After nearly a year’s worth of village meetings, Northbrook residents will finally see accessory dwelling units in their backyards — provided they comply with all permits, zoning rules, size limits, and strict conditions on who can live in the attached unit.
Trustees voted unanimously for attached ADUs on March 8, though the ordinance places myriad restrictions on the units, including requiring they be incorporated into the single-family dwelling on the lot as opposed to a separate structure.
“I’m hoping that with this small step, we can all see what it will do or not do to our town, and hopefully there will be better understanding,” Trustee Joy Ebhomielen said.
The approved units are in many ways a far cry from the tools of economic and demographic inclusivity envisioned by supporters of ADUs.
Under the ordinance, the Northbrook units must be located in the same zoning lot as a single-family residence and remain under the same owner; may not exceed 600 square feet or 25 % of the single-family residence’s floor area; must retain the appearance of a single-family home; and must be occupied by a person at least 55 years old or a person with a disability.
The owners of the single-family residence also have to apply for a special permit to build the unit, which would go before the village board and be subject to public input.
Proponents of unrestricted ADUs had argued the units could expand the scope of people who could live in a village where single-family dwellings make up nearly 80 % of homes and the median value of homes exceeds a half-million dollars, per 2015-2019 American Community Survey data.
ADUs, supporters argued, were more environmentally sustainable than single-family units, would encourage employees of Northbrook business to live within village limits — and local property tax boundaries — in the work-from-home era, and could allow for greater numbers of single parents, young people, and aging relatives to move into or remain in the village.
“ADUs would invite a more diverse population to live within the community, which fortifies our character and enhances life in Northbrook,” resident Karen Brownlee wrote in a statement read aloud at public comment.
But opponents, who often cited their longevity in Northbrook and service on various community and municipal boards, claimed more density would hamstring village services and said they did not want to live in a “crowded” or “urbanized” community.
Some even accused village trustees of carrying out a hidden agenda to change the character of Northbrook.
“It seems to be very goal-oriented to change the demographics of our village,” resident Rob Holt wrote.
For reference, Northbrook is nearly 80 % white and has a median household income nearly double that of Illinois at $124,863, according to U.S. Census data. A supporter of ADUs, Bruce Bondy, wrote critics’ objections were “based on vague, elitist fears and racism.”
Several suburbs have passed ordinances implementing ADUs in recent years, often to combat rising costs of living and limited affordable housing options. In Evanston, ADUs can be rented to individuals who are not part of the single-family household. Lake Bluff passed an ADU ordinance in January that requires the owner or renter of the single-family residence to also occupy the ADU but does not include the same restrictions on age or disability status.
Northbrook’s village board first discussed the possibility of adding ADUs to the zoning code in October 2020, and the units were seen as a possible avenue to increase affordable housing in the village after the village overhauled its affordable plan that December to address the village’s long-standing failure to meet a state-mandated requirement of 10 % affordability.
By Illinois’ definition, affordability is determined if those making 80 % of the median income for the Chicago region are able to purchase a home and those making 60 % of the area median income are able to rent, spending no more than 30 % of their household income on housing.
By Tuesday, the board had met to discuss ADUs some 18 times, according to multiple members’ estimates, an experience Trustee Heather Ross compared to the movie “Groundhog Day.” Trustee Ebhomielen called it “the most difficult decision” she had encountered as a board member since taking office last May.
Board president Kathryn Ciesla put perhaps the most positive spin on it.
More Top Picks Dreame D10 Plus Gen 2
“If both sides are a little unhappy, it’s a successful compromise,” Ciesla said.
Ross, who had backed ADUs early on, said she was “encouraged” by these first steps but uncomfortable with the number of restrictions opposed on units.
In particular, Ross was “very uncomfortable” with a requirement that homeowners should have to submit an affidavit testifying to the age or disability status of the Northbrook units’ occupants.
“This lack of applicants will not be reflective of necessity but rather a person’s hesitation to have to open the door to neighborhood feuds or publicly discuss personal issues such as age or disability,” Ross said.
At least one trustee, Muriel Collison, said she was counting on that.
Listing at length the numerous restrictions placed on ADUs, she said she expected the ordinance would preserve Northbrook’s character rather than modify it.
“I’m not interested in living in an urban suburb,” Collison said. “We’re just not set up for it.”
Joshua Irvine is a freelance reporter for Pioneer Press.