A sweeping new proposal for developing property at the intersection of Oak Park Avenue and Madison Street has surfaced, and the Oak Park-based architect who submitted it is crying foul over what he says is an insider’s game for development in the village.
Brian Hammersley, of Hammersley Architecture, which served as the architect for Sugar Beet Food Co-op, 812 Madison St., confirmed in a telephone interview that his firm has submitted a proposal for the development of the parcel of land on the northeast corner of the intersection, which is now a village-owned surface parking lot.
The village put out a request for proposals last month, giving developers about a month to submit conceptual plans for the corner lot.
Meanwhile, the village and its economic development arm, the Oak Park Economic Development Corporation, have been negotiating with a single development firm, Jupiter Realty, for more than a year behind closed doors.
Hammersley’s proposal for the site is a stark contrast to Jupiter’s proposal of building 40 condominiums and 25,000 square feet of retail space on the village lot and additional retail and residential space at buildings adjacent to the lot to the east of the parking lot and on the south side of Madison Street. The proposal from Jupiter also would bend a section of Madison to expand the parcels of land up for development.
Hammersley submitted three proposals – one that would develop just the village-owned lot; one that would develop the parking lot and the lots Jupiter is currently working to secure for additional development, including the Madison Street bend; and another that would develop those parcels but without bending the street.
Hammersley’s vision for the parking lot includes four mixed-use buildings with residential above and ground-level commercial space; a fifth building to the east of the parcel that would have a child-care facility on the ground floor and a business-and-arts incubator on the upper levels; and residential courtyards.
The multi-story business and art incubator building would include open collaboration spaces, galleries, private studios and offices, and “would offer a wide range of space types to house many different kind of uses,” according to Hammersley’s proposal to the village.
The alternate proposal from Hammersley for the north side of Madison Street puts a “community center” and business incubator at the site east of Euclid Avenue; the mixed-use development and childcare facility between Oak Park Avenue and Euclid; and additional residential/commercial space, office space and a green roof park on the south side of Madison.
Hammersley said in a telephone interview that he has been looking at the site for about a year and met with Tammie Grossman, Oak Park director of development customer services; Village Engineer Bill McKenna; and other village staff about a month before the request for proposals was made by the village.
Hammersley said he was disappointed to learn from Grossman that the village already was working with a developer on the project.
He said he was told at that meeting that the window for submitting proposals would be about two weeks. The time period for submitting proposals ultimately was extended to three weeks and ultimately was expanded to be about a month, but Hammersley said that’s not a realistic amount of time for developers to put in a proposal, much less secure financing for such a project.
Hammersley said he received a warmer welcome from John Lynch, executive director of the Oak Park Economic Development Corporation, which has been negotiating the deal with Jupiter privately.
“Lynch was a completely different story [compared to the village],” Hammersley said. “He said it was important that these ideas get out there and that people talk about them.”
It is not known whether Jupiter and Hammersley are the only two firms to submit proposals. Village Manager Cara Pavlicek has declined to release any information about the proposal process, other than to say that Jupiter was not the only company submitting a proposal.
Hammersley said he believes the village is not being transparent about the process and cutting deals without input from the community.
“The way the whole process is structured is geared to court individuals and usher them through the system; it’s like a private vetting system,” Hammersley said. “It’s like, ‘We’re the experts, we know what the village needs.’ They kind of have it backwards.”
He encouraged the village to consider something other than condominiums and national retail chains on the ground level.
“I think it is important that Oak Park and the current administration is keeping an eye on what’s good for the community,” he said, adding that Oak Park can be profitable without national retailers because, he said, “They will love you and they will leave you.”
“We believe that we can cultivate people in Oak Park, because we have the financial base [to encourage homegrown businesses],” he said. “That mindset has to be established. A lot of people I talk to [want] a measure of calm and thoughtfulness prior to further development in Oak Park.
“That’s why we’re putting this out there because we want to be part of that process.”
