Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/22/2026 PZ-24-26 / 300 S Elmhurst Avenue / Signage Variations1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-24-26 Hearing Date: October 8, 2026 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 300 South Elmhurst Avenue PETITIONER: St Raymond De Penafort Parish 301 South I Oka Avenue Mount Prospect IL 60056 PUBLICATION DATE: September 23, 2026 REQUEST: Signage variations to install seven signs for a period longer than ninety days on private property along Elmhurst Avenue MEMBERS PRESENT: Joseph Donnelly William Beattie Wa lte r Szym cza k Ewa Weir Michael Fricano Fay Costa MEMBERS ABSENT: Donald Olsen Richard Rogers STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Antonia Lalagos —Senior Development Planner Ann Choi —Senior Development Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: Joseph Petricca Chairman Donnelly called the meeting to order at 7:01 PM. Vice Chairman Beattie made a motion seconded by Commissioner Szymczak to approve the minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on September 24, 2026. The minutes were approved 5-0 with Commissioner Costa abstaining. Chairman Donnelly introduced case number PZ-24-26, 300South Elmhurst Avenue, a request for signage variations to install seven signs for a period longer than ninety days on private property along Elmhurst Avenue. Ms. Lalagos explained that the petitioner was requesting sign variations to install seven signs for Longer than 90 days at the subject property. Ms. Lalagos described the property's location, zoning, and size, noting that it contains St. Raymond de Penafort Church, the rectory, and the parochial school. Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2026 PZ-24-26 Ms. Lalagos stated that the petitioner sought relief from the Village Sign Code to install an outdoor Stations of the Cross display. The display would consist of seven removable signs, each depicting two stations. Ms. Lalagos summarized the dimensions, materials, spacing, and non -illuminated nature of the proposed signs. Ms. Lalagos detailed the variations requested: 1) Permission for more than one sign per street frontage; and 2) Permission for signs to remain longer than 90 days. Ms. Lalagos explained applicable sign ordinance provisions, RLUIPA considerations, and staff's review. Staff determined that the proposal met the variation standards and would not negatively affect public welfare or neighborhood character. The petitioner had reduced the original plan from 14 permanent signs to seven removable signs after consulting with staff. Alternate locations were ruled out due to access, safety, and privacy concerns. Ms. Lalagos concluded that staff found that the proposed sign variation requests meet the applicable standards contained in the Mount Prospect Sign Ordinance. Staff requested that the Planning and Zoning Commission make a motion to adopt Staff's findings as the findings of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approve the following motion: "Approval of signage variations to allow a Stations of the Cross installation consisting of seven removable signs, for a period longer than 90 days, at 300 South Elmhurst Avenue, Case No. PZ-24- 26, subject to the following conditions: 1. The signs shall be developed in substantial conformance with the approved plans which consist of the following: a. "Site Plan" dated 9/4/26 prepared by the Petitioner; and b. "Sign Rendering" dated 9/4/26, prepared by the Petitioner; 2. The signposts shall be installed at least one foot from the property line; 3. Each sign area shall not exceed three square feet; and 4. Except for the sign variations granted herein, all other applicable Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois ordinances and regulations shall remain in full force and effect as to the Subject Property." Ms. Lalagos stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission's decision is final for this case. Commissioner Beattie asked whether some variation standards, particularly the first three, applied meaningfully to this case. He observed that the criteria appeared tailored to commercial signage and questioned whether staff had concerns about proceeding despite their limited relevance. Commissioner Beattie also asked why alternate locations were deemed unsuitable and raised concerns about potential precedent for requests in the future. Ms. Lalagos responded that the variation standards were intended for commercial signage. She clarified that some standards do not neatly apply to certain requests, including both variations and conditional uses. In this case, staff evaluated whether the signs would affect neighborhood character, create safety concerns, or interfere with the property's intended religious use. Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2026 PZ-24-26 Commissioner Beattie agreed the installation would not be detrimental and asked why alternate Locations such as indoor areas or interior yards were unsuitable. Ms. Lalagos explained that interior locations would be inaccessible due to locked doors and could compromise school security. The interior yard includes a rectory, and placing the signs there would invade the resident's privacy. Commissioner Beattie reiterated concerns about future precedent and whether this approval might encourage other long-term sign requests. Ms. Lalagos explained that temporary signs pertaining to holidays are restricted to prevent year-round display, which is why the petitioner must request relief. The signs remain classified as temporary because they are not permanently anchored. Chairman Donnelly added that the Commission had previously approved similar relief for religious quiet areas and that such cases are evaluated individually. Commissioner Beattie acknowledged this but reiterated the importance of understanding potential impacts on future cases. Commissioner Costa noted that the conditions state all other Village codes remain in effect, which helps limit broader precedent. Chairman Donnelly clarified that future applicants would still need to appear before the Commission and justify their requests. Ms. Lalagos stated that staff's role was to balance code compliance with the needs of religious institutions. Commissioner Costa asked whether petitioners must meet all seven variation standards. Ms. Lalagos replied that petitioners must address each standard but do not need to meet all of them. Commissioner Weir asked about the requested duration of the display. Ms. Lalagos stated the signs were intended to be displayed year-round. Commissioner Weir asked whether the signs were removable. Ms. Lalagos explained that the signs posts were removable, but the intent was to keep them up year-round. Commissioner Weir asked whether religious services would occur on the public walkway. Ms. Lalagos suggested that the petitioner should answer that question. Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2026 PZ-24-26 Commissioner Weir asked whether religious activity on the public way was permissible under Village codes. Ms. Lalagos responded that she was unsure if there was a requirement for processions to remain entirely on private property. Chairman Donnelly swore in Joseph Petricca of 116 South Hi Lusi Avenue. Mr. Petricca stated he was completing an Eagle Scout project for St. Raymond Church. He explained that the outdoor Stations of the Cross would allow greater community access, as the indoor stations are inaccessible when church doors are locked. The intent was to provide parishioners and students with a place for reflection at anytime. Commissioner Weir asked whether the petitioner intended to hold religious services in front of the signs. Mr. Petricca stated that services were not intended. Funeral processions may pass by, but usage would mainly consist of individual or small -group prayer. Commissioner Weir asked why the signs needed to remain year-round. Mr. Petricca explained that parishioners desired year-round access due to the religious significance of the Stations of the Cross. Commissioner Beattie asked for clarification on how the Stations of the Cross are physically prayed. Mr. Petricca explained that individuals move from station to station, pausing to reflect on each event depicted, similar to the practice inside the church. Commissioner Weir asked about concerns related to placing the signs in the parking lot. Mr. Petricca explained that the parking lot has heavy traffic from masses, weddings, and school activities, and students use it for recess, creating safety concerns. Commissioner Fricano asked whether St. Raymond was comfortable with community members walking near the school during the day. Mr. Petricca acknowledged the concern but stated that the physical layout provides separation and that the signs could be repositioned if needed. Commissioner Fricano asked why the signs were not made permanent at this time, but recognized that the ability to reposition the signs was important. Commissioner Costa asked how far the signs would be placed from the sidewalk. Mr. Petricca stated that the signs would be placed three to five feet from the sidewalk to maintain visibility and preserve the grass. Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2026 PZ-24-26 Chairman Donnelly asked Staff if there were public comments. Ms. Lalagos reported that no letters or calls had been received. Chairman Donnelly polled the audience to ask who was present to support the project. Several audience members raised their hands. No objectors came forward. Hearing no further comments or questions, Chairman Donnelly closed the hearing and asked for a motion to approve the conditions as noted in the Staff report. Commissioner Beattie made a motion and Commissioner Costa seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL AYES: Szymczak, Beattie, Fricano, Costa, Donnelly ABSTAIN: Weir NAYS: None ABSENT: Rogers, Olsen The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the sign variations (5-0). After hearing one more item of new business, Chairman Donnelly asked if there were any citizens to be heard. Hearing no further discussion, Commissioner Beattie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fricano, and the meeting was adjourned at 9:18 PM. b, adry mow., ^ M 9 Antonia Lalagos, Senior Development Planner Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting — October 8, 2026 PZ-24-26