We first professed our appreciation of NIMBYs (“Not In My Back Yard”) four years ago, in our post of 04.21.08 addressing an attempt to open a PADS homeless shelter.
Back then a group of local church officials and some City politicians, led by then-mayor Howard Frimark, wanted to ignore the City’s Zoning Code and stick the shelter in the basement of St. Mary’s Episcopal Church. But a group of NIMBYs loudly challenged that plan (and a subsequent one for St. Paul of the Cross school) on a variety of grounds, including zoning considerations; and their efforts quickly captured the attention and support of residents throughout the City for enforcement of the zoning requirements that ultimately kept the PADS shelter out of Park Ridge.
Now a new NIMBY cause celebre has arisen in response to the Whole Foods store planned for the corner of Touhy and Washington.
The NIMBYs oppose the zoning change known as a “map amendment” – from R-5 (multi-family residential) to B-1 (retail and office) – that passed through the City’s Planning & Zoning Commission last Tuesday night by a vote of 9-0, and which now moves to the City Council for final approval. The site is currently occupied by: (a) a long-time vacant, 2-story 76,000 square foot office building at 225 W. Touhy Ave.; (b) a long-time vacant 2-story 30,000 square foot office building at 1 S. Washington Ave.; and (c) 269 parking spaces.
The proposed Whole Foods store would be a 1.5 story, 38,000 square foot structure. According to the proposed site plan, the Advocate health care office building immediately east of the site on Touhy and the medical office building immediately south of the site on Washington would remain.
A number of neighborhood residents (i.e., the NIMBYs) and a few residents from outside the neighborhood have sounded the alarm on this project, raising concerns about traffic, congestion and safety – especially of the children who have to cross an already pedestrian un-friendly Touhy Ave. when walking to and from nearby St. Paul of the Cross elementary school. Ironically, some of the opponents to this new zoning change from R-5 to B-1 opposed the change from B-1 to R-5 for the same site back in 2007, when this same developer, along with Norwood Builders, tried to construct a 4-building, 168-unit condominium complex there.
But real estate market forces made that project unworkable, and so the developer is coming back to the well with a new concept believed to be better suited to the changed real estate market.
As we wrote in our 02.01.12: “[W]e welcome the idea of a Mariano’s and/or Whole Foods locating in areas that otherwise might prove alluring to yet more multi-family residential developers.” And, frankly, we see almost all pluses from replacing a total of 106,000 square feet of perennially-vacant office space with 38,000 square feet of retail space, especially the higher-end kind of retail that Whole Foods represents.
In response to NIMBY complaints, the developers claim to have looked at other sites in Park Ridge but that none would accommodate the kind of store Whole Foods wants for Park Ridge. Assuming the developers are telling the truth, that casts the issue as a simple up-or-down one: Does Park Ridge want a Whole Foods or not?
Assuming the answer to that up-or-down question is “yes,” it should still be incumbent on the City to do whatever it can – notwithstanding the limitations that come from Touhy and Northwest Hwy. being state roads over which IDOT has principal authority – to address any real problems and dangers that arise from turning underperforming property into what we hope will become a thriving retail business. That means analyzing and balancing all the competing interests in a deliberate, well-reasoned and wise manner, relying on facts rather than anecdotes and mere opinion whenever possible.
Coping with increased traffic – both vehicular and pedestrian – in that area would appear to be the most significant challenge, one that will require a lot of attention and, perhaps, some innovation.
By raising these issues the Whole Foods NIMBYs already have provided a valuable service to the community. But that shouldn’t be the end of it. Should the project be approved by the City Council, we sincerely hope that the NIMBYs will work with the City and the developer to minimize those problems instead of simply taking their ball and going home.
Because, at the end of the day, we’re all in this together. And the first order of business is to do what’s best for the community as a whole.
To read or post comments, click on title.
19 comments so far
Having a Whole Foods in our community would be awesome! I love the grocery store in Deerfield and in Evanston.
I do understand the issue of congestion that Whole Foods would bring. Hopefully, as you pointed out, there will be some innovative or creative ways to make it work.
Certainly the city should look at the traffic and parking issues but are the NIMBYS suggesting that Wholefoods will cause a NOTICEABLE increase in traffic…..on Touhy!!!! Please!!! Along with the normal commuter traffic, there are already hundreds of semi trucks per day that drive down Touhy. A few with Wholefoods on the side are not even going to be noticed. Along with that, I believe that deliveries occur very early well before school opens. The kids already have to cross a busy NW hwy and Touhy. I cannot see how Wholefoods is going to increase the risk in any dramatic way. Truth be told, the real risk has more to do with someone yammering on their cell phone than any Wholefoods related traffic.
I guess we could ask Wholefoods to open at 10AM, well after school opens and close at 2, before school closes….they would do that, right??
EDITOR’S NOTE: We’re not aware of any of the complaints about extra traffic being tied to Whole Foods delivery trucks but, instead, to the additional traffic from Whole Foods customers – which makes sense, especially given that those office buildings haven’t even had “office” traffic, much less grocery shopping traffic, for years.
We do, however, agree with you that we don’t see how the risks to pedestrians will increase where there already are 4-way traffic signals and “Walk/Don’t Walk” lights.
I attended St. Juliana grammar school (which, as we all know) is directly on Touhy avenue. And years later I was hit by a car blowing through the red light at that location. It’s always been a troublesome street full of speeders and giant trucks, as far as I’m concerned.
Now that I live a few blocks off of Touhy, I avoid it at all costs. I’d rather lose some time going thru the side streets than dodge the manic drivers that use Touhy as their personal expressway.
Maybe the WF would create more traffic. And maybe, just maybe, if the traffic pattern were altered it would slow things down just a little bit around that area. Is that so bad?
EDITOR’S NOTE: There already is a 4-way traffic light at Touhy and Washington to control both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Isn’t that enough safety?
I do not live in that part of town and my kids do not go to SPC so I will have to plead ignorance as to whether they already have a crossing guard at that intersection. I know they have one at the train tracks mainly for SPC kids so I would think they already have one at Touhy. If they do not I would think that would be a “reasonable” addition if there are concerns.
If the NIMBY’s want to pony up the extra tax $$ then fine, buy the property and put up a park. If not, let Park Ridge be business friendly for ONCE and let a Whole Foods be built. How much tax $$ has to be passed by because of BS politics in PR. Let’s ask the pub that was supposed to be on Main street how BS politics goes in PR..
EDITOR’S NOTE: Let’s not mix apples and oranges here. The Irish pub isn’t in PR because the investors – although fine fellows – didn’t want to pony up the extra cash it was going to cost them to address various problems NOT of the City’s making.
Putting a park there is one of the dumber ideas we’ve heard, and that’s saying something – because in the years we’ve been following local government and politics we’ve heard plenty of really dumb ideas.
“Should the project be approved by the City Council, we sincerely hope that the NIMBYs will work with the City and the developer to minimize those problems instead of simply taking their ball and going home.
Because, at the end of the day, we’re all in this together. And the first order of business is to do what’s best for the community as a whole.”
We’re on the same page here…I was at the meeting and ended up speaking out in support of Whole Foods after listening to objection after objection.
I was so frustrated upon leaving, despite the 9-0 vote, that I wrote a letter to the editor of the local papers essentially asking the same thing. Change can be frightening. But in this case it seems inevitable given the current economic/fiscal situation. Instead of fighting it and complaining about it I think it would be a lot more productive if we as a community could come together and try to deal with the issues that come along with it.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Thanks for showing up, no matter what side you’re on.
We are no fans of change simply for change’s sake. We’re old enough to remember when products were advertised as “New and improved” where, now, just “New” is enough to get the attention of many people. So we’re not sold on a Whole Foods just because it’s “new” – although many people seem to believe it’s also an improvement over the other grocery stores in town.
But if the NIMBYs are right on this issue and can make a convincing case for their position, they do the rest of us a dis-service by simply going along to get along. Let’s see what happens when the matter gets to the Council.
806, they already have a crossing guard there. Apparently they haven’t been sufficiently trained in the particular hazards of that apparently extra-dangerous intersection because a few who objected to the WF at the meeting said they think the crossing guards aren’t adequate protection.
Ironically, we live on the north side of the six corners intersection and we have designated that Touhy/Washington intersection as the “safe” one to use to get Uptown even thought it adds a little bit of distance to the walk. To hear the NIMBYs talk I should be reported to DCFS for allowing my kids to actually cross there.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Some people demand complete and perfect safety…at least when they leave their bunkers.
I can’t understand why whoever owns the building have allowed them to run down.
They were occipied for years and there’s the red building on Northwest HWY. and Washington St. which is still occupied I believe.
EDITOR’S NOTE: It’s a chicken-and-egg argument, Mike: What comes first, a lack of tenants paying rent or dilapidation of the building?
“….because a few who objected to the WF at the meeting said they think the crossing guards aren’t adequate protection”.
I try to look at these issues logically but now I am really confused!!!
Are they saying that they are OK with sending their kids walking across that intersection on their way to school aided by a crossing guard today, but if and when a WF opens a crossing guard will be completely inadequate??
If I am not mistaken the morning bell goes off at 8AM at SPC. That would mean that those kids would be crossing that intersection prior to WF even opening (virtually every WF I have ever lived near or gone to opens at 8AM).
I agree with some of the previous comments about Touhy and the way people drive on that street but guess what??…it was that way when the kids crossed the street this morning and it will be that way tomorrow morning. I fail to see how the addition of a WF would suddenly up danger factor to make it dramatically different.
On a final note, if you assume that the buildings that are currently there were fully occupied, with employees and customers coming and going, there would be additional traffic. People would be ariving for work about the same time SPC opens. In other words, the site as designed, if in full use, would appear to be unacceptable to these folks.
If, rather than WF, it was 10 smaller stores selling various products that would still add traffic. If they really want multi family residential, first no developer will touch it as they canoot even sell exisitng condos in town, and even multi family units that would cover that space would add traffic.
EDITOR’S NOTE: No, you’ve got it figured out just fine – which probably explains why the P&Z commission voted 9-0 to approve restoring the zoning it had before it was changed to R-5 a few years ago.
One can argue that if the current 106,000 square feet of office space was occupied, most of those officeworkers would arrive between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and leave between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m., while WF customers will be coming and going throughout the day. But that does not seem to make WF traffic inherently more dangerous than operating office buildings.
On the other hand, vacant office buildings generate no traffic, so the status quo probably works just fine for the NIMBYs. For the rest of the community, no so much.
I like the idea of WF in Park Ridge. But I have heard that Ald. Jim Smith wants a high-rise senior citizen condo development at Washington and Touhy. Any chance that might happen?
EDITOR’S NOTE: None whatsoever. The current devloper of the WF is one of the same developers who tried to develop condos there a few years ago, and that developer has said there is no market for condos in Park Ridge at this time.
As we understand it, Smith wants a Mariano’s at Cumberland and Touhy for his buddy Elliott and, therefore, Smith needs an excuse to oppose WF as a competitor of Mariano’s. But, then again, we try not to speculate on what’s going through Smitty’s mind at any given time.
If anything, it would seem to me that the 7-9AM and 4-6PM “rush hours” would make the office senario more dangerous. The WF traffic from 8:01 AM (one minute after the store opens)to closing bell (2PM??) occurs while the kids are in school.
EDITOR’S NOTE: We don’t disagree, but talking about either of those options making a traffic-lighted intersection “more dangerous” seems like idle speculation without any supporting facts.
“Are they saying that they are OK with sending their kids walking across that intersection on their way to school aided by a crossing guard today, but if and when a WF opens a crossing guard will be completely inadequate??”
No, they basically said that the crossing guards are barely able to protect the kids now because the traffic if so horrific and that the addition of WF and the hordes of additional cars would make it virtually impossible for them to continue to do their jobs. They were also outraged that the crossing guards were not consulted by the firm who did the traffic study, being the “experts” they are on that intersection.
A couple people mentioned how the traffic on the way to SPC is so dangerous that they are “forced” to drive their kids to school just a few blocks to ensure their safety. I wonder if they have ever considered that by doing so they are in fact contributing to the traffic “problem?”
And when the park idea came up I could hardly believe the contradiction. After person and after person has just cited the dangers of that intersection the NIMBYs then decided a kid magnet like a park would be acceptable. I was just waiting for them to propose locating the playground right at the corner of Washington and Touhy. Because that makes about as much sense as many of their arguments.
EDITOR’S NOTE: If traffic already is “horrific” at a fully-signaled, crossing guard-assisted intersection, people SHOULD drive their kids to school in order to “ensure their safety.” Same goes for Maine South parents who want to “ensure” their kids’ safety. And while they’re ensuring kids’ safety on the way to and from school, they hopefully are doing it the remaining 24/7.
Bodyguards anytime the kids leave their homes and yards? Monthly physicals to ensure that health problems are caught at the earliest possible time? Replacing the family SUV with a halftrack?
Bubble-wrap, anyone?
Everyone I’ve heard from is in favor of Whole Foods. While we all remember fondly your long-ago comment that it would take a lot of wasabi mayo jars to make the same sales tax revenue as one auto, the fact remains that any retail will help ease the tax burden, a lot or a little, on the homeowner. One of the best things about the City is the creative tension between maintaining the ambience of Bedford Falls and bringing in conveniences for how we really live today. The NIMBYs have their role as the loyal opposition and stand as an essential, usually well-researched and articulate counterweight to the powerhouse developers who routinely bulldoze City staff and elected officials into submission. The NIMBYs are joined by what one wag has called the NOTES (Not Over There Either, Stupid), at which point it gets a bit harder to sympathize. However, the challenge of distracted, careless drivers in a town full of kids and seniors is a real problem and deserves to be treated seriously. The more unsafe it appears to be on foot, the more car congestion. Maybe Whole Foods will cause enough extra traffic that the selfish ones will have to slow down for their own sakes.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The beauty (and safety) of bumper-to-bumper traffic?
Why would anyone consider a park at this location when the Youth Campus just opened up 11 acres of green space?
EDITOR’S NOTE: Process of elimination: no market for high-rise condos; no market for single-family homes; no market for office buildings; and don’t want a Whole Foods. Not much left beside “park.”
Maybe PRPD could take the land. Don’t we need another pool in town??
EDITOR’S NOTE: No.
Sorry about that. It was a bad suggestion. I mean the kids would have to cross Touhy to get to the pool, right?
EDITOR’S NOTE: No, another pool is a bad suggestion, unless it’s an indoor one. The issue of kids crossing Touhy doesn’t even get reached.
You have so limited a vision! You pooh-poohed my idea for water parks at the youth campus and the old caddy property… thus eliminating any chance of tax dollars coming from those locations. Now, since we are going to create and live with a whole new set of problems at Touhy and Washington, I guess you’re going to pooh-pooh my idea that Whole Foods should construct a huge water park (with steam calliope) on the roof of their food store.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Let us know when Whole Foods submits its grand plans to Planning & Zoning.
Some random thoughts…
If WF opens at 8:00, there is not going to be much of a traffic issue before school as I doubt people will be lining up before the doors open. And I’m guessing there isn’t going to be a mad rush for a blue light special at the same time as school gets out, so yes, there will be more cars, but come on people.
Besides, after school most of the SPC kids don’t cross Touhy, they head uptown to congregate on the sidewalks in front of the Library and Subway. Hey, maybe the sales tax from WF will make up for the lost revenue from people who avoid Uptown after school.
And speaking of the hordes of SPC kids uptown after school, drivers are just as concerned about accidentally hitting one of your children as they dart between cars jay walking on NW Hwy and Prospect as you are about them crossing with a guard at Touhy.
Isn’t it true that a good majority of the NIMBY’s are really more concerned about traffic cutting through the “Country Club” area than an increase on Touhy? They wouldn’t be using SPC kids as leverage, would they? Perhaps the same people who oppose the Sr. group housing across from NE Park.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t people say the same thing about Trader Joe’s? As I recall, there were going to be senior citizens from Summit Square and T-ballers from Hinkley laid out all over the place.
I don’t want it to sound as if I am not concerned for the children’s safety, because I am, but perhaps there should be more of a focus on how to improve the general safety overall. With or without WF. Instead of throwing out unrealistic suggestions like making it a park, how about looking into something like a pedestrian overpass?
EDITOR’S NOTE: We don’t think Touhy and Washington is considered part of the “Country Club” neighborhood. But irrespective of that, we think Touhy would have to be the Indianapolis Speedway before kids (or most adults) would consider climbing up onto a pedestrian overpass to cross it.
We need the tax revenue here for sure. But – too bad you missed the film piece by a Lax ch 7 crew on the food that is gown and packaged in China for Whole Foods.
Enjoy!
EDITOR’S NOTE: No, we saw that news piece. But what we must have missed is the Whole Foods bankruptcy filing caused by all its customers defecting to Jewel, Dominick’s, etc. because of that Ch. 7 news piece. By any chance do you have that bankruptcy case filing number for WF?
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>