By Our Fine Staff

Ignoring opposition from the homeowners affected, its own Plan Commission, a petition signed by 190 residents of the area, and the District 34 School Board, the Village of Winfield is considering forcibly rezoning all the residential properties in the block directly across the street from the elementary and middle schools on Beecher Ave.

The Village Board is scheduled to vote on the matter at its Feb. 2 meeting at 7:00 p.m. at Village Hall.

By changing the zoning on the 11 properties on the north side of Beecher Ave. between Winfield Rd. and the DuPage River, some Village Trustees and unaffected residents hope to make the adjoining Winfield Fuel and Material property more attractive to a developer. The property has been available for sale for several years.

Spearheaded by Village Trustees Tim Allen and Jay Olson, the hope is that development of Beecher Ave. along with the Winfield Fuel and Material property would generate revenue for the village in a few years.

Following three months of public hearings, Winfield’s Plan Commission cast a 6 to 1 vote opposing the proposed rezoning of the properties on Beecher Avenue. Dolly Pointer, the sole commissioner voting in favor of the zoning change, defended her vote saying that the development of the Winfield Fuel and Material property has been a vision of Town Center for nearly twenty years and the time is right for the village to finally act.

The Plan Commission heard evidence from real estate agents and mortgage lenders that the existing homeowner’s property values and ability to refinance could suffer because of restrictions under the new zoning that would inhibit them from rebuilding after a fire or flood, or even remodeling.

There are already several homes within the Town Center zoning district and so they are presently under those handicaps. The Plan Commission proposed changes to the zoning rules that would remove those financial problems for the homeowners.

Village Trustee Tony Reyes was incensed at that, saying the Village Plan Commission has no business proposing any solution for anything unless the Village Board asks them to do so, and that, anyway, the ultimate goal of the rezoning is to force homeowners to convert their land to commercial use.

He also asserted that the Plan Commission’s recommendation was illegal because no formal notice had been published inviting the public to of one of the two public hearings they held. Newspaper clippings of the legal ads for each of the two public hearings were then projected side-by-side onto the board room’s screen by Community Development Coordinator Peter Krumins.

Trustee Olson then insisted any motion to remove the financial handicap from homeowners already in the Town Center zoning district be worded so that it would not become effective unless the Beecher Ave. homes are forced into that zoning too.

Others in the community oppose the rezoning for various reasons:

According the District 34 School Board President Susan Gillespie, “commercial development would inevitably result in increased traffic flow on an already congested Beecher Ave.” In spite of the fact that the school district would someday be one of the largest recipients of potential new revenues, Mrs. Gillespie, along with the entire Board, has steadfastly opposed the rezoning, because in their minds the safety of students is paramount.

Alice Besch, an 81-year resident of Beecher Ave., staunchly opposes the proposed zoning change to “Town Center,” in part because her home is currently surrounded by the flood plain. She fears the building of condominiums, parking lots, and commercial buildings would inevitably force the flood waters on to her immaculately-kept property.

At the last Village Board meeting, Miss Besch pleaded with the Trustees to come to her residence to personally see how her home would be impacted. The trustees were challenged at Jan. 19 board meeting as to which of them would be helping her fill sandbags when the flood waters encroach on her property.

Some of the Trustees contend a developer could actually help permanently solve the flooding problems that frequent this part of the village.

Other residents questioned whether it should be the function of the village Trustees to entice land sales or whether their primary goal should be to protect the property rights of citizens that have resided in the Village for more than eight decades.

Dave Sayner, another Beecher Avenue homeowner opposed to seeing his family’s home rezoned to Town Center, argued at the village board meeting that the rezoning should wait until a developer has first been ­secured. “All you have to do is drive around Winfield to see the numerous For Sale signs and commercial spaces available to realize that this is not the right time for the Village to be attempting to solicit more development,” claims Mr. Sayner. “By adding more land into Town Center the village will be saturating an already depressed real estate market.”

Some of the Trustees have countered arguing that the village must act “proactively” to try to spur development on a piece of property — Winfield Fuel and Material — that is better suited for multi-residential and commercial development.

But some trustees say that burden should not fall upon innocent nearby homeowners, and that rezoning should wait until it is actually needed by an actual developer who will have already bought their property from them.

Others point out that standard procedure nationwide is for a village to wait until the developer needs something, like annexation or rezoning, and then use that as an opportunity to negotiate better streets or other public benefits the developer would not otherwise have to provide. For example, the large tract of undeveloped land on County Farm Rd. north of Parkway Dr. —the Matson Property— has never been annexed into the Village limits.