East Dundee delays adoption of comprehensive plan after consultants’ presentation

Northern Illinois University consultants presented a draft comprehensive plan to the Village of East Dundee Board of Trustees on Monday and the board voted to postpone adoption to its April 21 meeting.

The draft plan, produced by the NIU Center for Governmental Studies with consultant input, lays out a nine-goal policy framework, prioritized objectives and a “preferred” future land-use map. Mim Evans, a principal with NIU’s Center for Governmental Studies, told trustees the plan is intended to “guide all of you and guide the plan commission, as you deliberate land-use-related decisions going forward.”

Why it matters: the comprehensive plan will inform future zoning changes, the village’s development strategy and how the board and planning commission evaluate major proposals — including the Hager property south of Route 72, which consultants flagged as a potentially mixed-use area that could support added residential or commercial development.

Consultants summarized the process used to draft the document: an inventory and data collection phase, four task-force sessions, a 272-response resident survey, a 44-response business survey, a public open house and an informational website that drew about 1,600 visits. Todd Manadolak, NIU’s urban-planning consultant on the project, said the task force generally favored a low-to-moderate growth scenario that would add some housing options without dramatic change to the village’s existing pattern.

Trustees and residents asked technical and policy questions during the presentation. Topics included how the future land-use map interacts with the legally binding zoning map, whether the plan would force particular developments, how planned-unit developments (PUDs) would be handled, and whether the plan should include more detail about desired housing types, parking expectations and commercial targets along the Route 72 corridor. Consultants told the board the plan is advisory; zoning changes would follow in a separate process to implement the plan’s recommendations and set legally binding regulations.

Trustee discussion focused on the schedule and on adding clarifying guidance in the document (for example, how to treat large parcels such as the Hager site and how to align parking and density expectations with possible RFPs). The board also heard a suggestion to update the plan regularly; consultants recommended routine reviews about every five years.

Outcome: Trustee [motion to postpone moved and seconded; the board voted to postpone final adoption to the April 21 meeting]. The vote recorded in the minutes was unanimous in favor.

The board asked staff to circulate suggested edits from trustees and to provide an opportunity for planning commission review ahead of the April meeting.