The first item on the agenda for Oak Park’s March 27 Historic Preservation Commission was a certificate of appropriateness (COA) for a proposed development at 1035 South Boulevard. The proposal centered on a 10-story addition planned to be built behind the landmarked Boulevard Arcade Building at 1031 South Blvd.
At a previous meeting on Jan. 9, the commission had voted unanimously to deny the proposal.
The proposed building was back before the commission last week and was in the process of being introduced when architect John Schiess asked to address the commission and the members of the public who attended the meeting in hopes of voicing their thoughts on the building. Schiess announced his clients had requested that the meeting be rescheduled.
He noted that he just learned of the change in plans that afternoon, precluding him from providing emailed notice to the commission. Schiess said, “I’ve been directed to take a look at the building and review all the functions, including the building height.”
Schiess said he hoped to be able to present any revisions at the next scheduled commission meeting but said he could not promise what date he would be prepared to present on the project. Noting that the team involved includes at least 10 consultants, Schiess said, “turning a ship this big is not very easy. It’s not like designing townhomes.”
Schiess did not respond to further requests for comment from the Journal.
Commission Chair Lou Garapolo was taken aback by the change in plans. “It was kind of a surprise announcement because it was on our agenda. I don’t recall this happening before,” he said.
Roberta Arnold, who attended the meeting alongside more than a dozen neighbors of the proposed project, was also surprised by the announcement.
Pointing out that more than two months had passed since the last preservation meeting, she said, “We felt like our time was wasted, and more importantly, the Historic Preservation Commission’s time was wasted.”
Arnold said she believes the commission is an important part of the development process for buildings such as this. She praised the vitality of downtown Oak Park and said, “The area we live in has over 1,200 new apartments. It’s brought a lot of new people to the village, which is great.”
She went on to say there are hazards to overstuffing an area and that she thinks the village needs to take seriously safety concerns that will flow from more traffic and density in a building that can only be accessed from an alley.
Arnold said that after the project was removed from the agenda, neighbors were left with more questions than answers. They wonder, she said, when the proposal will go before the village’s Plan Commission and if Commissioner Paul Beckwith, who previously owned 1031 South Boulevard, will need to recuse himself from the process.
Arnold hopes that traffic studies will be conducted and that there will be some transparency to the process for the public. “People get more upset when they feel they’re not getting the whole story,” she said. “It feels very disenfranchising.”
Atefa Ghaznawi, the village’s urban planner in historic preservation, said Schiess and his clients had three options after the preservation commission voted not to approve the project on Jan. 9: appealing the commission’s decision and requesting a public hearing with the commission; or revising the proposal and coming back to the commission for a Certificate of Appropriateness application; or withdrawing the COA application.
The commission meeting on March 27 was a formal COA application for a revised proposal and not a public hearing.
Garapolo said, “At the last meeting, the project was defeated. Their next step is to come back in and present a modification. They could’ve requested a public hearing, which they did not.”
Schiess and the building owners could revise the plans in a manner that responds to the commission’s comments at the January meeting, and Garapolo said, “If the [COA’s] approved, they’ll be off and running. If it’s not, their next step would be to request a public hearing.”
A public hearing would require notice to neighbors of the proposed building as well as sharing the plans with the public.
If the commission approves the COA, Garapolo said the project would then head to the Plan Commission to address any variances in zoning the developers are requesting. Once through the Plan Commission, the project will be sent to the village board, which will consider recommendations made by both the preservation and the plan commissions.
Members of the public interested in attending the next meeting or commenting on the development will need to watch the village website to see when the building is back on the agenda.
Prior to the next meeting at which 1035 South Blvd. is considered, the preservation commission will be given any revisions to the project, and citizens can make a Freedom of Information Act request if they would like to see the revisions prior to the meeting.
Craig Failor, director of the Development Services Department, says that all reports are sent to commissioners one week prior to meetings, and Ghaznawi said, “The HPC should be informed about any changes to the proposal at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Once the meeting agenda is posted, the public can view the proposal by submitting a FOIA request.”
(Editor’s note: Paul Beckwith is a donor to Growing Community Media and a member of the organization’s Development Steering Committee.)
