We closed Wednesday’s post with the comment that converting B-1 space to “R” (residential) space is not something that the City of Park Ridge should rush into just because a handful of residents want it, or because some local politician thinks he can buy some goodwill from such a change.
Unfortunately, that’s exactly what happened this past Monday night, as 5th Ward Ald. Robert Ryan led the charge for the zoning change to the former Napleton Cadillac triangle parking lot at Northwest Hwy and Meacham. That change, and a similar one to the “Audrey’s” property at Northwest Hwy and Elm, passed on first reading and are scheduled for final second-reading approval at this coming Monday night’s Council meeting.
Two readings in seven days sure sounds to us like a classic rush to judgment, especially when we have a holiday weekend intervening. But that just shows how badly the Council wants to get this done. And “badly” is how it likely will end.
Why is this being done when there aren’t even any plans on the drawing boards for the affected properties, and with the City growing increasingly desperate for tax-generating businesses to locate here? If Park Ridge truly does have an “anti-business” reputation, it sure isn’t being helped by B-1 properties being converted to R properties.
But according to Ryan, he’s being “responsive” to the wishes of his 5th Ward constituents…after repeatedly having given them the back of his hand on issues like the redevelopment of Executive Office Plaza and his support of the PADS homeless shelter. And that’s when he wasn’t leading the Council in number of missed meetings.
Ryan claims that changing the Napleton lot’s status from the B-1 designation it has had for at least the past 20 years to R-3 will “provide consistency with the Uptown plan” – even though that property (and Audrey’s, for that matter) isn’t even part of the Uptown plan, as best as we can tell; and even though Northwest Hwy is dotted with a variety of businesses and strip centers from Uptown all the way out past Oakton Street.
At least new First Ward Ald. Joe Sweeney and Second Ward Ald. Rich DiPietro voted “No” on the Napleton change, although DiPietro flipped over to the “Yes” side and supported a B to R zoning change for the Audrey’s property.
Ironically, these changes were passed after the Council heard approximately 30 residents complain about flooding problems. And several of the speakers noted that “something has changed” to make flooding more common than it used to be – a comment heard from residents every time flooding is discussed.
If we’re looking for “what has changed,” how about: “We’re losing too much green space (i.e., grass) to oversized structures”? Or: “We’re adding too many residential units for our antiquated sewer system to handle”?
These same concerns were expressed prior to the addition of approximately 200 residential units to a few square blocks of Uptown where there formerly was none. We wonder exactly how much additional sewer capacity – if any – was added to the system in order to account for the evacuation of the sewerage generated by those units which, notably, are located at the highest point of the City.
Don’t get us wrong. We are big fans of the “residential character” of Park Ridge, although our taste in “residential character” runs more toward single-family houses. But residences don’t generate sales taxes, nor do they generate property taxes at the same higher rate of commercial property. So gratuitously converting B parcels to R sure seems like shooting ourselves in both feet for no good reason.
Residences, however, are the “low-hanging fruit” when it comes to sales and profit for developers. And the higher-density, multi-family residences are the lowest of that low-hanging fruit.
Park Ridge continues to have a budget that is $2 million in deficit, and growing…thanks to even more spending by City Staff, blessed by the City Council, without any increase in revenues. Where’s the revenue going to come from to fill that hole, much less to help pay for things like flooding relief? We don’t know. And neither does City Staff or the Council, apparently.
That’s why turning business property into residential without any kind of game plan is the kind of narrow, shortsighted thinking that not only won’t provide any solutions, but which actually raises more questions than it answers.
8 comments so far
I don’t get your point. What’s wrong with getting businesses out of our neighborhoods?
PD:
I agree with your point about our tax base but It seems to me related to residences taxing the sewer system and green space that these issues have left the barn, so to speak.
I certainly hope that the flood committee looks at these issues in their proposal but I must say that I just do not buy it as a major contributer to the flooding. In sept and a few weeks ago, the rain fall was huge (especially in sept). I believe it was this huge amount of rain entering the sewer system that caused the system to overload. Somemone is going to have to do a hell of a lot of convincing to get me to believe sewage generated by newer residences was a major factor in this or that sewage from whatever residences will be built in this particular parcel will make it worse.
Related to green space. I cannot see how a B rather than an R designation somehow guarantees more green space. If a business is built here there may even end up being less green space, especially if they include parking. Beyond that, a few weeks ago the green space we have was already so saturated that the water either ran off or turned our parks into lakes.
Though I have not read any studies on this issue and am merely looking at it from an anecdotal perspective, I believe that the flooding is very much effected by the increasing size of the houses that are being built in PR (and the new multi family housing) and the elimination of green space.
We have lived in this town for over 18 years and over the past few years the impact of “heavy” rain on the streets and the basements has gotten worse. Why is this happening? What has changed? 18 years ago, there were not as many teardowns and mcmansions being built with 10 foot deep basements, multiple bathrooms, laundry rooms and kitchens, along with sump pumps and flood control systems that utilize every allowable green square footage of the lot. The city has allowed the builders and developers to dictate to the city what should be acceptable and for the builders it means bigger houses with bigger price tags. The city seems to go along-possibly hoping for the real estate tax increase from these mcmansions. The potential negative effect on the surrounding homes does not seem to be of concern to the city.
A perfect example is 322 Vine Ave. This house is enormous and completely out of character with the surrounding homes. It takes up significantly more of the lot than the home that was torn down. The new homeowner has managed to “convince” some city employees to ignore many of the city building codes. The new home and property are 18 inches higher (per the outside consultants report whose work was paid for with PR city dollars) than the one torn down. The ‘sump pumps discharge directly into a pipe that connects with the sewer system-a violation. There are many other violations and reports are available under the freedom of information act at city hall.
As a result, the homes surrounding this house now have their yards flood regularly. Their basements also have experienced seepage-a never before occurence. All fo this has been videotaped and shown to the city. But somehow this homeowner, who is also the builder, manages to convince the city that his new home is not at fault for the problems his neighbors are now experiencing. The rules be damned-they do not apply to him.
So yes, we need to spend money to continue to update and upgrade the sewer system as part of a basic maintenance/repair/replace program, but the city also needs to adopt and enforce building codes that protect the green space and better match house size to lot size.
EDITOR’S NOTE: PublicWatchdog has no knowledge of the size of the house the current structure replaced, or whether the current structure’s size complies with City Code requirements. But we suggest that the affected neighbors take their concerns – and whatever “reports” they may have – to their Alderman (Robert Ryan?) and to City Staff, demanding answers to these questions and the issuance of appropriate citations if violations are found.
But we also caution about apples-to-oranges comparisons of seepage and sewer back-up. “Seepage” results from foundation cracks, which generally are the responsibility of each homeowner, while back-up generally implicates a systemic problem which more likely is the responsibility of the City.
PD-I know the surrounding homeowner’s have taken their concerns to city hall-for nearly the past two years as the home has been being built and the building code issues come up. The city manager and mayor and Ald Ryan are all well versed on this matter. Perhaps they can explain why the homeowner continues to get away with these violations and the neighbors keep getting screwed. The city wrote up a report last October that says the property FAILED its inspection and required a significant list of items be fixed before even a temporary occupancy permit could be granted. Guess what-none of the req’d work has been done and the homeowner’s started moving in over the long holiday weekend when no city employees were around to deal with the issue. So the neighbors are screwed again.
And you may be right about seepage. But this is one of the highest points in town. If you raise your property 18 inches then the water will flow down and find the lower point in the surrounding properties. Grades are not supposed to be changed with out some how accomodating them-like by putting in a swale. This did not happen when the old home was on the lot at 322 Vine.
My point was to agree with you PD and disagree to an extent with the blogger who stated he did not think reduced green space and bigger dwellings contributed to the problem of flooding in PR. Here is a perfect example at 322 Vine of how it does.
Update-the city has caved again in favor of the builder of 322 Vine. The homeowner/builder at 322 Vine has been given occupancy despite the fact he has corrected none of the violations that caused the outside consultant to write up a FAILED report regarding inspection just this past October. So the ac units will stay on the side of the house, not the back yard. The sump pumps (yes there are two for the extra deep basement) will continue to discharge directly to the city sewer system. No swails have to be put in the yard to manage the water runoff from the oversized house despite the fact the builder/homeowner raised the property grade 18 inches. The five or six additional trees he was required to plant because he tore down a beautiful healthy tree are not planted. So the neighbors lose-thanks to the city and employee Kataya.
Park Ridge can adopt all the rules/ordinances it wants. But just like the issue with Ryan pushing the change in the zoning of parcels of land, unless the rules are enforced for all the residents and not waived or overturned for those with connections, the rule/ordinances are meaningless.
A9:51,
Your phonetic spelling effort is admirable.
I would suggest you re-read the Watchdog’s
eta: This, “Park Ridge can adopt all the rules/ordinances it wants. But just like the issue with Ryan pushing the change in the zoning of parcels of land, unless the rules are enforced for all the residents and not waived or overturned for those with connections, the rule/ordinances are meaningless.” is exactly correct.
Alpha Female-sorry we are not all as perfect as you are. Your days must be very stressful-trying to deal with lesser humans than yourself and maintaining your facade of perfection. I was simply trying to bring more attention to the inconsistent manner in which the city deals with all matters related to ownership of property. Whether commercial or residential. It seems to be who you are and who you know rather than what the city’s rules/laws/ordinances actually require.
A1:17,
I forgive you.
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>