HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.5 1st reading of an ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW INSTALLATION OF AN ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE AND ASSOCIATED ACCESSORIES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1650 DEMPSTER STREET AND 1510 SOUTH BUSSE ROAD, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOISMr�GauC �'d'+rt;�iect
Item Cover Page
Subject-..' ORDINANCE
CONDITIONAL TO ALLOW INSTALLATION OF
SUPPORTAN ANTENNA
LOCATEDASSOCIATED ACCESSORIES FOR PROPERTY
SOUTH• A D MOUNT PROSPECT,
ILLINOIS
Meeting December 1 A' MEETING OF •
PROSPECT. BOARD
Fiscal Impact
Dollar Amount
Budget Source
Category NEW BUSINESS
Type Action Item
Information
Background / Property History
The Subject Property consists of an electrical substation located at 1650 Dempster
Street and a portion of 1510 S. Busse Road, within one of ComEd's existing utility
corridors. The substation is located on two lots; the existing substation is located
on the entire lot currently zoned I-1 Light Industrial and only partially on the lot
zoned R-1 Single Family Residential District. These two lots comprise the "zoning
lot".
Surrounding properties include B-3 Community Shopping and B-4 Commercial
Corridor zoned lots to the west (liquor store, laundromat and restaurant), east
(restaurant) and south (commercial strip center) of the Subject Property. Abutting
the ComEd utility corridor and to the north of the Subject Property are R-4 Multi -
Family Residential planned unit developments including the Dover Park
Condominiums and the Greens Apartments. The Subject Property was annexed
into the Village in 1963 under Ordinance No. 920.
1
Antenna Support Structure - The Petitioner proposes improvements to its
substation to preserve and enhance the provision of electrical service. As part of
ComEd's multi-year "smart grid" initiative which includes an upgrade of the
existing electrical distribution communication system with newer technology and
infrastructure, the first improvement includes the installation of a 104 -foot tall
antenna support structure within the existing substation on the I-1 zoned portion
of the zoning lot, just east of the western substation building. The proposed
antenna support structure would enhance the provision of reliable electrical
service and upgrade the existing electrical distribution communication system with
newer technology and infrastructure. Per the Petitioner, the proposed antenna will
emit radio signals exclusive to ComEd and communicate with ComEd's electrical
devices/equipment on the electrical grid system. The proposed antenna will not be
used for any commercial communication services (e.g., 5G or any other cellular
telephone technologies).
The conditional use is requested since the support structure would exceed the
maximum height of seventy feet (70') under Section 14.305 which regulates
radio, satellite and television antennas and towers. The antenna support structure
would support five receiving and transmitting antennae to support approximately
250 monitoring and sensing devices to be installed in the Mount Prospect -area
distribution circuits over the next two years. For proper system functioning, the
lowest antenna would be installed at a minimum height of 35 feet to avoid foliage
blockage and each additional antenna would be installed a minimum of 15 feet
apart vertically, above the first antenna. The proposed antenna support structure
will be situated approximately 7 feet east of the existing western substation
control building, 114 feet from the northern fence line, 238 feet from the northern
property line, 82 feet west of the western property line, and 153 feet from the
southern property line.
Landscaping - The second improvement is a comprehensive landscape screening
plan around the perimeter of the substation. The landscape plans indicate a
substantial amount of ground level screening proposed along the Dempster Street
frontage, the northern fence, and portions of the east and west fences located
within the transmission right-of-way. The proposed perimeter landscaping will be
composed of a mixture of large deciduous shrubs, evergreen shrubs, perennials
and grasses. Per code, the proposed shrubs will be three feet (3') tall at time of
installation and will reach their mature height within three (3) to five (5) years.
Per the project's landscape architect, the species of shrubs were chosen because
the shrubs will reach the desired screening height of eight feet (8') to ten feet
(10') along the north, west and east fence lines, to fifteen feet (15') for the taller
evergreens along Dempster Street, and are durable and will tolerate the proposed
location without substantial maintenance. Five different species of deciduous
2
shrubs and two species of evergreen shrubs were also selected as a precautionary
measure against pests or disease. If either of these were to attack one species,
the others would remain.
There are twenty-two (22) existing trees across the Dempster Street frontage of
which twelve (12) trees will be removed. Of these twelve (12), three (3) are dead
(1 Austrian Pine and 2 Spruce). The remaining trees are Austrian Pine trees that
are either planted within the 10 -foot security clear zone or are declining in health
and have limbs that protrude into the 10 -foot security clear zone. The 10 -foot
security clear zone is necessary to ensure there is no vegetation in close proximity
to the fence which can be used to aid in an attempted climb over the fence, to
ensure clear visibility of the area outside the fence so that security camera
visibility is not impeded, and to eliminate potential hiding areas.
Per Staff's request, a substantial amount of landscaping was added along the
north fence and along portions of the east and west fences. However, staff is now
proposing to eliminate these areas of landscaping as well as paring down the
landscaping along the Dempster Street frontage in light of new comments
received by the Mount Prospect Park District and Police Department. The Park
District has requested that the areas of landscaping in the ComEd right-of-way be
eliminated due to safety concerns and to deter people from camping, drinking,
and residing within the tall bushes. The Police Department has echoed the Park
District's concerns and also requested that the landscaping along Dempster Street
be scaled down for safety issues. The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended to add a condition of approval that requires the petitioner to work
with staff to prepare a revised Landscape Plan that addresses these public safety
concerns.
Staff Recommendation
Staff is supportive of the conditional use request. From an aesthetic standpoint,
the proposed antenna would be noiseless, unlit and would blend in with existing
substation mechanical equipment and the taller utility towers within the ComEd
right-of-way. Staff believes the proposed antenna support structure aligns with
the Village Comprehensive Plan and would improve the reliability of an existing
public utility to the entire Village. Staff recommends the elimination of the
landscaping areas at the north, east and west fence lines, as well as scaling down
the landscaping along the Dempster Street frontage due to public safety concerns.
Planning Zoning Commission Hearing
At the Planning & Zoning Commission hearing on December 9, 2021, the
Commission voted to recommend approval of the request 5-0 (they also approved
a variation for fence height and are final on that request). Primary discussion
involved highly technical explanations for the proposed antenna support structure.
KI
One member from the public voiced concerns about the number of wireless
devices that would be installed in the vicinity in order to upgrade grid reliability.
There was no additional commentary from the public at the December 9th
hearing. The Planning & Zoning Commission added a condition of approval that
the Petitioner work with Staff to revise the landscape plan to address the public
safety issues raised by the Police Department and the Park District.
The Petitioner has submitted a letter requesting to waive the 2nd reading of the
case.
Alternatives
1. Approve a conditional use permit to allow for the installation of a 104 -foot tall
antenna support structure, including a 4 -foot tall lightning rod atop and five
(5) monitoring antennae, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report
for PZ -17-21 and discussed at the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting on
December 9, 2021.
2. Discretion of the Village Board.
Approval
1. A conditional use permit to allow for the installation of a 104 -foot tall
antenna support structure, including a 4 -foot tall lightning rod atop and five
(5) monitoring antennae, subject to the following conditions listed in the staff
report for PZ -17-21 and discussed at the Planning & Zoning Commission
meeting on December 9, 2021.
ATTACHMENTS:
PZ -17-21 Administrative Content.pdf
PZ -17-21 Plans.pdf
PZ -17-21 Public Comments.pdf
PZ -17-21 Staff Report.pdf
PZ -17-21 Minutes.pdf
PZ -17 -21 -2nd Reading Waiver Request.pdf
CU PZ 17-21_Choi- FINAL. pdf
4
Village of Mount Prospect
Community Development Department
50 S. Emerson Street
Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
Phone: (847) 818-5328
Zoning Request Application
Official Use Onl (To be completed try Village'Staff)
Case Number: PBZ - - Date of Submission: Hearing Date:
Project Name/Address:
I. Subject Property
Address(es): 1650 Cern ster St. and 1510 S. Bug -se, Ed., Motint Er
1-1 and R-1
7.4 acres (appy
Zoning Distrct (s): Pro art Area (5qFt. and/or Acrea e):
Parcel Index.Number(s) (PIN(s): 08-15-400-0191 08-15-400-084
and 08-15-400-085
ll. Zoning Request(s) (Check all that apply)
® Conditional Use: For installation of 100' tall ComEd-only antenna support structure wi
install 11' expanded metal fence with 12" 4 11 tning ro on
Variation(s): To y -s a ar ware on op wa our 1�C HT1
❑ Zoning Map Amendment: Rezone From To
security functions
❑ Zoning Text Amendment: Section(s)
❑ Other:
III. Summary of Proposal (use separate sheet if necessary)
Install 104" antenna su ort structure for ComEd electrical rid monitELnkand relia
enhancements. Replace the existing 7' chain link fencing with 1' barbed wire on top
11' tall security fencing plus 12" of y -shaped barbed wire with four _16' tall posts
u rtin the fence a d oche securityfunctions. -plan
See Addendum for complete details.
IV. Applicant (all correspondence will be sent to the applicant)
Name: Scott Saef Corporation: Sidley Austin LLP
Address: One South Dearborn Street
City, State, ZIP Code:
Phone: 312-853-4159 Email: ssaef( sidle i. com
Interest in Property:
huy12 1 TCve raper, iessee, architect, etc...)
1
ailit
in
5
V. Property Owner
❑ Check if Same as Applicant
Name: Corporation: Comwnweelth Edison
Sae .ler.at,
Address: 3 Lincoln Centre, 4th Floor
City, State, ZIP Code: Oakbrook Terrace, IL 60181
Phone: 630-576-6396 Email: jo H1Chra t@ComEd.Com
information- In consideration of the containedIn thispetition
applicant
requested that approval, be given to this request. The
owner of the property. Thei petitionier « owner of
prospect and their agenVs permission toenteron property
subjectthe property.
Information provided
aw
application are, true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. 01Applicant:
.0 " Date:
(S-ignatute) e5
or♦'
If applicant is not property owner:
I hereby designate the applicant to act as my agent for the purpose of seeking the zoning request(a) described in this
application and the associated supp ng met dal. 2�
Property Owner:..
1. Cate: E5� 2u 2
(S tore)
hoc 6 AL (t 2�
(Irina orypa Name)
Ij
Affidavit of Ownership
COUNTY OF COOK
STATE OF ILLINOIS
I & + #.-c U rL + i , under oath, state that I am
(print name)
❑ the sole owner of the property
❑ an owner of the property
® an authorized officer for the owner of the property
commonly described as 1650 Dempster Street, PIN 08-15-400-019, 08-15-400-084 and
(property address and PIN) 08-15-400-085
and that such property is owned by COIEwmealth Edison COTPany.. as of this date.
(print name)
Signature
Subscribed and sworn to before
me this �= day of
Att6U,5"T ,20Ll.
r
Notary Public
----------
OFFICK SEAL
NANCY R CARRINO
NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF ILLINOIS
MY CO6M� ISSION EXPRE5:090/23
......... ...........
Submission Requirements Checklist
asohmif nna nrialinal (i I set of the information listed below:
IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR SUBMISSION
All required items, Including plans, shall be folded not to exceed 8 112-" xW in area.
All required plans/drawings shall indicate the following basic information:
a. Name of development(project;
b. Property address',
c. Date of preparation and any subsequent revisions;
d. scale, both In nurnerals and graphic, and
a. North arrow.
please note zoning app,110800ins will not be reviewed until all of required items have been satisfactorily
submittals will not be accepted. it is strongly suggested
submitted to the Planning Division. 1111cOmPlete that materials
YIMMW
Plan •..Dlvision before the application deadline so
can be reviewed for accuracy and completeness.
4
L-1
ITEM
1.
2.
Zoning Request Application (pages 1-2)
Affidavit of Ownership (page 3)
Gg
3.
Proof of Ownership (e.g. warranty deed, etc.--)
4.
Paid receipt of the most recent tax bill
a.
Document indicating intent to buy or lease _AZa_
❑
S.
Responses to applicable standards (pages 5-6) see attacFeT enTu_m_'_
7.
Plat of Survey that accurately reflects current conditions
a.
Plans (drawn to scale):
Site Plan, including a zoning data box with the existing and proposed building setbacks, floor area,
a.
overall lot coverage, and parking;
b. Building Elevations (existing and proposed);
c, Floor Plans (existing and proposed);
d. Engineering Plans;
e. Landscape Plan and Tres Preservation Plan;
f. photometric Plan;
g. Sidn Drawings;
h. Traffic Study, if required;
I. List of all current tenants and vacant space if a multi4enant building. include square feet of each unit;
and
j. Other Information, as determined necessary by the Village Staff,
9.
Legal Description saved as a Microsoft Word file
jo. LISS Flash Drive or compact disc (CD) with all items listed above
11. Application Fee(s) (page 7) -----------
IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR SUBMISSION
All required items, Including plans, shall be folded not to exceed 8 112-" xW in area.
All required plans/drawings shall indicate the following basic information:
a. Name of development(project;
b. Property address',
c. Date of preparation and any subsequent revisions;
d. scale, both In nurnerals and graphic, and
a. North arrow.
please note zoning app,110800ins will not be reviewed until all of required items have been satisfactorily
submittals will not be accepted. it is strongly suggested
submitted to the Planning Division. 1111cOmPlete that materials
YIMMW
Plan •..Dlvision before the application deadline so
can be reviewed for accuracy and completeness.
4
L-1
Affidavit of Public Notice
Zoning Case # PZ -17-21
I Scott Saef, attorney for CAr oath, t tha I a ties petitioner of the zoning case number listed above
regarding the property located at wlter�10 �t'i. e I hereby affirm that a copy of the public notice
was mailed out to all property owners of record within two hundred fifty feet (250'), exclusive of right of way width, of
the subject property no more than thirty (30) days nor less than fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing scheduled on
December 9 2021
I also certify to submit any returned mail from the United States Postal Service of said property owners to the Village of
Mount Prospect Community Development Department.
I fully understand that in the event that public notification are not mailed out as per public hearing procedures stated in the
Zoning Code of the Village Code, then the Village of Mount Prospect may elect to reject the zoning application and the
permit for which I am applying will not be approved (or work in progress pursuant to the permit will be stopped) until
proper public hearing procedures are followed /
Petitioner: Date: r
(s gnature'
Scutt , aef
(print name)
Subscribed and sworn to before
me this e;�-2' I-& day of
Iv CV el t 61f , 20 .
nl
Notary Public
"OFFICIAL MEAL"
MICHELLE PON ARELLI
NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF IWNOIS
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 4/26/2023
11:TLAMApphuii—\U0Wd Applications 2010\Affidwit uMbli. N.6.e090409A..
9
.gIRTIrICATE OE MTHDRAWA3678712
This is to certify that Commonwe,alth EdIS20
a Corporation
the registered owner(s) of the following described lands situated In the County
of Cook, State of Illinois, the title to which has been heretofore registered under
the laws of the State of Illinois, to wit:
SEE ATTACHED
having heretofore filed a petition for the withdrawal of the title to said lands
from the registry system; NOW, THEREFORE, the title to said above described
lands has been withdrawn from the effect and operation of the title registry
systems of the State of Illinois and the owner(s) of said lands (is/are) by law
authorized to convey, encumber or otherwise deal with the title to said lands
In the same manner and to the same extent as with the title to lands that have
M .
not been registered.
Witness my hand and seal this_ S�_d of
Registrff of Titles fqf fook County
Certificate No.
Vol. * Page * * See list attached
LR No.
Party in title: Commonwealth Edison Coen any
10
1 7.3
That part of LOT TWO (9M In Edward Busoot# Division of part of Ike Southeast Quarter (1)
of section i tneea0dl, end the Yortheast Quarter lIl of Section Twonty-Two 1271, Township
Fora-One (41) Worth, Hangs Eleven (1I). East of the Third Principal Moridloo, as recorded
December IT. 141#, ss Document Number 4e46346,in gook Counly, Illinois, described as (ollowi t-
Commencing at a point in the Old center line of Algonquin hood which Is Two Hundred Teo (310)
(a*I East of ( mongered of right angles 10 the West line of the Eaatt Half (1) of said Southeast
Quarter (1) , thence North along a lite 'two Hundred Ten (310) test East of and parallel slth the
West line of the East Half 11) of said Sostheent Quartet t1) a distance of One Hundred Three and
Five Hundredth# (103.001 foot to an, angle point, thence Northeasterly along a diagonal line drawn
from said angio point to It point In the East lino, of said Lot Two (3) which is Three Hundred Twenty-
Six and Twenty- Vivo Hundredths (330.35) foot North of the South tine of eald Section Fifteen (15) 1 as
measured along the East lloe of said Lot Two (31) a distance at Three Ifundrod Thirty-Throe and
Eighty- Five Hundredths 1333. 35) feet for a point of beginning of This parcel of land I said point of
boglttiting is Six Hundred Thirty-Six and Eight Hundredth* M. 04) tool Southwesterly of the East'llne
of said Lot Two 131 on measured slon j said dlago0al Lino); theses Southeasterly lion# a lino drawn
at right angles to said disgoasal line a diatpncs of Two Hundred Nineteen and Elghly-Two Hundredths
MO. 021 tort to the Intorsoctton of said line with the South line of said Southeast Quarter (1), Mean
East along said South Lino a distance of Four Hundred Four nod Fifty-Nine Hundredths 4404. !91 feet
to a point which is Ono Hundred Eighty-Ono fill ) real West of the Rost Lino of said Lot Two (3).
taelee Numb along a line drawn #1 rijbi onglos to said Soutit Lino a distance of Two Hundred Ninety-
Four (3441 foot to the Intersection of sold Ileo *fib the aforesaid diagonal line ( eiid Interseclift bels#
One Hundred Eighty-31st and Eighty- Ftvs Hundredths (1041, 35) foot Soullmosteriy of the East fine of it"
Lot Two 13) so measured alae# said diagonstl Unith thsttee Southwesterly along esJd'dl,line a
distance of Four Hundred f+brty-Nino and TeootyiThres Hundredths 1449.231 tat to tho point of
beglaalng of this pascal of Lad.
400-019
lloo EAST DEMQSTIA ST
A "t s .
rte
11
L' (2. 11 v -S,0
That part of Lat Two (21, detertbed as folloirm- 16#glanlog at a polio al the Intersection
at the old center tine of Algonquin Road, with in* Wool lino of the hast Half (1) of the
Southeast Quarter (j) of said Section riReon 115), which point to a dtatanoe of One Hundred
sixty three and sixty four hundredths (163. $41 toot North of the Southwest corner of sold
East Half 11) of the Southeast Quarter (j); thence North along the West line of said test
Half (1) of the Southeast Quarter (j), a distance of One hundred seventy one and ninety two
hundredths (171.92feat to an angle point; thence Northeasterly along a dlsgonal line drawn
from said point to a point in the East tin# of said ion Two (2). which Is a distance of rive
hundred thirty nine and eighty hundredths (636.60) toot North of the South line of #old
Section rlfteen (13) (ss measured along the East tin* of said tat Two (2), a distance of one
thousand one hundred eighty three and sixty hundredths (1163.60) foot to the rest line of
said Lot Two (2), thence South along the East line of said Lot Two 121, a distance of Two
hundred thirteen and fifty-five hundredths (213.56) test to a point which I# two hundred ten.
12101 feet Southeasterly of (measured at right angles to) and parallel with the aforesaid
diagonal line; thence Southwesterly along oofd parallel lint, a distance of nine hundred
altny nine and ninety three hundredths (961.90 fact to the intersection of said parallel line
wtth a line which it two hundred ten (210) test East at and parallel with the Weal tint of said
East Halt (1) of the Southeast Quarter (j); thence South along said parallel lint, a distance of
One Hundred three and five hundredths 1103.03) toot to the intersection of told parallel line
with the old center line of Algonquin Rood; thence Northwesterly along the old center line.of
Algonquin Road, a distance of Two huwdred thirty five and thirty two -hundredths (295. 321
feexto the point of beginning.
Of EDWARD HUSSE'S DIVISION of part of the Southeast Quarter 11) at Section 16, and the Northeast quarter (J) of
Section 22, Township 41 North, Range 11, Reel of the Third Principal Meridian, as per Ptd recorded in the Recorder's
Office of Cook County. Illinois, December 17, 1916 to Document No. 6666216.
I �So a- alt ILA .s s FL ,
IL
12
•
g��yCS� C1�
pLJS �2 �
M o�aJW
�f �M
3678712 '+►
M
. 3678712
•
13
PARCEL 1 - PIN 08-15-400-019 (PER DOCUMENT NO. 1938870)
THAT PART OF LOT TWO (2) IN EDWARD BUSSE'S DIVISION OF PART OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION FIFTEEN (15), AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION TWENTY-TWO
(22), TOWNSHIP FORTY-ONE (41) NORTH, RANGE ELEVEN (11) EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL
MERIDIAN, AS RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1919, AS DOCUMENT NO. 6696216, IN COOK COUNTY,
ILLINOIS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT A POINT IN THE OLD CENTER LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD WHICH IS TWO
HUNDRED TEN (210) FEET EAST OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) THE WEST LINE OF THE
EAST HALF OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH ALONG A LINE TWO HUNDRED TEN
(210) FEET EAST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF SAID SOUTHEAST
QUARTER A DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED THREE AND FIVE HUNDREDTHS (103.05) FEET TO AN
ANGLE POINT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG A DIAGONAL LINE DRAWN FROM SAID ANGLE
POINT TO A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2) WHICH IS THREE HUNDRED TWENTY-
SIX AND TWENTY-FIVE HUNDREDTHS (326.25) FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION
FIFTEEN (15) (AS MEASURED ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2)) A DISTANCE OF THREE
HUNDRED THIRTY-THREE AND EIGHTY-FIVE HUNDREDTHS (333.85) FEET FOR A POINT OF
BEGINNING OF THIS PARCEL OF LAND (SAID POINT OF BEGINNING IS SIX HUNDRED THIRTY-SIX
AND EIGHT HUNDREDTHS (636.08) FEET SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO
(2) AS MEASURED ALONG SAID DIAGONAL LINE); THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG A LINE
DRAWN AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID DIAGONAL LINE A DISTANCE OF TWO HUNDRED NINETEEN
AND EIGHTY-TWO HUNDREDTHS (219.82) FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF SAID LINE WITH THE
SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE
OF FOUR HUNDRED FOUR AND FIFTY-NINE HUNDREDTHS (404.59) FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-ONE (181) FEET WEST OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2); THENCE
NORTH ALONG A LINE DRAWN AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF TWO
HUNDRED NINETY-FOUR (294) FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF SAID LINE WITH THE AFORESAID
DIAGONAL LINE (SAID INTERSECTION BEING ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-SIX AND EIGHTY-FIVE
HUNDREDTHS (186.85) FEET SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2) AS
MEASURED ALONG SAID DIAGONAL LINE); THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID DIAGONAL
LINE A DISTANCE OF FOUR HUNDRED FORTY-NINE AND TWENTY-THREE HUNDREDTHS (449.23)
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS PARCEL OF LAND, SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF
COOK, IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS.
PARCEL 2 - LEGAL DESCRIPTION - PIN 08-15-400-084 & 085 (PER DOCUMENT NO. 1807207)
THAT PART OF LOT TWO (2) IN EDWARD BUSSE'S DIVISION OF PART OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION FIFTEEN (15) AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION TWENTY-TWO
(22), TOWNSHIP FORTY-ONE (41) NORTH, RANGE ELEVEN (11) EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL
MERIDIAN, AS RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1919, AS DOCUMENT NO. 6696216 IN COOK COUNTY,
ILLINOIS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE OLD
CENTER LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SAID SECTION FIFTEEN (15), WHICH POINT IS A DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED SIXTY -
14
THREE AND SIXTY-FOUR HUNDREDTHS (163.64) FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
SAID EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID
EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER A DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-ONE AND
NINETY-TWO HUNDREDTHS (171.92) FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY
ALONG A DIAGONAL LINE DRAWN FROM SAID POINT TO A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT
TWO (2), WHICH IS A DISTANCE OF FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY-NINE AND EIGHTY HUNDREDTHS
(539.80) FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION FIFTEEN (15) (AS MEASURED ALONG
THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2); A DISTANCE OF ONE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-
THREE AND SIXTY HUNDREDTHS (1183.60) FEETTO THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOTTWO (2); THENCE
SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2) A DISTANCE OF TWO HUNDRED THIRTEEN
AND FIFTY-FIVE HUNDREDTHS (213.55) FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS TWO HUNDRED TEN (210)
FEET SOUTHEASTERLY OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) AND PARALLEL WITH THE
AFORESAID DIAGONAL LINE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE
OF NINE HUNDRED SIXTY-NINE AND NINETY-THREE HUNDREDTHS (969.93) FEET TO THE
INTERSECTION OF SAID PARALLEL LINE WITH A LINE WHICH IS TWO HUNDRED TEN (210) FEET
EAST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED THREE AND FIVE
HUNDREDTHS (103.05) FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF SAID PARALLEL LINE WITH THE OLD
CENTER LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE OLD CENTER LINE
OF ALGONQUIN ROAD, A DISTANCE OF TWO HUNDRED THIRTY-FIVE AND THIRTY-TWO
HUNDREDTHS (235.32) FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
15
$0.00
By 12/01/2021
IF PAYING LATE,
PLEASE PAY
Taxing Districts
2020 Second Installment Property Tax Bill - Cook County Electronic Bill
Property Index Number (PIN) Volume Code Tax Year (Payable In) Township Classification
08-15-400-019-0000 049 16048 2020 (2021) ELK GROVE 5-93
12/02/2021 - 01/01/2022 01/02/2022 - 02/01/2022 02/02/2022 - 03/01/2022 LATE INTEREST IS 1.5% PER
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 MONTH, BY STATE LAW
2020 Tax 2020 Rate 2020% Pension 2019 Tax
MISCELLANEOUS TAXES
2020 Total Tax Before Exemptions
56,728.91
Homeowner's Exemption .00
Northwest Mosq Abatement Dist Wheeling
65.76
0.010
0.12%
2020 State Equalizer X 3.2234
62.56
Metro Water Reclamation Dist of Chicago
2,485.63
0.378
4.38%
276.18
2,433.51
Mt Prospect Park District
3,642.96
0.554
6.42%
341.93
3,421.93
Miscellaneous Taxes Total
6,194.35
0.942
10.92%
5,918.00
SCHOOL TAXES
Harper College Comm College 512 Palatine
2,689.48
0.409
4.74%
2,521.09
Township HS District 214 (Arlington Hts)
15,663.41
2.382
27.61%
558.93
14,738.69
Community Consolid. SD 59 Arlington Hts
17,984.65
2.735
31.70%
552.36
17,209.73
School Taxes Total
36,337.54
5.526
64.05%
34,469.51
MUNICIPALITY/TOWNSHIP TAXES
Mount Prospect Spec Sery Area 5
0.00
0.000
0.00%
0.00
Mount Prospect Library Fund
3,899.41
0.593
6.87%
3,747.23
Village of Mount Prospect
6,431.07
0.978
11.34%
2,400.14
6,180.74
Road & Bridge Elk Grove
85.48
0.013
0.15%
87.58
General Assistance Elk Grove
72.33
0.011
0.13%
68.81
Town of Elk Grove
348.51
0.053
0.61%
344.07
Municipality/Township Taxes Total
10,836.80
1.648
19.10%
10,428.43
COOK COUNTY TAXES
Cook County Forest Preserve District
381.39
0.058
0.67%
13.15
369.09
Consolidated Elections
0.00
0.000
0.00%
187.67
County of Cook
1,788.62
0.272
3.16%
572.08
1,720.36
Cook County Public Safety
868.00
0.132
1.53%
838.28
Cook County Health Facilities
322.21
0.049
0.57%
281.51
Cook County Taxes Total
3,360.22
0.511
5.93%
3,396.91
(Do not pay these totals)
56,728.91
8.627
100.00%
54,212.85
2019 Assessed Value 214,534
2020 Total Tax Before Exemptions
56,728.91
Homeowner's Exemption .00
Senior Citizen Exemption .00
2020 Assessed Value 204,000
Senior Freeze Exemption .00
2020 State Equalizer X 3.2234
2020 Equalized Assessed Value (EAV)
2020 Total Tax After Exemptions
657,574
56,728.91
2020 Local Tax Rate X 8.627%
First Installment 29,817.07
2020 Total Tax Before Exemptions
Second Installment + 26,911.84
56,728.91
Total 2020 Tax (Payable in 2021)
56,728.91
COMM EDISON TAX DEPT
1720 DEMPSTER AVE THREE LINCOLN CTR 4TH
MOUNT PROSPECT IL 60056 4802 OAKBROOK TER IL 601814204
*** Please see 2020 Second Installment Payment Coupon next page ***
16
$0.00
By 12/01/2021
IF PAYING LATE,
PLEASE PAY
Taxing Districts
2020 Second Installment Property Tax Bill - Cook County Electronic Bill
Property Index Number (PIN) Volume Code Tax Year (Payable In) Township Classification
08-15-400-084-0000 049 16048 2020 (2021) ELK GROVE 1-90
12/02/2021 - 01/01/2022 01/02/2022 - 02/01/2022 02/02/2022 - 03/01/2022 LATE INTEREST IS 1.5% PER
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 MONTH, BY STATE LAW
2020 Tax 2020 Rate 2020% Pension 2019 Tax
MISCELLANEOUS TAXES
2020 Total Tax Before Exemptions
97.92
Northwest Mosq Abatement Dist Wheeling
0.11
0.010
0.11%
Senior Citizen Exemption
0.10
Metro Water Reclamation Dist of Chicago
4.29
0.378
4.38%
0.47
3.99
Mt Prospect Park District
6.29
0.554
6.42%
0.59
5.61
Miscellaneous Taxes Total
10.69
0.942
10.91%
First Installment
9.70
SCHOOL TAXES
Second Installment +
49.02
97.92
Total 2020 Tax (Payable in 2021)
Harper College Comm College 512 Palatine
4.64
0.409
4.74%
4.13
Township HS District 214 (Arlington Hts)
27.04
2.382
27.61%
0.96
24.17
Community Consolid. SD 59 Arlington Hts
31.04
2.735
31.70%
0.95
28.23
School Taxes Total
62.72
5.526
64.05%
56.53
MUNICIPALITY/TOWNSHIP TAXES
Mount Prospect Spec Sery Area 5
0.00
0.000
0.00%
0.00
Mount Prospect Library Fund
6.73
0.593
6.87%
6.15
Village of Mount Prospect
11.10
0.978
11.34%
4.14
10.14
Road & Bridge Elk Grove
0.15
0.013
0.15%
0.14
General Assistance Elk Grove
0.12
0.011
0.12%
0.11
Town of Elk Grove
0.60
0.053
0.61%
0.56
Municipality/Township Taxes Total
18.70
1.648
19.09%
17.10
COOK COUNTY TAXES
Cook County Forest Preserve District
0.66
0.058
0.67%
0.02
0.61
Consolidated Elections
0.00
0.000
0.00%
0.31
County of Cook
3.09
0.272
3.18%
0.98
2.83
Cook County Public Safety
1.50
0.132
1.53%
1.37
Cook County Health Facilities
0.56
0.049
0.57%
0.46
Cook County Taxes Total
5.81
0.511
5.95%
5.58
(Do not pay these totals)
97.92
8.627
100.00%
88.91
2019 Assessed Value 352
2020 Total Tax Before Exemptions
97.92
Homeowner's Exemption
.00
Senior Citizen Exemption
.00
2020 Assessed Value 352
Senior Freeze Exemption
.00
2020 State Equalizer X 3.2234
2020 Equalized Assessed Value (EAV)
2020 Total Tax After Exemptions
1,135
97.92
2020 Local Tax Rate X 8.627%
First Installment
48.90
2020 Total Tax Before Exemptions
Second Installment +
49.02
97.92
Total 2020 Tax (Payable in 2021)
97.92
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO
1550 S BUSSE RD THREE LINCOLN CTR 4TH
MOUNT PROSPECT IL 60056 4991 OAKBROOK TER IL 601814204
*** Please see 2020 Second Installment Payment Coupon next page ***
17
$0.00
By 12/01/2021
IF PAYING LATE,
PLEASE PAY
Taxing Districts
2020 Second Installment Property Tax Bill - Cook County Electronic Bill
Property Index Number (PIN) Volume Code Tax Year (Payable In) Township Classification
08-15-400-085-0000 049 16048 2020 (2021) ELK GROVE 5-90
12/02/2021 - 01/01/2022 01/02/2022 - 02/01/2022 02/02/2022 - 03/01/2022 LATE INTEREST IS 1.5% PER
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 MONTH, BY STATE LAW
2020 Tax 2020 Rate 2020% Pension 2019 Tax
MISCELLANEOUS TAXES
2020 Total Tax Before Exemptions
9,509.28
Northwest Mosq Abatement Dist Wheeling
11.02
0.010
0.12%
.00
9.97
Metro Water Reclamation Dist of Chicago
416.66
0.378
4.38%
46.29
387.90
Mt Prospect Park District
610.66
0.554
6.42%
57.31
545.45
Miscellaneous Taxes Total
1,038.34
0.942
10.92%
4,752.76
943.32
SCHOOL TAXES
4,756.52
9,509.28
Total 2020 Tax (Payable in 2021)
Harper College Comm College 512 Palatine
450.83
0.409
4.74%
401.86
Township HS District 214 (Arlington Hts)
2,625.61
2.382
27.61%
93.69
2,349.31
Community Consolid. SD 59 Arlington Hts
3,014.71
2.735
31.70%
92.59
2,743.19
School Taxes Total
6,091.15
5.526
64.05%
5,494.36
MUNICIPALITY/TOWNSHIP TAXES
Mount Prospect Spec Sery Area 5
0.00
0.000
0.00%
0.00
Mount Prospect Library Fund
653.65
0.593
6.87%
597.30
Village of Mount Prospect
1,078.02
0.978
11.34%
402.32
985.19
Road & Bridge Elk Grove
14.33
0.013
0.15%
13.96
General Assistance Elk Grove
12.12
0.011
0.13%
10.97
Town of Elk Grove
58.42
0.053
0.61%
54.84
Municipality/Township Taxes Total
1,816.54
1.648
19.10%
1,662.26
COOK COUNTY TAXES
Cook County Forest Preserve District
63.93
0.058
0.67%
2.20
58.83
Consolidated Elections
0.00
0.000
0.00%
29.91
County of Cook
299.81
0.272
3.16%
95.89
274.22
Cook County Public Safety
145.50
0.132
1.53%
133.62
Cook County Health Facilities
54.01
0.049
0.57%
44.87
Cook County Taxes Total
563.25
0.511
5.93%
541.45
(Do not pay these totals)
9,509.28
8.627
100.00%
8,641.39
2019 Assessed Value 34,196
2020 Total Tax Before Exemptions
9,509.28
Homeowner's Exemption
.00
Senior Citizen Exemption
.00
2020 Assessed Value 34,196
Senior Freeze Exemption
.00
2020 State Equalizer X 3.2234
2020 Equalized Assessed Value (EAV)
2020 Total Tax After Exemptions
110,227
9,509.28
2020 Local Tax Rate X 8.627%
First Installment
4,752.76
2020 Total Tax Before Exemptions
Second Installment +
4,756.52
9,509.28
Total 2020 Tax (Payable in 2021)
9,509.28
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO
1550 S BUSSE RD THREE LINCOLN CTR 4TH
MOUNT PROSPECT IL 60056 4991 OAKBROOK TER IL 601814204
*** Please see 2020 Second Installment Payment Coupon next page ***
18
Village of Mount Prospect — Zoning Request Application Addendum
Introduction and Summary of Approvals Requested
ComEd proposes two improvements to its Dempster Street substation (called by ComEd
"TSS 152"), situated at 1650 Dempster Street (the "Substation"), both intended in different ways to
preserve and enhance the provision of reliable electrical service. First, ComEd proposes to install a
104 -foot antenna support structure (called more formally by ComEd a Smart Grid distribution
automation device monitoring support structure) (the "Structure") and an expanded metal perimeter
fence of 1 I feet in height with 12" of Y-shaped barbed wire atop plus four 16 -foot -tall posts supporting
the fence and other security functions (the "Fence"). Collectively, the Structure, the Fence and the
Landscaping (described below) shall be referred to as the "Project." The Substation property is
currently split between two zoning districts: I- I Limited Industrial and R-1 Single -Family Residential.
The Structure will be situated within the I-1 district and the Fence will generally follow the existing
fence line in both zoning districts.
Significantly, ComEd is also proposing a comprehensive landscape screening plan along
the southern edge of the Substation facing Dempster Street and along the northern lines of the
Substation and the portions of the east and west lines within the transmission right-of-way (the
"Landscaping"). At completion of the Project, the Substation will be modernized and better protected,
while any ground -level aesthetic impact as viewed from Dempster Street, Algonquin Road, Busse
Road and private Knights Bridge Drive will be substantially mitigated by new dense shrubs which at
full maturity within a few years will largely screen any view of the Fence from the adjacent public
right-of-way.
Per feedback from Village staff for implementation of the Project, ComEd is requesting
that:
(1) a conditional use be approved to allow for installation of a 100 -foot Structure (which will hold
five monitoring antennae) to which will be attached a 4 -foot -long lightning rod at the top, and
(2) one or more variations be approved to allow for installation of an ] ] -foot expanded metal
perimeter fence plus 12" of Y-shaped barbed wire atop plus four 16 -foot -tall posts supporting the
fence and other security functions.
As a regulated public utility and given that the Structure and Fence relate to core aspects
of the electrical grid, ComEd respectfully suggests that the Village's land use authority may not apply
to the company's implementation of the Structure and Fence at its Substation. Nonetheless, ComEd is
voluntarily submitting this request in an effort to work on its project cooperatively with the Village.
Project Narrative
1. Structure's role in and contribution to ComEd's Distribution Automation Network
The Structure is part of the company's wide-ranging implementation of its multi-year
"smart grid" initiative. The smart grid initiative includes an upgrading of the existing electrical
distribution communication system with newer technology and infrastructure. The Structure will be a
19
Page 2
key aspect of that infrastructure and technological upgrade. Key resulting community benefits will be
improved reliability of the electrical grid (through the reduction of electrical outages and the duration
of outages), and increased voltage efficiencies along each distribution line, resulting in smoother
electrical grid operations.
ComEd's new technology and infrastructure involves the creation of a ComEd-only
radiofrequency ("RF") network in which sensors and monitoring devices being installed within
distribution circuits and/or on distribution poles communicate in real time with antennae support
facilities like the Structure. The sensors and devices control and monitor equipment within the
distribution lines such as line reclosures, cap banks and switches which are important for reliability
and "voltage optimization" -- meaning, promotion as much as possible of a steady voltage through a
particular distribution circuit (given that voltage on a distribution line tends to become less strong as
the distance on the line increases from a particular substation). The Structure will only communicate
with ComEd's electrical devices/equipment on the electrical grid system. It will not be used for any
commercial communication services (e.g., 5G or any other cellular telephone technologies).
The benefit of the new wireless technology can be explained with reference to a lightning
strike and its impact on a distribution line. With "legacy" technology, a lightning strike to a distribution
line would likely cause removal of a larger portion of a distribution circuit -- and the customers served
by such circuit -- until ComEd crews could determine the precise location of the strike and re-route
power around the affected area. By contrast, once the newer wireless technology is deployed in a
particular area, the sensors in the distribution circuit -- including at the top of a distribution pole --
would communicate the fault to receiving antennae on the Structure, which directly links to IT
infrastructure tied into ComEd's centralized command and control centers. The precise area of the fault
is known and crews can be dispatched efficiently to the precise location. Further, the proposed
Structure's antennae can direct receiving equipment on the distribution lines how to switch power
around the fault.
The efficacy of the new technology depends on clear, clean wireless communication and
strong security given the criticality of the electrical grid to the nation's infrastructure system. Existing
electrical substations have been selected for locations of the antenna support structures since they offer
necessary security, along with the indispensable link to the company's high-speed existing IT
backbone network. The necessary IT equipment accompanying the Structure will be housed in an
existing substation control building, so no new equipment enclosure is required, thereby minimizing
any external "footprint" resulting from the upgraded technology. And electrical substations are already
locations which contain pre-existing taller electrical infrastructure (and/or community expectations for
such taller infrastructure), mitigating visual concerns.
The request for a conditional use is related to the need for five receiving and transmitting
antennae on the Structure (each antenna mount is a very thin two inches in diameter, just under 5 feet
long and installed only 3 feet from the Structure) to support approximately 250 monitoring and sensing
devices to be installed in Mount Prospect -area distribution circuits over the next two years.
Below is a computerized graphic which shows an existing "gap" in the ComEd distribution automation
device monitoring network. The locations with "flags" (light blue, green and dark blue) indicate
2
20
Page 3
existing communication structures and the proposed structure on Dempster Street is assigned a gray
flag on the graphic below.
The dark blue -colored, green -colored and light blue -colored dots are existing sensors and
monitoring devices in the Mount Prospect area operating on ComEd's RF network. The dark blue -
colored devices are communicating wirelessly in particular to antennae located at ComEd's Des
Plaines substation, while the green -colored devices are communicating with antennae at a substation
in Schaumburg and the light blue -colored devices are communicating with antennae at a substation in
Itasca. The antennae on these structures are reaching capacity limits very quickly and in such
circumstances would not provide optimum RF coverage for sensors and monitoring devices within the
Village. This condition will only be aggravated as an additional approximately 250 devices are
installed within Mount Prospect -area distribution circuits over the next two years. The graphic above
dramatically illustrates the important role in the network that will be carried out by the proposed
Structure on Dempster Street.
The five antennae proposed for the Structure are needed for proper RF capacity, since a
reduced number of antennae on the Structure installed at lower heights would result in an
overburdened and less effective wireless communication system (resulting in numerous "dropped" or
"blocked" calls to use cellular telephone analogies) or "garbled" communications related to foliage
interference. For proper system functioning, the lowest antenna should be installed at a minimum
height of 35 feet to avoid foliage blockage. Each additional antenna must be installed a minimum of
15 feet away vertically to avoid technological interference. It is this required minimum spacing and
the need for five antennae for effective network functioning which forms the basis for the Structure's
3
21
Page 4
100 -foot height. A reduced number of antennae, for example, on a Structure with an "as of right"
height of 70 feet, are not enough to allow for seamless functioning of the Mount Prospect -area wireless
technology imbedded in (or to be imbedded in) the distribution circuits and on distribution poles.
Delving further into key technical details of the system, ComEd has engineered the
Structure and its height in a manner which allows for seamless smart grid coverage of the electrical
distribution network. Each antenna on the Structure has a capacity of approximately 40 sensing devices
per antenna. ComEd considered the impact of installing at the Substation a Structure of less overall
height - and by extension fewer antennas - yet has concluded that device communication would
become compromised due to overcapacity of the antennas to be installed. This, in turn, leads to a gap
in radiofrequency coverage since the support structures and their attached antennae are generally
evenly spaced to allow for effective coverage. A height reduced from 100 feet (5 antennae) essentially
precludes regional effectiveness of ComEd's smart grid distribution automation network.
ComEd is careful and judicious in its selection of locations for new support structures. To
the greatest extent feasible, ComEd installs its antennae on ComEd existing taller structures (other
than transmission towers where such installation is not feasible), such as taller rooftops or existing
taller microwave towers. New structures are placed at substations which have physical space within
the existing footprint (so that a physical expansion of the outer substation footprint can be avoided),
space within an existing substation control building (so that development of a new equipment
enclosure is obviated) and a secure link to the ComEd IT backbone. The Substation meets all of these
criteria.
2. Depiction of similar existing Structures
Please see Technical Appendix for a depiction of similar structures which have been
installed in the Chicago metropolitan area by ComEd and for additional detail in particular on how the
Structure and antennae will function in accordance with FCC and FAA regulations.
3. Site Plan and renderings
As can be noted on the attached Site Plan, the proposed Structure will be situated within
the Substation approximately 7 feet east of the existing western substation control building and 13 feet
south of the northern line of the building. The Structure's base will be set back nearly 240 feet from
the northern property line, approximately 72 feet west of the western property line and approximately
153 feet from the southern property line.
The proposed Structure has been carefully placed within the Substation so as to maintain
the required close distance to the western substation control building in which the electronic equipment
will be housed so as to minimize signal degradation while also avoiding impacts to either existing
substation electrical equipment or areas set aside for future equipment expansion (so that the
Substation continues to maintain adequate space to serve growth in the area's electrical demand
without the need for additional and new property acquisition for construction of an entirely new and
different substation).
The proposed Structure should have limited impact on surrounding property. All but one
of the parcels immediately surrounding the Substation are commercial districts, zoned B-3 and B-4.
C!
22
Page 5
In addition, many surrounding parcels (including the Substation itself) currently contain similarly -
sized or taller structures (such as electrical or other vertical structures and transmission and distribution
poles). To the north of the Substation and proposed Structure is a ComEd transmission corridor
running east to west. This corridor is home to a major network of overhead power lines held up by
numerous towers equal to or greater in height and appearance as compared to the Structure. The base
of the Structure, in that it will be placed to the east of the western control building, is by design
screened by the control building, existing larger electrical equipment to the east and north of the
western control building and planned dense foliage to the south.
In addition to the Structure's strategic placement and the proposed Landscaping, ComEd's
upgrade of the existing 7 -foot chain link fence surrounding the perimeter of the Substation to an 11 -
foot expanded metal fence (plus barbed wire) will provide enhanced screening of the Structure from
all sides of the Substation.
4. Fence upgrade to protect the Substation and Structure
The Fence project is being undertaken at one of the country's critical infrastructure sites,
which include substations comprising the electric power grid, as required by the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission ("FERC") and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation
("NERC"). FERC is the federal agency that regulates the interstate transmission of electricity, and it
oversees NERC in the United States. Both FERC and NERC regulate ComEd's activities and impose
obligations on ComEd with regard to securing the bulk power system.
In February 2013, President Obama issued Presidential Policy Directive 21 ("PPD -21"),
which established national policy on critical infrastructure security and resilience.' PPD -21 identified
energy and communications systems (among other things) as uniquely critical due to the enabling
functions they provide across all critical infrastructure sectors, and it required federal departments and
agencies to implement the directive. Following the April 2013 "Metcalf' sniper attack on a
transmission substation near San Jose, CA, FERC started official regulatory proceedings which
resulted ultimately (as explained below) in the promulgation of NERC's CIP-014 mandatory physical
security standards.
In March 2014, as part of its ongoing oversight of the bulk power system, FERC ordered
NERC to submit proposed reliability standards requiring transmission owners meeting certain criteria
to take steps or demonstrate that they have taken steps to address physical security risks and
vulnerabilities related to the reliable operation of the electric power grid. On May 23, 2014, NERC
filed with FERC (as it was mandated to do by federal law) its proposal for mandatory physical security
standards.3 This reliability standard (Physical Security) requires transmission owners or operators to
perform a risk assessment of their systems to identify critical facilities (including transmission
1 See Presidential Policy Directive, "Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience," Presidential Policy Directive -
21, February 12, 2013, available at haps.!/orbama hrt. hawse archives.gov/the••press••office/2013/02/12/presidential•••
policy -directive criticat•.•irafrastructure•Security-arrd••resiI
'- Reliability Standards for Physical Security Measures, 146 FERC ¶ 61,166 (Mar. 7, 2014).
3 NERC, Petition of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation for Approval of Proposed Reliability
Standard CIP-014-1, May 23, 2014,
httls /feu w.tlere .coni/ll ilanion%20..
flysiWl 9Se Laity%/020CQP-014•-1.pdf
5
23
Page 6
substations), evaluate the potential threats and vulnerabilities to those identified facilities, and develop
and implement a security plan designed to protect against physical attacks on those identified critical
facilities. On November 20, 2014, FERC approved the proposed standard, with minor changes, as
NERC's new Physical Security Reliability Standard (CIP-014-1).4 FERC approved a revised version
of the standard (CIP-014-2) on July 14, 2015.5 FERC's order made these physical security obligations
compulsory.
With oversight by FERC, NERC has the authority to develop, oversee, and enforce
implementation of the CIP-014-2 Physical Security Reliability Standard. The stated purpose of
NERC's Physical Security Reliability Standard is to "protect transmission stations and transmission
substations, and their associated primary control centers, that if rendered inoperable or damaged as a
result of a physical attack could result in instability, uncontrolled separation, or cascading within an
interconnection."6 This standard applies to Transmission Owners, including ComEd, that own
transmission substations meeting certain criteria.' The Fence as it has been designed is part of a
consistent security plan being carried out by Exelon public utilities nationwide (of which ComEd is
one) pursuant to NERC (and FERC) mandatory requirements as explained herein.
CIP-014-2 is one of NERC's mandatory and enforceable reliability standards. This
standard is enforced by NERC under a penalty review policy for mandatory reliability standards
approved by FERC, and it is subject to FERC's enforcement authority and oversight under the Energy
Policy Act of 2005.8 FERC certified NERC as the electric reliability organization in accordance with
Section 215 of the Federal Power Act on July 20, 2006.9 NERC has authority to monitor compliance
with its reliability standards and impose penalties for non-compliance.10
In sum, these security upgrades at the Substation are being made in accordance with FERC
and NERC requirements. The Project implements a mandatory federal reliability requirement for
electric transmission owners to protect transmission substations.
To meet the security mandates described above, Exelon created a standardized list of
security requirements for implementation by all of its public utility subsidiaries, including ComEd. In
turn, ComEd was required to initiate security improvement projects at each substation consistent with
the Exelon Security Standards, all to adhere to the goals committed to by the electric energy subsector
and the security plan components approved by FERC Order 802. Exelon's security standards have six
stated design goals: (1) Deter; (2) Delay; (3) Detect; (4) Assess; (5) Communicate; and (6) Respond.
The planned Fence at the Substation implements the first three security goals — Deter, Delay and
Detect.
4 Physical Security Reliability Standard, 149 FERC ¶ 61,140 (Nov. 20, 2014).
5 N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp., FERC Docket No. RD 15-4-000 (July 14, 2015) (delegated letter order) (approving
Reliability Standard CIP-014-2).
'NERC, CIP-014-2 — Physical Security, available at
hhtps./?w v.ncr� rrn1 tay�ruatsll5/V�rirrtSfrandard.asps`?sharrrrdardrrurrrrrber—C"fP...O14•..
? tntl� lit ysncal�l20Sccuri4y� lur didi n United%20Sta es
Id.
'Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability Organization; and Procedures for the Establishment,
Approval, and Enforcement of Electric Reliability Standards, 123 FERC ¶ 61,046 (Apr. 17, 2008).
'North American Electric Reliability Corporation, 116 FERC ¶ 61,062 (2006)
10 See 16 U.S.C. § 824o(e)(1); 18 C.F.R. 39.7.
n
24
Page 7
As depicted on the attached Site Plan, the proposed replacement Fence will be placed at
the same location as the existing fence and consist of an expanded metal material, 11 feet in height
plus 12" of y -shaped barbed wire (with four 16 -foot -tall posts supporting the fence and other security
functions). To meet the "Deter" and "Delay" security requirements described above, Exelon, reflecting
industry best practice, requires the installation of fencing with outriggers installed on top of the fence.
The outriggers must hold one foot of barbed wire using a "Y" -shaped configuration.
Importantly, installation of barbed wire increases the delay time for any attempted fence
climb -over. This has been proven in prior tests, as has been confirmed by ComEd security consultants
retained by the company to evaluate the sufficiency of the upgraded fencing at critical infrastructure
sites such as this type of substation. The empirical data has proven that outward -facing barbed wire in
particular delays a climb -over threat by several seconds. A Y-shaped configuration further mitigates
climb -over threats, in part because potential intruders typically need additional tools to attempt to
compromise the barbed wire and the transport by intruders of such tools allows for more rapid threat
detection. In the security world, particularly, as with the Substation where critical equipment is not
situated within a building (which obviously provides an additional physical barrier), seconds can be
the difference between detection and assessment through on-site cameras and other surveillance
methods, and a security operations employee missing an unauthorized intruder. Exelon and ComEd's
mandate for barbed wire, reflective of expectations adopted by the U.S. Department of Defense for its
own facilities, is mission -critical for safeguarding the Substation from unauthorized access. Prevention
of unauthorized entry not only mitigates the risk of injury or death, but also safeguards the reliability
of the power supply to the Village and surrounding communities.
ComEd is able to install its expanded metal fence using either a grey or black color. Both
options are depicted on the renderings attached with this application and ComEd seeks direction from
the Village during the application process as to the Village's preferred fence color.
5. Landscaping and Screening of the Fence
Based on prior feedback from the Village, ComEd proposes adding new substantial
ground -level screening along Dempster, the northern Substation line and those portions of the east and
west Substation lines lying within the transmission right-of-way in conjunction with plans for the
Fence and will retain trees along the southern property line where feasible while implementing a 10 -
foot "clear" zone south of the fence for effective security monitoring purposes.
As shown on the enclosed Landscape Plan, ComEd proposes adding a mixture of deciduous
shrubs, perennials and grasses along the southern boundary of the Substation, approximately 235 new
shrubs in total. The shrubs will be a mix of Chokeberry, Forsythia, Spirea, Lilac and Viburnum. Upon
reaching maturity in approximately three years, the overall 8- to 10 -foot height of the shrubs will
effectively screen the updated Fence (which should have limited visibility behind the shrubs) while
still providing the necessary 10 -foot minimum distance between the Fence and the landscape screening
to meet ComEd's standards for perimeter security. Three trees (a spruce, a flowering crab and a locust)
will be incorporated into the new planting plan. An additional 5 trees will be preserved.
7
25
Page 8
Attached are renderings of the Fence (both grey -colored and black) with the proposed
landscaping.
Standards for Conditional Uses -- Proposed Structure
Sec. 14.203(F)(8)(a): The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the conditional use will not
be detrimental to, or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general weEare;
The Structure will not be detrimental to public health, safety, morals, comfort, or the
general welfare. The Structure will be unmanned, silent in its operation and unlit. The
Structure will consist of a silver-grey steel pole, similar to numerous existing support
structures on and nearby the subject property and in this way will blend into the existing
look and function of the Substation.
The very low (1 Watt or less) output power of the ComEd antennae coupled with their
only -intermittent operation (along with compliance with all of the other applicable federal
regulations) will allow ComEd's Structure to operate in a manner protective of public health
and safety in that radiofrequency emissions are highly attenuated.
Finally, the Structure will be noise -less and, because of the existing substation control
building and exterior Substation fencing, will not need to be accompanied by any additional
fencing or an equipment enclosure. The essential nature and functioning of the Substation
will remain unchanged once the Structure is implemented.
Sec. 14.203(F)(8)(b): The conditional use will not be injurious to the uses and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish
and impair property values within the neighborhood in which it is to be located;
The proposed Structure will have limited impact on surrounding property because it will
function as an integral, but unmanned and unlit part of the Substation, just like any other
piece of taller electrical infrastructure within or adjacent to the Substation. Many
surrounding parcels (including the Substation itself) currently contain similarly -sized or
taller structures (such as electrical or other vertical structures and transmission and
distribution poles). Other than the Structure, no additional adjustments within the
Substation are proposed, thus minimizing any external effects. To the north of the proposed
Structure is a corridor extending from east to west which is home to a major network of
overhead power lines held up by numerous towers similar in height and appearance to the
Structure.
Further, the Structure will be compatible with similar structures in the general vicinity. Its
gray color will match the existing Substation electrical equipment. It will be unlit and all
associated electronics equipment will be housed inside an existing building, minimizing
any new external facilities within the Substation.
The base of the Structure, in that it will be placed to the east of the western control building,
is by design screened by the control building, existing larger electrical equipment to the
east of the western control building and the Fence with the planned dense foliage to the
south, north, east and west (see additional Landscaping description herein). In effect, the
base of the Structure should not be visible from any direction. To the east is a commercial
plaza with restaurants, a hair salon, and a grocery store. To the south is five -lane Dempster
Street, and on the south side of Dempster is the rear alley of a commercial plaza and the
27
parking lot of a fast food restaurant. To the west is a commercial plaza containing a
restaurant, laundromat, and liquor store. All of these surrounding properties have long been
located by the towers, wires and electrical equipment of the Substation, and adding the
Structure to the Substation will not alter the character of the surrounding property.
Sec. 14.203L)(8)L6: The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and
orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the
district;
The Structure will not impede the orderly development and improvement of surrounding
properties. Rather, by offering an efficient and low -impact, low-power use of
radiofrequency to help improve grid reliability, minimize outages and stabilize distribution
line voltage flows, the Structure will ultimately support surrounding properties and the
entire Village in its development. Additionally, the nature of the Structure's design (tall,
unlit, thin vertical mast) is essentially the same as structures allowed (or already located)
on the subject property as well as structures similarly allowed (or already located) on
nearby properties.
Sec. 14.203LF)(8)(d): Adequate public utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessatyfacilities
have been or will be provided;
Installation of the Structure at the Substation will not increase the need for the Substation
to be served by any new essential public facilities or services.
Sec. 14.203(F)(8)(e): Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress
so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets;
The Structure will be served by existing ingress and egress to the Substation, and, in that
it will be generally unmanned, it will not interfere with traffic on surrounding public
streets.
Sec. 14.203(F)(8)(0: The proposed conditional use is not contrary to the objectives of the current
comprehensive plan for the village; and
The Village's Comprehensive Plan of 2017 identifies as a goal, "Ensure that all parts of
the community are well served by infrastructure, and support their maintenance and
enhancement to serve the future needs of the community" (see Plan, p. 24). By installing
the Structure, ComEd will bolster its monitoring of the Village's electrical grid, which in
turn will provide the Village with more reliable and stable electric energy. However, if the
Structure's height is limited to 70 feet and only three antennae, it will not be able to
effectively monitor the grid due to overcapacity of the three antennae. In order to best serve
the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, the Structure should be built to 104 feet, with
five evenly spaced antennae to effectively handle addressing regional grid reliability and
voltage flow concerns.
Sec. 14.203LF)(8)(g): The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable
regulations of the district in tivhich it is located, except as such regulations may, in each instance,
be modified pursuant to the recommendations of the planning and zoning commission.
10
Antennae such as the Structure are permitted as of right in I-1 districts up to 70 feet in
height. Public utility uses are also permitted as of right in I-1 districts. Except for its height,
the proposed Structure conforms in all ways to the applicable regulations of the I-1 zoning
district.
11
Standards for Fence Heieht Variation
Sec. 14.203LQ(9)(a): Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the specific property involved, a specific hardship to the owner would result, as
distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations was to be allied;
ComEd's plan for upgrading the exterior protection system of the Substation by replacing
chain-link fencing (which can be climbed) with a protection structure (expanded metal
material) which is both taller and unscalable (using barbed wire as an additional security
feature on top) fully complies with the policy directives of a Presidential executive order
addressing physical security at the country's critical infrastructure sites (which include
substations comprising the power grid), a Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") plan
implementing the President's order and a FERC Order. The Substation security upgrades
also reflect industry -implemented best practice. If ComEd cannot build the proposed Fence
around the Substation, it will face the specific hardship of failing to comply with applicable
federal directives and industry requirements and standards.
Sec. 14.203(C)(9)(b): The conditions upon which an application for a variation are based are
unique to the propertyfor which the variation is sought and are not generally applicable to other
property within the same zoning classification;
Following the April 2013 "Metcalf' sniper attack on a San Jose, California electrical
substation, President Obama issued a form of Executive Order in the security arena known
as Presidential Policy Directive 21 ("PPD -21"). In his Directive, the President stated the
clear policy of the United States to "...strengthen the security and resilience of its critical
infrastructure against both physical and cyber threats." The President required the federal
government to work with critical infrastructure owners such as the Exelon Corporation and
its subsidiary ComEd to take "proactive steps" to both manage risk and "strengthen the
security and resilience" of the country's critical infrastructure. Per PPD -21, required
improved security efforts by ComEd must aim to "reduce vulnerabilities, minimize
consequences, identify and disrupt threats, and hasten response and recovery efforts related
to critical infrastructure."
PPD -21 required the DHS to develop, in coordination with the Department of Energy, a
national plan to implement the improved security mandates of PPD -21. In response, DHS
and the U.S. Department of Energy issued in 2015 an Energy Sector -Specific Plan ("2015
ESSP"). Key stated goals of the 2015 ESSP include: (1) assessing security risks and threats;
(2) securing critical infrastructure from all hazards; and (3) enhancing critical infrastructure
resilience. With the 2015 ESSP, the electricity industry subsector made as an explicit
published priority the deploying of tools to "enhance situational awareness and security of
critical infrastructure."
On top of the 2015 ESSP are the FERC and NERC mandates previously described.
The proposed Substation security upgrade plan implements these published priorities and
mandates, which do not apply to typical property owners in the I-1 and R-1 zoning districts.
12
RT11
Sec. 14.203(C)(9)(c): The purpose of the variation is not based prirnard. upon a desire to increase
financial _gain:
This request is not based on a desire for economic gain. Rather, building the proposed
Fence is linked to ComEd's unique need to meet the heightened security objectives of PPD -
21, 2015 ESSP and FERC Order 802 and to implement electric utility industry
requirements and best practices. If anything, implementing the Fence could conserve public
resources because enhanced security for the Substation will deter potentially malicious
intruders from causing disruptive power outages.
Sec. 14.203(C)(9)(d): The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this chapter and has not been
created by anv person presently having an interest in the property;
No, the hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the
property. This variation would allow ComEd to build the Fence not to provide additional
privacy but rather to provide heightened protection and security consistent with federal
and industry directives, with which ComEd is obligated to comply. The proposed Fence
is designed to be non -scalable and will be placed in the same location as the existing fence.
Sec. 14.203LC)(9)(e):The rg anting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare
or iniurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is
located;
No, this variation will provide added protection to the public and added security to the
Substation to ensure the facility will be protected from malicious activities. The proposed
Fence will be placed in the same location as the existing fence.
Sec. 14.203L)(9)0: Theranting of the variation will not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood; and
No, the variation seeks to only seeks to boost the security capabilities at this Substation
consistent with PPD -21, FERC and NERC requirements.
Sec. 14.203LC)(9)(g): The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air
to ad
iacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the
danger o�fire, or impair natural drainage or create drainage problems on ad'at cent properties, or
endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the
neighborhood.
The proposed new Fence is similar to the existing fence, changing only the height, fencing
material, and the shape of the barbed wire (barbed wire is already deployed today at the
Substation configured inward -facing). The requested variation will not adversely impact
the surrounding properties, since the new Fence will be placed in the same location as the
existing fence. The Fence will be within ComEd's property limits, will provide added
safety to the public, and is substantially set back from exterior property lines. Considering
the light industrial and commercial nature of the properties contiguous to the Substation,
implementing the Fence should not diminish property values within the neighborhood.
13
31
Structure -- Technical Appendix
Depiction of similar existing Structures
Similar 104 -foot Smart Grid Distribution Automation Device Monitoring support
structures can be found at ComEd's Willow Springs substation and its substation in Pleasant Hills
(near West Chicago).
Willow Springs
The Willow Springs substation carries the common address of 8600 Willow Spring Road
in Willow Springs, but it is actually located on the south side of an industrial access road (leading
to Valvoline's Willow Springs facility) across the street from a Speedway gas station and just south
of the Tri-State Fire Protection District station which is situated at 8259 Willow Springs Road in
Willow Springs.
A picture of the structure as located at the Willow Springs substation is set forth below.
The structure is located to the rear of the substation control building. Note that if one visits
the Willow Springs substation, one will see a cellular telephone facility outside the boundaries of
the substation but adjacent to it. Know that, as noted earlier, neither ComEd's proposed Structure
Substation nor any portion of the Substation property will be used for personal wireless service
14
32
(5G or otherwise) or any other commercial communications function other than the Structure and
other ComEd-only grid -related monitoring and functioning communications.
Pleasant Hills
The Pleasant Hills substation is located on the east side of Pleasant Hill Road just south of
the Great Western Trail and St. Charles Road and a short distance south of North Avenue. The
substation is north of Geneva Road, north of the Village of Winfield and south of the Village of
Carol Stream. (The address assigned to the substation for property tax purposes is 1N701 Pleasant
Hill Road, Winfield. Our experience is that this address does not show up on common mapping
applications such as Google Maps. The street address of the business to the north is 26W115 St.
Charles Road in Carol Stream to provide a Google -friendly geographic reference point.)
A picture of the structure as located at the Pleasant Hill substation is set forth below.
The structure in the Pleasant Hills substation is located on the north side of the substation
just west of the substation control building. Like in Willow Springs, there is a cellular telephone
facility outside of the substation itself. Again, by contrast, a cellular telephone facility does not
exist at the Substation and is not proposed whatsoever.
15
33
Technical, ReEulatory and Permitting Information
The antennae proposed for use on the Structure will operate in the frequency
range of 902-928 MHz with a center frequency of 915 MHz. These frequencies are a small part
of the designated industrial, scientific and medical ("ISM") radio bands. The FCC opened these
ISM frequency bands for wireless communications in 1985. Parties using this frequency range in
the manner of ComEd are not generally required to obtain use, structure or antenna licenses from
the FCC (and are not so required in ComEd's specific situation), but must comply with Federal
Communications Commission ("FCC") regulations (47 CFR Part 15) on how the frequencies are
used, including the maximum output power of the antennas on the Structure. The output power
of the ComEd antennas will be extremely low, at 1 Watt or less. Further, the antennas will only
operate intermittently and will not continuously transmit. By observing these two key operating
criteria, along with compliance with all of the other applicable federal regulations, ComEd's
Structure will operate in a manner protective of public health and safety, in that RF emissions are
highly attenuated.
Other wireless devices operate in the frequency range of 902-928 MHz, with a
center frequency of 915 MHz -- most notably, ComEd's smart meters. The Structure will not
being used for smart meter functions. Although certain household wireless equipment operates at
915 MHz, most notably certain cordless phones, baby monitors, and wireless home security
systems, most household wireless equipment now operates within the 2.4 -GHz frequency band.
Like any system which chooses to operate with the ISM radio bands, ComEd's
Smart Grid Distribution Automation Device Monitoring System must tolerate the potential for
occasional interference from other wireless devices in use. At the same time, ComEd has
engineered its system to minimize any potential interference through incorporation of specific
technical features such as signal encryption and security which, like the smart meter system
using the same frequency range, have a now -proven record of safe, effective, reliable operation
without material impact to existing household wireless devices. In addition to these specific
technical features, in accordance with FCC regulations and as a technique to ensure minimal
interference, the electronic equipment used in the Distribution Automation Device Monitoring
System utilize a protocol called "frequency hopping" within subchannels spread evenly across
the frequency range of 902-928 MHz. Such "frequency hopping" allows for efficient use of the
full range of the allowable spectrum while minimizing interference risk.
The FCC is not required to review the specific siting of the proposed Structure.
Instead, parties such as ComEd may use the frequency range involved in the antennas on the
Structure without a specific license granted by the FCC so that as compliance with the detailed
ISM radio band regulations (47 CFR Part 15) is maintained. In addition, in terms of compliance
with the federal National Environmental Policy Act (to which the FCC is subject), the FCC has
delegated to each applicant the responsibility of determining whether a proposed structure is
"categorically excluded" from environmental review under the National Environmental Policy
Act ("NEPA") when there is minimal or no impact on the environment, or whether an
Environmental Assessment needs to be prepared.
16
34
FCC rules categorically exclude all actions -- including ComEd's proposed
Structure -- from detailed environmental review unless such a structure: (a) is located in a
wilderness area or wildlife preserve; (b) might affect threatened or endangered species or their
habitat; (c) might affect properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of
Historic Places or Indian religious or cultural sites; (d) will be located in a floodplain; (e) involve
construction involving significant changes in surface features, such as effects on wetlands, water,
ground disturbances, deforestations, etc.; (f) structures of over 450 feet potentially affecting
migratory birds; or (g) structures involving high-intensity lighting in a residential area or those
which would cause RF radiation in excess of FCC -established limits.
ComEd, through its consultant team, determined that the placement of the
Structure within an existing developed substation will have none of these impacts and therefore
that the proposed Structure is appropriately categorically excluded from NEPA review.
The proposed Structure will not be required to have a beacon and/or designated
paint. This is because ComEd received a determination from the Federal Aviation
Administration ("FAA") as of April 2021 that its Structure will not be a hazard to air navigation
and thus no lighting or special markings are required. ComEd's Structure will not be illuminated
in any way or painted any special color.
ComEd will be applying for a building permit from the Village. No additional
known governmental permits are necessary. ComEd will secure any additional necessary permits
which may be identified during the building permit process.
17
35
• � = x �„(,tsz),BercL 3.9zo6lasx 7 � �,=
9azo �` II ;m
3m
� •�
SNE—,.
�
NB rS
1,89T[Z 3.ZF,Sf.00.S
- N$
(,SZ'8Zf],FI'9ZF 3.Zf,Bf:005
kk�*
ko
-
-- ----_
avOd HL3 3)BYBIYA)
3ssna
�y 8
® (,LLmom 'L91 �OL,Lf.00$ .10'011
yWy W
3.iS; 1>OBS
(,t0'011)
$I$X�
yl
4�3q � �
h R
y
h H1n
o
8
U
Y
Dpi I,`�Int,
<
g1
I I
28
mm tl
o
3I
71
NI
<
9k
g
�
�W
m
II III I
d
:JR
• � = x �„(,tsz),BercL 3.9zo6lasx 7 � �,=
9azo �` II ;m
mdS
�4g �
R€ia330d
fa6.5T' i148.64) �
1Jf1Y2'J8'W I�
TIO"��_ ,SOIY11�3t4tt.005
yy�� ,eL 9S
F Se 3•i0.t6.04S' l l/ � / / ti,•
4"P k I
4ti8BN./
/ w (.tBYSI),LB'fBl M�W.tt.OBN
`
kk�*
ko
a<
!
g1
I I
g
�
�W
m
II III I
d
:JR
yf9.71
i�
mdS
�4g �
R€ia330d
fa6.5T' i148.64) �
1Jf1Y2'J8'W I�
TIO"��_ ,SOIY11�3t4tt.005
yy�� ,eL 9S
F Se 3•i0.t6.04S' l l/ � / / ti,•
4"P k I
it
4ti8BN./
/ w (.tBYSI),LB'fBl M�W.tt.OBN
`
kk�*
ko
a<
it
avow 3ssna
LzctsU ,zczn 3.coceoos
3 y e
Lro'ou/,ae'so1 3•[alraos -�
aa�
� � n
14
.. V
NE
C
0
k:
3�N
��u
P
rya
r
p4pq �
f1 I�f
��ir
oz
I
cS
(146.640
N102.36•w
n
_
zi
�
N S
- E
wI
C I
f C1 I.
N3fn
I]
m
0
� ntl
N
��ir
oz
cS
(146.640
N102.36•w
n
_
zi
�
q'a
paw®®3%y•tt9®oi@��`;��(*'1,
- E
3 �
PEM
d
sa$^g g�eefig��E
ComEd Structure TSS M. 16SO Dempster Street, Mount Prospect Exhibit
Structure Exhibit TSS 152 Busse, 1650 Dempster Street
Con* Commonwealth Edison �Co. d ChAcaqo. Hl$n6.,
M L� iump" mea! 5%,VtL&an Opwa6K a
w o U m Q
an
€=moo
zo „aae
Q
w
E _ w
o u
w
z
w
N
di
0
N
a
ri
FF
r7
r7
a
0
Z
O
o Q
W
J
W
W
O
W
X
LO
isodaadns �zs�
+L
LO
CO
0
1SOd 3N17 ,.ZU
d
>F'7777����
r
CO
w o U m Q
� ar
}R$
=}\j/
_
\\)�\
®
\�
*
\3
§<
't 0m
:o
\U)
�
\�
[)/
\j§j
C):_�
U)
§)
_
\\\�
«
:}
{ x)`=
o%%;:;
}
� ar
9
Il1�'iiroduct detali1l1
• Easy installation, upgrade, repair
and maintenance
• Seamless security integration
• 10 year warranty
• Anti -ram barrier can be installed as
a stand-alone solution
uirli[ty IID Y IIII
El ..... IEMM
Anti -cut & anti -climb
The Guardian Fence System° protects against both cutting and climbing, with heavy gauge mesh
and small mesh openings that resist common cutting tools and hand or foot holds.
Engineered design
Steel rails within the Guardian Fence System® create a protective raceway for security component
cabling such as intrusion detection, surveillance, and access control; providing a superior, fully -
integrated security barrier.
Efficient installation
Panels are affixed to steel rails, which are attached to the steel posts. This smart fence platform
configuration allows for fast installation and means that exact post spacings are not a requirement.
Anti -ram barrier add on available
M30, M40 and M50 Rated Anti -Ram Barriers can be integrated into the Guardian 5000 System to
provide hostile vehicle mitigation along the perimeter fence line.
Illlllllll illi °IIII ill I�°UL� Illf�hllll III Illl illi ��iili
Mi.11111
� 13
b ]1 . ,
43
High strength security mesh panels create an effective anti -cut, anti -climb barrier.
A variety of mesh options are available to meet specific risk or architectural
requirements.
Guardian Unions securely connect panels to high-strength horizontal rails within
the Guardian Fence System° and is then secured with bolted steel straps adding
additional rigidity to the fence.
Choose from a wide range of gate styles such as swing, v -track and cantilever
gates. Crash -rated options are also available.
Guardian system panels and gates are standard with a
superior galvanization, and are available with Betafence ARCHITECTURAl. GRADE POWDER COATING
USA's exclusive Super -Durable powder coating. This
coating provides longer protection from U.V. rays and salt 4PC
spray than either E -Coat or standard polyester coatings.
The Guardian Fence System® is backed by a 10 -Year Manufacturer's Warranty.
The Anti -Ram barrier is a stand-alone solution, providing formidable resistance to
vehicular attack.
GtjaiI d���an15-000 a�iri a�r M e��hjpt,J��a�illli 0 Welded Wire MiniLouver75 ^�rrx Expanded
Welded Wire DutyGuard 3-5-8 3° x 1/2" x 8ga 36% 64% 0.162 210 225 0.338 2.838
MiniLouver 75 MiniLouver 75 MiniLouver 75 75% 25% 0.188 0.09 282 310 0.25 0.8
LouverMesh 94 LouverMesh 94 LouverMesh 94 94% 6% 0.577 0.09 295 340 0.325 1.75
Expanded Metal Sentry 34-9 3/4° x 49 32% 68% 0.15 0.135 180 198 0.688 1.562
Expanded Metal Sentry 112-6 1-1/2"x 6” 31% 69% 0.203 0.198 250 275 1.11 2.313
Additional options available. Contact us for a solution that meets your specific security requirements.
I:..ulrolpe USA d A d d d d d uddll¢:, II...aot
Dokkestmat 344 3309 SVY Ilnlf IrslaIle 4'�3 � PO Box 263 517 IDAFIA
B 63'3'.x0 Zwevegem Binis FX 75119 E3i1ikflrItg F 51131ka:kA
Tell: 113: 1-32 56 73 466 X163 Tell -1 972 878 7000 M^°EIN RIEUSA 8th Roor, Office, 33123
Tell: INI1 0800 022 76 93 1 1888 650 d 76 IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII ToII: 97�1 34 6091122
Bet- fent is hew rma rlk e � Ir in 9 r am.. s rdJ n � . s n r and e e ur In for rilm e Ir r c a In A IBa iian rxr irn a ni.a« n Ir ur
.. I.na .., ,e �s h e c.}rha9 d eh CdCYf' e ,., .I ��.f.. . C4 wv, edf. a,a„��.0 CCB h n1 uS :1 a1,h.r,h ..} C& Ike ehe � ehe..,h {) IIII eha „ C,e, ..,.V p�cd C�a.0 ��., Ctl ;k �}dl..I.
nsarrnes are hraaein}arlkua owned by IFIR/1-SIE111AD 6:nlro uip ILiirnil:ed Ifitodi hiica:hiion lin paroduar,hs and aa;;soi tumenh are wu.bier., io cih<anpe wiflho0Iprirnlr IrnCuhce.
f'Irorid tl.} Pte as IF'16il biraarid, Betaferice is ptartl n:uf a gIloball nerhAloirk }n orik inq alongside G rialydialr arid Iliesco as as Ileader in pe;rili neilanr secuurihy
,steams and solutions For rmrlre, lWorrmia ticln Fullease visite pr'aesiildiad corn.
Africa
B10, Bergdvar 11.31.Jneaa Park
Paad,
71.)41.')
Fell -27 021 36313 7300
Ell
seclluuulrn;q %%IIIIIu d II'"krrHlim,v
hs:rCuPtel:a:herar.,e.Garn I kke9:a'felnce.corul
44
V
n
�tI
DI
a
I Cl)
II
I I
J
,96£6Z 3 80001
�;�
Q
� Qj
z
' o o v ... .. ...... .
O
II �
Q
U
K�K �Q Zw
w E E o E E E o E E o E E E o o E E o 0 o
1y I
u m
III
�
a N
�
LU
TSI wo
O z z rc rc a z z rc m m z rc a a 0
Q
Z
I
II
II
X51
wll
U I I
Z W
Q m �U cJii Q Z
O
�
I
YY
teak
w
LLJ
Q_-�?
T
ll"m\(
�j
� Z
li li
a
W
z Z
U C
L
�
au
SII LU
LU
rI SII
If
�
Dz
l
z w
¢z
¢d
v
crD-
ci m m ci ci m ci ci ay ci
z wl
Z
� W
`
z
cc
�IJw I
hula � I
��
�❑
�I III
l4! V
t s
m
w, m
III
L� � �II
2982
2
< < x < < < a' < < < < m m u < <
a
I Cl)
H
z
Q
z
' o o v ... .. ...... .
O
Q
U
W
w E E o E E E o E E o E E E o o E E o 0 o
CY
a
LU
O z z rc rc a z z rc m m z rc a a 0
Q
"_
N
O
�
-'^N'^^'NNNNNNNON^'
^'NN°'
WO
ci m m ci ci m ci ci ay ci
Z
� W
`
l4! V
t s
Q
F
3 0 0 3
A
< < x < < < a' < < < < m m u < <
O
W
„
N
o�
a
I Cl)
W 0 U m Q
ILo
Ico
Ir•
H
Q
z
O
U
W
O
CY
a
LU
W 0 U m Q
ILo
Ico
Ir•
V
n1
ztI
a
> 1
c w 3
S170N/W/7Lg
� 11
1 �m
oQz I �m
N Wig° 1 ��
m 1 ��
3
I
I
R , �
t m m m m m m m U U
o_
T r
I g
t E
E
E U > d
� n
Q T
W co
W b
Q m E
E w 2 E E h
F o° ro
5si� N 4
as a
d I m m
LL J
w I
1
�O 1
t; tiro
1
Ul ❑ 1 m
�j239 1
¢ W o
1 m 1
1 1
1
1
1 a 1I
a o o
z w �zcuz
I
w
U
2
O
Z
Z
J
a
W
a
Q
U
Z
J
w
U)
O
a
O
w
a
I Cl)
I1�t
TIP,
2
F
O
Z
Q
J
a
LU
a
Q
U
w
O CID
Z
J
W
O
a
O
w
CL
r
a
(00011)
9b 60L _>
-------------
N
I
— II
Old
I
aE
d w
II
O g
O
I
SII
QII
II
�
v II
s
3
T
a
i
11
z
X11
W
W
�
�rhV
Of
.III
SCI
U
LU
W
QJ
)I
1=
CL
CL
0
W
a
2
I
II
II 11
w
�
y
o
II
fn
a
3
11
I�
II
� III II
2
LL
J
O
I
I
I
II
I
�
❑
U
O
♦
III
II
E l I
z
all
o
l ��III
I� II
I
m
❑
j o
m
� �
I I
III
❑
�
1062
J
d
II
� I
`7
9F,'rz,9� t6,p6",
I Cl)
I1�t
TIP,
2
F
O
Z
Q
J
a
LU
a
Q
U
w
O CID
Z
J
W
O
a
O
w
CL
49
50
Z w
O v
- z
H w
Q LL
w
�
U
w Q
LU
m
LU '
cr- z
O
DC Q
W W
V)
LOa-
G
W a
51
z w
O v
- z
LU
Q LL
w CC
J LU
W J
W U-)
W
� z
O
N N
DC Q
W LU
G �
Lu a
0
52
Z w
O v
- z
H w
Q LL
w
�
U
w Q
LU
m
LU '
cr- z
O
DC Q
W W
V)
N 0
i
20
LU U
0
53
Z w
O v
- z
LU
LL
LU LU
J LU
W J
W N
W
� z
0
N N
DC Q
W LU
N N
d r)
2 J
LU 0
0 U
54
z w
O v
LU
Q LL
w �
w Q
N m
Q
Lu z
0
N
Q
W
C)
G
OC
Q
55
Z W
O v
H w
a LL
LU LU
J W
W I
V N
N
a
W z
O
N
a
W
V)
5
a
56
LU
U
z
LU
LL
U
Q
J
Co
z
0
C/)
Q
W
V)
r)
J
0
U
z
_O
Q
W
J
W
Q
W
57
LU
U
z
LU
LL
Of
LU
>
J
z
O
V)
Q
W
J
O
V
z
O
Q
LU
J
W
Ln
Q
W
58
LU
U
z
LU
LL
U
a
J
m
0
a
LU
V)
5
a
0
a
LU
J
W
H
0
z
59
LU
U
z
LU
LL
LU
J
Ln
z
O
V)
Q
W
�C
G
Q
r
It
0
Q
LU
J
W
o
z
60
LU
U
z
LU
LL
U
a
J
m
z
O
a
LU
0
J
O
U
z
O
H
Q
LU
J
W
O
z
61
LU
U
z
LU
LL
w
J
z
0
Q
W
V)
J
0
U
z
0
Q
LU
J
W
0
z
62
December 3, 2021
Ann Choi
Development Planner
Mt. Prospect Park District
Email only ACllhoii@rniountpirospea t.oirg
Re: Comments on the improvements at the ComEd ROW - ComEd Enclosure
Dempster Road -
Dear Ann,
We have reviewed Dempster Road ComEd Landscape Plan dated 12/1/21 by CBB. The Mount
Prospect Park District maintains approximately 3 miles of the ComEd corridor from 1-90 to Mt.
Prospect Road. This includes maintenance of the trail, grass and some existing shrubs in the corridor..
In other areas of the path we have had problems with people camping and drinking within shrub beds
and areas hidden from view. We have been requested in the past by the Mt. Prospect Police
Department to remove or trim shrubs that create hiding places.
We would recommend removing the shrubs from the ComEd corridor side (not Dempster) of the plan
and either install the fence only or install fence with small trees. We recommend the small trees to be
single stem with the lowest branches at 4 or 5 feet so you could easily see under them. Some
examples of trees we believe may be appropriate would be Syringa reticulata `Ivory Silk' single stem -
Ivory Silk Tree Lilac or Crataegus crus-galli `inermis - single stem Thornless Hawthorn'.
I prefer the black fence over the silver. If you have any questions please let me know.
1
Sincerely,
Ben Kutscheid, PLA, ASLA, CPSI
Planner/Landscape Architect
CC: Matt Dziubinski, Parks and Planning
Superintendent, MPPD
Gents ll Coinnnnur ty Center RecllwVex Llions Recireaflon Center i'rir ndsNp Park Conservatory W. lil'iro wtpect Glo' f Club
1000 W. Central Rd. 420 W. Dempster St. 411 S. Maple St. 395 W. Algonquin Rd. 600 See-Gwun Ave.
Mount Prospect, IL 60056 Mount Prospect, IL 60056 Mount Prospect, IL 60056 Des Plaines, IL 60018 Mount Prospect, IL 60056
i� ii i� •� 1 111 i� • • i� •i 11 i� • � 11
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 50 S. Emerson Street, Mount Prospect, IL 60056
STAFF REPORT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF Community Development
William J. Cooney, AICP
Director of Community Development
DATE: December 2, 2021
CASE NUMBER
PZ -17-21
PUBLIC HEARING DATE
December 9, 2021
Ann Choi
Development Planner
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER
Scott Saef (Sidley Austin LLP)
Joe Gilchrist (Commonwealth Edison Company)
PROPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION
1650 Dempster Street and 1510 South Busse Road
BRIEF SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The Petitioner, on behalf of Commonwealth Edison ("ComEd"), is seeking a conditional use approval to
allow for the installation of a one hundred four -foot (104') tall antenna support structure, including a four -
foot (4') tall lightning rod atop and five (5) monitoring antennae, a variation from the fence height
regulations to allow for the installation of an eleven -foot (11') tall expanded metal perimeter (security)
fence with an additional twelve inches (12") of Y-shaped barbed wire atop and four sixteen -foot (16') tall
fence posts, and associated landscaping improvements.
2021 Villa
Map
EXISTING
EXISTING LAND USE/SITE
ZONING
IMPROVEMENTS
R-1 Single Family
Open Space/Utility Corridor
Residential and
Electrical Substation
1-1 Limited
Industrial
SURROUNDING ZONING & LAND USE
North: R-4 Multi Family Residential
East: B-3 Community Shopping
B-4 Commercial Corridor
South: B-3, B-4
West: B-3, B-4
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPROVE (2EEEEOE:)
SIZE OF
PROPERTY
7.38 Acres
W\PLAN\Planning & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2021\Staff Reports\PZ-17-21 1650 Dempster St (CU - Antenna, VAR- Fence Height) docx
DENY
1
64
BACKGROUND/PROPERTY HISTORY
The Subject Property consists of an electrical substation located at 1650 Dempster Street and a portion of
1510 S. Busse Road, within one of ComEd's existing utility corridors. The substation is located on two lots;
the existing substation is located on the entire lot currently zoned 1-1 Light Industrial and only partially on
the lot zoned R-1 Single Family Residential District. These two lots comprise the "zoning lot".
Surrounding properties include B-3 Community Shopping and B-4 Commercial Corridor zoned lots to the
west (liquor store, laundromat and restaurant), east (restaurant) and south (commercial strip center) of the
Subject Property. Abutting the ComEd utility corridor and to the north of the Subject Property are R-4 Multi -
Family Residential planned unit developments including the Dover Park Condominiums and the Greens
Apartments. The Subject Property was annexed into the Village in 1963 under Ordinance No. 920.
PROPOSAL
Antenna Support Structure —The Petitioner proposes three improvements to its substation to preserve and
enhance the provision of electrical service. As part of ComEd's multi-year "smart grid" initiative which
includes an upgrade of the existing electrical distribution communication system with newer technology and
infrastructure, the first improvement includes the installation of a 104 -foot tall antenna support structure
within the existing substation on the 1-1 zoned portion of the zoning lot, just east of the western substation
building. The proposed antenna support structure would enhance the provision of reliable electrical service
and upgrade the existing electrical distribution communication system with newer technology and
infrastructure. Per the Petitioner, the proposed antenna will emit radio signals exclusive to ComEd and
communicate with ComEd's electrical devices/equipment on the electrical grid system. The proposed
antenna will not be used for any commercial communication services (e.g., 5G or any other cellular
telephone technologies).
The conditional use is requested since the support structure would exceed the maximum height of seventy
feet (70') under Section 14.305 which regulates radio, satellite and television antennas and towers. The
antenna support structure would support five receiving and transmitting antennae to support
approximately 250 monitoring and sensing devices to be installed in the Mount Prospect -area distribution
circuits over the next two years. For proper system functioning, the lowest antenna would be installed at a
minimum height of 35 feet to avoid foliage blockage and each additional antenna would be installed a
minimum of 15 feet apart vertically, above the first antenna. The proposed antenna support structure will
be situated approximately 7 feet east of the existing western substation control building, 114 feet from the
northern fence line, 238 feet from the northern property line, 82 feet west of the western property line, and
153 feet from the southern property line.
Fence - The second improvement includes the replacement of the existing chain link fence with an eleven -
foot (11') tall expanded metal security fence with twelve inches (12") of Y-shaped barbed wire atop and four
(4) sixteen -foot (16') "super -posts" supporting the fence. The plat of survey indicates the existing
nonconforming chain link perimeter fence is six feet (6') tall with one -foot (1') of barbed wire currently
within the front and side yards of the Subject Property. Barbed wire is permitted when used to protect
industrial property and is required to be at least six feet (6') above the sidewalk and extend inward of the
property. The proposed fence would generally follow and replace the existing fence line. The Zoning
Ordinance allows fences up to eight feet (8') in height in industrial districts when used for the purpose of
screening accessory building material or equipment. Fences used for the purposes of screening utility
H:\PLAN\Planning & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2021\Staff Reports\PZ-17-21 1650 Dempster St (CU - Antenna, VAR- Fence Height).docx
65
equipment in industrial districts are required to be solid. The Zoning Ordinance allows fences up to six feet
(6') in height in rear and interior side yards in all other zoning districts provided the fence is located behind
the front line of the principal building structure. The Petitioner proposes a solid perimeter fence that
exceeds the maximum fence heights in the two zoning districts as summarized in the following table:
. ............. .. ..
. . ..
........ .
.. .... .,.,.,..,
. . ......... - -------------------------- .
.... . . .....
Section
t
inmc
District
Requirement (Height)
Existing Height
Proposed Height
% Increase
.w..........
a
6Ipermittedterior side
...-. "
..
6'plus 12barbed
11'plu1"bard
/fence
/o
14.31
ads
re,16su erost
166.67%sper st
_..........w.-........
14.318.B.7.a
1-1
................ ...._..
8'
...
6'..plus 12" barbed
11' plus 12" b.....-���
arbed
37.5%
wire
wire
Landscaping - The third improvement is a comprehensive landscape screening plan around the perimeter of
the substation. The landscape plans indicate a substantial amount of ground level screening proposed along
the Dempster Street frontage, the northern fence, and portions of the east and west fences located within
the transmission right-of-way. The proposed perimeter landscaping will be composed of a mixture of large
deciduous shrubs, evergreen shrubs, perennials and grasses. Per code, the proposed shrubs will be three
feet (3') tall at time of installation and will reach their mature height within three (3) to five (5) years. Per
the project's landscape architect, the species of shrubs were chosen because the shrubs will reach the
desired screening height of eight feet (8') to ten feet (10') along the north, west and east fence lines, to
fifteen feet (15') for the taller evergreens along Dempster Street, and are durable and will tolerate the
proposed location without substantial maintenance. Five different species of deciduous shrubs and two
species of evergreen shrubs were also selected as a precautionary measure against pests or disease. If either
of these were to attack one species, the others would remain.
Per the project's landscape architect, there are twenty-two (22) existing trees across the Dempster Street
frontage of which twelve trees will be removed. Of these twelve, three are dead (1 Austrian Pine and 2
Spruce). The remaining ten trees are Austrian Pine trees that are either planted within the 10 -foot security
clear zone or are declining in health and have limbs that protrude into the 10 -foot security clear zone. The
10 -foot security clear zone is necessary for two reasons: (1) to ensure there is no vegetation in close
proximity to the fence which can be used in any way to aid in an attempted climb over the fence; and (2) to
ensure maximum, clear visibility even in less -than -ideal weather conditions of the critical zone just outside
the fence so that security technology used for protection in conjunction with the fence is not impeded and
to eliminate, for both ComEd and local public safety forces, potential hiding areas.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Village Comprehensive Plan designates the Subject Property as Utility/Right-of-Way and Open Space
and Recreation. The proposed project aligns with Goal 7 of the Comprehensive Plan which ensures that all
parts of the community are well served by infrastructure, and support their maintenance and enhancement
to serve the future needs of the community.
CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS
The standards for conditional uses are listed in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Zoning Ordinance and
include seven specific findings that must be made in order to approve a conditional use. The following list is
a summary of these findings:
I I \fIIA1ti ,I\Nn ari )ln , ij _ n'iii�v f.f)Ml\/lAf°&1 20),1 1 aff I;C, s\ I,/ 1.7 J 1 1f,7f,J I)(.n)p'JeI `,I (( IJ Antenn , V!'"R I (_in(e 1Iei[',hI)dw:x
66
• The conditional use will not have a detrimental impact on the public health, safety, morals, comfort
or general welfare;
• The conditional use will not be injurious to the use, enjoyment, or value of other properties in the
vicinity or impede the orderly development of those properties;
• There is adequate provision for utilities, drainage, and design of access and egress to minimize
congestion on Village streets; and
• The request is in compliance of the conditional use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan,
Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances.
• The request conforms to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located, except as
such regulations may, in each instance, be modified pursuant to the recommendations of the
planning and zoning commission.
The Petitioner states that the proposed conditional use will not be detrimental to the general welfare of the
neighborhood, will support surrounding properties and the entire Village by helping to improve grid
reliability and minimize power outages, and will not impede the normal and orderly development and
improvement of the surrounding properties. The Petitioner states that the proposed variation is requested
to fully comply with applicable federal directives and industry requirements and standards, and that these
mandates are not applicable to typical property owners in the 1-1 and R-1 zoning district. Failure to comply
with the federal mandates would signal a hardship. The Petitioner further states that the variation is not
based on a desire for financial gain but to deter potentially malicious intruders from causing disruptive
power outages, and that the variation is needed to provide heightened protection and security only.
Staff is supportive of the conditional use request. From an aesthetic standpoint, the proposed antenna
would be noiseless, unlit and would blend in with existing substation mechanical equipment and the taller
utility towers within the ComEd right-of-way. Staff believes the antenna would improve the reliability of an
existing public utility to the entire Village.
VARIATION STANDARDS
The standards for a variation are listed in Section 14.203.C.9 of the Village Zoning Ordinance and include
seven specific findings that must be made in order to approve a variation. The following list is a summary of
these findings:
• A hardship due to the physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of a specific
property not generally applicable to other properties in the same zoning district and not created by
any person presently having an interest in the property;
• Lack of desire to increase financial gain; and
• Protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character.
Staff has reviewed the Petitioner's variation request and finds unique conditions exist that are not generally
applicable to other properties as the site must comply with federal mandates not applicable to typical
owners in the 1-1 and R-1 zoning districts. The height of the proposed fence and the proposed perimeter
landscaping will improve the screening of the existing substation equipment, improve the aesthetics of the
substation frontage along Dempster Street and within the ComEd right-of-way, and provide the site with
better security. The proposed variation will not impair or be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood.
IJ,I IarI1 111i,; ZoI-] ri„ CfCMla✓I\M,I M `,Iraif [",eprar", J -v 'l7 �) 1 D ir�p'd eir S((:U Arfl,orii ), VA R, f (,n, (, fIe, l,l t),c�ocy
67
Staff finds that the conditional use and variation requests meet the conditional use and variation standards as
listed in the Zoning Ordinance and that granting such requests would be in the best interest of the Village.
Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission make a motion to adopt
staff's findings as the findings of the Planning & Zoning Commission, recommend approval for the conditional
use, and approve the variation request. If the Planning & Zoning Commission wishes to support the requests,
Staff recommends approval of the following motions:
1. Adopt the Findings of Fact in response to the Standards for Conditional Uses and Standards for
Variations as outlined in the Administrative Content included in the staff report for Case No. PZ -17-21.
2. Recommend approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the installation of a 104 -foot tall
antenna support structure, including a 4 -foot tall lightning rod atop and five (5) monitoring antennae,
subject to the following conditions:
a. The antenna support structure shall not be used for any commercial communication services,
personal wireless services, and/or small wireless facilities (e.g., 5G or any other cellular
telephone technologies).
b. Development of the antenna support structure shall be in general conformance with the
drawings prepared by the Commonwealth Edison Co., undated, and as attached to this staff
report.
c. Any future height modification to the proposed 104' antenna support structure shall apply for
an amendment to the proposed conditional use.
d. A building permit submittal shall be submitted for record purposes and shall require third party
inspection approvals to be submitted to the Village for record purposes.
3. Approve a variation from the fence height regulations to allow for the installation of an 11 -foot (11')
tall expanded metal perimeter (security) fence with an additional 12"of Y-shaped barbed wire atop
and four (4) sixteen -foot (16') tall fence posts, and associated landscaping improvements, subject to
the following conditions:
a. Development of the fence and associated landscaping improvements shall be in general
conformance with the drawings prepared by the Commonwealth Edison Co. dated 12/1/21.
b. The fence shall be black.
c. A landscape plan which complies with Village Code requirements shall be submitted as part of
the building permit submittal.
The Planning and Zoning Commission's decision is final for the fence variation request.
The Village Board's decision is final for the conditional use request.
ATTACHMENTS:
I concur:
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTENT
(Zoning Request Application, Responses to
Standards, etc...) -0
William J. Cooney, AICP
Director of Community Development
PLANS
(Plat of Survey, Site Plan, etc.)
OTHER
Q
plemental Information,ic Comments Received,
etc...)
H:\PLAN\Planning & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2021\Staff Reports\PZ-17-21 1650 Dempster St (CU - Antenna, VAR- Fence Height) docx
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
CASE NO. PZ -17-21 Hearing Date: December 9, 2021
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
1650 Dempster Street and 1510 S. Busse Road
PETITIONER:
Scott Saef, Sidley Austin LLP
PUBLICATION DATE:
November 24, 2021
REQUEST:
CU: Antenna Support Structure
VAR: Fence Height
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Thomas Fitzgerald
William Beattie
Walter Szymczak
Joseph Donnelly
Donald Olsen
MEMBERS ABSENT: Norbert Mizwicki
Lisa Griffin
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Cooney, AICP — Director of Community Development
Connor Harmon —Senior Development Planner
Ann Choi — Development Planner
Valeria Tarka — Planning Intern
INTERESTED PARTIES:
1
Commonwealth Edison Company, Village of Mount Prospect
Chairman Donnelly called the meeting to order at 7:01 PM. Commissioner Beattie made a motion
seconded by Commissioner Szymczak to approve the minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting on November 11, 2021. The minutes were approved 4-1. Chairman Donnelly introduced Zoning
Case No. PZ -17-21 1650 Dempster Street and 1510 South Busse Road (Subject Property), for a
conditional use for an antenna support structure and a variation for fence height. The fence variation
request is Planning and Zoning Commission final and the conditional use request is Village Board final.
Ms. Choi stated that the petitioner is requesting the approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the
installation of a 104 -foot tall antenna support structure, including a 4 -foot tall lightning rod atop and 5
monitoring antennae. Ms. Choi also stated that the petitioner is also requesting approval of a variation
from the fence height regulations to allow for the installation of an 11 -foot tall expanded metal
perimeter security fence with an additional 12 inches of Y-shaped barbed wire atop and four 16 -foot tall
fence posts, and associated landscaping improvements.
Ms. Choi gave a brief introduction of the subject property. Ms. Choi stated that the subject property
consists of an electrical substation located at 1650 Dempster Street and a portion of 1510 S. Busse Road,
19
within one of Commonwealth Edison's (ComEd's) existing transmission corridors. Ms. Choi explained
that the subject property is located on two lots; the existing substation is located on the entire lot
currently zoned 1-1 Light Industrial and only partially on the lot zoned R-1 Single Family Residential
District. These two lots comprise the "zoning lot".
Ms. Choi gave a brief description of the history of the site and described the surrounding properties and
its adjacent uses, including B-3 Community Shopping and B-4 Commercial Corridor zoned lots to the
west (liquor store, laundromat and restaurant), east (restaurant) and south (commercial strip center) of
the Subject Property. Ms. Choi stated that abutting properties to the north of the subject property are
R-4 Multi -Family Residential planned unit developments including the Dover Park Condominiums and
the Greens Apartments. Ms. Choi stated that the subject property was annexed into the Village in 1963
under Ordinance No. 920.
Ms. Choi presented a series of site photographs to illustrate the existing conditions. Site photographs
included the subject property's frontage along Dempster Street and views from the east, west and
north.
Ms. Choi explained that the petitioner proposes three improvements to its substation to preserve and
enhance the provision of electrical service. Ms. Choi further explained that as part of ComEd's "smart
grid" initiative which includes an upgrade of the existing electrical distribution communication system,
the first improvement includes the installation of a 104 -foot tall antenna support structure within the
existing substation on the 1-1 zoned portion of the zoning lot, just east of the western substation
building. Ms. Choi stated that the proposed antenna support structure would enhance reliable electrical
service and upgrade the existing electrical distribution communication system by emitting radio signals
exclusive to ComEd to communicate with ComEd's electrical devices/equipment on the electrical grid
system. Ms. Choi indicated that the proposed antenna would not be used for any commercial
communication services such as 5G or any other cellular telephone technologies. Ms. Choi also pointed
out that the existing transmission structures directly north of the substation range in height from 125
feet to 139 feet in height.
Ms. Choi further stated that the antenna support structure would support five receiving and
transmitting antennae to support approximately 250 monitoring and sensing devices to be installed in
the Mount Prospect -area distribution circuits. Ms. Choi stated that the lowest antenna would be
installed at a minimum height of 35 feet to avoid foliage blockage and each additional antenna would be
installed a minimum of 15 feet apart vertically, above the first antenna. Ms. Choi presented an image of
a similar structure that was installed in Willow Springs, Illinois.
Ms. Choi further stated that the project has been designed as part of a security plan being carried out by
Exelon public utilities nationwide in response to mandatory federal directives and standards, and as a
response to these directives, the petitioner proposes the second improvement that includes the
replacement of the existing chain link fence with an 11 -foot tall expanded metal security fence with 12
inches of Y-shaped barbed wire atop and four 16 -foot super -posts supporting the fence. Ms. Choi noted
that the proposed fence would be solid and would generally follow and replace the existing fence line.
70
Ms. Choi then presented a series of slides including an elevation and images of the proposed fence.
Ms. Choi presented the third improvement consisting of a comprehensive landscape screening plan
around the perimeter of the substation. Ms. Choi explained that a substantial amount of ground level
screening was proposed along the Dempster Street frontage, the northern fence, and portions of the
east and west fences located within the transmission corridor. Ms. Choi stated that the proposed
perimeter landscaping will be composed of a mixture of large deciduous shrubs, evergreen shrubs,
perennials and grasses.
Ms. Choi went on to explain that there are twenty-two existing trees across the Dempster Street
frontage of which twelve would be removed due to the poor condition of the trees or if they protruded
into the 10 -foot security clear zone. Ms. Choi explained that a 10 -foot security clear zone is necessary to
ensure there would be no vegetation in close proximity to the fence which can be used to aid in an
attempted climb over the fence, to ensure clear visibility of the area outside the fence so that security
camera visibility is not impeded, and to eliminate potential hiding areas. Ms. Choi highlighted that per
Staff's request, the petitioner added substantial landscaping along the north fence and along portions of
the east and west fences. Ms. Choi stated that Staff would like to eliminate these areas of landscaping as
well as paring down the landscaping along the Dempster Street frontage in light of new comments
received by the Mount Prospect park district and police department. Ms. Choi indicated that the park
district requested that the areas of landscaping in the ComEd right-of-way be eliminated due to safety
concerns and to deter people from camping, drinking, and residing within the tall bushes. Ms. Choi
added that the police department echoed the park district's concerns and also requested that the
landscaping along Dempster Street be scaled down for safety issues due the prevalence of illicit
activities. Ms. Choi further added that Staff requests that the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommend adding a condition of approval that requires the applicant to work with Staff to prepare a
Final Landscape Plan that addresses the concerns of the police department and park district.
Ms. Choi presented a series of renderings showing the proposed fence during the warmer season and
noted that the Petitioner provided renderings to show the fence in a black color and a silver color and
seeks the Village's input on a preferred color. Ms. Choi noted that Staff unanimously preferred the black
color.
Ms. Choi stated that the Village of Mount Prospect's Comprehensive Plan designates the Subject
Property as Utility/Right-of-Way and Open Space and Recreation and that the proposed project aligns
with Goal 7 of the Comprehensive Plan which ensures that all parts of the community are well served by
infrastructure, and support their maintenance and enhancement to serve the future needs of the
community.
Finally, Ms. Choi stated the Staff finds that all standards have been met and recommends approval of
the conditional use and variation requests, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report with the
added condition that requires the petitioner to work with Staff to prepare a final landscape plan that
addresses the safety concerns raised by the police department. The Planning and Zoning's decision is
71
final for the fence height variation request and the Village Board's decision is final for the conditional
use request.
Ms. Choi concluded her presentation.
Chairman Donnelly swore in Calandra Davis, External Affairs Manager for Commonwealth Edison, 201 N.
Arthur Avenue, Mount Prospect, IL. Ms. Davis indicated there will be three individuals speaking on
behalf of Commonwealth Edison including Scott Saef of Sidley Austin LLP (land use counsel for ComEd),
Christopher Collins (Senior Manager for Exelon IT Digital Grid Projects), Christina Deuchler (Manager of
Infrastructure for ComEd Security). Ms. Davis In addition to the speakers, Ms. Davies also introduced
Duke Ali (Project Manager for ComEd) and Doug Gotham (Landscape Architect with Christopher B. Burke
Engineering). Ms. Davis turned over the presentation to Mr. Saef.
Chairman Donnelly asked Ms. Davis if she had any issues with the proposed conditions listed in the staff
report for PZ -17-21. Ms. Davis replied that she had no problems with the conditions listed in the staff
report for PZ -17-21.
Chairman Donnelly swore in Scott Saef, Sidley Austin LLP, One S. Dearborn Street, Chicago, IL. Mr. Saef
stated he is land use counsel for ComEd. Mr. Saef stated that ComEd accepts the conditions listed in the
staff report for PZ -17-21. Mr. Saef stated there would be two speakers, Chris Collins who would describe
the technology and why it is important for reliability and how the voltage flows through the system, and
Christina Deuchler, who would explain why the security directive for the project.
Commissioner Beattie inquired if there would be any discussion regarding the federal mandate requiring
the upgrades. Mr. Saef responded that Christina Deuchler would provide the explanation.
Chairman Donnelly swore in Christopher Collins, 146 Des Moines Street, Lemont, IL. Mr. Collins stated
he is the Senior Manager for Exelon IT, who has been working on this project for ComEd. Mr. Collins
stated he builds the smart grid network infrastructure for distribution automation and advanced smart
meter infrastructure, for ComEd and other Exelon utilities, in the mid-Atlantic region.
Mr. Collins explained there are three main reasons for wireless infrastructure. Mr. Collins stated the first
reason is to minimize electrical distribution outages. In the event of an electrical outage, the second
reason is to minimize any duration of an electrical outage, and the third reason is to efficiently provide
the voltage along the distribution line. Mr. Collins provided an analogy and described a 2 -mile long
distribution line. At one end of the two miles is a source, the substation, and at the other end, there is
an end user (customer). In that two miles, there may be 2,000 customers, evenly distributed. Mr. Collins
explained that if there is a lightning strike or a fault at the end of that 2 -mile line from the substation,
that fault would take down all 2,000 customers. Mr. Collins stated that if a switch was put at mile 1, with
the same fault, and that switch opens, only 1,000 customers would be out of power. Mr. Collins also
stated that if another switch was located between the halfway point between the second mile, with the
same fault, and that switch opens, only 500 customers would lose power. Mr. Collins further explained
the more switches that are placed, the less outages would occur. Mr. Collins stated that more devices
72
and sensors that are placed on the network would more precisely identify the fault and ComEd could be
dispatched more quickly to repair the fault, minimizing the duration of the outage.
Mr. Collins explained the third reason for this system is to optimize the voltage across the distribution
line. In any electrical line, there is electrical loss or impedance, and in order to compensate for voltage at
the end of the line, you have to crank up the voltage from the source, which is an inefficient way of
compensating voltage. Ways to compensate for this are putting capacitator banks or regulators along
the line, for a more efficient voltage along that line so that pumps and motors so that things can run in a
more efficient manner. Wireless infrastructure is necessary, Mr. Collins explained, for these switches to
communicate with each other, for the information to flow to the operations control center, and to
dispatch help quickly. Mr. Collins stated that the installation of 250 devices would allow the radios to
communicate with these devices. Mr. Collins stated that each antenna can handle about 50 devices so
250 divided by 50 results in five antennae. These antennae have to be spaced apart with certain
distances and this determines the height of the tower at 100 feet. Mr. Collins noted that the existing
transmission towers are taller at approximately 125 feet to 139 feet and concluded his testimony.
Chairman Donnelly noted that the height of the existing towers helps the request.
Commissioner Beattie asked that in the event that something happens, the sensors would allow
whoever is maintaining this system to know where the faults happened more efficiently. Mr. Collins
confirmed.
Chairman Donnelly stated that these devices subdivide the line into 250 sections instead of one. Mr.
Collins confirmed.
No further questions were asked of Mr. Collins. Mr. Saef then introduced Christina Deuchler to explain
the reason for the security upgrades.
Chairman Donnelly swore in Christina Deuchler, Physical Security Manager for ComEd, 1919 Swift Drive,
Oak Brook, IL.
Ms. Deuchler explained that a presidential directive around 2015 under President Obama was
introduced after the Metcalf Sniper attack in California, where attackers shot up a substation. Ms.
Deuchler stated that prior to this incident, there were previous attacks across the country on electrical
substations. Ms. Deuchler presented some statistics of incidents that occurred locally in ComEd's
territory in Illinois, outside of the city of Chicago, mainly in the northern, western, and southern
suburbs. Ms. Deuchler stated that these incidents included burglaries, sabotage, vicious persons, and
explosive devices. Ms. Deuchler stated that the last explosive device was used in the north suburbs in a
transmission right-of-way. Ms. Deuchler also presented some photos of substation damage including an
incident that occurred in the western suburbs near O'Hare airport where a burglar dug underneath a
substation fence, pried open a control house door, removed copper grounding bars inside the
substation building. Ms. Deuchler stated that all of this occurred between the time the alarm went off
and the police arrived at the scene to arrest the burglar. Ms. Deuchler described another incident where
individuals cut through decorative fencing with a hack saw and the mesh fencing behind it.
73
Ms. Deuchler noted that the fencing proposed for the subject property is being deployed across the
entire Exelon footprint within the country. Ms. Deuchler explained that substations are tiered in the
order of criticality and the amount of investment placed into the substation is measured to how critical
the substation is. Ms. Deuchler stated that all of the fencing is ASTM -rated, evaluated and certified. Ms.
Deuchler stated that the Department of Homeland Security has also audited ComEd to evaluate how
well ComEd has responded to the presidential directive, noting that ComEd has been successful and
consistent in its approach.
Ms. Deuchler then provided an explanation of the three different levels of threats in the context of
threats measures and the type of fencing selected. Low level threats include opportunists who might be
searching for copper, low level sabotage, and not very organized. In response, Ms. Deuchler stated that
ComEd has established a cut time, how long it would take to cut through and climb over the fence
material. Ms. Deuchler stated that a medium threat is a more organized group who may be equipped
with power tools. Ms. Deuchler stated that high level or aggressive threats include individuals that are
determined to get into the substation, and there is very little that ComEd can do to stop high level
threats except to detect them.
Ms. Deuchler presented a slide showing the threat levels and how much time it would take to cut
through that fence. The slide indicated that for a low level threat (an individual with hand tools), it
would take more than 45 minutes to cut through; for a medium level threat (more than one individual
with power tools), it would take more than 10 minutes; and for a high level threat (dedicated offenders),
cut -through time is less than 5 minutes, and represents a failed fence. Ms. Deuchler stated that the
particular fence that is proposed was chosen because of the cut -through time and it is important not to
substitute it with other materials.
Ms. Deuchler concluded her presentation. Chairman Donnelly asked if there were any questions.
Commissioner Beattie asked if the 11 -foot height was determined because it was required by the federal
mandate or if this is common ComEd practice. Ms. Deuchler responded that the federal mandate was
not prescriptive and directed utility companies to evaluate their own structures, to measure their
criticalities within the national grid and community, and to "harden" these structures. Ms. Deuchler
explained that the 11 -foot height was chosen because a standard ladder is 8 feet, and barbed wire was
added so that intruders would need additional tools to overcome the barbed wire. Ms. Deuchler stated
that ComEd locates landscaping 10 feet away from the fencing and chooses landscaping that does not
grow more than 10 feet in height for clear visibility.
Commissioner Beattie then asked if ComEd used the 11 -foot fence with barbed wire in other locations.
Ms. Deuchler responded that 11 -foot fences with barbed wire are used at all other operationally critical
substation sites.
Commissioner Beattie inquired about the high level threat and why the fence failed in Ms. Deuchler's
previous slide. Ms. Deuchler responded that if a box truck were to be driven into the fence, there is very
little to stop it.
74
Commissioner Beattie asked if it was common to have incidents like the one that occurred in the
western suburbs mentioned earlier. Ms. Deuchler replied that when the copper prices are up, it is not
uncommon. Chairman Donnelly then thanked Ms. Deuchler for her presentation.
Mr. Saef stated that their presentation was concluded and were open to any questions.
Chairman Donnelly asked the audience if there was anyone that would like to address the case.
Chairman Donnelly swore in Robert Galler, 1810 W. Hatherleigh Court, Mount Prospect, IL. Mr. Galler
noted that the representatives for ComEd were kind and previously answered a number of questions
already. Mr. Galler noted that the project comes down to two main issues, security and outages. Mr.
Galler agreed that the infrastructure should be hardened. Mr. Galler stated the directive was mandated
by the federal government, and asked if the federal government would be responsible for the cost or if
ComEd would be paying for the upgrades and passing that cost down to the taxpayers. Mr. Galler's
requested an explanation of a footprint on the site plan just north of the substation. Mr. Galler then
asked what frequency would be used by the antennae on the support structure. Finally, Mr. Galler then
asked if the community is aware that there will be additional two-way communication devices all over
the neighborhood. Mr. Donnelly commented that the 250 devices would be much smaller than any 5G
devices installed in the community in the future. Mr. Galler responded that he had no issue with the
reliability of the grid, but clarified that his issue was related to the number of the smaller wireless
devices coming into the community.
Chairman Donnelly asked what issue Mr. Galler had on the frequency of the radio signals. Mr. Galler
replied that it is about disclosure and transparency.
Mr. Saef responded to Mr. Galler's questions and stated that the improvements would not be paid by
the federal government and would be paid by the utility users. Mr. Saef stated that the frequency used
by the antennae would be in the range of 902-928 MHz. Chairman Donnelly noted that the footprint on
the site plan was an existing transmission tower footprint.
Chairman Donnelly asked Director Cooney to confirm that future commercial communication service
equipment such as 5G could not be installed on the antenna support structure since this would be
restricted by one of the conditions in the staff report. Director Cooney confirmed.
Hearing no further comments or questions, Chairman Donnelly asked for a motion. Commissioner
Beattie made a motion seconded by Commissioner Fitzgerald to approve the following motion:
1. Adopt the Findings of Fact in response to the Standards for Conditional Uses and Standards for
Variations as outlined in the Administrative Content included in the staff report for Case No. PZ -
17 -21;
2. Recommend approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the installation of a 104 -foot tall
antenna support structure, including a 4 -foot tall lightning rod atop and five (5) monitoring
antennae, subject to the following conditions:
a. The antenna support structure shall not be used for any commercial communication
services, personal wireless services, and/or small wireless facilities (e.g., 5G or any
75
other cellular telephone technologies);
b. Development of the antenna support structure shall be in general conformance with
the drawings prepared by the Commonwealth Edison Co., and attached to this staff
report;
c. Any future height modification to the proposed 104 -foot antenna support structure
shall apply for an amendment to the proposed conditional use;
d. A building permit submittal shall be submitted for record purposes and shall require
third party inspection approvals to be submitted to the Village for record purposes;
e. Prior to building permit submittal, the petitioner shall submit a revised landscape plan
that addresses the public safety concerns of the police department; and
f. A final landscape plan which complies with Village Code requirements shall be
submitted as part of the building permit submittal.
3. Approve a variation from the fence height regulations to allow for the installation of an 11 -foot
(11') tall expanded metal perimeter (security) fence with an additional 12"of Y-shaped barbed
wire atop and four (4) sixteen -foot (16') tall fence posts, subject to the following conditions:
a. Development of the fence shall be in general conformance with the drawings prepared
by the Commonwealth Edison Co. received by the Village on 11/30/21.
b. The fence shall be black.
UPON ROLL CALL AYES: Olsen, Fitzgerald, Beattie, Szymczak, Donnelly
NAYS: None
The motion was approved 5-0 with a positive recommendation to the Village Board for the conditional
use request. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the fence height variation request.
After hearing one additional case, Commissioner Beattie made a motion seconded by Commissioner
Fitzgerald and the meeting was adjourned at 8:44 PM.
I
Ann Choi
Development Planner
76
SIDLEY
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
ONE SOUTH DEARBORN STREET
CHICAGO, IL 60603
+1 312 853 7000
+1 312 853 7036
SSAEF@SIDLEY.COM
AMERICA • ASIA PACIFIC • EUROPE +1 312 853 4159
December 10, 2021
BY ELECTRONIC DELIVERY
Ms. Ann Choi
Development Planner
Community Development
Village of Mount Prospect
50 S. Emerson Street
Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
Re: Request for Waiver of Second Reading -- 1650 Dempster Street and 1510 S.
Busse Road -- PZ -17-21
Dear Ann:
On behalf of the Commonwealth Edison Company ("ComEd"), I am hereby respectfully
submitting this letter as a formal request for a waiver of the Village Board's second reading
regarding our conditional use proposal so that the Village Board may take final action on the
application at its meeting scheduled for December 14, 2021.
As you are aware, the Village of Mount Prospect's Planning & Zoning Commission
unanimously recommended approval of our conditional use application last evening.
Waiver of second reading will help set the stage for ComEd's activities right away on
permitting so that the antenna support structure project can be implemented as soon as feasible.
This will assist with the reliability and voltage optimization initiatives discussed in our
application and during the Commission meeting last evening.
I would be happy to answer any questions about this request.
Very truly yours,
Scott E. Saef
77
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW INSTALLATION OF AN ANTENNA
SUPPORT STRUCTURE AND ASSOCIATED ACCESSORIES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1650
DEMPSTER STREET AND 1510 SOUTH BUSSE ROAD, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS
WHEREAS, Commonwealth Edison (Petitioner), has filed a petition for a Conditional Use to allow
for the installation of a one hundred four foot (104') tall antenna support structure, including a
four foot (4') tall lightning rod atop and five (5) monitoring antennae for property located at
1650 Dempster Street and 1510 South Busse Road (Property) and legally described as:
PARCEL 1:
THAT PART OF LOT TWO (2) IN EDWARD BUSSE'S DIVISION OF PART OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION FIFTEEN (15), AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION
TWENTY-TWO (22), TOWNSHIP FORTY-ONE (41) NORTH, RANGE ELEVEN (11) EAST OF THE
THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, AS RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1919, AS DOCUMENT NO.
6696216, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT A POINT IN
THE OLD CENTER LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD WHICH IS TWO HUNDRED TEN (210) FEET EAST
OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF SAID
SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH ALONG A LINE TWO HUNDRED TEN (210) FEET EAST
OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER A
DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED THREE AND FIVE HUNDREDTHS (103.05) FEET TO AN ANGLE
POINT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG A DIAGONAL LINE DRAWN FROM SAID ANGLE POINT
TO A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2) WHICH IS THREE HUNDRED TWENTY- SIX
AND TWENTY-FIVE HUNDREDTHS (326.25) FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION
FIFTEEN (15) (AS MEASURED ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2)) A DISTANCE OF
THREE HUNDRED THIRTY-THREE AND EIGHTY-FIVE HUNDREDTHS (333.85) FEET FOR A POINT
OF BEGINNING OF THIS PARCEL OF LAND (SAID POINT OF BEGINNING IS SIX HUNDRED
THIRTY-SIX AND EIGHT HUNDREDTHS (636.08) FEET SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE EAST LINE OF
SAID LOT TWO (2) AS MEASURED ALONG SAID DIAGONAL LINE); THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY
ALONG A LINE DRAWN AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID DIAGONAL LINE A DISTANCE OF TWO
HUNDRED NINETEEN AND EIGHTY-TWO HUNDREDTHS (219.82) FEET TO THE INTERSECTION
OF SAID LINE WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE EAST ALONG
SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF FOUR HUNDRED FOUR AND FIFTY-NINE HUNDREDTHS
(404.59) FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-ONE (181) FEET WEST OF THE
EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2); THENCE NORTH ALONG A LINE DRAWN AT RIGHT ANGLES
TO SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF TWO HUNDRED NINETY-FOUR (294) FEET TO THE
INTERSECTION OF SAID LINE WITH THE AFORESAID DIAGONAL LINE (SAID INTERSECTION
BEING ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-SIX AND EIGHTY-FIVE HUNDREDTHS (186.85) FEET
SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2) AS MEASURED ALONG SAID
DIAGONAL LINE); THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID DIAGONAL LINE A DISTANCE OF
FOUR HUNDRED FORTY-NINE AND TWENTY-THREE HUNDREDTHS (449.23) FEETTO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING OF THIS PARCEL OF LAND, SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF COOK, IN THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS
and
PARCEL 2:
THAT PART OF LOT TWO (2) IN EDWARD BUSSE'S DIVISION OF PART OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION FIFTEEN (15) AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION
TWENTY-TWO (22), TOWNSHIP FORTY-ONE (41) NORTH, RANGE ELEVEN (11) EAST OF THE
THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, AS RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1919, AS DOCUMENT NO.
6696216 IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT AT
THE INTERSECTION OF THE OLD CENTER LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD WITH THE WEST LINE OF
THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION FIFTEEN (15), WHICH POINT
IS A DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED SIXTY- THREE AND SIXTY-FOUR HUNDREDTHS (163.64) 78
PZ 17-21
FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER;
THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER A
DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-ONE AND NINETY-TWO HUNDREDTHS (171.92) FEET TO
AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG A DIAGONAL LINE DRAWN FROM SAID
POINT TO A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2), WHICH IS A DISTANCE OF FIVE
HUNDRED THIRTY-NINE AND EIGHTY HUNDREDTHS (539.80) FEET NORTH OFTHE SOUTH LINE
OF SAID SECTION FIFTEEN (15) (AS MEASURED ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOTTWO (2);
A DISTANCE OF ONE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY- THREE AND SIXTY HUNDREDTHS
(1183.60) FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2); THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST
LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2) A DISTANCE OF TWO HUNDRED THIRTEEN AND FIFTY-FIVE
HUNDREDTHS (213.55) FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS TWO HUNDRED TEN (210) FEET
SOUTHEASTERLY OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) AND PARALLEL WITH THE AFORESAID
DIAGONAL LINE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF NINE
HUNDRED SIXTY-NINE AND NINETY-THREE HUNDREDTHS (969.93) FEET TO THE
INTERSECTION OF SAID PARALLEL LINE WITH A LINE WHICH IS TWO HUNDRED TEN (210)
FEET EAST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED THREE
AND FIVE HUNDREDTHS (103.05) FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF SAID PARALLEL LINE WITH
THE OLD CENTER LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE OLD
CENTER LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD, A DISTANCE OF TWO HUNDRED THIRTY-FIVE AND
THIRTY-TWO HUNDREDTHS (235.32) FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PROPERTY INDEX NUMBER: 08-15-400-019, 08-15-400-084-0000 AND 08-15-400-085-
0000; and
WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for a Conditional Use being the subject of
PZ -17-21 before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Village of Mount Prospect on the
9" day of December, 2021, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the Daily
Herald on the 24" day of November, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has submitted its findings and
recommendations to the Mayor and Board of Trustees in support of the request being the
subject of PZ -17-21; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have given
consideration to the request herein and have determined that the request meets the standards
of the Village and that the granting of the Conditional Use allows for the installation of a one
hundred four foot (104') tall antenna support structure, including a four foot (4') tall lightning
rod atop and five (5) monitoring antennae for property located at 1650 Dempster Street and
1510 South Busse Road, and would be in the best interest of the Village.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS ACTING IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR
HOME RULE POWERS:
SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated as findings of fact by the
Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect.
SECTION TWO: The Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect grant a
Conditional Use to allow for the installation of a one hundred four foot (104') tall antenna
support structure, including a four foot (4') tall lightning rod atop and five (5) monitoring
antennae for property located at 1650 Dempster Street and 1510 South Busse Road, subject to
the following conditions:
1. 'The antenna support structure shall not be used for any commercial communication
services, personal wireless services, and/or small wireless facilities (e.g., 5G or any
other cellular telephone technologies); 79
PZ 17-21
2. Development of the antenna support structure shall be in general conformance with
the drawings prepared by the Commonwealth Edison Co., and attached to this
Ordinance as Exhibit "A";
3. Any future height modification to the proposed 104 -foot antenna support structure
shall apply for an amendment to the proposed conditional use;
4. A building permit submittal shall be submitted for record purposes and shall require
third party inspection approvals to be submitted to the Village for record purposes;
5. Prior to building permit submittal, the petitioner shall submit a revised landscape
plan that addresses the public safety concerns of the police department; and
6. A final landscape plan which complies with Village Code requirements shall be
submitted as part of the building permit submittal."
SECTION THREE: The Village Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy
of this Ordinance and Exhibit "A" with the Recorder of Deeds of Cook County.
SECTION FOUR: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage,
approval in the manner provided by law.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
PASSED AND APPROVED this 14th day of December, 2021
Paul Wm. Hoefert
Mayor
ATTEST:
Karen M. Agoranos
Village Clerk
80