Community Development Committee

Community Development Committee Regular Meeting Thursday, May 02, 2024 at 4:30 PM Minutes - Approved I. Called to Order: At 4:30 P.M. II. Community Development Committee Meeting Roll Call : PRESENT : Mayor Gunter P Clerk Szymski P TRUSTEES: Brady (Chair) P Simonovich P Barker P Guzzo A Liddle P Nero A Staff Present : Director of Community Development Joseph Hennerfeind, Deputy Director of Community Development Jason Vitell, Senior Planner Scott Williams, Village Manager Steve May, Assistant Manager Spencer Parker, Fire Deputy Chief Fitzgerald, Human Resources Megan Williams, Public Works Director Amy Ries, Communication Director Larry McIntyre III. Pledge of Allegiance IV. Approval of Minutes: Trustee Barker made a motion to approve the minutes from the February 08, 2024 Regular Meeting and Trustee Liddle seconded the motion. Motion passed on a voice vote. V. Public Comment - Dwayne Newton was interested in learning more about the zoning update, and commented that the committee minutes did not seem to be up to date on the website. VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Zoning Ordinance Update: Past Topics (continued from February 08, 2024) 1. R-3 Lot Widths - Senior Planner Scott Williams responded to questions presented at the previous committee meeting. Williams provided lot width information for three additional surrounding towns averaging from 60-75 feet. Williams also answered the committee’s questions that 78 lots would benefit from the lot width reduction, allowing them to potentially subdivide. Williams also stated that since 1985, there have been 40 substandard lot width variances. 1  2. Short Term Rentals in the Downtown - Williams met with the Village Attorney to find out if the Village has the authority to inspect the rentals as a non-home rule community. The Village Attorney provided a memo that addressed ways the Village can regulate or prohibit the rentals through preliminary research. It was unclear if annual inspections could take place without further research into the licensing abilities. However, a municipality does have the power to enforce its zoning regulations, and the power to enforce does include the right to inspect for violations of the zoning ordinance. Trustee Barker commented that he was supportive of the lot widths, but had concerns that in some areas, reducing the lot width size requirement could change the characteristics of the neighborhood and possibly hurt the value of other homes. Williams replied that conditions can be added to match other set-backs to help with aesthetics. Trustee Simonovich asked staff to confirm if all other set-backs would still be in place, Williams replied that all bulk standards would still need to be met. Simonovivh did not feel that the difference in housing and lot size was a problem, especially given that she currently lives next to a larger home on a smaller lot. Trustee Liddle posed the question if having a taller house on a smaller lot next door would benefit or negatively impact home value. Williams was unable to answer, but generally, new development and growth is beneficial for home value. Trustee Simonovich asked what brought on the proposed change for the lot width size. Director of Community Development Joe Hennerfeind explained that changing the lot width requirement from 60 feet to 50 feet would more so align with close communities, promote development, and would also accommodate the eventual annexation of Liberty Park. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Zoning Ordinance Update Presentation - Kirk Bishop with Duncan Associates presented to the committee some of the findings and highlights for the draft zoning ordinance update. (Slideshow presentation attached). B. Zoning Ordinance Update: New Topics for Discussion and Direction - Director Hennerfeind spoke more about the new ideas that were introduced during the presentation, and asked the 2 committee for feedback on the below items, and weather or not it was something the committee wanted staff to pursue : Director Hennerfeind noted that the topics for the current discussion are primarily focused on the downtown, and the hope is to have the committee discuss the prime details, and by August to have a draft complete. That would be after the Planning and Zoning Commission provided feedback. 1. Public & Institutional Uses - Senior Planner Williams went into further detail regarding the proposed new zoning district for entities such as park district properties, school district properties, public library properties, and properties with major utilities, and religious institutions if they came forward to propose their own rezoning. In summary, the new district would accommodate uses that really haven’t fit in well with the current residential districts that most of them are currently zoned, as well as the downtown districts. The P District is further intended to help avoid the problems inherent in treating public and institutional uses and buildings as permitted or special uses in zoning districts that primarily intended to accommodate other (dissimilar) types of uses and buildings. Trustee Barker had concerns that this change could restrict religious institutions, however Williams replied that the rezoning would be voluntary, and any existing religious institutions would still be able to operate, and any planned development would be considered a legacy district. The goal is to make the uses uniform and to align westmont with other communities. 2. Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) Williams provided the committee with general information related to ADUs stating that accessory dwelling units are usually defined as second housing units on a single family residential lot, and that these can be attached or detached from the primary structure. The dwelling consists of a separate living space that has a kitchen and bathroom, and these types of dwellings are usually called mother-in-law suites, granny flats, or coach houses. Williams also noted that 12 municipalities in the Chicagoland area that have allowed ADU’s with restrictions that widely varied. In some communities, the ADU’s were permitted by right and others require a special use permit. Restrictions can also include occupying or renting the space with family members only, although difficult to enforce. Staff was looking to see if there was any general interest from the committee to pursue the idea. Director Hennerfeind added that typically, the reason for the ADU requests is to accommodate aging and multi-generational families, or when there is an affordability problem. He also stated that there are not a lot of surrounding communities looking into this other than 3  Naperville, and that the Village is not so much looking to be a trendsetter. Simonovich was in favor of looking more into the topic due to the affordable housing crisis, especially for aging family members. Hennerfeind replied that it would be difficult to regulate blood relatives only, so the committee would need to be comfortable with a second dwelling on the same property, family or not . Mayor Gunter was not in favor of a potential third structure, but wasn’t against permitting a living space above the garage and the general concept of a second dwelling. Vitell spoke about the differences with the communities across the country that have coach houses. He did not believe Westmont was designed or built for something like this, and it cannot be enforced with the current staffing levels, and also not being home rule would prohibit annual inspections. The committee expressed some interest in looking further into the idea, pointing out that they were less favorable of a third structure, and more favorable of using or improving an existing structure such as a dwelling above a garage. Director Hennerfeind said they would get more feedback from the public on the topic before bringing the item back to the committee. 3. B-1 Development Permit - Director Hennerfeind explained the current B-1 Permit process as a requirement of any business that wishes to operate in the downtown B-1 District, which Hennerfeind described as a unique anomaly to Westmont. Staff felt that with the new zoning use table, proposed division of the B-1 sub districts, and current code enforcement abilities that many concerns could be addressed. The zoning code changes for the downtown does not encompass the mix of uses and tax base considerations, which is some of the purposes of the B1 development permit. The committee wanted to be sure there would still be control over liquor stores, vape shops, and similar establishments. Staff responded that there would still be ways to regulate through the special use permit process and licenses. Staff wanted to make sure that they had the committee’s support if the B-1 permit approval process were to be removed from the zoning code. The committee was ok to move forward with the proposal. 4. Downtown Zoning Districts - Director Hennerfeind spoke in more detail about the proposed sub districts of the downtown including the downtown edge (DE), downtown core (DC), and the downtown residential (DR). Creating the sub districts can better align development with the Comprehensive Plan and is preferred best practice. There was some interest in the concept and the committee wanted to discuss it in more detail. 4 Mayor Gunter suggested scheduling a special meeting for further discussion on the above topics. The committee and staff agreed to postpone the discussion and schedule a special meeting for May 30, 2024. VIII. REPORTS - See attached Quarterly Report IX. MISCELLANEOUS - None X. ADJOURN - Trustee Liddle made a motion to adjourn the meeting and recess the topic at 5:55 PM, and Trustee Barker seconded the motion. The motion to adjourn was approved by unanimous consent. 5