With beautiful new homes standing along cozy cul-de-sacs and framed by meticulous landscaping, a recently completed subdivision often elicits oohs and aahs from passersby. Perhaps it’s the kind of place where they’d like to raise a family or spend retirement years.
But before empty acreage becomes a residential community, developers spend months, maybe years, gaining the necessary approvals and support from local municipalities and an assortment of other organizations and agencies.
Peter Brennan, general counsel for Town & Country Homes, estimates six years will lapse between purchase of land for the Baker Hill community in Glen Ellyn and sellout of the homes built there.
“It’s definitely been an extended process,” he says.
The company’s early plan called for 270 town homes, 16 single-family homes and a 10-acre retail center. Nearly two years and about 16 meetings with village planners and trustees later — all open to the public, it was given approval to build 190 town homes, a 15-acre shopping center and no single-family homes. This number despite the fact the 50-acre tract at the northeast corner of Roosevelt Road and Illinois Highway 53 was within the city limits and appropriately zoned for its corporate vision.
Those 16 meetings included two with the architectural review commission, nine with the plan commission and five with the village board. The plan commission never did approve the plans for Baker Hill, so Town & Country stopped negotiating with it and went directly to the village board, which is the body that ultimately votes yea or nay.
Is this overkill in an era of widespread griping about the size and scope of government? Is this the shackles put on business that we hear about, especially around election time? Or is it, perhaps, the kind of government demanded by the citizens of the cities and villages of the Chicago area–a good example of the people having their say?
The developer who went through 16 meetings defers to the latter explanation.
“The reason this took longer than normal,” says Town & Country’s Brennan, “was (that) so many people were interested in the property. There was so much public participation,the discussion went on and on. If it had gone faster, it would have been better for us, but that’s the country we live in. People get a chance to stand up and speak.”
Public comments about the Baker Hill proposals were positive, negative and in between. People questioned the number of homes to be built, the configuration of streets to be built or altered, and the number of mature trees to be left standing. Some felt the shopping center was unnecessary while others lauded the healthy competition and tax revenues it represents.
The village board is required to listen to the commentary, not necessarily abide by it, explains Richard Dunn, the village’s director of planning and development.
“If that affects (developers’) thinking, they might follow the advice of the citizens,” he says.
Many governmental decisions about development have to do with adherence to a master plan for the community, a sort of map of the future, in addition to public comment.
Furthermore, there are the economic needs of the community to consider: Is the town rich in housing but poor in revenue-producing businesses and industry? There also are zoning codes and any variances that are deemed desirable and proper to accommodate new development. Rules and regulations about density and size of buildings are often numerous throughout the suburbs.
Town & Country and the village finally came to an agreement on Baker Hill and ground was broken for the models a few weeks ago. But only after concerns of several other governing bodies and interest groups were addressed as well. These included the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Illinois Department of Transportation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Forest Preserve District of DuPage County, ComEd and the adjacent Philip J. Rock Center and School. In addition, Town & Country agreed to pay “impact fees” to two school districts, the fire department, park district and library to offset additional usage by Baker Hill’s new residents. Such fees are also common in the Chicago area, and help keep property taxes more in control.
The protracted process “allows the municipality to have the type of development it wants to have and still respect the property and the developer’s rights,” says Dunn. “It also helps insure storm water management and the structural health and safety and aesthetics are correct for the site. Some communities allow pole barns to be built.”
“It’s a balancing act,” says Brennan. “The process can be frustrating at times, but it’s just something you have to keep moving forward with.”
Not all residential projects undergo the scrutiny that Baker Hill has, but it is a rare project that passes muster the first time. The standards, codes and fees vary from municipality to municipality. Some require exteriors be of brick or that garages have alley access. Others have formulas for how large a home can be built on lots of certain sizes.
“Some villages won’t sign the annexation agreement unless you’ve made peace with the school board,” says Richard J. Brown, chairman and chief executive officer with the Libertyville-based Cambridge Companies, which has 23 residential communities under construction in the Chicago area. “The school board knows you can’t go in until you give them what they want. The donations can get high. On one project we backed off because we felt we could not build a product which we felt was competitive.”
Sometimes, but not always, the bureaucracy is less complicated the further the development is from the city, he says.
“In some municipalities you don’t have as many steps to go through, but you still have things you have to get from the state and historical and endangered species” agencies, he says. “If you’ve got a certain kind of bird nest on the property or a certain kind of field rat and it’s an endangered species, you’re in trouble.”
At Scarsdale Woods, a single-family-home community that Elliott Homebuilders is building in Arlington Heights, the property butted up against park district and school property. Before getting the go-ahead, Elliott was required to donate about 10 percent of its land to those bodies to create a larger tract of open space.
“In most cases they take cash because it doesn’t make sense to have little tiny parcels of land all over the place,” says Mark Elliott, president of the Morton Grove-based company. “For us, many times it’s better to give cash rather than lose the opportunity to build another house.”
Allen Schulman, an attorney and president of NorthStar Homes in Northbrook, sought a lot-size variance for his latest project of three custom homes in that municipality. The parcel, annexed from Cook County about 10 years ago, originally consisted of three lots that met the county’s width requirement then. They are 25 feet narrower, although much deeper, than Northbrook now allows. He pleaded his case and won over objections that he should build only two homes.
“The zoning process is no less intense and no less expensive on a three- to seven-lot subdivision than if you’re building 80 or 90 homes,” he says. “When you start spreading the cost, the more expensive it is per lot.”
Developers want to get approval, but they also hope to get it at a time of year when they can maximize their investments.
“If you get it in the middle of winter, it’s too cold,” says Schulman. “There is frost on the ground and you can’t do your earth work or put in streets. You’re sitting there stalled until spring.”
Municipal approval is the biggest hurdle developers face, but not the only one. After a project is approved, the developer can apply for building permits and begin construction. Land improvements, streets and utilities come first. Inspections are frequent. As the homes are constructed, municipal officials check for sturdy foundations and to make sure the mechanical systems conform to the building code. Several inspections are typical, says Cambridge’s Brown.
“Some villages have a single inspector pretty well trained to do everything,” he says. “Others have different inspectors for everything.”
The final step is the occupancy permit, which is the municipality’s stamp that the home is habitable.
In general, the developers are either understanding of or accustomed to the regulatory processes required to complete a community. Some say the number of steps could be reduced or fees lessened.
“Some municipalities are so bogged down in bureaucracy, which costs extra time and money,” says Brown. “That ultimately costs the homeowner.”
How much that adds to the price of a house depends, the developers say, on the municipality and the size of the subdivision, though pre-planning expenses are pretty much the same whether you’re building 50 houses or 200.
But some developers and builders say that impact fees alone–money paid for new schools and parks, for example–can add thousands, maybe even $10,000, to the cost of a home.
“There are very few (regulations) I’d take issue with,” says Elliott. “Appearance committees make sense in theory, but they can be very subjective in deciding whether this house fits or doesn’t fit. Building codes are fairly objective. If it says you have to use a 3-inch pipe here, you use a 3-inch pipe here.”
Appearance commissions, however, serve a couple of purposes, says Randall Deerfield, director of community preservation and development for Park Ridge.
“First of all, we like to see that what is new fits in with what is existing, and not totally out of character,” he says. “We also like to think that what comes in will be of quality architectural design.”
Park Ridge established its appearance commission in 1990 in response to a high number of older homes being torn down and new ones built in their places.
“The new was destroying the character of some of our older, nicer neighborhoods,” he says.
It would be hard to imagine that builders and developers enjoy the governmental approval process, or that governments and the people they represent hate development.
“It’s a lot of hard work and a lot of anxiety,” Town & Country’s Brennan says, “but once you start to move dirt, it’s one of the best feelings to have in this business.”
HOW IT WORKS IN THE CITY
Creating a residential community within the Chicago city limits isn’t necessarily easier or more difficult than in the suburbs, but some of the concerns are different, say those who have worked on residential projects in both areas.
“They all have a system and you work with it,” said Michael Newman, president of Golub & Co. in Chicago. “I don’t think any of the processes are easy.”
Golub is developing The Bristol Condominiums, 57 E. Delaware Place, and co-developing Arlington Town Square in Arlington Heights with Joseph J. Freed & Associates in Wheeling.
One difference is the strength of neighborhood and special interest groups, which tend to be more organized in the city.
“Dealing in the city, some of the established organizations have been around a long time,” says Newman. “When they come out, they come out with a unified front. It’s easier to work with them. In the suburbs, if a group has a gripe about a project, they tend to be the vocal minority.”
That minority can sometimes garner negative press toward a particular project, even when a project of that type was deemed appropriate by the local government years earlier, he adds.
“How can you prevent someone from doing something that is part of the village process?” he poses. “That’s frustrating for us.”
On the other hand, city developers need sanction from local aldermen, who must introduce legislation in support of a building project before the city council votes. A few developers believe this requirement holds them hostage to aldermen, who may insist upon conformation to the demands of neighborhood groups before they act.
“It gets frustrating when you look up in the zoning book and think you can build `X’ and realize you can’t rely on it,” says one developer, who has built in both the city and suburbs.
Michael Peterson, president of Diversified Real Estate Concepts Inc. in Chicago, is more forgiving of the system.
“It’s really done on a good-will basis,” he says. “It’s very important to receive the blessings of the neighbors in order for the city to receive a project with open arms.”
One current Diversified project is Park Pointe, 520 N. Halsted St., a five-story town home and condominium community with fitness center, retail center and courtyard. Construction will begin in June.
City developers also say they seldom run into impact fees, which are donations to park districts, libraries and other municipal services to offset the additional population moving into a new community. Few developers encounter wetland problems but, depending upon where they build, may have to work around historic preservation issues.
The importantce of open space, long demanded of suburban developers, is growing in significance in the city. Increasingly urban developers are required to allocate a portion of their land to grass, landscaping and courtyards.
“One of the key components to successful development in Chicago is to work in terms of green space,” says Peterson. “There is so little of it. These things also add a tremendous amount of class to a project.”
Yet another challenge to city developers is building on a small piece of land and in high-traffic areas. They must find places to store their materials and dirt piles until they can be used or removed. Suburban developers usually have the luxury of space.
“Parking is more difficult,” says a developer who has worked both in and out of the city, sharing the lament of thousands of residents and businesses. “It is hard for your trades to pull up to the property. Everybody gets tickets.”
