Board rejects recommendation to rezone 6000 Washington from R1 to R6 after neighbors raise traffic, flooding and compatibility concerns

The Gurnee Planning and Zoning Board declined to forward a favorable recommendation on July 1 for a requested rezoning of roughly 1.15 acres at 6000 Washington Street from R1 single‑family to R6 multifamily. Staff said the rezoning would allow up to 15 units by right at R6 and that the current petitioner proposes a six‑unit apartment to remain under Lake County DOT thresholds for access permits.

Petitioner George Lozada of Loza Properties said he is proposing a smaller six‑unit apartment now because county permitting would trigger a major access review for a larger development; he answered board questions about access and said the concept was scaled down after discussion with Lake County DOT. Staff explained Lake County’s threshold of about 50 trips per day (based on roughly 7.5 trips per unit) separates minor and major access permits and that rezoning to R6 would establish zoning independent of any current site plan.

Nearby residents spoke at length against the rezoning. David Weinstein, who lives at 6020 Washington Street, told the board the proposed building would sit "about 8 feet from our bedroom window" and said the project would bring lights, traffic and privacy loss to his property, arguing it would harm property values. Another resident, Aaron Weinstein, cited local traffic congestion on Cemetery Road and Hunt Club Road and raised flooding and wildlife concerns if a pond and permeable surface were converted to parking. Don Adams, speaking for the Winchester Estates homeowners association, said the petitioner had not met the burden to justify rezoning and warned that granting R6 would change the neighborhood’s character "for generations and decades to come."

Board members discussed whether R6 was appropriate or whether a lower‑intensity R5 zoning (which would permit up to 10 units) offered a better transition between single‑family homes and existing high‑density uses nearby. Several members said they were uncomfortable approving R6 without stronger evidence the rezoning fit the comprehensive plan and compatibility criteria. After the public hearing closed, a motion to forward a favorable recommendation to the village board for rezoning to R6 was made and seconded; roll call votes were unanimous nays and the motion failed.

Because the board is a recommending body, the petitioner may still pursue the rezoning before the village board despite the unfavorable recommendation. The Planning Department noted that any future site plan must include stormwater detention design and that sanitary sewer extension to the corner of the Weinstein property would be part of the development process if the project proceeds.