While plenty of folk have criticized the neighbors, I'll note that as yet no one has offered any explanation why it is in our village's interest to grant a special use permit for this particular proposed land use.

Or is that irrelevant?

First of all...I hate those Montessori kids just as much as the next guy. What is your question, counselor? Are you asking why the village would do something that a neighbor doesn't want? It is because they can.

Also, how does the use of this church violate the following guidelines...other than the neighbors don't want it?

CHAPTER 10 - Administration and Enforcement

(E) The Plan Commission shall not recommend that a Special Use be granted nor shall the Village Board grant a Special Use, unless it shall find, based upon the evidence presented to the Plan Commission in each specific case, that the Special Use:

1. Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the general objectives, or within specific objective of the Comprehensive Plan and/or this Zoning Code;
2. Will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area;
3. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighborhood uses;
4. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewers and schools, or that the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use shall be able to provide adequately any such services;
5. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services, and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the Village;
6. Will not involve uses, activities, porcesses, materials, equipment and/or conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, propoerty or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke fumes, glare or odors;
7. Will have vehicular approaches to the property, which shall be so designed as not to create an undue interference with traffic on surrounding public streets or roads;
8. Will not increase the potential for flood damage to adjacent property or require additional public expense for flood protection, resuce or relief; and
9. Will not result in destruction, loss or damage of natural, scenic or historic features of major importance to the community;

I hope this issue works out for the neighborhood as much as the next guy. But looking it these guidelines...I can't imagine why the school would be denied. Other than the fact that the neighbors don't want to be in the presence of these Montessori punks (who would?), there doesn't appear to be a reason to deny the special use permit. And this administration has a shoving things through that people don't want. One has to wonder how this brouhaha will hinder Trustee Armstrong's political ambitions in the spring.

The Western Avenue construction traffic hasn't been too horrible. However, the traffic that will come when the new clinic opens will be more than I think anyone is expecting. There was an article in the Herald last week, read it here, that states:

"The new facility has upgraded diagnostic testing facilities with comprehensive exams geared for women, including digital mammography and an ultrasound suite.

The clinic also has expanded physical therapy space. The first floor contains retail space and an optical shop.

The medical staff will be increased by about 145 employees."


Yeah, that won't make traffic a nightmare on Western. I can barely back out of my driveway during rush hour now....can't wait.

quote:

I can't imagine why the school would be denied. Other than the fact that the neighbors don't want to be in the presence of these Montessori punks (who would?), there doesn't appear to be a reason to deny the special use permit.

I find this offensive. I don't believe these neighbors do not want the school there because of it being a Montessori school - it is because of the increased traffic. Your attack on Montessori and assumption about the neighbors is in poor taste.

Ummm, that's Clam's humor.

And I understand that people don't like traffic. Trust me, I really do. But, the reality is there is a church in the neighborhood that needs a buyer and a bunch of kids in a Montessori school is alot better than other things that could go in there. Would the neighbors like a full time PADS facilty better? How about a counseling center for people overcoming addictions? Don't get me wrong, I care deeply about the homeless and addicted but that would be a less sensible and safe use of a facility in a residential neighborhood.

quote:

Originally posted by Amy:
The Western Avenue construction traffic hasn't been too horrible. However, the traffic that will come when the new clinic opens will be more than I think anyone is expecting. There was an article in the Herald last week, read it here, that states:

"The new facility has upgraded diagnostic testing facilities with comprehensive exams geared for women, including digital mammography and an ultrasound suite.

The clinic also has expanded physical therapy space. The first floor contains retail space and an optical shop.

The medical staff will be increased by about 145 employees."


Yeah, that won't make traffic a nightmare on Western. I can barely back out of my driveway during rush hour now....can't wait.

But Jan will love the increase dry cleaning business. Interesting how the impact of a medical facility (read "commercial property") is a thumbed nose salute to the neighbors, while a preschool causes an uproar. Punks.

quote:

Originally posted by mom:

quote:

I can't imagine why the school would be denied. Other than the fact that the neighbors don't want to be in the presence of these Montessori punks (who would?), there doesn't appear to be a reason to deny the special use permit.

I find this offensive. I don't believe these neighbors do not want the school there because of it being a Montessori school - it is because of the increased traffic. Your attack on Montessori and assumption about the neighbors is in poor taste.

I am doing my best to offend as many as possible so I never, ever run for political office in this town .

BTW, mom...my mother has the exact same name. And picking on Montesorrians (my guess is that isn't a word) isn't like picking on Catholics or whatever kind of group is currently operating out of that cute little church. Jeez.

I have clearly been watching too much HGTV, but one of my first thoughts was what a cool house that church building would make!!!

Agreed.

Well, that's true.

quote:

Originally posted by GEmom2:
I have clearly been watching too much HGTV, but one of my first thoughts was what a cool house that church building would make!!!

Funny, I have had the exact thought! However, I am not certain that the neighbors would like the fact that we have a lot of parties!

quote:

Originally posted by GEmom2:
I have clearly been watching too much HGTV, but one of my first thoughts was what a cool house that church building would make!!!

I thought the same thing...that is, once all the asbestos, which is surely there, is removed.

Maybe, but go to their website - www.christchurchinglenellyn.org and look at that sanctuary. It has beautiful wood beams and ceiling, windows and stone walls.

I would move there...but the neighbors would not welcome me. Mom has already shown that she dislikes me. Apparently I am "offensive" and "insensitive" and "overweight" and "lack culture" and "rarely bathe." Other than that, I'd be a great neighbor.

This story, linked to the church's site, paints a very similar factual picture to the facts as I stated....and as rejected as "seemingly" wrong.

Again, facts.....not evicted by a Montessori...but foreclosed upon/evicted by the current owner, a company out of Iowa...who is looking to sell to the Montessori.

It is interesting how anyone found out about this sale though - since there was no for sale sign in the yard. Who did the sellers contact?

quote:

Originally posted by Clamato:
I would move there...but the neighbors would not welcome me. Mom has already shown that she dislikes me. Apparently I am "offensive" and "insensitive" and "overweight" and "lack culture" and "rarely bathe." Other than that, I'd be a great neighbor.

Yet people seem to really like you around here.

quote:

Originally posted by GEmom2:

quote:

Originally posted by Clamato:
I would move there...but the neighbors would not welcome me. Mom has already shown that she dislikes me. Apparently I am "offensive" and "insensitive" and "overweight" and "lack culture" and "rarely bathe." Other than that, I'd be a great neighbor.

Yet people seem to really like you around here.

Facts "are" or "are not"....they don't "seem."

quote:

Originally posted by GE Fan:

quote:

Originally posted by GEmom2:

quote:

Originally posted by Clamato:
I would move there...but the neighbors would not welcome me. Mom has already shown that she dislikes me. Apparently I am "offensive" and "insensitive" and "overweight" and "lack culture" and "rarely bathe." Other than that, I'd be a great neighbor.

Yet people seem to really like you around here.

Facts "are" or "are not"....they don't "seem."

seem - def. 2 APPEAR TO BE TRUE to appear to exist or be true, used especially to lessen the force of the following statement, usually by suggesting uncertainty or mitigating criticism, often for the sake of politeness or for use discussing the opinions of those who don't pick up on Clam's sarcasm.

I guess I don't really feel all that strongly about this one way or the other, other than my perception that in several past instances I believe the village has paid insufficient heed to the reasonable interests of existing neighboring property-owners when approving development.

I know little to nothing about zoning law or the granting so special use permits. But I recall looking at a zoning map and seeing that this particular property is zoned low density residential. Apparently schools and churches are permitted uses in residential areas.

It seems to me, however, that if the use of a particular property in a residential neighborhood property is going to change, it should change in a manner that does not impose a greater burden upon neighboring residents. In my opinion the change from a church to a school is a significant change in the use of this property. And it seems to me that a school will reasonably be expected to have different traffic flow than a church, even without the proposed new driveway.

I'm very comfortable with a presumption that property that is zoned residential be primarily used for residential purposes, with existing church and school uses primarily being grandfathered in.

I'm curious at the motivation for the property owner wanting to sell to Montessori. Are they getting more cash than they would for residential housing?

My position is not influenced by "preservation." I'd have no objection to the existing church building being rehabbed into - or torn down for - a residence. Maybe a nice set of "flying nun" dormers, no?

Where was the neighborhood outrage over that situation, Dinsdale? Where???