Some Northbrook trustees experienced sticker shock at cost estimates of projects proposed in the village’s draft downtown plan.

Projects suggested in the draft plan, such as a new apartment building and parking deck next to the Metra station, could require millions of dollars in public investment to be profitable, consultants said.

“Development has to be driven by the private sector with oversight from the public sector,”Village Board Trustee Michael Scolaro said last week.

Scolaro called some of the potential public investment laid out in the draft plan, including a $9.5 million funding gap for the aforementioned apartment building and parking deck, “astronomical” and questioned whether those price tags were fully vetted.

Trustees Todd Heller and Kathryn Ciesla piggybacked on Scolaro’s comments, saying that although they liked some aspects of the plan, they questioned whether the village should get involved in funding some suggested projects should they ever come to fruition.

“We are not developers,” Heller said. “I want the developers to come to us.”

Some of the trustees said the using eminent domain and tax increment financing to build certain projects, as suggested in the draft plan, is out of the question.

Eminent domain is the government’s process of seizing private property for public use or even possibly redevelopment. Tax increment financing, or TIF, involves appropriating incremental property tax revenue to spur development within a particular district.

Scolaro and Ciesla said they would never vote for eminent domain; Heller said he would only support it if it were in the public’s interest, not necessarily for private development.

The village should examine the reasons businesses don’t move to downtown and work to address those issues, Ciesla said.

Other board members spoke more favorably about the draft plan, which came to the Village Board this week after months of workshops and public input.

Trustees Robert Israel and Jim Karagianis shared their colleagues concern about aspects like expenses and eminent domain. But they said the downtown plan wouldn’t be a blueprint for redevelopment, rather it would help developers understand the village’s vision for downtown.

The tools laid out in the plan don’t have to be used, and the projects suggested don’t have to be built as drafted or at all, they said

“What bothers me (about the discussion) is we embarked on this so we could look at a plan, and so far, the plan has worked,” said Karagianis, who has shepherded the plan through its development. “I don’t think any of us liked those numbers, but we didn’t have those numbers before.”

Village President Sandy Frum said  when she was campaigning for office three years ago, one frequent question residents asked was what would the village do to revitalize downtown. Frum, said she still hears the same question today.

The study, conducted with a Regional Transportation Authority grant and consultation from Teska Associates, improves on a downtown study in the 1990s in that it does include potential price tags, Frum said.

“I think in the past we saw pie-in-the-sky dreams with no cost,” she said.

Eventhough both the supporters and detractors said they were impressed with the community input, Frum said the village still needs more feedback from residents.

“Is this something they want and are willing to pay for?” she said. “If they don’t, it’s really simple.”

The trustees tended to agree that the village should consider zoning changes proposed in the draft plan that would allow for taller buildings, greater residential density and shared parking.

The zoning would send a clear message to builders about what type of development Northbrook wants downtown, officials said.

While some downtown property owners  want to see the village move forward with aspects of the plan,  they don’t want t be forced into making decisions about their properties.

Selwyn Marcus, a member of the Downtown Plan Steering Committee and owner of the Village Green Center building downtown, said people talked about at least one property owner like he was a “villain” during committee meetings. Some committee members accused the owner of not working to fill the vacancies because they were still providing income, Marcus said. On top of that, they talked about changes for Meadow Plaza that might not be feasible for the owner, he said.

“I listened to what sounded like a slash, burn and destroy movement,” Marcus said, adding that he wouldn’t want to see public money used for any private downtown projects.

Marcus said he voted in favor of the draft plan as a committee member, but he regrets his vote now.

Jay Heitman acknowledged after Tuesday’s meeting that he was the property owner criticized, partly due to vacant storefronts in his Meadow Plaza shopping center still leased by Walgreens and Blockbuster Video. Heitman didn’t address the Village Board, but he said he has been talking with officials during development of the plan.

Heitman said some of the suggestions in the draft plan,  range from opening storefronts to Meadow Road to adding a multistory residential building on the site, would be expensive.

But, he said, “I think it’s important now to lay the groundwork for the future. Anything that economically makes sense should be done.”

Heitman said while he understands the concerns about vacancies in his mall, the poor economy has made filling them tough.

The Village Board has not yet decided whether to adopt the downtown plan or implement any changes the draft suggests. Discussions are scheduled to continue in March

“A certain amount of momentum has been created on this project,” Karagianis said.

Now,  the village needs to build on that momentum, he said.