Fairview Village’s proposal to build four multi-family units on the west side of Fairview Avenue was to have been heard by the plan commission Monday, but for reasons that remain unclear, the senior citizen community put off submission of the petition.
You’ll recall that Fairview Village’s plan to expand its campus across Fairview has raised the ire of neighbors who wish the area to retain its single-family residential zoning rather than be rezoned to allow townhouses as Fairview Village has proposed.
Fairview Village previously had indicated its willingness to work with neighbors in refining the plan. The proposal is expected to come before the commission on Sept. 8.
This post will be updated if/when calls to Fairview Village are returned.
They had nothing new to show the PC. FV is a great place and it a class operation, but they are the rock, and the promises made to the residents-specific promises-are the hard place, and council is right there in the middle.
More specifically:
” Staff believes the petitioner has sufficiently addressed the Council s concerns regarding the appropriate use of the land, stormwater and traffic. However, staff believes the petitioner has not demonstrated the impact of the proposal on adjacent property values. As such, staff recommends the Plan Commission recommend denial of the requested preliminary Planned Development Amendment to Fairview Baptist Home Planned Development #32.”
FV a great place?? OK, that’s one perspective. Glad to see that according to Mark’s post, the issue was denied.
MT is just lobbing for a place to rest his head in a few years…lol
lobbying
Lobbing works.
Mark is lobbying for a few votes from the senior circuit for when he runs for V.C. So, MT? When do you make the FORMAL announcement?
LOL. Have you ever been there or know anyone who lived there, or had their parents move there, or look into it for your own parent? That’s what I base my lobbing comments on.
Hmm, possibly 200 village or the single story garden homes, but 250 is your typical nursing home replete with smell and for the most part, low staffing and everything that goes with it. IMHO
Greg, you are sorely misinformed as to the FV expansion plan, and way out of line. Avail yourself of the several opportunities at this site and elsewhere to find out that this plan in no way resembles a “nursing home.” I would venture that the quality and design of these condo- like buildings rival that of the majority of homes in this town. Perhaps even yours? The hyperbole and hysteria of the surrounding homeowners was , IMHO, ridiculous. The new residents would likely make very quiet, fastidious and model neighbors and the buildings are no taller than the mansions popping up all over town.
I had problems with the negative tax implications but that is another issue.
Amazingly it is still PC to ridicule and discriminate against individuals based on their age. We are seeing it up close and ugly in this election cycle and it is shameful.
Hmmm,
YOU DON’T GET IT. These people don’t want a big building in thier backyard. Is it your backyard Hmmm? No so lets leave it up to the lawyers who are involved in this case to finish it. If the Residents loose then the old farts can move in, but if they don’t I don’t want to hear a peep out of them.
I hear you Hmmm.
It goes without a thought for the Paris Hilton types to make fun of a person because of their hair color or texture of their skin….Could you imagine if she did the same with the “other” candidate’s skin color???!!!!
hmmm, sorry I think you misunderstood. I was not commenting on the type/style or quality of construction. Nor was I commenting directly to you. So I think you might be the one that is out of line. I would venture to say that I am on that property a bit more than you. The comment was directed towards the initial comment that FV is a great place.
Also, not only is it a loss of possible tax income for the village. Please correct me if I am wrong, but they dont’ pay because they hide behind the “church” ownership. So it has huge negative tax implications in addition to a potential hardship on the public safety system with an increase of calls for service. FV is in the process of expanding their campus on the east side of fairview already. Which will increase the calls for service, now add in the additional west side and where does that put the tax paying residents on the south side who contribute to the system when they need service and the rig isn’t there? Perhaps a huge impact fee would be in order.
Take the age of the future residents out of it , the type of construction, style and look at it from a stat/logistic angle. A concentration of users of a system that don’t contribute to the cost of that system.
Enjoy the weekend all, be safe
have a good weekend
You should all be ashamed of yourselves. The people that are and will be living at Fairview Village and places like that are the same people that worked hard, lived and payed taxes in our fair town for many, many years. These are the people that paid taxes so both are high schools could have indoor pools and these are the people that paid taxes so that we could have a new library built when the town had outgrown the old one. These are the people that paid taxes so that many of our schools, elementary through high school could have additions put on them to make room for more students. These are the people that kept the two outdoor pools that we havew in town open and operating so we could swim when we were kids. Should we run them all out of town now that they are “negative tax implications”.
Remember, You will be that senior citizen one day.
It takes a village, maybe Fairview village.
LOL on that post. Ashamed for having a discussion..
And the last time I checked I don’t believe anyone has said, To quote:” Should we run them all out of town now that they are “negative tax implications”.
I would like to see some planning done on the impact of the development. And please check, I doubt all of FV is comprised of all DG residents. The tax burden to cover those costs should be on the facility. The post seemed all based on emotion. I too as well as most if not all of the others who post here, whether they agree with you and I, are one of those people who work hard, pay taxes in our fair town, for schools, library, etc etc.
Not ashamed of my opinion.
Trish,
You go get us the demographic info that these people paid taxes in Downers Grove!!!!!!!!!! I am going to guess just like Friendship Village in Schaumburg that if you cant afford it you cant live there Trish. Find me that data that says that most of the FV residents are long time DG residents and I will NEVER argue that point again.
Oh ya and Friendship in Schaumburg gets residents from all over.
“Perhaps a huge impact fee would be in order.”
Maybe. They already donated cash and land for the park areas on the north side. No other senior facility has done anything like that, but they are (I think) the biggest facility in DG, at least acreage-wise.
FV can move forward with their to eliminate 52 or so beds in the nursing home and add (net) 190 1&2 bedroom apts. in the proposed new four story complex.
East side additions:
Park District donation $321,411.58
District 58 donation $81,504.52
District 99 donation $30,224.55
Total $433,140.65
West side (32 2 bedroom apts)
Park District donation $63,691.89
District 58 donation $20,932.49
District 99 donation $6,212.96
Total $90,837.34
Note: The proposed west side is a net donation giving FV credit for previously paid donations by Rosol Construction.
At least 118 current residents have lived in DG 20 years or longer.
http://www.downers.us/assets/production/agenda_related_doc/file/770/Active_c.pdf
You can check for yourself here.
I would imagine that if we have seniors living at Fairview Village that did not live and pay taxes in DG, then other towns have DG Residents living in their retirement villages. It’s a wash, they paid their taxes somewhere.
So Fairview Village does not pay property taxes ? I’m just curious. That is what is implied in some of these posts. Or is it just that they do not pay much as far as income taxes because they are retired ???
So basicly FV is indirectly paying off the village to get its way. Great, I hope the council remembers the ethics ordinance they just passed when they debate this issue in the future. Seems like there is some conflict of interest here.
Trish,
You were right!
MT,
You complain about a stupid sidewalk that is being built in your yard. I can only imagine if FV was putting thier appartments in your back yard. Keep that in mind dude.
Sounds like you have a stake in this game Greg. Problems with the zoning change? I’ll listen. But while I am a loooong way off from needing FV’s services I get offended when age is factored in the argument . It only serves to diminish your point. Maybe stop in a nursing home or,even better, volunteer and you’ll find that most do not smell or provide poor care.
I also have a problem with the exaggeration of possible ambulance calls. These folks wouldn’t be on ventilators. As a whole seniors probably do use EMS more often than younger residents but I imagine the parents of kids with asthma, allergies and special needs call 911 more frequently too. Should we discriminate in terms of their housing too?
Chad-
Please read the background on the FV issue, and if you still don’t get it talk to Comm Schnell.
The “stupid sidewalk”, and zoning for higher density in my neighborhood are not part of this thread.
And, really, I’m okay with you not caring about trees and quality of life. Why do you seem to have a problem with the idea that I DO care about trees and quality of life here in DG?
Nope, no stake in this game or any other for that matter. I agree with ya Hmmm, I have all along said let’s leave the age stuff out of it. Please review post 13. So i’m not clear on that part of your comment. No exaggeration of possible calls there. That’s my point. I believe I was leaning towards some work being done on to what the impact of service calls would be. See post 15. Let’s discuss the thread and not throw in the personal stuff. I don’t think it serves any purpose, nor adds to the discussion. And the last line about the children was off base and totally not related I felt.
Have a good week all
MT,
I dont have a problem with it. My issue is that you seem to support FV in thier quest to put in an apartment complex in peoples back yards. I am trying to say that when it comes to your block you are always vigilant. If your block is zoned for higher density then what would stop FV from buying your block and doing the same thing. Why then is it so different for us to defend the residents from a huge contributor to the village.
It appears Mr. Walz does not understand the Village’s subdivision and planned unit development ordinance.
Village ordinance requires that developers “contribute” money to the various municipal jurisdictions that are impacted by their developments, namely park and school districts, as well as comply with many other requirements like putting in roads, sidewalks, street lights, water, sewer, etc. When it was a “greenfields” subdivision in the past the developer often actually gave land to those districts, even built facilities.
There is nothing corrupt or unethical about this.
- FV is a nice senior center.
- The EAST side development is approved. Done deal.
- The WEST side development is not approved because residents there oppose it for many valid reasons, not the least of which is that council TWICE promised residents there that the rest of Fairview Ave there would be single family housing.
- I have never expressed an opinion for or against the WEST side proposal beyond noting it would upzone for higher density, and council has TWICE promised they would not do that again; once after Family Video at the corner, once after the townhomes immediately south of Family Video.
And there’s the rub; promises were made, that’s why I suggest you talk to Schnell. Has the facts and was there voting on both items.
Village Hall can set you straight for the required donations projects make to the PD, 58, and 99.
John, I understand it, doesnt make it right. Over $500k in PUD ords huh. What impact is FV going to have on the PD? Schools? Funny how these donations are already recieved. Last time I checked the project on the west side is still awaiting approval. Call it what you want John but that is wrong. That looks like a bribe.
“”Bribe” to whom, Chad? You’re making no sense.
The west side fees were levied when the property was previously divided for single-family residential development. Do you consider that a bribe?
The east side development is a done-deal, approved by the Council. Where were your opinions when it was considered?
I don’t have any position ultimate disposition of the west side development, except that the proposed fee structure is what the law requires.
You could best help the neighbors who are fighting the west side development by doing your homework, getting your facts straight, and maybe thinking before you blog!
Chad–You’re sounding a little testy lately. Just stirring the pot or do you have some beef that needs to be addressed?
EJ,
probably a little of both.