Converting suburban houses into group homes – but they cannot look like group homes

Multiple suburbs in the Chicago region allow for the conversion of suburban single-family houses into group homes for seniors or adults with disabilities. However, they generally agree that the conversion cannot alter the appearance of the home:

Photo by Dave Frisch on Pexels.com

A 2021 Northwest Municipal Conference survey of its members identified 14 suburbs permitting group homes for particular populations, largely those with disabilities.

However, the conversion of homes into assisted living centers for seniors is becoming increasingly prevalent. Schaumburg has seen two proposals in the past year alone. There are also online seminars offered to entrepreneurs looking to flip homes and turn them into assisted living centers, aimed at the nation’s aging population.

Regulations vary in towns that allow such conversions. Some require approval from a village board or city council, while other towns don’t require such approval because these uses are already allowed in its residential code. But all enforce rules against external changes to the houses that would identify them as group homes…

“You’ll be driving down a neighborhood and never know we’re there apart from a van picking people up or dropping them off,” said Little City Foundation CEO Rich Bobby…

While the intention of the homes is to blend in, a degree of engagement with neighbors is sought in advance to paint an accurate picture of those who are going to live there.

A common suburban story regarding proposed changes to houses might go like this: neighbors get wind of a possible change in a subdivision or residential area. They express concerns about such changes altering the character of the community. Perhaps there might be increased traffic, noise, and lights? They share that they moved into this location because it was a quiet, residential space. Changes to that format threaten their day-to-day experiences and their property values.

But what if the changes to that house or residence were minimal in nature? Or, as the regulations above suggest, the exterior of the home does not look any different and there is not a noticeable change in day-to-day life around the home? Would this allay all the concerns?

From this article, it sounds like concerns have been at a minimum thus far. The number of conversions is small. Perhaps there is a tipping point where multiple proposals in the same neighborhood or on the same straight might draw more attention. But if neighbors do not see significant changes on the outside, they might not have many issues.

Given the needs of the suburban population, I suspect more suburbs will face this particular issue in the coming years. Building large facilities can be difficult and costly. If converting homes to group homes can help serve residents and neighbors are okay with it, perhaps this will happen in a lot of places.

(This reminds of a 2013 book looking at affordable housing built in New Jersey where one of the goals was to design the multi-family housing units in a way that people passing by would not identify them as affordable housing. With some design work, this was largely accomplished and relatively few neighbors opposed the project.)

Suburban redevelopment where on the same property 4 and 3 bedroom apartments are turned down, 1 to 2 bedroom apartments are approved

In consecutive years, developers brought two different proposals for redeveloping an almost empty set of suburban office buildings into apartments. The first was turned down, the second was accepted. One factor was the size of the proposed apartments. From the first proposal:

Photo by Miguel u00c1. Padriu00f1u00e1n on Pexels.com

At an initial public hearing in August, the developer indicated he would target grad students with young families. According to the original plan, each apartment would have four bedrooms.

“If the target market demographics is going to be students, that’s more like a dormitory, not a residence. It’s a residential hall, but it’s not what we would envision in a neighborhood such as ours,” nearby resident Roberta Stewart told the zoning board.

The developer modified the proposal after the zoning board expressed concerns over a lack of details and too much parking. The property now has 80 parking spaces, most of which fall within a flood plain.

The revised plan shows three-bedroom units with offices in both buildings. There’s an “unmet need” for that size apartment in the area, Che said last month.

From the second proposal:

The previous zoning request was ultimately denied by the council last November in part due to the use of nontraditional floor plans — originally calling for four-bedroom units — and a surplus of on-site parking spaces, according to city documents.

Under the current plan, the buildings would contain a dozen one-bedroom units and 10 two-bedroom apartments, totaling 22 units. The proposed rents are approximately $1,674 a month for a one-bedroom unit and approximately $2,000 for a two-bedroom, said Mike Mallon, founder of Mallon and Associates, who represents the developer.

“We believe that our proposed plan will meet the residential demand in the market,” Mallon told city council members earlier this month.

It does not sound like the idea of apartments is the problem. The suburb was working with a plan that “recommends low-density multifamily residential development and repurposing existing structures.” The issue was the size of the apartments or the kinds of residents. If this was student housing – pitched by the developer as “grad students with young families” – then neighbors expressed concerned about dorms. Big apartments will lead to too many people near single-family homes.

Where are suburban residents to find larger apartments? Which suburban communities are approving construction of apartments with more bedrooms? Are the only concerns about students? Both developers said there is a market for their units but I would guess relatively few suburban apartments under construction have four bedrooms.

The Chicago suburbs soon to be home to the country’s biggest truck stop

I would not expect the biggest truck stop in the United States to be in the Chicago suburbs. But it will soon open:

Photo by Marcin Jozwiak on Pexels.com

Outpost, an Austin, Texas-based company, is transforming 30 acres at 70 Airport Road into a location where 1,000 semi trucks can park in a safe, secure setting, said Trent Cameron, the company’s co-founder and CEO…

When it opens Oct. 1, the number of parking spaces will exceed the 900 available at the Iowa 80 Truckstop in Walcott, Iowa, which bills itself as the world’s largest truck stop, in part because of the restaurants, stores, truck dealership, movie theater, repair shop and other service businesses spread out over its 220 acres, according to its website.

As Cameron noted, there’s a need for more truck parking. A report done by the American Trucking Association found there is one parking space for every 11 trucks on the road and many drivers spend nearly an hour every day trying to find a place where they can stop, resulting in about 12% lost pay annually.

Beyond that, truck drivers waste a lot of fuel searching for parking and often are forced to park in unsafe and unauthorized locations, the association report said.

Suburbs are not often home to truck stops as these tend to be located further outside of big cities. Developers may see land as more profitable for other uses. Companies may want cheaper land and more of it. As noted later in the article, suburban residents often do not like lots of trucks on local streets and as neighbors.

However, local and long-term trucking is essential to everyday life. Suburbanites may not like trucks on their roads but they would not like it if their local grocery store or big box store did not have what they want. For people to receive their deliveries from Internet orders, the goods have to get to warehouses first and then have to make it to their addresses.

Additionally, Chicago is an important trucking and transportation hub, serving both the large metropolitan area and a lot of traffic passing through to other places. Many trucks make their way into and out of the region with many warehouses, retail facilities, and communities.

Will large suburban truck stops become more and more common? Will this push residents and communities to make certain choices about land and locations?

When American big cities devote much of their land to single-family homes

The big city in the United States is dense. It has tall buildings and busy streets. There are plenty of apartments and mixed-use structures. They look and feel different than suburbs, small towns, and rural areas.

Photo by Phu Nguyen on Pexels.com

But even American cities have lots of single-family homes. Chicago, for example, has a lot of land devoted to single-family homes:

More than 40% of the city is zoned for single-family housing…

This figure might even be higher in other cities, particularly sprawling ones.

What might this figure mean? Some thoughts:

  1. Denser populations can fit into less space. But the amount of space given to one kind of land use, homes in this case, still matters.
  2. These neighborhoods and residents are going to get at least some attention and representation. Their interests might converge and diverge in important ways from interests of other locations and residents in big cities.
  3. This fits with an American emphasis on single-family homes, even if these homes happen to be in cities.
  4. Suburbs are in between cities and more rural areas. Are city neighborhoods of single-family homes often in between denser populations and suburbs? Do these city places feel more like suburbs or like life in different densities in the big city?

Another way to think about this percentage: even the places that Americans tend not to associate with houses and the lives that go with them have lots. of single-family homes.

New mosque on 248th Avenue in Naperville almost complete after a long process

There is an update on a case of zoning conflict in Naperville regarding a proposed mosque (see a 2019 journal article here and two blog posts here and here):

An aerial view of the property circa 2011 when originally purchased by the Islamic Center of Naperville.

Nearly two years after breaking ground, the first phase of the Islamic Center of Naperville’s mosque complex on 248th Avenue is nearly complete.

Phase one work — the construction of a 28,400-square-foot mosque — is set to finish in October, according to Islamic Center President Anees Rahman. As of mid-August, Rahman estimated the mosque was about 90% to 95% complete…

It took 15 meetings held over nine months for the proposed complex to receive a positive recommendation in October 2021 from the city’s Planning and Zoning Commission. The Naperville City Council unanimously OK’d the venture a month later — with a slate of restrictions.

Those included conditions aimed at addressing traffic, parking, fire safety and noise concerns raised by neighboring residents. As part of the approved plans, ICN agreed it would not proceed past phase two — a 41,749-square-foot school — until improvements to 248th Avenue are complete…

With traffic projections estimating the road will average 18,000 vehicles daily by 2050, the city is planning to widen 248th Avenue to five lanes between 95th and 103rd streets and to add storm sewers, curbs, gutters, street lighting, sidewalks and noise walls.

This sounds like a good outcome for the group and its members as the building will open soon. This provides space for worship and fellowship.

At the same time, this was a long process with a lot of public involvement. The property was originally owned by a church who did not build a church building on it. When it was sold to the Islamic Center of Naperville and they put forward plans, neighbors and others responded.

Given what I found in two studies (see more about the second one involving the New York City area) regarding local zoning conflict and religious buildings, proposals from Muslim groups receive more scrutiny. This particular building is almost complete but what are the consequences of longer processes and more questions compared to what others face?

Turning down a big proposed warehouse, thinking about affordable housing for certain members of the community

The spread of warehouses in suburban areas can meet opposition:

Photo by Thijs van der Weide on Pexels.com

For the second time in less than a year, the Geneva Planning and Zoning Commission is recommending the denial of a request to allow a 719,200-square-foot warehouse on the northeast corner of Kirk Road and Fabyan Parkway.

The commission voted 4-1 Thursday against Venture One Acquisitions LLC of Rosemont’s requests to amend the city’s comprehensive plan for the 55.62-acre site, changing it from rural single-family residential to light industrial, and approving a site plan.

If not warehouses at a site of suburban open space, what else could go there?

Walendziak said the east-side residents do not want more diesel pollution and truck noise.

“What the residents do want is residential,” Walendziak said. “We need affordable housing in Geneva. This is one of the last big sites left. … Housing for starting families, for seniors that they can afford to stay living here in Geneva.”

Commissioner Mim Evans also suggested that housing is the best use for the site.

“We need housing in this town, even if it isn’t technically affordable housing,” Evans said. “Housing is needed everywhere at every price point, at every level of density.”

If warehouses are the enemy – traffic, noise, out of character for a community due to their scale and industrial aspects – then housing may be more desirable. And housing for certain people groups, including families or young professionals starting out and older residents of the community who want to downsize and stay.

It may be helpful to look at the longer trends. Suburban residents and leaders have had heated debates about land use since at least the beginning of the postwar era. Big proposals could generate conversations about what the community could become. Community needs shift over time as social and economic conditions change.

At the same time, I wonder if there is extra urgency these days due to two factors. First, many suburbs have few large parcels left. This means that decisions like those above feel extra consequential. Second, housing prices are high enough in many places that people want to protect their housing values and extend housing opportunities to certain people.

Figuring what happens with this particular property might take years from additional discussions to planning to actual construction.

A common suburban playbook: zone for big lots, oppose apartments

A new book about Southlake, Texas discusses some of the mechanisms used to keep the community white:

These approaches are found across American suburbs. Start with zoning for larger residential lots which has several effects. It keeps houses further apart. It maintains a more rural image. It avoids having dense housing. It raises the price of homes as each lot is bigger and costs more and the houses can be bigger since there is more space to build.

Next, take apartments and why a good number of suburbanites do not like them. They are denser housing. Suburbanites prefer homeowners, who they think have more commitment to the community and to the property in which they live. They are cheaper and this may drive property values down.

Put these two together and suburbs can keep housing values up and limit who can live in a community. This is not an accident; suburbs often have particular residents in mind when they think about development and the future of their community.

Religion in the American suburbs: numerous religious buildings and buildings used by religious groups

Imagine a stereotypical suburban downtown in the United States. It has two story brick buildings with storefronts on the first floor. There are some offices and places to eat. A few people walk around while cars drive past parked vehicles. There may be train tracks and a station marking the ability to commute to the big city. Not far from such a streetscape are often church buildings of various denominations and traditions.

Photo by Jatuphon Buraphon on Pexels.com

Not all suburbs have downtowns. Many of the postwar suburbs are agglomerations of subdivisions, commercial areas, and industrial parks. But, religious buildings are there too. Go to a major intersection involving a highway; is there a megachurch nearby? Are there congregations meeting in former big box stores and in strip malls? There may not be an obvious walkable center to these suburbs but there are still plenty of congregations.

Religious buildings dot the suburban landscape. They may not be the most desirable land use with congregations not paying property taxes for their property and the opportunity costs of how valuable land might instead by used. Neighbors and local leaders may object to constructing a new religious building or a religious group altering an existing building. However, numerous residents attend these congregations. A number of these congregations and buildings are fixtures and centers in their communities. These congregations host services and can provide services to and space for the community.

These buildings range in size and architecture. Some of this depends on religious traditions. Some traditions have a particular approach to a building. Other traditions have more flexibility. People of faith in the suburbs may meet in a traditional-looking church – even as a member of a faith that is not Christian – or in a school, a movie theater, a mall, an office building, or a home. These approaches might be guided by financial resources or by concerns that certain styles may inhibit people from joining their community.

Thus, the American suburbs can include large Hindu temples, mosques and Islamic community centers, megachurches, and traditional religious buildings large and small. They can meet in old and new structures. They can move between locations as their congregations grows or shrinks, acquires resources or has difficulty finding resources.

Needing thousands of signatures and a ballot initiative to start building a new community

To build on rural land, the backers of a proposed new city in California need to collect signatures and get on the ballot:

Photo by Matthias Zomer on Pexels.com

Former Goldman Sachs trader Jan Sramek unveiled his closely guarded ballot initiative for the proposed community between San Francisco and Sacramento in January, a plan that envisions 20,000 homes, transit infrastructure, schools, jobs and green space for an initial 50,000 residents. He has since amended it twice to address concerns raised by Solano County and a neighboring U.S. Air Force base.

Thursday is the deadline for the county counsel’s office to give the ballot initiative a title and summary, which will allow signature gatherers to hit the streets in search of the 13,000 they need — and preferably thousands more as a cushion. The delays mean the campaign has just two months, not three, to collect signatures if they want to give elections officials the maximum time to verify them…

“We’ve been walking a line of making sure we get this right and also realizing that the clock is ticking,” he said. “At the same time, we believe that the amendments that we made to the measure will significantly help increase our chances of success in November, and it was definitely worth the additional time that it cost us to get it right.”…

California Forever could have avoided this had the campaign shared its proposal with local officials ahead of time, said Ross, the consultant. “It’s very much an outsider approach,” he said…

The initiative specifies that the development agreement will include the 10 guarantees made by California Forever, such as $400 million to help county residents and Travis Air Force Base families buy homes in the community and $200 million for the county’s existing downtowns. An environmental impact review would also be required.

A friendly reminder: you cannot just start building a city or community in the United States. You may have been able to do this in the days before states or even afterward with more undeveloped land and smaller populations. But, at some point, communities had to appeal for incorporation. Later, they could appeal for home rule or other recognition.

Today, land use is governed by zoning guidelines at the county and municipal levels. Any change usually has to be approved by some body of local government. Local officials and local residents may disagree with developers and property owners about the best use of land. Some proposals are turned down while others are approved.

It sounds like this proposal has multiple local governments steps to proceed through. Will there be enough signatures to get on the ballot? Will it be approved by voters? What will local (and state) officials do? There is a long way to go even before any ground is broken.

When you can build a suburban warehouse where an office building used to stand

With less demand for suburban office buildings, the void is being filled with warehouses. One example from the northern suburbs of Chicago:

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

The old Allstate campus was a traditional suburban office environment with lush landscaping, reflecting ponds and thousands of workers. That property now is called the Logistics Campus, a massive industrial development underway in Glenview…

“The ability to put modern industrial in the middle of an established community — it’s unique in the sense that there will be very few other sites of this size that can replicate what we’re doing,” said Neal Driscoll, Dermody’s Midwest region partner.

Development of big-box industrial space in the Chicago region set a record in 2023 with construction of 70 buildings totaling nearly 33 million square feet, according to a recent report by commercial real estate company Colliers International.

The shift to warehouses in the suburbs has been going on for a while. What I noticed in this story was this thought: the unique opportunity to put warehouses (“modern industrial”) in “an established community.” Translation: many upscale suburbs would not chose to put in warehouses. They might generate noise and traffic. They do not provide many white-collar jobs. They are not attractive buildings.

But, empty office parks are also not desirable. Suburban offices or headquarters for Fortune 500 companies are attractive: quality jobs, status, most likely a glass building. No one working in these buildings and companies leaving these spaces leads to issues.

Thus, warehouses might now be found in communities that would not necessarily select them if they had such options. A set of warehouses might be preferable to vacant office buildings or unwanted office buildings. Figuring out the best land use or zoning in a suburb can be less about the most ideal use of land but rather about the possible alternatives at that moment.