Elmhurst council approves 933 South Riverside warehouse PUD after heated public comment, 12–1

The Elmhurst City Council voted 12–1 on July 20 to approve a preliminary planned unit development for a speculative 140,000‑square‑foot warehouse at 933 South Riverside Drive, adopting nine conditions the Development, Planning and Zoning (DPZ) committee negotiated to limit the site's intensity and protect neighboring homes and Salt Creek School.

Alderman Chris Jensen, DPZ chair, presented the committee's unanimous recommendation and walked the council through nine conditions intended to address residents' concerns: a deed restriction barring use as a detention center; dark‑sky exterior lighting; a prohibition on trailer storage and cross‑docks; lease provisions and signage to require trucks to turn right onto northbound Riverside and prohibit left turns onto Van Buren; IEPA‑approved remedial action plans required before demolition or excavation; submission of remedial completion documentation prior to certificate of occupancy; a construction plan with dust and erosion controls and air monitoring; permanent maintenance and monitoring of engineered remediation barriers; and timely recording of remediation documents.

The committee report described the traffic analysis as classifying the site as a low‑intensity ITE 150 warehouse with roughly 31 vehicle trips per day and an estimated 62 truck trips generated by the project over the day, and said those numbers are materially lower than trips the existing Clarion hotel generates at certain occupancy levels. Jensen emphasized that environmental conditions “put a gate at every phase before shovel, before those doors open, and permanently thereafter,” and said the IEPA sign‑offs would prevent ground disturbance until remediation objectives are approved.

Residents urged rejection or postponement of the PUD. ‘‘You can’t just drop a 140,000‑square‑foot warehouse box on this site and assume it will have little impact on traffic, noise and air pollution,’’ said Mark Trish, a nearby resident, arguing the traffic study is a prediction, not a fact. Andrea Ross, who worked in the Salt Creek school library for years, said classrooms and preschool windows are much closer to the proposed truck entrance than some project slides indicated and cited a bill circulating in Springfield that would bar loading docks within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors: “How can it be right to build a 28‑dock truck warehouse within 500 feet of an Elmhurst public elementary school?” she asked.

Attorney and resident James Henry framed the decision as a legal finding under Section 22.31 of the Elmhurst zoning ordinance: the council must itself make the required PUD findings and cannot delegate that responsibility. He reminded the body that the burden of persuasion rests with the applicant.

Supporters on the council said the PUD process produced material concessions that improve the project. Alderman Michael Brennan said the committee had pushed Alliance (the applicant) to reduce footprint and increase buffering and landscaping, and that the DPZ review and conditions make the proposal acceptable. Alderman Virgil, while noting a projected decline in some city fees and tax revenue compared with the hotel now on the site, said he believed the application meets the code and pledged to work on broader zoning map reforms.

In the roll call that concluded deliberations, the motion to approve report 8.1 passed with 12 ayes, 1 nay and 1 absent. The council directed the city attorney to prepare documents for final action.

What happens next: The ordinance implementing the PUD and the required recorded deed restrictions and IEPA‑compliance documents will be prepared for subsequent council action. The committee report and its nine conditions remain the operative record of what the council relied on in voting to advance the project.