by Peter Furey, M.D.
Feb. 21, 2008
The Changing Character of Hinsdale
Hinsdale, Illinois has been an idyllic village in which to live, to raise families and to educate children for over one hundred years. Hinsdale’s Zoning Code, Article I, Sec. 1-102 states:
The overall purpose of this code is to maintain Hinsdale as one of the nation’s finest residential suburbs by preserving and enhancing its historic character as a community comprised principally of well-maintained single family residential neighborhoods and small thriving business areas to serve the day-to-day needs of local residents …to limit the bulk and density…. to preserve the existing scale of development…to protect public facilities and utilities from being overloaded…to protect residential streets from degradation by non-residential traffic.
With the economic boom of the 1990’s much of Hinsdale has changed. More than 30% of the housing stock has been destroyed, replaced by larger structures with less green space. Hundreds of magnificent large trees have been removed. The bulk and density have not been limited. The existing scale of development has not been protected. Schools are overcrowded. Public facilities and utilities have become overloaded. Residential streets have not been protected from degradation by non-residential traffic. Hinsdale now has over 1,200 multi-family units and the adjacent towns have many more. Recently, there has been an escalation of requests by developers to change single-family residential zoning to Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) to build multi-family homes, condos, offices, box stores, and a hotel. PUD projects do not require oversight by the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). The Board of Trustees alone can approve these projects. A few examples:
1. Ryan-Foxford LLC ”The Hinsdale Club”: This is a $250 million redevelopment of a 20-acre office park along Ogden Ave. The current plan calls for a nine-story 180-unit hotel, three eight-story 300-unit condominiums, town homes and retail shops. This proposal would require over 70 variances to the zoning code. Five liquor licenses are requested. Last May sixty Hinsdale residents filed a petition and asked the ZBA to review the plan. On May 29, 2007, President Woerner, without the approval of the BOT, filed a lawsuit (VOH v. Baldwin et. al.) against the residents. The ZBA was added as a defendant in July to prevent them from hearing the citizen’s appeal. Intimidated, 32 residents withdrew their names. Twenty-eight defendants have filed a counterclaim suit seeking a court ruling. At the BOT meeting on June 19, 2007, Trustee Smith made a motion, seconded by Trustee Cauley, to dismiss the action in the case of the VOH v. Baldwin et. al. Trustees Orler, Schultz, Follett voted against the motion. The motion failed. Trustee Follett then moved to continue to litigate against the residents. Trustees Orler, Schultz, Follett voted aye and Trustees Smith and Cauley voted nay. The motion passed to sue the residents. Trustee Cauley expressed his opinion that an appeal to the ZBA stays [stops] all proceedings to approve the development agreement. But Follett countered by making a motion to approve the agreement between the VOH and Foxford LLC and the motion passed with aye votes by Trustees Orler, Schultz, and Follett. Trustees Smith and Cauley abstained. The motion passed.
2. Hinsdale Meadows Venture, LLC has requested a change in zoning for 24.5 acres from R2 to R5 for a development at 55th and County Line Road. Instead of single-family homes, they can construct multi-family duplexes and homes on small lots. Nearly 2,000 residents have signed a petition to uphold the code and maintain R2 zoning. Residents believe that development should serve the needs of residents and not the economic desires of developers.
3. Amlings: The former Nursery on Ogden is zoned R2. The new owner wants to put a high-density development on this site and is requesting a change in zoning.
4. Episcopal Church: At the October 16, 2007 BOT meeting, the Episcopal Church property, was rezoned from R2 to a PUD, except for one lot. Their proposal will destroy two houses, one on each side of the church to increase parking. Tragically, a new house will replace the historic classic Italianate they plan to demolish next to the Hallmark House. This authentic streetscape will be lost forever. “Economics” was the reason given. It seems to be cheaper to build a new house than to replace the rear addition and save the original front of this historic home.
5. District 181- Middle School and Veeck Park: On January 18, 2008, Village President Woerner and 181 District President Lisa Armonda announced a proposal that D181 would sell Hinsdale Middle School to a developer and proceeds from the sale would go toward building a new middle school in Veeck Park. The Village would give Veeck Park to District 181 and the Village could get taxes from the condominiums and shops in the downtown district, a destination site for shoppers in the western suburbs. Again, this proposal supports high density, loss of green space in the center business area and no protection of residential streets from non-residential traffic.
President Woerner, Trustees Orler, Schultz, Williams, Follett Plan to Rewrite the Zoning Code
At the BOT meeting October 16, 2007: Trustee Follett, seconded by Trustee Orler, made a motion to approve a Professional Services Contract with Camiros, Ltd. for an amount not to exceed $199,530.00 to rewrite the Zoning Code of the Village of Hinsdale. Trustees Orler, Schultz, Follett and Williams voted aye and Trustees Smith and Cauley voted nay. The motion was carried.
President Woerner, Trustees Orler, Schultz, Williams, Follett
attempt to control the ZBA.
President Woerner, Trustees Orler, Schultz, Williams and Follett are consumed with attempting to eliminate the oversight of the ZBA. The following excerpts from the minutes of the Board Of Trustees document their intent.
At the BOT meeting June 5, 2007, President Woerner introduced a text amendment to the Zoning Code that would make the Zoning Board of Appeals an advisory board instead of an independent board. The final decisions about petitions for variances to the code would then be the responsibility of the Board of Trustees instead of the ZBA. Trustee Orler made the motion but there was no second and it failed to pass.
In a press release on September 28, 2007 President Woerner called for the removal of Tom Nelson, chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals. No specific charges were made. At the BOT meeting October 2, 2007, Trustee Orler, seconded by Williams, made a motion to have a Public Hearing to remove Mr. Nelson. Trustees Orler, Schultz, Follett and Williams voted aye and Trustees Smith and Cauley voted nay. Trustee Cauley stated that he was disturbed by the press release. He didn’t see it until it was released. He said it suggested the Board unanimously agreed to impeachment and they did not. He stated he strongly opposed this action. Trustee Smith stated that he could not support the motion. Trustee Cauley stated the Board should know the charges against Mr. Nelson before a vote is taken. He asked who is the court in this matter. Village Attorney Ken Florey stated that Illinois Municipal Code authorizes the body that appointed the person would rule at the hearing. The question whether or not to have the public hearing was called. Trustees Orler, Schultz, Follett and Williams voted aye and Trustees Smith and Cauley voted nay. The motion passed.
The charges against Mr. Nelson were finally posted a few weeks later and a Hearing was held October 30. Over 300 residents attended and demonstrated their overwhelming support for Mr. Nelson. The three charges were:
1.Violation of the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) in a request for documents regarding the “Hinsdale Club.”
The Facts: At the July 11, 2007 ZBA meeting, Tom Nelson proposed that the ZBA write a letter to the Illinois Attorney General to obtain a ruling relating to Ryan-Foxford’s “Hinsdale Club.” After discussion, the ZBA did not write and therefore did not send the proposed letter and therefore did not have a document from the Attorney General’s Office regarding the Hinsdale Club. On July 17, 2007 Foxford sent a FOIA request to the Village: “In regards to the application for appeal regarding the proposed development known as ‘The Hinsdale Club’ to the office of the Illinois Attorney General, including correspondence recently referenced during the special meeting of the Hinsdale ZBA on or about July 11, 2007.” Tom Nelson responded that there was no letter written about the Foxford development. The Village claimed he should have produced the letter he did read at the July 11, 2007 meeting but that letter was about the Johannson case and had nothing to do with the Hinsdale Club.
There was no letter written and therefore there was no response. The whole issue of the violation of the freedom of information act was nonsense.
2. President Woerner charged Tom Nelson with adopting rules and procedures for the ZBA that do not comply with the village code.
The Facts: The ZBA’s proposed rules and procedures have never been finalized. They have not been reviewed by the Village attorney to ensure they are consistent with the Village Code and Illinois Law. These rules are not finalized and have never been applied.
3. The third charge related to the ZBA entertaining the residents petition to review the variances requested by Foxford Developers.
The Facts: When 60 residents filed an appeal with the ZBA, the Board of Trustees, at great expense to the taxpayers, filed suit against the residents in declaratory judgment action claiming that the ZBA lacked jurisdiction over the appeal. Neither Tom Nelson nor the ZBA acted or heard the merits of the residents appeal. The ZBA waited for the Court’s decision and has abided by the Court’s decision. There was no misconduct relating to the “Hinsdale Club” appeal. These charges against Tom Nelson again were false.
The Trial
At the hearing, the Village Trustees served as prosecutor, judge, and jury in a “kangaroo” court. The outcome was puzzling. The testimony of witnesses and Mr. Nelson vindicated Mr. Nelson but the Board refused to vote. A closed session was held. President Woerner gave an ultimatum addressed to the entire ZBA not just Mr. Nelson:
- The ZBA will not appeal the Foxford decision or participate in the appeal.
- The ZBA will withdraw its rules and procedures.
- The ZBA will work with attorney Rob Bush to adopt rules and procedures that comply with village code and state laws.
- The ZBA will agree to keep all records at village hall.
- The ZBA will acknowledge and abide by Judge Kenneth Popejoy’s ruling regarding jurisdiction over planned unit developments.
On November 6, 2008 at the BOT meeting, Trustee Smith moved to approve the release of the closed session minutes of the October 30, 2007 Nelson hearing. The motion failed. At this meeting, Hinsdale resident Stan Balzekas said that tying the decision whether or not to remove Tom Nelson to how the ZBA would vote on future events is technically extortion. Resident John Bohnen suggested that Woerner and the four Trustees have done the following: reduce the ZBA to an advisory status, sue residents who dare appeal, rewrite the zoning code, impeach Tom Nelson, and intimidate the members of the ZBA. He said it is all about real estate and PUDs so they have total power to do whatever they want. He said that the conditions Woerner requested are illegal and violate his oath of office. Resident and ZBA member Bill Haarlow asked that the Board exonerate Mr. Nelson and offer him and his family an apology.
Instead, at a special meeting of the BOT, on December 13, 2009, Orler, Schultz, Williams, and Follett voted to remove Mr. Nelson. Only Cauley and Smith reviewed the accusations and presented the facts from the hearing that there was no evidence to support his removal. The other four Trustees repeated their false allegations and presented new unsubstantiated allegations to which Mr. Nelson could not respond. The final vote demonstrated that the hearing was a sham that one cannot act as accuser, judge and jury. Mr. Nelson’s fundamental right to due process was violated.