This is the second in a series of posts on the aggressive expansion of the College of DuPage on its 273 acre campus. This post looks at some of the recent issues, concerns, some of the problems and some of the causes for the concerns of our association, which is on the western border of the college. We're not the only neighbor with issues as a consequence, and what the college does on its campus affects run off, the wetland within its campus, traffic and what people view when they sit on their patios and porches. It also affects the nearby lakes, air quality and nighttime lighting levels. I should state that I live about 1500 feet from the problem area. So I have neither a direct view of the campus, nor am I directly and immediately affected by the doings of the college. However, as a fiduciary, I am required to act on the behalf of all residents of BLMH. We could argue the merits or pitfalls of this college, be it traffic or the influence on property values. That is another discussion and another post.
A summary of the June 19th County Development Hearing meeting is included at the end of this post. The college president did state that construction of the enlarged "pond 9" will be completed in 2012, and the "material staging area" off of Gloucester and Salisbury will be cleaned up. It will all be green and restored to something pleasant in 2012. A portion of the "Planned Development Site Plan" is contained at the end of this post.
This will be a lengthy post. Photos, etc. of "before and after" comparisons of the campus, and green belts on the west and southwest areas of the campus are included.
Is the Problem Resolved?
Some of our residents have concluded the issue of COD expansion is resolved. It is not. The college faces some difficult choices. Expand to the extents of its borders or spend more on multi-level parking and maintain a green space on it's perimeter and contented neighbors. Or scale back future plans. The college seems committed to the addition of about 570,000 square feet of buildings on the campus. Some of this will replace existing buildings scheduled to be demolished. The question for the new buildings is not "if" but "when." At present the college cannot state a precise timetable.
I am of the opinion that the college has made it's choice, the current respite is temporary and the college will continue the push. Within the campus there are limits and trade offs to achieve the desired growth. The
college has already reached some of them. That's why the eager, somewhat careless expansion into formerly green, buffer spaces and the backyards of the neighbors.
Alternatives
There are finite financial resources available, and I surmise that the college would rather spend it's borrowed money on buildings than on multi-level parking. There are over 900,000 residents in DuPage county, only a few thousand within sight of the campus, and perhaps 100,000 in the 5-mile radius. It is possible the college feels mandated or justified in doing what it chooses. Somewhat like the perceived, God-given rights of the settlers of America, as described in the book "Nature's Metropolis." I know, this is the 21st century, but old habits die hard and our "progressive" community college has a mission to fulfill. The trustees live some distances from the campus. I suspect they may not have considered the issues for the immediate neighbors, or perhaps did not care; it's "out of sight, out of mind," so when it's time for that evening meal, they'll have it ensconced on their patios some miles away, or within the confines and with the mechanically contrived views of the "Waterleaf" restaurant on the campus. They'll be certain to avoid the newly designated "Service Area" which they have decided to build at the other end of the campus, in our lap.
However, Dr. Breuder, the president of the college, has stated that there will be a "green" belt along the western edge of the campus and separating us from these plans. For the moment, buildings, etc. in that area have been removed from the site plan of the campus. The CMC building will be to the east of "Pond 9."
The Apparent Plans of the College
I attended the June 19 Development Committee Meeting for the county. The item of interest was the petition of the College of DuPage which had begun as a large scale expansion request as part of its move from oversight by the Village of Glen Ellyn to oversight by DuPage County. The development meeting was the second of three current steps in the process. COD is a large "community" college and is one of (11) colleges and universities within DuPage County.
Two other BLMH board members attended this meeting as did several owners. When the opportunity was presented, I made a brief statement. You have probably read that the college has scaled back it's "official" expansion plans. That is true to the extent of what has now been submitted to the County for immediate approval. Ultimately, it seems the college will attempt to bring them to fruition at some future date. The college desires, I understand, an additional 570,000 square feet of buildings. What is undetermined is when they will be built, precisely where, and what their size and configuration will be. During the May ZBA meetings, a college representative stated that some may not be for a decade or more.
The college is constrained by its 273 acres and available funding. For all of its alleged beauty, the college, in its need to handle about 30,000 daily students, requires an incredible amount of parking space. If one looks at the aerial view of the campus it seems to be, as much as anything, one huge parking lot; I've included an aerial photo. Make you own opinion.
I am unaware of public mention of multi-level parking facilities by the college. If this ever occurs, it would effectively increase the size of the campus and free up a lot of space for those new buildings that the college desires. But asphalt is relatively inexpensive and the college has not yet completely built to the extremes of the campus. It is trying, however. That is the cause of some anguish for the neighbors!
One would hope a long term plan would avoid building and then demolishing parking. This has been an indicator of the magnitude of the space problem facing the college. A truly long term plan
would "re-invent" the campus. At present, there seems to be a more or less traditional architectural, cookie-cutter approach with stunning buildings, lots of parking, and green space where available or where it suits a specific purpose. For example, the "Inn at Waters Edge" which boasts "Each room offers floor to ceiling windows facing a peaceful lake." We do wonder if this was the source of some of the stuff that was dumped in the "material staging area" within yards of our patio steps! Perhaps I am cynical, but I don't think such a sacrifice is necessary for that wonderful college next door!
Synergy is Needed
There does not seem to be a synergistic or holistic approach to the campus. Given the recent issues of material staging, partially completed ponds and plans for muti-story buildings in neighbors laps, I think what I am saying is pretty apparent. During the June 19 hearing, the president and representatives of the college used the word "community" to describe their school, not once, but several times.
A "community" college would consider how it can be an enhancement for its neighbors and how it could contribute to their lives. This is not rocket science. Synergy goes well beyond the minimums of investigation of the immediate community in which it resides, or the impact of its plans and vision on that community. A progressive college is a lot more than bricks, mortar and landscaping. It is far more than a temporary daily respite for its students. It has the possibility of being the nexus of the community. COD seems to have once embarked on that journey, but then lost sight of the prize, or that vision collapsed.
COD borders on several communities. It has the capacity to join Glen Ellyn and Wheaton. It can transcend old rivalries. But that is a different vision, a different possibility. Connecting the borders of Glen Ellyn and Wheaton creates a unique possibility, rather than creating boundaries. The college seems to have turned its back on that possibility, choosing instead to extricate itself from its community and elevate itself to the county. And yet, the college is completely surrounded by residences, some 35 years old, and built when the college was comprised of a few low buildings on a much smaller campus. Some of those buildings, allegedly built 40 years ago as "temporary" buildings, are to be demolished. It's easy to tear down, it's easy to build; exceedingly difficult to create.
The college may now talk community, but it remains to be seen if it can "walk" community. The mud slinging with the Village of Glen Ellyn has left a sour taste in many mouths. Using the funds of the community collected via real estate taxes to sue the community in which it resides was not a good thing. If the residents of BLMH felt aloof that the disagreement was "in Glen Ellyn," or had any doubts about the vision and intention of the college, it was clarified when the college destroyed the ambiance of our most easterly homes, and then went on to attempt to permit a treatment facility, water tower and numerous buildings in what was formerly green space.
I don't think these were the actions of a college concerned about their neighbors, or about the impact on the lives of those around them. I would say it was pretty callous and was done with complete disregard for those neighbors. Aggressive college expansion plans have resulted in a "scorched earth" policy, as far as some of our residents are concerned! Ahh, that's what happens when progress and money collide with living spaces. Welcome back the wild west, where it's the ranchers versus the farmers!
The View from Above
Here's a recent aerial photo of the campus and adjoining residential neighborhoods. As can be seen, the college has used most of the space in its central campus area and is now forced to expand into the green areas to the west and to the south. In that direction and even within the college boundaries are "Zone A" Special Flood Hazard Areas.
The eastern portion of the campus includes the tennis courts and stadium. Earlier trustees and management wisely built soccer fields, practice fields and so on, on the perimeter which is against existing residences to the west and south, and in the vicinity of the "Zone A" flood hazard areas.
BLMH is also adjacent to these areas and is completely developed and was built in 1974-1978. We are elevated and are not in the flood areas. However, with their proximity it's reasonable to be concerned by any alteration of drainage, runoff and water flow control. Runoff from CODs "wetland" flows into the southern lake and we do maintain the shoreline of that lake. The following photo shows the college, as well as portions of the neighborhoods immediately adjoining. These include BLMH to the west, St. James Catholic church to the northeast, and Glenfield Baptist Church to the south, near the southwest corner,
This aerial photo was before the decision to remove the green space on the western border of the college, The green tone of the photo is attributable to summer growth. As can be seen, the college maintained a buffer to the communities to the west. This was all the more important because there is nothing separating the apartments on the north, and BLMH in the middle of the campus, from the college. Portions of the southwest areas of the campus "Before" and "After" are shown elsewhere in this port:
Click to enlarge this, and other photos:
Here's a more recent aerial photo, taken early spring 2012, and before summer growth:
Source: Google
The June 19 Development Meeting
I had the opportunity to have a brief conversation with Dr. Breuder, the president of the college, who explained the latest "Planned Development Site Plan" of the college and answered a few questions. We discussed the "Material Staging Area," the enlarged "Pond 9" construction and the issues of BLMH with the college's aggressive and, in my opinion, irresponsible expansion immediately against homes on Gloucester. During the hearing, Dr. Breuder addressed the Development Committee and those present. Some of my conversation and statements of Dr. Breuder are contained in this post, and a more lengthy report on the meeting is at the end of this post.
Dr. Breuder addressed the assembly and stated "The College of DuPage prides itself to be a good neighbor." He also announced a program of improved communications with the neighbors including an "open office" and regular meetings to be held in the spring and fall.
However, as the statements of the college representatives continued, the southwest corner of the campus was described as the
"Service Park" which will contain the new "CMC" building. It is 42,000 square foot, to be built in the southwest area of the campus in what was "college 7" parking. The "CMC" designates "Campus Maintenance Center" and it was stated that it will replace the existing "L" Building, which is to be demolished and has been removed from the "Planned Development Site Plan" of the college.
However, the "L" building is in the
northwest quadrant of the campus!
This was the first time I have heard the college speak of an official "Service Park" on the campus. It is to be adjacent to a flood hazard area and wetland and a pristine residential community. This revelation is one of the reasons BLMH has come to be apprehensive about the plans of the college. It remains to be seen if this college will be a "good neighbor" in the future.
Building a "Service Park"
One of the surprises of the June 19 meeting was the statement by the representatives of the college that the southwest corner of the college is the "Service Park" of the college. I took exception to that description and made a public statement during the hearing. The next photo
is what the southwest corner of the campus looked like prior to the work to expand the parking, which was announced in 2011 and began that summer. There is a large green space along the western boundary of the college, extending from the "M" building west and to the wetlands to the south.
This was the philosophy of previous college leadership; to create and maintain a buffer to the residences on the perimeter of the campus. The "M" building is clearly visible to the west of existing pond 6, as is the large wetlands in the southwest corner. That is within the boundaries of the college, and under college control. BLMH Lake #4 is partially visible in the extreme southwest corner. A church, unaffiliated with the college, is in the space to the east of the wetlands. This is a non-retouched photo, but it does have an overlay of streets and the boundaries of the college, to make it more understandable:
Source: Yahoo.
The next aerial photo is of the same area, and is better resolution. It was taken prior to completion of the construction of the "Early Childhood Center," south of pond 6. That is also prior to the construction of "Pond 9" and the "material staging area" to the southwest of the "M" building. The only touch-up in this photo is the addition of the "M" to label the "M-building" which the college has announced is to be demolished. Again, it is obvious the southwest area was a green space, no "service park" or anything to indicate that it is used as such. There is only a tall antenna in or on the edge of the wetlands, and to the southeast of the parking area "College 7:"
Source: Bing, (c) Navtek.
How to Deal with Limited Space and Accomplish Stated Goals
Here's what the college did to deal with its expansion goals. Next is a "Before" picture in summer, 2010, in the area to the east of Gloucester. Our residences are clearly visible, as is one of our walks:
Here's the same area
"After" the college's announced "parking improvement program." There is a new chain link fence installed at the property line and the area has become what was later acknowledged to be a "Material Staging Area." The "pond 9" which was to be in this area was not completed in 2011 as scheduled. The photo was taken in the early spring 2012. The rectangular "patch" at the end of the driveway at Gloucester is a large grass mat that was laid in the fall of 2011 to deal with a water main repair by our association.. This gives some idea of the proximity to our patios:
Next is the "wetland" on the southwest corner of the college campus, in summer, 2010. The existing radio tower is clearly visible. That wetland is designated a "Zone A Flood Hazard Area" by the county:
Here's the same "wetland" area earlier this year, after expansion of the college roadway:
The Conversion of "green space" into a college "Service Area"
Here again is the aerial view of the southwest corner of the campus as it existed in 2010, before the improvements the college promoted as a "parking improvement program." Do you see any evidence of a "service area" for the college in this photo? The homes on Salisbury and Gloucester are clearly visible on the left of the photo:
A more recent aerial photo follows. It shows the same general area after work by the college as part of its "Parking Improvement" program of 2011, and the conversion of the green space to the southwest of the "M building" to a "material staging area" which I have stated is a euphemism for "dump." It also contains the unfinished "Pond 9." Note the proximity to the residences to the west, and the wetlands. This area is now the "service area" of the campus. How can the college say that? I suppose all it takes is bulldozers and money! This is why I challenge Dr. Breuder's statement on June 19 that the "college prides itself in being a good neighbor." Good neighbors don't do things like this. When I lived in a private residence in Wheaton, had I done this on the far end of my property and adjoining my "neighbors" the city would have been all over me, as would my neighbors, and rightly so. But the college elevated itself above the communities it serves. Perhaps, as it resided in Glen Ellyn, the issues for Wheaton residents were of no concern? I do hope the college will fix this in 2012 as Dr. Breuder stated during the June 19 hearing:
Source: Google.
The next photo shows the existing northwest corner of the campus, which was the "service area" of the campus, if there was one. But note the "green space" buffer to the apartments adjacent to the northwest corner of the campus. Previous college leadership understood that these were sensitive, residential areas.
The "L" building is to be demolished, and it will be replaced by the CMC building to be built in the southwest corner, in the area immediately adjacent to the existing wetlands on what was mostly green space. Also in the northwest corner, the "K" building, the "Open Campus Center" and "Field Studies Center" will all be demolished, according the the plan of the college submitted to the county on June 19 and approved by the Development Committee. The college stated that the "M" building is empty!
Source: Google
Flood Issues
There are three special flood hazard areas on or bordering the college. These are shown on the following excerpt of the RFM-0154 Flood Map. One of these is the wetland on the southwest corner of the campus. The other two are lakes, one on the northwest boundary and the other to the west of the wetland. Building on the campus is a very sensitive issue for neighbors adjacent to the campus. Gloucester and adjoining streets in BLMH are clearly labeled. These three areas are designated "Zone A" on Flood Map, as shown:
Here's a brief summary of the June 19th meeting:
Prior to the meeting, I approached the new “Planned Development Site Plan” revised 6/18/12. A discussion ensued between myself and two of our board members. Dr. Breuder, the college President overhearing us, approached us and we had a conversation about the latest construction on the southwest corner of the campus. Dr. Breuder made several statements about the pond, etc. and stated all work including the "material staging area" will be completed in 2012 and this will be a green space and he emphasized that the “pond 9” will be bermed, but larger. He implied it would be shielded from view and I disagreed because of the two story nature of our buildings and the fact that we are at a higher elevation than the present grade. Dr. Breuder insisted this will be a green space, and stated that he preferred cattails, etc, but that in the case of pond 6 the Village of Glen Ellyn did not approve.
The meeting began and after preliminaries and discussion of other business by the board, the topic arrived at 7.3 which is the COD petition.
A revised motion was presented by Mr. Eckoff, who is one of three District 4 county board members, who described the amended petition submitted by the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA).
There was a series of questions from the development board to Mr. Eckoff, and statements were made by several ZBA members. After further discussion among the development committee and ZBA members, Dr. Breuder and representatives of the college made a series of public statements. This included the use of the word “community” a number of times and a re-affirming that this is a community college and will serve the community. Dr. Breuder emphasized the green space (buffer) along the western edge of the campus and the commitment of the college to finish work on the BLMH property line in 2012. He turned to the left and looked directly at us as he spoke of these things. A representative of Glen Ellyn also made a brief and positive statement.
It was stated that the “M” building is empty and will be demolished, as will several 40 year old “temporary, 20 year lifespan” buildings north of the M building. A proposed building “1” occupying space in the northwest corner of the former M building was described as future, but it is also included in item 7 on the Z12-022 motion and is therefore imminent. It is described as a “3-story education building” but will be smaller than originally proposed and will replace the removed structures. According to the motion which was approved, it and the CMC building are to be built (begin construction) “within one year” of any approval by the County Board. The “CMC” building will be east of the enlarged “pond 9” and will occupy part of the formerly “college 7” parking. It will be about 350-400 feet east of the residences on Gloucester. It too was described as being smaller. This structure is approved and will be built. New signage on Fawell will meet county codes, will be non-illuminated and not more that 48 square feet each.
There was a discussion of lighting levels at the college and the code requirement of 0.5fc. There is a question if these levels are exceeded and it was stated by the county that this will be investigated.
The water tower and treatment facility have been removed from the development site plan. However the college representatives made several questionable statements alluding to the future use of the southwest corner of the campus; specifically the use of the term “Service Park” to describe it.
There was an opportunity for observers to speak, with a 3-minute limit. I and another BLMH board member took the opportunity, and so did several owners. I was brief but emphasized several things. 1) the college is viewed largely as an asset and is our neighbor, immediately to the east of us; 2) I objected to the use of the term “Service Park” to describe the southwest corner of the campus, which includes a wetlands and was open and green space until the “2011 Parking Improvement Program;" 3) I stated that BLMH had been fully developed in 1974-1978 and has been here for about 35 years. Long before much of the current construction.
Our treasurer questioned water runoff and related flood issues.
An owner stated dismay at a new service road along the shore of the north lake #3 before turning into the campus in the location of the soon to be demolished M building. That turning away from our property will occur about as the road approaches the most northerly building on Salisbury.
After listening to all testimony and statement, the Development Committee approved the motion Z12-022. It now goes to the County Board.
As a consequence of the meeting I have revised the draft of the letter to the May 21st reply by the college representative and its attorney. This was sent to management for comment, and has since gone to our board, prior to sending to our attorney for drafting a cover letter and submittal letter. In the letter I continued my approach to maintain a green space along our property, and that is my first priority in this matter.
Portion of "Planned Development Site Plan" as revised June 15, 2012:
Note:
- A letter was written to the board of trustees of the college and a response received on May 21. Our board has drafted a letter in reply and with current ZBA and Development Hearings.
