Wasn't it discussed that this development would be tax-subsidized specifically for low-income residents? I think some of the concerns about background checks might be related to this point. Unfortunately, that point was missing from this article.

I live in Water Chase and clearly there is a misunderstanding by some of my concerns. Let me make this unmistakable clear - I am not against seniors or senior housing - this is entirely untrue and in fact -- I love seniors!! My grandparents both lived in NL until they passed away (both in their 90s), my parents who are seniors live in NL, and I have friends who are seniors who are my greatest mentors. (sorry because of character restrictions my response is in a couple of postings.)

The area in which the building is proposed is on 3.016 areas. It is surrounded by the gas station, the day care center, the high tension wires, and Calistoga Drive – so the lot itself cannot be increased in size. If you put the currently proposed building up (what was submitted to the village on February 2nd) with parking there is no room for anything else. There is no room for any outdoor space such as walking paths, a picnic area or even an area for just sitting outside in the shade like a gazebo. These same concerns, as well, were expressed by the village as you can see in the article. To quote the article, “…’village staff did not recommend approval for the plans...’, and in the author’s opening line, ‘…received backlash from village staff…”. Where are the residents going to walk around, exercise or just be able to sit down and get some fresh air?? If you look around you can see that the other recent developments in NL have been required to plan and provide for this type of common outdoor open space. This requirement for open space is repeated several times in the village code. But more importantly – it is just the right thing to do. Would you want (or want for your parents or grandparents) to live where there was no place to walk around outside except for a parking lot? I think not. Michael maybe you could get from the village a copy of exhibit F from the developer’s February 2nd proposal which shows the proposed use of the land?

As for the other comments, I am not going to address each one but I do ask you to consider a few things. First, the article that was written as an overview/summary of a public hearing that lasted well over an hour. And because of this sometimes when the full context of a question/comment is not known the comment/question can be easily misinterpreted and wrong conclusions can be made. As an example, the discussion regarding ambulances/emergency responders had to do with the freight rail tracks on Cedar just north of Laraway. With the significant increase in freight train traffic, vehicular traffic backs up on Cedar regularly because of the time it takes for these trains to pass. What is the plan to get those of us who live south of the tracks to the hospital quickly? In a medical emergency such as a stroke or heart attack, minutes can literally make the difference in a positive or negative medical outcome. And, maybe there is a plan for all of us – but I think it is something that needs to be discussed. Studies show the risk of stroke doubles for each decade between the ages of 55 and 85 (source: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stoke), if you are proposing a high density residential building for seniors, I think this needs serious consideration.

According to the developer, the development needs to be at least 48 or 50 units or it will not meet the requirements for state funding. There are other locations in NL that have larger tracks of land (and they are out there) that will follow the spirit of the village code and village’s future land use map BUT most importantly do what is right for the seniors – provide them with walking paths and other open outdoor space amenities and an assurance they can get to the hospital quickly when minutes make a huge difference in medical outcomes. Let’s make this a WIN-WIN for everyone!!

In conclusion, if a large development was going up near your home, I think you would want to be able to discuss it and voice your concerns - this is why we have public hearings. Let me repeat this again – my opposition has nothing to do with seniors or senior housing – I love seniors. I ask you to step back and look at the real issues instead of jumping to conclusions based solely on emotional hot buttons.

When you buy a home next to vacant land, the best you can do is check existing zoning laws. The developer is requesting a change to zoning laws to accomplish the development.

Right or wrong I think we have all seen this happen before. An emotionally charge topic is introduced into a discussion and people join into the conversation based on THIS topic and what ends up happening is a group of people get labeled, to quote the author, “sad” when in reality they never said/felt/believed in what they are being accused of doing.
There are many reason for doing this, the following are few: i) it allows the person or individuals to gather support -- not based on the real issues of the discussion but on an emotional hot button, ii) the person or group of individuals is able to continue to divert the conversation away from the real issues rather than address them, and iii) it enables the person or individuals to place a label on the other side to make them out as bad or ‘sad’ people. (again sorry but because of character limits my response will continue below)

My opposition has NOTHING to do with seniors (I love seniors) it has to do with a high density residential apartment building (50 plus units all under one roof), the size (3.016 acres) & proposed use of the land it is being developed on, and the real safety concerns regarding getting people to the hospital quickly when minutes literally make the difference between positive or negative medical outcomes.
Some individuals have tried to steer the discussion or make it look as I/we are against the seniors. I ask you step back and consider what we are truly questioning/opposing. And,then ask yourself, who is really looking out for the seniors and what is BEST for them and the village of NL as a whole? As I said earlier, let’s make this a WIN-WIN for all!!

Another Concerned NLCitizen - My comment didn't "label" anyone "sad" , my comment said, in my opinion, the comments made by residents were "sad", nothing else. And based on the following quotes from the article, I stand by my opinion and comment!!
"Residents in the Water Chase subdivision, which is just to the east, weren’t as happy with the chosen location. During the public comments, six residents spoke against the plan and more were in attendance. "
"They worried about lighting in the parking lot having an adverse affect on their homes, the fact that the building is three stories and how maintenance and landscaping would be handled. They also asked whether potential renters would receive criminal background checks and worried about the impact it could have on new building in the incomplete subdivision. "
"Others were concerned with a potential increase of ambulances in the area, both because of the noise of the sirens and because of the possible barrier of railroad tracks between the housing and the new Silver Cross Hospital."

To say that my comment was not based on the real issues but on an emotional hot button, is incorrect, my comments were based directly on what residents were quoted as saying. Everyone on the south-side of the tracks should be concerned about getting to the hospital when trains are blocking the tracks, not just low income seniors. Just as you are entitled to your opinion, so am I. Best thing is more people will be at the meeting, pro or con.

@Judd the last update I have on the Bristol Meadows senior housing you mentioned at Schoolhouse is that the developers were working on getting tax credits for the project.

Did you read the same article that I read? I don't see Trinity Services mentioned in the article, or anything about 30% of profits. Did I miss something?

To Judd -- The article doesn't tell the whole story. At the initial planning meeting on this subject, the Trinity relationship was discussed and it is a matter of public record which can be verified with the village. It sounds fraudulent to me to use a not-for-profit umbrella to get taxpayer monies but I will let the Attorney General look into that.

To Reality -- I live in the real world and you need not tell me to grow up. I AM a senior citizen but I knew when I began getting out of bed and going to work every day for 40 years that I needed to save for my retirement and I did just that. I intend to protect that which I worked long and hard for. Don't stand in judgment of me. Check it out, there will never be a tag day held for William Bolker, his net worth is in the several millions ... again, a matter of public record. You're correct, Mr. Bolker's corporation did build the bandshell but he has also been involved in legal disputes with the village regarding the same ... again, a matter of public record. I don't begrudge Mr. Bolker making money ... I will not, however, allow him to use my tax dollars on a project from which he will profit. He's down in Florida for the winter ... but he'll be back for the next meeting on the 21st ... he can easily afford the airfare!

@Concerned NL resident: I wasn't at the initial plan commission hearing on this, but the Trinity Services ownership was discussed briefly during Tuesday's meeting. I didn't include that in the article because there was a lot discussed at the meeting that I wanted to focus on, and that wasn't one of the main points of contention. It is, however, a story I'll be following up on, so thank you for reading.

Reality, I have many issues with the development; I do not know Mr. Bolker personally. If you care to do so, check out corporationswiki.com and reference Willaim N. Bolker. He has a vested interest in five corporations (that he has reported) according to Dun & Bradstreet (for a fee, more detailed information is available but the site will give you an overview). We built our dreamhome in NL but before doing so we did our homework and investigated the Calistoga subdivision ... single family one-story villas and the 3 acre commercial land between the gas station and the day care center "might be a bank, or a bakery, or maybe a dry cleaning establishment," but no one ever said "it might be subsidized housing" which will lower your property value. This type of development is plentiful in Joliet but seniors don't want to live in them because over time they become dangerous places. I agree whole-heartedly with Marie's comments which follow and I stand by my earlier comment that no tears need to be shed for Mr. Bolker.

Thanks, Judd! I'm finding retirement to be quite boring so far, maybe I should look into the trustee possibility. It is refreshing to find a few people to discuss community issues with in an intelligent manner. I've been on topix.net but it is riddled with ignorance and immaturity. I will continue to go to any/all public hearings regarding subsidized housing in New Lenox in the hope of preventing the social issues that inherently come with it.

@Jill there is a senior housing development planned for the area by the Jewel Plaza at Schoolhouse and Laraway, but the last I heard they were still working on getting tax credits to help finance the project. Here's a bit more information on that project: http://newlenox.patch.com/articles/after-parking-lot-changes-board-gives-senior-development-green-light