Brookfield Homes, the multi-billion dollar developer, is showing up once more at the City Council, asking once again for preferential treatment. And why shouldn’t they get it? They got it the last time they asked. After all, along with their employees and associates they invested nearly $100,000 helping elect 4 of the current 5 sitting council members. Doesn’t that entitle them to some preferential treatment?
Who cares if the citizens of Lake Forest, in overwhelming numbers, opposed the Brookfield project?
Who cares if the City staff opposed the Brookfield project?
Find out what's happening in Lake Forestwith free, real-time updates from Patch.
Who cares if the Planning Commission opposed the Brookfield project?
What matters is Brookfield and associates invested nearly $100,000 and they expect a return on their investment. What’s the point in getting someone elected if they can’t do you a favor, now and then?
Find out what's happening in Lake Forestwith free, real-time updates from Patch.
And what are they asking for now? This time they are asking that they be allowed to build a project that just about everyone opposes, from so many differing points of view I can only ask you to click here for the previous discussion. But the three major stumbling blocks appear to be these –
1. There is no valid study that shows changing the area is the best use of the land. Ironically, Brookfield refused to do a study that would have shown what the best use of the land was, and therefore, lacking that study, they have no rationale to propose that the Planning Commission or the City Council allow them to change it. BTW, in case you don’t recall, the last time Brookfield asked the City Council for a favor was when they requested that they be allowed to refuse the staff’s demand that such a study be performed; and the Council sided with Brookfield.
2. There is no valid study of what’s going to happen to Lake Forest as a whole as a result of the increased traffic in the City from the 4,000+ new homes already approved, much less Brookfield’s 140+ new ones. Brookfield did commission a study which showed the impacts to the immediate area, but not the City as a whole. Interestingly enough, a law suit against a developer right next door was just settled on Friday, and the Judge ruled against the developer, citing this very issue, saying “The traffic impacts of the proposed development are disguised” because the developer only looked in “limited areas”. It’s the exact same situation we’re in, so approval of the Brookfield project surely invites a similar lawsuit. Click here for more info.
3. The Brookfield project proposes to use tandem parking to achieve the City’s parking requirements, but tandem parking is not approved for that area, so an exception must be made. But just about everyone who looked at the proposal feels that tandem parking is not a solution, but merely a ruse. To get the parking numbers down to acceptable limits, Brookfield must build fewer homes, narrowing their profits, and giving them less money to elect City Council members in the next city they plan to build in. Needless to say, Brookfield is not in favor of shaving their profits.
Will the City Council ask Brookfield to do the two critical studies that should have been done in the first place?
Will the City Council side with the citizens, the staff, and the Planning Commission?
Or….......
You can make a difference. Show up at the City Tuesday night at 7 pm and let the Council know your opinion.
