The Long Grove Village Board has followed the recommendation of the Plan Commission and voted against a controversial proposal for a country inn, restaurant and cultural center.
Trustees voted 4-2 against the plan, saying it had become too extensive for the 14-acre parcel on Old McHenry Road.
“This is simply too much for the site and also too much for the adjoining properties,” ssaid Trustee Ed Hoak, who voted against the proposal.
He said he felt the developers, Long Grove Venture 2000, had tried to circumvent the Plan Commission.
“It would be a crime to ignore the Plan Commission’s hard work,” he said, referring to a 12-page recommendation from the Plan Commission criticizing the proposal.
But developer Bill Feldgreber said, “I don’t feel that the Plan Commission or the trustees gave us enough guidance as to making changes in the plans that would have made them more acceptable.” He said his group is still considering an alternate plan.
About 50 of the 75 residents at the meeting wore yellow paper badges reading “No to Venture 2000.”
“I feel that the weight of the world has just been lifted,” Susan Vanderbosch said, adding that she helped circulate petitions against the plan.
Although trustees said they liked the inn idea, they did not favor the expanded plans for a cultural center, restaurant and outdoor entertainment venue.
“We desperately need at least one country inn in the village,” Trustee Timothy Burns said, “and it needs to be within walking distance to the business district,” as the proposed inn would have been. He said he favored the inn because it “would enlarge, enhance and preserve the park area.”
The park area runs along the rear of the site and is a buffer between the commercial and residential areas.
The location of the property, just west of the historic business district on a narrow two-lane road, has played a key role in the debate. The developers and some residents had contended the location is ideal for drawing shoppers and visitors into the downtown business district during the week, when business is slow. Other residents, however, have maintained that the site should not be developed because they fear harm to the environment and increased traffic and noise for nearby homeowners.
The controversy has raged since the plan was first proposed in February.
The property in question includes a 3.6-acre parcel, known as the Mangel property, and 10 acres, known as the Terzian property. A house on the latter parcel would have been converted into a community cultural center under the plan.
Some residents said that the proposed complex would have added to traffic congestion on Old McHenry Road. They said they collected 702 signatures against the proposal.
Last month, the Plan Commission issued a scathing 12-page recommendation against the plans. After six months of discussion, commissioners voted 7-2 against the development.
In their recommendation, they found that “the proposal would impose unacceptable burdens on the adjoining properties and on the affected neighborhoods … aggravate existing traffic congestion … and impose burdens of excessive noise, light pollution and loss of privacy” for neighbors.
