Village of BERKELEY. OFComprehensive Plan VILLAGE

Transcription

1 Village of BERKELEY OFComprehensive Plan VILLAGE October 2009

2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee Lou Rodriguez Peggy Stanko Patrick M. Hurley Sean P. McMillen Jacque Jones Jackie McCulloch Andrea (Bonnie) Routen Jerry Brown Grant L. Sabo David Ditchfield Berkeley Plan Commission Patrick M. Hurley Jacque Jones Jackie McCulloch Pat Blondin Sheri Barnich Chris Morgan Juan Espinoza Kevin Lowe Village Officials Village President Michael A. Esposito Village Clerk Peggy Stanko Trustee William J. Daugherty Trustee Diane Salemi Trustee Robert E. Lee Jr. Trustee Lou Rodriguez Trustee Valerie Williams Trustee Jerry Perez Acting Village Manager Timothy Griffin Consultant Camiros, Ltd. 411 South Wells Street Chicago, Illinois 60607

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Why Plan? Legal and Functional Role Relation to Regional Planning Efforts Community Building Role Relationship to Past Planning Efforts Plan Organization Chapter 1: A Profile of Berkeley 9 Community History Berkeley Overview and Regional Context Population Trends Population and Household Projections Age Composition and Migration Patterns Race and Ethnicity Characteristics Chapter 2: Community Input 16 Berkeley Vision Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee Focus Group Meetings Chapter 3: Land Use 23 Best Practices in Land Use Planning Existing Land Use Analysis Community Image and Identity Future Land Use Plan Subarea Plans Land Use Objectives and Policies Strategic Land Use Action Agenda Chapter 4: Transportation 42 Illinois Transportation Planning Best Practices in Transportation Planning Street System Bicycle and Pedestrian Pathways Public Transportation Freight Rail Service Public Streetscape Environment Transportation System Plan Transportation Objectives and Policies Strategic Transportation Action Agenda

4 Chapter 5: Economic Development 57 Economic Profile Competitive Strengths and Challenges Economic Development Efforts and Directions Economic Development Objectives and Policies Strategic Economic Development Action Agenda Chapter 6: Community Resources 62 Village Facilities and Services Intergovernmental Cooperation Community Engagement Community Resources Objectives and Policies Strategic Community Resources Action Agenda Chapter 7: Sustainable Development 71 Quality of Living Low Impact Development Open Space and Natural Resources Telecommunications Infrastructure Sustainable Development Objectives and Policies Strategic Sustainable Development Action Agenda Chapter 8: Implementation 79 Implementation Strategies and Actions Summary Appendix A: Local Planning Technical Assistance Act 82

5 List of Tables Table 1.1 Population Trends, Table 1.2 Regional Population Trends Table 1.3 Regional Population Projections 12 Table 1.4 Regional Household Projections 14 Table 1.5 Age Composition, Table 1.6 Racial and Ethnic Characteristics Table 3.1 Existing Land Use Distribution, Table 4.1 Traffic Counts 45 Table 4.2 Berkeley Metra Station Parking Capacity and Utilization 47 List of Figures Figure 1.1 Population Trends, Figure 1.2 Regional Population Projections 13 Figure 1.3 Age Composition, Figure 3.1 Existing Land Use Map 27 Figure 3.2 Existing Land Use Distribution 28 Figure 3.3 Future Land Use Map 31 Figure 3.4 St. Charles Road Redevelopment Concepts 34 Figure 3.5 Village Center Redevelopment Concept 38 Figure 4.1 Metra Weekday Ridership 48 Figure 4.2 Transportation System Plan 52 Figure 5.1 Sales Tax Trends 57 Figure 6.1 Community Facilities Plan 63 Figure 7.1 Open Space and Natural Features Plan 75

6 Introduction The Berkeley Comprehensive Plan serves a variety of functions. Foremost, it is a roadmap for the future. It provides a set of policies that can facilitate a coordinated approach to decisions regarding land use, transportation, economic development, community facilities, and environmental sustainability. It serves as a guide for elected and appointed officials within Berkeley as they consider new program initiatives or review development proposals before them. It also conveys the Village s development philosophy and intent to other communities and regional service providers. The Comprehensive Plan also helps form the basis for zoning through the articulation of the land use plan and map. Finally, the Plan will allow Berkeley residents and decision makers to continue to identify and respond to the changing needs of its citizens through the insights gained as residents and other community stakeholders participated in the comprehensive planning process. The goal is to keep Berkeley moving forward in a positive proactive manner, and to celebrate all that Berkeley has achieved and continues to achieve. Why Plan? Berkeley is a completely developed community, with little vacant land and seemingly few opportunities for change. However, like death and taxes, change is certain. The question is whether Berkeley will respond in a proactive or reactive way. This plan is designed to provide the directions that will ensure that this change is positive and reflects Berkeley s community values, as established traditions continue and new directions are embraced by a new generation of active and involved Berkeley residents. We intend to continue to improve our quality of life with better shopping and community facilities, excellent schools and a strong economic base that provides jobs for residents and the revenues needed to support excellent community services. Throughout its history Berkeley has had to adjust to a variety of changes, including the construction of major highways in the 1950s and 1960s, demographic shifts that have been occurring gradually over the past 30 years, and the rapid changes in technology that allow residents, businesses and local government to connect in entirely new ways. Sustainable development and energy conservation are becoming increasingly important. So is the desire to set a course for the future that will allow Berkeley to maintain its quality of life and small town traditions, even as it positions itself to successfully compete regionally and globally. Page 1

7 As Berkeley s commercial and industrial buildings gradually reach the end of their useful lives, they will need to be replaced by new buildings and development models. The form that this future development will take depends on Berkeley s vision for its evolution as a community as much as it depends on future economic conditions and the marketplace. Planning allows this changing landscape to be considered and a course of action charted in a careful proactive way. The alternative is to sit back and wait to see what some future developer proposes or what infrastructure repairs can no longer be delayed. As noted in the 1974 Comprehensive Plan: The preservation of living qualities in the Village can only be accomplished by maintaining public facilities and services at a high level, protecting the stability of taxable values, and keeping abreast of advances in technology and ever changing socioeconomic conditions. This statement is as true today as it was in 1974, and continues to be the mission and focus of Berkeley s Comprehensive Plan. A healthy community is a well balanced community and through our Comprehensive Plan we will have the vision and direction that will allow us to manage whatever changes come our way. Legal and Functional Role The Comprehensive Plan is the basis for the Village s Zoning Ordinance and other development regulations. The future land use plan defines the desired land use categories that are subsequently regulated by the development standards pertaining to specific zoning districts. The Plan should be used by the Village not only as the basis for zoning and development approvals, but also to identify desired road improvements, outline potential planning studies to advance plan elements, and capital improvements programming to implement specific projects. In August 2002, the State of Illinois enacted the Local Planning Technical Assistance Act, which has among its purposes, encouraging local governments to engage in planning, regulatory and development approaches that promote and encourage comprehensive planning, and supporting planning efforts that include one or more units of local government working together. Municipalities that adopt plans in accordance with these guidelines may be eligible for additional preferences in funding under State economic development, transportation, planning, natural resources and agricultural programs. This Plan has been organized around the requirements of the Local Planning Technical Assistance Act. More detail about the Local Technical Planning Assistance Act may be found in Appendix A. Page 2

8 Relation to Regional Planning Efforts The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) is working with communities throughout a seven county region that includes Cook, DuPage, Lake, McHenry, Kane, Will and Kendall Counties to prepare the Go to 2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan, an integrated plan for land use and transportation. CMAP is engaging stakeholders throughout the region to develop and implement strategies to shape the region s transportation and development patterns, while also addressing the natural environment, economic development, housing, education, human services and other factors shaping quality of life. One of the unique challenges in this effort is to establish a regional planning framework that allows for each community to develop a comprehensive plan that can address particular circumstances and the desired community direction. The population of the metropolitan Chicago area is expected to reach 11 million by These additional 2.8 million new residents will need to be accommodated within the seven county region. Critical decisions will be needed at both the regional and local level to accommodate the projected growth. As a region, should continued outward growth be encouraged, or should we try to consolidate housing and jobs on underutilized sites where infrastructure already exists? Should transportation investments be focused on roads, transit or both? How can energy consumption be reduced while also strengthening the regional economy? Even though Berkeley is not projected to see population increases and only modest growth in the number of housing units, it may be subject to a number of regional demographic shifts including an increasing Latino population and an aging population, as Baby Boomers reach retirement age. The larger regional trends and policy directions need to be considered as Berkeley develops its vision for the future and strategies for achieving its vision. Community Building Role The Vision of the Comprehensive Plan was created by Berkeley s citizens and creates a picture of the future of the community. The Comprehensive Plan presents an action program that will help the Village and other community stakeholders to implement specific projects and programs and other initiatives designed to help Berkeley realize its potential for the life of the Plan and beyond. Page 3

9 This Plan incorporates the principles of sustainable planning, transitoriented development, and context sensitive solutions to land use and transportation issues. The intent is to use the full range of best practices to help Berkeley maintain and enhance its high quality of life. The aim of sustainable planning is to ensure that thoughtful development decisions create a well balanced community that supports balanced growth, preserves the environment, encourages the health of its citizens, minimizes the negative impacts of transportation on the community s quality of life, promotes fiscal balance among land uses, and guides local investments in maintaining the public infrastructure required to support existing and future development. Each section of this plan addresses the concept of sustainable planning and best practices that are guiding similar planning initiatives across America. Relationship to Past Planning Efforts Berkeley s previous Comprehensive Plan was its first, adopted in Even in 1974, Berkeley was almost completely developed with only about 21 acres of undeveloped land within its borders. Its population had reached its peak at 6,130 residents. Today, only about four acres of vacant land remains, including several unusable green spaces along the I 290 and I 294 embankments. The 1974 Comprehensive Plan recommended: Acquisition and development of the former Chicago & Great Western and Chicago, Aurora & Elgin railroad rights of way as part of the Illinois Prairie Path and for the development of a community park; Development of a community center and swimming pool as part of the community park complex; Incorporating the fire detention reservoir into the community s recreational system; Development of an industrial park adjacent to the Proviso Yards; Reducing the number of curb cuts on St. Charles Road to improve safety; Creating an effective landscaped buffer between the street and parking lots along St. Charles Road to improve the aesthetic appearance. Some of these recommendations have been accomplished, including development of Berkeley Park and the Illinois Prairie Path, creation of an industrial park along Proviso Drive and improvement of the St. Charles Road corridor. Other projects remain unfinished; to be revisited as part of this planning process. Even as the 1974 Comprehensive Plan was being developed a number of major milestones were achieved that are reflected in the Plan including formation of the Berkeley Park District and construction of a new library. Page 4

10 Development of new park facilities was particularly important, because at the time there were only two playgrounds available. Acquisition of the Chicago & Great Western and Chicago, Aurora & Elgin property that now includes the Prairie Path and Berkeley Park was a major plan goal and subsequent achievement. The Plan was successful in getting St. Charles Road business owners to develop integrated joint parking facilities that allowed the number of curb cuts along St. Charles Road to be reduced. Other Plan recommendations that have been implemented include implementation of a long range, multi year capital improvement program to guide investments in infrastructure improvements in a sound and fiscally responsible manner. The 1974 Comprehensive Plan also identified several long range policy issues that could influence future land use development patterns. The 1974 Comprehensive Plan did not come to specific conclusions as to how best to address these issues. They continue to be issues that will affect Berkeley s growth and development potential, and include: Guiding subdivision of the deep single family residential lots in the area generally bounded by St. Charles Road, Wolf Road, Hawthorne Avenue, and Taft Avenue to allow the rear halves of these lots to be developed with appropriate street access. Encouraging the acquisition of the undeveloped portions of deep lots behind St. Charles Road commercial uses to allow provision of additional parking. Promoting additional industrial development on land in and around the Proviso Yard. More recently, Berkeley has focused its planning efforts on the improvement of the St. Charles Road commercial corridor. The St. Charles Road Corridor Plan was prepared in 1999, and contained a number of land use, streetscape improvement and redevelopment recommendations. The Village subsequently established a tax increment financing (TIF) district to create a funding mechanism for public and private improvements along the corridor, and adopted new zoning and signage regulations to encourage appropriate development patterns and uses. Village officials have also engaged in strategic planning workshops through Northern Illinois University s Regional Development Institute to establish priorities for Village government. The most recent workshop was in 2006 where Village officials and community leaders undertook a visioning exercise, identified the Berkeley s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) and developed and ranked goals and objectives for achieving the vision and overcoming obstacles facing the community. Three major themes emerged from this effort that Village officials have been addressing. Page 5

11 Infrastructure, Environmental and Development Issues: Including business development, marketing and retention; updating the comprehensive plan; undertaking needed street resurfacing, pavement repairs and sewer relining projects; and developing a plan for a progressive and compliant municipal center that provides appropriate accommodations for police, fire and Village services. Organizational Issues: Including adopting and using a five year capital improvement program to guide infrastructure investments; a more aggressive code enforcement and property maintenance program; updating various portions of the Village Code, including the zoning ordinance, updating the Village website to make it more user friendly, and considering new programs for residents, such as dial/ride, snow removal, handyman program, etc. Building Relationship Issues: Including establishing links with other local chambers to create a viable Chamber of Commerce in Berkeley and establishing a human relations commission. Plan Organization The Berkeley Comprehensive Plan is a document that takes the land use, transportation, community infrastructure and economic development initiatives that the Village has been pursuing in recent years and pulls them together into a single plan document. The result is a comprehensive whole that allows the synergies among these seemingly disparate efforts to be clearly seen and new linkages established. The Plan also is designed to highlight the relationship between community specific planning and development initiatives and planning initiatives and development agendas being pursued at the regional level by CMAP and others that will impact the Village of Berkeley in various ways. The Plan is intended to be flexible and is designed to meet the Village s evolving needs. A good comprehensive plan should be just specific enough to give direction to immediate needs, but broad enough to be capable of addressing a variety of issues that may arise in the future. At the heart of the Comprehensive Plan are the goals, objectives and policies that provide guidance and direction for current and future decision makers. Goals represent the overarching guiding principles. Objectives are more specific statements that address relevant aspects of Berkeley s vision for its future. Policies state how Berkeley plans to go about achieving its objectives. Policies are ongoing directions as opposed to strategic actions that are discrete projects or programs with identifiable beginnings and endings. The goals and objectives in this Comprehensive Plan may appear to be somewhat generic and applicable to any other community. This is in part because all Page 6

12 municipalities face similar challenges. However, it is in the creation of policies and identification of specific actions that will be pursued in furtherance of the community s vision for its future that make the Comprehensive Plan a true roadmap for Berkeley s future. The Berkeley Comprehensive Plan is presented in eight chapters that set the context and explain the goals, objectives and implementation strategies that have been established to guide Berkeley s growth and development over the next 15 to 20 years. While building on the existing community context and community values, the Plan recognizes that change will come to Berkeley and that the community can act proactively to ensure positive benefits. While change will come, the Village is in a strong position to guide its destiny in a way that supports Berkeley s traditional strengths and desire to remain the small town that it has always been. 1. A Profile of Berkeley This section provides an overview of the community s development history and examines Berkeley s population and demographic characteristics based on data from the U.S. Census and projections prepared by CMAP. 2. Community Input This section summarizes the public participation process and presents the community s vision for its future. This input helps inform the directions and recommendations of the Plan. 3. Land Use Existing land use describes the physical makeup of the community. Recommendations for future land use change are presented in the Future Land Use Plan. The Land Use Objectives and Policies establish the basis for the initial strategic action agenda designed to facilitate the redevelopment and repositioning of obsolete land uses throughout the Village over time. Subarea Plans are presented for select areas of focus in the Village, including the St. Charles Road corridor, Metra Station and vicinity, and the Village Hall and Berkeley Park area. 4. Transportation This section examines the existing transportation system within the Village and its links to the surrounding region. Transportation recommendations are presented in the Transportation System Plan and the Transportation Objectives and Policies. 5. Economic Development This section provides an overview of the economic development initiatives that Berkeley has been pursuing to enhance its economic base. Economic and employment trends within the Page 7

13 region that impact Berkeley s economic development efforts help to inform the Village s Economic Development Objectives and Policies. 6. Community Resources This section analyzes the existing community facilities in Berkeley, including municipal facilities and services, public infrastructure, library, parks and schools. While the focus of this section of the Plan are the buildings, services and public infrastructure that are under Village control, opportunities to improve facilities and services through intergovernmental cooperation are addressed. This section also identifies ways to build upon Berkeley s greatest asset its people, and ways in which the community s quality of life can be enhanced. The Community Facilities Plan is presented in this section along with an accompanying set of Objectives and Policies. 7. Sustainable Development Sustainable development is addressed throughout the Comprehensive Plan. Compact development patterns are discussed in Chapter 3: Land Use. Encouraging use of alternative transportation modes to reduce energy consumption and improve air quality is addressed in Chapter 4: Transportation. Issues related to the redevelopment and reuse of environmentally challenged commercial and industrial properties is addressed in Chapter 5: Economic Development. This section of the Plan focuses more generally on energy policies and initiatives designed to mitigate the impacts of climate change, such as increased flooding due to intense storms, reducing energy consumption and energy costs through low impact development techniques, and improving energy efficiency. This chapter also includes objectives and policies related to open space and natural features and telecommunications infrastructure. The Open Space and Natural Features Plan is presented in this section along with an accompanying set of Objectives and Policies. 8. Implementation The final section summarizes the recommendations of the plan and offers a schedule for executing each of its components and identifies responsibilities for moving forward. Page 8

14 Chapter 1: A Profile of Berkeley Community History Berkeley began its existence as a farming community in 1835, mostly settled by families of German and Dutch ancestry. Settling on farms that ranged from 40 to 160 acres, the Dutch tended to be truck farmers, while the Germans did general farming. Early settlement in the Village included Old Settlers Cemetery on St. Charles Road, dating from 1838, and Sunnyside Elementary School, originally established in 1848 on the site where the existing school operates today. The 1902 completion of the Chicago, Aurora & Elgin Railroad gave the area its first passenger rail service. Subdivision in 1908 and again in brought residential construction and new residents, many of whom were English, to the area. The Village of Berkeley was incorporated in The population growth of the early 1900 s paled in comparison to the population boom experienced by Berkeley after World War II, when the population tripled from 1,882 in 1950 to 5,792 in At the same time, Berkeley lost a number of houses when the construction of the Interstate 290 extension in the late 1950 s cut a north south swath through the western section of the Village. With traffic diverted to the new expressway system, the Chicago, Aurora & Elgin terminated its passenger service in 1957; but its route through the Village is still marked by the Illinois Prairie Path. Berkeley s land purchase from the railroad in the 1960 s extended its northern boundary, allowing for the addition of a small industrial park. In 2000, the industrial park s 12 light industries included electrical contractors, printing companies, warehouses, wholesalers, and the World Dryer Corporation, one of the world s largest manufacturers of hand dryers. Berkeley has remained a predominately residential community, however. Many of the people who bought homes in the 1950 s have remained in the Village, although new residents have begun to take their places. Today, Berkeley continues to be a desirable place for people of all ages thanks to the high quality of life it offers through its values, affordability and location within the region. Berkeley Overview and Regional Context Berkeley is located 15 miles west of Chicago, on Cook County s western border and its neighbors include Elmhurst to the west, Hillside to the south and Bellwood to the east. The Village is situated approximately four miles south of O Hare International Airport. Berkeley has one commuter Page 9

15 railroad station on Metra s Union Pacific Railroad/West Line with regular daily service to Chicago and Elburn, Illinois. Pace bus service further connects Berkeley to adjacent communities. With Interstates 290 and 294 forming its southern and western boundaries, and the Union Pacific Railroad and Proviso Rail Yard forming its northern boundary, major transportation corridors not only shape the physical edges of Berkeley, but also help provide easy access to the region. These transportation corridors also serve as a buffer from adjacent development, helping Berkeley maintain a quaint and smalltown feel. Population Trends Berkeley has experienced a stable population since Like many of its neighbors, Berkeley s major period of growth occurred between 1950 and This was a period of major expansion in the western suburbs of Chicago as the construction of the expressway system encouraged development in undeveloped areas outside the Chicago. For Berkeley the construction of these new highways was a mixed blessing, providing superb transportation access, but limiting the community s growth potential. With nearly all of the vacant land in the Village developed by 1960, Berkeley s population has hovered around 5,200. Berkeley s population reached a peak in 1970, with a population of 6,130. Today, Berkeley has an estimated population of 4,938 a decrease of approximately 6% from See Table 1.1: Population Trends, This decrease is due in part to shrinking household size, reflective of a national trend where families are having fewer children. The average household size in Berkeley is 2.79 persons per household. This is larger than the statewide average of 2.63 persons per household. Table 1.1: Population Trends, Year Population % Change , , % , % , % , % , % 2008 (est.) 4, % Source: U.S. Census Page 10

16 Figure 1.1: Population Trends, Source: U.S. Census Between 1990 and 2000, Berkeley experienced modest growth of 2%, comparable to the neighboring communities of Bellwood and Elmhurst, which also grew less than 2% during the same period. Other communities such as Stone Park and Melrose Park experienced more dramatic growth, growing 17% and 11% since See Table 1.2: Regional Population Trends, below. Like Bellwood and Elmhurst, Berkeley is a mature and fully built out community and as such is not likely to add large numbers of new residents. More rapidly growing communities, however, can attribute much of their growth to the development of housing on previously undeveloped land, redevelopment of former industrial land, building high density housing such as condominiums or multi family housing, or an influx of demographic groups with larger family size. Table 1.2: Regional Population Trends, Community % Change Berkeley 5,137 5, % Bellwood 20,241 20, % Elmhurst 42,029 42, % Hillside 7,672 8, % Melrose Park 20,859 23, % Northlake 12,505 11, % Stone Park 4,383 5, % Cook County 5,105,067 5,376, % Source: U.S. Census Page 11

17 Population and Household Projections It is projected that Berkeley will have 5,126 residents by 2030, representing a decline of 2.3% from 2000, yet numbers of households are expected to rise slightly. The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP), the metropolitan planning agency for the seven county Northeastern Illinois region, is responsible for the region s official forecasts of population, households and employment. CMAP has created population projections to the year 2030, and these numbers are used as the official forecast numbers for planning activities across the region. The purpose of population projections is to describe the possible future evolution of the population, both in its total numbers and by different variables of the population. Projections are based on assumptions about future births, deaths, and net migration. It is projected that Cook County will add approximately 600,000 new residents by the year 2030 an increase of 10%. Currently there are 5,376,741 persons living in Cook County. This number is expected to grow to 5,952,794 by Berkeley s 2030 population projection is 5,126, a 2.3% decrease over the 2000 population. Other nearby communities, including Hillside, Melrose Park and Northlake, are also expected to experience slight population loss by See Table 1.3: Regional Population Projections, below. Table 1.3: Regional Population Projections Community 2000 CMAP 2030 est. % Change Berkeley 5,245 5, % Bellwood 20,535 21, % Elmhurst 42,762 43, % Hillside 8,155 7, % Melrose Park 23,171 22, % Northlake 11,878 10, % Stone Park 5,127 4, % Cook County 5,376,741 5,952, % Source: U.S. Census, CMAP Page 12

18 Figure 1.2: Regional Population Projections Source: U.S. Census, CMAP While a slight loss in population is projected, by 2030 Berkeley is expected to grow to 1,905 households, an increase of 1.5%. This anticipated growth in number of households is less than many of Berkeley s neighboring communities, which are expected to grow anywhere from 3% to 7.2% by This can be attributed to many factors, including amount of developable land in a community, proximity to public transit, future projects that affect residential development, or density of development. Because Berkeley is a fully built out community, it is expected that this projected increase will be in the form some higher density residential development where more units will fit on less land area. Such housing may take the form of condominiums, multi family residential development, senior housing, mixed use development containing residential units or resubdivision of large single family lots to create additional development sites for new homes. As traffic congestion and demand for public transportation continues to grow, communities with access to the commuter rail network such as Berkeley are likely to experience continued residential development. See Table 1.4: Regional Household Projections. Page 13

19 Table 1.4: Regional Household Projections Community % Change CMAP 2030 est. % Change Berkeley 1,898 1, % 1, % Bellwood 6,270 6, % 6, % Elmhurst 15,486 15, % 16, % Hillside 3,029 2, % 3, % Melrose Park 7,554 7, % 7, % Northlake 4,228 3, % 3, % Stone Park 1,276 1, % 1, % Cook County 1,879,488 1,974, % 2,229, % Source: U.S. Census, CMAP Age Composition and Migration Patterns Berkeley s population is making minor shifts in age, trending toward increasing numbers of school age children and those in their 40 s, while numbers of persons in their 20 s is on the decline. As shown in Table 1.5: Age Composition, , the overall trend is an increasing number of school age children and persons in their 40 s, while number of persons in their 20 s as well as those in their 60 s are decreasing. The most dramatic increase has been in the 40 to 49 age group, increasing from 11% to 17% of the total population since The senior population also increased, growing from 2.5% in 1990 to 4% of the population in Meanwhile, persons age 20 to 29 and age 60 to 69 each experienced a 5% decrease in population. The largest group continues to be persons age 30 to 39, representing 17% of Berkeley s total population. The median age of Berkeley residents is Table 1.5: Age Composition, Age Group 1990 % of Total 2000 % of Total % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % Total Population 5, % 5, % Median Age 37.2 Source: U.S. Census Page 14

20 Figure 1.3: Age Composition, Source: U.S. Census Race and Ethnicity Characteristics Berkeley is becoming a more racially and ethnically diverse community. Although the full extent of this shift won t be quantified until after the next U.S. Census in 2010, school demographics and anecdotal evidence suggests that Berkeley s population is a relatively balanced mix of white, Latino and African American residents. Census data shows that between 1990 and 2000, Berkeley experienced an increase in the minority racial groups. The fastest growing group is that of African American (an increase of 23%), followed by the Hispanic or Latino group (an increase of 9%). See Table 1.6: Racial and Ethnic Characteristics Table 1.6: Racial and Ethnic Characteristics, Race 1990 % of Total 2000 % of Total White 4, % 3, % Black or African American % 1, % American Indian and Alaskan Native 7 0.1% 6 0.1% Asian or Pacific Islander % % Some Other Race/Two or More Races % % Total Population 5, % 5, % Race (Hispanic or Latino) 1990 % of Total 2000 % of Total Hispanic or Latino (of any race) % % Non Hispanic or Latino 4, % % Total Population 5, % 5, % Source: U.S. Census Page 15

21 Chapter 2: Community Input The Berkeley Comprehensive Plan was developed under the auspices of the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee that began work in early Extensive public involvement was a priority throughout the planning process and members of the community were involved in each phase of the development of the Plan. The Vision for the future of Berkeley is a reflection of the collective view of Berkeley residents and community stakeholders. Through planning Berkeley can have an influence over the outcome of future development. In order to do so, it is important to learn first hand from community stakeholders including residents, business owners and elected and appointed officials. Berkeley Vision Berkeley is a community where everyone works together to be the best that we can be. We have and will continue to build upon our community assets and proximity to the regional transportation network to promote our identity as a special place a place where residents can easily access all that the region has to offer. We continue to maintain our valuable small town character. We have chosen to build upon our inherent strengths, rather than trying to reinvent ourselves as a different kind of place. People know, appreciate, and care about one another. We are a family oriented community that provides exceptional residential choices for residents of all ages. Involved residents celebrate the diversity of the community and actively participate in civic life including village government, the school system, public library and our well regarded park and recreation programs. Education is highly valued and we have worked together to improve the quality of our local schools and community facilities that form the heart of our community identity. We have a collective sense of common purpose. We work together to solve the issues and challenges that we face as a community. This effort involves working with other local taxing districts, such as the local school district, local businesses and major employers to find common ground. Our single family residential neighborhoods are well maintained. Multi family housing choices are focused along transportation corridors as part of mixed use developments or in close proximity to community facilities. People are investing in their homes reflecting their belief in the stability and continued improvements being made in the community. Page 16

22 Our employment centers range from industrial uses that are wellserved by rail and highway access and public transportation to strong commercial concentrations along St. Charles Road. Residents have easy access to other employment centers within the region. Our St. Charles Road commercial corridor not only meets the shopping needs of Berkeley residents, but attracts shoppers from neighboring communities as well. In conjunction with our economic development efforts, we are working to retain and attract businesses that encourage visitors to stop and explore Berkeley s local retail destinations and allow residents to do their shopping in Berkeley. We value our quality of life and promote healthy lifestyles. Equally important is maintaining the fiscal health of Village government as we provide services to local residents and work to improve the image and appearance of our Village through a wellconceived capital improvements program and carefully planning. We are a value oriented community and strive to keep our taxes low and our community affordable for our residents. Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee The Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee is comprised of the representatives of the Plan Commission/Zoning Board of Appeals, Economic Development Commission, Village Board, Library, Park District and School District 87. The Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee covered a wide range of topics during the visioning process. Issues such as economic development, parks and recreation programming, demographic change, community image and identity were all discussed. Several important issues were identified. Strengths Cultural diversity Stable growth community Transportation access Housing affordability Prairie Path Homeownership Low crime rate Affordable housing Values/sense of community pride Strong industrial base Weaknesses Identity (location and image) Lack of involvement in local govt. Educational system Infrastructure improvements Recreational programming Physical appearance Multiple park district boundaries Lack of destination shopping Busy streets dangerous for kids Vacant businesses Page 17

23 Focus Group Meetings Four hour long four focus group meetings were held at the Berkeley Public Library on May 20 and 21, 2009, for residents, business owners, and other community stakeholders. In addition to these sessions, focus group discussion questions were distributed to the Economic Development Commission, Planning & Zoning Commission, Library Board, Berkeley Park District and School District 87, for discussion at their respective board meetings. Written responses were received from the Library and Park District and most of the other groups had members participating in the focus group sessions. This included four District 87 representatives, including the incoming district superintendent and McArthur & Sunnyside principals. The focus groups were publicized in a variety of ways, in an effort to maximize participation. Flyers and posters were distributed in various locations around the Village inviting residents to participate in one of the four sessions. The meetings were announced at the Economic & Transportation Forum for business leaders and publicized on Republic Bank s electronic message board. In addition, flyers were distributed to each household and calls were made to each residence using the Village s new reverse 911 phone system, which many residents found to be effective in letting them know about and getting them to one of the focus group sessions. Finally, Village staff set up a comprehensive plan webpage on the Village website. A sign in sheet was provided for participants at each session and a flyer describing the comprehensive plan process was handed out at each of the focus group sessions. Approximately 100 residents and local business owners were in attendance in total. Each participant was asked to introduce themselves and indicate how long they have lived in the Village. Length in the community ranged from one year up to one life long resident who has lived in Berkeley for 86 years. The majority of attendees stated they have lived in Berkeley upwards of years. Each session began with an introduction to the Comprehensive Planning process. There were two major parts to each session a group discussion and an image preference survey. The findings from each are described below. Page 18

24 Focus Group Discussion Overall, participants indicated they like Berkeley the way it is. Rather than change, they would like to see Berkeley upgrade and modernize without jeopardizing its small town character. These conclusions mirror the results of a community leader s survey and strategic planning workshop undertaken in Community Self Image Participants were asked a variety of questions identifying strengths, weaknesses, community needs and their vision for Berkeley s future. The discussion was conversational in nature, and the themes that emerged are summarized below. What words come to mind when you think about Berkeley? Small Friendly Good location Simple Plain Stable Blue collar Affordable Quiet Low taxes Accessible to transportation Older community Can walk anywhere Serene Reliable local government Issue Identification When asked the question what are some of the problems with Berkeley? residents comments covered a range of topics, which are summarized below. What are some of the problems with Berkeley? People don t know where it is Can t see Berkeley from expressway Commercial signs are too small and flat to building Pace eliminated old bus route down Taft Speeding/dangerous drivers Metra station is underutilized and poorly marketed Metra station has no modern safety features (i.e. panic button) Potholes on Wolf and Taft Condition of Hawthorne Avenue on Berkeley s border General roadway maintenance and striping issues Not aware of available senior programs, lack of senior services IDOT does not cooperate/allow improvements Lots of commercial vacancy on St. Charles Road Code enforcement issues; poorly maintained commercial properties Stormwater management; some areas don t drain and ice forms, flooding Dislike for rental apartments Property maintenance issues, especially with respect to bank owned, foreclosed properties New street lights are already peeling Litter Page 19

25 A theme emerged which identified certain problems with Berkeley s commercial corridor, St. Charles Road. The overriding issue is that many people from outside the community do not know where Berkeley is located. They felt that this could be attributed in part to a lack of recognizable image and destination shopping that so many other communities enjoy. Discussion about the visibility of local business on St. Charles Road suggested that the business community needs to make changes to become more visible to automobile traffic, and a need to better cater to traffic that may be entering St. Charles Road from the I 290 ramp. The elimination of a Pace bus route along Electric Avenue was frequently mentioned as a great loss to the residents. The new bus route along St. Charles Road is perceived as being to inconvenient for residents to use. Another transportation issue identified had to do with pedestrian safety. While crossing guards are present at the Wolf and St. Charles Road intersection as children go to and from school, ad hoc pedestrian crossings are common between Republic Bank and the shopping centers on the south side of St. Charles Road. Conflicts between vehicles, pedestrians and bicyclists were also identified at Taft Avenue s intersection with Electric Avenue and the Prairie Path. St. Charles Road and Taft Avenue are owned by the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), which has made resolving these traffic conflicts problematic. Image and Identity Overall, focus group participants stated that Berkeley does not suffer from an image problem. Rather, Berkeley is not instantly recognizable to people outside the community and, therefore, lacks an image. Several ideas about how Berkeley can improve its image were given. Much of it had to do with more aggressively marketing the quality and affordable housing that Berkeley has to offer compared to its more expensive neighbors. Such marketing could extend to the industrial businesses as well, where additional connections could be made which match Berkeley s existing business with new strategic partnerships. How can Berkeley improve its image? Modernize, but without too much change Embrace technology (citywide internet, Village website) Better marketing and wayfinding signage Market the industrial businesses Provide activities and programs in Berkeley Park community garden, winter social event (not the holidays) Use banners to get the word out More arty Play up location in new home sales and business Neighborhood block parties Page 20

26 Improvement Opportunities For the most part, residents indicated they like Berkeley the way it is but would like to see it make certain modernizations to maintain its desirability and remain competitive in the region. There was also a strong desire to bring well known commercial establishments such as familystyle chain restaurants to the community that would serve residents and attract visitors from outside Berkeley. During the focus group discussions, business signage emerged as an issue. Residents stated that signs are often not easily visible from St. Charles Road because they are too small or too flat against the building. Wayfinding and informational signs were also identified as an area that needed improvement so that residents and visitors alike would know what retail stores and services were in each retail center. What type of physical improvements should occur? Need larger and more visible signs, so people know what businesses are in town Need visibility of signs coming off I 290 Lobby IDOT for adequate pedestrian amenities Need a 24 hour gas station Illinois Prairie path crossing on Hillside side of Taft is misaligned and dangerous Better striping, especially by Village Hall Upgrade image of existing commercial buildings Make sidewalk connections; add sidewalks where they don t exist (but, homeowner without sidewalks likes things the way they are) Wide speed humps (St. Charles, Taft and any streets near park) Dog park along Prairie Path Community garden Residents stated they would like to see better connections being made between residents and the services that the Village and other local public agencies provide. This extended to senior services. Residents expressed a need for programs where volunteers would help seniors with leaf and snow removal. In terms of communication including newspapers, the Village website and other media, a need to continue producing Village information in a traditional format such as print media was still desired, as many residents to not have access to the internet. What types of services does Berkeley need? Need to get information out about existing programs Senior snow shoveling program/raking Senior check in program Continuation of youth and senior programs (mentoring, kids and cops, senior cab or shuttle services) Indoor park district building Match park district boundary to Village boundary Pharmacist, offers delivery services Police Department needs to expand facilities Use variety of communication techniques (still need print media) Page 21

27 Focus group participants had a wide range of opinions on what types of new development should occur in the future. Some people wanted only single story commercial buildings along St. Charles Road, for example, while others were more accepting of three and four story mixed use commercial development. Much of the discussion focused on the poor condition of buildings along the St. Charles Road corridor and the types of retail stores that could be encouraged to fill retail vacancies. What type of redevelopment would you like to see, if any? Single story commercial Low density (2 3 stories) mixed use development, if set back with parking in front At least one notable anchor Family style/sit down restaurant Specialty shops (ice cream shop, popcorn shop) New development needs adequate parking Senior housing Maintain single family character Address vacancy in Berkeley Square Redevelopment of vacant office building Image Preference Survey An image preference survey was presented in each focus group session. The image preference survey is a photo slideshow that provides examples of different types of development and improvements. The image preference survey used during the focus group session consisted of 42 slides covering five topic areas: Public spaces Gateways and streets Business signage Commercial development Mixed use development The images selected for the survey were not intended to represent actual proposals or design concepts, but rather demonstrate in a general sense the various improvements that are currently in place in other communities that may or may not be desired in Berkeley. The purpose of the exercise was to help participants articulate particular aspects of public and private improvements they personally like or feel are appropriate, including their feelings on building height and density, various layout and setback options for commercial and mixed use property, signage, the amount and types of landscaping treatments, etc. Participants were asked to provide a score from 1 to 5 (1 being low and 5 being high) on a handout for each image indicating how appropriate or desirable it would be in Berkeley in their opinion. Results suggest an emphasis on enhancing the pedestrian and bicycle environment, an inclination toward larger and easy to read signage, and a general dislike for development built to the street. The desired scale of development is relatively low rise; there was little support for mixed use buildings with more than five stories. Page 22

28 Chapter 3: Land Use Berkeley is a mature, fully built out community consisting primarily of single family detached residential dwellings. The distribution of land uses has remained relatively stable for decades and is not expected to change dramatically. However, significant redevelopment opportunities can be expected as buildings on larger lots reach the end of their useful lives and become candidates for redevelopment. Best Practices in Land Use Planning Creation of a compact, walkable, vibrant, mixed use community with good regional connections is at the core of best practices in land use planning. Creating this type of environment goes by a number of terms including Smart Growth, New Urbanism, Traditional Neighborhood Design, Transit Oriented Development (TOD), and Sustainable Design. Berkeley developed during a time when compact communities were the norm rather than the exception. While the construction of the highway system facilitated the growth of suburban sprawl focused almost exclusively on the automobile, Berkeley s neighborhoods were walkable, with sidewalks and commuter rail and bus service that connected residents with jobs. Even as the region transitioned to the automobile, Berkeley was uniquely positioned to take advantage of this new transportation mode, in addition to its historic transportation network. The U.S. Green Building Council has established a rating system to encourage energy efficient buildings known as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). This system is being expanded to rate larger scale development projects under the LEED Neighborhood Development program or LEED ND. A comparison of the criteria checklist with Berkeley s established land use pattern shows that Berkeley today has many of the ingredients that developers are trying to emulate in new developments to create sustainable communities. Transit oriented development (TOD) typically involves encouraging increased residential density around commuter rail stations and is often cited as way to increase the use of public transportation. Often such increased residential density is also used to help to support commercial development as well. However, since only a portion of new residents can be expected to use public transit to get to and from employment centers, and most commercial uses must rely on more than commuters as their market, traditional TOD is not appropriate for every site. Thus, one of the considerations in maximizing the use of public transportation through land use policy involves understanding the potential market for transit riders and developing ways to provide the facilities needed to attract new riders. Page 23

29 Existing Land Use Analysis The Village s existing land use pattern is presented in Figure 3.1: Existing Land Use Map. Figure 3.2: Existing Land Use Distribution illustrates these characteristics graphically. Table 3.1: Existing Land Use Distribution, compares the distribution of land uses in Berkeley based on a land use survey conducted by Camiros, Ltd. in April 2009 with the land use distribution in 1974, when Berkeley s last comprehensive plan was adopted. Residential Single family residential is the predominant land use category in Berkeley, accounting for 50% of all land uses in the Village. Multi family uses can are also found primarily along St. Charles Road. Multi family residential accounts for 1.7% of total land use, or 11 acres. Attached single family residential, or duplexes, can also be found in the Village in much smaller amounts. Approximately 0.3%, or 2 acres, of land use in the Village is dedicated to this land use. There are approximately 1,830 buildings in Berkeley that contain approximately 1,914 residential units. Approximately 97% of these are single family residential. According to the U.S. Census, in 1950 there were only 497 housing units in Berkeley. By 1960, the housing stock had more than tripled, with 1,511 units. By 1974 and the adoption of Berkeley s last Comprehensive Plan the total was 1,807. At the time, the estimated potential capacity on scattered vacant lots and subdivision of large single family lots was expected to allow development of an additional 87 single family homes and 47 multi family units. Approximately 35% of Berkeley s housing stock is considered affordable under established state affordability definitions and is well maintained. Special needs housing is integrated into neighborhood settings. There are no housing complexes in the community that are specifically reserved for senior housing, although this may become a community need as the population continues to age. The most significant barrier to housing production is the lack of vacant land. Commercial The majority of Berkeley s commercial uses are found along St. Charles Road, which runs east west through the center of the Village. Some of these land uses include commercial retail, which includes restaurants, grocery stores and other establishments where goods are sold. Commercial retail uses account for 10 acres, or 1.6% of total land use in the Village. Professional office and service uses such as banks, insurance Page 24

30 agencies and medical offices, account for 0.6% or 4 acres of total land use in the Village. A smaller node of commercially zoned land is located along Taft Avenue between Electric Avenue and Elm Avenue, adjacent to Village Hall, Berkeley Park and the Illinois Prairie Path. The commercial buildings along the St. Charles Road corridor mostly date from the 1960s and early 1970s and are nearing the end of their useful lives. The McDonalds restaurant was recently rebuilt and a small retail center has been completed at St. Charles Road and Ashbel Avenue. While there have been recent investments to upgrade existing commercial buildings, many other properties will be candidates for redevelopment during the life of the plan. Railroad and Industrial Due to its location south of a major railroad corridor serving the region, a significant amount of land in the Village is dedicated to railroad uses. Berkeley is unique in that a significant portion of the Village consists of railroad property, which is part of the Union Pacific Proviso Rail Yard Global II Intermodal Facility. Railroad uses account for approximately 30% of all land uses, or about 200 acres, all located in the northern part of the Village. Industrial land uses also make up a large share of land use in the Village, with all types of industrial users, including light and heavy industrial uses. This includes wholesale, distribution and storage, as well as users engaged in processing and manufacturing of materials. Industrial uses account for approximately 10% of land area in the Village, or approximately 61 acres. These land uses are located primarily in the northeast part of the Village, south of the railroad yards. Most of Berkeley s industrial buildings were built between 1965 and While these buildings continue to adequately serve contemporary manufacturing and distribution functions, over the last two decades larger warehouse, distribution and intermodal centers have been built on the periphery of the Chicago metropolitan area in response to increased traffic congestion. While Berkeley s industrial base can be expected to remain viable well into the future, regular communication with the businesses that call Berkeley home should be initiated as an early warning system for future unanticipated change. Public and Institutional Public, institutional and open space land uses are also found within Berkeley. Public uses include municipal facilities such as Village Hall, Police Department, Fire Department and new public works building, the Berkeley Public Library, and Berkeley s two public schools and District Page 25

31 87 administrative center, and several Berkeley Park District facilities. Public uses account for 1.7% of all land uses, or 11 acres. Institutional uses typically include religious institutions, parochial schools and cemeteries. Institutional uses account for 1% of land uses in the Village, or approximately 6 acres. This includes Old Settlers Cemetery on St. Charles Road and two religious uses. Parks and open space account for approximately 1.7% of total land area in Berkeley. This includes area designated for active and passive recreation and for natural resource preservation. Parks and open space include Berkeley Park, the Illinois Prairie Path, Victoria Park and Lind Park. While 70% of the total land area within Berkeley Village limits is dedicated to land uses described above, a significant amount of land is dedicated to transportation. Surface streets within Berkeley account for approximately 20%, or 185 acres of total land area within Berkeley s municipal boundary, while 10%, or about 78 acres, is Tollway and embankment property. Community Image and Identity New development will take the form of infill development, with change occurring incrementally and gradually over time. The Village has the ability to influence new development through zoning, design guidelines and building code regulations. Where development incentives, such as tax increment financing, are used to stimulate private investment, the Village may have further impact over design quality. Streetscape improvements involving public rights of way will be among the most visible, high impact improvements to Berkeley s image and identity. There is typically more local control because streetscape improvements typically occur along longer street segments and are publicly funded. This is evident along much of the St. Charles Road corridor. Page 26

32 HIGH ST VICTORIA AVE COOLIDGE AVE VICTORIA AVE ATWOOD AVE ATWOOD AVE HARDING AVE ARTHUR AVE HERBERT AVE HERBERT AVE TAFT AVE VE ASHBEL AVE LIND ST SUNNYSIDE DR HOWARD AVE IRVING AVE HILLSIDE AVE LIND ST ELM ST LEE BLVD ROHDE AVE H LIN ELM A LAVERNE AV WOLF RD LAKEWOOD PRATER AVE NIEMEYER CT CARYL A ROY AVE SPARROW ST ROBIN ST EAGLE AVE 290 Proviso Yard Berkeley Metra Station PARK AVE Union Pacific Railroad RICHARD AVE ARTHUR AVE HERBERT AVE CHICAGO AVE McDERMOTT DR Detention Pond SUPERIOR AVE HURON ST HURON ST ST CHARLES RD BOHLANDER AVE WOLF RD MORRIS AVE SPENCHLEY AVE SPENCER AVE JERELE AVE MURRAY DR ALBIN TER BURR OAK AVE BIRCH DR HAWTHORNE AVE MAPLE AVE Illinois Prairie Path ELECTRIC AVE KOUBA DR ROSE CT Legend RIDGE AVE Single-Family Residential Single-Family Attached Public/School Institutional Multi-Family Residential Park/Open Space ELM AVE Mixed-Use Commercial/Residential Retail Commercial Railroad Vacant Building/Land PROSPECT AVE Service Commercial Embankment Industrial MADISON ST BUTTERFIELD RD Figure 3.1 Existing Land Use Berkeley Comprehensive Plan Village of Berkeley, Illinois Miles CALVIN AVE VAN BUREN ST CONGRESS ST SHBEL AVE HOWARD AV IRVING AVE HILLSIDE AVE

33 Figure 3.2: Existing Land Use Distribution Source: Camiros, Ltd. A comparison of the land use distribution when the last Comprehensive Plan was developed in 1974 to today shows relatively few changes. The biggest change is the amount of vacant land or buildings. In 1974, 20 acres, or 3.2% of total land area in the Village, were classified as vacant. In 2009, the figure has decreased to just four acres of vacant land, suggesting except for redevelopment opportunities, Berkeley has reached full build out and has no remaining undeveloped land. See Table 3.1: Existing Land Use Distribution 1974 to Table 3.1: Existing Land Use Distribution, Existing Land Use 1974 % of Total 2009 % of Total Single Family % % Duplex 2 0.3% 2 0.3% Multi Family % % Commercial 9 1.4% % Office 2 0.3% 4 0.6% Industrial % % Railroad % % Public % % Open Space 4 0.6% % Institutional 3 0.5% 6 0.9% Vacant % 4 0.6% Source: Berkeley Comprehensive Plan 1974, Camiros, Ltd. Page 28

34 Future Land Use Plan The overall land use pattern of the Village is not anticipated to change dramatically over the next 15 to 20 years. This is because Berkeley, as a fully developed community, is expected to remain a stable, predominantly single family community with its commercial areas focused along St. Charles Road and its industrial uses north of McDermott Road as they are today. Figure 3.3: Future Land Use Map illustrates the planned future development pattern of Berkeley. Land use changes are expected to focus on redevelopment of existing sites, consistent with established zoning. Such redevelopment activities represent significant opportunities to strengthen community character and the local tax base. However, redevelopment also presents certain challenges including the economics of redeveloping existing uses and issues involving environmentally challenged sites. The following future land use category descriptions provide additional detail on future land use types within the context of the Future Land Use Map. Single Family Residential This land use category describes existing single family neighborhoods and allows for the replacement of single family homes through future redevelopment. This may be in the form of teardowns and new construction on individual lots or through the creation of new residential subdivisions. Such redevelopment would involve acquisition and consolidation of multiple properties to allow for creation of larger residential developments. Multi Family Residential The multi family residential land use designation is limited to locations where such housing currently exists as a permitted use. In the future, new multi family residential development is expected to be developed as a component of mixed use projects along St. Charles Road and Taft Avenue. Housing for seniors and other special needs populations is most likely to be located in these areas. Commercial TOD Mixed Use This land use designation has been applied to much of the St. Charles Road corridor, where the emphasis will be on restaurant and commercial retail uses, with new residential uses possible on upper floors. Because of the proximity to transit in the form of Pace bus Service and the nearby Berkeley Metra station and the traffic characteristics of St. Charles Road and its interchange with I 290, this area allows the highest development densities, consistent with economic development objectives and TOD principles. Page 29

35 Community Mixed Use This land use designation has been applied to secondary commercial nodes, including the area around Village Hall. These areas can accommodate a mix of small scale community serving commercial uses. Senior and multi family housing could be developed as part of mixed use development projects. Industrial/Employment This land use category has been applied to manufacturing, distribution, office and other commercial uses found within the Village s industrial zoning districts. The intent is to continue to reserve land for industrial and other employment uses, especially those that can take advantage of the availability of freight rail service and public transportation for their workers. Public/School This land use category has been applied to buildings and owned by the Village, School District 87, and the Berkeley Library. Property owned by the Berkeley Park District or the Village that is intended to be used in the future for passive or active recreation or open space use is identified with the park/open space designation. Park/Open Space This designation has been applied to existing parks operated by Berkeley Park District facilities and the Old Settlers Cemetery, which is maintained by the Village. In addition the detention pond located along McDermott Drive, east of Wolf Road has been identified as a potential future open space resource. Railroad This land use designation includes the portion of the Proviso Yard located in the Village of Berkeley and the Metra/Union Pacific rail lines. Embankment This land use designation has been applied to land located between the I 290 and I 294 travel lanes and interchanges that are located within the Village s boundaries. It also is applied to remnants of land along the embankments for these roadways. Because of the location, size and topography, these parcels in are generally unusable, except as passive natural elements that help to soften the impact of these expressways on the community. While the overall land use pattern is expected to remain stable, redevelopment can be expected as buildings reach the end of their useful lives and become candidates for redevelopment. The areas where such changes are expected or should be encouraged are the subject of three subarea plans that are described below. These subareas include the St. Charles Road corridor, the Berkeley Metra Station environs, and the Village Hall subarea. Page 30

36 HIGH ST VICTORIA AVE COOLIDGE AVE VICTORIA AVE ATWOOD AVE ATWOOD AVE ARTHUR AVE HARDING AVE HERBERT AVE HERBERT AVE TAFT AVE VE ASHBEL AVE LIND ST SUNNYSIDE DR HOWARD AVE IRVING AVE PROVISO DR HILLSIDE AVE LIND ST ELM ST LEE BLVD ROHDE AVE H LIN ELM A LAVERNE AV WOLF RD LAKEWOOD PRATER AVE NIEMEYER CT CARYL A ROY AVE SPARROW ST ROBIN ST EAGLE AVE 290 Proviso Yard Berkeley Metra Station PARK AVE Union Pacific Railroad RICHARD AVE ARTHUR AVE HERBERT AVE CHICAGO AVE McDERMOTT DR SUPERIOR AVE Detention Pond HURON ST HURON ST ST CHARLES RD BOHLANDER AVE WOLF RD MORRIS AVE SPENCHLEY AVE SPENCER AVE JERELE AVE MURRAY DR ALBIN TER BURR OAK AVE BIRCH DR HAWTHORNE AVE MAPLE AVE Illinois Prairie Path KOUBA DR ROSE CT ELECTRIC AVE RIDGE AVE Legend Single-Family Residential Public/School ELM AVE Multi-Family Residential Commercial TOD Mixed-Use Park/Open Space Railroad PROSPECT AVE Community Mixed-Use Embankment Industrial/Employment MADISON ST BUTTERFIELD RD Figure 3.3 Future Land Use Map Berkeley Comprehensive Plan Village of Berkeley, Illinois Miles CALVIN AVE EAST-WEST TLWY VAN BUREN ST CONGRESS ST SHBEL AVE HOWARD AV IRVING AVE HILLSIDE AVE

37 Subarea Plans This section of the Plan addresses the areas of Berkeley that are likely to have the most impact on future land use. Each of these areas represents different challenges and opportunities. Recommendations respond to a unique set of issues. St. Charles Road Corridor Goal: Strengthen the St. Charles Road corridor as Berkeley s commercial shopping district and promote its identity as a location for transitoriented development (TOD) and sustainable design. St. Charles Road serves as Berkeley s most prominent corridor and is the center of commercial activity in the Village. This important eastwest route connects Berkeley to neighboring communities and also provides a direct link to I 290 to the west. The overall character of St. Charles Road is defined partly by its long standing history as a commercial corridor. However, differences exist between the north and south sides of the street, which have an influence on future land use recommendations. The north side of St. Charles Road is characterized by shallow lot depths and lots containing a mix of service commercial uses and multi family housing. The existing development pattern limits the range of uses that can be accommodated on existing sites. The south side of St. Charles Road is vastly different in character, both in terms of land use and land area. It is made up of numerous retail commercial establishments including several strip shopping centers and a grocery store. By virtue of greater lot depth, the south side of St. Charles Road is better suited for retail commercial uses given the parking and access demands of such development. The St. Charles Road corridor is included in an existing tax increment financing district that provides a range of development tools that can be used to help repurpose and strengthen this important economic engine. The Village may elect to assist in land assembly should certain redevelopment opportunities arise. Key issues with respect to the St. Charles Road corridor involve identifying appropriate market niches to pursue, land assembly, and determining the desirability of development incentives to stimulate economic development. Page 32

38 This Plan identifies several redevelopment opportunity sites between Wolf Road and Taft Avenue; a vacated gas station site on the north side of the street between Taft Avenue and Ashbel, a vacant Village owned site on the south side of the street located mid block between Ashbel and Irving, a vacant office building on the north side between Hillside and Lind, and an existing commercial shopping center on the south side of the street between Hillside and Sunnyside. Though the first three sites offer the most immediate opportunity for development, the shopping center site provides the largest area to consider a long term redevelopment strategy that could have a great impact on the character and functionality of the St. Charles Road corridor. Figure 3.4: St. Charles Road Redevelopment Concepts illustrates potential redevelopment schemes for these parcels, as well as the preferred locations of gateways and standard improvements to existing properties. Page 33

39 Taft Avenue Commercial (improvement) Multi-family Institutional Site #1 Concepts Concept 1 Concept 2 Sites #2 & #3 Concepts Concept 1 Concept 2 Huron Street #2 & #3 #2 & #3 Ashbel Avenue Howard Avenue Irving Avenue Lind Street Sunnyside Drive #1 Hillside Avenue Wolf Road ft Legend Commercial (redevelopment) Link to Train Station Corridor Gateway St. Charles Road Primary Redevelopment Area Secondary Redevelopment Area Corridor Gateway Link to Village Center Potential Expanded Redevelopment Area #4 Site #4 Concepts Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3 Figure 3.4 St. Charles Road Redevelopment Concepts Berkeley Comprehensive Plan Village of Berkeley, Illinois

40 Berkeley Metra Station and Vicinity Goal: Encourage transit oriented development (TOD) and increased Metra ridership. The Berkeley Metra Station serves as a gateway to the Village from the local commuter rail network. It connects Berkeley residents and commuters from other nearby communities to the rest of the region and provides a valuable link to employment opportunities both for residents and those working in Berkeley. Metra and the Union Pacific Railroad are undertaking a series of improvements that will improve safety and eventually provide an opportunity for increased commuter service. The addition of a third rail is planned to the north of the existing platform. The current building will be replaced by a shelter and the new central platform will be configured to allow dual boarding. Plans call for the new shelter to be heated, but would not have vendor space or restroom facilities. Inclusion of additional station amenities beyond the basics planned by Metra would most likely involve local funding. Major land use change is not one of the recommendations of this Subarea Plan. Typically, commuter railroad stations are centrally located within a community surrounded by high density mixed use development in order to maximize its function as a multi purpose area serving a diverse range of needs from shopping to housing. However, the viability of this development model depends on how the station developed historically. The area surrounding Berkeley Metra Station is situated adjacent to a single family residential neighborhood and rather hidden from the more visible areas of the Village. It is separated from the St. Charles Road corridor by several residential blocks and from the main St. Charles Road shopping district by several more blocks. It is also immediately adjacent to the Proviso Yards, which limits the potential commuter shed north of the station It is impractical to consider major land use changes around the Berkeley Metra Station for the sake of traditional transit oriented development. Quality and stable homes exist as part of the permanent fabric of the community and this land use should remain unchanged. Rather than attempt to drastically modify the character of the neighborhood surrounding the Berkeley Metra Station to match a standard of traditional transit oriented development, the focus of these recommendations is on how to maximize role and benefit of the Metra Page 35

41 Station for Berkeley. For example, what strategies could be used to increase transit use among industrial workers or and attract commuters who would park in the Metra lot and patronize Berkeley businesses on the way to and from the station? Should the potential for some sort of local shuttle service that would link the Metra Station with the St. Charles Road shopping centers, the Taft/Electric Avenue Village Center and major employers be evaluated? To the extent that Berkeley residents could be encouraged to take advantage of shuttle service, there would be more space in the Metra lot for commuters from neighboring communities. Does this make economic sense? The Future Land Use Plan anticipates that the existing land use pattern around the Berkeley Metra Station will not change. The goals and policies contained within this Plan recommend that the station be positioned to serve a bigger role in the supporting the existing and future industrial and employment base, and that it be marketed to existing and prospective businesses as an asset for employees. In addition, more prominent wayfinding signage installed enroute to the station will reinforce the relationship between the station area and village amenities such as the St. Charles Road shopping district, Village Hall and the Prairie Path bike trail. Thus, the Plan recommendations focus on development of a new TOD model, one that encourages 1) increased use of the 132 space Metra parking lot by Berkeley residents and residents of other communities who can be encouraged to stop and shop in Berkeley, and 2) expanding the existing industrial employment base by attracting new high tech facilities and jobs within walking distance of the Metra station as existing industrial buildings become obsolete and redevelopment candidates. Page 36

42 Village Center Redevelopment Concept Goal: Create an attractive, cohesive and economically viable community center oriented around Village Hall, Berkeley Park and the Illinois Prairie Path. Berkeley s Village Hall and Berkeley Park have long served as the focal point for community events. The Berkeley Public Library, a short two blocks away, and the Illinois Prairie Path comprise the balance of this civic anchor. There are a number of issues and opportunities that need to be addressed as the future of this area is considered. These include ways to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety around the Taft/Electric/Prairie Path intersection, the future of Village Hall, expanding retail activity along Taft Avenue, potential development of a new community center, coordination with the Village of Hillside on land use policy for the area, and streetscape and other traffic enhancements to be pursued as part of IDOT s planned Taft Avenue resurfacing project. Village Hall currently is the Village s administrative center and houses police, fire and public works. It is overcrowded, functionally obsolete and does not meet current accessibility standards. With the completion of the new public works building on Wolf Road, some additional space will be available for reprogramming. The Village is in the process of doing architectural studies to determine whether the existing building can be expanded and rehabilitated to meet space needs and better serve the public or if a new structure is required. There is a small commercial node along Taft Avenue that is anchored by the LeDonne True Value Hardware store. There are several other commercial buildings that are either vacant or house marginal commercial uses. The east side of Taft Avenue from the Prairie Path south to Butterfield Road is located in the Village of Hillside. Thus, efforts to redevelop the area as a neighborhood commercial center will require cooperation from Hillside property owners and Village officials. Figure 3.5: Village Center Redevelopment Concept illustrates potential improvements to the Village Center area that, together, can create a multi functional and active place. Streetscaping on Taft Avenue and Electric Avenue can complement the Prairie Path corridor and create a greener Downtown Berkeley. By reconfiguring the Village Hall parking on the north side of Electric Avenue, a memorial plaza can be installed that reinforces the importance of the civic center. These public realm improvements can help foster private redevelopment on key sites in the subarea. Page 37

43 Taft Ave ft To Library Reconfigured Parking Rose Ct New Plaza Existing Prairie Bike Path Kouba Dr Streetscape Improvements Electric Ave Streetscape Improvements Existing Village Hall Potential Village Hall Expansion Area Reduce Traffic Conflicts Ridge Ave Mixed-use Redevelopment Area Ridge Ave To Elm Street Figure 3.5 Village Center Redevelopment Concept Berkeley Comprehensive Plan Village of Berkeley, Illinois