===== PDF PAGE 1 =====
[Extraction: OCR (rendered-page OCR)]
City CA
WEST CHICAGO
WHERE HISTORY & PROGRESS MEET
Approved 3.5.24
PLAN COMMISSION/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
February 6, 2024 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Establishment of a Quorum
Chairperson Laimins called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll call found Chairperson Laimins,
and Commissioners Banasiak, Billingsley, Kasprak, Slattery, and Terrazas present. Commissioner
Henkin was absent. With six members present, a quorum was established.
Staff in attendance included City Planner John Sterrett.
2. Pledge of Allegiance
Chairperson Laimins led the Commission in the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. Chairperson’s Comments
Chairperson Laimins welcomed newly appointed Commissioner Jenaro Terrazas.
4. Public Comment
None.
5. Approval of draft meeting minutes from January 3, 2024
Commissioner Banasiak made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Billingsley, to approve the
draft meeting minutes of the January 3, 2024 Plan Commission meeting. With a voice vote of 5 ayes
the motion carried. Commissioner Slattery abstained.
6. Public Hearing of Case PC 24-02 — 803 Industrial Drive — Special Use Permit
Commissioner Kasprak made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Slattery, to open the public
hearing. With a voice vote of all ayes, the motion carried.
Mr. Sterrett was duly sworn in. Mr. Sterrett stated that this is a request from American Innovative
Staffing, Inc. represented by Ismael Carcamo for approval of a special use permit to operate an
employment staffing agency with temporary employees reporting to the agency to collect a job
order or to collect compensation in accordance with Sections 5.5 and 11.2-4(L) of the Zoning Code.
The proposed use will occur within a 260 square foot office space within a multi-tenant building,
known as 803 Industrial Drive in the M Manufacturing District. The proposed agency will have two
employees with hours of operation of 10am to 6:30 p.m. No site improvements are proposed and no
modifications to the building are needed. The petitioner intends to use the existing parking
immediately south of the building. The petitioner has complied with all notification requirements
including notifying all property owners within 250 feet and placing a hearing sign on the property.
A notice of the public hearing appeared in the Daily Herald on Monday, January 22"4.
475 Main Street T (630) 293-2200
West Chicago, Illinois F (630) 293-3028 Ruben Pineda Michael L. Guttman
60185 westchicago.org MAYOR CITY ADMINISTRATOR

===== PDF PAGE 2 =====
[Extraction: OCR (rendered-page OCR)]
Staff recommends that the Plan Commission pass a motion recommending approval of the special
use permit request. Staff has drafted findings of fact for the Plan Commission to consider in its
recommendation.
The petitioner did not choose to speak during the public hearing.
With all members of the public having had the opportunity to speak, and with all Plan
Commissioners having the opportunity to question staff, Commissioner Billingsley made a motion,
seconded by Commissioner Kasprak, to close the public hearing. With a voice vote of all ayes, the
motion carried and the public hearing was closed.
7. Review and Recommendation of Case PC 24-02 — 803 Industrial Drive — Special Use Permit
The Plan Commission deliberated the proposed Special Use Permit. After a brief discussion,
Commissioner Kasprak made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Slattery, to recommend
approval of the proposed Special Use Permit with the following conditions:
1. No occupancy shall occur until such time that a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued by
the City.
2. Operations shall not commence until such time that a business license for an employment
staffing agency has been approved.
And that the following Findings of Fact be incorporated in the motion to recommend approval:
(A) Is necessary for the public convenience at the location or, the case of existing
nonconforming uses, a special use permit will make the use more compatible with its
surroundings. ***7his standard should be interpreted as indicating whether or not the proposed
use is good for the public at that particular physical location, and not whether or not the use itself
is needed there***
The proposed use is best suited in the Manufacturing District and the property is conveniently
located near a common intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Industrial Drive. Staff is_of the
opinion the petitioner has satisfied this finding.
(B) Is so designed, located and proposed to be operated that the public health, safety and
welfare will be protected:
The proposed use will occur within an existing office space with minimal activity other than
temporary staff occasionally reporting to the site for job placement and to receive compensation.
The existing parking provided for the tenant space satisfies the requirements for the space and
proposed use. Staffis of the opinion the petitioner has satisfied this finding.
(C) Will not cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood in
which it is located:
The petitioner is not proposing any site improvements nor changes to the exterior of the building.
All operations will occur within the office space. The proposed use will have no greater of an
impact on the surrounding area than existing tenants within the building and nearby buildings.
Staff is of the opinion the petitioner has satisfied this finding.
Plan Commission/Zoning Board of Appeals
February 6, 2024
Page 2 of 5

===== PDF PAGE 3 =====
[Extraction: OCR (rendered-page OCR)]
(D) The proposed special use is designated by this code as a listed special use in the zoning
district in which the property in question is located:
The proposed use of an employment agency with temporary staff reporting to the agency is listed as
a special use in the M Manufacturing District, per Section 11.2-4 (L) of the West Chicago Zoning
Code. Staff is of the opinion the petitioner has satisfied this finding.
A roll call vote found Commissioners Kasprak, Slattery, Banasiak, Billingsley, and Terrazas, and
Chairperson Laimins voting “aye” and no one voting “no”. With a roll call vote of six (6) “aye” and
zero (0) “no”, the motion carried.
8. Public Hearing of Case PC 24-03 — Zoning Text Amendments
Commissioner Kasprak made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Slattery, to open the public
hearing. With a voice vote of all ayes, the motion carried.
Mr. Sterrett was duly sworn in. Mr. Sterrett stated that staff drafted an Amendment to the Zoning
Code that will define and allow Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations to be installed as an
accessory use in all zoning districts and will include the use of EV charging stations as part of
motor vehicle service stations. There has been an increased interest to install EV charging stations
by existing gas stations, commercial centers, and homeowners to accommodate the rise in the use of
EVs. Staff is proposing to allow the installation and use of Levels 1, 2, and 3 EV Charging Stations
in all business and manufacturing districts as an accessory use and to allow levels 1 and 2 EV
Charging Stations in all residential districts. Staff has attached a fact sheet describing the
differences between these three various charging levels. A property to be used primarily for
charging EVs would be considered a motor vehicle service station, which requires approval of a
special use in the B-2 General Business and B-3 Regional Shopping districts.
This proposed Text Amendment is in keeping with the vision adopted by the Plan Commission
within the Comprehensive Plan which is to “always demonstrate an unwavering commitment to
green space and the environment.” Furthermore, one of the focused goals of the Comprehensive
Plan is to provide green transportation options such as those with zero emissions.
Members of the Plan Commission discussed if there was a need to include the provision proposed
by staff that residential EV charging stations required a building permit. Mr. Sterrett stated this
could be taken out because if a permit is needed, the Zoning Code does not dictate it, but rather the
Building Code.
Staff has also drafted an amendment to the Zoning Code that allows greater flexibility in the type of
materials permitted to be used in construction and renovation projects in commercial and multi-
family buildings. The City’s Design Standards located in Section 7.13 of the Zoning Code permits
only brick and stone to be used for commercial structures and requires that multi-family buildings
contain at least 90% brick and stone. These requirements may stifle creative architectural design
and may significantly increase overall costs for a developer. The trend in commercial and multi-
family development in the Chicago suburban market has shifted in the last decade away from all
brick/stone buildings to incorporate more creative and cost-effective materials.
Plan Commission/Zoning Board of Appeals
February 6, 2024
Page 3 of 5

===== PDF PAGE 4 =====
[Extraction: OCR (rendered-page OCR)]
The Development Committee discussed this topic at their November 2023 and January 2024
meetings and directed staff to research the design standards of other communities, including the
City of St. Charles and the City of Naperville. Both communities allow more flexibility in choices
for building materials, including textured concrete masonry units (CMU), stucco, cedar wood and
fiber cement siding, commonly known as Hardie-board. Based on these findings, the Development
Committee directed staff to prepare a zoning text amendment that would allow other primary
materials other than brick and stone on commercial and multi-family structures, including fiber
cement siding, textured CMU, and stucco.
This proposed Text Amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s implementation
strategy to review existing design guidelines for commercial and residential development and
update as needed.
Members of the Commission discussed adding a provision that would give the Zoning
Administrator the ability to approve a material that is not listed within the Design Standards if the
material still meets the intent of the Design Standards. Members of the Commission also discussed
eliminating textured CMU from the list of approved materials. Members of the Commission agreed
that the Design Standards zoning text amendment should be brought back for further discussion
before being voted on.
With all members of the public having had the opportunity to speak, and with all Plan
Commissioners having the opportunity to question staff, Commissioner Slattery made a motion,
seconded by Commissioner Kasprak, to close the public hearing. With a voice vote of all ayes, the
motion carried and the public hearing was closed.
9. Review and Recommendation of Case PC 24-03 — Zoning Text Amendments
The Plan Commission deliberated the proposed Zoning Text Amendments. After a brief discussion,
Commissioner Billingsley made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Kasprak, to recommend
approval of the proposed Zoning Text Amendment for the Electric Vehicle Charging Stations.
A roll call vote found Commissioners Billingsley, Kasprak, Banasiak, Slattery, and Terrazas, and
Chairperson Laimins voting “aye” and no one voting “no”. With a roll call vote of six (6) “aye” and
zero (0) “no”, the motion carried.
Regarding the Zoning Text Amendment to the Design Standards, members of the Plan Commission
agreed with the concept of expanding the type of building materials permitted but wanted a
provision added that would allow the Zoning Administrator flexibility in approving materials that
may not be listed in the Design Standards, such as emerging and improved building materials,
provided that they meet the purpose and intent of the design standards. For this reason, the
discussion of the proposed zoning text amendment was continued to the March 5" Plan
Commission to give staff time to draft language reflecting the members’ comments.
8. Petition Updates/Staff Report
Mr. Sterrett provided a brief update on upcoming projects and previously approved projects.
Plan Commission/Zoning Board of Appeals
February 6, 2024
Page 4 of 5

===== PDF PAGE 5 =====
[Extraction: OCR (rendered-page OCR)]
9. Adjournment
With no further business to discuss, Commissioner Terrazas made a motion, seconded by
Commissioner Billingsley to adjourn the meeting. With a voice vote of all ayes, the motion carried
and the Plan Commission, at 7:52 p.m., adjourned.
Respectfully Submitted,
John Sterrett, City Planner
Plan Commission/Zoning Board of Appeals
February 6, 2024
Page 5 of 5