going forward. We could have them look at you know the different lots and lot sizes and what should be our ones and what should be not. Um you know that's a significant project as well which is something we could always discuss and bring to the board and see if they'd want us to do as well. Um but yeah, they I mean there's a lot of properties out there just looking at the parcel sizes, they don't make sense. Um

Andreas, where is you said there's homework for us? Yeah. So if you look at pages 46 and 47 uh where [Music] um so uh 47 particularly I think it's 50 minutes.

No, should be 47. The top of the page says Indian Head Park zoning code update August 13, 2025 agenda. Um, and if you read through that, it talks a little bit what we were talking about, but then in bold in some of the areas, you know, to they say homework assignment, look at these types of things. Um, and so that was our homework assignment for Gavin and I. And like the poor student I am, I'm throwing it all on you. No, I'm review I've reviewed them as well. But I just want like I said this is as commissioners also as residents, longtime residents or short-time residents, but people who live here and are here more often than I am putting your eyeballs on these to see if make sure that these there's nothing that I look at and go, "Yeah, my year and a half here, this looks right." And then Bob's all like Bob's like, "I've been here for 30 years. That doesn't make any sense." So that's what the homework assignments were.

Got it. Andreas, um I can kind of confirm that I know that uh Cook County, like when you mentioned the table, this is how Cook County structures their like zoning maps. So, I guess just for the record, I've seen this before. My my um question is they're adding this R3 and R3 R3A, R3B. No, those already currently exist.

Okay. Um, well, then I guess it doesn't regard my question. R3A and R3B are slight tweaks in acacia for slightly denser than the previous acacia. No categories have been added.

No, no additional ones. Okay. For those at home who are quite what what do I mean when I'm talking about density? I'm density means that we are going to be more people are going to be or more properties and more buildings are going to be in smaller lots. So a single family home you know single family home neighbors Hayawa has very even though it's very small lots is has a lot less people than you know Nakona over here with its 15 or whatever. Actually, that's a bad example, but the town houses have much you fit more people in town houses than you fit people in in uh single family homes. So, that's when density goes in. It basically how much buildings, how many people are shoulderto-shoulder. So, we were much more dense here earlier in this meeting than we are currently now.

Good example.

I second the motion. [Laughter] Well, and to go back to the the question before about are we going to create a public zone, you know, for anything that's a government use or a park or open space use. What we're suggesting doing, there are a couple places that are zoned P2 for a park. There's no P1, there's just P2. Um, but I guess that, you know, what what things are mapped relates then to this permitted uses like in a lot of in a lot of codes just the parks would just be the least dense residential category, right? and and then if there was ever any consideration of making it something other than a park, there would have to be a discussion about what to zone it. Is that the way we're proceeding with some of these things or is there going to be a park and a public category that will like like we're sitting in a building right now that's R1,

right? So, so if you look at page 53, you can see where it says non-residential zones permitted uses. Yeah.

And um O which would which is going to be the open land district is what would be converting P1 and P2 park one and park two. As you're right we have no we have no park one. Um but the yeah the issue is that in if we decided to suddenly build a house right here. I don't know why we would but you know if we knock down village hall they could put a house here by right. There's nothing else they could do. It's aacia. So, but that's kind of the point is is Sacriia Park. These places when they're zoned R1 are not O well, that's PE. But when you when you have something that's just zoned R1 is the least dense, whatever that zoning is is the permitted right to do it. So, we could, like I said, I could put up a house if I knock down this building and put up a house or just or just decide to make this my home, which kind of feels like sometimes um we I could do it by right. And so by going shifting some of these to the O the the open land district we don't have that that conflict by shifting this from being R1 into um like institutional or governmental

PA. Is that what it is? Oh yeah that's that's a B5. Yeah. Um basically we're saying the only thing that can be in here is governmental type work and then we have to have a conversation if you don't want it to be that. So, let's uh let's take a look at these homework assignments, guys. And uh

email thoughts. What What do you want to? Yeah, email it to me. I have a meeting with them on the the second and fourth Wednesday of every month. Um, so you know, if you give me information, if you have questions and and all that type of sort, I can give it to them and they can be more than happy to answer them. Excellent. Anything else on the uh safe build effort?

If not, uh, anything generic for the plan commission? Are there specific questions about the development standards or is it really about the permitted uses versus a special use versus just prohibiting? Guessing they're going to get to that.

Yeah, it's mostly it's mostly the um the the uses and cleaning that up. Um I did recently give them the subdivision code uh that I had to find from 1968. Um and so you'll probably be seeing that. They're going to clean that up, review it, um check it against state laws to make sure things are legal, and then uh we'll be incorporating that into the municipal code as well. Um because we're cleaning everything up. So, so that would replace these development standards or they are looking

where's the development standard looking at? Sorry. No mo most all this will just most of this is just just clean up and and and consolidation and making it just clearer. So these standards are still what are going to exist in there. If there's anything that's not highlighted, it's it's them not changing anything. It's just just them putting everything into a neat table for us. Mhm. anything uh to report on board activity. Moving on to correspondence.

Not I don't think there's anything to report on board activity. Next Thursday night thankfully. No, not this Thursday night. Excellent. This Thursday night's the secretary Park public hearing right here at 7:00 probably 6 p.m. sometime. I don't know. I'm not in charge of that. Do you have a building report for us?

Uh the building report is currently I am still trying to learn BSNA to get that kicked out. Sorry. Um I wouldn't tell you that we have got a rush of of permits in the last it's also September 2nd. So, um, but we got a rush of permits in the last few days because everyone seems to realize that once the weather dropped beneath 90 that the summer is over and oh no, my summer projects was supposed to be my summer project is now my fall pro. Do you have any commercial projects? No, we have everything we currently have is residential. We have nothing commercial coming and going.

Okay. Uh, any comments from the public? Seeing none, thank you all for attending. like to entertain a motion for adjournment. Motion by Mr. Bolina, seconded by Mr. Mong. All in favor of adjourning at 8:44. I All opposed. Let's get out of here.

You know, y'all tired like Call me whatever the hell you want.