Will County’s Land Use and Development Committee discussed ways to improve how the county notifies neighbors about zoning cases and how it posts signs on affected properties.

A committee member said signs she visited were often handwritten, illegible and lying in weeds, and that some residents received no mail notice because mailings were sent to an HOA rather than to current homeowners. “They didn't get anything in the mail. It was sent to the HOA,” she said, describing a recent case where neighbors were surprised by the scale of a replacement structure.

Staff described the county’s minimum requirements and discretionary practices. Colin, a county staff presenter, showed the printed sign template the office uses; Marguerite, the zoning administrator, said staff provides a template with minimum letter heights (for example, a 4-inch minimum for the title and 2-inch minimum for body text) and requires applicants to submit an affidavit confirming posting. “It was their choice to handwrite it instead of contacting a sign company to get them made,” Marguerite said of noncompliant signs.

Staff also noted limitations in the mailing process. Mapping and planning databases are updated annually from tax records, so newly platted subdivisions or newly occupied properties may not appear in the GIS that generates certified-mail lists. A staff member explained that when GIS or tax records lag, applicants should consider mailing additional neighbors they know are current residents.

The committee considered several fixes: requiring larger printed signage for specific project types (the office has already asked for larger signs in some solar and industrial cases), adding the project purpose to sign text, specifying minimum font sizes or even a font family in the template, and collecting comparative notification practices from neighboring counties. Staff noted technology options (QR codes, SmartGov subscription alerts or a public case-lookup portal) could help but might require additional funding and implementation time.

The committee asked staff to return with examples from surrounding counties and potential ordinance language; no formal code change was enacted at the meeting.