Public Comments of Oct. 9, 2007
La Grange Plan Commission
Hearing on Proposal for La Grange Place

Ed Kram, 222 N Kensington Ave

We want this Plan Commission to be responsive to the interests of the residents and not solely to the interests of the developer and to the business community. We've heard that many of these developments have been evaluated in the context of how they would be desirable to the downtown business district.

I feel our community is at a tipping point in terms of the amount of density housing that is being put in. There are a number of developments that are being developed.

We are a bedroom community. We are close to the train. We value our good schools. We value our parks. Those are some of the reasons why people move here.

I'm glad to hear some of the analysis [presented earlier in the meeting by expert consultants hired by the Village], even from Richard Aaronson [President of Atlantic Realty Partners, who showed slides of other similar projects built by his company, including one in Evanston]. Evanston is one of our ten top cities in Illinois. It's not appropriate for La Grange.

That goes with my comments about being at a tipping point. The interests of the residents have to considered by this Plan Commission.

In terms of the exclusion of the subject of the parkland, [the sale of which by the Park District was ruled off limits as a topic for discussion by the pro tem chairman of the Plan Commission prior to commencing with hearing public comments], I understand there is a job to done here by the Plan Commission and its role is limited.

However, we were told in the one meeting [which he did not further identify], where we were not presented with the information about the Park District, that this was in the Village's hands.

So I believe this gentleman here [Harlan Hirt, who addressed the Commission prior to Mr. Kram] is correct. This is relevant. It is open space, and it is not to be ruled out as something that should be excluded from the discussion.

We feel that this is sort of a Catch 22. That the ship has passed, and we cannot discuss it.

I want to make another point. Maybe the developer feels that this is just a concern of the people at La Grange Towers. It goes well beyond that. Many of our children use the parks, and the traffic concerns are certainly well known on all accounts.

In terms of the discussion about rental properties, I noted [in a story in] the newspaper the other day that [the Village of] Glenview just bought the Dominick's [supermarket] at its most prominent intersection because of the failure of that Dominick's to succeed.

This [the site where La Grange Place would be built] is one of our most prominent intersections. Not to say [the project] would fail, but long term we must consider whether this different or similar.

The safety of kids ... we heard about [the 289 proposed rental units] attracting a demographic of 24 to 34 year olds. We heard about the impacts to the schools and the analysis of the costs and benefits. These children would probably go to Ogden Ave School and, with this added traffic, they would be crossing La Grange Rd to get to that school, with a very limited time frame. Even if they have countdown [crossing signals], we're talking about [the need for] crossing guards. Right now, we need crossing guards even at smaller streets such as Kensington and Brewster—at numerous locations along Ogden Ave.

So it's also a concern that seems to be between some of the different disciplines [represented by the consultants present], but we certainly have a concern about cut-through traffic north of Ogden and west of La Grange Rd.

So I think those are some of our summary concerns, but I do think it's unfair to say that [sale of the parkland by the Park District] cannot be discussed. It a disservice to the residents here.

Thank you.

Bill Holder, chairman pro tem presiding over the hearings, responded to Mr. Kram's remarks.

Before our next speaker, let me clarify something that counsel has clarified for me.

The rezoning of that open space [where the parkland to be sold is located] is a germane topic for discussion at these hearings. So I stand corrected.

However, the decision on the part of the Park Board to sell that land is not germane for these discussions.

But I want to reiterate that testimony about the impact that you feel [the project would have] on neighboring properties such as Plymouth Place, Gordon Park, the intersections of those roads, et cetera, is certainly germane.

So hopefully that is helpful.