City officials said Monday that a Zoning and Planning Commission meeting on building height that was canceled last month due to lack of notice to neighbors could have proceeded without interruption.
The Zoning and Planning Commission was set in May to discuss a zoning code text amendment that would allow 65-foot-tall buildings to be built in the central business district without setbacks from the street.
The city is obligated to mail notice to neighbors within 500 feet of the affected area for "map" amendment changes. A text amendment changes written provisions in zoning ordinances; a map amendment changes the zoning district for an area.
The Zoning and Planning Commission did not tell neighbors whether the discussion was over a text or map amendment. Two aldermen and local watchdog Citizen Advocacy Group said the discussion could have been a map amendment change, and the meeting was canceled due to ambiguity.
Still, city officials maintained Monday that the discussion was a text amendment issue, and the commission could have proceeded without mailing notice.
"We've never mailed notice to residents because of a text amendment," Zoning and Planning Administrator Than Werner said.
Postage costs are a main reason the city would want to avoid mailing notice. At 44 cents each, expenses for mailing notice to every resident and neighbor within 500 feet of the central business district would add up quickly.
"There's no other city in the state of Illinois (that mails notice for text amendments)," Werner said.
Werner added that mailing notice is a prime example of an aggravating "rule of the 1920s" the city must adhere to, along with posting legal notices in a local newspaper or paying a stenographer to record Zoning and Planning Commission hearings.
Development, Planning and Zoning Committee Chairman Steve Morley said the lack of notice was mostly due to a clerical error omitting "text" from the commission's agenda last month.
"We need to be very clear about throwing around 'open' and 'transparent,' " he said. "This is simply clarification."
But a local watchdog group thinks more than clarification is necessary when dealing with a potential ordinance change that could affect a whole neighborhood. Terry Pastika, executive director of Elmhurst-based Citizen Advocacy Center, believes an ordinance amendment granting 20-foot taller buildings in the City Centre without setbacks directly affects many more people than other zoning amendments.
"Changing a building height affects adjacent property owners more than a political sign," Pastika said.
The ordinance amendment directly affects the often-discussed , a venture that would redevelop a vacant medical office building into a 65-foot-tall structure with retail, office space and parking.
Currently, the city allows for buildings to be up to 90 feet high under conditional use in the business district, but obtaining a conditional use requires several meetings with the Zoning and Planning Commission as well as the City Council.
Resident Darlene Heslop suggested Monday that if a builder would benefit from a zoning code amendment allowing 20 more feet of height, no questions asked, then maybe the developer could pay for notice to neighbors themselves.
"We need to put all of the residents and business owners of Elmhurst first," she said.
Werner said the issue has been referred back to the Zoning and Planning Commission, which will likely discuss the matter in August or September.
Nathaniel Werner shame on you! A whole $.44 cents per resident to notify it's stake holders within 500 feet that has a huge negative impact on the look and feel of the city going forward. Cut it out! Ms. Heslop, why should anyone be notified when the deal is already done? They want to fast track a development that will Not benefit the taxpayer one penny in sales tax revenue and very little property tax revenue. Happen to notice all the large blocks of vacant retail and office space in downtown "uptown" Elmhurst? I challenge Mr. Morley to televise or skype the planning and zoning meetings so that Mr. Werner and others can get aquainted with 21st century technology. Even youtube would work.
Elmhurst is in a retail quandary due to the fact that it's proximity is much too close to 2 major shopping malls in Oak Brook and Lombard (Don't forget about Walmart in Northlake and Villa Park. Target in Hillside, Lombard and Villa Park. Thank God we have Kohls). This does not even take into consideration that there is limited parking during weekdays. Saturday downtown traffic is a crap shoot and and on Sunday's the downtown sidewalk's roll up south of the tracks. Face it, York Street is too narrow to accommodate any increase in vehicle traffic that might even look inviting to potential revenue generating retailers to this happy hamlet. If Elmhurst was such a great location, one would presume that pragmatic major retailers, who depend on volumes of people with disposable income would have made Elmhurst an investment priority. Let's not forget about the Union Pacific Railroad and the ordeal of being so close to a switching yard a mile or two east. When standing on the sidewalk in front of 100 S. York in the warmer weather, one can hear the profane utterances of the unfamiliar drivers who have been stopped for up to 15-20 minutes and unable to move northbound on York when caught by a stopped freight waiting to switch tracks.
You have made a fairly accurate analysis. I wonder if a hotel would be a good choice. Walkability would be great and serve our restaurants and retail. The train is within walking distance. The old Holiday Inn made a mistake with the water park. Mixing children with business professionals is a bad mix. This is the one thing that we do not have. I made this suggestion for the Hahn street project but never received any feedback.