Orland Park shifts flush‑mounted rooftop solar reviews to building‑permit process

6441695 · October 22, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning Commission approved a Land Development Code amendment to allow all flush‑mounted rooftop solar installations to be approved through the building permit process rather than a separate appearance review; historic properties remain subject to certificate of appropriateness review.

The Orland Park Planning Commission approved a code amendment to allow flush‑mounted rooftop solar panel installations to be reviewed and approved through the building permit process instead of the appearance review for nonresidential properties.

Planner Marcus said the amendment would “allow all flush mounted rooftop solar panel installations to be approved through the building permit process rather than going through our current appearance review application process.” He noted that residential rooftop solar already moved to a building‑permit process in 2023 and that the proposed change would remove a duplicate administrative review for nonresidential flush‑mounted systems.

Marcus gave examples of recent nonresidential projects (Jewel Osco, Target and a Lexus site) where appearance reviews resulted in no required corrections because conduits and wall‑mounted equipment were painted to match buildings or were not visible from rights‑of‑way. He told commissioners that the building‑permit reviewers already check glare, screening, wiring and setbacks, creating duplication with the appearance review.

Commissioners asked whether the historic district would still require review; Marcus said historic properties would continue to require a certificate of appropriateness and could still come to the planning commission. No public commenters spoke on the item.

A motion to approve the staff‑recommended amendment to Section 6‑3‑14(b)(1) passed unanimously.