Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Octane Lounge topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lombard delays Octane Lounge decision after resident complaints about noise, safety and parking
Summary
Residents told the village board they heard loud revving, reported a May 16 car meetup near 865 E. Roosevelt Road and raised concerns about parking and children crossing Roosevelt; the applicant denied involvement and the board voted to continue action until June 17 so the owner can appear and trustees can get more information.
President Puccio opened a public comment period on proposed text amendments and a request related to the Octane Lounge at 865 East Roosevelt Road (PC26‑7). Several nearby residents said they were worried about safety, noise and parking if the club-style automotive storage and recreation use is approved.
"I come here tonight out of concern for the safety of our community," Adam Johnson said, describing a May 16 car meetup and saying revving cars left the premises between roughly 6 and 8 p.m. He added that a school sits near the intersection and said he feared more traffic and risk to children and families crossing Roosevelt Road.
James Barnett and other residents described recurring noise, loss of wildlife as nearby development progresses, and skepticism about whether the site has adequate parking. Ann Toby Garcia said nearby streets regularly experience late-night vehicle noise and questioned use of valet and where overflow parking would be located.
Mark Daniel, who said he represents Octane Lounge (owner Ahmed Khan), told trustees the applicant had no connection to the May 16 gathering. "We have no affiliation or connection or tie whatsoever to anything that went on there on Saturday," Daniel said, and said he circulated photos and video and reviewed property surveillance and contractor footage to check for evidence of a large event on that date. Daniel described valet operations as limited to moving cars into and out of a garage and said surveillance would be in place when the site is occupied.
Police Chief Graves said the department received no call for service about the Saturday incident and that the sheriff likewise reported no call; he noted parts of the property are set back from Roosevelt so activity there could occur without being seen from the road, but added he was skeptical that 30–40 cars would have gone entirely unnoticed.
Trustees discussed whether the proposed use would fit Roosevelt Road and the comprehensive plan, how valet parking would be managed, and what assurances the applicant could provide that nonmembers would not congregate in the parking lot. Several trustees said they wanted the owner present and stronger operational assurances before taking final action.
Given the conflicting accounts, the absence of two trustees and the owner's not being present, the board voted to continue PC26‑7 (865 E. Roosevelt Road) to the June 17 meeting to allow the applicant and additional evidence to be presented. The motion to continue was entered on the record and carried by roll call.
