Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Schools topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Plan Commission withholds recommendation on Meadowbrook School gym addition after public opposition, votes against staff approval
Summary
The Northbrook Plan Commission voted 5-0 against adopting a staff draft resolution that would have recommended approval of a gym addition, loading-space variation and site plan for Meadowbrook School at 1600 Walters Avenue.
Get email alerts on the Schools topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Northbrook Plan Commission voted 5-0 against adopting staff's draft resolution that would have recommended approval of a special permit, loading-space variation and site plan for a proposed gym addition at Meadowbrook School (1600 Walters Avenue).
Staff described the petition as a request by Northbrook School District 28 for a special permit to allow an elementary school use in the Institutional Building (IB) District, a variation to reduce the loading-space requirement from one to zero, and site plan approval for a single-story gym addition of approximately 10,000 square feet plus a roughly 1,000-square-foot temporary connector. Staff said the property predated the current zoning code and that a special permit is required for an elementary school when a substantial addition is proposed.
Architect Eric Sickbert of DLA Architects and Jessica Donato (who identified herself as the district's chief school business official and treasurer) described the project as a single-story gym with a sloped roof (north elevation about 32 feet, south elevation up to about 38 feet), brick-and-stone exterior, and underground stormwater management vault. Sickbert said the district had designed the gym before the referendum passed and that the gym is needed to address existing space constraints for physical education and lunch operations; petitioners said the referendum that passed will result in a larger replacement school to be built later and that the gym is intended to serve current needs while the new school is developed.
More than a dozen members of the public spoke at the hearing. Residents raised repeated concerns about loss of neighborhood green space and mature trees, the gym's visual scale and color palette, stormwater and drainage impacts on adjacent properties, construction parking and truck routing, and the lack of a complete plan showing how the new school will relate to the proposed gym. Several speakers said the gym appeared to be the first piece of a two-phase plan and urged commissioners to see the full school plan before recommending approval. Staff confirmed receipt of multiple written comments and two additional emails delivered before the meeting.
Commissioners repeatedly said they were uncomfortable reviewing the gym in isolation from the full school project and expressed concern about approving site changes piecemeal. After deliberation Commissioners voted against the staff-recommended draft resolution (roll call: 5 no, 0 yes); the commission's negative recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for final action. Staff advised the commission that the next available Board agendas are tentatively July 8 or July 22.
Petitioners said they have attempted to preserve large/older trees where possible and that they are coordinating stormwater permits with the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) as required. The applicant also said construction parking plans and staging are under discussion with the contractor and that access points may be managed to preserve pedestrian routes during some parts of construction.
