Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Text Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Plan Commission adopts text amendment requiring neighborhood meetings for planned developments
Summary
The La Grange Plan Commission voted to recommend a text amendment (PC 292) adding a requirement that applicants for planned developments hold a pre-application neighborhood meeting with mailed notice to taxpayers within 250 feet and provide proof of notice and attendance to village staff; commissioners clarified timing language and debated location/format and mailing radius.
The La Grange Plan Commission voted to recommend adoption of a text amendment (PC 292) to the zoning code that would require applicants for planned developments to host a neighborhood meeting before an initial public hearing.
Staff presented the proposed addition of subsection J to section 14‑101, which would bar scheduling an initial public hearing for a planned development application until the applicant has held a neighborhood meeting, mailed written notice by regular mail to taxpayers of record within 250 feet (15–30 days prior to the meeting), and submitted a copy of the notice, the mailing list and a list of attendees to the village no later than the fourth Thursday preceding the requested public-hearing date.
Commissioners debated several implementation questions. One commissioner urged the draft require the meeting be held within the village (with a remote option), arguing that developers who file applications to build in La Grange should host meetings locally. Others cautioned the code should avoid micromanaging meeting formats and recommended 'best-efforts' or review of good-faith outreach at the public hearing. Staff and commissioners agreed to clarify timing language by noting the requirement applies to the initial public-hearing date so that continuances or amended applications do not automatically trigger a new neighborhood meeting.
Residents who spoke during public comment welcomed the policy but urged stronger parameters: requests included requiring presentation materials or a meeting outline, expanding notice beyond the 250-foot minimum for large projects, and using in-person meetings to evaluate developer responsiveness. Staff explained the 250-foot mailing radius mirrors common state and local notice practice and is a minimum; applicants may mail more widely for larger projects, and title companies commonly generate the 250-foot mailing lists.
After discussion, the commission agreed to the clarified language (including an initial-public-hearing clarification) and voted to recommend adoption of the amendment. Staff said the amendment is legislative in nature and will be considered again as part of an upcoming comprehensive zoning-code rewrite.
The amendment requires written notice by regular mail to taxpayers of record within 250 feet at least 15, but not more than 30, days before the neighborhood meeting and submission to staff of the notice, mailing list and attendee list prior to the public hearing; the commission left operational details such as the precise meeting format to applicants while reserving the commission’s ability to judge whether an applicant made a meaningful good-faith outreach at the time of the public hearing.
