Title
title
*Concur with the Plan Commission and Adopt the Ordinance Approving a Planned Development at the Property Located at 6104 Roosevelt Road
..end
Introduction
overview
The Community Builders, Inc. seeks Planned Development approval for a mixed-use affordable housing development for the property commonly known as 6104 Roosevelt Road.
end
body
Recommended Action
Adopt the ordinance to approve a four (4) story affordable housing mixed-use development containing a total of 28 units, which includes two live/work dwelling units, located in the RR Roosevelt Road Form-Based Zoning District.
Prior Board Action
The Applicant was awarded monies from the Village’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund to support this development.
Background
The proposed development is located within the RR-Roosevelt Road Form-Based District at the northwest corner of Lyman Avenue and Roosevelt Road. The site is currently vacant. The proposal is a four-story mixed-use building composed of brick masonry and fiber cement panels. The building is 50 feet tall with 28 residential apartment units, including two live/work units and 16 parking spaces located on the ground floor underneath the building that accesses the alley to the north.
The proposed 4-story mixed-use development is allowed within the RR Roosevelt Road Form-Based District, but because of the zoning relief being sought and the fact that the gross floor area of the structure is over 20,000 square feet, the development falls under the Special Use-Planned Development requirement and regulations.
The Petitioner seeks eight (8) allowances from the Oak Park Zoning Ordinance associated with the Planned Development application as follows: 1.) Increase in Density, 2.) Decrease of front setback, 3.) Decrease in side street setback along Lyman Avenue, 4.) Decrease in rear setback for all floors containing residential dwellings, 5.) Decrease in landscape setback for parking along the alley, 6.) Decrease in off-street parking spaces, 7.) waiver of bicycle space design, and 8.) Increase in illumination along the alley, Lyman Avenue, and the residential entry along the Roosevelt Road sidewalk.
On March 31, 2026, the Project Review Team (PRT) reviewed the final proposal. The PRT consists of representatives from various departments and divisions within the Village government. The Plan Commission held a public hearing on this request on June 4, 2026. This process is a core service priority.
This item is also related to the Board goal related to diversity and affordable housing opportunities. The development of new housing that is affordable and accessible increases the opportunity for a more diverse population. The proposed development will be 100% affordable units. All tenants will earn between 30-80% of the area median income (AMI). This development helps to achieve the Village’s goal of providing more affordable housing options.
Timing Considerations
The Village Board must act on the application within 60 days of receipt of the Plan Commission recommendation. If the Village Board does not act upon the application within 60 days of receipt, the application is deemed denied. If the Ordinance is approved on July 28, 2026, the Applicant is required to file for permits by July 28, 2027, and to complete construction by July 28, 2030.
Financial Impact
The cost of the Public Notice was $462 from GL account 1001.46202.101.550652.
Operations Impact
There is no operating impact associated with this item. The item aligns with the department’s core service delivery. Approximately twenty (20) hours of staff time have been put toward this item. Managing planned Development applications is a standard operating function of the Planning & Urban Design Division within the Development Services Department.
The Village Consultant, Wight & Company, reviewed this project based on drawings received on 04/07/2026 and dated 02/10/2026. Wight & Company also had a discussion regarding the design with the development team on 4/14/2026. Wight & Company issued a memo on May 26, 2026, in support of this project and spoke in favor of the proposal at the public hearing.
DEI Impact
This affordable housing development would increase affordable housing options and promote a more diverse and inclusive community.
Community Input
The Applicant held their mandatory neighborhood meeting on October 7, 2025. The results of which are provided within the application.
The Plan Commission held a public hearing on June 4, 2026. Two (2) community members spoke in support of the proposal, and one person spoke neither in support nor in opposition to the proposal. There was no one in attendance in opposition to the proposal.
The Commission finds that the proposed development at the Property as a planned development satisfies the objectives and standards set forth in Sections 14.5.A. and 14.5.H. of the Zoning Ordinance, and that approval of the requested planned development, and associated allowances, is appropriate. The Plan Commission recommended to the Village President and the Board of Trustees that the application be APPROVED by a 6 to 1 vote, subject to 24 conditions as outlined in the Recommendation. Commissioner Beckwith voted in opposition as he felt that the proposal should include more dwelling units and add one additional story in height.
Recommendation number 20 requires that the Applicant must request from the Village an on-street parking zone adjacent to the Property, along Roosevelt Road and Lyman Avenue. The Applicant must further request from the Village that an overnight parking zone be created to include 13 on-street parking spaces around the perimeter of the block near the proposed development.
The Applicant submitted a request to the Transportation Commission pursuant to recommendation number 20. On July 13, 2026, the Transportation Commission reviewed the request by the Applicant to expand Overnight Permit Parking Zone Z1 Adjacent to 6104 Roosevelt Road. The Transportation Commission voted to direct staff to review and revise the proposed parking spaces along Roosevelt Road. While the Commission expressed support for extending the residential permit parking zone, they had reservations about the specific Roosevelt Road parking spaces that were presented.
Based on the Commission's feedback, Staff identified an alternative layout that is more in line with what the Transportation Commission would like to approve. Staff will present the revised proposal to the Transportation Commission on August 10 for final approval. It should be noted that the newly adopted legislation for Parking Over People eliminates the requirement for any onsite parking for this proposal.
The Findings of Fact report is attached to this agenda item, and the meeting can be viewed on Commission TV here: <https://www.oak-park.us/your-government/citizen-commissions/commission-tv>
Staff Recommendation
Adopt the Ordinance
Advantages:
• The completion of the development helps to achieve the Village’s goal toward more affordable housing options.
• The completion of the development will invest in Oak Park and utilize a vacant piece of property for an affordable housing project.
• The development is in line with the updated Roosevelt Road Corridor Plan that aims to facilitate pedestrian-oriented development.
• The development proposes to remove two (2) curb cuts on Roosevelt Road and one (1) on Lyman Avenue, which reduces pedestrian-vehicular conflict points;
• The development proposes to install curb bump-outs at pedestrian crossing locations to reduce crossing distances and improve driver visibility at key points along the corridor.
Disadvantages:
• Affordable housing developments may yield lower property and sales tax revenues for the Village compared to market-rate developments.
• The development may create additional traffic and parking congestion in the area.
Alternatives
Alternative 1:
The Board can elect not to approve the Ordinance and deny the planned development.
Advantages:
• Parking and traffic congestion will remain as is.
• Provides another opportunity for higher tax revenue.
Disadvantages:
• Denying the proposed affordable housing development would be contrary to the Village Board’s goal of increasing affordable housing opportunities.
• Denying the development would prevent a viable development along Roosevelt in an area that has experienced disinvestment over the years.
Alternative 2:
The Board can remand the proposed planned development back to the Plan Commission.
Advantages:
• This alternative would trigger more review and information from the Applicant, staff, and the public.
Disadvantages:
• This alternative would result in delays to the developer.
Anticipated Future Actions
There are no anticipated future actions in relation to this item.
Prepared By: Mike Bruce, Planning & Urban Design Manager/Village Planner
Reviewed By: Craig Failor, Development Services Director
Approved By: Kevin J. Jackson, Village Manager
Attachment(s):
1. Ordinance
2. Findings
3. Application
4. Staff Report
5. Design Review Memo
6. Applicant’s Presentation