Proposed 15-home development faces opposition in Palatine

A developer is reworking plans for a 15-home subdivision in Palatine, but not because nearly three dozen residents showed up to a recent plan commission meeting to oppose it.

While those neighbors voiced concerns about the development’s impact on already problematic flooding, village staff said KF Walter Homes needs to downsize the proposal to meet zoning codes. Otherwise, it won’t support the project at 262 W. Michigan Ave., just northeast of Birchwood Park.

Commissioners voted unanimously not to recommend approval, leading the developer to ask the village council to remove the proposal from its April 9 meeting agenda while modifications are made.

“The developer wants to change his plan slightly,” Assistant Director of Planning and Zoning Kevin Anderson said. “There’s a way he can redesign plans so they would be in compliance.”

Several residents, most of whom live in the Pleasant Hill subdivision to the immediate north, said the area can’t handle additional homes because of frequent flooding from nearby Salt Creek.

Officials acknowledge the water troubles, saying the property, which is owned by Deer Grove Covenant Church, falls in a flood plain. Also, Pleasant Hill was built in the 1950s with infrastructure, such as undersized sewer lines, that would be considered substandard today.

However, village engineer Mike Danecki reiterated that because the Michigan Avenue proposal is downstream from Pleasant Hill, its water would have no effect on the existing neighborhood. Regardless, Anderson said developer Gregory Rose plans to build a retention basin much larger than required.

“He’s actually going above and beyond what our code requires,” he added.

While water isn’t a concern to village officials, both the number and size of homes are. Palatine’s current zoning for the property would permit just eight homes, a prospect the developer said isn’t economically feasible.

Anderson said it’s possible for KF Walter Homes to eliminate one lot, build 14 homes and comply with a certain zoning designation. However, the council may not approve even that plan because the homes would be smaller than what officials envisioned during a 2007 review of the property.

Much larger homes are located nearby, and officials have voted down similar proposals in the past due to the contrast in size.

It will be at least a month before the council will consider any revised proposal because the developer would have to go back before the plan commission, Anderson said.