Lake County committee denies modification to allow fourth home on private Douglas Terrace road

The Planning, Building, Zoning and Environment Committee on April 30 denied a request to modify county road standards so a new house at 201 Melvin Drive could access the site from Douglas Terrace, a private road in Shields Township.

County staff said the applicants, Jessica and Michael Chappell, asked to allow more than three lots to be served by the private road and to keep the current compacted gravel pavement rather than upgrading to the Lake County minimum standards. The committee voted the request down following public comments from nearby residents and a staff recommendation to deny.

The county presentation, delivered by Eric Wagner, Planning, Building & Development director, said the application would change the number of lots served by the private street from three to four, which would require a modification to Lake County Code Section 151.19(b)(1). Wagner also summarized that the existing surface is compacted gravel and that county Table 151.194(m) and Section 151.194(m)(4)(c) set higher pavement-width and construction specifications than those currently in place.

In public comment, applicant Jessica Chappell told the committee, “we are not seeking to pave the road,” and said the improved portion would be limited to about 140 feet in length and 20 feet in width (about 2,800 square feet). She said engineers and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had reviewed the site and that her plans included stormwater best management practices. “Our engineering plans meet all counties and specifications, including proper drainage and core sampling,” she said.

Neighbors opposed the modification. Resident Patrick Sassen said he and neighbors have maintained Melvin Drive for 19 years and warned the request could create a “slippery slope” allowing more homes to develop without improvements. Elizabeth Sassen said safety and emergency access are primary concerns: “Right now, two cars cannot pass each other on Douglas Terrace,” she said. Resident Samantha Medland cited past county denials of similar waivers and said approving the modification would “set a dangerous precedent.” Clara Gable of the Village of Lake Bluff submitted a remote comment and told the committee staff had already “summarized our concerns.”

County staff noted other contextual details: the Arden Shores Estate Subdivision was platted April 27, 1927; the private road was recorded as North Shore Drive but is now commonly called Douglas Terrace; a creek and wetlands near Melvin Drive have a history of flooding; prior owner requests in 2006, 2008 and 2020 sought various waivers and partial improvements with mixed outcomes. Staff also reported that Shields Township supports the modification, citing long-standing local maintenance and cost savings, while Lake County Division of Transportation recommended denial, identifying no hardship other than cost and expressing concern about long‑term maintenance.

Committee discussion focused on consistency with the Unified Development Ordinance road standards, public-safety implications, and precedent. Member Schlick moved to approve the modification; Member Kanishnik seconded. After deliberation, the committee recorded a roll-call vote (No = against the modification; Yes = approval): Chair Cheryl Altenberg — No; Member Campos — No; Member Kniesick — No; Vice Chair Peterson — No; Member Schleck — Yes; Member Wasick — No. The motion failed.

Following the vote, Wagner said staff would continue to work with the property owners and Shields Township to identify a road-improvement solution the township will accept so the owners may proceed with construction once requirements are met. The committee’s denial means the applicant must pursue the county’s road-improvement requirements or reach a township-approved alternative before final approval for construction.

The county record includes cost estimates the applicant cited of $40,000 to $60,000 to pave the short section of road, and the applicant committed to a maintenance plan and periodic ditch checks if the modification were approved. The committee did not adopt any new policy changes; it applied existing code standards and previous interpretations when voting to deny the requested modification.