By Dee Longfellow
For The Elmhurst Independent
The Elmhurst City Council meeting on Monday, Oct. 18 began with quite a few more disgruntled persons speaking at public forum, urging aldermen not to vote for the conditional use of property 272-276 W. Eggleston and 283 W. Eggleston, also known as the Roberto’s parking lot project.
At first, there was an attempt to postpone the decision on the ordinance until the next City Council meeting, but that was almost immediately voted down.
When the Council began discussion of the ordinance, Alderman Marti Deuter (First Ward) addressed the height of the fences on the parcels.
“As of now, [the ordinance] says an eight-foot opaque fence would be used adjacent to 271, along the rear of the single-family homes adjacent to the south parking lot,” she said.
Deuter asked to add the following verbiage to the ordinance: “Within 120 days, property owners may opt for a 4-foot, 6-foot or 8-foot fence.”
“This would amend the fence height requirement to give homeowners more choices,” she said.
The vote was 11-2, with one absent to approve the addition of the specified language. The two “nay” votes came from Aldermen Mark Mulliner (7th) and Ald. Noel Talluto (4th). (Sixth Ward Ald. Michael Honquest was absent.)
More discussion of the ordinance itself led to comments by Ald. Mike Brennan (7th Ward).
“Two weeks ago, I did not support the report that called for a parking lot east of Spring and north and south of Eggleston and since that time, nothing’s been brought to my attention to change my opinion,” he said. “I believe the size of the parking lot is too big, I believe it is invasive to the bordering homeowners, I believe it will negatively impact the neighborhood east of Spring on Eggleston and specifically impact property values of the bordering homes. For these reasons, I cannot support the ordinance.”
Jennifer Veremis (1st Ward) disagreed, saying she’d been through this process before as a homeowner.
“I have first-hand experience as a resident disputing a conditional use permit,” she said. “I learned the process of how the Commission evaluates the uses and now, as an alderman, how the Committee and Council members analyze the Commission’s findings. And that is what I have done. From reading transcripts, emails, speaking with residents, visiting the site several times, and example sites including Manny’s Ale House located in my neighborhood. I agree with the Commission that the standards, including the second standard, have been met by the applicant. There are no zoning changes to the parcels, there are several parking lots adjacent to homes throughout our community, Our Comprehensive Plan addresses the need for parking and specifically refers to these parcels, the applicant has shown evidence that it will not diminish property values. Therefore, I support the report and the ordinance.”
Ald. Emily Bastedo (6th) spoke next.
“I will be voting no for this because I still think the City should not allow houses to be torn down and turned into parking lots. Alderman Veremis, yes, there are parking lots next to homes. We have not allowed houses to be torn down and turned into parking lots. There is a huge difference there. I hope with a few weeks to consider it, a couple of you will agree that what was created for the Minority report is actually worse for the neighbors than what came out of the Commission. The map that’s on there now doesn’t even say where the fence line will be.
“Many liked the Plan that they had seen in-between, which gave more feet to the neighbors, but that is not what is in front of us tonight.
“The Code asks us to consider the neighbors use and enjoyment of their land, it says not to grant a conditional use if it’s going to lessen the use of their land and their home, lessen the use or enjoyment of their home, their biggest asset, I choose to believe the neighbors that the hours of testimony on the record, I find it very convincing that their use and enjoyment will be lessened by this move
“Even with the Amendment that I moved for last time, this is still worse than what came out of the Commission and I will be voting no.”
At that time, the vote was taken as follows: Those in favor of the ordinance as amended (for fence height) were Marti Deuter, Bob Dunn (2nd), James Neudara (5th), Tina Park (5th), Dannee Polomsky (3rd), Noel Talluto, Jennifer Veremis; Nay votes came from: Emily Bastedo, Mike Brennan, Brian Cahill (4th), Jacob Hill (2nd), Christopher Jensen (3rd) and Mark Mulliner. The vote was 7 ayes to 6 nays. Ald. Michael Honquest was absent, making it necessary for Mayor Levin to vote. He voted with the ‘ayes’ and the ordinance passed.
