Special Meeting Monday on Groves at Corporate Reserve
St. Charles Planning and Development Committee to meet Monday, Nov. 5, after the City Council’s Government Operations Committee meeting.
The Groves at Corporate Reserve will be the subject of a special meeting of the St. Charles Planning and Development Committee on Monday, Nov. 5, immediately after the City Council’s Government Operations Committee meeting, the city announced in a release Tuesday afternoon.
The Groves at Corporate Reserve originally was planned for discussion at the regular Planning and Development Committee meeting on Nov. 12.
The project was first proposed as multiple office buildings and parking garages on 17 acres of a 50-acre site north of West Main Street at Cardinal Drive, which is west o Randall Road. Corporate Reserves purchased the site in 2008 and proceeded with the first phase of the development, which stalled as the Great Recession locked its grip on the nation.
The area is zoned office research space, but Schaumburg-based JCF Real Estate proposed last fall a dramatic revision of the project, with new plans for a $40 million luxury apartments complex featuring between 300 and 400 units in three- and four-story buildings on 17 acres of the property. The developers had hoped to break ground in April.
But the plan quickly ran into opposition. St. Charles Patch reported in November that residents and some aldermen were critical of the project’s density — that there were too many units packed too closely together in the area. The developers had revised the plan at this point to include 407 units in the project.
Then, in July, St. Charles Patch reported the developer had scaled back the project to 331 units and made other concessions, but the changes failed to meet the city’s affordable housing requirements, offering instead to make a $50,000 contribution to the city’s Housing Trust Fund; but under the city’s ordinance, eliminating affordable housing from the project would have obligated the developer to pay $2.6 million, city officials said at that time.
Since then, talk of the project has slowed, although residents’ interest and concerns about it remains high.
Information about Monday’s meeting will be posted on the city’s website on Friday, Nov. 2, according to the city’s release.
For more information, contact Matthew O’Rourke, Community Development Department, at 630-377-4443.
Let Patch save you time. Get more local stories like these delivered right to your inbox or smartphone with our free newsletter. Fast signup here. Like us on Facebook.
Henry James
11:23 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Thank you Patch for posting this story. Once again we are trying to stuff a high density apartment development down the throats of the people when there is nothing that dense near it. Why does it appear that some elected officials seem to think they are there to represent the developers instead of the people. Last time I checked my taxes go to the City I am the one paying their salaries, not the developers. Oh wait this is Illinois maybe the developer is paying them too.
Ted Schnell
11:40 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012
I have not been covering this issue very much yet since much of it was developing before I am on board on July. But I have seen contentious plans “move through the process” in other communities. From what I have seen, written about or edited, the elected officials are required to go through hoops just like the developers do — to ensure there is a level of fairness being applied to all sides and that all voices are heard, from residents to businesses to surrounding property owners. It seems to me that the due diligence elected officials are required to follow sometimes gives folks the impression that the developer is being favored — especialy when the critics feel there is such overwhelming opposition to a proposal that it should be rejected, never to appear again. Yet America is the land of second chances, especially where there is money to be made … which is why developers keep revising their plans and returning.
Henry James
12:00 am on Thursday, November 1, 2012
Ted I agree that they give them the chance to present their plans. But as was said by the developer of Lexington Developmentown attorney(who happens to be the same attorney as Corporate Reserves) at a meeting he has been working with the Staff and Administration for 5 years and the developer was given this direction and he was shocked to see this is not what the Council wants. There was a similar concern with Corporate Reserves. If the Council had more input at an earlier level it wouldn't be so shocking and most likely would not even come this far into the process. What I see is the City has spent the last 6 years pushing extremely high density apartment and townhome developments instead of focusing on economic development.
Ted Schnell
12:43 am on Thursday, November 1, 2012
Henry, you may very well be right -- I was simply pointing out that what I'm seeing here -- and what I've been reading from Nick Swedberg's and Alex Keown's excellent past coverage for St. Charles Patch -- is not much different from what I've witnessed in other communities, and reflects my general understanding of the process. It's also a chess game of sorts, with both sides weighing the advantages and disadvantages of this or that concession. City officials look for a balance of residential and commercial/retail that will best serve residents and generate tax dollars the community needs to support itself. The developer comes in looking to make a living just like you or I, and will leverage whatever he/she can to achieve that. In the course of things, everyone is examining criteria by which to make judgments, and that criteria can be objective -- like a bottom line -- or subjective. It will be interesting to see how this evolves and what other factors enter into the equation.
josephine s.
11:58 am on Thursday, November 1, 2012
Ahhhh, there, you said it, Ted: "a BALANCE of residential and commercial/retail that will best serve residents AND GENERATE TAX DOLLARS." . The "more rooftops" theory of econ devel is flawed: build more, they will come & buy and shop. The answer is not that simple. There are several reasons why the "if/then" synergistic formula of current residents/local consumers/city prosperity/ growth is not working. Lack of vision in devel. decisions made by Councils long ago & dysfunctional land use: loss of 2 big box stores,catalyst for growth on Randall in 2 adjacent towns, poor positioning of a mid-size mall creating a "domino effect" in surrounding retail strips, density of multifamily, gradually degenerating into mainly low-end renters and worn-out property, placement of multifamily along precious Randall corridor, past economic incentives starving our current city needs and security. Built a 30M-plus bridge before shoring-up and growing center & east-side commerce, further emptying downtown and east side stores. Existing housing stock sits empty, from foreclosures & low, slow, choosy "buyers market". Build more & they will come? And do what? Take Red Gate bridge to support So. Elgin, from the east. Take Randall to Geneva, Batavia, So Elgin on the west. FIX what we HAVE. Now is the time to preserve commercial/retail zoning,create incentives not costly to taxpayers . Cater to US, your residents, in the equation, St Charles!
Ted Schnell
3:25 pm on Thursday, November 1, 2012
I was not referring to the philosophy of building more homes to attract developers -- no matter what planning/development philosophy you follow, there has to be a balance. In that regard, by the way, every theory has flaws. As I see it, the trick is understanding which best fits the community based on a list of criteria that is too long to discuss here. The other thing to consider is that implementation and assessment of any plan takes decades. Decisions made 20-30 years ago are still having ramifications today -- not just in St. Charles, but in any city or town you pcik (unless, of course, they've only been established in the last 15 years or so. :)
josephine s.
9:14 pm on Thursday, November 1, 2012
In 2008, St Charles hired Lynn Montei Assoc. to draft an aspirational "2014" Strategic Plan, on a shorter timetable of 3-10 yrs to function differently from the Comp Plan, which they framed as a "reactive" document, at that time. That's what those are for-vision and forward-thinking. Did not say that YOU were referring to "more rooftops", Ted . You missed my point. Exactly what you said-balance between development that serves the community, does not foresake it, and opportunities for new revenue streams-- is not accomplised by building more residential, or rezoning land residential at this time, and with these current conditions in St Charles. I also did'nt mean to imply that St Charles is alone in our current condition. (Altho I did say that Geneva & Batavia have indeed reaped rewards of our short-sightedness)Decisions made 15-20-30 years ago natureally don't stand up to market trends and economic conditions & that's why "smart " redevelopment strategies are needed. I DID imply that in St Charles, "more rooftops" is a mantra among some past & present leadership and current staff..... and let us not forget to press our candidates for their position. At least one mayoral candidate may well be the loudest cheerleader for residential density that we have ever seen!
josephine s.
9:15 pm on Thursday, November 1, 2012
Ted, you are doing a yeoman's job, covering our St Charles issues.:)
Ted Schnell
11:56 pm on Thursday, November 1, 2012
Thanks, Josephine -- and thanks for clarifying your point.
At one time the written word was considered the perfect form of communication. That has changed significantly over the past 100 years. Today, we're a culture of talkers and listeners and find it more difficult to read the nuances and tone intended in another's writing. I enjoy forums like this immensely, but as I just demonstrated, in this day and age, it's all too easy to misread a comment.
Henry James
8:32 am on Friday, November 2, 2012
Ted I get where your coming from and in most cases I completely agree that this is how the process works and how it should work, but the problem with this one is the West Side of St. Charles has basically been under attack with high density developments, the residents don't want them, they would be okay with development with lower density, the Council is not being informed of all the information just as it was a shock to them that it was being announced in a meeting the other night that Lexington was being brought to the P&D meeting on the 12th, yet the Council was not told this, and The Mayor is pushing for a positive vote for Corporate Reserves. Why when the City needs economic development is the Mayor pushing for apartments on a great piece of office property.
On another note I think you and Patch do a great job of getting the local news out and giving the people a chance to get information out that normally could not be shared easily. Thank you.