A proposed 25-unit townhome project on a 2.3-acre site eyed for redevelopment was denied a recommendation by the Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission. Safety concerns were an overarching reason for the denial.
Petitioner Kramer Homes is seeking approval for the project, dubbed Ostara, on the northwest corner of Spring Avenue and Mill Street. The land previously housed Paul Davis Restoration Services of DuPage and three single-family homes, all of which were razed last fall.
The proposed Ostara project is near the BNSF Railroad to the north, Ozinga Concrete to the west, Naper Auto Works to the northeast, and residential homes to the east and south.
Premium, luxury townhomes part of the pitch
Jimmy Calvo with Naperville-based Calvo Law Offices is representing Kramer Homes with the petition. Calvo served as the project spokesperson at the commission’s Wednesday, June 17, meeting.
As proposed, Calvo detailed Kramer’s plans for 25 luxury townhomes, with each unit encompassing 2,900 to 3,400 feet, two-car garages and, for second-floor units, balconies. He also touted the property’s close proximity to downtown Naperville and the Metra train station.
“The project’s name, Ostara, is an old word for spring and new beginnings — fitting for a corner on Spring Avenue the city has long hoped to see renewed,” Calvo said.
He said the project meshed with the city’s master plan, pointing to efforts to transition the immediate corridor from industrial to residential use.
In addition to seeking a requisite conditional-use permit, Kramer representatives are requesting a variance under the municipal code for rear yard setbacks because of the project’s density within the site. The city’s planning staff within the transportation, engineering, and development department recommended the variance.
Prior to submitting documents to city officials, Kramer representatives also held a neighborhood meeting.
“The residents offered a wealth of feedback, and a lot of thoughtful feedback, and it resulted in significant changes to the plan,” Calvo said.
Some of the plan adjustments, Calvo added, included a reorientation of the site plan to better fit in with the area and an adjustment of the roof designs to complement other nearby residences.
Image courtesy: Torch Architecture
Traffic and density two prevailing concerns
During the public hearing, commissioners heard from a number of residents who shared several concerns about the project proposal — most notably, traffic and safety conditions at the intersection of Mill Street and Spring Avenue, and the project’s overall density within the 6-lot site. Traffic accidents have been reported in the area on a recurring basis, according to details shared at the commissioners’ meeting.
“While the impact of this development may appear manageable when viewed in isolation, please consider that this proposal sits within a corridor that has been identified for redevelopment for many years, and there remains additional properties along Spring Avenue that could potentially redevelop in the future,” said resident Sarah Eddy, who lives near the site.
Fellow neighbor Jennifer Bruzan Taylor also was among the commenters who shared concerns. She said she personally was involved in an accident at the intersection, and nearby residents have methodically avoided it over time, she asserted.
“Why would we put such a dense development on that corner?” Bruzan Taylor, a former Naperville councilwoman, said. “We can’t look at this as just this development. We have to look at it as a street as a whole, and the density and what that does to the safety in the neighborhood.”
Some of the commenters offered suggestions to alleviate safety concerns within the intersection.
“While I understand growth and development are part of a thriving community, I strongly object to approval of this project unless critical traffic infrastructure improvements are completed first — specifically, the installation of a traffic signal and traffic safety improvements necessary to protect residents, pedestrians, school children, cyclists, and motorists,” neighbor Christine Merino stated in a written comment to commissioners.
For their part, Kramer representatives did submit a traffic analysis that suggested the new development’s impact on the area would be “nominal,” with a net decrease from historical records during peak-hour trips and a modest increase on weekends.
“Townhomes are simply a lower intensity use than the prior industrial uses,” Calvo said.
Stephen Corcoran, director of traffic engineering at Eriksson Engineering Associates, spoke to commissioners about his findings. He was contracted to conduct the traffic analysis.
“Quite honestly, we’re not adding enough traffic to make a noticeable change in the traffic patterns, just from this development,” he said.
When questioned by commissioners, City Engineer Peter Zibble said the information Kramer representatives provided in the petition met municipal requirements.
“I think I should point out, staff is well aware of the concerns on Mill Street,” Zibble said. “It’s my commuting route. I take it every day. I see it.”
Zibble added there is “no easy quick fix” to alleviate concerns related to the intersection.
Image courtesy: Torch Architecture
Commissioners unanimous in their ‘no’ votes
All eight of the members in attendance at the city’s Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on June 17 provided a negative recommendation on Kramer’s variance request and the granting of a conditional-use permit. The commission provides recommendations to the city council, which has final say.
Commissioner Allison Longenbaugh said she did not believe Kramer representatives provided sufficient data to mitigate the safety concerns at the intersection — particularly for school-aged children. She said she would have preferred traffic data during school arrival and dismissal hours.
“The trip count generator really doesn’t give the full story,” Longenbaugh said of the traffic analysis submitted. “I really was not convinced that adding 25 units here without the school data included meets the public safety standard required for an R2 conditional-use.”
At face value, commissioner Whitney Robbins said she agrees the project proposal is well suited for an area that transitions from the train line to the north to residential properties to the east and south. But she, too, had concerns about the intersection and the impact the project would have on it.
“I appreciate the concept of this development being a buffer — I get it,” Robbins, chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission, said. “I think it’s a good transition. I think it’s a huge improvement to what’s sitting there today. I am struggling with the variance request and the conditional-use. I really would like to see pedestrian paths. It’s a great question how these people folks would walk to the train.”
From his vantage point, commissioner Mark Wright said Kramer representatives checked all but one of the boxes with their petition.
“I think Kramer did an excellent job at listening to the community — I know some do not feel that way … in attempting to mitigate all of the issues that were raised as a concern,” Wright said. “I think we missed one major piece of that, and this is the safety aspect.”
Image courtesy: Torch Architecture
If you have a story idea, send us a tip!
