Developer presents 15.5‑acre ARIA mixed‑use plan for Homer Glen; trustees ask for another public presentation

Developers of a proposed 15.5‑acre project called ARIA told the Village of Homer Glen Board of Trustees that the plan would add two mixed‑use buildings along 159th Street with roughly 30,000 square feet of ground‑floor commercial space and 66 residential units, and the board asked the team to repeat its presentation so more residents can see the plans and ask questions.

Director Grubergaard, summarizing staff review, said the conceptual proposal includes two mixed‑use buildings at the 159th Street frontage with commercial on the first floors and condos on upper floors, plus 20 duplex buildings (40 units) in the rear. "This is very conceptual right now," Grubergaard said, and noted the project would require a planned unit development (PUD), plat of subdivision and rezoning or a new mixed‑use zoning district before it could proceed. He also said the plan proposes no public parkland even though the code would require about 1.67 acres, which staff estimated would translate to roughly $293,000 in lieu of land based on bedroom count.

The presentation and subsequent trustee questioning focused on density, tree preservation, traffic access and how the commercial component would be phased and operated. Steve Francis, the project's architect, described ARIA as a walkable, amenity‑focused neighborhood with ponds, terraces and gathering spaces. He said the two front buildings each have approximately 16,000‑square‑foot footprints and that the lower level would provide about 68 conditioned parking spaces and storage. The second floor would contain condominium units and the third floor penthouses; the team said there are about 13 condo units per front building (26 total) and 10 penthouses across the two buildings.

Boris Predovich, identified as part of the ownership team, said the developers reduced the scheme from prior, higher‑density concepts. "We went from over 200 units to 66," Predovich said, adding that the developer expects the residential component to help attract commercial tenants. Predovich also told trustees the team will not begin building condos until pre‑sales or financing commitments are in place: "We're not gonna build them till we have presold." He estimated early, preliminary condo pricing could start near $600,000 but cautioned that pricing remains preliminary and dependent on final finishes and construction costs.

Trustees pressed on several community concerns. Multiple trustees asked whether the plan would preserve trees and whether the project would connect to neighboring subdivisions; Scott Schreiner, the project's engineer, said about 8.5 acres of the site are open while roughly 7 acres contain the wooded area in the rear, and steep grades and required detention basins limit the ability to save many trees in that back area. On traffic, trustees asked about eastbound access on 159th Street and the need for deceleration or turn lanes; Predovich said a traffic study will be completed and noted some turn‑lane infrastructure already exists from the road project, while staff said any recommended lane changes would be determined through traffic study and permitting processes.

Trustees also asked about governance and ownership: whether a single homeowners association would manage the residential areas and how the commercial units would be owned. Predovich said the ownership structure was not finalized but that condos and commercial space would be governed by HOA guidelines; some commercial parcels may be sold to tenants while others could be retained by the ownership group.

On process, Director Grubergaard said staff expects the developer to submit conventional engineering plans (gross floor area, scaled elevations, setbacks and other materials) for zoning review and that the project could be processed as a PUD with a planning commission workshop followed by a public hearing. Staff indicated February 19 could be used for a planning commission workshop but a public hearing is more likely in March; trustees asked that the applicant return to the board or hold an extra public workshop so residents have clearer notice and opportunity to comment before any planning‑commission public hearing. An attorney advising the applicant recommended placing a workshop on the next board agenda to provide broader notice.

No formal zoning action or vote occurred at the meeting. The board concluded the session by asking the applicant to provide more detailed drawings and information about tree replacement and parks and to return for further public engagement and staff review. Trustee Mason moved to adjourn at the end of the session; the board approved the adjournment by voice vote.

Next steps: staff said the developer must submit full engineering and scaled building elevations for staff review and that the planning commission schedule will determine the timing of any public hearing.