Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors press objections as DuPage County board hears petition for five-unit development in Lombard
Summary
A DuPage County zoning hearing on March 12 reviewed a request by N Properties LLC to add four attached homes to an existing house at 511 Swift Road; county staff reported no conceptual objections but residents raised water, traffic, parking and precedent concerns and the record was left open for an April 2 recommendation meeting.
DuPage County zoning officials on March 12 heard hours of testimony on a petition from N Properties LLC to create a planned development at 511 Swift Road in Lombard that would add four attached single-family units while retaining one existing detached house, for a total of five units.
County staff outlined the proposal and read departmental responses into the record, saying building, health, stormwater and public works divisions raised no conceptual objections but noted that additional information will be required at permit application. The Bloomingdale Fire District told the board that residential fire sprinklers will be required and that plans must be submitted to the County Building Department and the fire district for review and approval before installation.
The petitioner’s representative told the board the ownership of the parcel will be unified during development, showed civil and architectural plans and said the project meets the county’s zoning standards. The submission includes a traffic memo estimating trip generation from the five homes; the petitioner said Swift Road carries roughly 10,000 vehicles and characterized the expected increase as modest. The petitioner also said stormwater will be handled with proposed infiltration/BMP systems and emphasized that "nothing can happen till that is completely approved." (petitioner representative)
Residents who appeared at the public hearing voiced strong opposition. John Robertson, an attorney, submitted written material and told the board the proposal appears inconsistent with the county’s comprehensive or master plan, questioned whether a conditional planned development is an appropriate mechanism to change single-family character, and asked the board to review any deed restrictions that might limit use. "If there are restrictions ... that it is restricted to a simple house then that needs to be resolved," Robertson said.
Kate Polyak, a nearby resident, said she opposes the conditional-use petition and asked the board to preserve the area’s single-family character. Several other neighbors raised concerns about drainage and wetlands in rear yards, strain on private wells and septic systems during drought, limited street parking on Dickens and nearby streets, and the possibility that units could be converted to rentals or house multiple unrelated occupants.
County staff and the petitioner repeatedly told the board that technical reviews — including detailed stormwater management scrutiny and fire and building plan checks — must be completed at later permit stages before any construction can proceed. The petitioner submitted a draft set of covenants, conditions and restrictions addressing maintenance (snow plowing, garbage, access) and said any change in use would require a return to the board.
The public hearing record was closed. The board said the case will be discussed and a recommendation made at a recommendation meeting scheduled for April 2, 2026 at 5:30 p.m. in room 3500B; the case will then proceed to the county development committee and the DuPage County Board on dates the staff cited as April 21 and April 28.
No formal vote on the petition occurred at the March 12 hearing; the board said it will base its recommendation on the record and the materials already submitted.
