After more than five hours, 18 public comments and two breaks, the River Forest village board early Tuesday morning approved an ordinance to grant a planned development permit for a five-story residential and commercial building at 7620 Madison St. to be developed by Chicago-based Five Thirty-One Partners.
Village trustees Katie Brennan, Erika Bachner and Megan Keskitalo voted against the measure, which was debated in front of about 60 residents at Trinity High School’s Fox Auditorium. Trustees Lisa Gillis, Robert O’Connell and Respicio Vazquez voted in favor, with Village President Cathy Adduci casting the deciding vote at roughly 12:30 a.m.
The redevelopment would include construction of a mixed-use building with 69 high-end apartments and first-floor retail space. The five-story building would be 87 feet at its tallest point with the majority of the building just under 73 feet.
The land sale price for the property is $10, with an incentive of up to $2 million in TIF-eligible reimbursement, with $1 million payable to the developer when a certificate of occupancy is granted.
“While change naturally brings questions and concerns, we are confident that this development will be a positive addition to our community,” Adduci said before casting the deciding vote. “This project will expand our tax base, with new property and sales tax revenue. These funds will support village services and provide critical revenue for our schools, contributing to our efforts to stabilize our property taxes.
“My approval is based on several conditions discussed tonight, and my commitment to the surrounding neighbors and adjacent neighbors to get it right. We’re going to get it right.”
Revision and conditions
The vote was contingent upon a revision to the redevelopment agreement to require payment of 50% of permit fees upon permit issuance, and 50% due at certificate of occupancy, replacing a longer proposed payment schedule for Five Thirty-One Partners.
More significantly, Adduci proposed several conditions for approval, including:
- Creation of a focus group to evaluate traffic and safety issues in the neighborhood around the development;
- Requirement of a post-construction occupancy traffic impact study;
- Replacement of lead service lines for residents on the 000 blocks of Ashland Ave. and Lathrop;
- Complimentary window-washing for homes on the block of the project after construction;
- Installation of security cameras on the property;
- Prohibition of construction parking on residential streets; and,
- Creation of a neighbor impact fund.
Village Administrator Matt Walsh said Five Thirty-One would be responsible for infrastructure and connections for water and sewer.
“The approval last night secured additional tax revenue for the village and its taxing bodies for decades to come, along with additional housing and retail options in River Forest,” Walsh said Tuesday morning. “The conditions placed on the approval improve the project and help the neighbors near the project site. We look forward to working with Five Thirty-One Partners to see the project through to completion.”
Representatives from tax services firm Ryan, LLC projected generation of $25 million in property taxes between 2026 and 2056. Total tax benefit to Oak Park and River Forest High School District 200 would be $7.5 million and $11.4 million for River Forest School District 90.
Resident pushback
Still, remarks from residents during the meeting’s public comment portion cast doubt on the review and approval process, especially in light of the fact that the village’s development review board July 9 unanimously but conditionally recommended project approval to the board.
“The DRB sat here for three hours, stoic; one person took notes,” said resident Bruce Faland. “A lot of this audience raised questions.
“The decision was made before they sat down … They sat down for three hours and listened to questions, comments and everything. No questions were raised.”
Regarding the building itself, former village trustee Patty Henek pointed out that “residents have consistently stated for years they do not desire a five-story dense building.” Two to four stories would be more appropriate for the location, she said.
“Buildings of this height contribute to a sense of enclosure and an intimate and pedestrian scale,” she said. “Why does this no longer apply?”
During the first break, Henek expanded on those thoughts.
“I personally would like them to pause and take into consideration what everybody has said, in terms of it’s not really what the community wants,” she said. “We need to go back to the drawing board.”
That didn’t happen. Another resident, Thomas Lamm, was more succinct.
“This property is too small for five stories,” he said.
Prior to Brennan’s no vote, she pointed out that the village also has to consider the anticipated September transfer of ownership and management of the River Forest Civic Center building to the village government.
“I think it’s appropriate to consider all of our obligations,” Brennan said.
Only one residential supporter
Resident Kris Mackey, a member of the River Forest District 90 school board, was the only supporter among the 18 residents that spoke during the public comment section.
“Because I think we need development, we need the revenue that can be counted on steadily going forward,” Mackey said post-meeting. “And not this stream. Other streams … the Sheraton, now the Sunrise. That was very important to this municipality. We hadn’t had anything for quite a while.
“This has to be thoughtful and steady for this revenue to meet what we pay people, which always goes up. And should.”
“Obviously, I’m happy, that was our goal,” said Five Thirty-One co-owner Viktor Jakovljevic, who himself spoke several times at the meeting, on his own behalf as a River Forest resident and also to answer board questions with fellow co-owner Chuck Westphal.
“I think we’re going to do great in this community and ultimately at the end this project will be accepted by the community,” he said. “It was a fight, like every project, but I think it was the right decision.”
But resident Greg Abcarian said after the meeting concluded that he was curious about the vote itself.
“All four yeses have always voted yes together,” he said. “Always voted no together. They have never not voted against each other.”