Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Business District Amendment topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board hears public concerns as village moves to add 1024 Newberry to 30 First Street Barnsdale Business District

5072930 ยท June 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Deputy Manager Dyer and consultant S.B. Friedman briefed the board on a proposed amendment to expand the 30 First Street Barnsdale Business District to include 1024 Newberry Avenue for a planned public parking lot; residents raised transparency and parking-study concerns, and staff said demolition and asbestos abatement are scheduled.

The Village of La Grange Park held a public hearing on Amendment No. 1 to the 30 First Street Barnsdale Business District plan to expand the district boundary to include the parcel at 1024 Newberry Avenue; the village says the parcel will be used to expand a public parking lot to serve the 30 First Street business corridor.

Deputy Manager Dyer presented S.B. Friedman Development Advisors' eligibility study, which concluded the 1024 Newberry parcel qualifies as a blighted area under the Illinois Business District Development and Redevelopment Law because of "deterioration of site improvements," slower property-value growth compared with the rest of the village over the past five years, and related criteria. Dyer said the amendment package revises the district's legal description and list of PIN numbers and includes 38 proposed changes to the original plan.

Why it matters: Village staff and consultants say adding the parcel to the business district will allow use of business-district funds for demolition and construction of a public parking lot that links to the existing Beach Avenue lot and supports businesses along 30 First Street; several residents questioned whether additional parking is needed and raised concerns about transparency.

Public comment and trustee concerns: Trustee Zora (absent) submitted a written statement supporting development of the parcel into a parking lot and arguing it would help address spillover parking; Trustee Counsel said she remains unconvinced the parcel must be added to the BDD and asked whether there are legal or financial ramifications for having used BDD funds for a purchase that was outside the district at the time. Attorney Jurisic (village legal counsel) recommended the board move forward with the amendment, saying it "aligns" the parcel with adjacent village-owned parking and will allow planned improvements.

Residents voiced objections. Robert Consul said SB Friedman's identification of cracked sidewalks and asphalt as evidence of blight was "a very weak argument." Mimi Lampert, who lives at 1000 Newberry, said the Sam Schwartz parking study completed in September 2024 concluded no additional parking was needed between the tracks and Kemman Avenue and that purchasing 1024 Newberry with BDD funds before it was in the district "doesn't seem like the proper or transparent way to me." Cheryl Peterson, a Newberry resident, criticized the transaction's confidentiality and said neighbors should have been told.

Staff clarifications and next steps: Deputy Manager Dyer and Village Manager Julia Sadillo responded that the village will seek further community input on parking-lot design and that environmental testing at 1024 Newberry is complete; asbestos abatement is scheduled for later this summer and demolition is targeted for September. Dyer said staff will prepare an ordinance for discussion at the July 8 work session and for action at the July 22 board meeting, and staff will prepare applications to amend the village comprehensive plan and rezone the parcel from R-1 (single-family residential) to the I (Institutional) zoning district to accommodate a public parking lot. Dyer also noted the limited number of local remediation vendors and said staff intends to solicit competitive bids and seek authority to waive the competitive bidding requirement when awarding vendor contracts.

Ending: The hearing was closed after public comment and trustee discussion. The board did not vote on the amendment at the hearing; staff will return with ordinance language and related land-use filings for future meetings.