South Cook News

City of Oak Forest Planning & Zoning Commission met Oct. 1

Here are the minutes provided by the commission:

The Planning & Zoning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:04 p.m. by Chairman Ziak. 

Pledge of allegiance. 

PRESENT: Chairman Ziak 

Commissioner Ater 

Commissioner Bittner 

Commissioner Guisinger 

Commissioner Larson 

Commissioner Runge 

Commissioner LaRoche 

Commissioner McGrath 

Staff Member Paul Ruane 

Staff Member Hunter Heyman 

ABSENT:  Commissioner Forbes 

1. ZC #25-25 - Marathon Electric Sign - Special Use Permit and Variance: PUBLIC HEARING - The applicant requests review and consideration for approval of a special permit to allow a pole sign and a variation for the height of the sign, and the location of an EMC sign as well as such other and further zoning relief as may be required in the C2 - General Service Commercial District 15301 S Harlem Avenue. 

Introduction: Community Planner Hunter shared that the applicant was seeking approval to replace an existing electronic display on a pole sign with a new LED display. This request was necessary because the sign is located in a general service commercial district, where specific regulations apply. 

Current Sign Status: The existing pole sign had undergone face changes, which are permissible under the zoning code as long as no structural alterations are made. However, the applicant's desire to upgrade to a full LED display required a special use permit and a variance due to the sign's height and the placement of the electronic message center. 

Height Variance: The current sign stands at 23 feet, while the zoning code stipulates a maximum height of 15 feet for pole signs. The applicant requested a variance to maintain the 23-foot height, arguing that the visibility provided by the pole sign is crucial in an area with fast-moving traffic. 

Electronic Message Center: The code allows electronic message centers to be between 8 and 10 feet high. The applicant proposed a height of 8 to 12 feet, necessitating another variance. Hunter pointed out that the pole sign is not uncommon in the area, as other businesses also utilize pole signs for visibility. 

Visibility and Aesthetics: The commission members discussed the visibility advantages of pole signs over monument signs, particularly in high-traffic areas. They noted that the existing sign's base appeared rusty and unkempt, which detracted from its overall appearance. 

Landscaping and Aesthetic Improvements: One commissioner suggested that instead of wrapping the poles, which could look tacky, a fresh coat of paint and some landscaping around the base would enhance the sign's appearance. They discussed the possibility of using low landscaping to buffer the sign and improve its visual appeal without obstructing visibility or violating code. 

Conditions of Approval: The commission agreed that the applicant should provide a landscaping plan as a condition of approval. They emphasized that the landscaping should not interfere with the fire hydrant located nearby. 

Chairman Ziak opened the meeting for public comment. Seeing none. 

Commissioner Runge Made the motion to approve the Special Use Permit and Variance. Commissioner Larson Seconded. 

Roll call. 

AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT 

Commissioner Ater 

Commissioner Bittner 

Commissioner Forbes 

Commissioner Guisinger 

Commissioner Larson 

Commissioner LaRoche 

Commissioner McGrath 

Commissioner Runge 

Chairman Ziak 

Motion carried 8-0-0, 1 absent. The motion was approved. 

Chairman Ziak asked for a motion for approval of September 17th, 2025 minutes. Chairman Ziak asked for any comments. None 

Commissioner Larson made a motion to approve. Commissioner McGrath seconded. 

Roll call. 

AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT 

Commissioner Ater 

Commissioner Bittner 

Commissioner Forbes 

Commissioner Guisinger 

Commissioner Larson 

Commissioner LaRoche 

Commissioner McGrath 

Commissioner Runge 

Chairman Ziak 

Motion carried 8-0-0, 1 absent. The motion was approved. 

Chairman Ziak asked about old businesses and Community Planner Hunter opened up the meeting to a discussion on ADUS and quick build transportation projects. 

State Regulations and Concerns: Hunter initiated the discussion by highlighting the uncertainty surrounding state regulations regarding ADUS. He noted that there was skepticism among commission members about moving forward with regulations without clear guidance from the state. 

Family Restriction Legality: A significant concern raised was how to restrict ADUS to family members legally. The commission debated the potential legal challenges of enforcing such restrictions, emphasizing the need for a well-crafted policy that would not expose the city to lawsuits. 

Gathering Questions for Legal Counsel: It was proposed that the commission compile a list of questions for the city's legal counsel, Scott, to ensure that all concerns regarding ADUS could be addressed in future discussions. This would help clarify the legal framework and potential restrictions that could be implemented. 

Community Input and Planning: The conversation shifted to the importance of community input in the planning process for ADUS. Hunter suggested that it might be beneficial to gather feedback from residents to gauge their opinions and concerns regarding ADUs. 

Traffic and Safety Considerations: The commission also discussed the impact of ADUS on traffic and neighborhood dynamics. Concerns were raised about how the addition of ADUS could affect parking, traffic flow, and overall neighborhood character. 

Next Steps: The commission agreed to invite Scott to the next meeting to provide legal insights and answer questions. They recognized the importance of having a clear understanding of the legal landscape before proceeding with any regulations regarding ADUS. 

In regards to quick build projects. Hunter presented ideas for improving road safety in the community. 

Identifying Key Locations: Hunter mentioned that data from the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) had identified several locations in Oak Forest with a high incidence of accidents. He suggested that these areas could be prioritized for improvements to enhance safety for non-motorized users. 

Proposed Improvements: Various traffic calming measures were discussed, including: 

Curb Extensions: These would extend the curb at intersections to reduce the turning radius for vehicles, thereby slowing down traffic and improving pedestrian safety. 

Pop-Up Roundabouts: The idea of implementing temporary roundabouts was proposed as a way to test their effectiveness in managing traffic flow and reducing speeds at critical intersections. 

Lane Narrowing: Narrowing lanes could help slow down traffic and create a more pedestrian-friendly environment. 

Community Involvement: The commission emphasized the need for community involvement in the planning process. They discussed the importance of engaging residents to gather feedback on proposed changes and to ensure that the solutions implemented would meet the needs of the community. 

Public Works Collaboration: Hunter highlighted the necessity of collaborating with the Public Works Department to ensure that any proposed changes align with maintenance capabilities and existing infrastructure. 

Pilot Projects: The commission discussed the possibility of implementing pilot projects to test various traffic calming measures before committing to permanent changes. This would allow for data collection and community feedback to assess the effectiveness of the interventions. 

Next Steps: The commission agreed to continue exploring these ideas and to work on developing specific proposals for the identified locations. They recognized the importance of creating a safer environment for pedestrians and cyclists in Oak Forest. 

Chairman Ziak asked for a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Runge made the motion. Commissioner LaRoche seconded. 

All in attendance answered aye. 

Meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. 

 http://www.oak-forest.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_10012025-2203