This story is the second in a series.
A number of Hazel Crest residents spoke during the public comment section of the Hazel Crest village board meeting Tuesday, Feb. 14, shortly after the board voted to annex Calumet Country Club into Hazel Crest.
No one spoke in favor of annexation or of the redevelopment project proposed by Catalyst Consulting. Comments from residents focused on the potential health and environmental impacts of the project; on worries about increases in truck traffic and potential flooding; and frustrations with what some felt was the village’s lack of responsiveness to residents’ concerns.
At the Jan. 24 board meeting, several residents said they wanted the village to hold a community forum before the annexation so people would know more about the redevelopment project. Mayor Vernard Alsberry recommended residents attend information sessions that are being held at 6 p.m. every Thursday in the country club’s clubhouse, 2136 175th St.
K.C. Mosley, a resident of the Pottowatamie Hills neighborhood in Hazel Crest, picked up on that theme at the Feb. 14 meeting. She said she had attended an information session presented by the Catalyst Consulting, the developer now working in partnership with property owner Diversified Partners of Scottdale, Ariz., but she thought residents need more and better information from village officials.
“I would like to suggest that what the residents of Hazel Crest could most benefit from is a real opportunity, with a real open meeting, with a real possibility of speaking with our board and our trustees regarding the development,” she said. “I would like to suggest that we deserve better information.”
Another speaker, Alice Snyder, said she is concerned about the health impact residents might face from the redevelopment project, and referred to the controversial Sterigenics facility in Willowbrook that closed after the community protested emissions from the plant of a cancer-causing chemical.
“There should be some kind of legal way that we can insist that they follow what we want them to do, which is not to pollute the environment and put the rest of us in danger,” she said.
Gloria Bashir brought up the apparent change in stance by Alsberry and the board. In February 2021, Alsberry issued a video statement expressing the board’s opposition to the industrial redevelopment of the country club and refusal to work with Brown.
“You were very poignant, very dignified and very, very succinct about your position with this annexation. And you said Hazel Crest will not vote for this one minute,” she said. “What changed?”
Alsberry has said he continues to stand by the February 2021 statement and considers the current proposal to be different from the one he objected to then.
In addition to Hazel Crest residents, a number of Homewood and Flossmoor residents spoke in opposition to annexation and to the project, many of them South Suburbs for Greenspace members who have spoken out at previous meetings.
One East Hazel Crest resident, Charlene Dixon, said she represented the Bremerton Woods neighborhood, which is across Dixie Highway from the country club. She said residents there already deal with air and noise pollution from Interstate 80/294 and from nearby rail traffic.
“Many residents will have to move if this takes place. To lose over 2,000 trees would be a travesty for this area,” she said. “It is the mayor and trustees who are elected in our town to protect us to do the right thing when issues arise that may jeopardize our wellbeing. You must say no.”
David Sacks of Flossmoor argued that the project would sacrifice greenspace without meeting the community’s economic needs.
“Your willingness to entertain this application is a fundamental misunderstanding of your community,” he said. “This is a middle class suburb. Our wealth as a middle class community is in our homes, our houses. We are not in desperate need of low-paying warehouse jobs. There are already freshly built warehouses sitting empty in our own community.”
Percy Scott of Flossmoor did not take a stance on the project but indirectly answered Snyder’s question by reminding the audience that now that the property is part of Hazel Crest and is zoned residential, the developer will have to go through the rezoning process, which will provide the village an opportunity to specify restrictions on the project. The process will include public hearings to give residents a chance to ask questions and provide input.
“So now that you have ownership of the land and you have the jurisdiction to either say yea or nay, I ask that you be very transparent with all of these people in the community through social media, your website and everything to talk about exactly what’s going to be there,” Scott said.
In comments at the end of the meeting, Alsberry said with annexation done, the village could move forward with the public meetings residents have requested.
On Thursday, Alsberry issued a statement on the annexation and reiterated his pledge to conduct public meetings on the issue. Public hearings are required for rezoning issues and for the formation of tax increment financing districts. The village commissioned a study at its Jan. 24 meeting to explore the feasibility of establishing a TIF district on the country club property.
“This board fully understands its responsibility to our community moving forward,” Alsberry said. “Any future development plans will be thoroughly reviewed and presented to our residents at transparent public hearings and open village board discussions. As we move forward with the process, we will only approve plans which are reasonable, viable and in the best interest of our Hazel Crest community.”