Oak Park’s Plan Commission reconvened at OPRF on Oct. 15 for the second hearing for the proposed Shape Oak Park zoning changes. The meeting included the first public presentation of a village commissioned feasibility study and the beginning of public comment.
There were 41 community members that spoke at the hearing, with more public comment still to come at the next hearing in November. There was a wide range of opinions expressed ranging from adamant opposition to complete support, but the majority fell somewhere in the middle.
There were 27 speakers against the proposal and 14 in support. Of the 27, many expressed they are in support of affordable housing solutions and making some sort of changes to address zoning issues, but feel the process is moving too quickly with insufficient information on impacts or want some aspects as it is currently written to change.
“Please do not recommend this village-wide package as drafted,” said Mike Gift, the first to give public comment. “Instead, recommend a focused approach around genuinely walkable transit in commercial areas, supported by Oak Park’s specific analysis of affordability, parking, traffic, schools, and infrastructure, and with meaningful residential input. Oak Park can grow.”
The crowd remained relatively calm giving occasional applause and cheers except for a substantial round of booing during David Teeghman’s statements in support of the proposal.
Teeghman is the executive committee chair for Sierra Club’s Chicago group and spoke to the organization’s support in regards to the plans potentially positive impact on the environment and commented on the racially motivated background of the zoning code.
“Single-family-only zoning is a tool of segregation that intentionally raises housing costs to decrease the racial and economic diversity of our communities as we face an affordable housing crisis. We cannot let a relic of Jim Crow like single-family only zoning hold Oak Park back from living up to its inclusive values,” said Teeghman. Those comments sparked the disapproving reaction from attendees.
He concluded his statement with a bow and blew kisses back into the crowd.
Multiple speakers highlighted the 2014 Envision Oak Park: A Comprehensive Plan for the Oak Park Community.
It was adopted to “be used to guide decisions related to development regulations, capital improvement expenditures, and other local policies and actions,” and provide “context for how village government may use its resources and collaborate with other partners to accomplish objectives beyond the scope of any one proposed improvement or investment,” according to the Comprehensive Plan document.
The Land Use and Built Environment section addresses transit-oriented development to address availability and affordability concerns placing emphasis on downtown Oak Park, Madison Street Corridor and commercial districts.
“If the board believes Oak Park’s vision has changed, the honest path is the one we took in 2014: Update Envision Oak Park first in public with every neighborhood at the table, and then write the zoning to match,” said Chris Popa during public comment. “Until then, the plan commission should send this proposal back to the board. Let’s honor the plan we already made and fix it to what we already have before we rezone the whole village.”
Another speaker, Sanjay Shivpuri, said he was “disappointed” in the commissioners and it was a “dereliction of your duties” for not asking questions related to the Comprehensive Plan during consultant presentations.
The next plan commission meeting will take place in Village Hall, to allow for livestreaming of the hearing, on Nov. 12 at 7 p.m. The public comment will resume, and any speakers that requested public comment at either of the previous meetings but was not present or did not get called yet will have an opportunity to present.
There are already 14 filings for cross examination which allows for 15 minutes instead of the three minutes allotted for public comment. Cross examination is directed at village staff and consultants, not the commissioners, who will then continue to deliberate before making a recommendation to the full village board.
If a decision is not reached at the November meeting, which could be likely said Commission Chair Michael Sturino the hearing will continue in December.