►
From YouTube: Plan Commission Meeting 5/13/2015
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
On
page
four,
the
section:
the
discussion
of
modifications
to
administrative
rules,
I
think
staff
wisely
compressed
these
minutes
and
included
only
the
principal
points
of
discussion,
rather
than
everything
that
was
said.
I
think
the
minute
should
note
that
we
did
make
two
amendments
to
the
Rules
Committee
draft,
one
in
article
four
section
C
and
one
in
article
9
and
the
staff
has
those
changes.
I
think
the
minute
should
also
note
that
the
adoption
was
done
by
roll
call
and
the
roll
call
was
unanimous
with
those
Corrections.
A
A
A
This
is
brought
to
us
on.
Is
it
all
dramatic
reference?
Is
it
council
references
its
staff,
okay
by
staff
staff?
Are
the
petitioners
in
this
case
this
is
a
formerly
called
public
hearing.
I,
don't
know
if
the
public
is
going
to
want
to
testify
on
this,
but
she's
certainly
welcome
to
do
it.
When
we
get
to
that
point,
okay,
we
will
proceed
as
usual.
A
In
hearings
staff
will
present
their
analysis
and
recommendation.
We
will
then
entertain.
Questions
for
staff,
including
questions
from
the
public
public,
will
then
be
invited
to
make
any
comments
statements
that
they
wish
to
make,
and
we
will
cross-examine
them
there
being
no
further
questions.
We
will
then
close
the
public
record
and
proceed
to
deliberation
by
the
Commission.
A
B
Chairman
Thank
You
mr.
chairman,
so
the
the
only
case
tonight
on
the
agenda
is
a
text
amendment
that
deals
with
firearm
ranges.
This
is
to
introduce
land
use
definition
and
the
zoning
ordinance
and
then
introduce
land
use
regulations
for
that.
So
this
is
a
follow-up
ordinance
to
ordinance
six
dash
0
dash
15
the
weapons
code
of
the
city
code
that
was
adopted
in
March
of
this
year
and
the
weapons
code
Delta
the
it's.
B
Basically,
a
reaction
to
stays,
firearm
or
concealed
carry
act,
was
it
out
there
in
2013
and
that
regulates
licensing,
possession
and
registration
of
firearms?
What
it
does
not
license
it
regulates
is
the
location
where
one
can
purchase
a
firearm
and
these
facilities
we
marking
trained
using
firearms.
So
the
the
Ordnance
six
dash
0
dash
15
does
deal
with
the
power
arm
ranges
and
where
one
can
purchase
some
firearms,
the
discharges
of
firearms
and
various
other
regulations
regarding
the
weapons
and
handguns.
B
So
there
was
because
the
the
weapons
code
introduced
firearm
ranges
and
allowable
use
in
the
city
we
needed
to
make
a
change.
The
zoning
ordinance
that
also
allows
firearm
ranges
as
one
of
the
allowable
uses
within
certain
districts,
so
we
needed
to
do
a
text
element
that
is
consistent
with
the
weapons
code
and
in
essence,
it's
exactly
the
same.
B
We
are
introducing
a
definition,
that's
exactly
the
same
as
the
definition,
the
original
ordinance,
the
weapons
code
and
that's
that
a
firearms
range
is
that
any
establishment
where
the
discharging
of
firearm,
as
defined
in
Section
981,
which
is
the
weapons
code,
is
a
lot
for
a
sporting
event
or
for
practice
instruction
testing
or
training
in
the
use
of
our
arm.
The
firearm
range
may
also
include
rental,
a
firearm
for
allowable
uses
within
the
establishment
and
the
firearm
dealer,
as
defined
and
regulated
by
title
nine
chapter:
nine,
the
weapons
core
of
the
city.
B
B
So
a
very
is
not
a
different
number
of
these
distance
separations
from
schools
were
posed
and
ultimately,
what
the
City
Council
feltz
was
that
the
350
foot
separation
from
these
uses
is
the
most
appropriate
distance.
Separation
for
firearm
ranges
and
that's
why
the
weapons
code
includes
that
separation
requirement.
This
map
shows
the
theoretical
areas
of
the
city
where
a
firearm
range
could
be
established.
B
There
was
some
discussion
before
the
meeting
that
you
know
the
map
indicates
these
pink
areas
with
that
that
are
that
meet
the
distance
separation
requirement.
But
you
know
most
of
these
lots
are
actually
closer
to
the
residential
areas
and
schools
and
parts.
So,
in
reality,
the
entire
property
has
to
be
within
the
350,
fluid
separation
and
therefore
there's
not
a
lot
of
properties
in
the
city
that
would
currently
as
they
stand
today,
that
would
that
would
qualify.
B
Of
course,
that
means
that
one
can
purchase
certain
Lots
in
these
areas
to
reach
subdivision
or
combine
multiple
lots
and
so
that
the
entire
facility,
the
entire
lot,
is
350
feet
from
from
schools
and
parks,
etc.
So
in
essence,
that's
the
proposal,
there's
no
other
changes
to
the
zoning
ordinance
or
to
the
weapons
code
for
that
matter.
B
In
regards
to
the
standards,
there
are
four
standards
for
the
text,
amendment
res
for
any
other
ones.
We
believe
that
all
standards
have
been
satisfied,
in
particular
the
first
one
whether
the
proposed
amendment
is
consistent
with
the
goals
and
objectives
of
the
comprehensive
plan.
We
believe
that
this
is
satisfied.
This
is
another
use
that
would
be
permitted
in
the
city,
and
this
proposed
text
amendment
makes
the
zoning
ordinance
consistent
with
the
with
other
portions
of
the
city
code.
B
We
also
believe
the
proposed
amendment
is
compatible
with
the
overall
character
of
the
existing
development
in
the
immediate
vicinity.
That's
why
the
proposed
use
was
selected
to
be
only
in
the
industrial
areas,
and
we
do
not
believe
that
these
types
of
facilities
or
the
proposed
amendment
will
have
adverse
effects
on
the
values
of
adjacent
properties.
B
This
again
is
something
that
would
be
evaluated
as
part
of
the
special
use
review
process
when
the
proposed,
if
there
was
a
proposal
to
review
and
then
the
same
time
their
number
for
which
we
believe
is
not
applicable
in
this
case,
but
if
proposed
facility
is
considered,
we
would
make
sure
that
there's
adequate
public
facilities
and
services
servicing
that
property
so,
but
that
staff
recommends
approval
of
the
proposed
text.
Amendment
and
I
would
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
D
B
Question
we
would
have
to
investigate
that.
I.
Don't
have
that
off
top
of
my
head.
There
is
no
land
use
definition
within
the
parking
requirements
for
the
firearm
range,
we're
not
proposing
to
add
one.
So
we
would
probably
us
find
something.
That's
the
most
similar
to
that,
depending
on
the
how
the
facility
is
designed
and
what
you
know.
What
is
what
it
serves
often
times
for
these
uses.
There
are
special
uses.
B
We
ask
for
traffic
studies
that
indicate
when
the
maximum
capacity
will
be,
and
you
know,
evaluate
the
existing
parking
scenarios
on
the
site
so
because
these
things
are
relatively
uncommon
and
they
can
vary
based
on
scale
and
I.
Guess
how
many
of
ranges
they
have
that's
something
that
will
have
to
be
determined,
probably
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
understood.
Thank
you.
A
B
B
That's
a
good
question:
we
had
this
conversation
before
the
meeting
and
maybe
the
counselor
can
provide
a
bit
more
information
on
that
when
I
believe
when
this
was
presented
to
the
City
Council,
they
investigated
various
distance
separation
requirements.
I
think
they
initially
started
with
something
less
than
that,
but
felt
that
too
many
properties
would
be
eligible
for
this
type
of
use
and
then
they
wanted
to
go,
get
a
500-foot
separation
which
then
essentially
eliminate
all
properties,
and
that
would
be
a
violation
of
the
constitutional
rights.
B
B
B
E
B
F
B
For
example,
disparate,
so
these
little
lines
black
lines
indicate
existing
parcels.
Okay,
so
this
particular
property
is
not
fully
pink,
which
means
that
there
are
portions
of
this
property
that
are
less
than
350
feet
from
schools,
parks
or
whatever,
and
therefore
this
particular
property
right
now
is
not
eligible
to
be
a
firearm
range,
unless
somebody
somehow
subzip
subdivided
that
a
new
property
on
this
lot
is
fully
outside
of
that
350
foot
range,
but.
F
B
Correct
so
so
these
properties,
this
property,
looks
like
it's
probably
exactly
350
feet
from
any
schools,
parks,
etc.
There
are
some
small
lots
here
that
are
eligible,
so
one
can
potentially
combine
these
Lots
right
here
into
one
larger
lot
or
maybe
take
portions
of
this
lot,
even
this
much
large
a
lot.
B
So
this
this
is
an
area
that
certainly
could
could
have
a
firearm
range
and
then
further
down
south
on
the
north
and
south
sides
of
oakton.
Definitely
this
property
right
here
that
looks
like
it's
landlocked
off
of
oakton,
but
it's
it's
a
it's
a
parcel
that
it's
fully
outside
of
the
350
foot
range
and
there
looks
like
there's
a
couple
right
there
on
the
north
side
of
opened
into.
D
G
This
is
a
good
question.
Legal
staff
did
our
due
diligence
and
looking
at
case
law
and
ends
particular
the
city
of
chicago.
I
think
when
we
were
talking
about
the
revisions
of
the
250
250
feet
vs.
I
think
there
was
a
proposal
for
500
at
City
Council
that
was
so
restrictive
and
the
case
I
would
indicate
that
you
needed
to
make
it
so
so
that
you
would
have
this
ability
to
have
a
firearm
range
in
your
municipality.
G
Based
on
the
preliminary
farm
review,
I
mean
I
can
do
a
little
bit
more
research
if
you'd
like,
but
as
I
recall,
when
we
had
a
500-foot
suggestion
at
the
City
Council
level
that
was
deemed
to
be
too
expensive,
where
it
would
just
not
allow
for
it
in
the
city.
I
still.
D
E
E
B
G
And
then
the
additional
concern
that
we
also
had
with
being
able
to
do
the
licensing
in
the
building
restrictions
that
would
give
the
city
some
sort
of
control
with
a
lot
of
the
issues
that
we
have,
such
as
noise.
You
know
sound
pollution,
dangers
that
the
firearm
ranges
can
prevent.
So
we
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
city
had
some
ability
to
look
at
any
of
those
issues
that
might
arise
and
you
know,
may
have
the
required
background
checks
that
you
need
to
with
all
that
am.
G
Issue
has
then
it's
and
it's
an
additional
that's
something
else
said
to
consider
is
the
fact
that
the
city
this
was
brought
up
at
City
Council
until
the
250-foot
definition,
that
is
permissive
of
the
firearm
ranges.
That
was,
that
was
a
trusted
that
at
that
level,
if
there's
any
brilliant,
if
there's
any
modification
to
the
350
feet,
then
that
would
require
an
additional
modification
to
the
actual
weapons.
Ordinance
that
the
council
had
already
has
already
accepted
and
approved
am.
C
Jessica
I
believe
it's
a
matter
of
pre-empting
a
user
occupants
who
would
want
to
operate
a
firearms
range
here
in
the
city.
If
the
city
hadn't
taken
the
steps
to
regulate
it
ahead
of
time,
they
could
have
gone
to
court
and,
ultimately,
if
they
prevailed,
would
have
ended
up
potentially
being
able
to
put
a
firearms
range
somewhere
where
the
city
wouldn't
have
wanted
it,
and
so
this
way
the
city
is
able
to
take
control.
A
C
Definitely
a
line
of
cases
dealing
with
I
believe
it's
multi-family
housing
that
cities
were
trying
to
prohibit
multi
families
from
there
from
inside
their
borders.
Some
of
our
neighbors
to
the
north
deal
with
those
kinds
of
issues
and
I
think
that
what
the
city
is
doing
here
with
firearms
ranges
follow
that
same
line
of
cases,
Commissioner.
H
To
add
on
to
what
damir
was
saying
in
his
presentation
earlier
is
that,
by
talking
about
the
difference
between
the
500-foot
distance,
that
was
deemed
too
restrictive?
Is
that
the
city,
I
believe,
is
not
allowed
to
use
owning
as
a
way
to
effectively
ban
a
usage
that
doesn't
mean
we're
encouraging
it.
It
just
means
that
it
is
technically
allowed
and
I
think
that
needs
to
be
pre-cleared.
H
F
I
kind
of
want
to
know
it's
not
clear
to
me
exactly
what
we're
adding
the
value
were.
Adding
to
this
to
this
to
this
weapons
ordinance
and
if
staff
can
please
clarify
what
we've
done
is
simply
add
the
the
industrial
zoning.
B
Is
exactly
right
right
now
the
zoning
ordinance
does
not
regulate,
does
not
address.
Firearm
ranges,
they're
not
defined
they're,
not
allowed
anywhere
one
way
or
the
other
permitted
or
special
use.
However,
there's
a
separate
chapter
of
a
city
code,
the
weapons
ordinance
that
allows
firearm
ranges,
defines
them
and
regulate
them
at
this
distance
separation
and
says
that
they
are
allowed,
especially
used
in
the
I
one.
Two
and
three.
So
we
we
have
is
a
discrepancy
between
the
two
ordinances
and
there's
a
need
to
change
the
zoning
ordinance
so
that
it's
consistent
with
the
weapons
ordinance.
B
A
H
B
I
mean
ultimately,
the
any
use
would
have
to
be
either
a
permitted
or
especially
use
I
guess
alternately.
We
could.
We
could
allow
them
as
a
permitted
use
I
use
that
does
not
have
to
go
to
the
special
use
approval
process
to
go
to
City
Council
for
evaluation
of
the
standards.
I
guess
that
could
have
been
done,
there's
an
option
that
the
zoning
ordinance
could
add
an
additional
separation
requirement
above
and
beyond
what
the
weapons
code
allows.
Certainly
anything
less
than
what's
in
the
weapons.
Ordinance
does
not
necessarily
make
sense
because
then
the
weapons
sword.
B
H
B
G
B
I,
don't
believe,
there's
any
there's
nothing
in
the
in
the
current
zoning
ordinance.
We
do
have
different
sections
of
the
building
code
that
deep
the
deal
with
the
south
sound
abatement
within
the
building
and
and
these
facilities
there's
a
separate
section
of
the
building
code
that
deals
with
the
type
of
insulation
that
would
have
to
be
provided
inside
the
building.
We.
E
A
H
B
Is
an
ARP
is:
there
are
part
of
the
ordinance.
We
talked
about
50
10,
15
you're
right.
Yes,
so
that's
that's!
A
new
ordinance!
That's
proposed!
That's
going
to
have
various
other
changes
to
the
rest
of
the
city
code.
Part
of
that
are
the
changes
to
the
zoning
ordinance.
So,
yes,
that
the
ordinance
can
certainly
be
modified.
B
A
D
F
A
A
Last
month,
when
we
adopted
the
new
rules
and
the
revised
rules
and
procedures,
we
agreed
to
amend
article
13
to
take
the
hearing
procedure
back
to
the
way
we
had
it
before
and
what
wasn't
clear
was
whether
that
was
simply
sort
of
a
ministerial
action
that
the
staff
could
take
or
whether
we
needed
to
bring
that
back
to
the
Commission.
As
an
amendment
I
think
we
need
to
bring
it
as
an
amendment.