The URL can be used to link to this page

Economic Development Packet 2015 09-01-15 AGENDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Tuesday, September 1, 2015 6:00 p.m. City Hall Conference Room Citizen Comments: Minutes for Correction/Approval: August 4, 2015 New Business: 1. EDC 2015-33 Building Permit Report for July 2015 2. EDC 2015-34 Building Inspection Report for July 2015 3. EDC 2015-35 Property Maintenance Report for July 2015 4. PC 2015-15 Text Amendment for Zoning Code Regarding Lot Coverage and Floor Area Ratio 5. ZBA 2015-04 Meadowvale Lot Coverage Variance 6. ZBA 2015-05 Sign Variance for Property Located at the NE Corner of John St. and Sycamore Rd. 7. EDC 2015-36 Comprehensive Plan Update – State of the City Report 8. EDC 2015-37 Commercial / Industrial Incentive Plan Old Business: Additional Business: 2015/2016 City Council Goals – Economic Development Committee Goal Priority Staff “South Side Economic Development” 1 Bart Olson & Krysti Barksdale-Noble “Revenue Growth (Industrial/Commercial Incentives)” 2 Bart Olson & Krysti Barksdale-Noble “Downtown Planning and Development” 3 Krysti Barksdale-Noble “Comprehensive Plan Update” 15 Krysti Barksdale-Noble United City of Yorkville 800 Game Farm Road Yorkville, Illinois 60560 Telephone: 630-553-4350 www.yorkville.il.us UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE WORKSHEET ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Tuesday, September 1, 2015 6:00 PM CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CITIZEN COMMENTS: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MINUTES FOR CORRECTION/APPROVAL: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. August 4, 2015 □ Approved ________ □ As presented □ With corrections --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NEW BUSINESS: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. EDC 2015-33 Building Permit Report for July 2015 □ Moved forward to CC __________ consent agenda? Y N □ Approved by Committee __________ □ Bring back to Committee __________ □ Informational Item □ Notes ___________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. EDC 2015-34 Building Inspection Report for July 2015 □ Moved forward to CC __________ consent agenda? Y N □ Approved by Committee __________ □ Bring back to Committee __________ □ Informational Item □ Notes ___________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. EDC 2015-35 Property Maintenance Report for July 2015 □ Moved forward to CC __________ consent agenda? Y N □ Approved by Committee __________ □ Bring back to Committee __________ □ Informational Item □ Notes ___________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. PC 2015-15 Text Amendment for Zoning Code Regarding Lot Coverage and Floor Area Ratio □ Moved forward to CC __________ consent agenda? Y N □ Approved by Committee __________ □ Bring back to Committee __________ □ Informational Item □ Notes ___________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. ZBA 2015-04 Meadowvale Lot Coverage Variance □ Moved forward to CC __________ consent agenda? Y N □ Approved by Committee __________ □ Bring back to Committee __________ □ Informational Item □ Notes ___________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. ZBA 2015-05 Sign Variance for Property Located at NE Corner of John St. and Sycamore Rd. □ Moved forward to CC __________ consent agenda? Y N □ Approved by Committee __________ □ Bring back to Committee __________ □ Informational Item □ Notes ___________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7. EDC 2015-36 Comprehensive Plan Update – State of the City Report □ Moved forward to CC __________ consent agenda? Y N □ Approved by Committee __________ □ Bring back to Committee __________ □ Informational Item □ Notes ___________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8. EDC 2015-37 Commercial / Industrial Incentive Plan □ Moved forward to CC __________ consent agenda? Y N □ Approved by Committee __________ □ Bring back to Committee __________ □ Informational Item □ Notes ___________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Have a question or comment about this agenda item? Call us Monday-Friday, 8:00am to 4:30pm at 630-553-4350, email us at agendas@yorkville.il.us, post at www.facebook.com/CityofYorkville, tweet us at @CityofYorkville, and/or contact any of your elected officials at http://www.yorkville.il.us/gov_officials.php Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Meeting and Date: Synopsis: Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Council Action Requested: Submitted by: Agenda Item Notes: Reviewed By: Legal Finance Engineer City Administrator Human Resources Community Development Police Public Works Parks and Recreation Agenda Item Number Minutes Tracking Number Minutes of the Economic Development Committee – August 4, 2015 EDC – September 1, 2015 Majority Committee Approval Minute Taker Name Department Page 1 of 3 DRAFT UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Tuesday, August 4, 2015, 6:00pm Yorkville City Hall, Conference Room 800 Game Farm Road In Attendance: Committee Members Chairman Ken Koch Alderman Diane Teeling Alderman Chris Funkhouser Alderman Carlo Colosimo Other City Officials City Administrator Bart Olson Community Development Director Krysti Barksdale-Noble City Planner Chris Heinen Code Official Pete Ratos Other Guests: Todd Roberts, MeritCorp Lee Fry, President, Lee Fry Co. Anthony DiMauro, V.P., Lee Fry Co. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Ken Koch at 6:00pm. Citizen Comments None Previous Meeting Minutes July 7, 2015 The minutes were approved as read. Approved on a unanimous voice vote. New Business 1. EDC 2015-29 Building Permit Report for June 2015 Mr. Ratos reported 6 B.U.I.L.D. permits in June, 1 standard single family and 5 commercial permits. Most of the homes were in Windett Ridge. No further action. 2. EDC 2015-30 Building Inspection Report for June 2015 There were 239 inspections, mostly single family homes, decks and miscellaneous. Commercial inspections were slightly slower with some work at Wrigley. No further action. Page 2 of 3 3. EDC 2015-31 Property Maintenance Report for June 2015 Mr. Ratos said there were 26 property maintenance cases heard in June, most of which were weeds and grass issues. The vast majority were dismissed per the City Attorney's recommendation since the grass was cut by the hearing date. Some of the dismissed cases were mowed by Public Works which generates a fee when action is taken on the lot. Alderman Koch received a call from a resident on Teri Lane regarding a complaint on Omaha Ct. for tall grass. Mr. Ratos will address this matter. 4. EDC 2015-32 Fountainview Plaza – Proposed New Dunkin Donuts, Fuel Station & Retail Store This was tabled until slightly later in the meeting.. 5. PC 2015-14 County Case 15-13 – Game Farm Road – 1.5 Mile Review Mr. Heinen said staff has reviewed this request for a reduced front yard setback at 1211 Game Farm Road. The petitioner asked for a reduction from 50 feet to 6 feet to accommodate a garage. Staff agreed with the County memo that recommended a setback of 30 feet. It was noted the petitioner may want to subdivide the property at some point. After a brief discussion, the committee agreed on a 30- foot setback. This matter will proceed to Plan Commission and then City Council. 4. EDC 2015-32 Fountainview Plaza – (out of sequence) Ms. Noble reported Hari Development LLC wishes to redevelop this site (previous owner defaulted) originally approved in an Annexation Agreement in 2007. It was zoned as B-3, then amended in 2008 to a PUD. A car care business has already built on lot 3 of this PUD. Hari LLC wishes to revert to the B-3 zoning and a modified PUD to include a gas station and Dunkin Donuts. Gas stations are special uses and must go through that process. They also desire to split lot #1 into 2 sub-lots: #101 and #102. Dunkin Donuts would be built on #101 and a convenience store, video gaming and fuel station would be on #102. The original lot 2 will be marketed as a commercial use, but will have parking for now. Staff has reviewed their various plans and variances are only required for signage and 1 parking setback. An incentive agreement is being discussed based on a reimbursement request for engineering and infrastructure costs and county fees totaling $122,000. The infrastructure will be private and the partial infrastructure in place is in default. The actual amount will be presented to the Council next week. Alderman Funkhouser questioned the site plan configuration, the saturation point of the video gaming and the close proximity to a nearby gas station. He said the challenging site for multiple users results in the variance and setback requests. He also briefly discussed the landscaping in conjunction with the incentive package. Mr. Lee Fry said Dunkin Donuts sites are highly studied and they will want to begin construction very soon. Mr. Funkhouser asked to see plans with the turn radius due to high vehicle movement on the site. He also noted concerns with the parking and loading (loading has already been removed). He suggested an island to delineate the drive lane from the stacking. Southside development is needed and will bring other developers, said Alderman Colosimo. A second gas station in that area should be beneficial and he will fully support the project, contingent upon engineering approval. Aldermen Teeling and Koch agreed. Chairman Koch questioned the tight spot for the gas station and right in/right out. Page 3 of 3 With regard to a second video gaming business in the area, Alderman Colosimo said the market would determine how many the town could support. Alderman Funkhouser agreed with the video gaming, however, he had concern with the liquor license. If the same person owned the video gaming store and the convenience store, only 1 liquor license would be needed, otherwise 2 would be required, along with a separate entrance, according to Mr. Fry. He said there will be 5 gaming machines and stated they will not allow 2 gaming licenses in this development. Architectural plans on the structure were requested by Mr. Funkhouser due to the gas station and overhead canopy. Mr. Funkhouser said that he felt the City should see the plans due to bad experiences in the past with PUD's. Mr. Fry said he could provide picture samples. Chairman Koch asked for some square foot comparisons with other convenience stores. This store will be about 3,100 square foot and will be similar in size to the southside Shell station. He asked about the fuel tank placement—they will be under concrete. Ms. Noble said this matter will move to City Council on August 11th for a Public Hearing on the Annexation Agreement. Then it will move to Plan Commission on August 12th for the special use, PUD modification and final plat and then to City Council on August 25th. She will address some of the comments made at this meeting and include it in the staff memo. The estimated opening time is estimated for spring 2016. Land development is scheduled for September. Drawings for the right in/right out have been submitted to IDOT. Old Business: None Additional Business: None There was no further business and the meeting was adjourned at 6:47pm Minutes respectfully submitted by Marlys Young Have a question or comment about this agenda item? Call us Monday-Friday, 8:00am to 4:30pm at 630-553-4350, email us at agendas@yorkville.il.us, post at www.facebook.com/CityofYorkville, tweet us at @CityofYorkville, and/or contact any of your elected officials at http://www.yorkville.il.us/gov_officials.php Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Meeting and Date: Synopsis: Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Council Action Requested: Submitted by: Agenda Item Notes: Reviewed By: Legal Finance Engineer City Administrator Human Resources Community Development Police Public Works Parks and Recreation Agenda Item Number NB #1 Tracking Number EDC 2015-33 Building Permit Report for July 2015 EDC – September 1, 2015 N/A N/A N/A Informational None All permits issued in July 2015 D. Weinert Community Development Name Department L:\Agendas - Packets\Packets\2015 Packets\Economic Development\09-01-15\Bld Permit Report - July 2015.doc Prepared by D Weinert UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE BUILDING PERMIT REPORT JULY 2015 TYPES OF PERMITS Number of Permits Issued SFD Single Family Detached B.U.I.L.D Single Family Detached Program Begins 1/1/2012 SFA Single Family Attached Multi- Family Apartments Condominiums Commercial Includes all Permits Issued for Commercial Use Industrial Misc. Construction Cost Permit Fees July 2015 71 0 10 0 0 12 0 49 2,263,111.00 162,957.30 Calendar Year 2015 367 5 47 0 0 62 0 253 41,822,402.00 773,277.09 Fiscal Period 2015 222 4 25 0 0 25 0 168 6,316,392.00 358,956.13 July 2014 50 1 4 0 0 9 0 36 1,986,122.00 69,836.36 Calendar Year 2014 352 6 31 0 0 57 0 258 11,499,466.00 553,152.86 Fiscal Period 2014 212 1 13 0 0 24 1 174 6,629,854.00 230,785.83 July 2013 69 7 6 0 0 12 0 44 2,611,215.00 147,889.50 Calendar Year 2013 378 25 37 0 0 76 0 240 12,392,515.00 828,001.22 Fiscal Period 2013 214 12 17 0 0 32 0 153 5,893,424.00 363,311.84 July 2012 71 2 5 0 0 15 0 49 2,435,683.00 93,346.54 Calendar Year 2012 335 20 23 0 0 66 0 226 11,751,784.00 548,424.26 Fiscal Period 2012 201 9 12 0 0 41 0 139 6,499,122.00 265,200.13 Have a question or comment about this agenda item? Call us Monday-Friday, 8:00am to 4:30pm at 630-553-4350, email us at agendas@yorkville.il.us, post at www.facebook.com/CityofYorkville, tweet us at @CityofYorkville, and/or contact any of your elected officials at http://www.yorkville.il.us/gov_officials.php Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Meeting and Date: Synopsis: Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Council Action Requested: Submitted by: Agenda Item Notes: Reviewed By: Legal Finance Engineer City Administrator Human Resources Community Development Police Public Works Parks and Recreation Agenda Item Number NB #2 Tracking Number EDC 2015-34 Building Inspection Report for July 2015 EDC – September 1, 2015 N/A N/A N/A Informational None All inspections scheduled in July 2015 D. Weinert Community Development Name Department DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 1 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 1 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- PR _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 4 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 1 0 5 4 4 3 1 1 C H U R C H S T 1 0 7 / 0 8 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 5 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 2 0 1 3 0 1 1 5 2 2 1 1 P R A I R I E G R A S S L N 2 9 5 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 7 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 2 0 1 3 0 4 3 3 2 1 9 3 O L I V E L N 2 8 8 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 8 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 2 0 1 4 0 0 2 3 2 3 0 3 O L I V E L N 2 8 3 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 8 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 2 0 1 4 0 0 3 6 1 4 2 8 S L A T E C T 3 4 7 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 5 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 2 0 1 4 0 0 3 7 1 4 6 8 S L A T E C T 3 4 3 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 7 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 2 0 1 4 0 0 5 4 2 2 2 5 L A V E N D E R W A Y 6 9 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 8 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 2 0 1 4 0 0 5 5 2 2 3 3 O L I V E L N 2 8 6 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 7 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 2 0 1 4 0 1 3 3 2 3 2 4 O L I V E L N 2 8 0 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - B K F B A C K F I L L 2 0 1 4 0 2 1 1 2 4 5 5 W Y T H E P L 8 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 0 3 - E S W E N G I N E E R I N G - S E W E R / W A T 0 7 / 0 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 4 - P L U P L U M B I N G - U N D E R S L A B 0 7 / 1 3 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 0 5 - G A R G A R A G E F L O O R 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 4 0 2 6 7 7 6 7 F I R C T 9 4 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 8 - R E I R E I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 4 0 3 2 8 9 2 2 S C A R L Y C I R 1 0 0 0 7 / 0 9 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : F I N A L I N S P E N G - B B O X TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 6 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 2 0 1 4 0 3 9 9 1 4 2 7 S L A T E C T 3 3 8 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 6 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 2 0 1 4 0 4 0 0 1 1 2 1 M I D N I G H T P L 2 7 6 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 1 5 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 4 0 5 2 1 6 8 1 W I N D E T T R I D G E R D 8 2 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 1 6 - P L F P L U M B I N G - F I N A L O S R R E A D 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 ED _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 7 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : T R E E BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 4 0 5 2 6 3 4 5 1 R Y A N D R 6 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : D E C K PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 4 0 5 2 9 3 2 0 E V E T E R A N S P K W Y 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 2 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 2 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - P L F P L U M B I N G - F I N A L O S R R E A D 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 6 - S U M S U M P 2 0 1 4 0 5 5 8 4 1 2 W I N D E T T R I D G E R D 1 9 3 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 3 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 4 0 5 6 6 8 2 8 H E A R T L A N D D R 1 6 9 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : D E C K PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 3 1 - E S W E N G I N E E R I N G - S E W E R / W A T 2 0 1 4 0 5 7 3 2 8 0 0 N B R I D G E S T 0 7 / 0 6 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - S U M S U M P 2 0 1 4 0 5 8 9 3 2 3 S U T T O N S T 1 9 6 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 2 4 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 5 - P H D P O S T H O L E - D E C K 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 2 0 1 4 0 5 9 0 3 4 7 S U T T O N S T 1 9 8 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - P H D P O S T H O L E - D E C K 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - P L F P L U M B I N G - F I N A L O S R R E A D 2 0 1 4 0 5 9 2 1 4 5 2 R U B Y D R 3 5 6 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 5 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 4 0 5 9 3 1 4 4 5 V I O L E T C T 3 6 4 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 5 - P L F P L U M B I N G - F I N A L O S R R E A D 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 6 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : T R E E , S O D DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 3 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 3 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 5 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 0 0 2 6 4 2 O M A H A D R 5 5 0 7 / 1 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 6 - P L F P L U M B I N G - F I N A L O S R R E A D 0 7 / 1 0 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 7 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 0 7 / 1 3 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : P A R K W A Y T R E E L A W N O K T O T E M P TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 8 - R E I R E I N S P E C T I O N 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : T R E E O K PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 0 0 4 2 0 2 E W O L F S T 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 0 2 5 2 0 2 N A D E N C T 6 4 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - P L F P L U M B I N G - F I N A L O S R R E A D 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 0 2 8 1 4 6 3 R U B Y D R 3 5 4 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 5 - P L F P L U M B I N G - F I N A L O S R R E A D 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 ED _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 6 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : P A R K W A Y T R E E BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 2 0 1 5 0 0 2 9 1 4 3 5 V I O L E T C T 3 6 3 0 7 / 0 9 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 0 9 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 1 6 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 2 0 1 5 0 0 3 3 1 1 5 3 T A U S C I R 1 1 0 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - M I S M I S C E L L A N E O U S 0 7 / 2 3 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : P O S T H O L E S F O R L O O K O U T L A N D I N G BC _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 0 1 - P H F P O S T H O L E - F E N C E 2 0 1 5 0 0 3 7 2 8 4 5 M C M U R T R I E W A Y 2 5 8 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 2 0 1 5 0 0 3 9 8 7 1 G R E E N F I E L D T U R N 4 2 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 1 3 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 ED _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 5 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 0 7 / 2 4 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 2 0 1 5 0 0 5 3 9 0 1 P U R C E L L S T 6 6 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : A N C H O R B O L T S I N G A R A G E N E E D N U T & W A S H E R C o m m e n t s 2 : , S T E E L B E A M I N B A S E M E N T DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 4 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 4 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - R E I R E I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 0 5 4 1 2 2 0 P A T R I C K C T 1 5 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : R O U G H F R A M I N G PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 5 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 2 3 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 5 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 2 3 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 2 0 1 5 0 0 5 5 1 1 2 1 C A R L Y D R 4 1 0 7 / 2 3 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 2 3 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 5 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 6 - P L F P L U M B I N G - F I N A L O S R R E A D 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 TK _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 7 - E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : P A R K W A Y T R E E PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 2 0 1 5 0 0 5 6 8 9 5 P U R C E L L S T 6 7 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : B E A R I N G W A L L N O T S T A B L E N E E D S T I E S T R A P PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - R E I R E I N S P E C T I O N 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : R O U G H F R A M E PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 2 0 1 5 0 0 5 7 5 0 1 W I N D E T T R I D G E R D 6 8 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - G A R G A R A G E F L O O R 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 0 5 9 2 5 8 3 M A D D E N C T 8 0 7 / 0 6 / 2 015 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 5 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 5 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 4 - P L U P L U M B I N G - U N D E R S L A B 2 0 1 5 0 0 6 5 1 9 7 1 M E A D O W L A R K L N 1 2 2 0 7 / 1 4 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - G A R G A R A G E F L O O R 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 2 0 1 5 0 0 6 6 1 5 0 1 C O R N E R S T O N E D R 3 9 0 7 / 0 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - G A R G A R A G E F L O O R 0 7 / 0 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - S T P S T O O P 0 7 / 0 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 0 7 / 2 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 2 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 2 8 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - S T P S T O O P 2 0 1 5 0 0 6 7 8 2 4 C A R L Y C T 3 2 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : S T R A P N E E D E D O N H V A C H E A T R U N K I T C H E N W A C o m m e n t s 2 : L L PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 2 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - G A R G A R A G E F L O O R 0 7 / 2 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 0 6 8 1 1 7 6 C O D Y C T 5 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - S T P S T O O P 0 7 / 2 3 / 2 015 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 6 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 6 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - G A R G A R A G E F L O O R 0 7 / 2 3 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 4 - P L U P L U M B I N G - U N D E R S L A B 2 0 1 5 0 1 0 5 1 0 5 B L A C K B E R R Y L N 2 2 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - U G E U N D E R G R O U N D E L E C T R I C 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 2 0 1 5 0 1 0 7 8 7 2 N C A R L Y C I R 4 6 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 0 1 5 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 0 1 5 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 0 1 5 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 0 1 5 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - S U M S U M P 2 0 1 5 0 1 1 4 2 4 2 2 F I T Z H U G H T U R N 1 4 6 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 0 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : A D J U S T S T E E L I N B A S E M E N T PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : I N S T A L L # 4 R E B A R O V E R W A T E R L I N E B E F O R E C o m m e n t s 2 : P O U R I N G BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - P H D P O S T H O L E - D E C K 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 2 0 1 5 0 1 1 5 7 9 5 K E N T S H I R E D R 1 4 3 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 2 0 1 5 0 1 1 9 1 4 2 3 R U B Y D R 3 5 0 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - G A R G A R A G E F L O O R 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - S U M S U M P 2 0 1 5 0 1 3 0 7 3 5 K E N T S H I R E D R 1 3 6 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 1 3 / 2 015 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 7 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 7 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 1 3 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 1 3 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 1 3 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 1 2 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 2 8 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 1 3 1 7 1 1 K E N T S H I R E D R 1 3 4 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - S U M S U M P 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - S U M S U M P 2 0 1 5 0 1 3 2 7 2 3 K E N T S H I R E D R 1 3 5 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 2 0 1 5 0 1 5 6 1 4 0 5 V I O L E T C T 3 6 1 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 1 0 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 1 6 / 2 015 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 8 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 8 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 1 6 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 2 0 1 5 0 1 5 7 1 3 8 7 S L A T E D R 3 3 5 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 2 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 2 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 2 0 1 5 0 1 5 8 1 3 6 7 S L A T E D R 3 3 3 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 2 - E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 0 7 / 2 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 3 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 0 7 / 2 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 4 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 2 4 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 1 6 2 1 9 5 6 S U N N Y D E L L C T 0 7 / 1 3 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : D O O R PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 2 0 1 5 0 1 9 6 1 4 5 7 S L A T E C T 3 4 1 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 0 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 1 1 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 2 0 1 5 0 1 9 7 1 4 2 2 R U B Y D R 3 5 9 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - G A R G A R A G E F L O O R 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 4 - P L U P L U M B I N G - U N D E R S L A B 2 0 1 5 0 2 1 3 1 0 9 6 C A R L Y D R 2 9 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 9 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 9 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 9 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - P H F P O S T H O L E - F E N C E 2 0 1 5 0 2 1 9 3 6 7 W E S T W I N D D R 3 6 0 7 / 1 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 3 - B K F B A C K F I L L 2 0 1 5 0 2 2 2 1 9 9 6 M E A D O W L A R K L N 1 4 2 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 0 4 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 7 - P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 8 - P L U P L U M B I N G - U N D E R S L A B 0 7 / 2 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 0 9 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 2 8 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 2 2 4 1 1 2 2 G R A C E D R 1 0 0 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : P E R G O L A PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - B N D P O O L B O N D I N G 2 0 1 5 0 2 2 7 4 2 2 W I N D E T T R I D G E R D 1 9 2 0 7 / 0 8 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H D P O S T H O L E - D E C K 2 0 1 5 0 2 3 1 2 3 2 4 O L I V E L N 2 8 0 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 3 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : D E C K PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 2 3 2 1 5 7 7 C O R A L D R 1 6 4 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 1 - P H D P O S T H O L E - D E C K 2 0 1 5 0 2 4 4 1 1 5 1 M I D N I G H T P L 2 7 3 0 7 / 0 7 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 0 2 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 0 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 1 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 2 0 1 5 0 2 4 7 2 4 7 8 C A T A L P A T R 1 7 8 0 7 / 0 9 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 2 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 0 7 / 0 9 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 3 - I N S I N S U L A T I O N 0 7 / 1 3 / 2 015 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 10 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 10 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - B K F B A C K F I L L 2 0 1 5 0 2 4 8 4 4 2 W I N D E T T R I D G E R D 1 9 0 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 0 3 - E S W E N G I N E E R I N G - S E W E R / W A T 0 7 / 0 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 4 - P L U P L U M B I N G - U N D E R S L A B 0 7 / 1 3 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - G A R G A R A G E F L O O R 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H F P O S T H O L E - F E N C E 2 0 1 5 0 2 5 4 2 1 8 W K E N D A L L D R 2 0 7 / 1 4 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 2 5 5 1 1 3 1 M I D N I G H T P L 2 7 5 0 7 / 0 8 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : D E C K BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - M I S M I S C E L L A N E O U S 2 0 1 5 0 2 5 9 3 3 7 P E N S A C O L A S T 1 1 4 2 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : P O O L T R E N C H BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 2 6 1 1 0 2 3 H O M E S T E A D D R 1 2 3 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - F T G F O O T I N G 2 0 1 5 0 2 6 2 9 4 3 S C A R L Y C I R 9 4 0 7 / 0 9 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 2 6 3 2 2 6 3 O L I V E L N 2 8 5 0 7 / 0 9 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 2 6 6 2 7 2 4 A L A N D A L E L N 2 2 4 0 7 / 0 6 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 2 6 7 2 3 5 9 T I T U S D R 2 5 3 0 7 / 0 6 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : R E I N F O R C E M E N T W I R E T O B E I N S T A L L E D B E F O R C o m m e n t s 2 : E P O U R , U N L E S S F I B E R C E M E N T I S U S E D . PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 2 7 1 5 0 7 W D O L P H S T 0 7 / 1 4 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : W I N D O W S BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 2 7 5 1 1 2 C O N O V E R C T 1 2 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : W I N D O W S PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 2 7 6 4 0 7 E K E N D A L L D R 3 0 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : W I N D O W S PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 2 7 7 1 3 1 E H Y D R A U L I C S T 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - P L F P L U M B I N G - F I N A L O S R R E A D 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 2 0 1 5 0 2 8 2 1 0 9 C L A R E M O N T C T 3 2 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H F P O S T H O L E - F E N C E 2 0 1 5 0 2 8 4 8 3 2 P A R K S I D E L N 1 8 4 0 7 / 2 4 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 11 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 11 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- PR _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 1 - F T G F O O T I N G 2 0 1 5 0 2 8 7 1 4 4 2 R U B Y D R 3 5 7 0 7 / 2 4 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - B K F B A C K F I L L 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 3 - E S W E N G I N E E R I N G - S E W E R / W A T 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 PR 1 1 : 3 0 0 0 1 - M I S M I S C E L L A N E O U S 2 0 1 5 0 2 9 0 1 0 1 W W A S H I N G T O N S T 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 C o m m e n t s 1 : W A L K T H R U W I T H C O N T R A C T O R , F I R E R E S T O R A T C o m m e n t s 2 : I O N BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H F P O S T H O L E - F E N C E 2 0 1 5 0 2 9 1 1 5 9 2 C O R A L D R 1 1 0 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H F P O S T H O L E - F E N C E 2 0 1 5 0 2 9 2 2 0 3 S T A T E S T 0 7 / 2 3 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H F P O S T H O L E - F E N C E 2 0 1 5 0 2 9 3 6 7 1 W I N D E T T R I D G E R D 8 1 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - F T G F O O T I N G 2 0 1 5 0 3 0 3 4 6 7 S U T T O N S T 2 0 9 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - E S W E N G I N E E R I N G - S E W E R / W A T 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 BC 1 0 : 3 0 0 0 3 - B K F B A C K F I L L 0 7 / 1 6 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 4 - P L U P L U M B I N G - U N D E R S L A B 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 5 - B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 6 - G A R G A R A G E F L O O R 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 BC 1 1 : 3 0 0 0 1 - P H F P O S T H O L E - F E N C E 2 0 1 5 0 3 0 8 2 4 2 8 S U M A C D R 5 7 0 7 / 1 6 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 2 0 1 5 0 3 0 9 4 0 1 E P A R K S T 0 7 / 1 0 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - E D A E N G I N E E R I N G - D R I V E W A Y A P 0 7 / 1 0 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 3 1 1 1 5 1 2 C R I M S O N L N 7 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 3 1 2 4 6 3 K E L L Y D R 1 1 4 0 7 / 2 8 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - R O F R O O F U N D E R L A Y M E N T I C E & W 2 0 1 5 0 3 1 3 1 2 1 9 W I L L O W W A Y 2 1 1 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H F P O S T H O L E - F E N C E 2 0 1 5 0 3 1 5 9 9 5 W H I T E P L A I N S L N 4 7 0 7 / 0 9 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 0 7 / 1 5 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 3 1 6 1 0 0 7 S U N S E T A V E 6 1 0 7 / 3 0 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : W I N D O W S PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - O C C O C C U P A N C Y I N S P E C T I O N 2 0 1 5 0 3 1 8 1 1 0 7 C S B R I D G E S T 0 7 / 0 6 / 2 015 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 12 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 12 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- PR _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 1 - R O F R O O F U N D E R L A Y M E N T I C E & W 2 0 1 5 0 3 1 9 5 1 0 W M A D I S O N S T 0 7 / 0 2 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 3 - F T G F O O T I N G 2 0 1 5 0 3 2 1 9 3 1 S C A R L Y C I R 9 5 0 7 / 0 9 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 3 2 2 1 5 3 9 C O R A L D R 1 7 0 0 7 / 2 0 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : P A T I O BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H D P O S T H O L E - D E C K 2 0 1 5 0 3 2 8 9 5 1 S C A R L Y C I R 9 3 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 3 2 9 1 4 5 4 V I O L E T C T 3 6 8 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - R O F R O O F U N D E R L A Y M E N T I C E & W 2 0 1 5 0 3 3 1 1 0 0 4 S U N S E T A V E 0 7 / 0 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H D P O S T H O L E - D E C K 2 0 1 5 0 3 3 2 2 8 9 8 M C M U R T R I E C T 2 1 9 0 7 / 2 8 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ A M 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 3 3 4 2 3 1 W A L S H C I R 3 9 0 7 / 1 4 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 0 1 - P H D P O S T H O L E - D E C K 2 0 1 5 0 3 3 5 3 6 7 W E S T W I N D D R 3 6 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 3 3 6 1 4 3 4 V I O L E T C T 3 7 0 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ P M 0 0 1 - F T G F O O T I N G 2 0 1 5 0 3 4 0 7 7 5 K E N T S H I R E D R 1 4 0 0 7 / 2 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - F T G F O O T I N G 2 0 1 5 0 3 4 3 7 0 1 W I N D E T T R I D G E R D 8 4 0 7 / 2 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - B K F B A C K F I L L 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : B R A C E W A L L S P R I O R T O B A C K F I L L BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 3 4 5 9 3 9 H E A R T L A N D D R 6 9 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H D P O S T H O L E - D E C K 2 0 1 5 0 3 4 7 3 3 7 P E N S A C O L A S T 1 1 4 2 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 C o m m e n t s 1 : 4 2 " M I N I M U M BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 2 7 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 3 - R E I R E I N S P E C T I O N 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 3 5 0 5 6 9 R E D B U D L N 4 4 0 7 / 1 4 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 2 0 1 5 0 3 5 2 1 2 1 3 S B R I D G E S T 0 7 / 2 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 0 7 / 2 8 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - R O F R O O F U N D E R L A Y M E N T I C E & W 2 0 1 5 0 3 6 1 6 6 3 W H I T E O A K W A Y 0 7 / 1 7 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 2 0 1 5 0 3 6 5 4 8 9 W I N D E T T R I D G E R D 6 6 0 7 / 2 4 / 2 015 BC 1 0 : 3 0 0 0 1 - R O F R O O F U N D E R L A Y M E N T I C E & W 2 0 1 5 0 3 6 9 2 9 1 W A L S H C I R 0 7 / 2 1 / 2 015 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 13 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 13 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 2 - F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 0 7 / 2 9 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H D P O S T H O L E - D E C K 2 0 1 5 0 3 7 1 2 2 9 3 O L I V E L N 2 8 4 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 015 BC _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - P H F P O S T H O L E - F E N C E 2 0 1 5 0 3 7 3 2 2 6 6 L A V E N D E R W A Y 5 9 0 7 / 2 8 / 2 015 PR _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 1 - R O F R O O F U N D E R L A Y M E N T I C E & W 2 0 1 5 0 3 7 5 3 1 2 E O R A N G E S T 0 7 / 2 3 / 2 015 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 14 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 14 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- PE R M I T T Y P E S U M M A R Y : A D D A D D I T I O N 1 A G P A B O V E - G R O U N D P O O L 2 B D O C O M M E R C I A L B U I L D - O U T 2 B I P B U I L D I N C E N T I V E P R O G R A M S F D 1 7 6 B S M B A S E M E N T R E M O D E L 3 C C O C O M M E R C I A L O C C U P A N C Y P E R M I T 3 C O M C O M M E R C I A L B U I L D I N G 1 C R M C O M M E R C I A L R E M O D E L 2 D C K D E C K 1 6 D R V D R I V E W A Y 2 F N C F E N C E 1 3 G A R G A R A G E 4 M I S M I S C E L L A N E O U S 1 P R G P E R G O L A 1 P T O P A T I O / P A V E R S 1 3 R E M R E M O D E L 2 R E P R E P A I R 1 R O F R O O F I N G 7 S F D S I N G L E - F A M I L Y D E T A C H E D 2 3 S H D S H E D / A C C E S S O R Y B U I L D I N G 1 W I N W I N D O W R E P L A C E M E N T 4 IN S P E C T I O N S U M M A R Y : B K F B A C K F I L L 6 B N D P O O L B O N D I N G 1 B S M B A S E M E N T F L O O R 1 1 E D A E N G I N E E R I N G - D R I V E W A Y A P R O N 1 E F L E N G I N E E R I N G - F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 1 6 E P W E N G I N E E R I N G - P U B L I C W A L K 1 7 E S W E N G I N E E R I N G - S E W E R / W A T E R 5 F I N F I N A L I N S P E C T I O N 2 6 F T G F O O T I N G 6 G A R G A R A G E F L O O R 1 0 I N S I N S U L A T I O N 1 6 M I S M I S C E L L A N E O U S 3 O C C O C C U P A N C Y I N S P E C T I O N 1 P H D P O S T H O L E - D E C K 1 0 P H F P O S T H O L E - F E N C E 1 0 P L F P L U M B I N G - F I N A L O S R R E A D Y 9 P L R P L U M B I N G - R O U G H 1 6 P L U P L U M B I N G - U N D E R S L A B 7 P P S P R E - P O U R , S L A B O N G R A D E 1 6 P W K P R I V A T E W A L K S 1 3 R E I R E I N S P E C T I O N 5 R E L R O U G H E L E C T R I C A L 1 8 R F R R O U G H F R A M I N G 2 2 R M C R O U G H M E C H A N I C A L 1 7 R O F R O O F U N D E R L A Y M E N T I C E & W A T E R 6 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 15 DA T E : 0 8 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 5 U N I T E D C I T Y O F Y O R K V I L L E P A G E : 15 TI M E : 1 0 : 3 8 : 1 5 C A L L S F O R I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T ID : P T 4 A 0 0 0 0 . W O W I N S P E C T I O N S S C H E D U L E D F R O M 0 7 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 T O 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 IN S P E C T O R S C H E D . C O M P . T I M E T Y P E O F I N S P E C T I O N P E R M I T A D D R E S S L O T D A T E D A T E -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- S T P S T O O P 3 S U M S U M P 6 U G E U N D E R G R O U N D E L E C T R I C 1 IN S P E C T O R S U M M A R Y : B C B O B C R E A D E U R 7 3 E D E R I C D H U S E 3 P R P E T E R R A T O S 1 8 7 T K T O M K O N E N 1 5 ST A T U S S U M M A R Y : A B C 1 C B C 2 1 C E D 1 C P R 1 5 C T K 8 I B C 5 1 I P R 1 5 9 T E D 2 T P R 1 3 T T K 7 RE P O R T S U M M A R Y : 2 7 8 Have a question or comment about this agenda item? Call us Monday-Friday, 8:00am to 4:30pm at 630-553-4350, email us at agendas@yorkville.il.us, post at www.facebook.com/CityofYorkville, tweet us at @CityofYorkville, and/or contact any of your elected officials at http://www.yorkville.il.us/gov_officials.php Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Meeting and Date: Synopsis: Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Council Action Requested: Submitted by: Agenda Item Notes: Reviewed By: Legal Finance Engineer City Administrator Human Resources Community Development Police Public Works Parks and Recreation Agenda Item Number NB #3 Tracking Number EDC 2015-35 Property Maintenance Report for July 2015 EDC – September 1, 2015 Informational None Pete Ratos Community Development Name Department Page | 1 Property Maintenance Report July 2015 Adjudication: 10 Property Maintenance Cases heard in July Case Number Offense Location Offense Outcome 07/13/2015 N 2267 4512 Harrison St. Weeds Compliant N 2268 216 B Hillcrest Dr. Weeds Compliant N 2269 2368 Emerald Ln. Weeds Compliant N 2270 96.59 Acres W Rt. 47 Weeds Liable/$2,475 N 2271 585 W. Barberry Cir. Weeds Compliant N 3127 96.59 Acres W Rt. 47 Junk, Trash Liable/$2,475 07/27/2015 N 2272 Lot 5 Fox Hill Unit 6 Weeds Compliant N 2273 1404 John St. Weeds Compliant N 2274 212 Windham Cir. Weeds Compliant N 2275 705 Mill St. Weeds Compliant July Postings for Weeds 84 Lots were posted in July for violation of Ordinance 4-1-5 July Property Maintenance Complaint Report Attached Memorandum To: Economic Development Committee From: Pete Ratos, Code Official CC: Bart Olson, Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Lisa Pickering Date: August 11, 2015 Subject: July Property Maintenance Ca s e # C a s e D a t e A D D R E S S O F C O M P L A I N T T Y P E O F V I O L A T I O N V I O L A T I O N LE T T E R S E N T CI T A T I O N IS S U E D POSTED 20 1 5 0 0 2 6 7 / 2 9 / 2 0 1 5 2 0 2 S B R I D G E S T P R O P E R T Y M N T 8 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 20 1 5 0 0 2 5 7 / 2 9 / 2 0 1 5 7 1 1 C L O V E R C T W E E D S A N D G R A S S 7 / 3 0 / 2 0 1 5 20 1 5 0 0 2 4 7 / 2 9 / 2 0 1 5 2 8 4 8 C R Y D E R W A Y G A R B A G E / T R A S H 7 / 2 9 / 2 0 1 5 20 1 5 0 0 2 3 7 / 2 8 / 2 0 1 5 1 2 8 1 D E E R P A T H D R I M P E D I N G S I D E W A L K 7 / 2 9 / 2 0 1 5 20 1 5 0 0 2 2 7 / 2 8 / 2 0 1 5 N O R T H E N D O F B R I S T O L A V E W E E D S G R A S S 20 1 5 0 0 2 1 7 / 2 7 / 2 0 1 5 R I G H T O F W A Y A T P R A I R I E P O I N T E , NE A R C H I L D R E N O F A M E R I C A A N D T H E PO S T O F F I C E WE E D S G R A S S 20 1 5 0 0 2 0 7 / 2 7 / 2 0 1 5 VA C A N T L O T S O N C R Y D E R I N G R A N D E R E S E R V E WE E D S G R A S S 20 1 5 0 0 1 9 7 / 2 3 / 2 0 1 5 8 0 2 P A R K S I D E L N W O R K I N G W I T H O U T P E R M I T 7 / 2 4 / 2 0 1 5 20 1 5 0 0 1 8 7 / 2 2 / 2 0 1 5 1 9 7 3 P R A I R I E R O S E L N W E E D S G R A S S 7 / 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 20 1 5 0 0 1 6 7 / 2 2 / 2 0 1 5 2 2 6 S B R I D G E S T D E B R I S 20 1 5 0 0 1 5 7 / 2 2 / 2 0 1 5 2 0 7 M A D I S O N S T W E E D S G R A S S 7 / 2 2 / 2 0 1 5 20 1 5 0 0 1 4 7 / 2 2 / 2 0 1 5 3 0 2 W F O X S T W E E D S G R A S S 7 / 2 2 / 2 0 1 5 20 1 5 0 0 1 3 7 / 2 2 / 2 0 1 5 6 0 4 S T A T E S T P A R K I N G O N L A W N 8 / 4 / 2 0 1 5 20 1 5 0 0 1 2 7 / 2 2 / 2 0 1 5 M I L L & B I G R O C K B L V D W E E D S G R A S S 20 1 5 0 0 1 1 7 / 2 2 / 2 0 1 5 8 0 4 M O R G A N S T D E B R I S 20 1 5 0 0 1 0 7 / 2 2 / 2 0 1 5 5 4 5 R E D B U D D R WE E D S G R A S S , F E N C E , G A T E , ST A G N A N T W A T E R I N P O O L 7/ 2 7 / 2 0 1 5 20 1 5 0 0 0 9 7 / 1 7 / 2 0 1 5 2 0 5 E L I Z A B E T H S T G R A F F I T I 20 1 5 0 0 0 8 7 / 6 / 2 0 1 5 8 8 3 W E S T E R N L N C H I C K E N S 7 / 7 / 2 0 1 5 7 / 2 0 / 2 0 1 5 20 1 5 0 0 0 7 7 / 1 4 / 2 0 1 5 1 0 3 E M A I N S T P R O P E R T Y M N T 20 1 5 0 0 0 6 7 / 9 / 2 0 1 5 1 1 5 2 K A T E D R W E E D S G R A S S 7 / 9 / 2 0 1 5 Pr o p e r t y M a i n t e n a n c e C o m p l a i n t s 07 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 5 - 0 7 / 3 1 / 2 0 1 5 To t a l R e c o r d s : 2 0 Have a question or comment about this agenda item? Call us Monday-Friday, 8:00am to 4:30pm at 630-553-4350, email us at agendas@yorkville.il.us, post at www.facebook.com/CityofYorkville, tweet us at @CityofYorkville, and/or contact any of your elected officials at http://www.yorkville.il.us/gov_officials.php Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Meeting and Date: Synopsis: Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Council Action Requested: Submitted by: Agenda Item Notes: See attached memo. Reviewed By: Legal Finance Engineer City Administrator Human Resources Community Development Police Public Works Parks and Recreation Agenda Item Number NB #4 Tracking Number PC 2015-15 Maximum Lot Coverage and FAR – Text Amendment EDC/September 1, 2015 Majority Vote Text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to increase the maximum lot coverage and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) in all Residential, Business & Manufacting Districts. Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, AICP Community Development Name Department Request Summary: This request is for a text amendment to Chapter 7: Dimensional and Bulk Regulations in the recently updated Zoning Ordinance to revise Table 10.07.01, Dimensional and Bulk Requirements to increase the Maximum Lot Coverage and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for all residential, business and manufacturing districts. Background: As the Economic Development Committee will recall in November 2014, the City Council approved a comprehensive update to the Zoning Ordinance which included a revised definition for calculating the maximum lot coverage for uses within all zoning districts. The goal of these regulations is twofold: to control stormwater runoff and to enhance neighborhood aesthetics which is mainly accomplished through controlling the intensity of development by limiting the amount of paved or other impervious surfaces on lots. By implementing a maximum lot coverage regulation which includes all impervious surfaces as part of the zoning ordinance, the City is using best management practices to enhance its drainage system and minimize Yorkville’s impact of the Fox River watershed, while maintaining the desired community character of open space and natural landscape. However, with any new substantial revision to an ordinance, particularly to zoning which has an immediate impact on the character and use of the built environment, staff understood that the “threshold of change” experienced by the community may require tweaks to the recently adopted Zoning Ordinance to find a balance between the present condition and future goals. With that in mind, staff reviewed previous research conducted as part of the original Zoning Code update discussion and provided a comparison of the current ordinance regulations regarding Maximum Lot Coverage and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of neighboring communities, best management practices with regards to stormwater impact, recent requests for variances and existing conditions to establish a basis for the proposed text amendment as recommended by staff in this memorandum. Research: As part of staff’s analysis for originally revising the lot coverage calculation as part of the Zoning Ordinance update was to make a clear distinction between “Maximum Lot Coverage”, which is a bird’s eye calculation of all areas covered in hard surfaces on a lot, and “Floor Area Ratio (FAR)” which is a calculation of all floor areas of a building in relation to the total lot area. While most districts had regulations for either lot coverage or FAR, the M-1 and M-2 Manufacturing Districts provided regulations for both which proved to be sometimes confusing or conflicting. The recently approved Zoning Ordinance strived to improve the regulations using best practices for stormwater management and provide clarification as to the purpose of each regulation. Memorandum To: Economic Development Committee From: Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator Date: August 24, 2015 Subject: PC 2015-15 - Text Amendment to increase Maximum Lot Coverage percentages and Floor Area Ratios (FAR) in all Residential, Business & Manufacturing Zoned Districts 1 Lot Coverage vs. Floor Area Ratio Per the current Zoning Ordinance, the following definitions apply: LOT, COVERAGE: The area of a zoning lot occupied by the principal building or buildings, accessory buildings and all other impervious areas such as driveways, roads, sidewalks, parking lots and structures, and any area of concrete asphalt. FLOOR AREA, RATIO: The numerical value obtained by dividing the floor area within a building or buildings on a lot by the area of such lot. The floor area ratio as designated for each district when multiplied by the lot area in square feet shall determine the maximum permissible floor area for the building or buildings on the lot. Under the previous Zoning Ordinance, “Lot Coverage” was defined as the area of a zoning lot occupied by the principal building(s) and accessory structures. This did not take into consideration other hard or impervious surfaces such as driveways, parking lots, sidewalks, etc. which all contribute to the increase in surface runoff rates, which may lead to flooding, and reduction in the amount of rainfall that infiltrates to the soil possibly lowering groundwater replenishment or recharge. Pervious vs. Impervious Surfaces The importance in considering Zoning Ordinance regulations related to lot coverage is rooted in the need to plan for future stormwater management systems and to understand the future environmental impact of increased urbanization. To understand these impacts, a distinction between pervious and impervious surfaces as a result of development is required. “Pervious” or permeable surfaces allow water to percolate into the soil to filter out pollutants and recharge the water table. “Impervious” or impermeable surfaces, are solid surfaces that do not allow water to penetrate through the soil forcing it to run off onto adjacent properties, across roads and into nearby bodies of water. The following tables provide examples of pervious and impervious surfaces typically found in development projects of all zoning districts as well as their runoff and infiltration rates. 2 Impervious Surfaces Pervious Surfaces Asphalt Planting Beds Concrete Mulch beds Traditional Stone Gravel Brick Permeable Pavers Concrete Pavers Turf Surrounding Communities Staff reviewed the Zoning Ordinances for surrounding communities such as Plano, Oswego, Montgomery and Plainfield to compare the previous, current and proposed regulations related to Maximum Lot Coverage and FAR. Upon our review, it was noted that three (3) of the surrounding communities (Plano, Oswego and Montgomery) define “Lot Coverage” as the area of a lot encumbered by buildings and structures. These coverage percentages ranged from 25% to 60% for Maximum Lot Coverage from residentially zoned properties to manufacturing/industrially zoned properties, respectively. The maximum FAR for these communities ranged from .30 to .85 for the residential to manufacturing/industrial zoning districts as well. Plainfield, however, was the only community researched that defined “Lot Coverage” to include all hard surfaces or man-made areas that does not allow the penetration of water such as buildings, roofs, driveways, etc. This regulation in the Plainfield Zoning Ordinance was referred to as an Impervious Surface Ratio, which ranged from 35% to 65% for residential districts to manufacturing/industrial districts. Examples of Lot Coverage by Land Use Finally, as part of staff’s research with regards to revising the Maximum Lot Coverage and FAR regulations for the zoning districts in Yorkville, we sampled a segment of existing properties 3 within the City in various zoning districts to verify if the current standard could be met or if it resulted in the creation of significant non-conformities. The following are a few graphic representations of typical lots in the residential, business and manufacturing districts in Yorkville and their current total impervious surface using the current zoning regulation standard for lot coverage: 4 Additionally, the following chart represents some of the residential, business and manufacturing zoned properties staff sampled which provides a context of the current lot coverage conditions in the City: Zoning Lot Area (sq. ft.) Building Area (sq. ft.) Impervious Area (sq. ft.) Total Lot Coverage (sq. ft.) Lot Coverage (%) R-2 14,000 1,606 1,639 3,245 23% R-2 12,000 1,863 1,054 2,917 24% R-2 12,000 1,446 1,093 2,539 21% R-2 15,474 1,982 1,104 3,086 20% R-1 18,405 1,737 1,058 2,795 15% R-2 12,113 2,200 1,020 3,220 26% R-2 12,586 2,915 924 3,839 30% R-2 12,543 1,404 1,400 2,804 22% R-2D 9,234 1,466 1,918 3,384 37% R-3 11,508 3,300 6,020 9,320 80% R-4 360,000 107,500 122,500 230,000 64% O 43,675 6,097 26,100 32,197 74% B-1 23,400 4,717 10,522 15,239 65% B-2 110,052 24,393 58,988 83,381 76% B-3 49,600 9,920 39,680 41,480 84% B-3 58,714 9,210 16,470 25,680 44% B-3 167,910 46,260 74,950 121,210 72% B-3 927,676 282,725 530,700 813,425 87% M-1 156,830 61,375 64,468 125,843 80% M-1 46,218 12,530 11,400 23,930 52% M-1 43,017 19,350 12,950 32,300 75% M-1 43,132 11,700 7,220 18,920 44% M-1 44,544 12,640 10,440 23,080 52% M-1 43,356 11,470 11,250 22,720 52% 5 Proposed Text Amendment: Based upon the research conducted and discussed in this memorandum, staff is recommending the following revisions to the Zoning Ordinance regarding Maximum Lot Coverage and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for all residential, business and manufacturing districts: Zone Zoning District Current Maximum Lot Coverage Proposed Maximum Lot Coverage Current Maximum FAR Proposed Maximum FAR Minimum Lot Size A-1 Agricultural - - - - - OS Open Space - - - - - E-1 Estate Residential 1 acre 30% 55% - - R-1 Suburban Residential 18,00 sq ft 25% 50% - - R-2 Traditional Residential 12,000 sq ft 20% 45% - - R-2D Duplex 15,000 sq ft 30% 50% - - R-3 Multi-Family Residential 9,000 sq ft 30% 70% - - R-4 General Multi- Family 15,000 sq ft 30% 70% - - O Office 20,000 sq ft 50% 85% - - B-1 Local Business 10,000 sq ft 50% 85% - - B-2 Retail Commerce Business 10,000 sq ft 80% 90% - - B-3 General Business 10,000 sq ft 50% 85% - - B-4 Service Business 10,000 sq ft 50% 85% - - M-1 Limited Manufacturing - 60% 90% .8 max .85 max M-2 General Manufacturing - 60% 90% .85 max .85 max Staff Comments: It is staff’s opinion, based upon research, best practices related to stormwater management and the current character of the community that the proposed text amendment regarding Maximum Lot Coverage and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) be approved. The proposed regulations would be consistent with communities that include all impervious surfaces of a lot into their maximum lot coverage calculations and is still consistent with those that regulate only the building and accessory structure coverage. 6 While we realize these proposed changes would not affect those properties with Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval or under a current annexation agreement with an ordinance lock such as Autumn Creek, Bristol Bay, Grande Reserve, it will provide for sound future planning in areas where infill development is likely to occur. Finally, staff acknowledges that some non-conformities may exist with properties that already exceed the current and proposed provisions of the Zoning Ordinance with regards to Maximum Lot Coverage and FAR, but these regulations will further the increase in impervious surfaces allowable on those lots yet allow the current condition to remain. This proposed text amendment is scheduled to be discussed at a public hearing before the Plan Commission on August 9, 2015. A recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at the April 22, 2015 regularly scheduled meeting. Staff will be available to answer any questions the Economic Development Committee may have at Tuesday night’s meeting. 7 PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE PLAN COMMISSION PC 2015-15 NOTICE IS HEREWITH GIVEN THAT the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, petitioner, is proposing a text amendment to Chapter 7: Dimensional and Bulk Regulations in the Zoning Ordinance to revise Table 10.07.01, Dimensional and Bulk Requirements with regards to an increase of Maximum Lot Coverage and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for all residential, business and manufacturing districts. NOTICE IS HEREWITH GIVEN THAT the Plan Commission for the United City of Yorkville will conduct a public hearing on said application on Wednesday, September 9, 2015 at 7 p.m. at the United City of Yorkville, City Hall, located at 800 Game Farm Road, Yorkville, Illinois 60560. The public hearing may be continued from time to time to dates certain without further notice being published. All interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing and will be given an opportunity to be heard. Any written comments should be addressed to the United City of Yorkville City Clerk, City Hall, 800 Game Farm Road, Yorkville, Illinois, and will be accepted up to the date of the public hearing. By order of the Corporate Authorities of the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois. BETH WARREN City Clerk BY: Lisa Pickering Deputy Clerk Have a question or comment about this agenda item? Call us Monday-Friday, 8:00am to 4:30pm at 630-553-4350, email us at agendas@yorkville.il.us, post at www.facebook.com/CityofYorkville, tweet us at @CityofYorkville, and/or contact any of your elected officials at http://www.yorkville.il.us/gov_officials.php Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Meeting and Date: Synopsis: Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Council Action Requested: Submitted by: Agenda Item Notes: See attached memo. Reviewed By: Legal Finance Engineer City Administrator Human Resources Community Development Police Public Works Parks and Recreation Agenda Item Number NB #5 Tracking Number ZBA 2015-04 Meadowvale Expansion (Lot Coverage Variance) EDC/September 1, 2015 Informational Feedback Request for a Variance in the Lot Coverage for a building and parking lot expansion located at 109 Beaver Street. Chris Heinen Community Development Name Department Background & Request: The petitioner, Meadowvale, Inc., has filed an application with the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, requesting to vary the lot coverage regulations contained in Chapter 7: Dimensional and Bulk Regulations, Section 10-7-1 of the United City of Yorkville Zoning Ordinance, to permit the development of additional parking and new buildings with a lot coverage of seventy seven percent (77%) which exceeds the maximum permitted lot coverage of sixty percent (60%) in the M-1 Limited Manufacturing District. The real property is located at 109 Beaver Street in Yorkville, Illinois. Memorandum To: Economic Development Committee From: Chris Heinen, Planner CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Date: August 26, 2015 Subject: ZBA 2015-04 – Building/Parking Expansion (Lot Coverage Variance) – Meadowvale Address Zoning Lot Area Building Area Impervious Area Lot Coverage without Impervious Area Lot Coverage with Impervious Area Required Difference 109 Beaver St.M-1 130,731 50,278 49,596 38%76%60%-16% 201 Beaver St.M-1 44,119 9,034 17,983 20%61%60%-1% 103 Beaver St.M-1 130,833 15,500 51,560 12%51%60%9% 205 Beaver St.M-1 87,317 23,315 19,300 27%49%60%11% 207 Beaver St.M-1 94,909 35,355 26,985 37%66%60%-6% 106 Beaver St.M-1 87,304 30,510 44,255 35%86%60%-26% 202 Beaver St.M-1 43,577 19,635 3,015 45%52%60%8% 204 Beaver St.M-1 43,494 7,850 3,000 18%25%60%35% 208 Beaver St.M-1 87,122 36,595 44,519 42%93%60%-33% 210 Beaver St.M-1 43,560 16,500 19,295 38%82%60%-22% The petitioner is looking to construct a building and parking lot addition onto the existing Meadowvale manufacturing facility. The building expansion will extend south towards Beaver Street and will entail an additional 17,500 square feet of manufacturing area with a 2nd floor office that will encompass an additional 5,500 square feet. As part of the building expansion, the petitioner is proposing 3 truck bays that will be completely enclosed within the building addition. The currently has 26 parking stalls and the reconfiguration of the building will relocate the existing parking stalls to the western portion of the building. After the reconstruction of the parking lot, there will be 30 total parking stalls, 1 of which will be handicap accessible. An additional curb cut is proposed approximately 120 feet to the east of the existing entry. This curb cut will allow better ingress and egress for trucks as well as employee and visitor automobiles. The overall lot coverage, which includes buildings and pavement, is approximately 77%. This calculation is above the maximum permitted 60% lot coverage. Existing Conditions: The existing lot coverage for properties surrounding the subject property are as indicated below: There are a couple of areas of interest regarding the chart above. First, that all of the properties met the minimum lot coverage when calculated prior to the current zoning ordinance. Since then, several of the lots will now fall into the nonconforming category as they currently exceed the maximum requirements for each zoning classification respectively. Staff is aware of this new issue with existing lots and will be revising the zoning ordinance to increase the lot coverage for the M-1 zoning district as well as all of the other zoning classifications. Proposed Conditions of Variance: Based upon the above review of the proposed building and parking lot addition, should the Zoning Board of Appeals consider favorable recommendation of the Variance to the City Council, staff recommends the following conditions: 1. The project is subject to final engineering review and approval based upon comments provided in a review letter from Engineering Enterprises, Inc dated August 3, 2015. 2. The project is subject to final landscape and tree preservation approval. Staff Comments: The proposed variance of the property is supported by staff. Several of the properties in the area exceed the maximum lot coverage requirements to date. The petitioner is also meeting the maximum FAR which is more restrictive than the lot coverage. Again, staff will be reviewing the lot coverage in all zoning districts and bring forward a text amendment to alleviate a majority of these variance requests. A public hearing will be held on September 2, 2015 at the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. A recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at the September 22, 2015 regularly scheduled meeting. Staff will be available to answer any question the Economic Development Committee may have at Tuesday night’s meeting. Attachments: 1. Copy of Petitioner’s Application w/exhibits. 2. Copy of staff comments from Plan Council. 3. Copy of Engineering Comments. 4. Revised Site Plan. 5. Response letter from petitioner. 6. Copy of Public Notice. United City of Yorkville 800 Game Farm Road Yorkville, Illinois 60560 Telephone: 630-553-4350 Fax: 630-553-3436 AppliCAtion for VAriAnCe reqUest Purpose of Application 1 The purpose of a variance is to provide relief from certain regulations of the zoning ordinance to permit the use of land in a way that is not otherwise permitted under the ordinance. A variance is granted when the terms of the zoning ordinance, if literally applied, would create an unreasonable hardship on the landowner, making the property virtually useless. This packet explains the process to successfully submit and complete an Application for a Variance Request. It includes a detailed description of the process and the actual application itself (Pages 7 to 11). Please type the required information in the application on your computer. The application will need to be printed and be signed by the applicant. The only item that needs to be submitted to the city from this packet is the application. The rest of the packet is to help guide you through the process unto completion. For a complete explanation of what is legally required throughout the Variance Request process, please refer to “Title 10, Chapter 4, Section 7 Variations” of the Yorkville, Illinois City Code. Application Procedure Procedure Flow Chart Step 1 Submit Application, Fees, and All Pertinent Information to Community Development Department 2 Step 2 Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing (1st Wednesday of the Month) Step 3 City Council Meeting If Applicable (2nd and 4th Tuesday of the Month) Application Procedure Step 1 3 Application submittal The following must be submitted to the Community Development Department: 2 original signed applications with legal description. 5 copies each of the application and exhibits, proposed drawings, location map, and site plan. Large items must be folded to fit in a 10” x 13” envelope. Appropriate filing fee. (See attached Fee Sheet on Page 6) 1 CD containing an electronic copy (pdf) of each of the signed application (complete with exhibit), proposed drawings, location map, and site plan. A Microsoft Word document with the legal description is required on the CD. Within one (1) week of submittal, the Community Development Department will determine if the application is complete or if additional information is needed. These materials must be submitted a minimum of 45 days prior to the targeted Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. An incomplete submittal could delay the scheduling of the project. The Kendall County Soil and Water Conservation District requires Natural Resource Inventory (NRI) applications from applicants seeking variances. A copy of this application can be found on the District’s website (www.KendallSWCD.org). Applicant will be responsible for payment of recording fees and public hearing costs, including written transcripts of the public hearing and outside consultant costs (i.e. legal review, land planner, zoning coordinator, environmental, etc.). The applicant will be required to establish a deposit account with the city to cover these fees. The Petitioner Deposit Account/Acknowledgement of Financial Responsibility form is attached to this document and must be submitted with the application. • • • • Step 2 Zoning Board of Appeals Applicant will attend a public hearing conducted by the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Zoning Board of Appeals meets on the 1st Wednesday of the Month at 7:00pm. Notice will be placed in the Kendall County Record by the United City of Yorkville. The applicant is responsible for sending certified public hearing notices to adjacent property owners within 500 feet of the subject property no less than 15 days and no more than 30 days prior to the public hearing date. Twenty Four (24) hours prior to the public hearing, a certified affidavit must be filed by the applicant with the Community Development Department containing the names, addresses and permanent parcel numbers of all parties that were notified. Application Procedure Step 3 City Council (If Applicable) If necessary, the applicant will attend a City Council public hearing where the Zoning Board of Appeals decision will be discussed and reviewed. The City Council meets on the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays of the month at 7:00pm. Variations other than those listed above may be granted by the City Council, but only after a public hearing for an authorized variation. The concurring vote of two-thirds (2/3) of all members of the City Council shall be necessary to reverse the recommendations of the Zoning Board of Appeals. 4 If the Zoning Board of Appeals decides that the requested variance adheres to the standards set forth by the Illinois municipal code (pages 9 and 10 of the application), then the variance may be granted under these instances and no others: To permit any yard or setback less than the yard or setback required by the applicable regulations, but by no more than twenty-five percent (25%). To permit the use of a lot or lots for a use otherwise prohibited solely because of insufficient area or widths of the lot or lots but in no event shall the respective area and width of the lot or lots be less than ninety percent (90%) of the required area and width. The percentage set forth in this subsection is not to be reduced by any other percentage for minimum lot width and area set forth in this title. To permit the same off street parking facility to qualify as required facilities for two (2) or more uses provided the substantial use of such facility by each use does not take place at approximately the same hours of the same days of the week. To reduce the applicable off street parking or loading facilities required by not more than one parking space or loading space, or twenty percent (20%) of the applicable regulations, whichever number is greater. To increase by not more than twenty five percent (25%) the maximum distance that required parking spaces are permitted to be located from the use served. To allow for the deferment, or land banking, of required parking facilities for a reasonable period of time, such period of time to be specified in the variance. To increase by not more than ten percent (10%) the maximum gross floor area of any use so limited by the applicable regulations. To exceed any of the authorized variations allowed under this subsection when a lot of record or a zoning lot, vacant or legally used on the effective date hereof, is, by reason of the exercise of the right of eminent domain by any authorized governmental domain proceeding, reduced in size so that the remainder of said lot of record or zoning lot or structure on said lot does not conform with one or more of the regulations of the district in which said lot of record or zoning lot or structure is located. If the Zoning Board of Appeals decides the requested variance follows the Illinois standards but is not included in the list of instances above, then the variance must be approved by City Council. • • • • • • • • Step 2 (cont.) Dormant Applications The Community Development Director shall determine if an application meets or fails to meet the requirements stated above. If the Director determines that the application is incomplete it will become dormant under these circumstances: The applicant has been notified of such deficiencies and has not responded or provided a time line for completing the application within ninety (90) days from the time of notification. The applicant has not responded in writing to a request for information or documentation from the initial plan commission review within six (6) months from the date of that request. The applicant has not responded to a request for legal or engineering deposit replenishment for city incurred costs and fees within ninety (90) days from the date of the request. If the Community Development Director has sent the required notice and the applicant has not withdrawn their application or brought it into compliance, then the director shall terminate the application. After termination, the application shall not be reconsidered except after the filing of a completely new application. Withdrawal or termination of an application shall not affect the applicant’s responsibility for payment of any costs and fees, or any other outstanding debt owed to the city. The balance of any funds deposited with the city that is not needed to pay for costs and fees shall be returned to the applicant. (Ord. 2011-34, 7-26-2011) • • • 5 Application Procedure inVoiCe & WorKsHeet petition AppliCAtion CONTACT: DEVELOPMENT/ PROPERTY: ____________________________________ ________________________________________ _____________________________________ Acreage: ______________ _____________________________________ Date: _____________ Concept plan review: [ ] Yes [ ] no $____________ Engineering Plan Review Deposit of $500 due Amendment: [ ] Yes [ ] no $____________ $500.00 Fee due for each: (Annexation) (Plan) (Plat) (PUD) Annexation: [ ] Yes [ ] no $____________ $250.00, plus $10/acre for each acre over 5. # of acres: ________ - 5 = ________ x $10 = ________ + $250 rezoning: [ ] Yes [ ] no $____________ $200.00, plus $10/acre for each acre over 5. # of acres: ________ - 5 = ________ x $10 = ________ + $200 If annexing and rezoning, charge only 1 per acre fee. If rezoning to a PUD, charge PUD Development Fee- not Rezoning Fee. special Use: [ ] Yes [ ] no $____________ $250.00, plus $10/acre for each acre over 5. # of acres: ________ - 5 = ________ x $10 = ________ + $250 Zoning Variance: $85.00 [ ] Yes [ ] no $____________ Outside Consultants deposit of $500.00 due preliminary plan fee: $500.00 [ ] Yes [ ] no $____________ p.U.D. fee: $500.00 [ ] Yes [ ] no $____________ final plat fee: $500.00 [ ] Yes [ ] no $____________ engineering plan review Deposit: [ ] Yes [ ] no $____________ [ ] Less than 1 acre = $1,000 due [ ] Over 1 acre and less than 10 acres = $2,500 due [ ] Over 10 acres and less than 40 acres = $5,000 due [ ] Over 40 acres and less than 100 acres = $10,000 due [ ] Over 100 acres = $20,000 due outside Consultants Deposit: [ ] Yes [ ] no $____________ Legal, Land Planner, Zoning Coordinator, Environmental Services Annexation, Subdivision, Rezoning, and Special Use: [ ] Less than 2 acres = $1,000 due [ ] Over 2 acres and less than 10 acres = $2,500 due [ ] Over 10 acres = $5,000 due totAl AMoUnt DUe: $____________ Word/ O Drive/ Dev. Dep. ARO/ Fee Sheet Wkst United City of Yorkville 800 Game Farm Road Yorkville, Illinois 60560 Telephone: 630-553-4350 Fax: 630-553-7575 6 7 Name of Holder of Legal Title If Legal Title is held by a Land Trust, list the names of all holders of any beneficial interest therein: Property Street Address Description of Property’s Physical Location Zoning and land Use of surrounding parcels Current Zoning Classification Kendall County parcel number(s) of property North East South West Application For Variance Request Name of Applicant(s) Business Address City State ZIP Business Phone Business Fax Business Cell Business E-mail Applicant Information stAff Use onlY Date of Submission PC# Development Name Property Information Application For Variance Request 8 Agreement Attorney Name Address City State ZIP Phone Fax E-mail engineer Name Address City State ZIP Phone Fax E-mail land planner/surveyor Name Address City State ZIP Phone Fax E-mail Additional Contact Information Attachments Applicant must attach a legal description of the property to this application and title it as “Exhibit A”. Applicant must list the names and addresses of any adjoining or contiguous landowners within 500 feet of the property that are entitled notice of application under any applicable City Ordinance or State Statute. Attach a separate list to this application and title it as “Exhibit B”. Application For Variance Request Please state the variance requested and the City Ordinance including the section numbers to be varied: Please state how the particular surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of regulations was carried out: Please state how the conditions upon which the application for a variation is based are unique to the property for which the variation is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification: Please state how the alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Title and has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property: 9 Variance Standards Application For Variance Request Variance Standards Please state how the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located: Please state how the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger to the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood: 10 Applicant Signature Date Agreement I verify that all the information in this application is true to the best of my knowledge. I understand and accept all requirements and fees as outlined as well as any incurred administrative and planning consultant fees which must be current before this project can proceed to the next scheduled committee meeting. I understand all of the information presented in this document and understand that if an application becomes dormant it is through my own fault and I must therefore follow the requirements outlined above. THIS APPLICATION MUST BE NOTARIZED PLEASE NOTARIZE IN THE SPACE BELOW: United City of Yorkville County Seat of Kendall County 800 Game Farm Road Yorkville, Illinois, 60560 Telephone: 630-553-4350 Fax: 630-553-7575 Website: www.yorkville.il.us Development/Property Address: Project No.: FOR CITY USE ONLY Fund Account No.: FOR CITY USE ONLY Petition/Approval Type: check appropriate box(es) of approval requested  Concept Plan Review  Amendment (Text) (Annexation) (Plat)  Annexation  Rezoning  Special Use  Mile and ½ Review  Zoning Variance  Preliminary Plan  Final Plans  P.U.D.  Final Plat petitioner Deposit Account fund: It is the policy of the United City of Yorkville to require any petitioner seeking approval on a project or entitlement request to establish a Petitioner Deposit Account Fund to cover all actual expenses occurred as a result of processing such applications and requests. Typical requests requiring the establishment of a Petitioner Deposit Account Fund include, but are not limited to, plan review of development approvals/engineering permits. Deposit account funds may also be used to cover costs for services related to legal fees, engineering and other plan reviews, processing of other governmental applications, recording fees and other outside coordination and consulting fees. Each fund account is established with an initial deposit based upon the estimated cost for services provided in the INVOICE & WORKSHEET PETITION APPLICATION. This initial deposit is drawn against to pay for these services related to the project or request. Periodically throughout the project review/approval process, the Financially Responsible Party will receive an invoice reflecting the charges made against the account. At any time the balance of the fund account fall below ten percent (10%) of the original deposit amount, the Financially Responsible Party will receive an invoice requesting additional funds equal to one-hundred percent (100%) of the initial deposit if subsequent reviews/fees related to the project are required. In the event that a deposit account is not immediately replenished, review by the administrative staff, consultants, boards and comm issions may be suspended until the account is fully replenished. If additional funds remain in the deposit account at the completion of the project, the city will refund the balance to the Financially Responsible Party. A written request must be submitted by the Financially Responsible Party to the city by the 15th of the month in order for the refund check to be processed and distributed by the 15th of the following month. All refund checks will be made payable to the Financially Responsible Party and mailed to the address provid ed when the account was established. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY Name/Company Name: Address: City: State: Zip Code: Telephone: Mobile: Fax: E-mail: Financially Responsible Party: I acknowledge and understand that as the Financially Responsible Party, expenses may exceed the estimated initial deposit and, when requested by the United City of Yorkville, I will provide additional funds to maintain the required account balance. Further, the sale or other disposition of the property does not relieve the individual or Company/Corporation of their oblig ation to maintain a positive balance in the fund account, unless the United City of Yorkville approves a Change of Responsible Party and transfer of funds. Should the account go into deficit, all City work may stop until the requested replenishment deposit is received. Print Name:________________________________________________ Title:________________________________________________ Signature*: ________________________________________________ Date: ________________________________________________ *The name of the individual and the person who signs this declaration must be the same. If a corporation is listed, a corporate officer must sign the declaration (President, Vice-President, Chairman, Secretary or Treasurer) FOR CITY USE ONLY ACCOUNT CLOSURE AUTHORIZATION: Date Requested: ________________________________________________ ❏ Completed ❏ Inactive Print Name: __________________________________________________ ❏ Withdrawn ❏ Collections Signature: ____________________________________________________ ❏ Other DEPARTMENT ROUNTING FOR AUTHORIZATION: ❏Comm Dev. ❏Building ❏Engineering ❏Finance ❏Admin. Petitioner Deposit Account / Acknowledgment of Financial Responsibility 11 PROPOSEDEXISTING BUILDING SETBACK SUMMARY REQUIRED ZONING SUMMARY FRONT PROVIDED SIDE REAR MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT M-1M-1PARCEL 1 ACRESSQUARE FEETEXISTING LAND AREA SUMMARY 3.00130,731.3TOTAL LOT AREA PARKING SUMMARY REGULAR STALLS HC STALLS 224EXISTING GREEN SPACE AREA 1.2956,077.1 (LOT COVERAGE) IMPERVIOUS AREA 1.7174,654.2 % 100% 42.9% 57.1% 19+13+4+3 = 29TOTAL PARKING (PROVIDED) 30TOTAL PARKING (COMBINED) TYPICAL REGULAR PARKING SPACE SIZE 9'W x 18'D TYPICAL HC PARKING SPACE SIZE 18'W x 18'D (INCLUDING LOADING ZONE) TYPICAL EMPLOYEE PARKING SPACE SIZE 9'W X 18'D (;,67,1*:$7(50$,1 BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE SUMMARY 25 FEET 27,240 S.F. 20 FEET N/A T.B.D. 25 FEET 20 FEET N/A T.B.D. 23,038 S.F. FLOOR AREA RATIO: (FAR)NOT MORE THAN 0.80 0.39 (PROVIDED) 50,278 S.F.TOTAL BUILDING AREA (COMBINED) ACRESSQUARE FEETPROPOSED LAND AREA SUMMARY 3.00130,731.3TOTAL LOT AREA GREEN SPACE AREA (PROVIDED)0.6930,071.0 (LOT COVERAGE) IMPERVIOUS AREA 2.31100,660.3 % 100% 23.0% 77.0% 30150 PROPOSEDEXISTING 2 PER 1000 (OFFICE) PLUS REQUIRED 0.5 PER 1000 (INDUST.) 5,482/1000x2= 11 PARKS (OFFICE); 50,278 (gross buildings) - 5,482(OFFICE) 129 (SEE NOTE BELOW) =44,796-4,620(DOCKS)=40,176 (LESS 5%, NET)=38,167/1000x.5=19 PARKS(INDUST) August 25, 2015 Chris Heinen Planner United City of Yorkville 800 Game Farm Road Yorkville, IL 60560 Re: Meadowvale, Inc. ZBA 2015-04 Meadowvale Expansion – Concept review and Lot Coverage Variance HRG Job #86150212 Dear Mr. Heinen: Please see below our responses below to the City’s review comment letter dated August 13th, 2015 in regards to the project. Responses to each comment are shown in bold following the comment. Engineering Comments: 1. Please refer to the attached comments prepared by Engineering Enterprises, Inc. (EEI) dated August 3, 2015. The following shall be submitted to the United City of Yorkville for review during the final Engineering process. a. Final Engineering Plans; RESPONSE: Noted. b. Lighting/Photometric Plan; RESPONSE: Noted. c. Landscape Plan RESPONSE: Noted. d. Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost for public improvements including earthwork, Stormwater management, erosion control and work within the road ROW. RESPONSE: None. 2. A single lot development site plan checklist is attached. RESPONSE: None. 3. The parking requirements should be verified. RESPONSE: See response to planning comment for same information. 4. The proposed driveways need to comply with the zoning code. RESPONSE: Noted. Fire District (BKFD) Comments: 1. A sprinkler system and fire alarm system in the new section of the building as well as under the overhead dock doors will been to be shown on the plans. RESPONSE: Noted. 2. During the final engineering, please take a look at the detention pond located on the fire Districts property for possible storage. RESPONSE: Noted. Mr. Chris Heinen Meadowvale, Inc. HR Green Job No. 86150212 August 25, 2015 Page 2 of 3 Yorkville Bristol Sanitation District : 1. YBSD would like more information if you are to be using a pre-treatment system for the building expansion. RESPONSE: At the time of engineering and building architectural design, the owner and their consultants will contact the sanitation district to discuss the pretreatment requirements for the project (if applicable).. Community Development Comments: 1. Please provide a landscape plan and tree preservation plan. RESPONSE: At the time of final engineering, the requested landscaping and tree preservation plans will be prepared and submitted to the City for review. 2. Please provide a tree replacement plan. Refer to Section 8-12-2-H-2 of the Landscape Ordinance for details. RESPONSE: At the time of final engineering, the requested tree replacement plan will be prepared and submitted to the City for review. 3. Indicate on the Site Data Table the required number of parking stalls per Table 10.16.03 of the Yorkville Zoning Ordinance. There are two uses indicated on the plan, manufacturing and office,, each of which has different requirements. RESPONSE: Please refer to attached (rev1) of the conceptual engineering site plan C.01. The site data table lists the required parking calculation of 11 parks required for planned office square footage. The remaining combined existing and proposed manufacturing square footage is reduced by the aforementioned office space as well as both internal loading docks A & B from the buildings’ gross manufacturing area. The calculation is as follows. 50,278 sf – 5,482 sf (office) – 3,080 sf (dock a) – 1,540 sf (dock b) = 40,176 sf. Reduce this gross square footage by 5% to obtain net area. 40,176 sf less 5% = 38,167.2 sf x (0.5parks/1,000 sf) = 19 parks (industrial) + 5,482 (office) x (2 parks/1,000 sf) = 11 parks (office) = 30 parks (combined). The site plan has been revised to provide the minimum 24 foot wide drive isle and pickup three (3) additional stalls to achieve a provided parking count of 30 combined parks, (29 regular and 1 handicap). Note that one of the existing handicap stalls will be restriped to create two (2) regular stalls. 4. Please provide a tree replacement plan. Refer to Section 8-12-2-H-2 of the Landscape Ordinance for details. RESPONSE: At the time of final engineering, the requested tree replacement plan will be prepared and submitted to the City for review. Mr. Chris Heinen Meadowvale, Inc. HR Green Job No. 86150212 August 25, 2015 Page 3 of 3 Thank you for your consideration on the matter. If you have any questions or require any additional information, please call. I may be reached at (815) 759-8379. The project proposes to construct a temporary construction entrance at the permanent driveway Sincerely, HR GREEN, INC. Eric J. Granrud, P.E. Project Manager EJG/ cc: \\hrgmhnas\data\86150212\Design\Corr\External\ltr-08252015_CityCouncilmeeting_responses.docx PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ZBA 2015-04 NOTICE IS HEREWITH GIVEN THAT Meadowvale, Inc., petitioner, has filed an application with the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, requesting to vary the lot coverage regulations contained in Chapter 7: Dimensional and Bulk Regulations, Section 10-7-1 of the United City of Yorkville Zoning Ordinance, to permit the development of additional parking and new buildings with a lot coverage of seventy seven percent (77%) which exceeds the maximum permitted lot coverage of sixty percent (60%) in the M-1 Limited Manufacturing District. The real property is located at 109 Beaver Street in Yorkville, Illinois. The legal description is as follows: ALL OF LOTS 4 AND 5 AND THAT PART OF LOTS 6 AND 7, BLOCK 1, FOX INDUSTRIAL PARK, UNIT 1, YORKVILLE, KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 7; THENCE SOUTH 88°15'53" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT AND THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6, A DISTANCE OF 153.33 FEET FOR THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 01°44'07" WEST, 211.0 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°15'53" EAST, 75.33 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01°44'07" WEST, 144.88 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 7; THENCE NORTH 89°58'06" WEST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE AND THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6 TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE SOUTHERLY, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 6, TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE EASTERLY, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING IN THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE, KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. The application materials for the proposed Variance are on file with the City Clerk. NOTICE IS HEREWITH GIVEN THAT the Zoning Board of Appeals for the United City of Yorkville will conduct a public hearing on said application on Wednesday, September 2, 2015 at 7 p.m. at the United City of Yorkville, City Hall, located at 800 Game Farm Ro ad, Yorkville, Illinois 60560. The public hearing may be continued from time to time to dates certain without further notice being published. All interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing and will be given an opportunity to be heard. Any written comments should be addressed to the United City of Yorkville City Clerk, City Hall, 800 Game Farm Road, Yorkville, Illinois, and will be accepted up to the date of the public hearing. By order of the Corporate Authorities of the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois. BETH WARREN City Clerk BY: Lisa Pickering Deputy Clerk Have a question or comment about this agenda item? Call us Monday-Friday, 8:00am to 4:30pm at 630-553-4350, email us at agendas@yorkville.il.us, post at www.facebook.com/CityofYorkville, tweet us at @CityofYorkville, and/or contact any of your elected officials at http://www.yorkville.il.us/gov_officials.php Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Meeting and Date: Synopsis: Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Council Action Requested: Submitted by: Agenda Item Notes: See attached memo. Reviewed By: Legal Finance Engineer City Administrator Human Resources Community Development Police Public Works Parks and Recreation Agenda Item Number NB #6 Tracking Number ZBA 2015-05 Sycamore Holdings (Sign Variance) EDC/September 1, 2015 Informational Feedback Request for a sign variance to allow for a development sign located at the northeast corner of John Street and Sycamore Road. Chris Heinen Community Development Name Department Background & Request: The petitioner, Sycamore Holdings LLC, has filed an application with the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, requesting to vary the sign regulations contained in Section 10-20-9-A-1 of the United City of Yorkville Zoning Ordinance to permit a free standing monument sign in a business district on a lot more than three (3) acres from a total of sixty-four (64) square feet in area to one hundred and fifty-five (155) square feet, from twelve (12) feet in height to eighteen and one half (18.5) feet. The real property is located at the Northeast corner of Sycamore Road and John Street in Yorkville, Illinois. Memorandum To: Economic Development Committee From: Chris Heinen, Planner CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Date: August 26, 2015 Subject: ZBA 2015-05 – Sycamore Holdings Sign Variance The petitioner is looking to construct a development sign for the property located at the northeast corner of John Street and Sycamore Road. The sign will be 18 ½ feet in height and have approximately 155 square feet of sign area. The sign will have a monument base constructed of a masonry material. The development sign will have enough panels to allow for the existing office building as well as for future tenants. Staff Comments: The proposed variance of the property is supported by staff. The property is oriented in a way that would only allow two monument signs on the property. The site lends itself to be more of an office development which would warrant a development sign of this nature. The location and orientation of the sign is situated on the property to allow for the best visibility and will not hinder the surrounding residential property owners. A public hearing will be heard at the September 2, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. A recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at the September 22, 2015 regularly scheduled meeting. Staff will be available to answer any question the Zoning Board may have at Tuesday night’s meeting. Attachments: 1. Copy of Petitioner’s Application w/exhibits. 2. Copy of Public Notice. PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ZBA 2015-05 NOTICE IS HEREWITH GIVEN THAT Sycamore Holdings LLC, petitioner, has filed an application with the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois, requesting to vary the sign regulations contained in Section 10-20-9-A-1 of the United City of Yorkville Zoning Ordinance to permit a free standing monument sign in a business district on a lot more than three (3) acres from a total of sixty- four (64) square feet in area to one hundred and fifty-five (155) square feet, from twelve (12) feet in height to eighteen and one half (18.5) feet. The real property is located at the Northeast corner of Sycamore Road and John Street in Yorkville, Illinois. The legal description is as follows: PARCEL 1: LOTS 3 AND 4, IN RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 1 IN FOX HILL, UNIT 6, A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 1 IN FOX HILL, UNIT 6, BEING A SUBDIVISION OF PART OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF SAID RESUBDIVISION RECORDED AUGUST 30, 2005 AS DOCUMENT 200500026016, AND CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION RECORDED SEPTEMBER 25, 2005 AS DOCUMENT 200500029458, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PART SUBMITTED TO THE CONDOMINIUM ACT BY THE DECLARATION OF CONDOMINIUM FOR THE FOX CENTER NORTH CONDOMINIUM RECORDED NOVEMBER 2, 2007 AS DOCUMENT 200700032453 AND AMENDMENTS THERETO RECORDED FROM TIME TO TIME, ALL IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL 2: UNITS 1458B AND 1456 IN THE FOX CENTER NORTH CONDOMINIUM AS DELINEATED ON A SURVEY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED REAL ESTATE: PART OF LOTS 3 AND 4, IN RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 1 IN FOX HILL, UNIT 6, A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 1 IN FOX HILL, UNIT 6, BEING A SUBDIVISION OF PART OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 7 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF SAID RESUBDIVISION RECORDED AUGUST 30, 2005 AS DOCUMENT 200500026016, AND CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION RECORDED SEPTEMBER 25, 2005 AS DOCUMENT 200500029458, IN KENDALL COUNTY, ILLINOIS, WHICH SURVEY IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT "B" TO THE DECLARATION OF CONDOMINIUM RECORDED NOVEMBER 2, 2007 AS DOCUMENT 200700032452, TOGETHER WITH ITS UNDIVIDED PERCENTAGE INTEREST IN THE COMMON ELEMENTS, AS AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME. The application materials for the proposed Variance are on file with the City Clerk. NOTICE IS HEREWITH GIVEN THAT the Zoning Board of Appeals for the United City of Yorkville will conduct a public hearing on said application on Wednesday, September 2, 2015 at 7 p.m. at the United City of Yorkville, City Hall, located at 800 Game Farm Road, Yorkville, Illinois 60560. The public hearing may be continued from time to time to dates certain without further notice being published. All interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing and will be given an opportunity to be heard. Any written comments should be addressed to the United City of Yorkville City Clerk, City Hall, 800 Game Farm Road, Yorkville, Illinois, and will be accepted up to the date of the public hearing. By order of the Corporate Authorities of the United City of Yorkville, Kendall County, Illinois. BETH WARREN City Clerk BY: Lisa Pickering Deputy Clerk Have a question or comment about this agenda item? Call us Monday-Friday, 8:00am to 4:30pm at 630-553-4350, email us at agendas@yorkville.il.us, post at www.facebook.com/CityofYorkville, tweet us at @CityofYorkville, and/or contact any of your elected officials at http://www.yorkville.il.us/gov_officials.php Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Meeting and Date: Synopsis: Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Council Action Requested: Submitted by: Agenda Item Notes: See attached memo and reports. Informational Item. Reviewed By: Legal Finance Engineer City Administrator Human Resources Community Development Police Public Works Parks and Recreation Agenda Item Number NB #7 Tracking Number EDC 2015-36 Comp Plan State of the City Report EDC/September 1, 2015 None Informational State of the City Report findings prepared by The Lakota Group. Chris Heinen Community Development Name Department BACKGROUND As the Economic Development Committee will recall, the City engaged The Lakota Group in September 2014 to conduct a Comprehensive Plan Update for the City. The three (3) phase approach proposed by The Lakota Group included Community Engagement/State of the City Report in Phase 1, Visioning and Plan Framework in Phase 2, and Plan Report and Implementation Strategy in Phase 3. Phase 1 began with a series of interviews and listening sessions that were conducted with various Yorkville stakeholder groups, including City of Yorkville department heads, such as Public Works, Parks and Recreation, the Library, and others; local corporations and business owners; developers; civic groups; the local school district; Kendall County; the Yorkville Bristol Sanitary District; the Kendall County Forest Preserve; the Illinois Department of Transportation other governmental agencies and Yorkville residents. In addition to these interviews, The Lakota Group engaged in a community speak-out workshop held on April 16, 2015. The workshop was the first interactive session that allowed the residents of Yorkville to engage in their wants and needs for the City. Phase 1 is now complete with the final State of the City Report. Phase 2 of the comp plan update has begun with the Visioning and Plan Framework for the study. The Lakota Team will prepare a draft Vision Statements and Planning Goals and Strategies based on community feedback and input during the State of City phase. The Lakota Group will also be engaging the community a few workshops to review the plans’ goals, vision, and objectives. In addition, based on the vision and planning goals, a range of land- use and planning strategies and options will be prepared. Conceptual plan drawings and design studies will be created addressing the following: • Future Land Use Mix and Development Patterns • Community Design/ Character/ Image • General Road/ Street Network • Open Space, Natural Resources and Greenway Linkages • Neighborhood Housing/ Commercial District Framework • Community Facilities • Community Character/ Gateways/ Identity • Sustainability and Sustainable Design • Historic Resources • Infrastructure/ Capital Improvements and Stormwater Management • Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Plan Memorandum To: Economic Development Committee From: Chris Heinen, Planner CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Date: August 27, 2015 Subject: Comp Plan Update State of the City Report • Riverfront Phase 3 will prepare a Second Draft Plans that incorporates Steering Committee and other stakeholder input. The Lakota Team will conduct a Community Open House to review the Draft Comprehensive Plan with the community at large. Similar to the Speak-Out in Phase 1, this Open House will also include topic and issue stations for participants to circulate around and to provide input on specific Comprehensive Plan elements as desired. A main emphasis of this open house is to educate the community on comprehensive planning goals and opportunities and to validate the" Yorkville vision." Additionally, as many of the elements of the Comprehensive Plan Update will be near final, this Open House provides a unique opportunity to convey to the community what the plan means to them. A final presentation will be made to the Planning Commission as well as City Council for final adoption. STUDY SUMMARY Attached is the State of the City Report provided by The Lakota Group regarding the data gathered during Phase 1 of the study. This report encompasses six (6) sections; Introduction/Demographics, Planning Process, Yorkville Land Use, Transportation and Infrastructure, Public Input Summary, and Summary of Planning Issues. The report creates a wonderful snapshot of where the City stands and where the City will need to address major key issues in the Phase 2 portion of the comp plan update. STAFF COMMENTS Staff will be available at Tuesday night’s meeting to answer any questions the Economic Development Committee might have regarding this item. This report will presented at the regular City Council meeting on September 22nd. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Final State of the City Report prepared by The Lakota Group. http://www.theyorkvilleplan.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/14026-State-of-the-City- Report-reduced.pdf LAKOTA AUGUST 17, 2015 State of the City Report THE YORKVILLE PLAN CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE ELECTED OFFICIALS Gary J. Golinski, Mayor Beth Warren, City Clerk Ken Koch, Alderman Ward 1 Carlo Colosimo, Alderman Ward 1 Larry Kot, Alderman Ward 2 Jacquelyn Milschewski, Alderman Ward 2 Joel Frieders, Alderman Ward 3 Chris Funkhouser, Alderman Ward 3 Diane Teeling, Alderman Ward 4 Seaver Tarulis, Alderman Ward 4 PLAN COMMISSION MEMBERS Randy Harker, Chairman Charles Kraupner Jack Jones Mike Crouch James Weaver Deborah Horaz Reagan Flavin Goins Chuck Galmarini Richard Vinyard PLANNING TEAM The Lakota Group Goodman Williams Group T.Y. Lin International STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS Amy Cesich, Park Board Deb Horaz, White Oaks Estates HOA Rose & Bob Delo, Windett Ridge HOA James Weaver, Planning Commission Mary Shilkaitis, Rush Copley Hospital Tom Kozlowicz, Chamber Member Bill Gockman, Resident Reagan Goins, Zoning Board of Appeals Joel Frieders, EDC Member Russell Walter, Library Board Tim Shimp, Yorkville School District Erin-Mikal Dickens, Resident Adalma Stevens, Resident Anthony Hansen, Resident UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE STAFF Bart Olson, City Administrator Rob Fredrickson, Director of Finance Eric Dhuse, Director of Public Works Rich Hart, Chief of Police Krysti Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director Chris Heinen, Planner Pete Ratos, Building Inspector/Zoning Officer Tim Evans, Director of Parks and Recreation Engineering Enterprises, Inc., City Engineering Consultant Michelle Pfister, Library Director PLAN ACRONYMS AADT – Annual Average Daily Traffic CDBG – Community Development Block Grant CLG – Certified Local Government CMAP - Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning CM2020 - Chicago Metropolis 2020 CUSD - Community Unit School District DOJ – U.S. Department of Justice FAR – Floor Area Ratio FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA - Federal Highway Administration FPA - Facility Planning Area GIS – Geographic Information System HUD – U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development IEPA – Illinois Environmental Protection Agency IDNR – Illinois Department of Natural Resources IDOT – Illinois Department of Transportation IHPA – Illinois Historic Preservation Agency IHDA - Illinois Housing Development Authority IL - Illinois Railway NRPA - National Recreation and Parks Association PUD - Planned Unit Development RTA - Regional Transportation Authority TIF – Tax Increment Financing TOD - Transit Oriented Development YBSD - Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION Overview 6 Comprehensive Plan Purpose 6 Relationship to the Go To 2040 Regional Comprehensive Plan 7 Community Profile 8 Demographic Characteristics 8 Household Characteristics 9 Employment Trends 10 Quality of Life 12 Shopping Districts 12 Parks and Open Space 12 Schools 12 Community Services 12 Regional Context 13 Historic Context 13 Form of Governance 13 Previous Plans and Studies 14 2008 Yorkville Comprehensive Plan 14 2005 Downtown Vision Plan 14 2008 Parks and Recreation Master Plan 14 2014 South Side Commercial District Market Study 15 SECTION 2: PLANNING PROCESS Methodology 16 Phase 1: State of the City 18 Phase 2: Community Visioning 19 Phase 3: Final Comprehensive Plan Update 19 Planning Area 19 SECTION 3: YORKVILLE LAND USE Existing Land Use 20 Land Uses within the Planning Area 22 Land Uses within the Municipal Boundary 23 Zoning Districts 24 Residential Land Use 26 Existing Residential Areas 26 Housing Conditions and Residential Market Opportunities 28 Residential Zoning Districts 36 Undeveloped Residential Zoning Areas 37 Summary of Key Residential Land Use Observations 38 Commercial Land Use 40 Downtown Yorkville 40 Downtown Zoning Districts 42 Illinois Route 47 and U.S. Route 34 Corridors (North) 43 Illinois Routes 47 Corridor (South) 43 Commercial Market Data and Analysis 44 Commercial Zoning Districts 47 Undeveloped Commercial Zoning Areas 49 Summary of Commercial Land Use Observations 49 Industrial Land Use 50 Existing Industrial Areas 50 Industrial Market Data and Analysis 51 Industrial Zoning Districts 52 Undeveloped Industrial Zoning Areas 53 Summary of Industrial Land Use Observations 53 Public / Quasi-Public Land Use 54 Existing Public / Quasi-Public Areas 54 Public / Quasi-Public Land Use Needs Analysis 55 Summary of Public / Quasi-Public Land Use Observations 55 Parks and Open Space Land Use 56 Existing Parks and Open Space Areas 56 Parks and Open Space Needs Analysis 57 Open Space Zoning Districts 58 Summary of Parks and Open Space Land Use Observations 59 Agricultural Land Use 60 Existing Agricultural Areas 60 Agricultural Market Data And Analysis 60 Agricultural Zoning Districts 61 Summary of Agricultural Land Use Observations 61 Planned Unit Developments 62 Existing PUD Areas 62 Undeveloped PUD Zoning Areas 63 Historic Resources 64 SECTION 4: TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Current Conditions 65 Roadway Network 65 Bicycle Network 67 Pedestrian Network 68 Transit 69 Rail Freight 69 Planned Improvements 70 Summary of Transportation Observations 71 Utility Infrastructure 72 Water Supply 72 Sanitary System 72 Summary of Utility Infrastructure Findings 73 Planning Area, Municipal Boundaries, and Growth Management 74 Municipal Planning Area and Extraterritorial Jurisdiction 74 Municipal Boundaries And Growth Management 74 Summary of Municipal Boundaries and Growth Management Issues 76 SECTION 5: PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY Stakeholder Listening Sessions 77 Infrastructure Systems 77 Open Space and Recreations 77 Land Use and Development 77 Urban Design 77 Institutions 77 Downtown Yorkville 77 Community “Speak-Out” Workshop #1 78 Station 1: Project Introduction 78 Station 2: Transportation And Infrastructure 78 Station 3: Route 47 Focus Area 79 Station 4: Eldamain Focus Area 79 Station 5: Downtown Focus Area 79 Station 6: Overall City Map 79 Online Survey 80 Summary of Demographic Responses 80 Summary of Community Quality Responses 80 Summary of Housing Responses 80 Summary of Business Responses 80 Summary of Overall Community Responses 80 SECTION 6: SUMMARY OF PLANNING ISSUES Summary of Planning Issues 81 6 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION A Comprehensive Plan is a document prepared by the Plan Commission which sets forth policies for the future development of the community. It is the result of considerable study and analysis of existing physical, economic, and social characteristics, and includes a projection of future needs and conditions. The value and purpose of a Comprehensive Plan is to rationally and objectively identify the timing and location of land and infrastructure development - something that zoning and subdivision regulations alone cannot accomplish. OVERVIEW In 2014, the United City of Yorkville, in collaboration with Yorkville citizens and stakeholders, initiated a two- year-long process to update its 2008 Comprehensive Plan. This updated Comprehensive Plan comes at a time when the Chicago metropolitan region is emerging from one of the more significant economic recessions in recent decades with many communities like Yorkville seeking ways to enhance the overall quality of life for their residents while addressing the issues of growth and development, changing economic conditions, infrastructure needs and limited financial resources. This Comprehensive Plan was developed to provide a new strategic vision and direction for Yorkville – one that capitalizes on its existing assets, including its traditional downtown core and neighborhoods, location along the Fox River, existing commercial areas, manufacturing base, schools and community services – while considering planning strategies for renewed but sustainable growth, revitalizing the downtown, diversifying its industrial and employment base, and adding new recreational and open space amenities. Furthermore, this Plan is being prepared with extensive community participation throughout the planning process. Specific questions were asked of Yorkville residents and stakeholders: What makes Yorkville a good place to live and work? What parts of Yorkville should be preserved or changed? What amenities in the neighborhoods, commercial districts or parks should be enhanced or added? What makes up Yorkville’s future industrial and manufacturing base? What should Yorkville’s image and brand identity be within the region? Yorkville is known in the Chicago area for its housing opportunities, location near natural resource and recreational amenities, schools and proximity to regional transportation services, including Interstate 88. Its location near Aurora and other Fox Valley suburbs also provides the community with access to the region’s employment centers, and other educational institutions and cultural attractions. However, like many Chicago outer-ring suburbs, Yorkville has several challenges that will require new approaches than what has been tried and implemented before. Due to the 2008 economic recession, recently planned residential subdivisions have yet to be fully built-out; commercial activity has Bicentennial Riverfront Park and the Fox River, downtown Yorkville failed to materialize on land zoned for such uses, and parking and brownfield issues need to be addressed before any substantial redevelopment activities can take place in Yorkville’s traditional downtown district. In addition, new infrastructure investments may be needed to support any future development activity. The United City of Yorkville has made significant strides in recent years to update its land use regulations, spur development activities in its commercial areas and residential subdivisions, and to enhance its municipal services to better meet the quality of life needs for its residents. Yorkville stakeholders recognize that in order to adequately address the issues that matter the most to them, it must continue to explore all opportunities for growth and development that build on its existing assets, including its people, businesses and institutions. With these opportunities and challenges in mind, the United City of Yorkville has understood that a new Comprehensive Plan can serve as the roadmap for undertaking new initiatives and in coordinating the efforts and activities of other key partners, such as the Park and Library departments, School District, business and property and owners, local industries and other organizations, agencies and entities. A fully up-to- date Comprehensive Plan can also help to make more informed decisions on critical issues related to land use, transportation, and capital improvements, issues that can have significant impacts on how Yorkville develops in the future. Change will always occur — a Comprehensive Plan that responds to local conditions effectively can help address the challenges that change always presents. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PURPOSE In 2014, the United City of Yorkville, in collaboration with Yorkville citizens and stakeholders, have initiated a process to prepare an update to its Comprehensive Plan since 2008 — a Comprehensive Plan that represents the community’s consensus and vision for Yorkville’s future. The process for developing the Comprehensive Plan included an assessment and evaluation of existing conditions in Yorkville in order to identify specific issues, constraints and opportunities for enhancing the community’s land uses, transportation and infrastructure systems, economic development and quality of life. This State of the City Report provides a “snapshot” of Yorkville’s existing conditions, community outreach efforts during the planning process thus far, and a summary of key issues and opportunities to be addressed in the Comprehensive Plan document. The Yorkville Comprehensive Plan is a guide for the people of Yorkville to accomplish the vision set forth in this document. Therefore, as a guidebook, the Comprehensive Plan will assist local planners and government officials determine and understand the appropriate types of development that should be permitted and encouraged in the City, realizing that each new development creates a lasting impact on the City’s character. The Plan should also influence policy decisions in a broad range of areas including, but not limited to, the following: • Land Use, • Transportation, • Infrastructure and Utilities, • Environmental and Agricultural Preservation, • Economic Development, • Recreation and Open Space, and • Housing. Finally, the Plan should be re-evaluated periodically in light of changing conditions so that it remains the true vision of the community. The 2015 Comprehensive Plan is intended to guide the community for the next 5 to 10 years at which point an update should be considered by the United City of Yorkville. “Change will always occur - a Comprehensive Plan that responds to local conditions effectively can help address the challenges that change always presents.” 7 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE In summary, the Comprehensive Plan serves several key purposes: • Future Vision. This Comprehensive Plan will serve as an important document in informing current and future community stakeholders about Yorkville’s long term vision. Above all, preparing a Comprehensive Plan represents a collaborative process between the United City and its citizens in determining Yorkville’s future. • Land Use Framework. The Plan provides a land use framework and strategy that seeks to promote the highest and best uses of land while reducing land use conflicts and increasing the benefits the land can provide in terms of residential and employment opportunities, transportation options, clean water, and recreational and open space. Benefits must also be enduring and sustainable so that current and succeeding generations of Yorkville residents can enjoy an enhanced quality of the life. In addition, the Plan sets forth broad strategies that can be used to review and refine current and future community development initiatives, as well as adjust zoning and land use regulations that ensure such projects are in conformance with the goals, policies and objectives set forth in this Comprehensive Plan. • Public Investment Guide. The Yorkville City Council should use the Comprehensive Plan to guide decision-making regarding investments in infrastructure, community facilities, and other capital improvements. The Plan can also be used in seeking grants and other sources of financial assistance at the regional, state and federal levels. RELATIONSHIP TO THE GO TO 2040 REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) is the official regional planning organization for the northeastern Illinois counties of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry, and Will. The Agency developed and now guides the implementation of GO TO 2040, metropolitan Chicago’s first comprehensive regional plan in more than 100 years. To address anticipated population growth of more than 2 million new residents, GO TO 2040 establishes coordinated strategies that will help the region’s 284 communities address transportation, housing, economic development, environmental, and other quality-of-life issues. Although this Comprehensive Plan is not funded by CMAP, it is the desire of Yorkville elected leaders and officials that the Yorkville Comprehensive Plan is aligned with the regional planning goals represented in GO TO 2040 and to take into account the larger regional economic and social changes and forces that may have an impact on Yorkville’s future. GO TO 2040 states that “municipalities are critical to the success of GO TO 2040 because of their responsibility for land use decisions, which create the built environment of the region and determine the livability of its communities. The most important thing that a municipality can do to implement GO TO 2040 is to take this responsibility very seriously.” By developing a new comprehensive plan, Yorkville has taken responsibility for guiding its future and demonstrated its commitment to helping shape the future of the region as well. • Private Investment Guide. Developers, industries, entrepreneurs and others interested in investing in Yorkville can use the Comprehensive Plan to gain insight into the City’s development and land use policies. Such investors also view sound comprehensive planning as critical to ensuring the viability and long-term success of their investments in the community. • Community Engagement Tool. The process in creating this Comprehensive Plan will provide an opportunity for local leaders, stakeholders and residents to understand and evaluate community strengths and weaknesses, and to craft strategies and recommendations for addressing critical planning issues. Future implementation and planning efforts for Yorkville’s residential, commercial, industrial, and open space and park areas as recommended in this Comprehensive Plan will also provide additional opportunities to engage Yorkville’s stakeholders on important development issues. • Implementation Strategy. A detailed implementation strategy proposed in the Comprehensive Plan will prioritize specific planning actions, outline roles and responsibilities between the United City of Yorkville and other agencies, organizations and entities, and identify other stakeholders and groups that could participate in implementation efforts now and into the future. “With these opportunities and challenges in mind, the United City of Yorkville has understood that a new Comprehensive Plan can serve as the roadmap for undertaking new initiatives and in coordinating the efforts and activities of other key partners, such as the Park and Library departments, School District, business and property owners, local industries and other organizations, agencies and entities.” “A fully up-to-date Comprehensive Plan can also help to make more informed decisions on critical issues related to land use, transportation, and capital improvements, issues that can have significant impacts on how Yorkville develops in the future.” 8 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE 20 0 0 19 o r yo u n g e r 20 - 2 4 25 - 4 4 45 - 5 4 5 5 - 7 4 75 o r m o r e 19 o r yo u n g e r 20 - 2 4 25 - 4 4 45 - 5 4 5 5 - 7 4 75 o r m o r e 20 1 0 19 o r yo u n g e r 19 o r yo u n g e r 20 - 2 4 20 - 2 4 25 - 4 4 25 - 4 4 45 - 5 4 45 - 5 4 5 5 - 7 4 5 5 - 7 4 75 o r m o r e 75 o r m o r e 20 1 4 ( e s t ) 20 1 9 ( p r o ) 2000 2010 2014 (est) Change % 2000 - 2014 19 or Younger 2,006 5,491 5,593 + 178.8 20 - 24 338 840 971 + 187.3 25 - 44 2,081 5,793 5,362 + 157.7 45 - 54 721 2,107 2,430 + 237.0 55 - 74 736 2,120 2,849 + 287.1 75 or More 307 570 672 + 118.9 Median Age 33.2 32.4 34.6 + 4.2 COMMUNITY PROFILE The United City of Yorkville is located approximately 50 miles southwest of Chicago in Kendall County, Illinois, considered in the last decade to be one of the fastest-growing counties in the country.1 Yorkville is currently the seat of Kendall County government with complexes located in downtown Yorkville and along Illinois Route 34 at John Street and Cornell Lane. Yorkville is located along the Fox River between the communities of Sugar Grove to the north, Montgomery and Oswego to the east, Plano to the west, and mostly unincorporated Kendall County land to the south. Yorkville’s approximate land area, including land and water, is 20 square miles. Two of Illinois’ largest cities – Aurora and Joliet – lie ten miles to the northeast and 20 miles to the southeast, respectively. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS According to the 2010 United States Census, Yorkville’s population was 16,921, a more than two- fold increase since the year 2000 due to new residential development and growth. That growth, not surprisingly, came to an end with the housing market crisis and national recession that began in late 2007 and continued through mid-2009. Post-recession population gains have been much more modest, with the City adding, by current estimates, fewer than 1,000 new residents between 2010 and 2014. Growth for the next five years is projected by Esri Business Analyst to be somewhat more robust, however, with the City adding approximately 300 new residents per year, for an annual growth rate of 1.5 percent. By current estimates, Yorkville is home to 6,240 households with an average size of 2.85 persons per household. Household size has risen slightly since 2000 when the average size stood at 2.76 persons, reflecting the City’s growing attractiveness to families with children. Over the next five years, Yorkville is projected to add roughly 460 households, with the average household size rising to 2.87 persons. The estimated median age of Yorkville residents stands at 34.6 years, slightly higher than that of Kendall County as a whole at 33.7 years. Interestingly, like many areas of the country, Yorkville’s population is aging. By 2019, the median age within the City is expected to have risen to 35.1 years as the proportion of residents age 20 to 34 falls from 19.4 to 18.6 percent, while that of residents age 55 and above increases from 19.7 to 20.5 percent. Notably, the proportion of residents age 35 to 54 – the primary target market for much of the single family housing built over the last two decades within the City – is expected to remain essentially unchanged. 2000 CENSUS 2010 CENSUS CHANGE 2000-2010 2014 ESTIMATE 2019 PROJECTION CHANGE 2014-2019 Population Total Population 6,189 16,921 173.4%17,878 19,313 8.0% Median Age 33.2 32.4 -2.4%34.6 35.1 1.4% Households Total Households 2,220 5,912 166.3%6,240 6,701 7.4% Average Household Size 2.76 2.84 2.9%2.85 2.87 0.7% Family Households 1,665 4,389 163.6%4,773 5,112 7.1% Average Family Size 3.22 3.31 2.8%3.27 3.29 0.6% Income Total Households $60,391 $82,007 35.8%$90,653 $100,891 11.3% Table 1.1: Demographic Trends Chart Table 1.2: Resident Age Distribution Chart Source: U.S. Census Bureau and Esri Business Analyst (estimates and projections) 1 Kendall County Website. Kendall County, retrieved June 1, 2015 2 Esri Business Analyst, Goodman Williams Group The median age of Yorkville residents fell through the 2000s as younger families with children moved to the City. However, in the last five years it has risen as these families have aged. Pe r c e n t o f p o p u l a t i o n 55-74 75 +45-5425-4420-24- 19 35 25 15 5 30 20 10 Graph 1.1: Population by Age 20 1 4 ( e s t i m a t e ) 20 1 4 ( e s t i m a t e ) 20 1 4 ( e s t i m a t e ) 20 1 4 ( e s t i m a t e ) 20 1 4 ( e s t i m a t e ) 20 1 4 ( e s t i m a t e ) 20 1 9 ( p r o j e c t i o n ) 20 1 9 ( p r o j e c t i o n ) 20 1 9 ( p r o j e c t i o n ) 20 1 9 ( p r o j e c t i o n ) 20 1 9 ( p r o j e c t i o n ) 20 1 9 ( p r o j e c t i o n ) 9 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 2000 CENSUS 2014 ESTIMATE 2,256 100.0%6,240 100.0% <$15,000 124 5.5%205 3.3% $15,000-$24,999 175 7.8%302 4.8% $25,000-$34,999 193 8.6%268 4.3% $35,000-$49,999 405 18.0%580 9.3% $50,000-$74,999 652 28.9%986 15.8% $75,000-$99,999 382 16.9%1,119 17.9% $100,000-$149,999 246 10.9%1,742 27.9% $150,000-$199,999 35 1.6%649 10.4% $200,000+44 2.0%389 6.2% Median HH Income $60,391 $90,653 Table 1.3: Household Income Distribution Chart HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS Yorkville exhibits considerable income strength, with a 2014 estimated median household income of $90,653. This is slightly higher than that of Kendall County, at $89,472, and considerably higher than the Chicago metropolitan area as a whole, at $62,118 (by 2013 Census estimates). Nearly two thirds of Yorkville households have incomes of $75,000 or more, and almost 45 percent have incomes of $100,000 or more. At the other end of the spectrum, less than 13 percent of households have incomes of $35,000 or less. As illustrated in the accompanying map, higher income households are most prevalent in the far eastern and southern portions of the City, where median household income stands above $100,000. In other areas, median income ranges from $75,000 to $100,000. In comparison to neighboring communities, Yorkville is in the middle of the median household income range. The map also outlines the highly irregular municipal boundaries of Yorkville, a result of the numerous annexations of farmland for planned and built subdivisions. 2015 Median Household Income by Census Block Group Source: Esri Business Analyst Online Median household income rose 50% between 2000 and 2014. The percent of Yorkville households earning $75,000 or more rose from 31% in 2000 to 63% in 2014.$ < $ 1 5 , 0 0 0 < $ 1 5 , 0 0 0 $1 5 , 0 0 0 - $ 2 4 , 9 9 9 $1 5 , 0 0 0 - $ 2 4 , 9 9 9 $2 5 , 0 0 0 - $ 3 4 , 9 9 9 $2 5 , 0 0 0 - $ 3 4 , 9 9 9 $5 0 , 0 0 0 - $ 7 4 , 9 9 9 $5 0 , 0 0 0 - $ 7 4 , 9 9 9 $7 5 , 0 0 0 - $ 9 9 , 9 9 9 $7 5 , 0 0 0 - $ 9 9 , 9 9 9 $1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - $ 1 4 9 , 9 9 9 $1 0 0 , 0 0 0 - $ 1 4 9 , 9 9 9 $1 5 0 , 0 0 0 - $ 1 9 9 , 9 9 9 $1 5 0 , 0 0 0 - $ 1 9 9 , 9 9 9 $2 0 0 , 0 0 0 + $2 0 0 , 0 0 0 + $3 5 , 0 0 0 - $ 4 9 , 9 9 9 $3 5 , 0 0 0 - $ 4 9 , 9 9 9 2000 2014 10 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE EMPLOYMENT TRENDS The most recent American Community Survey (ACS) estimates Kendall County had a resident workforce of 51,874 people in 2010. Of these, slightly more than 28 percent worked within the County itself, with the majority (nearly 72 percent) of residents commuting outside the County, primarily to DuPage, Kane, and Cook Counties for work. Year-over-year employment growth in Kendall County flagged after 2008 as the regional economy, like the nation as a whole, suffered through the economic recession. However, unlike many other counties in metropolitan Chicago, Kendall County experienced just one year of employment losses. After this, employment growth resumed. Indeed, the County has seen the addition of more than 2,800 jobs since cyclical labor market lows were experienced in 2010, with total employment now standing some 1,900 jobs higher than that reached in 2009 during the previous high. EMPLOYED IN WORKERS % Kendall 14,583 28.1 Du Page 13,626 26.3 Kane 10,242 19.7 Cook 6,429 12.4 Will 4,687 9.0 De Kalb 777 1.5 Grundy 394 0.8 McHenry 186 0.4 Other 950 1.8 Total 51,874 100.0 Table 1.4: Kendall County Resident Workforce by County of Employment Graph 1.2: Trends in Nonfarm Employment - Kendall County, Illinois Graph 1.3: Year-Over-Year Change in Employment - Kendall County and Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL Metropolitan Division Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2010 American Community Survey Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 25.000 15,000 5,000 -4% -2% 0% +2% +4% +6% +8% +10% 20.000 2014 2014 2013 2013 2012 2012 2011 2011 2010 2010 2009 2009 2008 2008 2007 2007 2006 2006 2005 2005 2004 2004 2003 Kenda l l C o u n t y Chicago-Jolie t - N a p e r v i l l e , Illinois Metr o p o l i t a n D i v i s i o n 2003 10,000 Nu m b e r o f e m p l o y e e s Ch a n g e i n e m p l o y m e n t Year 16 , 5 5 4 17 , 4 2 9 18 , 4 8 9 1 9 , 9 8 0 21 , 8 8 9 23 , 8 5 5 23 , 9 4 2 23 , 0 0 8 2 4 , 1 6 7 25 , 0 5 7 25 , 3 0 6 25 , 8 4 9 11 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE However, it should be noted, given the importance of the regional labor market to residents of Kendall County, employment within the eight-county Chicago metropolitan area as a whole, has yet to fully recover from employment losses experienced in 2008 and 2009 and, as of the end of 2014, remained some 72,000 jobs below levels seen in 2007. The largest private employer in Kendall County is heavy equipment manufacturer Caterpillar, Inc., which employees approximately 2,500 people at its Montgomery/Oswego facility. The Menard’s Distribution Center, located in Plano across Eldamain COMPANY # OF EMPLOYEES INDUSTRY LOCATION Top Kendall County Employers Caterpillar, Inc.2,500 Manufacturing Montgomery/Oswego Menard’s Distribution Center 600 Distribution Plano Plano Molding 310 Manufacturing Plano/Sandwich Walmart 500 Retail/Commercial Oswego/Plano Wrigley Manufacturing 355 Manufacturing Yorkville Top Yorkville Private Employers, 2012 Raging Waves Water Park (seasonal)450 Entertainment Route 47 Wrigley Manufacturing Company LLC 355 Manufacturing Route 47 Super Target 180 Retail/Commercial Kendall Marketplace Menards Mega Store Yorkville 140 Retail/Commercial Yorkville Crossing Jewel/Osco 130 Retail/Commercial Yorkville Marketplace Newly Weds Foods 130 Retail/Commercial Route 47 Kohl's 115 Retail/Commercial Kendall Marketplace Boombah, Inc 90 Wholesale Route 47 Hillside Health Care Center 90 Medical Route 34 Home Depot 85 Retail/Commercial Kendall Marketplace Top Yorkville Public Employers, 2012 Kendall County 345 Public Service - Yorkville School District #115 550 Public Service - United City of Yorkville 145 Public Service - United States Postal Service 100 Public Service - Table 1.5: Major Employers in Kendall County and Yorkville Sources: Economic Development of Kendall County, Yorkville Economic Development Corporation Graph 1.4: Metropolitan Chicago Trends in Employment Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 3,000 3,500 4,000 3,750 3,250 19 9 0 19 9 1 19 9 2 19 9 3 19 9 4 19 9 5 19 9 6 19 9 7 19 9 8 19 9 9 20 0 0 20 0 1 20 0 2 20 0 3 20 0 4 20 0 5 20 0 6 20 0 7 20 0 8 20 0 9 20 1 0 20 1 1 20 1 2 20 1 3 20 1 4 Th o u s a n d s o f j o b s Road from the Yorkville’s municipal limits, is the County’s second largest employer, with 600 workers. The largest private employer in the City of Yorkville is Raging Waves Water Park, which employs 450 people seasonally. Wrigley Manufacturing Company, with 355 workers, is the City’s second largest employer. Wrigley is planning to add 75 jobs in 2015 by expanding their capacity to produce Skittles at the Yorkville location. In the public sector, Kendall County employs 345 people at its offices and locations in Yorkville, while Yorkville School District Number 115 employs 550 teachers and staff. 12 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE QUALITY OF LIFE The Yorkville community has a number of assets – its downtown and other commercial districts, schools, parks and amenities – that define its overall quality of life. It is these assets that the United City of Yorkville seeks to maintain and enhance in order to attract new residents, businesses and investment and in turn, diversify the tax base and provide for an increasing level of community services and amenities in the long term. SHOPPING DISTRICTS Yorkville’s shopping areas are generally comprised of the traditional downtown core located along Illinois Route 47 between the Fox River and East Fox Street, and the newer auto-oriented commercial areas along Illinois Routes 34 and 47 corridors between Beecher Road west to East Countryside Parkway on the east and Kennedy Road north to Landmark Avenue to the south. Downtown Yorkville is home to a number of dining and entertainment establishments housed in traditional commercial buildings, the historic Kendall County Courthouse and other governmental offices, and a number of buildings housing light industrial and manufacturing companies. Downtown also offers access to the Fox River from Bicentennial Riverfront Park and the Marge Cline Whitewater Course, a significant recreational attraction for the community. The Illinois Route 34 commercial corridor provides a wide diversity of shopping and dining opportunities in various commercial developments. Stores and retail venues located here include Starbucks and Panera Bread, Jewel-Osco, Menards, Home Depot, Target, Kohls and other small and mid-sized brand retailers. Smaller shopping strips and commercial centers are also found in other areas of Yorkville providing service and convenience-related retail. PARKS AND OPEN SPACE In addition to Bicentennial Riverfront Park, the United City of Yorkville manages 45 different parks encompassing 276 acres of land and open space. The parks provide a variety of recreational opportunities ranging from ball fields and basketball courts, playgrounds and unstructured play spaces, trails, and picnic areas and boat launches. In addition, there are a number of private parks operated by local homeowners associations. In close proximity to Yorkville are several state and county-owned parks and forest and nature preserves, including Silver Spring State Park and the Millbrook North and South, Millhurst Fen, Meremech Woods, Hoover and Harris County preserves. Other Kendall County-owned recreational lands include Subat, Lyon, Richard Young, Henneberry, and Pickerell- Pigott forest preserves, all within 20 to 30 minutes driving time of Yorkville. Yorkville is also adjacent to Saw Wee Kee Park along the Fox River and operated by the Oswegoland Park District. These facilities offer picnic areas, boat launches along the Fox River, lodging and summer camp facilities, and nature and educational centers. Although not a recreational center, the Farnsworth House, designed by noted architect Mies van der Rohe and owned by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, is a noted tourism destination in the region, located along a 62-acre site north of the Fox River less than five miles from downtown Yorkville. SCHOOLS Yorkville is served by Yorkville Community Unit School District 115, which is comprised by six elementary schools for grades kindergarten through 6th, two middle and intermediate schools serving grades 7th through 8th and one high school. The district covers an 85 square mile service area and employs approximately 550 teachers and staff. As of the 2014-2015 school year, the School District has a combined enrollment of 5,576 students. The High School has recently completed a $22 million, 90,000 square foot facility expansion. COMMUNITY SERVICES Several institutional and governmental entities and agencies serve the Yorkville community, including Kendall County, the United City of Yorkville, and the Bristol Kendall Fire Protection District. Kendall County maintains its administrative center and other departmental functions in downtown Yorkville, while its County Jail, Court Administration and Health Department are located at the West John Street/ Illinois Route 34 building complex. The United City of Yorkville maintains its offices, including its Police Department, in its Game Farm Road facility adjacent to the Public Library, High School, and High School Academy and Yorkville Grade School complexes. The Bristol Kendall Fire Protection District serves as the fire department for Yorkville and has three fire stations in Yorkville. The United States Post Office is located in northeast Yorkville at the intersection of East Countryside Parkway and McHugh Road. In addition to governmental services, Yorkville is the location of the new Rush-Copley Medical Center along Illinois Route 34 (Veterans Parkway), which provides a range of medical services from emergency medicine to oncology, OBGYN, and occupational services. A campus of Morris Hospital and Medical Center is located at the intersection of Illinois Routes 47 and 71, offering services in primary and immediate care, diagnostic services, occupational medicine and physical therapy. Medical services are also provided by a number of smaller medical facilities and professional offices throughout Yorkville. Other nearby hospitals and medical facilities are located in Oswego, Aurora, Naperville, Plano, and Sandwich. Apart from medical services, Yorkville has 11 churches including Roman Catholic, Congregational, Baptist and Evangelical denominations. Downtown Yorkville at the Fox River 13 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Yorkville train station, downtown Yorkville REGIONAL CONTEXT Yorkville is one of 284 municipalities that comprise the Chicago metropolitan region, a region that extends geographically over eight counties and includes a population of approximately 8.3 million people. Yorkville is located 50 miles southwest of the City of Chicago, south of Interstate 88 (Ronald Reagan Memorial Highway) and Illinois Route 56, and north and west of Interstate 55 (Stevenson). Its corporate boundaries generally include Base Line Road (Illinois Route 30) to the north, Fairfax Way to the south, Galena Road to the northwest, Veterans Parkway and American Way Road to the east, Illinois Route 126 and Ashley Road to the southwest, West Fox Road and Popular Drive to the southwest, and Eldamain Road to the west. Yorkville is divided in two by the Fox River, which extends from Colgate, Wisconsin to the north to Ottawa, Illinois at the confluence of the Illinois River 31 miles to the southwest. In addition to its relative proximity to the two Interstates and other arterials that connect Yorkville to adjacent and nearby suburbs and communities, the Chicago region’s two airports, Midway International (44 miles) and O’Hare International (50 miles) are within one hour to 90 minute drive times. In addition, Yorkville is located near other small and mid-sized airports, including DuPage County, Joliet Regional, Cushing Airfield, the Aurora Municipal Airport, and the Hinckley Airport in DeKalb County. Yorkville is not currently served by Metra, the northeastern Illinois commuter rail system; the nearest station to Yorkville is 13 miles to the northeast located in the Aurora Transportation Center in downtown Aurora. Bus and other transit services are provided locally in Yorkville by Kendall Area Transit operated by Kendall County. Yorkville’s transportation options and connections to other parts of Kendall County and Fox Valley region makes Yorkville fairly accessible and attractive for prospective businesses and residents to locate in the community. HISTORIC CONTEXT3 The Kendall County and Yorkville area was first settled around 1829 by pioneers and newcomers from the New York state and New England. Although the Blackhawk War of 1832 briefly slowed settlement, the prospect of cheap and fertile land for agriculture and navigable transportation along the Fox River and nearby trails continued to attract many to the area. The first reported permanent structure in Yorkville was built in 1833 by Earl Adams, located south of the Fox River, atop of the hill which is now home to the Kendall County Courthouse. During the same time, Lyman and Burr Bristol began to develop property north of the Fox River. During the years from 1834 to 1836 the community of Bristol, was platted north of the Fox River. In 1835, the Bristol brothers sold their claim on the south side of the Fox River to two cousins, Rulief Duryea and James Cornell, who were originally from New York. In the following year, Duryea laid out the village of Yorkville. In 1856, Captain F.M. Hobbs, laid out the village square in Bristol, which would later be incorporated in 1861 with Yorkville following in 1887. Yorkville’s designation as the Kendall County seat in 1859 would guarantee the future growth and development of Yorkville and Bristol. The advent of the railroad to Yorkville in the 1870s spurred the growth of downtown Yorkville with businesses that took advantage of the area’s natural resources – businesses that included Squire Dingee’s pickle factory, the Yorkville Ice Company, which sold the harvest from the Fox River, and the Renbehn Brothers button factory whose product was made from clam shell found in the Fox River. Several buildings in downtown Yorkville date from this period of development. These communities continued to grow as similar, but separate entities for over 100 years. The two entities merged as the United City of Yorkville in 1957. The Kendall County Courthouse was originally built in 1864 on the same location it is today. Despite a fire in 1887, the exterior walls of the courthouse are still the same ones built in 1864. Kendall County offices have expanded since the Courthouse was originally built in 1864. Additions were added to the courthouse in the 1950s along with satellite buildings/office space built in 1975 across the street and a new jail, at US 34 and Cannonball Trail, opening in 1992. In 1997, a new courthouse was built to service Kendall County on US 34, and expansion plans are currently underway for the property on US 34 in 2008. The historic courthouse still remains in use serving as offices for other county departments. FORM OF GOVERNANCE The United City of Yorkville was formed and incorporated by the amalgamation of the Villages of Bristol and Yorkville in 1957 and is currently governed by a Mayor-Council form of municipal government managed by a professional administrator. The City Council consists of eight alderman elected from four geographic wards. All alderman along with the Mayor 3 Adapted from the 2008 Yorkville Comprehensive Plan 4 Yorkville, Illinois History Website, Kathy Farren. Retrieved June 2015 5 Ibid 6 Ibid 7 Ibid serve four-year terms. The Mayor serves as Yorkville’s Chief Executive Officer and votes only in the case of tie among the City Council alderman. In addition to the Mayor and the City Council, there are two other elected administrative posts, including the City Treasurer, responsible for managing the City’s financial operations, and the City Clerk, the administrator of all municipal records. Yorkville is currently an Illinois non- home rule community. Other administrative staff posts and departments that carry out specific functions of the United City include the Police Department, Community Development, Public Library, Engineering and Public Works, Employment and Finance, and Parks and Recreation. There are also several boards and commissions, including the boards of Police and Fire, Library and Parks, and the Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals. There is a Police Pension Board. The City’s economic development activities are managed by the Yorkville Economic Development Corporation but the Corporation will be dissolved by the end of 2015. 14 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE PREVIOUS PLANS AND STUDIES Comprehensive plans and plans at the district and neighborhood level are vehicles to establish clear goals and policies for community land use and the development and revitalization of commercial, residential and industrial areas. The following is a review of past planning efforts and initiatives, which provide relevant background information and planning concepts related to transportation, capital improvements, parks and open space and urban design. 2008 YORKVILLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN In 2008, the United City of Yorkville adopted an update to its Comprehensive Plan, which had been prepared in previous years in two parts, one plan for the planning area south of the Fox River and one for the north. It was the intent of the Comprehensive Plan to “create a vision and strategy for the management and growth over the next five to ten years,” with a long-term vision that recognizes Yorkville “as continu(ing) to embody the social and physical characteristics of a small town— epitomized by a sense of community and a charming, revitalized downtown.” The Plan was prepared with the involvement of a 30-member citizen steering committee, the City’s Planning Commission and Yorkville elected officials and staff, and including a thorough analysis and assessment of various planning issues related to community demographics, natural resources, land use and transportation, and community facilities. Accordingly, the planning goals, policies and strategies of the Comprehensive Plan were organized around four major planning areas: land use, community facilities, infrastructure and natural resources. Apart from these major planning areas, the Comprehensive Plan does not provide a chapter on plan implementation actions and initiatives. The Comprehensive Plan’s land use strategy organizes land use in Yorkville into four residential land use classifications, two commercial, two industrial and office use districts, one mixed use classification, and two institutional categories, one for parks and open space and the other for public or quasi-public uses. A focus of the residential land use classifications is to “provide quality, distinct, and creative housing opportunities which preserve existing natural areas and emulate the unique character of the United City of Yorkville.” In addition, future residential development should “provide a variety of housing types, as well as opportunities for citizens to interact with each other, their natural surroundings and the entire United City of Yorkville.” Commercial land use objectives stress the need to promote “market-sensitive” development located in areas that meet the needs of adjacent residential neighborhoods; interestingly, downtown Yorkville is not assigned a particular land use classification nor addressed in detail in the plan document. Other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan provide recommendations on promoting quality new development, enhancing parks and environmentally sensitive areas, conserving water, improving neighborhoods, and planning efficiently and effectively for new infrastructure investments. Transportation and utilities are also accorded separate chapters. 2008 PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN In 2008, the Parks and Recreation Department completed a comprehensive assessment of its parks and open space system in order to create a long-term plan for future investments in parks and park facilities. As part of the assessment, an analysis of community demographics was undertaken along with a community mail survey administered by Northern Illinois University. In addition, all parks and park facilities were also inventoried. Major Master Plan recommendations include the future development of an indoor recreation facility and a new park south of the Fox River. Additional initiatives in creating new greenways and in linking bike trails together throughout Yorkville were other key recommendations made within the Master Plan. 2005 Downtown Vision Plan2008 United City of Yorkville Comprehensive Plan 2005 DOWNTOWN VISION PLAN In 2005, a Downtown Vision Plan was prepared to help “improve the regional image and economic base” and viability of downtown Yorkville. The Plan evaluated several planning issues, including its housing, business and employment mix, and provided a listing of downtown strengths to its long-term revitalization, among them being its ready access to the Fox River waterfront, its intact street wall of historic commercial buildings, adjacency to traditional neighborhoods and its high traffic count along Illinois Route 47. Key weaknesses include its lack of newer commercial spaces, competition from nearby commercial areas, and the distances between the downtown district and outlying Yorkville subdivisions. Major plan recommendations focus on downtown streetscape improvements, the redevelopment of the Fox River waterfront with a plaza space and additional community facilities, the installation of a new “city green” along the east side of Illinois Route 47 and the construction of a new City Hall to the east of the city green. The Vision Plan provides several schematic concepts for downtown’s long-term development; implementation actions and initiatives are not provided in the plan document. 15 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE 2014 South Side Commercial District Market Study 2014 SOUTH SIDE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT MARKET STUDY In July of 2014, driven by a desire to grow the retail base on its South Side, the City of Yorkville engaged The Retail Coach, LLC of Tupelo, Mississippi to provide a South Side Commercial District Market Study. As noted in the report that was delivered to the City, The intent of this strategy was to provide a better understanding of the Yorkville South Side Commercial District’s retail opportunity in order to provide a foundation for attracting new retail development. In its report, The Retail Coach defined a Yorkville South Side Commercial District Primary Trade Area that stretches generally north to south from U.S. 34 to U.S. 52 and east to west from Schlapp and McKanna Roads to County Line Road and the Fox River. (Note that this trade area is not contiguous with Yorkville’s municipal boundary.) The report noted that the trade area population currently stands at 18,504 and is expected to grow to 18,991 by 2020. The median household income within the trade area stands at $76,610. Using this trade area as a basis for its investigation, the report drew several key conclusions and made several recommendations, summarized in the following bullet points: • The trade area is currently underserved by retail. • Retail categories in which particular opportunity exists within the trade area include the general merchandise, grocery, casual sit- down restaurant, pharmacy and drug store, and quick-service restaurant segments. • While acknowledging that, due to existing retail on the North Side, many retailers would prefer to be located there, Retail Coach recommends that Yorkville create a focus on new retail development within the South Side. The study noted that “[a]s residential growth continues to grow in the South Side Commercial District, retail growth will follow.” • Retail Coach outlined a plan for Yorkville to engage retailers’ interest in the South Side Commercial District. Broadly, this plan consists of a series of steps that include attending regional and national trade shows, continuing to foster close relationships with property owners, and taking a proactive, long- term approach while exercising patience and perseverance. • The report identified ten key undeveloped or underdeveloped properties within the South Side Commercial District to serve as a starting point for growth efforts. The properties, which range from 0.93 to 23.95 acres in size, are all located generally along the Illinois 47 and Illinois 71 corridors. The report summarized physical attributes, traffic counts, and proximate retail for each site and provided conclusions regarding the highest and best use of each site. Other plans, studies and memorandums related to transportation and infrastructure were also reviewed as part of this analysis phase. These include documents from the City of Yorkville and other local and regional agencies. • Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) GO TO 2040 plan. The long- range transportation plan for the Chicago metropolitan planning organization provided the background for major regional transportation projects that will impact Yorkville. Two regional projects would affect Yorkville. The first is the proposed Prairie Parkway, which would travel through southwest Yorkville. Currently, planning for the Prairie Parkway is on hold and no funding has been earmarked for the project. The proposed improvement remains a part of the regional plan for future consideration. The second is the proposed extension of the Metra BNSF Line. A Yorkville commuter station would be planned along the line. Preliminary Engineering and an Environmental Assessment are currently being conducted by Metra. Both projects are listed in the unconstrained part of the plan. This means that while these projects are included in the long range plan, there is no funding available for implementation. The regional plan is updated every five years and the project status will be reconsidered at that time. • Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) Projects. IDOT prepares a multi-year plan and manages a web page that serves as a resource for identifying studies and projects currently under way within Illinois. The multi-year plan and website were visited to obtain information for all projects and studies that will impact Yorkville. Conversations also were conducted with IDOT officials to determine the status of state projects. • Kendall County Highway Department. The Kendall County Highway Department was interviewed as part of the planning process to identify and discuss all highway projects managed by the County that impact Yorkville. This included the identification of the Wikaduke Trail, a planned multi-county highway project located east of Yorkville that, when completed, will connect Interstates 55 to 80 through Will, Kane, DuPage, and Kendall Counties. The Eldamain Road Bridge over the Fox River, while planned, is not programmed for construction as of 2015. • Boundary Agreements. Yorkville has boundary agreements with neighboring municipalities in order to manage growth and development. Yorkville has agreements with the municipalities of Plano, Sugar Grove, Montgomery, and Oswego. • City of Yorkville Capital Improvement Program (2015-2019). The City of Yorkville’s capital improvement program (CIP) was reviewed to identify all capital needs regarding transportation and utilities. City staff was interviewed as part of the planning process to identify capital needs. • Integrated Transportation Plan (2009). The City of Yorkville prepared an Integrated Transportation Plan in 2009 that proposed a multi modal transportation network. This plan, which built off of recommendations from the City’s 2008 Comprehensive Plan, was used to identify bicycle, pedestrian, and automobile needs for the City. • City of Yorkville Memorandum dated December 10, 2010 on Eldamain Road Reconstruction – Intergovernmental Agreement. This memorandum provided information regarding the alignment of Eldamain Road through Yorkville. 16 SECTION 2 - PLANNING PROCESS THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SECTION 2 - PLANNING PROCESS METHODOLOGY Yorkville’s first Comprehensive Plan was completed in 1974 with updates in 1994, 2002, 2005, and 2008. The 2002 Comprehensive plan guided growth and decision making for the community north of the Fox River, while the 2005 Comprehensive Plan guided growth and decision making for the community south of the Fox River. In the summer of 2007, it was decided by the Plan Commission that given the population growth, in which population had increased over two-fold since the last Census in 2000 and was projected to continue steadily increasing, the 2002 and 2005 comprehensive plans needed to be updated. The Plan Commission also recognized that the 2002 and 2005 comprehensive plans should be merged into one cohesive document for the entire Yorkville planning area. The 2008 Comprehensive Plan, in its present form, was approved at the October 28, 2008 City Council meeting. In August 2014, the United City of Yorkville, along with community stakeholder groups and residents, initiated an two-year planning process to update the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. The key purpose of the Plan was to create a long-term vision and planning framework for enhancing the community’s overall land use, economic vitality, and physical appearance and image, along with a set of practical implementation action strategies. To facilitate the creation of the Comprehensive Plan Update, the United City of Yorkville engaged a multi- disciplinary planning team that included the following firms: • The Lakota Group (Planning, Urban Design, Historic Preservation, Landscape Architecture, Community Relations) • Goodman Williams Group (Market Analysis) • T.Y. Lin International (Transportation Engineering) A Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee, representing a broad-based segment of community stakeholders, including local property owners and residents, industries, merchants, civic institutions, governmental agencies, and City leaders and officials, was formed in January 2015 to help guide the Plan’s development. Beyond understanding Yorkville’s long-term future, the Comprehensive Plan also seeks to assess current conditions and propose strategies and recommendations for the following Comprehensive Plan elements: • Land Use. Evaluate existing community land uses and identify specific issues, constraints, and opportunities to encouraging appropriate land use patterns and development within and near Yorkville’s corporate boundary and extraterritorial jurisdiction. • Regulatory Tools. Research and recommend new zoning and regulatory tools that manage and direct community growth and revitalization in ways that promotes economic diversity and vibrancy, and attractive places and neighborhoods. • Transportation Systems. Document and analyze Yorkville’s current roadway network and physical conditions as a method for exploring opportunities for achieving network efficiencies, roadway changes, and pedestrian enhancements. • Infrastructure and Capital Improvements. Conduct an overview assessment of the City’s sanitary, public utilities, and stormwater management systems, and consider strategies for long-term system maintenance and capital improvements. Remaining farmsteads within YorkvilleKendall County Courthouse in downtown Yorkville 17 SECTION 2 - PLANNING PROCESS THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE • Neighborhoods and Housing. Assess and analyze the condition of residential neighborhoods and the existing housing stock in order to determine appropriate planning strategies that address local housing needs through new construction, housing rehabilitation, and infill development. • Commercial Areas and Corridors. Examine planning and revitalization issues along the commercial corridors, including building and storefront improvements, business and real estate development, and urban design enhancements. Additionally, this Comprehensive Plan will assess downtown planning issues in depth and will develop a Downtown Sub Area Plan as part of this Comprehensive Plan. • Economic/Market Assessment. Analyze and understand market trends for commercial, residential, and industrial development within Yorkville as a basis for establishing recommendations regarding future land use and economic development scenarios. Several market analysis components were consulted and incorporated in this Comprehensive Plan’s Market and Economic Conditions section. • Parks and Open Space. Identify, protect, and enhance Yorkville’s “green infrastructure” of existing parks and natural systems, as well as consider sustainable design initiatives that reduces stormwater run-off and promotes cleaner air and water. • Agencies, Organizations, and Institutions. Understand the current capacity of governmental agencies and other organizations and entities, including non- profit groups and religious and educational institutions to help implement various aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. • Implementation Strategy. Create a detailed implementation strategy that prioritizes specific planning actions, outlines roles and responsibilities between the United City of Yorkville and other agencies, organizations, and entities, and identifies other stakeholders and groups that could participate in implementation efforts now and into the future. • Community Engagement. Undertake an effective planning process that involves a broad and diverse section of community stakeholders in order to generate consensus for the Comprehensive Plan’s long-range development and revitalization vision, and short-term action strategies and planning recommendations. Factory adapted as housing in downtown Yorkville Bicentennial Riverfront Park, downtown Yorkville 18 SECTION 2 - PLANNING PROCESS THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 2.1 - Phase 1 Timeline The planning process for creating the Comprehensive Plan Update involved three distinct phases: a “State of the City” / Community Engagement phase where an assessment of existing conditions was conducted by the planning team and a preliminary set of planning goals were developed with input from the community; a “visioning” phase where preliminary planning strategies and concepts will be developed and presented for community feedback; and, a final plan-making phase in which planning goals, strategies, and implementation action steps are to be developed by the planning team in collaboration with the community, and accepted and adopted by the City. The last two phases of the planning process are expected to be completed by June 2016. PHASE 1: STATE OF THE CITY (SEPTEMBER 2014 - JULY 2015) The first phase, initiated in September 2014, comprised a comprehensive assessment of Yorkville’s existing conditions in the following areas: land use, transportation, infrastructure, parks and open space, community facilities, neighborhoods and housing, and commercial and industrial areas. The planning team also reviewed relevant planning documents and policies, assessed the community’s existing demographics and economic development activities, and defined challenges and opportunities on achieving short-term and long-range planning and revitalization goals. Phase 1 also included various focus group and stakeholder interview sessions to gain public input and insight regarding critical planning issues. Field work activities were also conducted. Field work, document analyses, and review of interview and focus group session proceedings were incorporated into this Existing Conditions Report. The Report will be subsequently reviewed by the Steering Committee with final draft delivered to the United City of Yorkville in July 2015. Phase 1 included the following specific activities: • Project Start Meeting and City Tour (September 19, 2014) A meeting with City staff was conducted to initiate the planning process and to discuss specific items related to the overall project schedule, and the scheduling of stakeholder and focus group interview sessions. • Previous Plans/Studies Review A review of previous comprehensive plans, planning reports, facility studies, demographics, and local development regulations was conducted by the planning team. These reports and studies are summarized in Section 3 on Community Context. • Stakeholder Listening Sessions (October - December 2014) Several interview and focus group sessions were conducted over a two-month period with various community stakeholders, including City officials and department heads and the local schools. STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING / PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY MAY 21, 2014 DRAFT STATE OF THE CITY REPORT JUNE 25, 2015 FINAL STATE OF THE CITY REPORT JULY 30, 2015 STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING JULY 16, 2015 20152014 SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL PROJECT START MEETING/ CITY TOUR SEPTEMBER 19, 2014 ADDITIONAL FIELDWORK MARCH 26, 2015 ADDITIONAL FIELDWORK APRIL 8, 2015 STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING JANUARY 22, 2015 FIELD WORK + ADDITIONAL INTERVIEWS FEBRUARY 19, 2015 STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS + TRAINING SESSION NOVEMBER 10, 2014 STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS DECEMBER 11, 2014 CITY DEPARTMENTS INTERVIEW SESSION OCTOBER 16, 2014 PROJECT WEBSITE LAUNCH SEPTEMBER 25, 2014 PROJECT START PHASE 1: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT / STATE OF THE CITY REPORT MAY JUNE JULY COMMUNITY SPEAK-OUT WORKSHOP #1 APRIL 16, 2015 • Team Fieldwork The planning team visited Yorkville several times between September 2014 and March 2015 to observe and assess existing conditions within the community. • Community Speak-Out (April 16,2015) A community workshop was organized and conducted on April 16, 2015 to solicit feedback through interactive exercises from the community on critical community planning issues. Over 30 people attended the workshop. • State of the City Report Following the assessment and analysis of planning issues and existing conditions, the planning team prepared the State of the City Report, which summarizes Yorkville’s key strengths, challenges, and opportunities for its long-range development and growth. 19 SECTION 2 - PLANNING PROCESS THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE PARKS/OPEN SPACE PLANNING AREA Illinois Municipal Code states that a Plan Commission has the authority to prepare and recommend a comprehensive plan for present and future growth and redevelopment to be adopted by the City. The Comprehensive Plan, “may be made applicable, by the terms thereof, to land situated within the corporate limits and contiguous territory not more than one and one half miles beyond the corporate limits and not included in any municipality” (65 ILCS 5/11 - 12 - 5). Given this and the existing and proposed boundary agreements with surrounding municipalities (Millbrook, Montgomery, Oswego, Plano, and Sugar Grove), the United City of Yorkville Planning Area is generally, US 30 to the north, Boundary Agreement lines with Montgomery and Oswego (north of the Fox River) and Grove Road (south of the Fox River) to the east, Helmar Road to the south, and Eldamain Road (north of the Fox River) and Highpoint Road (south of the Fox River) to the west. This area encompasses approximately 47,726 acres, or approximately 74.6 square miles. Figure 2.3 - Planning Area Figure 2.1: Planning Area Map RIVERS/STREAMSTRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER Legend - Planning Area YORKVILLE BOUNDARY PLANNING AREA TRADITIONAL CENTER After the State of the City Report is delivered and feedback is received from the Steering Committee and Yorkville community, the following two phases will be undertaken to complete the planning process: PHASE 2: COMMUNITY VISIONING (JULY - SEPTEMBER 2015) The second phase of the planning process will involve the creation and development of specific planning concepts and land use strategies that enhance Yorkville’s physical appearance, transportation and infrastructure options, and overall economic environment. As part of the visioning process, planning concepts will be presented for discussion and consideration during a community workshop. Afterward, planning concepts will be refined into a draft Comprehensive Plan Update Report. PHASE 3: FINAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE (SEPTEMBER 2015 - JUNE 2016) Based on the information analysis and community input gathered from the first two phases of the planning process, the final phase will involve the refinement of preliminary planning concepts and implementation strategies into a Final Comprehensive Plan Update. Specific site studies and illustrations will also be prepared for feasible development sites within Yorkville. 20 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.1 - Existing Land Uses North of the Fox River EXISTING LAND USE This section describes the existing land use conditions within the United City of Yorkville, and provides a specific focus on the types of uses that exist in particular areas, its relevant zoning, and the overall quality of the built environment and surroundings. The information and data provided in this section has been obtained through field work and visual assessment, and analysis of existing land use maps and other data. Land use is typically the central element of a comprehensive plan since it establishes the community’s overall urban form and physical configuration, including where specific land uses are located and how transportation and infrastructure systems are designed and instituted to support those land uses. Yorkville’s land use pattern and the physical conditions in which those uses are found serve as the basis point for determining a future land use map and land use policies that will guide both public and private users of the land. Figures 3.1 and 3.2 exhibit the existing land use conditions within Yorkville’s planning area. The map was prepared using the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS) and field review of existing land use along with an analysis of entitled and proposed development areas and subdivisions within Yorkville. The Existing Land Use Map is used in understanding current land use conditions and in determining future land use directions. SECTION 3 - YORKVILLE LAND USE Figure 3.1: Existing Land Uses North of the Fox River An important step in the formulation of a Comprehensive Plan is an analysis of existing land uses. This analysis not only identifies what and where particular uses have occurred, but highlights where future development might occur and where land use conflicts may exist or develop. The existing land use calculations provided in this chapter will also allow for a comparison with future land use calculations to determine the extent of land that is available for future land development. Land use categories have been divided into seven land use classifications: Residential, Commercial, Office, Industrial, Public/Quasi Public, Park/Open Space, and Agricultural. Residential: Classifies all residential properties and developments and includes residential in agricultural areas which are on a separate parcel than the primary agricultural use. Commercial: Identifies all existing commercial areas including the downtown and corridor commercial areas. Office: Classifies all existing office uses, including areas along Illinois Route 47 and Schoolhouse Road. Industrial: Identifies all existing industrial areas. Public/Quasi Public: Classifies all existing governmental buildings and institutions, including the Kendall County government complexes, United City of Yorkville facilities, the Public Library, and local schools and churches. Park/Open Space: Identifies all existing parks, recreational facilities and conserved open space. Agricultural: Lands not classified as any of the previous existing land uses listed above is considered agricultural. Legend - Existing Land Use YORKVILLE BOUNDARY RESIDENTIAL OFFICE PUBLIC / QUAI-PUBLIC AGRICULTURAL PLANNING AREA COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL PARK / OPEN SPACE RIVERS / STREAMS 21 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.2 - Existing Land Uses South of the Fox River Figure 3.2: Existing Land Uses South of the Fox River 22 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE RESIDENTIAL: 18.8% LAND USES WITHIN THE PLANNING AREA Land use in Yorkville can also be described and analyzed according to what exists within the Planning Area and its Municipal Boundary, given that the Planning Boundary covers a more extensive land area. The distribution of various land uses within the Yorkville Planning Area are summarized in Table 3.1 and illustrated in Graph 3.1. The predominate land use in the Planning Area is agricultural with 32,531 acres of land (71.9 percent), largely due to the inclusion of extensive agricultural land south of Yorkville’s municipal boundaries to Helmar Road, east to Grove Road, and west along Stagecoach Road. A significant portion of agricultural COMMERCIAL: 1.9% OFFICE: 0.2% AGRICULTURAL: 71.9%PARK / OPEN SPACE: 5,6% PUBLIC / QUASI-PUBLIC: 0.8% INDUSTRIAL: 0.9% LAND USE AREA (ACRES)PERCENTAGE Planning Area 45,251 100% Residential 8,494 18.8% Business 932 2.1% Commercial 849 1.9% Office 83 0.2% Industrial 419 0.9% Public/Quasi-Public 349 0.8% School/Institution 187 0.4% Church 52 0.1% Government 110 0.2% Park/Open Space 2,526 5.6% Agricultural 32,531 71.9% Graph 3.1 - Existing Land Use within the Planning Area Table 3.1: Existing Land Uses within the Planning Area Graph 3.1: Existing Land Uses within the Planning Area land can also be found north and west of Yorkville’s municipal boundaries to Baseline and Eldamain Roads. This percentage of agricultural land still largely reflects the agricultural nature of unincorporated Kendall County. Other significant land uses include residential at 8,494 acres (18.8 percent), reflecting the mostly residential character of incorporated Yorkville, and parks and open space at 2,526 acres (5.6 percent), which includes the municipal parks and recreational facilities along with Kendall County Forest Preserve land. Other land uses, including commercial, industrial and public/quasi-public, comprise less than five percent of the remaining land uses in the Planning Area. Agricultural Land UsesResidential Land Uses Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 23 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE LAND USES WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY The distribution of the various land uses within the Yorkville Municipal Boundary are summarized in Table 3.2 and illustrated in Graph 3.2. Within the Municipal Boundary, agricultural use still predominates as the major land use although in less proportion at 5,348 acres (45.1 percent) than in the Planning Area. Residential land use is the second most predominate land use category at 3,940 acres (33.2 percent), again reflecting Yorkville’s overall residential character. As opposed to the Planning Area, RESIDENTIAL: 33.2%COMMERCIAL: 6.2% OFFICE: 0.7% AGRICULTURAL: 45.1%PARK / OPEN SPACE: 8.9% PUBLIC / QUASI-PUBLIC: 2.5% INDUSTRIAL: 3.5% LAND USE AREA (ACRES)PERCENTAGE Municipal Boundary 11,870 100% Residential 3,940 33.2% Business 815 6.9% Commercial 732 6.2% Office 83 0.7% Industrial 410 3.5% Public/Quasi-Public 298 2.5% School/Institution 143 1.2% Church 52 0.4% Government 103 0.9% Park/Open Space 1,059 8.9% Agricultural 5,348 45.1% Graph 3.2 - Existing Land Use within the Municipal Boundary Table 3.2: Existing Land Uses within the Municipal Boundary Graph 3.2: Existing Land Uses within the Municipal Boundary commercial, office and industrial land use account for a slightly larger portion of the overall land use pattern with commercial and office comprising 815 acres (6.9 percent) and industrial 410 acres (3.5 percent) of total land area. In addition, public/quasi-public, and parks and open space also encompass an increased portion of land area at 298 acres (2.5 percent) and 1,059 acres (8.9) respectively. Irrespective of the agricultural land within the Municipal Boundary, the overall Yorkville land use mix appears to be fairly balanced between residential, commercial, and public/quasi-public uses. Park/Open Space Land UsesCommercial Land Uses Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 24 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.3 - Zoning Districts North of the Fox River Legend - Zoning Districts YORKVILLE BOUNDARY E-1 - ESTATE RESIDENCE R-3 - Multifamily ATTACHED RESIDENCE B-1 - LOCAL BUSINESS M-1 - LIMITED MANUFACTURING PLANNING AREA R-1 - SINGLE-FAMLY SUBURBAN RESIDENCE R-4 - GENERAL MULTI- FAMILY RESIDENCE B-2 - RETAIL COMMERCE BUSINESS M-2 - GENERAL MANUFACTURING FOREST PRESERVE A-1 - AGRICULTURAL R-2 - SINGLE-FAMILY TRADITIONAL RESIDENCE R-2D - TWO-FAMILY ATTACHED RESIDENCE PUD - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT O - OFFICE B-3 - GENERAL BUSINESS B-4 - SERVICE OS-1 - OPEN SPACE (PASSIVE) OS-2 - OPEN SPACE (RECREATIONAL) ZONING DISTRICTS The United City of Yorkville adopted a new Zoning Ordinance on November 25, 2014. While there have been many individual text amendments to the Zoning Ordinance over the years, a revision of the entire ordinance has not been undertaken since the Zoning Ordinance was last adopted in its entirety in 1974. Yorkville is has 17 different zoning district classifications, including: • A-1 Agricultural District • OS-1 Open Space (Passive) District • OS-2 Open Space (Recreational) District • E-1 Estate District • R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residence District • R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence District • R-2 Duplex, Two-Family Attached Residence District • R-3 Multifamily Attached Residence District • R-4 General Multifamily Residence District • O Office District • B-1 Local Business District • B-2 Retail Commerce Business District • B-3 General Business District • B-4 Service Business District • M-1 Limited Manufacturing District • M-2 General Manufacturing District • PUD Planned Unit Development District ZONING DISTRICT ACRES % Municipal Boundary 11,942 100.0% Residential Zoning Districts 7,259 61% E-1 Estate District 311 2.6% R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residence District 454 3.8% R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence District 5,161 43.2% R-2 Duplex, Two-Family Attached Residence District 143 1.2% R-3 Multifamily Attached Residence District 740 6.2% R-4 General Multifamily Residence District 450 3.8% Business Zoning Districts 1,296 11% O Office District 82 0.7% B-1 Local Business District 4 0.03% B-2 Retail Commerce Business District 84 0.7% B-3 General Business District 1125 9.4% B-4 Service Business District 1 0.01% Manufacturing Zoning Districts 1,049 9% M-1 Limited Manufacturing District 663 5.6% M-2 General Manufacturing District 386 3.2% Open Space Zoning Districts 303 3% OS-1 Open Space (Passive) District 92 0.8% OS-2 Open Space (Recreational) District 211 1.8% A-1 Agricultural District 1008 8.4% PUD Planned Unit Development District 919 7.7% Forest Preserve 108 0.9% Figure 3.3: Zoning Districts North of the Fox RiverTable 3.3: Zoning Districts Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 25 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.4: Zoning Districts South of the Fox River Figure 3.4: Zoning Districts South of the Fox River 26 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE RESIDENTIAL LAND USE Within the Planning Area, Yorkville’s residential areas comprises 8,494 acres, which represents 18.8 percent of Yorkville’s total land area. This section summarizes general residential land use and market conditions. EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS In general, Yorkville’s single family residential stock represents the community’s most significant land use in terms of acreage next to agricultural. Single family neighborhoods can largely be characterized as consisting of the traditional neighborhoods both north and south of the Fox River that developed from the mid to late 1800s, when Yorkville and Bristol were first founded, to the 1940s and 50s, and the relatively newer annexed developments located north, south, east and west of the Traditional Neighborhood Center. The Traditional Neighborhood Center is bounded generally by Somonauk and Center Streets on the north, Liberty Street to the east, Orange and Blaine Streets to the south, and Morgan and Mill Streets south of the Fox River to the west and east respectively. In this area, the housing stock can be described as older, vernacular housing types and styles ranging from Gable-Fronts and Upright and Wings to Queen Anne’s and Ranch homes that were mostly built after World War II. Split levels Ranches and newer homes can be found on select lots and locations. Lot sizes in the Traditional Neighborhood Center are typically 7,000 square feet with fairly consistent setbacks and building placement, although there is some informality to the arrangement of houses on each block. Infrastructure conditions, including sidewalks and streets, are in good condition although some sidewalks are missing on block faces that have steep grade differences. The housing stock in the Traditional Neighborhood Center is a unique character-defining area of Yorkville and provides a tangible link to the community’s first years and decades of development. Such homes could be a selling point for those seeking housing stock near a traditional, walkable downtown and recreational amenities. Figure 3.5 - Existing Residential Land Use Areas North of the Fox River SUBDIVISION KEY ACRES LOTS Grande Reserve 1 956 1,365 Whispering Meadows 2 297 295 Bristol Bay 3 292 626 Fox Hill 4 149 467 Autumn Creek 5 250 424 Prairie Meadows 6 139 164 Heartland Circle 7 129 261 Caledonia 8 85 145 Heartland 9 85 184 Kylan's Ridge 10 70 134 Blackberry Woods 11 60 139 Cannonball Estates 12 57 110 Kendall Marketplace 13 55 1 Cimarron Ridge 14 24 68 B&P Properties 15 14 1 Reserve at Fox River 16 8 1 York Meadow Apartments 17 8 1 Countryside Center 18 106 177 Countryside 19 21 144 Lynwood 20 -112 Willowbrook 21 -104 Woodworth Estates 22 33 92 Fox River Gardens 23 -86 Bristol (Original Town)24 44 85 Prairie Lands 25 26 82 Blackberry Creek North 26 45 77 Prairie Park 27 20 77 Longford Lakes 28 14 62 Figure 3.5: Existing Residential Land Use Areas North of the Fox RiverTable 3.5: Existing Residential Land Use Areas 1 2 10 13 12 8 15 3 4 11 20 21 22 25 27 26 24 23 14 5 6 7 9 16 28 17 18 19 Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 27 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.6 - Existing Residential Land Use Areas South of the Fox River SUBDIVISION KEY ACRES LOTS Raintree Village 29 298 654 Prestwick of Yorkville 30 192 108 Windett Ridge 31 158 259 Hudson Lakes 32 142 1 White Oak Estates 33 119 94 Rivers Edge 34 100 166 Greenbriar 35 76 174 Tanglewood Trails 36 68 1 Country Hills 37 66 168 Sunflower Estates 38 61 117 Kendallwood Estates 39 53 83 Wildwood 40 42 41 Fox Highlands 41 36 54 Briarwood 42 19 40 Wynstone Townhomes 43 13 1 Windmill Farms 44 9 1 Kleinwachter 45 5 1 Fields of Farm Colony 46 -125 Farm Colony 47 -89 Miller Subdivision 48 10 83 Foxlawn 49 -82 Black’s Addition 50 36 78 Yorkville (Original Town)51 22 73 Oak Creek 52 -64 Pavilion Heights 53 -64 Prairie Garden 54 20 58 Timber Creek 55 -53 Edgewood 56 10 48 Figure 3.6: Existing Residential Land Use Areas South of the Fox RiverTable 3.6: Existing Residential Land Use Areas 29 30 31 3956 40 41 43 45 48 46 47 52 44 36 55 53 37 38 32 33 50 51 34 49 35 42 54 Outside of the Traditional Neighborhood Center, the newer annexed residential developments date mostly within the last four decades and comprise a mix of housing types from single-family to attached duplexes and townhomes representing, for the most part, a mix between neo-Colonial and Ranch home styles. Lot sizes are larger than in the Traditional Neighborhood Center with 9,500 square foot lots found in most subdivisions such as Bristol Bay to 10,000 square feet in the Grande Reserve, Yorkville’s largest residential subdivision. These areas include newer roads and sidewalks, most with parks and bike and recreational trails incorporated in the subdivision design. A few subdivisions include clubhouses and other amenities. Streets and rights-of-way vary in the subdivisions with 70’ right-of-ways on residential streets in Bristol Bay to 90’ in Grande Reserve. This contrasts to 50’ to 60’ street right-of-way dimensions in the Traditional Neighborhood Center. The detail of residential design varies from subdivision to subdivision, some incorporating a higher level of landscaping and site treatments than others. Foundation plantings are sometimes missing and side elevations often do not include window openings, contributing to a monotonous appearance in some subdivisions. Traditional Single-Family Residential near downtown Yorkville Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 28 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE HOUSING CONDITIONS AND RESIDENTIAL MARKET OPPORTUNITIES This section examines the characteristics of the City of Yorkville’s existing housing stock as well as housing unit occupancy and affordability. It further investigates recent residential construction trends and current conditions within the City’s housing market. Conclusions are presented related to the needs, challenges, and opportunities of the residential sector in Yorkville. HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS Commensurate with the explosive growth of the City throughout the opening decade of the 21st century, nearly 59 percent of Yorkville’s homes were built between 2000 and 2009. During this period, builders added an astonishing 3,700+ homes to the City’s housing stock. Another 12 percent of homes within the City were built during the 1990s, when the outward-moving path of development within the Chicago metropolitan area first made serious inroads into Kendall County. Not surprisingly given its growth pattern, Yorkville has few older homes, with just 13.6 percent of the City’s housing stock built prior to 1970. Demographic Trends 2000 2010 2014 (est)Change % 2000-2014 Total Population 6,189 16,921 17,878 + 173.4% Total Households 2,220 5,912 6,240 + 166.3% Family Households 1,665 4,389 4,773 + 163.6% Average Household Size 2.76 2.84 2.85 + 2.9% Total Housing Units 2,931 6,353 6,728 + 116.8% Explosive growth changed the face of Yorkville in the decade of the 2000s. The City added nearly 11,000 residents and 3,500 housing units. 2000 2014 2,931 6,728 +116.8% 2.76 2.85 +2.9% 1,665 4,773 +163.6% 2,220 6,240 +166.3% 6,189 17,878 +173.4% Housing Units by Year Built Total Housing Units 6,304 100.0% 2010 or Later 138 2.2% 2000-2009 3,704 58.8% 1990-1999 753 11.9% 1980-1989 389 6.2% 1970-1979 464 7.4% 1960-1969 183 2.9% 1950-1959 157 2.5% 1940-1949 127 2.0% 1939 or Earlier 389 6.2% Nearly 60% of housing units in Yorkville were built in the years between 2000 and 2009. 19 3 9 o r E a r l i e r 19 4 0 - 1 9 4 9 19 5 0 - 1 9 5 9 19 7 0 - 1 9 7 9 19 8 0 - 1 9 8 9 19 9 0 - 1 9 9 9 2000-2009 58.8%20 1 0 o r L a t e r 19 6 0 - 1 9 6 9 Fox River Subdivision Multifamily Residential Source: U.S. Census Bureau Source: U.S. Census Bureau 29 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Housing Unit Tenure & Occupancy Yorkville Kendall County Illinois Total Housing Units 6,304 40,415 5,291,704 Occupied Housing Units 5,835 38,075 4,772,723 Vacant 469 2,340 518,981 Percent 7.4%5.8%9.8% Owner-Occupied 4,360 31,847 3,220,038 Percent 74.7%83.6%67.5% Renter-Occupied 1,475 6,228 1,552,685 Percent 25.3%16.4%32.5% Nearly three quarters of Yorkville’s occupied housing units are owner-occupied. This is higher than Illinois as a whole, but significantly lower than Kendall County as a whole. Yorkville Kendall County Illinois Owner- Occupied 74.7% Owner- Occupied 83.6% Owner- Occupied 67.5% Housing Units by Type Total Housing Units 6,304 100.0% Single Family Detached 3,803 60.3% Single Family Attached 1,134 18.0% Multifamily 1,329 21.1% Mobile Home 38 0.6% More than 78% of Yorkville’s housing units are single family homes. Single Family Detached 60.3% Single Family Attached 18.0% Multifamily 21.1% Mo b i l e H o m e 0 . 6 % By the most recent U.S. Census estimates, there are 6,304 housing units within the City of Yorkville, of which 5,835 are occupied. The resulting vacancy rate (7.4 percent) is somewhat higher than Kendall County as a whole, at 5.8 percent, but is not considered imbalanced. Yorkville’s housing stock consists overwhelmingly of single family, detached units, which make up more than 60 percent of homes within the City. Single family attached units (i.e., “single address” attached forms such as duplexes and townhomes) make up another 18 percent of the City’s housing units. Multifamily units make up just 21 percent of the City’s housing units, while mobile homes and non-traditional housing forms have a negligible presence within the City. Like other exurban areas across the country, the vast majority of Yorkville householders own their homes. Nearly three quarters of occupied homes in Yorkville are owner-occupied, compared to just over two-thirds for Illinois as a whole. However, the City’s rate of owner-occupancy is lower than Kendall County as a whole, where nearly 84 percent of homes are owner- occupied. Single-Family Residential in the Heartland Subdivision Source: U.S. Census Bureau Source: U.S. Census Bureau 30 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Yorkville’s owner-occupied housing stock is comparatively high in value. By U.S. Census estimates, the median value of owner-occupied homes in Yorkville stood at $234,100 for the 2009-2013 period (adjusted to 2013 dollars). This is 11 percent higher than Kendall County as a whole and more than 28 percent higher than the State of Illinois. Reflective of the relative homogeneity of the City’s housing stock, nearly 44 percent of all owner-occupied homes in Yorkville are valued between $200,000 and $300,000. Meanwhile, less than seven percent of homes in the City are valued at less than $100,000, compared to nearly 23 percent for the state as a whole. At the other end of the spectrum, Yorkville has very few homes valued at $500,000 or more. HOUSING COSTS AND AFFORDABILITY Of Yorkville’s 1,424 renter households, nearly 68 percent pay between $750 and $1,250 per month, while just 12.3 percent pay $1,500 or more per month. The estimated median monthly gross rent within the City stands at $1,064. Meanwhile, nearly 49 percent of owner households have housing costs (inclusive of mortgage principal and interest, property tax, insurance, utilities, and homeowners association fees) of $1,750 to $2,500 per month. Another 30 percent have housing costs above $2,500 per month, while the median for all 3,674 owner households City-wide is $2,149. Government measures typically use 30 percent of annual income as a threshold for housing affordability. In other words, a home is considered affordable if its associated annual housing costs do not exceed 30 percent of the resident’s annual household income. As shown in the following table, data from the U.S. Census suggest that roughly 50 percent of Yorkville’s renter-occupied homes are affordable to those who rent them, while 60 percent of owner-occupied homes are affordable for their owners. Roughly 24 percent of renter and owner households have a relatively low housing cost burden equating to 20 percent or less of annual income. However, nearly 39 percent of renter and 28 percent of owner households have a high cost burden equating to 35 percent or more of annual income. Graph 3.3: Owner-Occupied Housing Units by Value Table 3.7: Households by Monthly Housing Costs Table 3.8: Households by Tenure & Housing Affordability Source: U.S. Census Bureau Source: U.S. Census Bureau and Goodman Williams Group Source: U.S. Census Bureau HOUSEHOLDS WITH CASH RENT HOUSEHOLDS WITH A MORTGAGE GROSS RENT NO.%OWNERSHIP COST NO.% Less than $500 70 4.9 Less than $1,000 58 1.6 $500 - $749 78 5.5 $1,000 - $1,249 227 6.2 $750 - $999 427 30.0 $1,500 - $1,749 495 13.5 $1,000 - $1,249 535 37.6 $1,750 - $1,999 751 20.4 $1,250 - $1,499 125 8.8 $2,000 - $2,499 1,027 28.0 $1,500 - $1,999 174 12.2 $2,500 - $2,999 557 15.2 $2,000 or More 15 1.1 $3,000 or More 559 15.2 Total 1,424 100.0 Total 3,674 100.0 Median $1,064 Median $2,149 ANNUAL HOUSING COST % OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH CASH RENT HOUSEHOLDS WITH A MORTGAGE NO.%NO.% Less than 20.0%339 23.8 872 23.7 20.0 - 24.9%257 18.0 824 22.4 25.0 - 29.9%114 8.0 500 13.6 30.0 - 34.9%165 11.6 464 12.6 35% or More 549 38.6 1,014 27.6 Total 1,424 100.0 3,674 100.0 At Affordable Level 710 49.9 2,196 59.8 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Pe r c e n t o f o w n e r - o c c u p i e d h o u s i n g u n i t s United City of Yorkville Kendall County State of Illinois ≤$50,000 $50,000-$99,999 $100,000-$149,999 $150,000-$199,999 $200,000-$299,999 $300,000-$499,999 $500,000-$999,999 ≥$1,000,000 31 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE EXISTING HOME SALES TRENDS The number of sales of existing homes in Yorkville listed and sold through the area Multiple Listing Service (MLS) fell dramatically after 2007 and remained at cyclical lows during the recessionary years of 2008 to 2009. The median price of homes sold likewise declined during these years. While the market has now recovered much of its strength in terms of overall sales volumes, median sale prices remain more than $50,000 below pre-recession levels. In this, Yorkville is not alone, as a similar pattern is seen in the surrounding municipalities of Oswego, Montgomery, and Plano. FORECLOSURE TRENDS According to data from RealtyTrac, 160 homes are in some state of foreclosure within Yorkville – equating to one in every 424 housing units. This is roughly equivalent to the Kendall County rate of one in every 400 housing units. While foreclosures remain a challenge, new foreclosure filings have fallen dramatically in recent quarters. For April 2015, for example (the most recent month reported), the number of homeowners who received a foreclosure filing fell 31 percent compared to the previous year. From a wider area perspective, the number of homes in foreclosure in Yorkville is much lower than in Plano and Montgomery, but significantly higher than in Oswego. Median Sale Price of MLS-Listed Single Family Homes Montgomery Oswego Plano Yorkville 2007 $192,000 $245,000 $172,250 $251,200 2008 $187,500 $244,850 $161,400 $252,500 2009 $158,700 $210,000 $120,000 $209,000 2010 $150,000 $200,500 $107,800 $186,950 2011 $125,000 $194,000 $88,500 $166,500 2012 $125,200 $174,000 $78,250 $155,000 2013 $135,000 $190,000 $89,900 $185,000 2014 $145,000 $207,000 $112,500 $190,700 After 2009, area single family home sales began to recover, though median sales prices continued to decline through 2012. While prices have risen considerably since then, they still remain well below 2007 levels. $ $1 2 5 , 0 0 0 $1 8 7 , 5 0 0 $2 5 0 , 0 0 0 $6 2 , 5 0 0 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Table 3.9: Foreclosure Trends Source: Midwest Real Estate Data Source: RealtyTrac MUNICIPALITY HOMES IN FORECLOSURE Y-O-Y CHANGE %TOTAL RATIO Yorkville 160 1 in 424 -31.0 Plano 107 1 in 296 -36.0 Montgomery 198 1 in 284 -13.0 Oswego 185 1 in 644 -55.0 Kendall Co.N/A 1 in 400 -35.0 Traditional Single-Family Residential Housing in downtown Yorkville 32 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Building Permit Issuances Single-Family Multifamily Total 1996 93 41 134 1997 54 12 66 1998 50 0 50 1999 82 25 107 2000 127 16 143 2001 198 54 252 2002 299 56 355 2003 388 12 400 2004 474 0 474 2005 588 96 684 2006 809 176 985 2007 413 96 509 2008 158 0 158 2009 64 0 64 2010 42 6 48 2011 43 0 43 2012 67 0 67 2013 81 0 81 2014 74 0 74 Residential construction activity in Yorkville has returned to 1990s levels. Almost no multifamily construction has taken place in the City since 2007. Single Family Multi- Family 50 0 75 0 1, 0 0 0 25 00 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION TRENDS With the onset of the building boom of the early 2000s, new home construction activity in Yorkville (as measured by residential building permit issuances) skyrocketed, with annual permit issuances growing from just 143 units in 2000 to nearly 700 five years later. Permitting levels peaked in 2006 at nearly 1,000 single and multifamily units, then fell dramatically with the impact of the housing market crisis. By 2010, the market had bottomed out, and just 42 permits were issued in total – a 95 percent drop peak to trough. Construction volumes have yet to recover to anything approaching the building boom years and, in fact, have not risen above 100 units annually since 2008. Current levels thus represent a return to those last seen in the latter half of the 1990s. Not surprisingly, given the relatively homogeneity of Yorkville’s single family home stock, multifamily units have historically made up a very small percentage of new home construction within the City. After a period from 2005 to 2007, which saw the construction of the Reserve at Fox River income-restricted apartment development and a number of condominium flats in the Bristol Bay for-sale community, virtually no multifamily construction has occurred. THE NEW HOME MARKET TODAY Yorkville has executed annexation agreements on 44 residential developments, most in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Of these developments, just 12 are fully built out. The remaining 31 developments fall into three categories: • Those consisting of undeveloped agricultural land; • Those with completed roadway and utility infrastructure that are considered dormant (i.e., in which homes are not currently being built); and • Those with completed infrastructure in which homes are currently being built, considered active. Single-Family Residential Housing adjacent to Agricultural Land Source: U.S. Census Bureau 33 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Active New Home Developments Development Product Type Total Units Entitled Units Built Units Not Yet Built Percent Built Out Autumn Creek Single Family 317 270 47 85.2% Blackberry Woods Single Family 132 34 98 25.8% Briarwood Single Family 41 19 22 46.3% Country Hills Single Family 138 27 111 19.6% Heartland Circle Single Family 250 216 34 86.4% Heartland Meadows Single Family 47 0 47 0.0% Prairie Meadows Single Family 164 116 48 70.7% Windett Ridge Single Family 277 122 155 44.0% Total ---1,366 804 562 58.9% Eight residential developments are currently active in Yorkville, representing 1,366 entitled homes. At post-recession construction levels, the 515 homes not yet built represent a supply of more than eight years. 16 0 24 0 32 0 800 Autumn Creek Blackberry Woods Briarwood Country Hills Heartland Circle Heartland Meadows Prairie Meadows Windett Ridge In addition, the City has recently given final plat approval for Heartland Meadows, a 47-lot age targeted community to be developed by Marker Full Homes. Sales are expected to begin soon. The seven developments that are active and one not yet started (Heartland Meadows) represent a total of 1,366 entitled units. As of the first quarter of 2015, 804 homes had been built in these developments, with 562 units remaining to be built. At post-recession construction levels, the remaining homes represent a supply of more than eight years. Moreover, dormant developments for which roadway and utility infrastructure is in place (in whole or in part) represent another 7,406 entitled units among five different housing product types. Of that total, 5,628 units are not yet built – a volume that is extremely unlikely to be absorbed at any point within the foreseeable future. (For perspective, from 2000-2009, during the height of the historic housing boom, 3,700 units were built in Yorkville in total). Moreover, the total occupied housing stock in Yorkville currently stands at 5,835 units. In other words, Yorkville would effectively have to double its current housing stock in order to successfully absorb all the units planned in these dormant developments. Table 3.10: Residential Developments by Status Source: City of Yorkville & Goodman Williams Group TOTAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS 44 Completed 12 Active 7 Not Yet Started 1 Dormant 24 Undeveloped Land 15 Infrastructure in Place 9 Single-Family Residential Housing in the Fox Hill Subdivision “In Yorkville 5,628 entitled housing units are not yet built – a volume that is extremely unlikely to be absorbed at any point within the foreseeable future. For perspective, from 2000- 2009, during the height of the historic housing boom, 3,700 units were built in Yorkville in total.” Source: United City of Yorkville and Goodman Williams Group 34 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Vacant lots within these dormant developments are primarily under ownership of private individuals or larger development entities. Two of the developments – Bristol Bay and The Highlands/Raintree Village – are owned by major national homebuilders (Centex and Lennar Homes, respectively). At the moment, it is uncertain when – if ever – any of the dormant developments will reopen. For classification purposes, this analysis divided Yorkville’s annexed residential developments into five geographical groups – east, west, north, central, southeast, and southwest. The groups correspond to geographically distinct areas of the City, but are not equal in terms of land area or number of developments. Broadly speaking, the most intense development to occur within Yorkville during its robust growth years occurred within the east and southeast groups, located east of Illinois 47 along U.S. 34 and Illinois 71, respectively. These areas are home to some of the City’s largest developments, including Grande Reserve, Autumn Creek, and Raintree Village. They were also some of the hardest hit areas when the housing crisis ensued, and developer and home builder bankruptcies and foreclosures have left hundreds of vacant lots in partially completed, dormant developments within these areas. However, four of the City’s seven currently active developments are also located here (including its most active development, Autumn Creek). The north group, aligning Illinois 47 and Baseline and Galena roads, consists largely of undeveloped land in active agricultural use. One exception is the large Bristol Bay community, which, after more than 770 homes were built in the early and mid-2000s, fell dormant with more than 1,300 entitled units remaining to be built. The west and southwest groups (located off of U.S. 34 near Kendall Marketplace and to the west and southwest of downtown, respectively) include eight of the City’s 12 completed developments, along with two of the seven active developments. Finally, the central group consists generally of smaller developments located east of Illinois 47 and south of U.S. 34. This group includes the one development recently approved but not yet started (the 47-unit age- targeted Heartland Meadows community). RENTAL MARKET CONDITIONS Yorkville’s rental market consists of a small number of multifamily developments built as rental apartments. A larger number of detached and attached homes were originally developed as for-sale units but have subsequently been entered into the rental market by individual owners or real estate investment and property management entities. Multifamily Rental Communities Yorkville is home to several multifamily rental developments, including two market-rate communities and one income-qualified community, all located in close proximity to Illinois 47 and U.S. 34. • York Meadow Apartment Homes is a 95-unit two-story garden-style apartment community located on East Kendall Drive and managed by T.J Adam & Company. The community was built in 1991 and offers one, two, and three bedroom plans. Current market rents range from $980 to $1,700 per month, and all units feature an attached one-car garage. • Yorkville Apartments is a 74-unit two and three-story garden-style apartment community located on Mulhern Court and also managed by T.J. Adam & Company. Built in 1986, the community currently offers two-bedroom apartments for $910 per month. • Reserve at Fox River is a 132-unit three-story garden-style apartment community located at on Market Place Drive, adjoining the Yorkville Marketplace shopping center. The community, developed with support from the Illinois Housing Development Authority (IHDA) and managed by Dominium, offers income-qualified two and three bedroom plans. Current income limits are $40,740 for one occupant, $46,560 for two occupants, and $52,380 for three occupants. Other Rental Options Other options for Yorkville renters include a variety of single family detached and attached homes, as well as a limited number of lower-density multifamily condominiums, all originally built for the for-sale market. While these homes are located throughout the City, concentrations do occur in some areas. Principal among these are the townhome and flats (condominiums) located within the Bristol Bay community. Built in the mid and later 2000s, a number of these units have found their way to the rental market. Current monthly asking rents are generally from $1,000 for flats and $1,200 for townhomes. SENIOR HOUSING MARKET CONDITIONS Senior housing options in Yorkville are limited, consisting of just two assisted living facilities, plus one skilled nursing center, as follows: • Heritage Woods of Yorkville, located at 242 Greenbriar Road, opened in December of 2007. The facility consists of 87 studio and one-bedroom apartments offering assisted living. The facility is managed by BMA Management, Ltd. • Countryside Village, located at 501 W. Kendall Drive, was built in 1977. The facility consists of 138 one-bedroom apartments, all of which are Section 8 assisted living units for seniors and persons with disabilities. The facility is managed by Oakbrook Corp. • Hillside Rehab & Care Center, located at 1308 Game Farm Road, offers a variety of skilled nursing, rehabilitation, and long-term care services, including hospice and memory care. The 79-bed facility is owned and managed by Helia Healthcare. HOUSING DEMAND, NEEDS, & OPPORTUNITIES Market demand for new homes is a function of many factors. First among these is household growth, which broadly determines long-term housing need. Another factor to be considered in demand forecasting is unit loss due to obsolescence, abandonment, or disaster. Nation-wide, most markets experience unit loss equal to 0.26 percent of total housing stock per year. Finally, a smaller component of demand is the “extra” units needed to retain balance in the availability of vacant units in order to allow for efficient sales and leasing efforts. (This need is greater for rental homes than for owner-occupied homes.) Assembling these factors together into a five-year forecast for Yorkville suggests that demand for new homes will equate to 557 units from 2015 to 2019, or an average of 111 annually. Given current tenure trends, it is expected that roughly 75 percent of demand will emanate from the owner-occupied sector, equating to 412 units overall for the forecast period, or 82 units annually. Likewise, 25 percent of demand will occur within the rental sector, equating to 146 units overall or 29 annually. Townhomes along Cummins Street 35 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE As this forecast suggests, overall demand for new homes in Yorkville is expected to remain relatively soft over the coming five-year period. However, near to mid-term opportunities do exist to responsibly bolster the residential market within the City while addressing the housing needs of potentially underserved populations. These opportunities include the following: Senior and Active Adult Housing Needs Shifting demographics within the City – most specifically the aging of the population – will play a primary role in determining housing needs over the near and mid-term period. Opportunities can be expected to strengthen over the coming five years in the following areas: • Senior Housing: By 2019, more than 20 percent of Yorkville residents are expected to be age 55 or older. This includes nearly 800 residents age 75 or older. Yet the total current supply of service-oriented housing geared for seniors is just 225 assisted living units – of which just 87 are market rate – and 79 skilled nursing beds. • Active Adult Housing: Similarly, age-restricted active adult housing geared toward those 55 and older is lacking within the City. (One exception being the recently approved Heritage Meadows development, which will bring 47 age-targeted single family homes to the market.) Additional active adult homes in small-scale, maintenance-free communities could help fill this gap. Appropriate product types include small-lot detached single family homes, along with duplex and fourplex configurations. Conventional Production Sector Opportunities In the conventional production sector (i.e., traditional single family attached or detached home developments, often referred to as “tract” housing) near to mid-term opportunities are more limited. However, Yorkville should continue to encourage the responsible build-out of currently active developments. Additionally, a priority should be placed on the identification and recruitment of home builders and other entities interested in investing in currently dormant developments where development infrastructure is already in place. While it may be difficult, in the near term, to gain the interest of national home building companies (though two – Ryland Homes and Pulte, Inc. – currently operate within the City), smaller local and regional builders (some of whom are already building in Yorkville and the surrounding areas), would be prime candidates. The current RENEW program, which provides building permit fee rebates on qualifying spec and model home construction, serves as a prime example of a creative City-led incentive that encourages responsible home building. Regardless, the large number of entitled lots in these dormant developments dwarfs anticipated market demand. Reasonable expectations should be set, knowing that some of these developments are unlikely to be fully built-out in any but the most distant planning scenarios. Affordable Housing Needs Finally, our analysis of housing affordability within the City suggests that a need exists for more affordable housing options, particularly within the rental sector. As shown previously, 50 percent of renter households within the City may be hard-pressed to afford their current rents. Yet just one all-ages rental development providing rent assistance exists within the City. Additional high quality affordable rental units would thus help meet the needs of the low- to moderate- income population and satisfy a large portion of forecast demand for rental housing. LOOKING TOWARD THE LONGER TERM Within a longer term planning framework (i.e., five years or longer), additional housing market opportunities emerge. Along with the potential acceleration of production market demand are the following, more location-specific, opportunities: • Transportation Oriented Development (TOD): Metra is currently investigating the feasibility of extending its commuter rail service to Yorkville. If the conclusions reached are favorable and a station is built, new opportunity for residential development could emerge in the area around the station. Such opportunity would most likely emanate from the moderate-density attached for-sale sector (e.g., townhomes) and the rental apartment sector. • Downtown Development: If Yorkville can continue to revitalize and strengthen its downtown core – and assuming suitable buildings and/or land could be found – opportunity for denser market-rate rental and for sale housing, including residential- over-retail, could emerge. Such housing could be developed either in existing renovated buildings or new, appropriately designed and scaled developments. Table 3.11: New Home Demand Derivation 2015 - 2019 Source: Goodman Williams Group; household forecast by Esri Households, CY Estimate 6,240 Households, 5Y Forecast 6,701 Projected HH Growth 461 Housing Units, CY Estimate 6,304 Occupied 5,835 Owner-Occupied (Percent)74.7 Renter-Occupied (Percent)25.3 Vacant (Percent)7.4 Expected Loss, Units (0.26%/year)82 Gross Housing Demand, Units 543 Owner-Occupied 406 Vacancy Requirement (1.5 Percent)6 Total Owner-Occupied Demand 412 Per Year 82 Renter-Occupied 137 Vacancy Requirement (6.0 Percent)8 Total Renter-Occupied Demand 146 Per Year 29 Total New Construction Demand 557 PER YEAR 111 36 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.7 - Residential Zoning DistrictsGraph 3.7 - Residential Zoning Districts E-1 Estate Residence R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residence R-2D Two-Family Attached Residence R-3 Multifamily Attached Residence R-4 General Multifamily Residence The E-1 Estate District zoning designation is intended to accommodate large-lot, single-family residential land uses within a rural setting. Other permitted land uses within this district are deemed compatible and conducive to the low-density, tranquil, and open space environment provided in the E-1 Estate District. Permitted uses include single-family housing, schools, golf courses, parks, playgrounds, and some public utility facilities. The maximum density in the E-1 Zone is one unit per acre and the minimum lot size is one acre. Building heights are limited to 3-stories or 40 feet. The R-1 Single Family Suburban Residence zoning designation is intended to create a spacious suburban residential neighborhood environment on parcels of at least 18,000 square feet. To protect the character of the district, permitted uses are limited to single- family detached housing yet accommodate other compatible and complimentary cultural, religious, educational and public uses. Permitted uses include single-family housing, schools, golf courses, parks, playgrounds, and some public utility facilities. Building heights are limited to 2.5-stories or 30 feet. The R-2 Duplex, Two-Family Attached Residence zoning designation is intended for moderate density duplex dwelling structures on lots of at least 15,000 square feet. This district is primarily located off of a major thoroughfare or as a transitional land use adjacent to single-family residences. Therefore, the R-2 Duplex district is intended to accommodate single-family attached dwelling structures of a size and character that is compatible with the surrounding single-family detached residential districts and adjacent to commercial, office and retail space. Permitted uses include single-family housing, duplex housing, schools, golf courses, parks, playgrounds, and some public utility facilities. The maximum density in the R-2D Zone is 4.8 units per acre and building heights are limited to 2.5-stories or 30 feet. The R-3, Multifamily Attached Residence zoning designation is intended for moderate density dwelling structures on lots of at least 9,000 square feet. This district also accommodates a roadway wide enough to park on both sides of the street. Permitted uses include single-family housing, duplex housing, townhouse housing, multifamily housing, schools, golf courses, parks, playgrounds, and some public utility facilities. The maximum density in the R-3 Zone is five units per acre and building heights are limited to 6-stories or 80 feet. The number of units per building is limited to six. The R-4, General Multifamily Residence zoning designation is intended for moderate-to-high density dwelling structures on lots of at least 15,000 square feet. This district is suitable for creating a transition between the business/commercial uses and the surrounding lower density residence uses. This district may accommodate other compatible and complimentary cultural, religious, educational and public uses. Permitted uses include single-family housing, duplex housing, townhouse housing, multifamily housing, schools, golf courses, parks, playgrounds, and some public utility facilities. The maximum density in the R-4 Zone is eight units per acre and building heights are limited to 6-stories or 80 feet. E-1 311 ACRES R-3 740 ACRES R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence The R-2 Single Family Traditional Residence zoning designation is intended to accommodate smaller, more conventional suburban residential neighborhood on lots of at least 12,000 square feet. The district’s moderately-low density allows for flexibility in site design, and creates a transitional land use between rural and suburban residential settings. The primary permitted uses are single-family detached housing in addition to compatible and complimentary cultural, religious, educational and public uses. Permitted uses include single-family housing, schools, golf courses, parks, playgrounds, and some public utility facilities. The maximum density in the R-2 Zone is three units per acre and building heights are limited to 2.5-stories or 30 feet. R-1 454 ACRES R-4 450 ACRES R-2 5,161 ACRES R-2D 143 ACRES RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Residential development is regulated by one of six residential zoning districts within the Yorkville Zoning Ordinance, outlined below: Figure 3.7: Residential Zoning Districts 37 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.8 - Undeveloped Residential Zoning Areas UNDEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL ZONING AREAS Apart from the entitled residentially-zoned areas in Yorkville, there are a number of undeveloped zoned areas totaling 2,513 acres of land (Figure 3.8). These areas are located in Yorkville’s northern and southeastern quadrants and are zoned in different categories from E-1 Estate to R-4 General Multifamily Residence. Most of the undeveloped land is zoned R-2 Single Family Traditional Residence. Total potential build-out in the areas would be over 8,900 housing units, which is unlikely to occur in the near-term. ZONING DISTRICT ACRES DENSITY POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL UNITS E-1 Estate Residence 226 1 226 R-1 Single-Family Suburban Residence 176 2.42 425 R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence 1,436 3 4,308 R-2D Two-Family Attached Residence 78 4.8 374 R-3 Multifamily Attached Residence 379 5 1,895 R-4 General Multifamily Residence 218 8 1,744 Totals 2,513 -8,972 Figure 3.8: Undeveloped Residential Zoning AreasTable 3.12: Undeveloped Residential Zoning Areas Single-Family Residential Housing at the Bristol Bay Subdivision Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 38 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SUMMARY OF KEY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE OBSERVATIONS The following are key observations and issues related to residential land use in Yorkville: • Yorkville housing stock can largely be categorized between the traditional housing constructed when Yorkville and Bristol were first developing in the mid to late 1800s to just after World War II, as represented in the Traditional Neighborhood Center, and the annexed subdivisions that comprise the majority of housing built in the last two to four decades. Approximately 59 percent of homes built in Yorkville were constructed between 2000 and 2009. • With its older, more historic housing stock, the Traditional Neighborhood Center represents an opportunity to encourage housing rehabilitation and to market it as a desirable place to live near downtown and the Fox River waterfront. • Yorkville, like most communities around the country after the economic recession of 2008, suffered a significant slowdown in housing construction and a number of foreclosures. However, its current housing vacancy rate (7.4 percent), although higher than Kendall County, is not significant and does not represent an imbalance in Yorkville’s housing market. • Nearly half of new homes built in Yorkville are within the $200,000 to $300,000, which represents a narrow and homogenous range of housing product in Yorkville. Other housing products offered at different pricing points could help to diversify the housing stock and offer additional housing opportunities for new residents. TYPE OF UNITS NUMBER OF UNITS ABSORPTION RATE / YEAR YEARS TO BUILD-OUT COMPLETION DATE Platted Units (Not Built)3,477 100 34 years 2049 Entitled Units (Not Platted or Built)3,655 100 36 years 2085 Undeveloped Residential Zoning Areas Capacity 8,972 100 89 years 2174 Table 3.8: Residential Build-Out Projections • Yorkville has a number of dormant developments for which roadway and utility infrastructure is in place. This represents another 7,406, and of that total, 5,628 units are not yet built – a volume that is extremely unlikely to be absorbed at any point in the near term given the slow-down of residential construction within the Chicago region (See Table 3.13 for overview of existing subdivisions). • A five-year forecast for Yorkville suggests that demand for new homes will equate to 557 units from 2015 to 2019, or an average of 111 annually. Roughly 75 percent of demand will emanate from the owner-occupied sector; in addition, 25 percent of demand will occur within the rental sector equating to 146 units overall or 29 annually. • Overall, it is estimated that given current market conditions, it would take anywhere from 34 to 89 years to build out all residentially platted, entitled and zoned land in Yorkville (see Table 3.8). This signifies that some residentially- zoned and unplatted developments may not be built, at least in the near and mid-terms. Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 39 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.9 - Active Residential Subdivisions Figure 3.9: Residential Developments (as of February 2015) SUBDIVISION KEY UNIT TYPE TOTAL UNITS PLATTED TOTAL UNITS ENTITLED UNITS BUILT % BUILD OUT PLATTED % BUILD OUT ENTITLED LEFT TO BUILD PLATTED LEFT TO BUILD ENTITLED Autumn Creek A Single Family 317 317 270 85.2%85.2%47 47 Town Homes 151 151 140 92.7%92.7%11 11 Blackberry Woods B Single Family 132 132 34 25.8%25.8%98 98 Briarwood C Single Family 41 41 19 46.3%46.3%22 22 Bristol Bay D Single Family 467 467 213 45.6%45.6%254 254 Duplex 182 182 0 0.0%0.0%182 182 Town Homes 802 802 224 27.9%27.9%578 578 Condominiums 624 624 336 53.8%53.8%288 288 Caledonia E Single Family 206 206 50 24.3%24.3%156 156 Country Hills F Single Family 138 138 27 19.6%19,6%111 111 Duplex 34 34 0 0.0%0.0%34 34 Grande Reserve G Single Family 953 1,324 263 27.6%19.9%690 1,061 Duplex 62 394 26 41.9%6.6%36 368 Town Homes 227 632 153 67.4%24.2%74 479 Condominiums 0 300 0 0.0%0.0%0 300 Heartland Circle H Single Family 250 250 216 86.4%86.4%34 34 Heartland Meadows -Age Rest. SF 47 47 0 0.0%0.0%47 47 Kendall Marketplace J Single Family 0 28 0 0.0%0.0%0 28 Town Homes 0 164 0 0.0%0.0%0 164 Kendallwood Estates K Single Family 83 83 0 0.0%0.0%83 83 Prairie Meadows L Single Family 164 164 116 70.7%70.7%48 48 Multi Family 0 268 0 0.0%0.0%0 268 Prestwick of Yorkville M Single Family 108 356 4 3.7%1.1%104 352 Raintree Village N Single Family 402 402 206 51.2%51.2%196 196 Duplex 124 124 65 52.4%52.4%59 59 Town Homes 128 128 20 15.6%15.6%108 108 Westbury East Village O Single Family 0 293 0 0.0%0.0%0 293 Town Homes 0 605 0 0.0%0.0%0 605 Westbury South Village P Single Family 0 181 0 0.0%0.0%0 181 Town Homes 0 294 0 0.0%0.0%0 294 Whispering Meadows Q Single Family 295 445 217 73.6%48.8%78 228 Windett Ridge R Single Family 261 277 122 46.7%44.0%139 155 TOTALS --6,198 9,853 2,721 43.9%27.6%3,477 7,132 Table 3.13: Residential Developments (as of February 2015) A B J K C D E G H L F M N O P Q R More than 75% Built-Out Approximately 50% Built-Out Less than 25% Built-Out Source: United City of Yorkville 40 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.10 - Existing Commercial Land Use Areas North of the Fox River COMMERCIAL LAND USE Within the Planning Area, Yorkville’s commercial areas comprises 849 acres, which represents 1.9 percent of Yorkville’s total land area. This section summarizes general commercial land use and market conditions. Commercial land use in Yorkville can largely be divided between the downtown Yorkville and other newly- developed commercial land area along Illinois Route 47 and U.S. Route 34 and along certain stretches of Illinois Route 47 south of the Fox River. Current retail facilities within the City of Yorkville consist primarily of large format (“big box”) stores located along Illinois 47 and U.S. Route 34 and community and neighborhood-scale centers offering general merchandise, groceries, specialty retailers, and food and beverage-establishments. In many instances the retail inventory was built in anticipation of the “rooftops” that were entitled prior to the recession. DOWNTOWN YORKVILLE For the purposes of this Comprehensive Plan, downtown Yorkville is defined by Van Emmon Park on the east, Orange and East Fox Streets on the south, Morgan Street to the west, and the Fox River on the north, However, Yorkville’s historic downtown commercial core is mostly bounded by the Fox River on the north, Fox Street to the south, Mill Street to the east, and Main Street to the west, and consists of mainly one to two-story traditional commercial buildings facing Illinois Route 47 and a mix of low-scale commercial and light and heavy industrial uses in its eastern quadrant near Mill Street. On its western side, the downtown faces a traditional single family neighborhood and the Kendall County Courthouse and its associated complex of offices along South Main Street and West Ridge Street. Historically, the downtown comprised a mix of commercial and industrial uses given its location along the Fox River and the rail spur that runs along Hydraulic Street. Remnants of industrial uses remain in the downtown and brownfield land has been identified on parcels just east of the traditional building street wall along Illinois Route 47. Figure 3.10: Existing Commercial Land Use Areas North of the Fox River Table 3.14: Existing Commercial Land Use Areas SUBDIVISION KEY ACRES EST. SF Kendall Marketplace 1 118 751,644 Cimarron Ridge 2 15 130,369 Countryside Center 3 25 177,859 Yorkville Business Center 4 30 336,727 Menards Commons 5 65 252,994 Fox Hill 6 4 23,737 Aurora Textile 7 7 24,556 Yorkville Marketplace 8 9 117,941 Landmark Center 9 5 36,042 Parkway Addition 10 6 57,248 Yorkville Market Square 11 1 17.807 Heartland Center 12 4 95,105 Inland Office Center 13 1 10,576 Bristol (Original Town)14 2 8,443 Prairie Pointe 15 10 46,637 Huntsville 16 1 5,912 Perkins 17 3 21,201 North Bridge Street 18 1 2,932 Raging Waves Waterpark 19 42 3,149 Corn Holdings LLC 20 46 0 Rush-Copley 21 42 221,370 1 2 3 8 11 12 15 16 13 14 18 17 10 9 5 6 19 21 20 4 7 Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 41 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE In recent years, some buildings along the north side of Hydraulic Street have been converted to residential use and new investment has occurred in adjacent Bicentennial Riverfront Park, transforming it into a significant Yorkville destination. Downtown buildings are generally in good condition although several along Route 47, Hydraulic Street, and Van Emmon Street could be candidates for building and storefront rehabilitation and adaptive use. There is also a significant need to improve streetscape conditions and the pedestrian environment, especially given the recent widening of Illinois Route 47 and the elimination of on-street parking. Community stakeholders have consistently commented that Illinois Route 47 is now a barrier to pedestrian movement in the downtown district, and with the loss of on-street parking along Route 47, finding areas to accommodate new parking has become a significant challenge given downtown’s tight building development pattern. However, given these constraints, it appears that downtown Yorkville is underutilized and that a more strategic and efficient use of land could accommodate new development along with the rehabilitation of its existing historic commercial buildings. Graph 3.1 - Existing Downtown Land Uses Figure 3.11: Existing Downtown Land Uses Commercial buildings on Van Emmon Street Traditional downtown commercial building 42 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE DOWNTOWN ZONING DISTRICTS Downtown land use is regulated by several zoning districts outlined below: Graph 3.1 - Downtown Zoning Districts Figure 3.12: Downtown Zoning Districts B-2 Retail Commerce The B-2 Retail Commerce Business District zoning designation is intended for the location of retail shops and stores offering goods to the population. Buildings in this district are allowed to build on a majority of the lot with diminished setbacks. This allows shops and stores to maximize retail space while supporting a pedestrian friendly environment in retail shopping areas. This district also encourages dwelling units located above the first floor of a permitted use to create mixed use buildings. The minimum lot size for the B-2 Zone is 10,000 square feet with a maximin building coverage of 80 percent. There is no front yard requirement, however 20 foot side and rear yards are required. Building heights are limited to 6-stories or 80 feet. B-1 Local Business The B-1 Local Business District zoning designation is intended for the location of commercial and professional facilities that are especially useful in close proximity to residential areas. The district is designed to provide convenient shopping and services that meet the needs and enhances the quality of life for surrounding residential neighborhoods. This district also encourages dwelling units located above the first floor of a permitted use to create mixed use buildings. The minimum lot size for the B-1 Zone is 10,000 square feet with a maximin building coverage of 50 percent. 30 foot front yards are required with 20 foot side and rear yards also required. Building heights are limited to 6-stories or 80 feet. B-3 General Business The B-3 General Business District zoning designation is intended for the location of a broad range of commercial uses, including small scale and large scale businesses. These uses are usually oriented toward automobile access and visibility; therefore they are typically set along major arterial roads. The businesses in this district are meant to serve regional as well as local customers. This district also encourages dwelling units located above the first floor of a permitted use to create mixed use buildings. The minimum lot size for the B-3 Zone is 10,000 square feet with a maximin building coverage of 50 percent. 50 foot front yards are required with 20 foot side and rear yards also required. Building heights are limited to 6-stories or 80 feet. M-1 Limited Manufacturing The M-1 Limited Manufacturing District zoning designation is intended to provide for the location of manufacturing, industrial, and related uses of a limited nature in size that will not have a harmful environmental effect on surrounding areas. The maximum lot coverage in the M-1 Zone is 60 percent. 25 foot front yards are required while no rear yards are required. Side yards must be a minimum of 10 percent of the lot up to twenty feet. There are no building height limits, but floor area ratio is limited to 0.8. OS-2 Open Space (Recreational) The OS-2 Open Space (Recreational) District is intended to govern the use of city-owned recreational areas and park land. Permitted uses include community centers, playgrounds, recreation centers, amphitheaters, and outdoor music venues. Front yards are required to be at least thirty feet and side yards are required to be at least ten feet or a distance equal to 50% of the building height, whichever is greater, when adjacent to a residential district. Rear yards are required to be at least twenty feet or a distance equal to 50% of the building height, whichever is greater, when adjacent to a residential district. Building height is limited to six-stories or eighty feet. R-2 Single-Family Traditional Residence The R-2 Single Family Traditional Residence zoning designation is intended to accommodate smaller, more conventional suburban residential neighborhood on lots of at least 12,000 square feet. The primary permitted uses are single-family detached housing in addition to compatible and complimentary cultural, religious, educational and public uses. Permitted uses include single-family housing, schools, golf courses, parks, playgrounds, and some public utility facilities. The maximum density in the R-2 Zone is three units per acre and building heights are limited to 2.5-stories or 30 feet. R-4 General Multifamily Residence The R-4, General Multifamily Residence zoning designation is intended for moderate-to-high density dwelling structures on lots of at least 15,000 square feet. This district is suitable for creating a transition between the business/commercial uses and the surrounding lower density residence uses. This district may accommodate other compatible and complimentary cultural, religious, educational and public uses. Permitted uses include single-family housing, duplex housing, townhouse housing, multifamily housing, schools, golf courses, parks, playgrounds, and some public utility facilities. The maximum density in the R-4 Zone is eight units per acre and building heights are limited to 6-stories or 80 feet. 43 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.11 - Existing Commercial Land Use Areas South of the Fox River Figure 3.13: Existing Commercial Land Use Areas South of the Fox River Table 3.15: Existing Commercial Land Use Areas SUBDIVISION KEY ACRES EST. SF Black’s Addition 29 11 115,649 Fountain Village 30 15 44,855 Stagecoach Crossing 31 2 53,943 Prairie Garden 32 8 73,471 Cozy Corner 33 1 21,984 Yorkville (Original Town)34 2 9,727 Johnson & Hughes 35 1 6,598 Walz 36 41 9,577 Highpoint Road & Route 71 37 61 0 Cross Evangelical Lutheran Church & School 38 17 83,862 29 34 30 31 36 37 38 35 32 33 ILLINOIS ROUTE 47 AND U.S. ROUTE 34 CORRIDORS (NORTH) The intersection of Illinois Route 47 and U.S. 34 (Veterans Parkway) can be considered the major hub for commercial activity in Yorkville, given the location of large format retailers and neighborhood- scaled centers offering general merchandise, groceries, specialty retailers, and food and beverage establishments. Such retailers and businesses include Walgreens and McDonalds, Menards, Starbucks, Jewel Foods, the NCG Cinemas, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut and Office Max. There is also a number of other locally- owned and regional businesses and chains located in this cluster. Further to the west along Veterans Parkway are other commercial developments, including the Kendall Marketplace where big-box stores such as Target, Marshalls, and Home Depot are located, and smaller office-commercial complexes housing restaurants, service businesses and medical offices. Across the street from the Kendall Marketplace is the Rush-Copley Medical Center. North of Veterans Parkway, along Illinois Route 47, are smaller strip mall developments such as the Yorkville Business Center, which is leasing space to several small retailers and businesses. General urban design conditions are good in this area although signage and landscaping could be more consistent from one development to another. The commercial developments along these areas are mostly of recent construction, one to two-story in scale, and are characterized by generous set-backs from the roadways, landscaping and parking areas in front of the buildings. In the Kendall Marketplace, the setback from the roadway to the inline retail is quite significant, although much of the intervening land has been reserved for outlot development. In total, in Yorkville’s northern quadrant, there are over 20 different commercial subdivisions totaling more than 2,00,000 square feet of commercial space. Several commercial subdivisions have been entitled but not yet developed. ILLINOIS ROUTES 47 CORRIDOR (SOUTH) South of the Fox River, there are more than ten different commercial subdivisions totaling more than 400,000 square feet of commercial space, located mostly along Illinois Route 47. A mix of older and newer developments characterize the commercial activities along this portion of Route 47 with businesses that range from restaurants and fast food places to drive-in banks to small strip centers housing a variety of small businesses. Developments are generally set back closer to the roadway than those located north at the Illinois Route 47 and Veterans Parkway intersection. General urban design and streetscape conditions can be improved in this area with more consistent landscaping, signage and wayfinding. Commercial uses in Yorkville Business Center, Illinois Route 47 Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 44 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE COMMERCIAL MARKET DATA AND ANALYSIS This section of our report focuses on characteristics of Yorkville’s current retail market and examines future retail opportunities within the City in the context of larger market area conditions and trends. METROPOLITAN CHICAGO AND FAR SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN RETAIL TRENDS CBRE, a prominent national brokerage firm, includes all of Kendall County in its Far Southwest Suburban Submarket. Within the market, CBRE currently tracks performance metrics on 48 prominent retail properties encompassing 8.6 million square feet of space. As of the first quarter of 2015, vacancy rates within the submarket stood at 6.0 percent – the third lowest among all submarkets within Metro Chicago and 360 basis points lower than that for the area as a whole, at 9.6 percent. Market conditions within the Far Southwest Suburban Submarket, as well as within the Chicago region as a whole, continue to improve with the ongoing regional and national recovery that has followed the recession. In particular, grocery-anchored shopping centers have performed well in the current environment, with market entrants such as Mariano’s spurring demand for new space and escalating competition for market share among grocers in many market areas. The growing popularity of on-line shopping has impacted some traditional “brick and mortar” stores, particularly in the apparel, electronics, and office supply sectors. And several prominent big box retailers have either closed stores or scaled back expansion plans within the region. Generally, however, current signs point toward continued strengthening of the regional suburban retail market in the near and mid-term, with redevelopment and re-use outpacing greenfield (i.e., vacant land) development. Household growth will continue to be key to attracting new retail development. COMPETITIVE RETAIL DESTINATIONS Retail centers within Yorkville compete with those in the surrounding municipalities of Oswego and Montgomery for area consumers’ shopping dollars. Interviews with residents and other stakeholders in Yorkville indicate that residents travel, in particular, to large centers in Oswego and, to a lesser extent, Montgomery for major shopping trips. (Plano, while located directly west of Yorkville, offers little in the way of destination shopping.) Three large multi-tenant shopping centers located along the U.S. 34 corridor in Oswego, encompassing nearly 1.7 million square feet of space, offer a wide variety of shopping and dining options, with major tenants including Walmart Supercenter, Kohl’s, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Home Depot, Target, and Buffalo Wild Wings. A fourth center, Ogden Hills in Montgomery, has more than 500,000 square feet of space and is anchored by Menard’s, JC Penny, and Sephora. A Sam’s Club was added to the location in the fall of 2014. YORKVILLE RETAIL MARKET CONDITIONS AND TRENDS Municipal sales tax revenues provide a proxy measure of overall retail activity and market growth. An examination of sales tax revenues for Yorkville and neighboring communities shows that retail activity in Yorkville grew only modestly during the ten years between 2005 and 2014, rising just 8.3 percent overall. During this same period, however, the neighboring municipalities of Oswego and Montgomery experienced high rates of sales tax growth as the U.S. 34 corridor was transformed into a major regional shopping destination. In Oswego, sales tax revenues grew more than 90 percent during this period, while Montgomery experienced growth of more than 78 percent. Of neighboring municipalities, only Plano saw a lower growth rate than Yorkville, at 2.6 percent. Graph 2.1 shows percentage of municipal sales taxes collected in Yorkville in 2014 by major SIC (Standard Industrial Classification) code shows that General Merchandise and Drugs & Miscellaneous Retail each accounted for more than 20 percent of retail sales. Lumber, Building, and Hardware sales accounted for 17 percent of goods sold, while Food (i.e., grocery) and Drinking and Eating Places each accounted for 11 percent. Notably, apparel accounted for just three percent of goods sold, suggesting that most residents of Yorkville travel elsewhere to purchase clothing. YORKVILLE’S RETAIL INVENTORY Most of Yorkville’s retail inventory is located along the Illinois 47 and U.S. 34 corridors. Average daily traffic counts in excess of 15,000 along Illinois 47 and 13,000 to nearly 20,000 along U.S. 34 made these corridors desirable locations for many regional and national retailers. Yorkville’s two primary shopping centers-- Kendall Marketplace and Yorkville Marketplace—were both built prior to the recession in anticipation of strong household growth. Since the Great Recession, however, the retail market in Yorkville has remained soft, with expectations for future growth largely unrealized. At this time, high vacancy rates plague Kendall Marketplace and Yorkville Marketplace and both centers remain only partially built, with the development of additional phases and outparcels delayed indefinitely. • Kendall Marketplace: Developed in 2008 by Chicago-based Harlem Irving Companies, Kendall Marketplace was conceived as a major regional destination, with 750,000 square feet of gross leasable area (GLA). It is built on 130 acres at the northwest corner of U.S. 34 and Cannonball Trail. Anchor tenants include: Marshalls, Super Target, Kohl’s, Dick’s Sporting Goods, and Home Depot. Currently, 19 retail spaces out of a total of 36 are vacant and available for lease, according to information from leasing agent Jones Lang LaSalle. In addition, numerous outparcels remain undeveloped. In the second quarter 2015, Greenwood Global purchased Kendall Marketplace from Bank of America, which seized the property through foreclosure in 2013. According to Kendall County records, the shopping center’s anchor tenants (Target, Kohl’s, Home Depot, and Dick’s Sporting Goods) own their own stores and were not included in the sale. In addition to the significant vacancies in the center, 19 outparcels remain undeveloped. Source: Illinois Department of Revenue Graph 2.1: 2014 Calendar Year - Sales made during January 2014 through December 2014 General Merchandise 22% Food 11% Agriculture & All Others 6% Automotive & Filling Stations 6% Manufacturers 3% Apparel 3% Drinking and Eating Places 11%Lumber, Bldg, Hardware 17% Drugs & Misc. Retail 21% 45 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Municipal Retail Sales Taxes Collected Montgomery Oswego Plano Yorkville 2005 $1,586,039 $3,215,658 $1,667,331 $2,479,311 2006 $1,764,974 $3,384,169 $1,687,246 $2,662,379 2007 $2,160,404 $4,384,546 $1,609,423 $2,586,447 2008 $2,620,735 $4,600,736 $1,489,449 $2,503,286 2009 $2,366,794 $4,669,432 $1,320,877 $2,394,036 2010 $2,507,094 $4,825,359 $1,306,385 $2,581,452 2011 $2,651,204 $5,011,615 $1,391,337 $2,554,296 2012 $2,680,321 $5,356,105 $1,550,507 $2,470,066 2013 $2,837,936 $5,429,931 $1,608,279 $2,592,877 2014 $3,025,900 $5,734,792 $1,710,686 $2,684,381 Change %+ 90.8 + 78.3 + 2.6 + 8.3 Retail sales taxes in Yorkville fell during the recessionary years and have risen only modestly since 2005. However, taxes collected in Montgomery and Oswego have increased more dramatically than those in Yorkville and Plano. $ 20 0 6 20 0 5 20 0 7 20 0 8 20 0 9 20 1 0 20 1 1 20 1 2 20 1 3 $6 million $5 million $4 million $3 million $2 million $1 million 20 1 4 Major Multi-Tenant Shopping Centers In and Around Yorkville Center Name Location Size (SF)Major Tenants Kendall Marketplace Yorkville 745,000 Kohl's, Dick's Sporting Goods, Home Depot, Marshalls, Super Target Yorkville Marketplace Yorkville 145,000 Jewel-Osco, Office Max, Panera Brea, Starbucks, GNC Prairie Market Oswego 720,000 Wal-Mart Supercenter, Koh's, Dick's Sporting Goods, Best Buy Gerry Centennial Plaza Oswego 375,000 Meijer, Michael's, Bed Bath & Beyond, Old Navy, Buffalo Wild Wings Oswego Commons Oswego 600,000 Home Depot, Target, T.J. Maxx, Office Max, Portillo's, Hobby Lobby Ogden Hills Montgomery 500,000 Sam's Club, Menard's, JC Penny, Office Depot, Sephora Yorkville’s Kendall Marketplace is one of the largest multi-tenant shopping centers in the area. However, a number of competing centers are located nearby in Oswego and Montgomery. 37 5 , 0 0 0 56 2 , 5 0 0 75 0 , 0 0 0 18 7 , 5 0 0 0 Kendall Marketplace Prairie Market Gerry Centennial Plaza Oswego Commons Yorkville Marketplace Ogden Hills • Yorkville Marketplace: Located at the Southeast corner of the U.S. 34 and Illinois 47 intersection, Yorkville Marketplace is a neighborhood center with 111,591 square feet of leasable space. It is anchored by Jewel-Osco, Office Max, and Panera Bread. Additional tenants include, among others, Starbucks and GNC. Four spaces are currently vacant and available for lease by The Peak Group, a Naperville-based real estate company. The center, developed in 2007 by Highland Park- based Tucker Development, was purchased in April of 2015 by Inland Real Estate Group for $24.5 million. In addition to the existing space, original plans called for a second phase which, if built, would add roughly 100,000 more square feet to the center. Inland has not said if it intends to go forward with this expansion at any time in the future. In addition to these two primary shopping centers, a number of national chains offering general merchandise, convenience and specialty goods, and service retail are located in smaller strip centers or stand-alone locations. Of particular note is the mostly undeveloped Yorkville Crossing shopping center located north and east of the Illinois 47 and U.S. 34 intersection. In addition to the anchor, Menard’s, current retailers include Ace Hardware; AutoZone, discount grocer Aldi, and thrift store Goodwill. A planned Walmart was never built. A variety of eating and drinking establishments and entertainment facilities are also located along the Illinois 47 and U.S. 34 corridors. These include a variety of fast food, fast casual, and full-service restaurants, bars and food-serving pubs, a multi-screen movie theater (NCG Yorkville Cinemas), a bowling alley (Yorkville Bowl), and, further to the north, Raging Waves Waterpark – the largest waterpark in Illinois. In addition two national chain-affiliated hotels are located in Yorkville: a 77-room Hampton Inn and a 42- room Super 8, both located near the Illinois 47 and U.S. 34 intersection. Source: Goodman Williams Group Source: Illinois Department of Revenue 46 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE INDUSTRY SUMMARY DEMAND SUPPLY RETAIL GAP RETAIL POTENTIAL RETAIL SALES Total Retail Trade and Food & Drink $250,856,462 $135,372,463 $115,483,999 Total Retail Trade $222,523,143 $117,060,736 $105,462,407 Total Food Services & Drinking Places $28,333,319 $18,311,727 $10,021,592 BY CATEGORY:DEMAND SUPPLY RETAIL GAP Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers $50,593,778 $1,421,668 $49,172,110 Gasoline Stations $23,255,645 $24,767,516 -$1,511,871 Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores $5,414,693 $945,635 $4,469,058 Electronics & Appliance Stores $6,596,347 $5,141,320 $1,455,027 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores $8,853,328 $20,117,371 -$11,264,043 Food & Beverage Stores $38,285,398 $11,444,297 $26,841,101 Health & Personal Care Stores $21,615,439 $16,801,147 $4,814,292 Clothing & Clothing Accessories Stores $15,564,080 $1,893,639 $13,670,441 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores $6,374,917 $6,724,457 -$349,540 General Merchandise Stores $40,798,099 $22,482,042 $18,316,057 Miscellaneous Store Retailers $5,171,419 $5,321,644 -$150,225 Food Services & Drinking Places $28,333,319 $18,311,727 $10,021,592 DOWNTOWN YORKVILLE The downtown Yorkville commercial district, generally encompassing the area bound by Fox Street to the south, Benjamin Street to the east, Morgan Street to the west, and the Fox River to the north, has a small cluster of dining, entertainment, and outdoor recreation associated with the Fox River. Retailers and restaurants tend to orient their storefronts to their parking areas away from Illinois 47 / Bridge Street, leaving very little foot traffic present along the busy Illinois 47 thoroughfare. LEAKAGE ANALYSIS One analytic tool used to identify possible retail opportunities within a market area is a calculation of the leakage, or gap, between the expenditure potential of households and estimates of actual sales from area businesses. For the purpose of this study, we define the retail gap as the difference between the demand from households residing in Yorkville and the estimate of sales from existing Yorkville stores. A negative number suggests that sales (supply) exceed local demand, indicating that stores are attracting shoppers from other communities. A positive number suggests that demand exceeds local supply, indicating that shoppers are travelling outside the City for these purchases. In most categories, as shown in the following table, local demand in Yorkville is being spent in stores outside the City. Retail Demand from households in the City of Yorkville exceeds sales estimates by approximately $115 million. The retail gaps are highest in the following categories: • Nearly half of total leakage ($49.2 million) comes from Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers. Car Dealerships have high sales volumes and tend to locate along major commercial arteries in more densely populated communities than Yorkville. • The Food and Beverage Stores is leaking $26.8 million. While the City of Yorkville’s boundaries do not represent a trade area for a particular grocer, this leakage figure suggests that Yorkville could potentially support another mid-size grocery store. BUSINESS NAME ADDRESS TYPE OF BUSINESS CATEGORY Yorkville Glass and Mirror 123 E. Hydraulic Street House Repairs Business Service GCP Sales 204 Heustis Street Golf-Carts Business Service Jack Hudson Insurance 108 S. Bridge Street Insurance Business Service Grieter's Mechanical 121 E. Hydraulic Street Mechanical Contractor Business Service Upper Crust Catering 109 S. Bridge Street Catering Business Service Caring Hands Thrift Shop 220 S. Bridge Street Former Thrift Store Closed/Vacant Record Newspapers 222 South Bridge Street Newspaper Publisher Office Old Second Bank 102 E. Van Emmon St.Bank Closed/Vacant Vacant 208 S. Bridge Street Office Closed/Vacant Vacant 135 E. Van Emmon Office Closed/Vacant Residential Homesites 214 South Bridge Street Office Closed/Vacant Mongolian 211 219 S. Bridge Street Food/Beverage Closed/Vacant Cobblestone Bakery and Bistro 101 W. Van Emmon Street Food/Beverage Closed/Vacant Law Offices 103 E. Van Emmon St.Law Office Closed/Vacant Semper Fi Yard Service 212 S. Bridge Street Yard Work Closed/Vacant Ginger & Soul 131 E. Hydraulic Street Food/Beverage Food/Beverage Rivers Edge Theater 217 South Bridge Street Theater Entertainment Rowdy's 210 South Bridge Street Bar Food/Beverage Foxy's Ice Cream 131 E. Hydraulic Street Food/Beverage Food/Beverage Casa Santiago 227 Heustis Street Food/Beverage Food/Beverage Barley Fork 209 South Bridge Street Food/Beverage Food/Beverage Kendall County Farm Bureau 111 E. Van Emmon Office Government Masonic Office Lodge 214 South Bridge Street Office Lodge HD Backhoe Service LLC 109 S. Bridge Street Contractors Office Foxes Den Hairstyling 109 S. Bridge Street Hair Salon Personal Service Satya Healing Market 202 S. Bridge Street Healing Center Personal Service Kairi Kearns Therapy 202 S. Bridge Street Therapy Office Personal Service Dickson's Building: Yorkville Judo and Trinity Fitness 130 Bridge Street Plaza Gym Recreation/Fitness Freeman's Sports 129 E. Hydraulic Street Bait Shop Recreation/Fitness Yak Shack 301 E. Hydraulic Street Kayak Rentals Recreation/Fitness Sense of Samadhi 202 S. Bridge Street Yoga Studio Recreation/Fitness Yorkville Flower Shop 214 South Bridge Street Flower Shop Retail Table 3.16: Downtown Yorkville Business Inventory Table 3.17: Leakage Analysis Source: Based on Fieldwork, June 2015 Source: Esri Business Analyst 47 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE RETAIL CONCLUSIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES Despite the opening of several key retail stores in the late 2000s – primarily in the Kendall Marketplace and Yorkville Marketplace shopping centers, Yorkville has seen only modest growth in overall retail sales volumes over the last ten years and these major shopping centers have existing vacancies and undeveloped outlots. While Yorkville remains underserved in several key retail segments, as noted in this analysis as well as the Retail Coach report, several challenges will impede its ability to draw significant new retail investment in the near and mid-term. These include the following: • The population of Yorkville is expected to grow only modestly in the coming five to ten years. In an era where “retail follows rooftops”, national retailers, who routinely weigh hundreds of expansion opportunities across the country, are unlikely to seek out Yorkville unless significant existing demand and household growth is amply demonstrated. • Yorkville’s north/south divide dampens its retail potential. As noted previously, feedback from area residents and other stakeholders suggests that Yorkville residents routinely travel to Oswego and Montgomery for shopping trips. Reportedly, this is particularly true of residents of southern Yorkville, who often find traveling to Oswego quicker and easier than traveling north along Illinois 47 to the heart of Yorkville’s retail district at Illinois 47 and U.S. 34, given traffic bottlenecks along Illinois 47. (Though completion of current major construction work along this route is expected to help relieve congestion.) • Moreover, Oswego continues to develop, and the Village has an aggressive retail growth plan in place for both U.S. 34 and Orchard Road, which it sees as a “growth corridor.” According to the Village, plans include the recruitment of a high-end grocery store, furniture stores, and a Costco in the near future. • The General Merchandise Stores category is leaking $18.3 million. Yorkville does have a number of discount department and general merchandise stores including Target. A Walmart was planned, but never built, on a site along Route 34 in Yorkville, but the company operates stores in neighboring Oswego, Plano, and Montgomery. Average sales per store for a Walmart supercenter is $72.5 million on an annual basis. • Apparel and Accessory Stores and Food Service & Drinking places are also showing modest retail gaps ($13.7 and $10.0 million respectively). Small merchants and full-service and quick casual restaurants and bars would be welcome additions in existing retail centers as well as in Downtown Yorkville. Note that this analysis is not a definitive indicator of retail opportunities within Yorkville. Successfully recruiting new businesses to an area requires, among other factors, the character and proximity of competitors or potential competitors, the demographic and socioeconomic makeup of the localized consumer base, vehicular and pedestrian traffic levels, and the availability of suitable land and/or commercial space. • Finally, a wild card with the potential to impact both the commercial and residential markets in Yorkville is the Hudson Pointe mixed-use development proposed for the southwest corner of U.S. 30 and Wolf’s Crossing Road in Oswego. If developed as currently envisioned, Hudson Pointe will add more than 34 acres of commercial development along with up to 1,600 new housing units to regional inventories. A community of such scale could further shift the focus of growth towards Oswego, dampening retail and residential demand potentials in Yorkville. Notwithstanding these challenges, potential opportunities for retail development do exist in Yorkville, primarily in the following forms: • Grocery-anchored development. As discussed, Yorkville has the potential to support additional specialty grocery store development. The estimated gap of more than $26 million in grocery spending would, if realized, support the addition of a mid-size specialty and/or regionally-based grocer. Not only would such a store be a benefit to the residents of Yorkville, the traffic generated would likely draw interest from additional retailers and service providers seeking proximity or co-tenancy. • Downtown development. Downtown Yorkville, with its picturesque Fox River views, has the potential to draw residents and visitors alike to businesses, parks and recreation areas, and outdoor events. Supportable uses within the downtown area in the near to mid-term would likely include additional eating and drinking establishments, and recreation-oriented businesses. In May, the City approved TIF financing for Three Angels nanobrewery to be located at what once was the Ingemunson Law Offices. The City has also approved plans for a cooking school and catering business at a city- owned building at Hydraulic Street. The City needs to continue to promote new businesses to locate downtown in order to revitalize the downtown area. With time, careful planning and incubation, and, most importantly, community support, a thriving downtown District could be fostered with the critical mass needed to lure additional businesses to the area. However, serious market challenges must be addressed in order to make this vision a reality. These include industrial blight on the eastern side of the district, inadequate parking, and high volumes of fast-moving traffic along Illinois 47 that make this most desirable commercial stretch of downtown also its most dangerous and unfriendly for pedestrians. OFFICE MARKET DATA Yorkville is located further west than the existing concentrations of west suburban multi tenant and single-user corporate office buildings. Therefore, the amount of investment grade office space in the City is limited. In Yorkville, business and professional service firms tend to be located adjacent to retail tenants in the various commercial shopping centers. The City is also home to several medical office users. • Aurora-based Rush-Copley has a 45-acre medical campus in Yorkville located on Route 34. The complex contains an urgent-care center, oncology center, diagnostic center, and physician offices. The complex opened in 2008, and was built in anticipation of the healthcare needs of the growing Yorkville population. In 2012, a 6,000 square foot emergency center was added to the medical campus. • Advocate Dreyer Medical Clinic and Presence Mercy Medical Center also have medical office locations nearby to Rush-Copley in Yorkville. A few other in-line medical offices are located in nearby strip centers. 48 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.13 - Residential Zoning DistrictsGraph 3.13 - Residential Zoning Districts B-1 Local Business B-2 Retail Commerce B-3 General Business B-4 Service District The B-1 Local Business District zoning designation is intended for the location of commercial and professional facilities that are especially useful in close proximity to residential areas. The district is designed to provide convenient shopping and services that meet the needs and enhances the quality of life for surrounding residential neighborhoods. This district also encourages dwelling units located above the first floor of a permitted use to create mixed use buildings. The minimum lot size for the B-1 Zone is 10,000 square feet with a maximin building coverage of 50 percent. 30 foot front yards are required with 20 foot side and rear yards also required. Building heights are limited to 6-stories or 80 feet. The B-2 Retail Commerce Business District zoning designation is intended for the location of retail shops and stores offering goods to the population. Buildings in this district are allowed to build on a majority of the lot with diminished setbacks. This allows shops and stores to maximize retail space while supporting a pedestrian friendly environment in retail shopping areas. This district also encourages dwelling units located above the first floor of a permitted use to create mixed use buildings. The minimum lot size for the B-2 Zone is 10,000 square feet with a maximin building coverage of 80 percent. There is no front yard requirement, however 20 foot side and rear yards are required. Building heights are limited to 6-stories or 80 feet. The B-3 General Business District zoning designation is intended for the location of a broad range of commercial uses, including small scale and large scale businesses. These uses are usually oriented toward automobile access and visibility; therefore they are typically set along major arterial roads. The businesses in this district are meant to serve regional as well as local customers. This district also encourages dwelling units located above the first floor of a permitted use to create mixed use buildings. The minimum lot size for the B-3 Zone is 10,000 square feet with a maximin building coverage of 50 percent. 50 foot front yards are required with 20 foot side and rear yards also required. Building heights are limited to 6-stories or 80 feet. The B-4 Service Business District zoning designation is intended for the location of a variety of service based commercial uses. These businesses focus on providing residents with services on a local level. The minimum lot size for the B-4 Zone is 10,000 square feet with a maximin building coverage of 50 percent. 50 foot front yards are required with 20 foot side and rear yards also required. Building heights are limited to 6-stories or 80 feet. O Office District The O Office District zoning designation is intended to provide for the location of professional offices, research and development facilities, and other related uses on parcels of at least 20,000 square feet. In addition, a mix of limited retail and service uses may be allowed to support other uses within the zone. The O Office District zone may be used as a transitional zone between residential and more intensive commercial and manufacturing districts. This district also encourages dwelling units located above the first floor of a permitted use to create mixed use buildings. The minimum lot size for the O Zone is 20,000 square feet with a maximin building coverage of 50 percent. 30 foot front yards are required with 10 foot side yards and 20 foot rear yards also required. Building heights are limited to 6-stories or 80 feet. B-1 4 ACRES B-3 1,125 ACRES B-2 84 ACRES O 82 ACRES B-4 1 ACRE COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Commercial development is regulated by one of five commercial zoning districts, outlined below: Figure 3.13: Commercial Zoning Districts 49 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE UNDEVELOPED COMMERCIAL ZONING AREAS Apart from land that is already developed and zoned for commercial development, there are several areas in Yorkville that are currently zoned but undeveloped for commercial use. These areas are located throughout Yorkville but the more significant parcels are within the community’s northern quadrant along Illinois Route 47 and Veterans Parkway, and are zoned in two different commercial zoning categories, B-2 Retail Commerce and B-3 General Business. These areas represent more than 6.4 million square feet of commercial space that according to current market conditions may not be developed in the near future. SUMMARY OF COMMERCIAL LAND USE OBSERVATIONS The following are key observations and issues related to commercial land use in Yorkville: • Downtown Yorkville remains a key opportunity for reinvestment and redevelopment given its adjacency to the traditional single family neighborhoods and the recreational opportunities along the Fox River and nearby parks. Targeted initiatives in addressing key downtown issues, such as its brownfield and urban design challenges, will be important in spurring downtown reinvestment. Inadequate parking and high volumes of fast-moving traffic along Illinois Route 47 also need to be addressed as key issues for downtown. • While Yorkville may experience limited demand for additional retail in coming years, particularly in the grocery and restaurant categories, it will continue to face competition from neighboring communities, particularly Oswego. New retail development will depend on, among other factors, the volume of new residential development. Figure 3.14 - Undeveloped Commercial Zoning Areas ZONING DISTRICT ACRES POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL SF O Office District 0 0 B-1 Local Business 0 0 B-2 Retail Commerce 6 65,340 B-3 General Business 587 6,392,430 B-4 Service District 0 0 Totals 593 6,457,770 Figure 3.14: Undeveloped Commercial Zoning Areas Table 3.18: Undeveloped Commercial Zoning Areas • Yorkville in general is over-zoned for retail and commercial development, especially along northern portions of Illinois Route 47 where residential development may be slow to occur in the long-term. • Yorkville has the potential to support an additional mid-sized specialty grocery store, which in turn could spur additional retail development adjacent to the grocery. • There is a defined need for a more consistent, cohesive approach to developing retail and commercial services in the downtown, especially in regards to downtown where sustained efforts in attracting and incubating new businesses should be the focus of economic development. Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 50 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.15 - Existing Industrial Land Use Areas INDUSTRIAL LAND USE Within the Planning Area, Yorkville’s industrial areas comprises 419 acres, which represents 0.9 percent of Yorkville’s total land area. This section summarizes general industrial land use and market conditions. Industrial land use in Yorkville can largely be found in five main areas both north and south of the Fox River. EXISTING INDUSTRIAL AREAS North of the Fox River comprise three of the larger industrial areas in Yorkville: the Aurora Textile industrial development, the Wrigley manufacturing complex, and the Yorkville Business Center, which also includes the commercial strip development facing Illinois Route 47. All three industrial developments account for over 507,000 square feet of industrial space, the largest being the Wrigley manufacturing complex – already slated to expand its facilities in 2015 – although a significant portion of its current land parcel is undeveloped. The Yorkville Business Center Park includes a number of warehousing, manufacturing and automotive-service related uses on lots that are mostly one acre in size. West of the Illinois Route 47 is the Aurora Textile industrial development; Aurora Textile is a manufacturer of textiles. All three industrial areas north of the Fox River are set back generously from the Illinois 47 roadway and are nicely landscaped with berms and water features providing a modern industrial park setting. South of the Fox River are three other industrial areas: the Fox Industrial Park, which comprises 461,000 square feet of industrial space, the older waterfront industrial areas of downtown and the F.W. Witt development, the latter two comprising 110,000 square feet of industrial space. The Fox Industrial Park is home to a number of light manufacturing and auto-related service industries on smaller lots than found in the Yorkville Business Park. Unlike the industrial areas north of the Fox River, this park’s industrial buildings are constructed closer to the sidewalk with a limited level of landscaping treatments; directly north of the park is a row of multifamily developments along Colonial Parkway. Industrial is also located along portions of the downtown just south and adjacent to the rail spur. These uses largely reflect the once industrial nature of the downtown. Figure 3.15: Existing Industrial Land Use Areas Table 3.19: Existing Industrial Land Use Areas SUBDIVISION KEY ACRES SF Fox Industrial Park 1 42 461,178 Wrigley Manufacturing 2 289 218,163 Yorkville Business Center 3 23 159,205 Aurora Textile 4 11 130,570 Yorkville (Original Town)5 6 57,992 F.W. Witt & Co.6 3 52,911 1 2 3 4 5 6 Industrial Uses along Hydraulic Street in downtown Yorkville Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 51 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE INDUSTRIAL MARKET DATA AND ANALYSIS Major industrial development in the far western and southwestern portions of the Chicago region is dependent on proximity to the interstate highway system, and features large “big box” bulk distribution centers as well as some industrial R & D product. The I-88 Corridor, anchored on the west by the City of Aurora, is located approximately 12 miles to the north of downtown Yorkville. The Interstate 55 Corridor follows the Stevenson Expressway as it turns south and intersects with Interstate 80 near Joliet’s intermodal logistics hub. Downtown Yorkville is approximately 16 miles from an entrance to Interstate 55. As a hub of inland transportation; industrial construction is surging in the Chicago metropolitan area. According to global real estate firm JLL, nearly 2 million square feet are currently under construction in the Interstate 55 corridor with another 1.7 million under construction along Interstate 88. The pace of new construction is somewhat slower west of Aurora along the Interstate 88 corridor. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG ELDAMAIN RD Yorkville and neighboring Plano have a few notable industrial developments: • On the west side of Eldamain Road north of Route 34, Menard’s built a major regional distribution center, likely in anticipation of the proposed $1 billion Prairie Parkway highway project that would have connected Interstates 88 and 80 approximately 1.5 miles west of Eldamain Road. Planning for the 37-mile roadway project was officially terminated in 2012. • Much of the land along Eldamain Road north of Route 34 in the City of Yorkville is zoned industrial, although agricultural uses still predominate, with the exception of the ComEd transfer station that distributes and services the City of Yorkville. • Past plans for this land included a 32-acre Lincoln Prairie Industrial Park across from the Menard’s distribution center that would have included a 14-acre asphalt plant run by Mount Prospect-based Healy Asphalt Company. Plans for the Konicek Farm Property called for a 234- acre commercial and residential plan called White Pines. Neither plan came to fruition. WRIGLEY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, LLC Yorkville is home to one of Chicago-based Wrigley Manufacturing Company’s facilities, where some of the company’s best known brands are made, including Juicy Fruit, Doublemint, and Life Savers. In 2014, Wrigley announced plans to expand the Yorkville facility, adding the production of Skittles. The $50 million expansion, set to be completed in 2016, will add 75 permanent manufacturing jobs. Wrigley Manufacturing is now the largest full-time, year-round employer in Yorkville. The Wrigley expansion is being assisted in part by the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity (DCEO), which will provide $2 million in tax incentives through the Economic Development for a Growing Economy (EDGE) program. DCEO also is investing $250,000 in the 147,000 sq. ft. construction expansion and $37,500 in job training. FOX INDUSTRIAL PARK Fox Industrial Park is approximately 54 acres of industrially-zoned land located southeast of the intersection of Route 47 and East Schoolhouse Road in Yorkville. Some of the single-tenant buildings were constructed as early as the 1970s. Advertised rents for vacant spaces are as low as $3 per square foot. The diverse mix of businesses located in the Fox Industrial Park includes Merlin 200,000 Miles Autobody Shop, Kendall County Food Pantry, and O’Malley Welding and Fabricating. DOWNTOWN INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES: In 1870, the railroad came to Yorkville and businesses sprung up along the tracks and nearby river. Past Industrial users included Squire Dingee’s pickle factory, the Yorkville Ice Company, the Rehbehn Brothers button factory, and Schneider’s lumber mill. Industrial users utilized the area’s natural resources. Presently, the land north of the train tracks that runs along Hydraulic Street and the Fox River is used for industrial, retail, and recreational purposes. The area south of the train tracks includes a large parking lot, one storage silo that houses golf carts, one vacant mill facility, and Nicholson Logging and Lumber which is active and sells lumber. These properties face the newly renovated Bicentennial Riverfront Park. New industrial development is not likely to be a major component of downtown Yorkville’s future but perhaps future commercial and/or residential development in the downtown can reflect its past industrial roots. Industrial Uses in the Yorkville Business Park Industrial Uses in the Fox Industrial Park 52 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE M-2 General ManufacturingM-1 Limited Manufacturing The M-1 Limited Manufacturing District zoning designation is intended to provide for the location of manufacturing, industrial, and related uses of a limited nature in size that will not have a harmful environmental effect on surrounding areas. Industries within this district are expected to follow performance standards to produce an environment suitable for industrial activities that will be pleasant and compatible with adjacent residential and business uses. The maximum lot coverage in the M-1 Zone is 60 percent. 25 foot front yards are required while no rear yards are required. Side yards must be a minimum of 10 percent of the lot up to twenty feet. There are no building height limits, but floor area ratio is limited to 0.8. The M-2 General Manufacturing District zoning designation is intended to provide for the location of manufacturing, industrial and related uses in a less restrictive nature than the M-1 Limited Manufacturing District. The district is designed to accommodate industrial activities that have moderate environmental effects but are located in relatively remote areas as to not conflict with residential and business uses. Industries within this district are expected to follow performance standards in order to create fewer problems of compatibility with adjacent properties. The maximum lot coverage in the M-2 Zone is 60 percent. 25 foot front yards are required while no rear yards are required. Side yards must be a minimum of 10 percent of the lot up to twenty feet. There are no building height limits, but floor area ratio is limited to 0.85. Figure 3.16 -Industrial Zoning Districts Graph 3.16 -Industrial Zoning Districts M-2 386 ACRES M-1 663 ACRES Figure 3.16: Industrial Zoning Districts INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Industrial development is regulated by one of two manufacturing zoning districts, outlined below: Menard’s Distribution Center along Eldamain RoadClass II Truck Route along Eldamain Road 53 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE UNDEVELOPED INDUSTRIAL ZONING AREAS Apart from land that is already developed and zoned for industrial development, there are several areas in Yorkville that are currently zoned but undeveloped for industrial use. These areas are located in different locations throughout Yorkville, in its northeastern quadrant along Eldamain Road adjacent to Plano, its far southwestern quadrant along State Route 71, and near the northeast corner of State Routes 71 and 47. The northeast quadrant is zoned primarily M-2 General Manufacturing while the other parcels are zoned M-1 Limited Manufacturing; in total, there are 589 acres of industrially-zoned land that is currently undeveloped. SUMMARY OF INDUSTRIAL LAND USE OBSERVATIONS The following are key observations and issues related to industrial land use in Yorkville: • The expansion of the Wrigley manufacturing complex and the Fox Industrial Park provides for a stable light industrial base but Yorkville’s relative distant location from interstate roadway access may be limiting factors in recruiting larger scale industrial and warehousing uses, at least in the short-term. • Undeveloped land currently zoned industrial appear to be appropriate locations for future industrial expansion, especially in Yorkville’s northwestern quadrant, although, again such Figure 3.17 - Undeveloped Industrial Zoning Areas ZONING DISTRICT ACRES POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL SF M-1 Limited Manufacturing 203 7,074,144 M-2 General Manufacturing 386 14,292,036 Totals 589 21,366,180 Figure 3.17: Undeveloped Industrial Zoning Areas Table 3.20: Undeveloped Industrial Zoning Areas development may be long-term. In addition, planned residential uses in this area should be carefully considered given that potential conflicts could exist between residential and industrial uses. Ideally, Eldamain Road north of these sites should be improved to accommodate long-term industrial development; currently trucks would still need to travel south along Eldamain Road to reach Illinois Route 34 in order to travel east, west and then north or south to reach interstate access. • The undeveloped industrially-zoned land to the south of Fox Industrial Park could provide a long- term opportunity to expand that park, as well as redesign and redevelop it into a more modern, landscaped setting. • Downtown industrial land uses should be considered long-term redevelopment opportunity sites for new commercial or mixed- use opportunities. However, some form of light industrial and assembly use with a potential retail sales component could be accommodated to full vacant spaces in the downtown district. • The Yorkville Business Park is currently a mix of commercial with industrial uses; long-term the Park could transition to accommodating more commercial uses given its location along Illinois Route 47 and its adjacent residential areas. Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 54 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE PUBLIC / QUASI-PUBLIC LAND USE Within the Planning Area, Yorkville’s Quasi-Public land uses comprises 349 acres, which represents 0.8 percent of Yorkville’s total Planning Area. This section summarizes general public and quasi-public land uses. According to the 2008 Comprehensive Plan, community facilities are buildings or places that provide services to residents - facilities such as City Hall and the Police Department, Public Works, and Parks and Recreation, and the Public Library. Community facilities also include schools and fire stations, as well as the United States Post Office and other Kendall County buildings and complexes. As with the Transportation and Infrastructure Section of this Comprehensive Plan, the United City of Yorkville already has a number of community facility plans in place, several dating to before the preparation of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. These plans include: • 2007 United City of Yorkville School Site Study • 2008 United City of Yorkville Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update • 2007 United City of Yorkville School Site Study • 2007 Bristol Kendall Fire Protection District Existing and Future Facilities Map • 2005 United City of Yorkville Downtown Vision and Municipal Facilities Plan • 2004 Kendall County Trails and Greenways Plan EXISTING PUBLIC / QUASI-PUBLIC AREAS Yorkville has two significant civic complexes north of the Fox River, including the Kendall County Courthouse and Jail, located just south of Veterans Parkway (Illinois Route 34) at Cornell Lane and John Street, and the Yorkville City Hall and Police Station along Game Farm Road. Adjacent to the north and south of the City Hall complex are a number of other public uses such as the Public Library and Beecher Community Center, and the Yorkville High School Academy and Grade School buildings. Directly to the east of City Hall and the Library are the Beecher ball fields, which also serves as a community gathering space for the community’s larger festivals and events. To the west of City Hall and Game Farm Road is Yorkville High School, which has undergone a significant expansion. This complex of public and civic uses along Game Farm Road along a two-lane road with generous spacing between buildings and setbacks from the roadway reinforces the somewhat suburban-semi- Figure 3.18 - Existing Public / Quasi-Public Land Use Areas KENDALL COUNTY KEY Harris Forest Preserve 1 Kendall County Animal Control 2 Kendall County Coroner & Facilities Management 3 Kendall County Courthouse 4 Kendall County Facilities Maintenance 5 Kendall County Fairgrounds 6 Kendall County Health Department 7 Kendall County Highway Department 8 Kendall County Office Building 9 Kendall County Public Safety Center 10 Old Kendall County Courthouse 11 CHURCH / INSTITUTION KEY Au Sable Grove Presbyterian Church 12 BP Amoco 13 Chapel On The Green 14 Cross Evangelical Lutheran Church 15 Cross Evangelical Lutheran Church & School 16 Gospel Assembly Church of Oswego 17 Grace Community Church of Yorkville 18 Helmar Lutheran Church 19 Helmar Lutheran Church 20 Lynwood Baptist Church 21 New Hope Apostolic Church 22 New Life Church 23 Trinity Church United Methodist 24 Yorkville Congregational Church 25 Table 3.21.: Kendall County Facilities Table 3.22: Churches and Institutions Figure 3.18: Existing Public / Quasi-Public Land Use Areas 50 15 54 49 69 24 23 4 10 58 46 39 57 55 52 11 9 18 62 8 61 60 70 47 64 55 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE rural setting of this portion of Yorkville. This complex also promotes the area as Yorkville’s civic campus, albeit not in a downtown setting where they are typically located. South of the Fox River in downtown Yorkville is the location of the historic Kendall County Courthouse along East Main Street and other associated buildings, including its main office and administrative building. The Courthouse is an iconic building and set on top of the highest point in the downtown. Other buildings along West Ridge and Jefferson Streets adjacent to the Courthouse are occupied by other County agencies and departments, and various commercial uses. The U.S. Post Office in Yorkville is located along East Countryside Parkway Drive north of Illinois Route 34. Figure 3.18 shows the location in Yorkville of various other public and quasi-public uses, including the facilities of the Bristol-Kendall Fire Protection District, Kendall Township, churches and religious institutions and schools, and other facilities related to community infrastructure. The Yorkville School District currently has ten buildings that house six elementary schools, two intermediate schools, one high school and one administrative building. Several schools in the Yorkville School District are of recent construction due to the community’s growth over the last two decades. Several civic facilities, such as the Yorkville City Hall and Public Library and the Kendall County Courthouse and Jail complex along Veterans Parkway are also of recent construction. Most churches and religious buildings are also significant visual icons and institutional anchors in locations throughout Yorkville. PUBLIC / QUASI-PUBLIC LAND USE NEEDS ANALYSIS During the planning process, most City of Yorkville departments have stated there are no significant facility needs at this time. The City currently shares its office complex with the Police Department. The library currently has no facility needs, although there is a pressing need to maintain and improve Library’s parking lot. The Yorkville School District will be exploring additional facility needs in its grade schools after it completes the high school expansion. SCHOOLS KEY Autumn Creek Elementary School 49 Bristol Bay Elementary School 50 Bristol Grade School 51 Circle Center Grade School 52 Cross Lutheran School 53 Grande Reserve Elementary School 54 Parkview Christian Academy 55 Peaceful Pathways Montessori Academy 56 Yorkville Grade School 57 Yorkville High School 58 Yorkville High School Academy 59 Yorkville Intermediate School 60 Yorkville Middle School 61 OTHER KEY Bristol Kendall Fire District #1 62 Bristol Kendall FPD Station #2 63 Bristol Kendall Fire District #3 64 Bristol Post Office 65 Bristol Town Hall 66 IDOT Yorkville Maintenance Yard 67 Kendall Township 68 United States Post Office 69 Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District 70 UNITED CITY OF YORKVILLE KEY Beecher Community Building 26 Bicentennial Riverfront Park 27 Booster PRV Station - South (Raintree)28 Booster Pump - North 29 Bruell Street Lift Station 30 Countryside Lift Station 31 COY Well #3 32 COY Well #7 & Treatment Facility 33 COY Well #8 & Treatment Facility 34 Raintree Village - Water Tower 35 Raintree Village Lift Station 36 River's Edge Lift Station 37 United City of Yorkville - Public Works Facility 38 United City of Yorkville City Hall 39 United City of Yorkville Parks & Rec Dept 40 United City of Yorkville Police Dept 41 Water Tower - North 42 Water Tower - North Central 43 Water Tower - Northeast- Grande Reserve 44 Boombah Boulevard Lift Station 45 Yorkville Public Library 46 Yorkville Public Works 47 Yorkville Well #4/ Treatment Facility 48 Table 3.23: United City of Yorkville Facilities Table 3.24 School Facilities Table 3.25: Other Public Facilities After the High School expansion is complete, the District will be assessing facility needs for the grade schools; both the Autumn Creek and Bristol Bay subdivisions have started to grow and their local schools may need more space. In addition, the School District is undertaking a substantial review of its school structure and potential realignment of its school boundaries. Currently, schools are organized around micro-neighborhoods; overall, there is potential to changing which schools serve which neighborhood or residential subdivision. Kendall County is also exploring potential expansion of its office and administrative facilities near its downtown location, mainly due to the lack of available land adjacent to its Veterans Parkway facility; expanding in the downtown is also a possibility and a challenge given the lack of land. The Yorkville Recreation Department has also expressed the need for a new maintenance building. SUMMARY OF PUBLIC / QUASI-PUBLIC LAND USE OBSERVATIONS The following are key observations and issues related to Public/Quasi-Public land use in Yorkville: • The Yorkville community appears to be well- served by its community facilities, by their location and by the quality of new building and facility construction. • The need for new schools appear to be long- term concerns given the slow-down of residential construction in Yorkville in recent years, although expanding existing schools remains a top priority especially if a school boundary restructuring is considered and undertaken in the near term. • During the planning process, community stakeholders have suggested that Yorkville City Hall would be better placed in the downtown rather than on Game Farm Road, thereby providing another anchor destination besides the Kendall County complex on East Main Street. Other stakeholders have suggested that a downtown City Hall building could be combined with a new Kendall County office complex. 56 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE LAND USE Within the Planning Area, Yorkville’s parks and open space areas comprises 2,526 acres, which represents 5.6 percent of Yorkville’s total Planning Area. This section summarizes general parks and open space conditions. In general, Yorkville is amply served by parks managed and owned by the United City of Yorkville and other public and private entities. EXISTING PARKS AND OPEN SPACE AREAS Yorkville’s Parks and Recreation Department owns and manages approximately 268 acres of park land and open space throughout the community with a vast majority located north of the Fox River. These park spaces range in size and uses from mini parks or tot lots of one acre in size to regional parks of 40 acres in size or more in order to accommodate a wider range of uses and attract park users from beyond Yorkville. Other neighborhood and community park ranges in size from two to ten or more acres in size to accommodate the recreational needs of one or more neighborhoods and incorporate facilities such as play spaces and playground equipment, basketball and tennis courts, ball fields, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and complexes for sport tournaments. Natural resource areas are also found throughout Yorkville Figure 3.19 - Existing Park / Open Space Land Use Areas Figure 3.18: Existing Park / Open Space Land Use Areas with an intent on maintaining wooded and forested areas while allowing some space for picnic areas and walking trails. Yorkville’s two regional parks, Bristol Bay and Steven G. Bridge Park, are the two largest in the system at 65 and 56 acres respectively. The Beecher Park athletic complex adjacent to the public Library and the Beecher Community Center is at 20 acres. Riverfront Bicentennial Park is regarded by many Yorkville stakeholders as the community’s showcase park given its location adjacent to the Fox River and the introduction of the rapids chute in recent years. Beyond the City-owned parks, there are 15 Kendall County Forest Preserve facilities which are located within the Planning Area, including the Hoover Outdoor Educational Center, which at 400 acres is one of the largest park and open spaces within the Yorkville Planning Area. The Educational Center provides outdoor learning experiences and a living history area for Yorkville area students and residents. The Kendall County Fairgrounds is also located in Yorkville at the Harris County Forest Preserve at Illinois Route 71 and East Highpoint Road, which, in addition to hosting the annual Kendall County Fair, also maintains a horse arena, a lake, picnic shelters, and trails. To Yorkville’s 40 48 54 5 626 12 11 2 2116 51 27 9 43538 44 18 41 33 50 22 15 36 35 37 25 52 20 10 42 23 14 45 47 4 Hometown Days Summer Festival at the Beecher Center 57 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE eastern quadrant along the southern bank of Fox River is Saw Wee Kee Park managed by the Oswegoland Park District; this park is adjacent to other open space and forest preserve land administered by other private sector entities and the State of Illinois. To the north along the intersection of Kennedy and Bristol Ridge Roads is the Blackberry Oaks Golf Course; directly to the west of the golf course is 80 acres of open space owned by Openlands, a regional non-profit land and nature conservation organization. The land was conveyed to Openlands in an effort to preserve wilderness and open space areas in Yorkville. Other parks, recreational facilities and open spaces are also owned and managed by individual Yorkville homeowner associations. Silver Spring Park and the Mies van der Rohe-design Farnsworth House are located directly west of Yorkville. PARKS AND OPEN SPACE NEEDS ANALYSIS The 2008 Parks and Recreation Master Plan suggested several recommendations for parks and recreational facility standards based on park planning standards promulgated by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources and the National Recreation and Park Association. For the most part, Yorkville meets the majority of the standards and provides more than adequate park facilities for its residents within close proximity to residential neighborhoods. Recommendations proposed in the Master Plan include the need to link parks and public spaces through a system of paved trails and greenways, locating a community athletic park with good access from Route 47 and available land, a lighted sports facility, and to continue developing greenways and trail locations throughout Yorkville (bike and pedestrian trails are discussed in the transportation chapter). A water-spray park feature in one of Yorkville’s neighborhoods was also considered a top priority. During this comprehensive planning process, community stakeholders have expressed the need to develop a recreational facility for indoor activities and a new park on the City’s south side that could be in the range of 50 to 100 acres. Some planning has already been undertaken for the recreational facility by the Parks and Recreation Department. The Department also needs a new maintenance building given that future park maintenance needs are projected to be more significant in the future. In addition, the Department has tried to attract baseball tournaments; however, only one field is currently lighted. The Department also owns property west of the Illinois Route 47 bridge, which could be an opportunity for a fishing pier or some other amenity along the Fox River. There already is a fishing pier east of the canoe chute. Table 3.26: Existing Park / Open Space Land Use Areas PARK KEY ACRES TYPE Baker Woods Forest Preserve 1 -Forest Preserve Beecher Park 2 20 Athletic Complex / Community Park Blackberry Creek Forest Preserve 3 -Forest Preserve Bristol Bay Park A 4 3 - Bristol Station Park 5 12 Community Park Cannonball Ridge Park 6 3 Neighborhood Park Cobb Park 7 1 Mini Park Crawford Park 8 6 Natural Resource Area Dick Young Forest Preserve 9 -Forest Preserve Emily Sleezer Park 10 1 Mini Park Fox Hill East Park 11 4 Neighborhood Park Fox Hill West Park 12 19 Neighborhood Park Gilbert Park 13 1 Mini Park Green's Filling Station Park 14 6 Neighborhood Park Harris Forest Preserve 15 -Forest Preserve Hiding Spot Park 16 1 Mini Park Hollenback Sugarbrush Forest Preserve 17 1 Forest Preserve Hoover Educational Center 18 400 Forest Preserve Jay Woods Forest Preserve 19 -Forest Preserve Jaycee Pond 20 7 Natural Resource Area Junior Women's Club Park @ Heartland Circle 21 5 Neighborhood Park Kendall County Fairgrounds 22 -Fairgrounds Kendall County Forest Preserve 23 -Forest Preserve Kendall County Forest Preserve 24 -Forest Preserve Kiwanis Park 25 2 Neighborhood Park Kylan's Ridge Trail Space 26 -Trail Space Lyons Forest Preserve 27 -Forest Preserve PARK KEY ACRES TYPE Meramech Forest Preserve 28 -Forest Preserve Millbrook North Forest Preserve 29 -Forest Preserve Millbrook South Forest Preserve 30 -Forest Preserve Newark Forest Preserve 31 -Forest Preserve Pickerill-Pigott Forest Preserve 32 -Forest Preserve Price Park 33 1 Neighborhood Park Purcell Park 34 1 Mini Park Raintree Village Park A 35 1 Mini Park Raintree Village Park B 36 7 Playground Raintree Village Trail Space 37 -Trail Space Raintree Village Trail Space 38 -Trail Space Raintree Village Trail Space 39 -Trail Space Regional Park at Bristol Bay 40 65 Regional Park Rice Park 41 1 Mini Park Riemenschneider Park 42 7 Neighborhood Park Riverfront Park 43 5 Community Park Rivers Edge Park 44 1 Mini Park Rotary Park 45 12 Neighborhood Park Silver Springs State Park 46 -State Park Stepping Stones Park 47 7 School/Park Site - Neighborhood Park Steven G. Bridge Park 48 56 Regional Park Subat Forest Preserve 49 -Forest Preserve Sunflower Park 50 2 Neighborhood Park Town Square Park 51 3 Community Park Van Emmon Park 52 2 Community Park West Hydraulic Park 53 1 Mini Park Wheaton Woods 54 5 Natural Resource Area Town Square Park located at Illinois Route 47 and Center Street Source: United City of Yorkville GIS Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 58 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 3.20 - Open Space Zoning Districts OS-1 Open Space (Passive)OS-2 Open Space (Recreational) The OS-2 Open Space (Recreational) District is intended to govern the use of city-owned recreational areas and park land. These regulations are intended to provide safe and accessible indoor and outdoor leisure and entertainment space for the general public while maintaining or establishing an appropriate buffer between differing land use types or intensities. Permitted uses include community centers, playgrounds, recreation centers, amphitheaters, and outdoor music venues. Front yards are required to be at least thirty feet and side yards are required to be at least ten feet or a distance equal to 50% of the building height, whichever is greater, when adjacent to a residential district. Rear yards are required to be at least twenty feet or a distance equal to 50% of the building height, whichever is greater, when adjacent to a residential district. Building height is limited to six-stories or eighty feet. The OS-1 Open Space (Passive) District is intended to govern the use of city-owned passive green space and park land. The regulations are intended to provide for the protection, conservation, and utilization of high-quality natural resources; preservation of wildlife habitats; creation of scenic vistas; provision of public gathering areas or facilities for safe and accessible outdoor space; connectivity between other green infrastructure via bike and hiking trails and paths; and maintain or establish appropriate buffers between differing land use types or intensities. Permitted uses include bicycle trails, community gardens, conservation areas, hiking paths, parks, and stormwater detention facilities. Front yards are required to be at least thirty feet and side yards are required to be at least ten feet or a distance equal to 50% of the building height, whichever is greater, when adjacent to a residential district. Rear yards are required to be at least twenty feet or a distance equal to 50% of the building height, whichever is greater, when adjacent to a residential district. Building height is limited to six-stories or eighty feet. Figure 3.20: Open Space Zoning Districts OPEN SPACE ZONING DISTRICTS Development of parks and open space is regulated by one of two open space zoning districts, outlined below: Graph 3.20 - Open Space Zoning Districts OS-2 211 ACRES OS-1 92 ACRES Riverfront Park in downtown Yorkville 59 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SUMMARY OF PARKS AND OPEN SPACE LAND USE OBSERVATIONS The following are key observations and issues related to Parks and Open Space land use in Yorkville: • The Yorkville community appears to be well-served by its current number of parks and recreational amenities, although the majority of parks are located north of the Fox River. • The Parks and Recreation Department has recognized that the maintenance of the existing parks is a key priority and concern going forward. New funding and financing sources will need to be developed and could include fundraising initiatives and public-private partnerships. There already is an agreement for maintenance services on one park facility with the Yorkville Junior Women’s Club. • There have been recent community discussions about transitioning the Parks and Recreation Department into a park district as a way to maintain and enhance the Yorkville’s park system. While Shady Oak Grove in the Yorkville Business Park Channel Restoration Area along the Fox River in downtown Yorkville Many subdivisions, including Grande Reserve, include protected Open Space there are benefits to becoming a park district, the Department currently saves money and resource by sharing equipment and staffing resources with other City departments. • Yorkville stakeholders have demonstrated a high level of understanding of the needs and benefits of maintaining its open spaces and natural areas. The protection of such land in association with land trusts and non-profits such as Openlands could provide additional partnership opportunities for land conservation in areas where conservation is warranted. Development tools such as conservation subdivisions should also be explored as one way to increase open space, protect Yorkville’s scenic qualities and encourage new development in more compact forms. • The Parks and Recreation Master Plan was last prepared in 2008; a new plan will need to be developed in alignment with the goals and objectives of the updated Comprehensive Plan. 60 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE AGRICULTURAL LAND USES Within the Planning Area, Yorkville’s agricultural land areas comprises 32,531 acres, which represents 71.9 percent of Yorkville’s total Planning Area, making it the predominate land use. This section summarizes general agricultural land use conditions. EXISTING AGRICULTURAL AREAS Agricultural land is mainly located around the perimeter of Yorkville’s developed area to the north, south, east and west with the majority south of Illinois Route 71. These areas contain working farms with corn and soybeans as the main crops. The majority of the farming area is accessed by state and county-designated routes. AGRICULTURAL MARKET DATA AND ANALYSIS Agriculture is an important component of the City of Yorkville and Kendall County economies. Agricultural land use is scattered throughout Yorkville, but is predominately located in the southern and western portions of the Planning Area. While only a portion of incorporated Yorkville is actually zoned for agricultural uses, significant acreage in both incorporated and unincorporated areas are operated as working farms. Some farmland that was planned for development prior to the recession has returned to agricultural uses. Figure 3.21: Existing Agricultural Land Use Areas Figure 3.21 - Existing Agricultural Land Use AreasAgricultural Land Uses along Illinois Route 47 The 2011 Comprehensive Plan for Kendall County calls for the continuation of viable agricultural activities and preservation of its rural character. The Land Resources Management Plan (LRMP) for agriculture in Kendall County aims to separate farm activities from urban intrusion to maximize successful agriculture and natural environment conditions. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) tracks agriculture data by county, and corn and soybeans are the commodities most commonly grown in Kendall County. The USDA estimates in 2013, 85,200 acres of corn were planted in the county, yielding over 15 million bushels of production. In the nine- county Northeast Illinois region, 7.5% of the corn production comes from Kendall County. Soybeans, and to a lesser extent, wheat and alfalfa are also grown in the County. In 2013, Kendall County planted 51,000 acres of soybeans and produced 2.5 million bushels of production, approximately 7.2% of Northeast Illinois’ soybean production. 61 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SUMMARY OF AGRICULTURAL LAND USE OBSERVATIONS The following are key observations and issues related to agricultural land use in Yorkville: • Historically, Yorkville has been the center for Kendall County’s agricultural industry for many decades and is also the dominate land use in the Yorkville Planning Area. From a land use and economic perspective, agricultural land provides several benefits, including the serving as a base of local employment and as buffering space between other land uses. Maintaining agricultural land uses should be considered an important component of a future Yorkville land use strategy. • Although most farms in the Yorkville grow soybeans and corn as the primary crop, other types of agricultural crops and agribusinesses, such as a cannabis farm, could support additional jobs and employment while maintaining local Yorkville land for farming purposes. Yorkville’s land use regulations already permit alternative farm crop uses. Yorkville could also work with other county- wide partners to promote agri-tourism to the area. A-1 Agricultural The purpose and intent of the agricultural zoning district is to provide for the protection, conservation, and utilization of natural resources; to preserve the value of existing and future open space and recreational facilities; and to allow for interim adaptive re-use of marginal agricultural and/or pasture lands pending the orderly redevelopment of the real estate. Permitted uses include apiaries, cultivation of non-food field crops and seeds, farming, forestation, greenhouses and nurseries, grain elevators and storage, stables or paddocks, temporary roadside stands, single-family residential dwellings for occupants that are engaged in the agricultural activities on the premises, and auction houses. Building setbacks include two hundred feet from the right-of-way along primary thoroughfares and one hundred feet from the right-of-way of all other streets. Side yards are required to be at least fifty feet. Residential structures are limited to have a maximum height of thirty feet, while grain silos are limited to a height of one hundred feet. All other buildings and structures are limited to a height of eighty feet. AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICTS Agricultural land is regulated by the A-1 Agricultural zoning district, outlined below: Graph 3.22 - Agricultural Zoning Districts A-1 1,008 ACRES Figure 3.22: Agricultural Zoning Districts Figure 3.22 - Agricultural Zoning DistrictsAgricultural Land Uses along Illinois Route 47 62 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS Within the Planning Area, Yorkville’s planned unit developments (PUD) comprises 942 acres of land within the Planning Area. A planned unit development is a grouping of both varied and compatible land uses, such as residential, parks and open space, and commercial, within one contained development or subdivision. Planned unit development are also a specific regulatory process defined within the City of Yorkville’s Zoning Ordinance. Since planned unit developments are not described as a specific land use classification, this section describes the number of PUDs within the City’s municipal boundaries on both developed and undeveloped land as defined on the City’s current zoning map. EXISTING PUD AREAS Currently, there are 12 different planned unit developments within the Yorkville Planning Area and located both north and south of the Fox River. Two of the 12 planned unit developments comprise a mix of existing commercial, office, residential and open space land uses; the other 10 planned unit developments are each strictly residential, commercial or agricultural in its existing land use. The Kendall Marketplace is the largest planned unit development in Yorkville at 187 acres. PUD Planned Unit Development Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) are unique and differ substantially from conventional subdivisions and therefore require administrative processing as “Special Uses”. PUDs are a complex type of Special Use, potentially consisting of various land uses and design elements, requiring the establishment of more specific procedures, standards, and exceptions from the strict application of the zoning district regulations to guide the recommendations of the Plan Commission and the action of the City Council. PUDs are typically established in order to allow and encourage development with innovation, increased amenities, and creative environmental and architectural design which would not be possible to achieve under the otherwise standard zoning district regulations, while being in general compliance with the planning objectives and intent of the zoning ordinance. Under this procedure, well planned residential, industrial/manufacturing, commercial and other types of land uses, individually or in combination, may be developed with design flexibility allowing for full utilization of the topographical and environmental characteristics of the site. PUDs must have an approved development plan which provides for a unified design, contiguity between various elements and be environmentally compatible with the surrounding area. There should be an increased benefit upon the health, safety, and general welfare of the public and particularly, in the immediate surroundings, than developments built in conformity with the underlying district regulations. PUDs must be developed as a unit under single ownership or control, which includes two or more principal buildings, and which is at least four acres in area, except for planned developments operated by a municipal corporation which shall be at least two acres in area, and Planned Unit Developments in manufacturing districts which shall be at least ten acres in area. Figure 3.23: PUD Zoning Districts Figure 3.23 - PUD Zoning Districts PUD NAME KEY EXISTING LAND USE ACRES SQUARE FEET / UNITS Schramm Property 1 Agricultural 180 0 B&P Properties 2 Residential 14 0 Kendall Marketplace 3 Commercial 140 711,232 sf Residential 35 28 units Open Space 12 - Rush Copely Healthcare Center 4 Office 41 221,370 sf Cannonball Trails 5 Residential 1 1 unit Office 5 0 Yorkville Crossing 6 Agricultural 178 0 Yorkville Town Center 7 Residential 25 0 Fountain View 8 Public/Quasi-Public 4 7,300 sf Edward Healthcare 9 Agricultural 89 0 Windmill Farms 10 Agricultural 51 0 Residential 50 12 units Towns at Windett Reserve 11 Agricultural 93 0 Loving Arms Daycare 12 Public/Quasi-Public 24 18,000 sf Table 3.27: PUD Zoning Districts 1 12 2 4 5 3 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 63 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE PUD NAME ANTICIPATED LAND USE ACRES PROJECTED UNITS YEARS TO BUILD-OUT PROJECTED SQUARE FEET Schramm Property Residential 111 333 5.4 - Commercial 69 --751,410 B&P Properties Residential 14 42 .7 - Cannonball Trails Commercial 6 --65,340 Yorkville Crossing Commercial 109 --1,187,0101 Residential 69 207 3.3 - Yorkville Town Center Commercial 25 --272,250 Fountain View Commercial 4 --43,560 Edward Healthcare Commercial 64 --691,515 Residential 25 75 1.2 - Windmill Farms Commercial 92 --1,001,880 Residential 9 27 .4 - Towns at Windett Reserve Residential 93 279 4.5 - Loving Arms Daycare Commercial 24 --261,360 TOTALS -714 963 15.5 4,274,325 UNDEVELOPED PUD ZONING AREAS In addition to the existing PUD’s there are 10 other planned unit developments that are not developed totaling 714 acres of land in Yorkville. The anticipated land use in these PUDs are either commercial or residential. The largest of these planned unit developments is the Schramm Property PUD, which will consist of 111 acres of residential and 69 acres of commercial development, and the Yorkville Crossing development, which will consist of 109 acres of commercial land and 69 acres of residential. Figure 3.24: Undeveloped PUD Zoning Areas Figure 3.24 - Undeveloped PUD Zoning Areas Table 3.28: Undeveloped PUD Zoning Districts Build-Out Projections Source: United City of Yorkville GIS 64 SECTION 3 - LAND USES THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE HISTORIC RESOURCES Historic buildings, sites and structures are important elements to revitalizing neighborhoods and traditional commercial districts and help to define and inform a community’s image and brand identity. In Yorkville, the Kendall County Courthouse and the Yorkville School (Parkview Christian Academy) are currently the only properties that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places, this nations’ official list of buildings, sites and structures that are worthy of preservation. The National Register of Historic Places is a program of the National Park Service, authorized under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and administered in the State of Illinois by the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA). Listing in the National Register does not impose restrictions on the use of private property but does provide tax credits for the rehabilitation of income-producing buildings and other incentives. Presently, there are no National Register Historic Districts in Yorkville and nor are there current historic resource surveys that identify and document architecturally and historically significant buildings and structures. However, the Illinois Historic Structures and Landmarks Surveys, undertaken by the State of Illinois from 1970 to 1975, identified 32 properties as potentially eligible for listing in the National Register; although, since the survey was undertaken more than 39 years ago, and buildings may have been altered in that time, additional consultation with IHPA would be needed to receive more current determinations of eligibility. Reconnaissance-level surveys of neighborhoods and commercial districts would also be needed to determine if any potential National Register Historic Districts are present in Yorkville. The State of Illinois surveys from the 1970s document a wide range of properties that could be eligible for the National Register - from Gothic Revival churches and schools to Craftsman style residences and Chicago Bungalows. Commercial and income-producing buildings listed in the National Register would be eligible to receive the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credit, which can be a significant incentive in facilitating the rehabilitation and adaptive use of some of Yorkville’s more significant historic resources, especially along the community’s commercial corridors. Residential buildings within National Register districts also qualify for the Illinois Property Tax Assessment Freeze program, which allows a homeowner to take an eight-year tax assessment freeze for a qualified rehabilitation of the property. PROPERTY NAME (if known)KEY ADDRESS Yorkville Congregational United Church of Christ 1 107 Center Street Unknown 2 108 East Somonauk Street Unknown 3 Northwest corner Bridge and River Street Unknown 4 406 S. Heustis Street Unknown 5 601 S. Huestis Street Kendall County Jail and Sheriff’s Office 6 111 W. Madison Street Unknown 7 610 S. Main Street Unknown 8 907 S. Main Street Unknown 9 210 E. Main Street Unknown 10 Northwest corner of Morgan and Ridge Street Unknown 11 507 W. Ridge Street Unknown 12 306 N. Bridge Street Unknown 13 Northeast corner of Bristol and Jackson Street Unknown 14 608 S. Huestis Street Unknown 15 206 E. Main Street Unknown 16 303 E. Main Street Unknown 17 308 E. Main Street Unknown 18 403 E. Main Street Greek Revival-styled house 19 11519 U.S. Route 34 Commercial building 20 Northeast corner Illinois Route 47 and Van Emmon Street Parkview School 21 201 W. Center Street Kendall County Courthouse 22 109 W. Ridge Street Beck Hotel 23 602 S. Main Street Schneider Saw Mill 24 W. River Street Kendall County War Dead Memorial 25 Bridge Street between Center and Main Streets World Wars Memorial 26 Northeast Ridge and Main Streets The United City of Yorkville is not currently a Certified Local Government (CLG), a program managed jointly between the National Park Service and the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency. Certified Local Government status provides opportunities to receive grants to conduct preservation planning activities, such as surveys and National Register nominations. To qualify as a CLG, a municipality must have an active historic preservation commission and have adopted a historic preservation ordinance certified by the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency. A complete listing of historic resources are identified in Table 3.29. Table 3.29: Properties Identified in Historic Architectural Geographic Information System Figure 3.25: Properties Identified in Historic Architectural Geographic Information System Figure 3.25: Properties Identified in Historic Architectural Geographic Information System 121 1225 2 13 3 4 14 5723 8 915 16 18 17 10 11 6 22 26 20 65 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE CURRENT CONDITIONS ROADWAY NETWORK Yorkville’s transportation system consists of a network of highways, local roads, sidewalks, freight rail lines, and trails. Yorkville is located approximately 12 miles south of Interstate 88 and 20 miles north of Interstate 80. The transportation network is owned and maintained by various agencies, including IDOT, Kendall County, and the City of Yorkville. The existing roadway and railroad network is shown in Figure 4.1. The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) provided traffic forecast data for key roadways. Existing and forecast traffic volumes are shown below. All of these roads are under the jurisdiction of IDOT. Roads that are highlighted in yellow in the table refer to roadways that are planned for roadway widening between today and 2040 to increase capacity. All remaining roadways shown in the table are expected to remain at their current width of 2 or 4 lanes as shown. With limited data, a planning level analysis of the major roads was conducted. Level of Service (LOS) is a measure of roadway performance that assigns a letter grade of A through F based on peak hour traffic volumes for a given roadway segment. It is a composite measure that takes into account average travel speed, average delay per roadway user, and the roadway’s design capacity or maximum serviceable traffic volume. An acceptable LOS for roadway networks is between LOS A, which signifies free-flow travel without delay caused by other roadway users and LOS D, which signifies delays average travel speeds that are roughly half of posted speed or traffic volumes approaching design capacity. SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Infrastructure is a twofold definition. First, it represents multi modal transportation systems which includes automobile transit and roadway systems, public transportation systems, airports and air travel, railroad (freight and commuter) systems, and bicycle and pedestrian transit systems. Second, transportation systems can be local, regional, state-wide, or even national. The purpose of this section is to describe the status of the current and proposed transportation system and explain how it will impact future growth. Findings that will influence planning recommendations are included at the end of this section. LANES CURRENT ADT YEAR 2040 ADT Illinois 47 South of IL 71 21 8,050 16,000 IL 71 north to Greenbrier Road 4 9,800 19,000 Greenbrier Road north to Schoolhouse Road (IL 126)4 12,300 23,000 Schoolhouse Road (IL 126) north to Fox Street 4 18,300 33,000 Fox Street north to River Road (Bridge)4 22,600 42,000 River Road north to US 34 4 19,500 33,000 US 34 to north Countryside Parkway 4 16,700 31,000 Countryside Parkway north to Cannonball Trail 21 15,100 26,000 Illinois 71 West of IL 47 2 8,450 13,000 IL 47 east to Country Hills Drive 21 9,200 18,000 Country Hills Drive east to Schoolhouse Road (IL 126)21 8,750 17,000 Schoolhouse Road (IL 126) east to Hilltop Road 21 9,050 16,000 Hilltop Road east to Van Emmon/Reservation Road 21 9,350 16,000 Illinois 126 (Schoolhouse Road) IL 47 east to IL 71 2 6,400 11,000 East of IL 71 2 6,150 11,000 US 34 West of Cannonball Trail 21 16,600 29,000 Cannonball Trail east to IL 47 21 19,300 25,000 IL 47 east to McHugh Road 21 13,300 26,000 McHugh Road east to Bristol Ridge Road 21 13,400 28,000 Bristol Ridge Road east to E. Rickard Road 21 16,000 31,000 E. Rickard Road east to Orchard Road 21 17,000 33,000 Orchard Road east to Clark Ave 2 12,500 18,000 Clark Ave east to W. Washington Street 2 11,900 17,000 Table 4.1: Existing and Forecast Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Volumes 1 These two-lane roadways are planned for widening to four lanes by 2040 Note: Roadways for which there may be capacity constraints in 2040 are highlighted in red. In the absence of peak hour data, the peak hour can be estimated as a share of average daily traffic (ADT). For typical conditions, peak hour traffic can be estimated at 10 percent of ADT. Using this method, key roadways in Yorkville were reviewed to identify existing or proposed year 2040 capacity constraints. Two-lane roadways with more than 17,000 vehicles per day and four-lane roadways with more than 36,000 vehicles per day may pose capacity constraints. However, other factors, such as driveways and the number of turning movements, also may have positive or negative impacts on roadway capacity and would need to be studied in further detail. Two roadway segments for which capacity constraints may be an issue in 2040 are highlighted in red in Table 4.1. With the proposed roadway widening, Yorkville’s transportation network is expected to be able to accommodate traffic forecasts. CMAP and IDOT update their plans on a regular basis to address changes in travel patterns and financial conditions. These plan updates should be monitored to determine if there are changes in conditions or planned improvements. 66 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 4.1 - Existing Roadway and Rail Network Figure 4.1 - Existing Roadway and Rail Network Pavement condition is another important factor in keeping the transportation network in a state of good repair. The City of Yorkville conducts pavement condition surveys on local roads on an as-needed basis to identify transportation project priorities for the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The City’s 2015 budget as approved by City Council stated that the City’s combined roadway score for roadways within the jurisdiction of the City of Yorkville is 82 out of a possible score 100. The figure below shows the share of roadways in each condition category by total mileage of roadway. In order to keep the roadway network in a state of good repair, the City estimated a need of $2.1 million annually for roadway improvements. $1 million has been funded. The City anticipates that the combined roadway score will drop from 82 to 77 by 2018 with some exceptions for roadway improvement projects currently under way. Graph 4.1: Roadway Conditions Source: City of Yorkville 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Mi l e s o f R o a d w a y Roadway Condition Rating 90-100 excellent 19.4 80-89 very good 31 70-79 good 20.2 60-69 fair 7.2 40-59 poor 3.7 10-39 vert poor 0 67 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 4.2 - Existing and Planned Bicycle Improvements Figure 4.2 - Existing and Planned Bicycle Improvements BICYCLE NETWORK Existing and proposed bicycle facilities are shown in Figure 4.2 – Existing and Proposed Bicycle Improvements. For the purpose of this plan the bicycle facilities are referred to as shared use paths or trails. A trail can be used by a pedestrian or a bicyclist and generally are a little wider than a sidewalk. Yorkville has done a very good job of requiring developers to include trails within residential subdivisions. The Yorkville Comprehensive Plan and Integrated Transportation Plan proposed much larger and more connected bicycle facility network. The Kendall County Trails and Greenways Plan states that “while a number of communities have constructed multi-use trails in Kendall County, the vast majority of the trail system exists only on plans.” Proposed trails from the Kendall County Trails and Greenways Plan were coordinated with the Yorkville Integrated Transportation Plan and 2008 Yorkville Comprehensive Plan. While a concerted effort has been undertaken to plan the location of trails within Yorkville, the proposed trail network relied on implementation by developers as a condition of subdivision approval. Additionally, trail connections are needed across roadways. On- street facilities will be needed in order to make these connections. Generally, low-volume, two-lane streets with posted speeds below 30 miles per hour are considered low-stress roadways that are good candidates for accommodating bicyclists on-street without much additional accommodation. If the City wishes to expand its existing bike network, many of these streets can be identified, or the City can install signs directing roadway users to the best streets for bicycling. However, wider and faster roadways need to be analyzed in greater detail to identify what types of facilities would be needed to provide a facility that is comfortable for bicyclists to use. A bicycle plan is needed that identifies specific gaps in the network for bicycling and prepares a capital improvement plan for bicycle facilities. Much of the cost in improving bicycling in Yorkville will occur at intersections, which generally are the highest-stress locations within a bicycle network. 68 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE PEDESTRIAN NETWORK Sidewalks, shown in blue in Figure 4.3, are located along most residential streets within the City. Illinois Route 47, through downtown Yorkville, also has sidewalks. As shown in the figure, every subdivision that has been completed in Yorkville has a sidewalk network. Gaps exist on major roads including River Road, Illinois Route 71, and Illinois Route 126. On these roadways, there are sidewalks in some locations but gaps in the network limit connectivity. Sidewalks are a requirement of subdivision approval, and are installed by developers when subdivisions are built. Some older subdivisions do not have sidewalks. Developments within the City of Yorkville where the sidewalk system has not been fully completed and gaps exist are outlined in red. Pedestrian crosswalks in Yorkville generally are not marked unless they are located on city-owned roads and there are sidewalks leading to the crossing. An example of this is on Game Farm Road near City Hall in the image below. Figure 4.3 - Existing Sidewalk Network Figure 4.3 - Existing Sidewalk Network 69 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE TRANSIT Transit service in Yorkville is provided as a paratransit “dial a ride” style service operated by Kendall Area Transit (KAT). Its objective is to “implement transit service in the Kendall County area that is reliable, flexible, and financially sustainable, while satisfying the various mobility needs of the general public and individuals unable to access or operate a private automobile.” The service requires registration and serves destinations within Kendall County as well as select locations outside Kendall County. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe ( BNSF) Line carries Metra commuter rail traffic between Aurora and Chicago. Currently, Metra is conducting a feasibility study to determine the potential for extending commuter rail service west of the current terminus in Aurora, located 12 miles northeast of Yorkville. Pending the results of the study, the City of Yorkville has identified a location along the BNSF line that could serve as a potential station area. The proposed station area would be located along the BNSF on the western end of Yorkville between Beecher Road and Faxon Road. The Illinois Valley Public Transportation Plan (IVPTP) is currently underway to explore the physical, operational, and financial feasibility of commuter rail along the Illinois Railway (IR) between Aurora and Peru and the CXS operated railway between Joliet and Peru. The study concluded that a physical connection was feasible, but that further study was needed to determine whether ridership would support the investment. Figure 4.4 - Existing Rail Network NAME STREET SITE SIZE (ACRES)ZONING N/W Corner Il.47&Bn N/W Corner Il.47&Bn 65.7 Industrial-Light N/W Corner Il 47&71 N/W Corner Il 47&71 50 Industrial-Light Corneils Rd.Corneils Rd.15.35 Unknown Yorkville Business Center - Lot 19 147 Commercial Drive 3.5 Industrial-Light Yorkville Business Center - Lot 20 169 Commercial Drive 2 Industrial-Light Yorkville Business Center - Lot 12 198 Commercial Drive 1 Industrial-Light Yorkville Business Center - Lot 14 n/a 1 Industrial-Light Yorkville Business Center - Lot 15 132 Commercial Drive 1 Industrial-Light Yorkville Business Center - Lot 23 225 Commercial Drive 1 Industrial-Light Yorkville Business Center - Lot 8 254 Commercial Drive 1 Industrial-Light Yorkville Business Center - Lot 9 232 Commercial Drive 1 Industrial-Light Table 4.2: Industrial Property Listings Figure 4.4 - Existing Rail Network RAIL FREIGHT The railroad network through Yorkville consists of two main lines: the BNSF Line that passes through northern Yorkville, and the Illinois Railway, which is a freight-only line that travels along the south bank of the Fox River from Montgomery to Streator, Illinois. In the Yorkville area, there are three spur lines: • Commonwealth Edison Spur Line, located near the intersection of Faxon Road and Beecher Road provides access to the BNSF Line • F.E. Wheaton Spur Line, located west of Illinois 47, northwest of the Wrigley Manufacturing Company provides access to the BNSF Line • Hydraulic Avenue Spur Line , located along the Fox River on Hydraulic Avenue, just east of Illinois 47 provides access to the IR Line These freight lines add value to property that could potentially be used as industrial property. Figure 4-4 Rail Line Services shows the approximate location of these rail spurs. The Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity (DCEO) provides developers with information on industrial properties by municipality. For each property listed, DCEO provides a transportation summary that identifies key information such as the distance to the nearest interstate, airport, and whether rail service is available. The properties listed are shown in Table 4.2. 70 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS Figure 4-5 – Regional Transportation shows the status of various roadway projects in Yorkville and nearby region that will impact Yorkville. The project sponsors include IDOT, Kendall County, Metra, and the Illinois Tollway. Table 4.3 below provides an overview of each project. It should be noted that projects often do not have funds available for the next phase of work since current efforts are a requirement to enter into the next phase. The Prairie Parkway is shown on Figure 4-5, which is a regional transportation project proposed to connect Figure 4.5 - Proposed Regional Transportation Improvements Figure 4.5 - Proposed Regional Transportation Improvements Interstates 88 to 80 through Kane and Kendall Counties. While planning for the project is currently on hold, it remains part of regional and local plans, as it would significantly impact roadway access in and around Yorkville. Figure 4-6 shows proposed new local roads that would provide connections for future growth. The proposed local roads were taken from the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. The issues associated with these proposed roadways remain the same as there was no reason to revise or update the proposed roadways. STATUS STATUS A.Prairie Parkway Study (Illinois Tollway) The Prairie Parkway is a proposed limited-access tollway that would connect I-88 to I-80 through Kane, Kendall, and Grundy Counties. The project, while shown in the GO TO 2040 regional plan for the Chicago Metropolitan region, is in the feasibility study phase and is currently on hold. Feasibility Study (currently inactive) B.I-88 / IL 47 Full Interchange (Illinois Tollway) The Illinois Tollway is currently in Phase 1 engineering for a full interchange at I-88 and IL 47. Currently only a partial interchange, the completed project will improve access in all directions.Phase 1 Study C.U.S. 30 from IL 47 to Dugan Road IDOT is in Phase 1 to improve U.S. 30 using a Context Sensitive Solutions approach. The study includes the potential to widen U.S. 30.Phase 1 Study D.IL 47 from Kennedy Road to Cross Street IDOT is in Phase 1 to improve IL 47 using a Context Sensitive Solutions approach. The study includes the potential increase traffic capacity.Phase 1 Study E.U.S. 30 from near IL 47 to near IL 31 IDOT is in Phase 1 to improve U.S. 30 using a Context Sensitive Solutions approach. The study includes the potential increase traffic capacity.Phase 1 Study F.U.S. 30 from Orchard Road to Briarcliff Road This section of U.S. 30 currently is under construction by IDOT to widen the roadway to four lanes.Under Construction G.Proposed Metra Station Metra currently is studying the feasibility of extending Metra commuter rail service west of its current terminus in Aurora. Kendall County would need to provide funding for construction and operations.Feasibility Study H.U.S. 34 from near IL 47 to Orchard Road This segment currently is under construction by IDOT to widen the roadway to four lanes.Under Construction I.U.S. 34 from Eldamain Road to Center Parkway IDOT currently is in Phase 1 engineering to determine potential traffic capacity improvements.Phase 1 Study J.IL 47 from IL 71 to Kennedy Road This segment of IL 47 currently is under construction by IDOT to widen the road to four lanes.Under Construction K.IL 71 from near IL 47 to near Orchard Road IDOT currently is in Phase 1 engineering to determine potential traffic capacity improvements.Phase 1 Study L.IL 47 from Caton Farm Road to IL 71 IDOT currently is in Phase 1 engineering to determine potential traffic capacity improvements Phase 1 Study M.Wikaduke Trail The four counties of Will, Kane, DuPage, and Kendall have identified a potential corridor for a north- south roadway linking I-88 and I-80, which seeks to provide a highway connection on the eastern end of Yorkville. It is currently part of an access study and in each county’s long-term transportation plan, though parts of it currently are under construction in Kane and Kendall Counties. Long-Term Plan (some local construction) N.Eldamain Road from Menards to Galena Road Kendall County currently is in Phase 2 engineering for the construction of an extension of Eldamain Road.Phase 2 Engineering O.Eldamain Road from Highpoint Road to U.S. 34 This segment of Eldamain Road currently is under construction by Kendall County but does not include funding for a bridge across the Fox River.Under Construction P.IL 47 from Sherril Road to Caton Farm Road This segment of IL 47 currently is under construction by IDOT to improve connections from the south end of the Yorkville Planning Area to the Kendall-Grundy County line.Under Construction Table 4.3: Regional Transportation Improvements Status 71 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SUMMARY OF TRANSPORTATION OBSERVATIONS The following are key observations and issues related to transportation in Yorkville: • Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are provided within many subdivisions. However, there is a need to develop connections between subdivisions. • The City’s Integrated Transportation Plan shows an extensive proposed trail plan. It was based on developers providing the facilities. Given the low growth period, the City should focus on connecting the existing trail network. • There is a lack of pedestrian and bicycle connections to major traffic generators such as schools, parks, commercial areas and employment locations. • A commuter station in Yorkville is in the very early planning stage as part of the proposed Metra commuter service extension along the BNSF Line. A land use strategy that focuses on transit oriented development is needed surrounding the area where the Metra station is planned. • Travel throughout Yorkville, for the most part, is automobile-oriented. That is, an automobile is needed to reach most destinations outside of residential subdivision. A much more conscious decision will need to be made if the City desires a Complete Streets approach that would encourage bicycling and walking beyond residential subdivisions. • Roadway capacity on bridges is a factor limiting development south of the Fox River. However, once Illinois 47 expansion is complete, it will be some time until this is an issue again. While traffic on Illinois 47 will continue to grow, the proposed Eldamain Road Bridge will provide another reliever to north south movement. Beyond these two expansions, it will be some time and a lot of growth will need to occur before a third bridge is needed. Given the extensive growth in traffic that has been forecasted, it would be a good idea for Yorkville to consider developing a travel demand model to consider the need for future roadway improvements. This could be done in conjunction with Kendall County. • Illinois 47 currently is undergoing a roadway expansion project throughout much of Yorkville. The Illinois 47 and other regional transportation investments will continue to add economic development value to the Yorkville area. Figure 4.6 - Proposed Roadways by Functional Classification Figure 4.6 - Proposed Roadways by Functional Classification 72 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE The purpose of this section is to review the status of the water supply and sanitary waste systems and to evaluate how they will affect growth. Findings are presented that will influence planning recommendations. The City has other utilities such as the stormwater system (United City of Yorkville), electrical (Commonwealth Edison), natural gas (Nicor), telephone/cable/internet (Comcast). However, it is the water supply and sanitary waste system that has the most impact on land use and growth. WATER SUPPLY The water supply system is owned by the United City of Yorkville. Water is obtained through ground wells, although it should be noted that a regional water source is being explored by the City as ground water supplies are being depleted. Future alternatives could include water from the Fox River or Lake Michigan. This is long-term study and no final conclusions have been reached. An analysis of the water supply system was prepared more than a decade ago and is no longer current. A copy of the water supply study was not provided by the City Engineer, as they felt it out of date and no longer reliable. Therefore, an analysis of this utility system in relation to future land use and growth was not possible due to the age of the study and need to prepare an update of the water supply plan. The Existing Water Main Network is shown in Figure 4.7. This figure illustrates one of the essential infrastructure components that add economic value to the City of Yorkville. For many developers, the ability to provide City supplied water is an important reason for annexing into the City. Figure 4.7 illustrates two important features in relation to growth management. First, there is a lot of undeveloped land on the outskirts of the City that are not serviced by City water. The City should update its water supply expansion plan before any extension of water mains is considered. Second, new development should be focused on those areas in the main part of the City that can utilize existing water mains. There are large parcels of undeveloped land on the outskirts of the City limits that are not serviced by the municipal water system. Figure 4.7 - Existing Water Main Network SANITARY SYSTEM Sanitary service infrastructure within the City involves three different government agencies. Most of the local sanitary sewers are owned by the City. These city- owned lines carry sanitary waste from buildings to the main lines that are owned by the sanitary districts. The sanitary sewer mainlines and waste water treatment facilities are owned by two separate government bodies. The Yorkville–Bristol Sanitary District is responsible for serving most of the area within the City. The Fox Metro Water Reclamation District serves a small area in the northeast corner of the City. These various lines are shown in Figure 4-8, Existing Sanitary Network. Figure 4-8 shows the watershed divide where storm water flows north to the Fox River or south to the Illinois River. Generally, sanitary sewer lines operate by gravity flow, providing sanitary sewer service south of this divide will be somewhat difficult as lift stations will be needed to get the flow over the ridge line. The Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District (YBSD) primarily services areas within the United City of Yorkville. There are two main elements of the system – collection and treatment. The future collection system has been addressed by the YBSD in a Future Wastewater Collection System Map dated August 8, 2007 showing the proposed locations for the extension of interceptors, force mains and lift stations. Figure 4.7 - Existing Water Main Network 73 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE Figure 4.8 - Existing Sanitary Network The YBSD wastewater treatment facility is located on the east side of Blackberry Creek and north of the Fox River. According to discussions with YBSD in Fall 2014, the facility is nearing capacity. While a slowdown in development has extended the time before the facility reaches operating capacity, YBSD identified a need for expansion. There are three primary factors that affect capacity of the facility: • flow (in of gallons of wastewater), • treatment for the removal of biological oxygen demand, and • treatment for the removal of suspended solids. YBSD will need to expand wastewater treatment capacity in the future. YBSD has secured a permit from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) and has acquired land for expansion. However, a slowdown in development halted construction and the permit has since expired. Figure 4.11 also shows the existing and potential facility area planning (FPA) boundaries. Sanitary districts are required to establish facility planning areas and have them approved by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA). A facility planning area is an area in which the sanitary district is allowed to extend their service area, as shown in Figure 4.11. The YBSD facility planning area boundary does not necessarily have to be coterminous with the City’s planning boundary as these are separate government agencies subject to different state statutes. Still, the YBSD system plan should be prepared in a coordinated manner with the City’s comprehensive plan. This is elaborated on in the next section. The situation with the sanitary sewer system is very similar to the water system. That is, an updated plan is needed to provide information on this system will be affected by future growth. The update of the sanitary system plan is more critical in that the system is near capacity. Sometime during slow growth periods it can be easy to overlook the need to prepare system expansion plans. However, the treatment system is near capacity and during a low growth period the water flow can slowly increase until it reached a critical point for expansion. Again, like the water system, encouraging development that can utilize the existing sewer mains should be preferred over extending main lines in the outskirts until the sanitary system is updated. SUMMARY OF UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE FINDINGS • The water supply system and sanitary waste system are the two utility systems that have the most impact of Yorkville growth. The water supply system is owned by the United City of Yorkville. The sanitary waste system is primarily operated and maintained by a separate government agency, the Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District. • An update to the water supply plan is needed. • The Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary Waste Treatment Facility is close to capacity. This has not been an issue with the recent economic slowdown. However, an expansion plan should be prepared. • The utility expansion plans should be prepared in light of revised population, economic and growth forecasts presented in this Comprehensive Plan. Figure 4.8 - Existing Sanitary Network 74 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE PLANNING AREAS, MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES, AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT The purpose of this section is to explain how utility infrastructure affects the municipal boundaries and growth patterns of the City. The ability of Yorkville to grow is very much a function of its capability to provide water and service. As Yorkville grows and develops it needs to consider what its future boundaries will be. This discussion is then used to present findings that assist in making planning recommendations. MUNICIPAL PLANNING AREA AND EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION A municipal planning area and extraterritorial jurisdiction, while sometime referred together, are not the same thing. A municipality can plan to grow its boundaries as far as it wants to. However, by Illinois State Statures, its comprehensive plan and territorial jurisdiction can only extend for one and one-half miles beyond its border. If there are other municipalities within that mile and one-half, then the planning area is equidistant between the two municipalities. State regulations allow a municipality to exert some control over development that falls outside its corporate limits but within its territorial jurisdiction with the understanding that these areas may eventually be annexed by the municipality. The municipality can influence the land use and impose its standards on roadways and infrastructure. The City of Yorkville has done a very good job of establishing boundary agreements with its neighboring municipalities that are used to define the planning area. These boundary agreements allow for thought out growth and clear demarcation of future city limits. It prevents the interlocked boundary lines that can occur when municipalities do not work together. The status of the boundary agreements is shown in Figure 4.9. Some of the boundary agreements will expire in the next decade and will need to be updated. The Village of Millbrook is now close to the United City of Yorkville borders and a boundary agreement should be considered. The 2008 Comprehensive Plan shows a planning boundary area to the south that is much greater than one and a half miles. While Yorkville can plan to grow into this area, its territorial jurisdiction can only extend a mile and a half beyond its municipal limit. Figure 4.9 shows that the City of Joliet has extended its municipal boundary into Yorkville Planning Area, as designated on the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. However, Joliet remains more than a mile and a half from the current Yorkville city limits. The City should consider developing a boundary agreement with the City of Joliet. MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT Due to the growth that occurred in the 2000s, the City witnessed leap frog development that has resulted in scattered municipal boundaries. Another way of looking at this is to say that the City boundaries grew out along the tentacles of the utility systems. In some areas on the outskirts of the City the municipal boundaries are beyond the current reach of the utility system. With the growth slowdown, it would be better to focus on infill development. That is, promote development that could use existing water and sanitary systems rather than extending the system. This sort of policy would promote economies of scale for providing municipal services. Contiguous municipal boundaries without unincorporated voids are easier to service. For example, a police car has to travel from incorporated to unincorporated and then to incorporated boundaries. This same principal applies to roadway maintenance and utility service (water and sanitary). This adds expense to the provision of infrastructure and services. Figure 4.9 - Boundary Agreements Figure 4.9 - Boundary Agreements 75 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE The City has the authority to exert greater control over future development in unincorporated Kendall County that falls within its extraterritorial jurisdiction. Figure 4.10 shows the subdivisions outside Yorkville that fall within the planning area. While these are outside the City limits, they are still part of the community and may still utilize City roads, parks, or other city facilities. Annexation of these areas after they are built is very difficult as it requires approval of residents. Therefore, it is recommended that Yorkville should work with Kendall County to either annex future development into the City or ensure that unincorporated subdivisions adhere to the United City of Yorkville’s roadway, sidewalk, and subdivision standards. Figure 4.10 also illustrates areas that are surrounded by Yorkville municipal limits. Under Illinois Statutes, a municipality can annex areas that are less than 60 acres and surrounded by the City. Figure 4.11 shows the Yorkville City and Planning Area Boundaries including those of the YBSD. The lack of congruency in boundaries is most visible in the area south of Fox River. When the water supply plan and sanitary district plan are updated, they should be in a coordinated fashion that takes into account realistic growth projections for the next ten to twenty years. Figure 4.10 - Existing Development Figure 4.10 - Existing Development 76 SECTION 4 - TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT ISSUES • The City has established boundary agreements with most neighboring municipalities. This is a very good practice that allows for orderly growth and clear demarcation of municipal limits. Some of these boundary agreements will need to be updated in the next decade. • Boundary agreement with Millbrook and Joliet should be considered. • To the south there are no municipalities within one and a half miles. The planning area at this location should remain at the full one and half miles currently shown. In some places the planning area can extend beyond the current designation. • Some of the City’s planning area extends beyond one and a half miles. This is okay, but its comprehensive plan and territorial jurisdiction can only extend one and a half miles. • Given current slow growth patterns, it is not likely that the City will grow to the south in the near future. This growth may be slowed by the Fox River/Illinois River watersheds ridge line. • The City should consider a policy that focuses on encouraging development that utilizes existing sanitary and water main lines before extending these lines until such time when growth accelerates. This policy would decrease incremental or per capita costs associated with water and sanitary service. Encouraging infill development also can help to reduce other municipal operating costs on a per capita basis. • The City should consider annexing areas that are surrounded by the City and are fewer than 60 acres. • The water supply system and sanitary system plans need to be updated. The updates should be done in a collaborative manner and use a realistic evaluation of growth potential for the next ten to twenty years. • The City should exercise more development control over new development in Kendall County that falls within the City’s extraterritorial jurisdiction. This could be done either by working with Kendall County to annex developments or ensure that development standards for Kendall County subdivisions within Yorkville’s extraterritorial jurisdiction are consistent with those of the United City of Yorkville. Figure 4.11 - Planning Areas Figure 4.11 - Planning Areas 77THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SECTION 5 - PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY SECTION 5 - PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY A fundamental component of any successful comprehensive planning process is community engagement. Employing a multi-layered public process enables the identification and establishment of shared priorities and civic character. It is important that this process achieve both a range of community involvement, and garner a deep understanding of the questions and concerns that arise. Beyond information gathering, a robust, multi phased public process also plays an important role in ensuring a smooth transition into implementation. To achieve these goals, the public process for Phase 1 of the Yorkville Comprehensive Plan Update utilized the following structures for engaging the community: STAKEHOLDER LISTENING SESSIONS Between October 2014 and March 2015, a series of interview and listening sessions were conducted with various Yorkville stakeholder groups, including City of Yorkville department heads, such as Public Works, Parks and Recreation, the Library, and others; local corporations and business owners; developers; civic groups; the local school district; Kendall County; the Yorkville Bristol Sanitary District; the Kendall County Forest Preserve; the Illinois Department of Transportation other governmental agencies and Yorkville residents. The following is a summary of key planning issues garnered from the listening sessions. INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS The City has undertaken very effective capital improvements programming and the programs are continually being reviewed. This program is being used to address a few subdivisions with outstanding infrastructure issues. It should also address resurfacing of downtown streets. A comprehensive street evaluation has also been undertaken to help shape the five-year capital improvements plan. In terms of sanitary system issues, there has been some infiltration issues in the central area. The City has been working with the Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District to address some of these concerns. The last Water Plan was completed more than 5 years ago and should be updated with a comprehensive evaluation. Water planning efforts should be a priority because according to the Illinois State Water Survey, Kendall County may be facing a water shortage in the coming years since there has been a decline in the County’s aquifer. OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION The Parks and Recreation Department has several needs, including a recreational facility, a maintenance building and a new park on the City’s south side that could be in the range of 50, 60, or 100 acres. Some planning has taken place for the recreational facility, which most likely would be a facility with indoor fields and equipment. A Parks Master Plan was prepared in 2008 that identified 11 specific park planning areas; the Plan needs to be updated given that the City is updating it’s comprehensive plan. The department is also in the process of conducting a community survey. Partnerships with the service clubs can be used to fund- raise and off-set capital and long–term maintenance costs, such as the agreement for maintenance services at Heartland Circle with the Junior Women’s Club. In 2010, a Transportation-Trail Plan was prepared; however the plan needs to be updated. About 500 trails are proposed. The City maintains easements over trails in private subdivisions but there is a need to connect these trails together. Other bike trail connections are planned and will occur along Game Farm Road, Kennedy Road and State Routes 34 and 71. There are many private parks in Yorkville, which causes confusion among residents regarding which parks are owned by the City and which are not. There have been some discussions about looking into becoming a park district but there seems to be a “silent majority” that has yet to speak out on the need for maintaining and enhancing the community’s park system. There are also some benefits to being a City Department, especially in regards to the sharing of equipment between other departments. INSTITUTIONS Yorkville CUSD 115 district is currently undertaking a substantial review of its school structure and shifting and realignment of its school boundaries. Currently, schools are organized around micro-neighborhoods. Overall there is potential to change which schools serve which neighborhoods or subdivisions. If all the undeveloped lots were developed in Yorkville today and there are two kids per household, the school population could grow to 9,000 students from 5,300 currently. The District is about to complete a $22 million addition to the High School that will add 90,000 square feet of new and remodeled space. However, the High School may need to be expanded again if there is additional population growth. After the High School expansion is complete, the District will be looking at facility needs for the Grade Schools. Both Autumn Creek and Bristol Bay have started to grow and may need more space. DOWNTOWN YORKVILLE Downtown Yorkville should be a key focus of comprehensive planning efforts, including exploring revitalization and redevelopment scenarios, particularly along the riverfront. An important first step should be to define the downtown area and determine which areas should be the focus of beautification standards or design guidelines. With brownfield and environmental issues, increasing traffic speeds on Illinois Route 47 and a lack of available parking as barriers to redevelopment, a sustainable development strategy based on market realities should be the goal. In addition to this, recommendations for how Yorkville can do a better job of packaging and promoting itself – downtown in particular, should be explored. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT Planning and growth efforts should focus on areas that have already been developed and invested in - in particular residential and commercial areas along and near downtown and at the Route 47 and 34 intersections. These areas have existing infrastructure that could be built on. The Fox River is viewed as a barrier in the community, creating a perception that the southern part of Yorkville is isolated. Development of a grocery store and new restaurants would help bring a stronger identity to the south side. The Route 47 and 71 intersection is an important commercial node where this development could be focused. The City’s subdivision and landscape codes need to be updated in order to provide more sustainable and appealing developments. This is particularly true for areas along Route 47 and Eldamain Road, two corridors that should be a priority for maintaining a unique community character. There has been some emphasis in the community on maintaining as much open space as possible in new developments There is not a lot of variety in housing choices in Yorkville. More dense housing with smaller lots or condominiums should be explored. A new Metra station could spur new development in Yorkville and a long term vision for this facility and its areas should be created. URBAN DESIGN Yorkville needs some placemaking – banners, wayfinding and signage could help to define the community a bit more. The Plan also needs to look at the corridors and consider gateway entrances, especially to define Yorkville better between itself and other communities. Community appearances should also be a key planning priority. Yorkville has a different “feel” than neighboring Fox Valley communities – it’s more “homier” and “small townish” than Oswego. Yorkville should strive to keep that feel. 78 THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SECTION 5 - PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY COMMUNITY “SPEAK-OUT” WORKSHOP #1 (APRIL 16TH, 2015) On the 16th of April 2015, a community workshop was held at the United City of Yorkville City Hall. Roughly 30 community members were in attendance. This first community workshop introduced the project team and planning process to the community, while providing an open forum to gather first hand thoughts and opinions about the United City of Yorkville. The workshop was comprised of various stations in which participants could provide their thoughts on certain topics, including: STATION 1: PROJECT INTRODUCTION Participants were given the opportunity to “sign-in” to the workshop and were given a project information handout. A project information board was also on display presenting the goals and phases of the project as well as an overall project timeline. A Study Area Map was displayed and participants were asked to place a yellow sticker where they lived and a blue sticker where they work. Fifteen participants live within the study area (eight north of and seven south of the Fox River). Two participants work within the study area (one north of and the other south of the Fox River) and four participants identified that they work outside of the study area boundary. Additionally community facts boards were displayed to share demographic, housing, and construction information about the City. STATION 2: TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE The transportation and infrastructure station focused on the following issues: • Proposed Roadway Network • Bicycle Network • Development outside City Boundaries but within Planning Area A majority of the discussion centered around the cost to the City for serving unincorporated areas without receiving property or sales tax revenue in return. Many workshop attendees felt that this issue was worth addressing. Additionally, there was general consensus that the City should support or encourage infill development before promoting development in new areas. Regarding commercial development, workshop attendees expressed concern that more retail opportunities are needed in Yorkville that would help keep more tax revenue in the City rather than letting it leak to the nearby municipalities of Aurora or Oswego. Some residents expressed concern about where future bridges would be located despite being part of the City’s transportation plan. It appeared to have been based on communication between homeowners and developers, and did not involve the City. These residents expressed concern over the placement of one of the bridges and the impact it would have on a particular subdivision. As part of station 2, a short survey was distributed that requested attendees’ preferences for how to work with unincorporated subdivision development, connect trails and open space, and manage the extension of storm and sanitary utility infrastructure to support and guide future development within Yorkville. 79THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SECTION 5 - PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY Figure 2.7 - Overall Public Input Map (North Yorkville) ACTIVE RECREATION (recreation center, dog park, sports fields)PASSIVE RECREATION (wildlife habitat) PASSIVE RECREATION (hiking trails) INDUSTRIAL (warehouse, manufacturing * SENIOR HOUSING CIVIC USES BIKE T R A I L GREENSPACE WITH CIVIC USES SINGLE- FAMILY WITH PARKS MIXED-USE, RETAIL, MULTIFAMILY COMMERCIAL WITH CIVIC USES MEDICAL WITH CIVIC USES COMMERCIAL WITH SENIOR HOUSING AND GREENSPACE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTSGREENSPACE WITH CIVIC USES STATION 3: ROUTE 47 FOCUS AREA Station 3 focused on the Route 47 corridor. Participants were asked to view land use maps of the corridor and to place icon stickers of elements and land uses where they would like to see them developed. STATION 4: ELDAMAIN FOCUS AREA Station 4 focused on the Eldamain Road corridor. Participants were asked to view land use maps of the corridor and to place icon stickers of elements and land uses where they would like to see them developed. STATION 5: DOWNTOWN FOCUS AREA Station 5 focused on the downtown area. Participants were asked to view an aerial photograph of downtown and to place icon stickers of elements and land uses where they would like to see them developed. STATION 6: OVERALL CITY MAP Station 6 provided an opportunity for participants to share their ideas about what they’d like to see anywhere in Yorkville. A large city-wide, overall land use map was provided for participants to place icon stickers onto. The input received from workshop participants has been summarized into general land use diagrams (Figures 2.7 and 2.8) described below: EASTERN GATEWAY Figure 2.7 - Overall Public Input Map (North Yorkville) 80 THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SECTION 5 - PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY ONLINE SURVEY The following section summarizes the results of an online survey conducted between January and March of 2015. 152 people participated in the survey. The planning team anticipates re-introducing the survey at another point in time during the planning process in order to gain additional community feedback. These initial results will be used to assess existing conditions and planning issues. SUMMARY OF DEMOGRAPHIC RESPONSES A series of nine questions were presented regarding respondent demographic characteristics, such as age and gender, household information, education and occupation, and place of employment. Of the respondents who took the survey, 66 percent were female, 34 percent male with the majority (79 percent) between the ages of 25 and 44 years old. In terms of household information and other similar characteristics, more than 67 percent of the respondents have one to three children living in the home and about an even number having lived in the home between one and five years (43 percent) and between six and ten years (42 percent). Most respondents work within 25 miles of Yorkville and more than 50 percent had an annual income of $100,000 or more. SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY QUALITY RESPONSES Ten questions were presented regarding respondent opinions on Yorkville municipal and community services, ranging from police and fire, schools, parks and infrastructure. Responses were measured according to a scale of 1 to 10 with “1” meaning “Very Dissatisfied” and “10” meaning “Very Satisfied.” Fire and police, and emergency and general health care services generally ranked high among all community services by survey respondents with an average rating of 7.9. The condition of streets and sidewalks and the quality of utility and recreational programs were the lower-ranked community services with an average rating of 5.3. Local schools received an average rating of 5.98. SUMMARY OF HOUSING RESPONSES Three survey questions were included regarding housing. More than 93 percent of survey respondents reporting owning their home while 7 percent rent. The approximate monthly payment for those who rent is an average of $850. When asked what type of housing is most needed in Yorkville, 54 percent of the survey respondents believed “higher-income housing” is desirable while 46 percent stated that “affordable housing” is a specific need in Yorkville. SUMMARY OF BUSINESS RESPONSES A series of five questions were asked in the survey regarding community growth and economic development. More than 83 percent of the respondents believe that restaurants and entertainment-related businesses are most needed in Yorkville, especially if they were located in the downtown district. In terms of tourism potential in Yorkville, on a scale of 1 to 5 with “1” being a low priority and “5” being a high priority, Fox River recreational tourism, including canoeing and kayaking activities, received the highest rated average at 4.11. Horseback riding and heritage tourism received the lowest rating averages at 2.50. Developing new events and festivals, revitalizing downtown, and allowing bed and breakfasts and more campgrounds in Yorkville were also listed as important future community initiatives. In addition, more than 46 percent of respondents said they would like to see Yorkville’s population increase. SUMMARY OF OVERALL COMMUNITY RESPONSES The last three questions in the community survey focused on general planning issues and Yorkville livability. According to survey respondents, the top planning issues include downtown revitalization, unfinished and deteriorated roads, incomplete subdivisions and the lack of a pedestrian and bicycle network. Respondents also stated that Yorkville’s affordability, good schools and small town feel were the principal reasons why they live in Yorkville. Figure 2.8 - Overall Public Input Map (South Yorkville) SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING WITH GREENSPACE RESIDENTIAL ACTIVE RECREATION RETAIL GROCERY STORE GROCERY/ OFFICE PARK SPACE MEDICAL/ RECREATION CENTER B I K E T R A I L BIKE TRAIL DOWNTOWN MIXED-USE *SOUTHERN GATEWAY Figure 2.8 - Overall Public Input Map (South Yorkville) SECTION 6 - SUMMARY OF PLANNING ISSUES 81THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE SECTION 6 - SUMMARY OF PLANNING ISSUES The following findings are policy issues that should be addressed through the comprehensive planning process. They are based on a review of the City’s municipal boundary, planning area boundary, the Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District Facility Planning Area (FPA), existing land use, zoning, and public input. ISSUE #1: UNINCORPORATED AREAS Subdivisions within close proximity to Yorkville have been built in unincorporated Kendall County without input or approval from the City. As Yorkville grows, these areas may be annexed into Yorkville in the future. While the City does not have land use jurisdiction in unincorporated areas, they do have influence on development that occurs within their planning area boundary. Additionally, unincorporated areas that are less than 60 acres in size and are completed surrounded by the City are eligible to be incorporated under State of Illinois law. Yorkville could better control its future by annexing these areas. A cost-revenue analysis could be performed to determine the financial benefit of annexation These areas could also be better served by the services that the City of Yorkville provides. Policy Questions: Should Yorkville work with Kendall County to have areas annex into the City as a condition of development approvals? Should areas of less than 60 acres that are surrounded by Yorkville be incorporated into the City? Should Yorkville work with property owners of unincorporated areas within close proximity to pursue annexation of these areas? ISSUE #2: FUTURE DEVELOPMENT The United City of Yorkville has grown in a scattered, leap frog manner. This type of development sometimes can occur when economic activity is strong and growth is occurring. However, when the economy stalls and growth is no longer occurring, it can result in inefficient provision of city services. Extension of water main, storm and sanitary sewer into undeveloped areas costs the City more in operations and maintenance than it does to develop in areas where water and sewer mains already exist. There is also a ridge line that travels in an east-west fashion along Illinois Route 71. The area north of this ridge City drains to the Fox River while the area to the south drains to Illinois River. This divide makes it more costly to extend municipal utilities to the south of the divide. Policy Questions: Should the City promote an infill policy to encourage new development to tap into existing utility lines before extending existing lines until such time that development within the City becomes more prevalent? Should the City prohibit or restrict development south of the ridge line along Illinois Route 71 until development becomes more prevalent throughout the City? ISSUE #3: TRANSPORTATION NETWORK Gaps currently exist in the bicycle transportation network. The Integrated Transportation Plan relies upon developers to complete the trail network and given the lack of development activity many proposed trails have not been completed and the system remains unconnected. While many new subdivisions have good conditions for walking and bicycling within the subdivision itself, it is difficult to travel between subdivisions especially when they are separated by County or State Highways with little to no bicycle or pedestrian accommodations. Additionally, the City has not adopted a policy of promoting on-street bicycle facilities. Future roadway connections within the planning area boundary of Yorkville present an opportunity to set aside space to accommodate bicycle, pedestrian, and automobile pathways. Policy Questions: Which bicycle connections or routes are priorities? Are on-street connections acceptable if they can be safely designed? Should the City have a complete streets policy to ensure that adequate space is preserved for collector and arterial roadways to accommodate automobiles, bicycles, and pedestrians? ISSUE #4: ACTIVE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENTS Eight residential subdivision developments are currently being developed in Yorkville, representing 1,366 entitled homes. With approximately 74 building permits being issued a year, the 515 homes not yet built represent a supply of entitled homes that will take eight years to complete. Policy Questions: Should the City take an active role in completing unfinished residential subdivision developments? Which unfinished residential subdivision developments should be a priority? Are there any entitled subdivisions that the City should work to remove entitlements from? SECTION 6 - SUMMARY OF PLANNING ISSUES 82 THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE ISSUE #5: RETAIL SALES / COMMERCIAL AREAS In most retail sales categories, local demand in Yorkville is being lost to stores outside the City. This is particularly true for the grocery store, general merchandise, and full service restaurant categories. Policy Questions: Where should new retail development be focused? ISSUE #6: DOWNTOWN Both survey respondents and open house participants expressed that one of the reasons they like living in Yorkville is because of the City’s small town feel. At the same time, the lack of a vibrant downtown was identified as one of the top three issues facing Yorkville today. Developing downtown was also an idea consistently shared when related to tourism ideas and opportunities. Policy Questions: Should building heights be limited in the downtown, and if so what would be the appropriate height? Should the City take an active role in cleaning up the “brownfield” site located east of Route 47 downtown? Should the City take an active role in addressing the concern for a lack of parking downtown? Would you consider a parking deck as a reasonable solution to the concern for a lack of parking, or should parking in the downtown be limited to surface lots? ISSUE #7: DESIGN CHARACTER Both survey respondents and open house participants expressed that one of the reasons they like living in Yorkville is because the City provides rural living with suburban features. Before future development occurs, the City may have the opportunity to guide the style and character of future development. Design guidelines could ensure that a rural character is preserved throughout Yorkville, or along specific corridors. Land use policy could also preserve scenic vistas of natural features or agricultural landscapes. Policy Questions: Should the City take an active role in preserving a rural character? If so, which areas of the City should be a priority? Should new developments be required to preserve natural features or agricultural areas? ISSUE #8: HOUSING Housing data shows that nearly 60% of homes in Yorkville were built between 2000 and 2009. A large percentage of home in Yorkville also fall within the $200,000 to $299,000 price range. An oversupply of homes at the same age and under the same price range could limit Yorkville’s ability to adapt to a changing economy, changing demographics, and an aging population. Policy Questions: Should the City allow residential development at a higher density than that which typically exists throughout Yorkville today? If so, which areas of the City should higher density residential be allowed? Should higher density be allowed for developments which preserve natural features or agricultural areas? SECTION 6 - SUMMARY OF PLANNING ISSUES 83THE YORKVILLE PLAN • CONNECTING OUR PAST TO THE FUTURE ISSUE #9: INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS The existing sanitary system is nearing its capacity. At some point, as population continues to grow, the system will need to be expanded. Collaboration with the Yorkville-Bristol Sanitary District facility planning area (FPA) should be ongoing so there is a clear understanding of the remaining capacity and need to expand as the City makes land use decisions. Additionally, the water treatment plan is nearly 10 years old and an up to date comprehensive evaluation of the water treatment system should be used to guide land use and policy decisions. Policy Questions: Should the City undertake studies to determine future needs, costs, and revenues associated with infrastructure system expansion? Should the City promote new development that can tap into existing main sanitary and water lines before the main lines are extended? ISSUE #10: PARKS AND OPEN SPACE When asked about their level of satisfaction with the quality of parks, recreational facilities, and programs, survey respondents expressed that they were neutral to somewhat satisfied. Additionally, when asked about what other community facilities and services are needed in Yorkville, the top responses were indoor activities (sports, recreation center, youth programs, or children’s museum), dog parks, and walking/hiking trails. Fox River recreation (canoeing, kayaking, etc.) and walking/cycling trails were also the top two responses when asked to prioritize items to be pursued in developing a tourism industry in Yorkville. Policy Questions: Should the City invest more resources into parks and open space development? Should the City consider establishing a Parks District as opposed to a Parks Department? ISSUE #11: SCHOOLS If all the undeveloped lots in Yorkville were developed today, and there were two kids per household, the school population could grow to 9,000 students from 5,300 currently. This would require expansion of existing schools or construction of new schools, potentially even a second High School. Policy Questions: Should the City use remaining capacity and expansion thresholds of school facilities to guide land use and policy decisions? ISSUE #12: LAND USE REGULATIONS Current zoning designations are reflective of a strong growth and development climate. A number of zoning districts appear to have been designated with specific development plans anticipated, which are no longer planned. Zoning districts should be reviewed and revised to better reflect current construction and development levels in order to more effectively guide development in the most appropriate locations. Additionally, the City’s existing subdivisions regulations should be reviewed and revised to reflect current housing and development trends. Policy Questions: Should the City revise its existing zoning map, and if so, which areas should be revised? Should the City revise its existing subdivision regulations? Have a question or comment about this agenda item? Call us Monday-Friday, 8:00am to 4:30pm at 630-553-4350, email us at agendas@yorkville.il.us, post at www.facebook.com/CityofYorkville, tweet us at @CityofYorkville, and/or contact any of your elected officials at http://www.yorkville.il.us/gov_officials.php Agenda Item Summary Memo Title: Meeting and Date: Synopsis: Council Action Previously Taken: Date of Action: Action Taken: Item Number: Type of Vote Required: Council Action Requested: Submitted by: Agenda Item Notes: See attached memo and reports. Reviewed By: Legal Finance Engineer City Administrator Human Resources Community Development Police Public Works Parks and Recreation Agenda Item Number NB #8 Tracking Number EDC 2015-37 Commercial and Industrial Incentives EDC/September 1, 2015 None Informational Discussion of commercial and industrial incentives to attract and retain businesses. Krysti Barksdale-Noble Community Development Name Department Background/Summary As the Economic Development Committee will recall, staff was asked as part of the FY 2015-2016 department goals to research and begin to implement a strategy to incentivize commercial and industrial businesses within the community similar to the BUILD program which has stimulated new single family construction. As part of the discussion, resources toward retention and attraction of existing and new businesses were also requested. Throughout the region, state and country, all levels of governmental agencies have historically offered economic development incentives to attract business activity, retain employment, encourage investment and spur revitalization in distressed districts. Similarly, Yorkville has established policies and entered into development agreements with businesses to forward the economic health of the commercial and industrial sectors within the community. Current Yorkville Incentives In December 2008, the City of Yorkville adopted a revised Economic Incentive Policy (Res. 2008-46) which establishes a framework for determining the appropriateness of incentivizing development by defining if a gap between the project’s cost and the project’s anticipated revenue exists. From there, the city has primarily used one of the following forms of economic inducement: Tax Increment Finance (TIF) District – Tax Increment Finance (TIF) Districts at one time had become the most important and widely used economic development tool for many local governments and a significant source of incentives for developers. Yorkville currently has two (2) active TIF Districts, the Downtown TIF and the Kendall Crossing (formerly Countryside) TIF. The Downtown TIF was established in June 2006 and has several redevelopment agreements in place with restaurant/commercial businesses along IL Rte. 47 between Van Emmon Street and Hydraulic Avenue. The Kendall Crossing TIF, formerly known as the Countryside TIF, was approved in February 2005 and currently has a movie cinema complex and several out parcel lots available for sale. • Benefit: A TIF District maintains its existing property tax revenue assessment level for all local taxing bodies throughout the life of the district (usually 23 years) despite any increases in assessment as a result of development. The resulting increase generated by the new development is placed into a TIF fund and is used to offset costs associated with the development. It also provides an opportunity for the municipal leaders and the developer to collaborate on project planning details. • Requirements: TIF Districts must meet certain criteria set forth by State law and must be established by ordinance by the municipality upon completion of an eligibility study. TIF expenditures for development related costs must also meet eligibility criteria. Memorandum To: Economic Development Committee From: Krysti J. Barksdale-Noble, Community Development Director CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator Date: August 26, 2015 Subject: Commercial and Industrial Incentive Incentives Sales Tax Rebates – Are approved as an agreement in writing between a local municipality and a business or other entity seeking to develop within the community. As part of the agreement, the local government agrees to pay a sum or percentage of sales tax dollars generated from retail sales back to the developer for the economic investment in the City. These development agreements related to sales tax rebates are the principal document defining the rights and obligations of the parties and will often contain very specific remedies in favor of the governmental entity should the developer default. • Benefit: Based upon a tangible dollar amount and defined revenue expectation which benefits both the developer and municipality. Additionally, these revenue sharing agreements can have a term set on a case-by-case basis and are generally shorter than a TIF District’s lifespan. • Requirements: State statute stipulates guidelines under which municipalities can issue agreements to share or rebate retailers’ occupation taxes (sales taxes) which include limitations and requirements on agreements for sales taxes that would have been paid to another local government or a retail locations or warehouses that are not the point of sale but delivered to purchasers in other jurisdictions. The chart below lists the current commercial and industrial (manufacturing) incentive agreements the City has approved in the last ten (10) years according to the Illinois Department of Revenue (IDOR) Rebate Sharing Agreement website portal1: Business Entity Business Location Agreement Duration Agreement Description Boombah, Inc. 202 Boombah Blvd. 07/01/2012 – 06/30/2022 Rebate to Boombah of 50% of the 1% sales tax generated from Boombah. James Ratos 604, 620, 634, 684 W. Veterans Pkwy. 02/02/2003 – 01/31/2018 Rebate developer 50% of any sales tax generated in the development up to $166,055.00. Menards 1745, 1800, 1845, 1905, 1925, 1985, 2075 Marketview Drive. 481 Countryside Center. 01/01/2003 – 02/28/2049 Eligible costs if $8,639,334.00 to be reimbursed from 50% of sales tax generated in the development. Tucker Development Corp. 234, 306, 312, 326, 376 Veterans Parkway. 1206, 1208, 1246 N. Bridge St. 1214 Marquette Place. 06/21/2002 – 06/20/2020 Eligible costs of $2,074,833.00 and accrued interest at 5% are to be reimbursed from 50% of the sales tax generated in the development. Dairy Delight, Inc. 704 E. Veterans Pkwy. 09/12/12 – 12/31/2022 The City shall rebate the developer 50% of the 1% sales tax generated from the development operation for 10 years or up to $30,000, whichever comes first. Surrounding Community Incentives As part of staff’s research, we surveyed several area communities on their incentive strategies for recruiting and retaining commercial/industrial developments (see attached). These incentives ranged from the usual approaches, TIF Districts and Retail Sales Tax Rebates, to such options as bonds, historic districts, loans, grants and tax abatement programs. The availability of some of these options depends on the municipalities “home rule” versus “non home-rule” status as well as financial resources. 1 http://tax.illinois.gov/LocalGovernment/RebateSharing.htm In addition to this research, the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) prepared an Examination of Local Economic Development Incentives in Northeastern Illinois in August 2013 2. This report provided an analysis of the incentive tools commonly used in Chicago area communities to attract or retain a wide variety of commercial, industrial and residential uses. The CMAP report focused on such topics as the prevalence of the incentives, structure, associated community goals, and types of entities receiving the assistance. Available Federal/State/County/Local Incentives In order for the City to discuss options for incentivizing commercial and industrial development within Yorkville, there needs to be an understanding of the available options at a local, county, state and federal level. The chart below provides an overview of the other opportunities for incentives at each governmental level which are not commonly utilized by the City or businesses: Government Entity Incentive Description Local Property Tax Abatement Property tax abatement (decrease) of its portion of the tax bill for specific properties. Local Industrial Revenue Bonds Tax exempt bonds to manufacturing companies to finance the acquisition of fixed assets including land, buildings, equipment, and also new construction and renovations. Local Grants/Loans Financial Assistance by the City to small businesses and manufacturing uses in various amounts to assist with operational needs such as building renovation/expansion, equipment purchase or modernization. County Kendall County Revolving Loan Fund Program – low interest loan program up to $15,000 per job created or retained. The total amount loaned can be up to 49% of a project cost. County Kendall County Private Activity Bonds- Through the Upper Illinois River Valley Development Authority (UIRVDA) - tax-exempt bonds to projects of $1 million or more that have an emphasis on manufacturing. County Kendall County Tax abatement to a business for an expansion, improvement or new construction- term of three years, 75% abated in year one, 50% abated in year two, and 25% abated in year three. State Enterprise/Empowerment Zones Tax incentives to expand businesses whose projects affect distressed areas. Typically an area that suffers from high unemployment, low incomes, declining populations or property values and plant closings. Incentives range from tax credits per job created to property tax exemptions. Federal Federal Environmental Protection Agency’s Brownfield’s Program Incentives involving the expansion, redevelopment or reuse of brownfield property. 2 http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/10180/82875/FY14- 0009+LOCAL+ECONOMIC+INCENTIVES+REPORT.pdf/51b8f555-4579-42df-8667-87587fcc14f1 Staff Comments/Next Step Recommendations Staff anticipates having an open discussion with the Economic Development Committee (EDC) on the City’s current incentives offered, a comparison of other inducements offered by communities in the area and the greater region, and finally which new approaches that can be taken to increase the City’s tool kit for attracting and retaining commercial and industrial businesses. We also plan to have this as a rolling item on the EDC agenda until a consensus of formal direction for staff to take to implement a comprehensive economic development incentive plan. Municipality Type of Incentive Details Links to Documents Aurora 1. Redevelopment Zone 2. Bonds 3. Historic District 4. TIF Districts Seize the Future- funded by the City. 5. Grant Program 6. Rent Subsidy 1. River Edge Redevelopment Zone- sales tax exemption on building materials physically incorporated into the building, additional funding through the Illinois Municipal Brownfield Redevelopment Grant program, and state tax credits such as an investment tax credit, job creation tax credit, and an environmental remediation tax credit. 2. Industrial Revenue Bond- tax exempt bonds to manufacturing companies to finance the acquisition of fixed assets including land, buildings, equipment, and also new construction and renovation 3. Stolp Island Historic District- allows property owners to qualify for the historic preservation tax credit program providing that the building is income producing and adheres to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation 4. The City has 7 active TIF districts 5. Finish Line Downtown Grant Program- From Seize the Future Foundation (Aurora’s version of YEDC )- assists owners in TIF districts 1 and a part of 3 for 20% to 50% of rehabilitation costs not to exceed a $75,000 grant. 6. Business Rent Subsidy Program- From Aurora downtown association- A rent subsidy program worth up to $6,000 to locate in downtown Aurora. http://www.investinaurora.org/wp- content/uploads/2014/02/Incentives.pdf 1. Same 1-4 2. Same 1-4 3. Same 1-4 4. Same 1-4 5. http://www.investinaurora.org/wp- content/uploads/2015/07/Finish-Line-Grant- New-Application.pdf 6. http://www.auroradowntown.org/rent-subsidy- program/ Joliet 1. TIF Districts Others from City associated organizations 1. City Center TIF District 2. Façade Rehabilitation and Small Business Incentive Program- From Joliet City Center Partnership • Store Front Restoration Grant- 1/3 the 1. http://www.cityofjoliet.info/index.aspx?page=10 2. http://jolietdowntown.com/wp- content/uploads/Facade-Rehabilitation-and- Business-Incentive-Program.pdf 2. Grant Program project cost up to $10,000 • Interior Restoration Grant- 1/3 the project cost up to $10,000 • “Quick Fix” Grant Program- up to 50% of approved project costs with a maximum grant of $1,500 Kendall County 1. Loan Program 2. Private Activity Bonds 3. Tax Abatement Program 1. Kendall County Revolving Loan Fund Program- low interest loan program, up to $15,000 per job created or retained. The total amount loaned can be up to 49% of a project cost. 2. Private Activity Bonds- Through the Upper Illinois River Valley Development Authority (UIRVDA)- tax- exempt bonds to projects of $1 million or more that have an emphasis on manufacturing. 3. Tax abatement to a business for an expansion, improvement or new construction- term of three years, 75% abated in year one, 50% abated in year two, and 25% abated in year three. http://www.co.kendall.il.us/economic- development/business-assistance/ Montgomery 1. Loan Program Revolving Loan Program- financial assistance to new or expanding businesses https://ci.montgomery.il.us/DocumentCenter/View/740 Naperville 1. Grant Program Ogden Avenue Site Improvement Grant Program- offers “owners along Ogden Avenue (between Rickert Drive and Naper Boulevard) an opportunity to apply for reimbursement matching grants to help pay for signage, landscaping, building facade and access improvements” http://www.naperville.il.us/emplibrary/FY%202016%20O gden%20SIG%20Application.pdf Oswego 1. Loan Program 2. Grant Program 1. Revolving Loan Program- Provides low interest loans to small business owners for start-up or expansion costs 2. Downtown Façade Improvement Program- offers owners up to $10,000 in matching grants per façade to improve exterior in downtown business district http://www.oswegoil.org/economic- pdf/Business%20Incentives%20-%20web%20posting.pdf Plainfield 1. Case by case basis Considered by the Village board on a case by case basis Incentives include but not limited to: Sales Tax Sharing Property Tax Abatements Capital Investment- for public assets- roads, water, sewer, etc. to support business. Page 15 of the document http://www.plainfield- il.org/pages/documents/BusinessPlanII_001.pdf Plano 1. Tax Rebate Program 1. Retail Sales Tax Rebate 1. http://il- plano.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/129 Sugar Grove 1. TIF Districts 1. 2 districts for business park development Usually on a case by case basis- has provided at least one sales tax rebate in the past No documents Examination of Local Economic Development Incentives in Northeastern Illinois August 2013 Local Economic Page 1 Development Incentives Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................. 4 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 7 Background and context .......................................................................................................................... 8 Analyzing local economic development incentives ........................................................................ 16 Prevalence of local economic development incentives.................................................................... 20 Structure of incentive agreements ....................................................................................................... 31 Local policies governing locally-based economic development incentives ................................ 36 Goals of incentives from the community perspective ..................................................................... 39 Regional economic impact of industries receiving local incentives ............................................. 43 How local economic development incentives influence site selection ........................................ 46 Alignment between local government and business goals ............................................................ 51 Conclusion: Supporting GO TO 2040 ................................................................................................. 53 Appendix: Case study summaries........................................................................................................ 55 Local Economic Page 2 Development Incentives Figures Figure 1: Tax Increment Financing districts .......................................................................................... 9 Figure 2. Incentive estimated amounts spent or committed to be spent across forty case studies, by development and incentive type ...................................................................................................... 18 Figure 3. Sales tax rebate data collection for 61 municipalities ........................................................ 19 Figure 4. Number of municipalities known to have used locally-based incentives, 1996-2013... 21 Figure 5. TIF incremental EAV relative to total EAV, by municipality, 2010 .................................. 23 Figure 6. TIF funds expended between 2000 and 2010, per capita .................................................. 24 Figure 7. Municipalities known to have utilized sales tax rebates since 1996 ................................ 25 Figure 8. Estimated market value of commercial/industrial incentive class properties as a percent of total commercial and industrial market value, by municipality, 2011 .......................... 29 Figure 9. Amount of TIF funding provided or committed in CMAP case studies ........................ 31 Figure 10. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and Redevelopment Agreement (RDA) scenarios .... 34 Figure 11. Use of incentives by stated land use goal.......................................................................... 41 Figure 12. Goals and incentives addressed in CMAP region comprehensive plans, 2009 ........... 42 Figure 13. Jobs multiplier by selected industries, 2012 ...................................................................... 44 Figure 14. U.S. average annual wages by industry, 2012 .................................................................. 44 Figure 15. Number of additional jobs supported in the region from an increase of 100 jobs in selected manufacturing, retail, or office development types, by sector, 2012 ................................. 45 Figure 16. Incentives to businesses by type and nature of development ........................................ 47 Figure 17. Number of case studies using incentives for an intraregional move, for the expansion of an existing business, or for a national firm’s market expansion, by primary incentive used and development type ............................................................................................................................. 48 Figure 18. Retailer regional market and site selection considerations ............................................ 50 Figure 19. Abt Electronics ...................................................................................................................... 55 Figure 20. Geneva Commons ................................................................................................................ 59 Figure 21. Oswego Commons ............................................................................................................... 60 Figure 22. Brookside Marketplace ........................................................................................................ 63 Figure 23. Klee Building ......................................................................................................................... 67 Figure 24. Southgate Market.................................................................................................................. 68 Figure 25. Park Ridge Uptown .............................................................................................................. 70 Figure 26. Whistler Crossing ................................................................................................................. 72 Figure 27. Prairie Park ............................................................................................................................ 74 Figure 28. ALDI ....................................................................................................................................... 76 Figure 29. Dollar Tree Distribution Center .......................................................................................... 81 Figure 30. Panduit ................................................................................................................................... 82 Local Economic Page 3 Development Incentives Tables Table 1. Commercial and industrial property tax abatements authorized by state statute .......... 13 Table 2. Cook County assessment classes............................................................................................. 15 Table 3. Sales tax rebate agreements and average amounts by development type ....................... 26 Table 4. General authority property tax abatements for tax year 2009 ........................................... 27 Table 5. Components of 17 sales tax rebate agreements .................................................................... 35 Local Economic Page 4 Development Incentives Executive Summary Local incentives play a major role within the overall economic development landscape of northeastern Illinois. In recent years, more than 70 percent of the region’s 284 municipalities have used at least one of four local economic development incentive tools: tax increment financing (TIF), sales tax rebates, property tax abatements, and Cook County property tax incentive classes. These incentives have been used to attract or retain a wide variety of commercial, industrial, and residential uses including retail, auto dealerships, corporate offices, manufacturing, warehousing, mixed-use, and affordable housing developments. CMAP has examined the use of these incentive tools, focusing on their prevalence, structure, associated community goals, types of firms receiving assistance, and the extent to which their use supports the goals of GO TO 2040, the regional comprehensive plan. The following summarizes key findings from this report. State tax policy drives the prevalence of local economic development incentives The vast majority of the region’s municipalities, 202 out of 284, have deployed at least one of the four primary incentive tools in recent years. State statute establishes the criteria and policies that allow local governments to use tax revenue to incentivize development. These include the criteria governing specific local incentives and the state tax policies that govern state sales tax revenue sharing and differential property assessment levels in Cook County. For example, while establishment of a TIF district requires satisfying state-imposed blight and conservation area criteria, these districts persist throughout northeastern Illinois. A total of 157 municipalities currently have at least one district, and TIF accounts for more than 10 percent of the total property tax base in 24 municipalities. Overall, TIF expenditures totaled $2.6 billion between 2000 and 2010. Sales tax rebates also remain common throughout the region. Since 1996, at least 137 communities have used this tool to attract or retain sales tax-generating developments like shopping centers, auto dealerships, supercenter/discount stores, and home improvement stores. The use of sales tax rebates will remain extremely common as long as the state tax system provides communities with a fiscal incentive to encourage the development of retail and other establishments that generate sales tax revenue. While this system allows municipalities to recoup the costs of supporting a retail development, sales tax revenues often exceed the costs of serving these developments. These fiscal benefits create intraregional competition among communities for sales tax-generating developments. The widespread use of Cook County incentive classes reflects the unique nature of Cook County’s property tax assessment classification system, a policy permitted under the state constitution. In 2011, 5.8 percent of estimated commercial or industrial market value across Cook County was designated with an incentive class. The prevalence suggests that the existing classification system, which shifts the property tax burden toward commercial and industrial properties, impedes economic development in many communities in Cook County. Local Economic Page 5 Development Incentives Incentives often influence site selection for businesses making an intraregional move or for a national firm expanding its market Local economic development incentives typically encourage development in a particular location rather than attract a business to the region as a whole. Incentives affect the site selection process by reducing the cost of initial site improvements or local taxes over the long term. This only influences where a development occurs in the region rather than whether it occurs at all. CMAP’s case studies indicate that the vast majority of local incentive deals involve intraregional moves, the expansion of an existing business, or national firms expanding their market. Only rarely did local incentives lure a firm from another state or assist a new business. This aligns with the findings of various academic studies showing that tax differences are more effective at influencing site selection within, rather than across, metropolitan regions. Local communities often provide incentives without knowledge of whether the development would have occurred anyway. Businesses are typically in an advantageous position to negotiate incentives with local governments—they may have several sites to choose from and may receive incentive offers from multiple communities in the region. This situation puts communities in the difficult position of competing against each other for economic development opportunities, many of which involve businesses or developers that intend to select a site in northeastern Illinois and are choosing from several specific sites in the region. Communities often provide incentives to maximize tax revenue, but these investments may generate few spillover benefits to the larger regional economy Based on available data, CMAP finds that many communities target incentives based upon future tax revenues rather than overall economic impact. For example, local governments have spent or committed significant amounts of sales tax rebates to firms that generate considerable sales tax revenue but are associated with low jobs multipliers and low wages. In examining 137 sales tax rebates, CMAP found rebates averaging $2.5 million for home improvement stores and $3.8 million for discount stores, despite the fact that one retail job supports just an estimated 0.3 to 0.9 other jobs in the regional economy and provides relatively low wages (an average of $21,903 per year). On the other hand, some local governments do use incentive tools to attract firms that employ workers in high skilled jobs. Office or manufacturing developments typically provide lower local tax revenues but higher regional economic benefits. For instance, one manufacturing job supports between 1.7 and 4 jobs in other sectors and provides higher average wages ($41,373). The economic benefits of these developments are more likely to spill over into other industries and to support employment in a range of sectors including business services, retail, and human services. The use of local economic development incentives varies in terms of aligning with the land use goals of GO TO 2040 GO TO 2040 prioritizes local government efforts to improve livability and encourages a future pattern of more compact, mixed-use development that focuses growth where infrastructure already exists. Communities often utilize local economic development incentives for goals that Local Economic Page 6 Development Incentives align with GO TO 2040, such as redeveloping an underutilized site, developing affordable housing, or meeting other reinvestment strategies. Specifically, redevelopment can require the consolidation of many small parcels under separate ownership, remediation of environmental contamination, rehabilitation of existing structures, or an upgrade of public infrastructure. In these cases, incentives can bridge the gap between market prices and high redevelopment costs, meeting both public goals and private investment needs. On the other hand, communities also use local incentives to compete for new developments on undeveloped land, which typically does not entail extraordinary development costs. While GO TO 2040 acknowledges that some greenfield development will occur, the plan does not prioritize the associated expenditure of limited public resources toward these ends. Proactive and collaborative planning does not always play a role in the use of local incentives While a significant majority of the region’s local comprehensive plans include a heavy or moderate focus on economic development, comparatively few of these plans discuss specific incentives. While the general goals of incentive agreements and comprehensive plans often coincide, it is unclear if incentives are being utilized to implement specific recommendations of a plan or if their use is more reactive. In general, aligning incentives with community plans builds on the analysis and public input that went into the plan, and ensures that public dollars follow long-term desired outcomes and land use patterns. Including clawback provisions in incentive agreements can also help protect community’s investments in development. Some local governments include a number of requirements in incentive agreements, such as requiring the business or firm to stay in the community for a certain number of years, hire community residents, generate a specific level of tax revenue, or maintain or modernize infrastructure. Employing incentives to compete with other communities over development runs contrary to the type of collaborative planning efforts envisioned in GO TO 2040. These collaborative efforts can help communities to gain efficiencies, share information, and strategically invest scarce public funds. GO TO 2040 encourages the formation of inter-jurisdictional planning groups to develop cooperative approaches to community challenges like economic development. Moving forward, fostering a collaborative environment to facilitate economic development would better utilize public resources and would benefit the region as a whole. Local Economic Page 7 Development Incentives Introduction GO TO 2040, the comprehensive regional plan for metropolitan Chicago, emphasizes the importance of an efficient, equitable, and transparent state and local tax system to keep our region economically competitive. Our current tax policies have an impact beyond the public revenue they raise and can create incentives that shape the commercial and residential development of our communities. Such decisions can be motivated by the imperative of raising local revenues rather than by the goal of building a stronger regional economy and livable communities. GO TO 2040 recommends moving toward a tax system that encourages effective local land use decisions, generates good jobs, and triggers sustainable economic activity. Shortly after the approval of GO TO 2040 in October 2010, CMAP assembled a Regional Tax Policy Task Force, an advisory group consisting of representatives from local and state government, business, civic organizations, and academia. Throughout 2011, this group deliberated on a range of state and local tax policies affecting the economic competitiveness of northeastern Illinois. One issue of interest to the Task Force was the use of local tax incentives, specifically sales tax rebates, to spur the development of large, sales tax-generating establishments. In its final report, the Task Force recommended that CMAP analyze the impact of sales tax rebates on development decisions. In its discussion of this report, the CMAP Board directed staff to conduct a detailed study on the prevalence of these rebates as well as other local incentives, and also analyze the impact on local and regional economic development. While many local investments in schools, infrastructure, public safety, and other public services help to drive economic development, this report takes a narrower view, defining “economic development incentives” as discretionary, direct financial outlays or tax relief tools to assist specific businesses or developers. Once employed, local economic development incentives may change the tax burden on specific private firms, shift the relative tax burden among different sets of taxpayers, or alter the tax base of local jurisdictions. In northeastern Illinois, four economic development incentive tools are frequently utilized by local governments. The most prominent of these tools include 1) Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts, 2) sales tax rebates; 3) property tax abatements; and 4) Cook County property tax incentive classes. These incentives are often used by communities to attract development when site or market conditions might otherwise compel a developer or business to choose another location. For example, when a community is less competitive in terms of infrastructure, workforce, or its tax system, it may use incentives to offset these factors and make the community more attractive for development. For a community that is already competitive on these basic market considerations, incentives are offered to attract a business that might be considering other, similar, locations. This report explores the use of local economic development incentives in northeastern Illinois, and focuses on their prevalence, structure, goals from the community perspective, types of firms receiving assistance, and the extent to which they support the overall economic, livability, Local Economic Page 8 Development Incentives and sustainability goals of GO TO 2040. This report focuses most specifically on observations from a series of development case studies, all of which are summarized in the Appendix. Background and context While these locally-based economic development incentives are administered by local governments, all have some basis in state law, which sets the relevant policies, limitations, and criteria. This section provides an overview of this information for the four incentives studied in this report: TIF; sales tax rebates; property tax abatements; and Cook County property tax incentive classes. Tax Increment Financing districts Tax Increment Financing districts are created to fund economic development projects in blighted areas where development would not otherwise occur or in conservation areas that may become blighted. Property tax rates applied to increases in property value that occur after the district is established, or the “tax increment,” are used to fund TIF district projects. TIF was first enacted in Illinois in 1977.1 Since then, the statute has undergone several revisions, including one in the 1980s that allowed TIFs created prior to 1987 to receive state and local sales tax increment, and a 1999 amendment that narrowed the criteria for determining blighted or conservation redevelopment areas and projects. Criteria The current version of the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act2 allows municipalities to designate TIF districts that meet criteria as a blighted area or a conservation area. Improved areas must meet at least five criteria to be considered blighted. For conservation areas, at least half of structures in improved areas must be at least 35 years old and the area must meet at least three of the criteria. Criteria include dilapidation, obsolescence, deterioration, presence of structures below minimum code standards, illegal use of individual structures, excessive vacancies, lack of ventilation, light or sanitary facilities, inadequate utilities, excessive land coverage and overcrowding of structures, deleterious land use or layout, lack of community planning, need for environmental remediation, and decline in property values. Vacant areas can qualify as blighted by meeting two of the following criteria: obsolete platting, diversity of ownership of parcels, tax delinquencies, deterioration of structures in neighboring areas, need for environmental remediation, and decline in property values. Alternatively, vacant land can qualify if it qualified as a blighted improved area before becoming vacant, is subject to chronic flooding, or has an unused quarry, mine, rail yard, rail track, railroad right-of- way, or disposal site. 1 Real Property Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, Illinois Public Act 79-1525 2 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4 Local Economic Page 9 Development Incentives Areas that do not meet blight or conservation criteria can be eligible for TIF designation if they are within a closed military base,3 within a half-mile radius of a proposed STAR Line station, or are industrial parks in an area with a labor surplus.4 Revenues TIF district revenues are generated from application of the current property tax rate to the incremental Equalized Assessed Value (EAV), which is the difference between the current EAV within the district, and the EAV at the time of establishment (the base EAV). Tax rates for all taxing entities (counties, municipalities, school districts, and special districts) located in the TIF district are computed using only the base EAV, which remains the sole “tax base” for these entities over the life of the TIF.5 Revenue generated by taxes on the incremental EAV flows to the TIF district, which is controlled by the municipality. The following chart illustrates how TIF district revenue is generated. Figure 1: Tax Increment Financing districts This illustration represents the general concept of how a TIF district works. Property tax rates are determined by dividing the property tax levy (requested revenues) by the EAV (property tax base) within the taxing district. Typically, levies increase over time due to inflation and the cost of providing services to more residents and businesses, but this often occurs in tandem 3 Economic Development Project Area Tax Increment Allocation Act of 1995, 65 ILCS 110 4 Under the Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, a labor surplus municipality has, at some point during the preceding six months, an unemployment rate that is more than 6 percent and at least twice the national average unemployment rate. Under the Industrial Jobs Recovery Law, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.6, the area can qualify under different labor surplus standards if it meets other criteria outlined in the statute. 5 If the current EAV is lower than the base EAV, the current EAV is used. Local Economic Page 10 Development Incentives with a rising tax base, keeping rates level.6 Since TIF essentially freezes the tax base for underlying jurisdictions, property tax rates become directly affected if levies increase or decrease. While this constrains the ability of underlying taxing districts to some degree, theoretically this higher incremental tax base would not materialize but for the TIF district. This specific question has sparked much debate in northeastern Illinois and many other places around the U.S. For example, in some TIF districts in northeastern Illinois, municipalities have brokered agreements to provide underlying taxing entities with a proportion of the incremental revenue. In addition, there have been unsuccessful legislative efforts in Illinois to require TIFs to provide a portion of their revenue to underlying taxing districts such as school districts.7 Expenditures and projects Any municipality can adopt a TIF district. Municipalities must identify the redevelopment project area using the criteria discussed above and approve a redevelopment plan. In the redevelopment plan, municipalities must find that development in the TIF would not reasonably be expected to occur without the presence of the TIF. Redevelopment projects undertaken in the TIF district must further the objectives of the redevelopment plan to eliminate the conditions under which the area qualified as a blighted or conservation area. Redevelopment project costs can include planning, marketing, property assembly, land acquisition, site preparation and improvements, demolition, rehabilitation, reconstruction, repair or remodeling of public or private buildings, replacing public buildings, infrastructure improvements, job training, financing costs, and other taxing districts’ costs attributable to the redevelopment. The statute also indicates several non-eligible costs including construction of a new privately- owned building, and financial support to a retail entity moving to the TIF district while closing an operation at another location within 10 miles of the TIF district, unless the previous location contained inadequate space, had become economically obsolete, or was no longer a viable location for the business. Redevelopment projects, as well as financial obligations issued to finance projects, must be complete within 23 years from when the TIF district was approved. If no projects have been initiated within a TIF district within seven years after the district was approved, the TIF district must be repealed. Sales tax rebates In Illinois, sales of most tangible goods are subject to the Retailers’ Occupation Tax or the Service Occupation Tax, which are commonly known as the “sales tax.” Sales taxes in Illinois are imposed based on where the order originated, unlike most states, which impose sales taxes based on where the goods were delivered. In a typical retail store, this distinction is not relevant, because the goods are ordered by the purchaser and delivered to the purchaser in the 6 The Property Tax Extension Limitation Law requires that non-home rule taxing districts in PTELL counties limit the annual increase in property tax extensions to the lesser of five percent or the increase in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers. See 35 ILCS 200/18-185 through 35 ILCS 200/18-245 7 For example, see House Bill 1575, 97th General Assembly Local Economic Page 11 Development Incentives same transaction at the same location. In situations where the goods might be delivered to the purchaser’s home or office, this distinction is relevant, because the sales tax rate will be based on where the order for the purchase was accepted, which could be a retail store, a warehouse, or an office. The Illinois state sales tax rate is 6.25 percent for general merchandise and 1 percent for sales of qualifying food, drugs, and medical appliances. A portion of the revenue is disbursed to local governments based on where the sale took place or where the final acceptance of the order occurred. Municipalities (and counties for sales in unincorporated areas) receive 1 percentage point of the 6.25 percent rate on general merchandise sales within their borders. They also receive the full amount of the revenues from the 1 percent state rate on qualifying items. Counties receive a quarter of a percentage point of the state rate on general merchandise sales within their borders. The exception is the Cook County share, which is allocated to the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA). In addition to receiving state sales tax revenues, counties, municipalities, and other units of government like the RTA can impose local option sales taxes under certain circumstances. Sales tax rebates are agreements that municipalities and counties make with businesses to rebate a portion of the sales taxes generated from the business back to the business or the developer of the improvements on the property. This typically includes the local share of the state sales tax, and occasionally the local option sales tax. Some rebates are simply a percent of sales tax revenue generated by the company and have no time limits, minimums, or maximums. Other agreements include provisions that define the number of years the agreement is in effect, the maximum amount of revenue that can be rebated back to the business, or a minimum amount of sales that must be reached before revenues are rebated. These agreements are made with a variety of sales-tax generating establishments, including retail stores, auto dealerships, and offices and warehouses where sales are sourced. State statute provides guidelines under which municipalities and counties can issue agreements to share or rebate sales taxes.8 Specifically, the Illinois Municipal Code9 and the Counties Code 10 include some limitations and requirements regarding these agreements. Under state statute, agreements are not allowed if the sales tax would have been paid to another local government absent the agreement and the retailer has a retail location or warehouse where goods are delivered to purchasers in that other jurisdiction. The statutes authorize any unit of government denied sales tax revenue because of an unlawful agreement to file suit in circuit court against the offending municipality or county. Recently, several local governments, including the RTA and Cook County, have filed court actions against Sycamore, Kankakee, and Channahon, as well as the companies involved in the 8 The retailers’ occupation tax is a legal term in Illinois for what is commonly known as a ‘sales tax.’ 9 65 ILCS 5/8-11-21. 10 55 ILCS 5/5-1014.3. Local Economic Page 12 Development Incentives agreements. 11 The lawsuits allege that the municipalities have entered into sales tax rebate agreements to induce companies operating within the jurisdictions of the Plaintiffs (the 6- county RTA service area and Cook County) to claim that their sales are sourced through offices in Sycamore, Kankakee , and Channahon. Spurred in part by the lawsuit by the RTA and several other taxing bodies, newly enacted legislation requires municipalities and counties to report data on sales tax rebates to the Illinois Department of Revenue. On August 17, 2012, Governor Quinn signed Public Act 97-0976, requiring municipalities and counties to file reports concerning sales tax rebate agreements with the Illinois Department of Revenue (IDOR). The new statute requires municipalities and counties to file reports regarding existing agreements by April 1, 2013, and thereafter within 30 days after a new agreement is executed. The reports include: • The name of the business and county or municipality entering into the agreement • The location of the business • Whether the business maintains additional places of business in Illinois • How the amount of sales tax to be rebated is to be determined • The duration of the agreement • The names of any businesses that would receive a share of the rebate • A copy of the agreement The bill does not implement complete transparency, however. Sales figures, the amount of sales tax collected, and the amount of sales tax rebated will be redacted and would be exempt from the Freedom of Information Act. IDOR was required to post the first reports (excluding the copy of the agreement) to its website by July 2013, and will update this website monthly with new reports. Property tax abatements Any district that extends a property tax can abate (or decrease) any portion of its taxes for certain properties. Approximately 1,200 districts in northeastern Illinois imposed a property tax in 2010, generating $20.1 billion in property tax revenue.12 Implementation of abatements requires municipalities and counties to solicit the participation of underlying districts, such as school districts and townships, if they wish to abate a substantial portion of the property taxes. The following table summarizes the abatements that taxing districts are authorized to offer to property taxpayers. 11 The Regional Transportation Authority v. The City of Kankakee, The Village of Channahon, Minority Development Company, LLC, MTS Consulting, LLC, Inspiring Development LLC, Corporate Funding Solutions, LLC, and XYZ Sales, Inc., Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, Chancery Division (complaint filed August 23, 2011). The Regional Transportation Authority v. United Aviation Fuels Corporation, United Airlines, Inc., and The City of Sycamore, Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, Chancery Division (complaint filed January 14, 2013). 12 CMAP analysis of Illinois Department of Revenue data Local Economic Page 13 Development Incentives Table 1. Commercial and industrial property tax abatements authorized by state statute In addition, abatements can be granted under some other circumstances, including:13 • Properties used for racing horses or motor vehicles • Academic or research institutes • Affordable senior housing • Historical societies • Properties in Enterprise Zones • Low-income housing • Properties owned by the surviving spouse of a fallen police officer, soldier, or rescue worker • New single-family residential buildings located in an “area of urban decay” (only home- rule municipalities are authorized to abate) • Properties that are the subject of an annexation agreement between the municipality and the property owner (only municipalities are authorized to abate) • Previously vacant properties Property tax abatements lower a property owner’s tax bill. However, property tax abatements do not necessarily result in a reduction in revenue for taxing districts. An increased property tax levy could potentially make up for any loss from abatements. This would also result in higher tax rates and a shift in the burden of the abatement toward other taxpayers in the district. However, if property tax revenue would not have been generated from the property if not for the abatement provided, a property tax abatement would be neutral to other taxpayers in the district. 13 35 ILCS 200/18 Local Economic Page 14 Development Incentives Property tax incentive classes Cook County assesses commercial and industrial property at a higher percentage of market value than residential property. This typically results in a higher property tax burden for business taxpayers, although the magnitude of the impact varies from place to place. This classification system does not exist in the collar counties, where business and residential taxpayers with similar market values share similar tax burdens. State statute requires that properties be assessed at 33 ⅓ percent of their market value,14 except in counties allowed to apply property classification. The Illinois State Constitution of 1970 authorized counties with more than 200,000 residents to apply different assessment ratios depending on the type of property, as long as the highest class does not exceed 2.5 times the level of assessment of the lowest class.15 Counties that would like to apply property classification must enact an ordinance.16 These provisions allowed Cook County to enact an ordinance to classify property for assessment purposes, a practice it had been employing for many years prior to its legal authorization. Currently, Cook County is the only county in the State that has enacted an ordinance providing for property assessment classification. In Cook County, vacant, farmland, and residential properties are assessed at 10 percent of market value. Commercial, industrial, and not-for-profit properties are assessed at 25 percent of market value. The result is that commercial and industrial taxpayers incur higher effective tax rates than residential property within the same taxing district. In addition to these general residential, commercial, and industrial categories, the classification includes various incentive classes that reduce the level of assessment on certain properties for a period of years. Commercial and industrial properties that are awarded an incentive class are assessed at the same percentage of market value as residential property for a ten-year period, which is renewable for certain classes. Table 2 provides an overview of the classes and assessment levels in Cook County. 14 35 ILCS 200/9-145 15 Illinois Constitution, article IX, § 4 16 35 ILCS 200/9-150 Local Economic Page 15 Development Incentives Table 2. Cook County assessment classes When an incentive class is provided to a parcel that previously was assessed at the full value, the property tax burden is shifted from that parcel to other taxpayers within the taxing district. Typically, the property tax incentive class shifts the tax burden away from commercial or industrial properties receiving the incentive class and toward residential taxpayers as well as commercial and industrial properties not receiving the incentive. To receive an incentive class, an application must be filed with the Cook County Assessor’s Office. In addition, the municipality where the property is located must pass a resolution or an ordinance stating that the municipality supports the incentive class designation. Other taxing districts that would be affected by lowering the assessment level for the property do not have to provide approval. This report will address the industrial development incentive (6b), the commercial development incentive (7), and the incentive for commercial and industrial development in areas in need of revitalization (8). For a Class 8 incentive, the property must be located in an Empowerment Zone in Chicago or in the South Suburban Tax Reactivation Project (Bloom, Bremen, Calumet, Rich, and Thornton townships). Otherwise, the area must be found to be economically depressed as shown by factors such as substantial unemployment, low median family income, aggravated abandonment, deterioration, and underutilization of properties, lack of viable commercial and industrial buildings, a pattern of stagnation or decline in property taxes, or a lack of economic feasibility for private development. Local Economic Page 16 Development Incentives Analyzing local economic development incentives Given varying reporting requirements, analyzing the effectiveness of locally-based economic development incentives presents some methodological challenges. Availability of information on locally-based incentive agreements made with businesses and developers varies by the incentive type and the community providing the incentive. Moreover, it is rarely possible to prove that a development would not have happened but for an incentive or whether an incentive caused positive or negative economic development outcomes for a community or for the metropolitan region. As a result, most previous research has focused on using indirect methods of assessing the impact of incentives rather than on validating counterfactual statements that a development would or would not have occurred but for an incentive. Much of the prior research on incentives has relied on broader datasets of property values to study the relationship between the use of incentives and changes in property values or other measures of growth.17 Other researchers have used tax differences among states or communities to assess the impact of incentives on development.18 In contrast, CMAP is interested in specific information about the use of incentives, such as the structure of the agreements, the context under which they are used, what types of industries received them, and the extent to which the use of incentives aligns with sustainable development goals outlined in GO TO 2040. This focus had a direct effect on the research methods utilized by CMAP. A case study approach was used to obtain detailed data regarding how incentives were used for specific developments. Prior to selection of case studies, a larger dataset of incentives was compiled using publicly available information, and this was used to assess the prevalence of incentives in northeastern Illinois. Methodology To both analyze the prevalence of incentives and find appropriate case studies, CMAP compiled a list of developments known to have received incentives with the assistance of a consultant, S.B. Friedman Development Advisors. The completeness of the list depended on the data available. Where possible, the development, the location, the date, the incentive used, and 17 See Russell Kashian, Mark Skidmore, and David Merriman, “Do Wisconsin Tax Increment Finance Districts Stimulate Growth in Real Estate Values?” (working paper, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 2007); Rachel Weber, Saurav Dev Bhatta, and David Merriman, “Does Tax Increment Financing Raise Urban Industrial Property Values?” Urban Studies 40, no. 10 (2003): 2001-2021; Richard Dye and David Merriman, “The Effects of Tax Increment Financing on Economic Development,” Journal of Urban Economics 47 (2000): 306-328; Richard Dye and David Merriman, “The Effect of Tax Increment Financing on Land Use.” in The Property Tax, Land Use and Land Use Regulation, ed. Dick Netzer (Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2003), 37-61; John E. Anderson, “Tax Increment Financing: Municipal Adoption and Growth,” National Tax Journal 43, no. 2 (1990): 155-163; Peter S. Fisher and Alan H. Peters, "Industrial Incentives: Competition among American States and Cities," Employment Research 5, no. 2 (1998): 1, 3-4. 18 See Ernest Goss and Philip Peters, “The Effect of State and Local Taxes on Economic Development: A Meta- Analysis,” Southern Economic Journal 62, no. 2 (1995): 320-333; Daphne A. Kenyon, “Theories of Interjurisdictional Competition,” New England Economic Review (March/April 1997): 14-35; Michael Wasylenko, “Taxation and Economic Development: The State of the Economic Literature,” New England Economic Review (March/April 1997): 38-52. Local Economic Page 17 Development Incentives the amount were included. In conjunction with other publicly available datasets, this information was used to analyze the prevalence of economic development incentives in the region. The final list included 1,293 projects in TIF districts completed since 1999, 137 sales tax rebate agreements made since 1996, 2,440 buildings receiving a property tax incentive class in 2011, and 25 properties receiving property tax abatements since 2003 within the region. The TIF data and incentive class data represent a relatively complete set, while the sales tax rebate and property tax abatement data include only what was available through public records or other knowledge of these projects. Next, a set of 40 case studies—19 TIF projects, 12 sales tax rebates, 6 property tax abatements, and 3 property tax incentive classes—were selected for further analysis. The aim of case study selection was to provide some diversity in terms of geography and development type. S.B. Friedman Development Advisors engaged in extensive research to gather more detailed data and information about these case studies. Data sources included publicly available data from state government, local governments, and the media, as well as information provided through interviews with the communities providing incentives in the case study developments. The case study information typically includes specifics on the type of firm, the structure and value of the incentive agreements, the goals governments have for using the incentives, and other dynamics specific to each development. With this information, CMAP compiled statistics on transparency, prevalence, structure, type of development, and community goals in order to examine the how incentives are used by local governments. By looking at the types of development that receive incentives, CMAP analyzed the wider regional impact of the case study development types, measured by the extent to which the expansion of different kinds of industries supports additional economic activity within the region. While it is not possible to verify whether a specific development would have occurred without an incentive, CMAP looked more broadly at the role of incentives in site selection and local government decision-making to drill deeper into the dynamics between incentives and regional economic development. The following chart provides an overview of the types of developments included and the amount of the incentives provided to the developments in the 40 case studies analyzed for this report. The amounts committed, expended, or estimated to be expended on development projects for each case study were primarily less than $5 million. Developments receiving property tax abatements tended to collect smaller incentive amounts, while developments funded with TIF received large amounts in several instances. Whereas TIF funding is a tool used across a range of development types, other incentives tend to be slightly more focused in their application. Sales tax rebates were predominately used for retail and auto dealerships, but they also played a role in other sales tax-generating establishments that were actually offices or distribution facilities. These offices are established as sales offices or credit offices, and are sometimes also the headquarters location of a business. Industrial users may be manufacturers or distributors that also sell on-site or, like a grocery delivery service, have no retail outlets. Local Economic Page 18 Development Incentives Figure 2. Incentive estimated amounts spent or committed to be spent across forty case studies, by development and incentive type Transparency of locally-based incentives Overall, the transparency of data and information on local economic development incentives proved to be extremely uneven. No comprehensive source for data on local incentives currently exists. For TIF districts, municipalities must provide annual reports to the Illinois Office of the Comptroller, by law.19 These reports provide basic information about project spending, contracts, and other financial obligations in TIF districts, but not all municipalities are in compliance with the law. However, there are effectively no penalties for failing to provide annual TIF reports, and several municipalities have never provided them. As a result, CMAP was unable to include those municipalities in this analysis. 19 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-5 and 65 ILCS 5/11-74.6-22 Local Economic Page 19 Development Incentives The Illinois Department of Revenue’s sales tax rebate reporting provides information on current sales tax rebate agreements, but this does not include sales figures, sales tax revenue collected, and the amount of tax revenue rebated. Some municipalities make this sales tax rebate agreement information available in publicly available documents, while others do not. Prior to the availability of the Illinois Department of Revenue sales tax rebate reporting, CMAP utilized a variety of sources for data collection on sales tax rebates, including municipal budgets, municipal comprehensive annual financial reports (CAFR), and newspaper articles. CMAP was able to determine that at least 61 municipalities in northeastern Illinois have made sales tax rebate agreements since 1996. After including the IDOR reporting data, CMAP determined that 137 municipalities in northeastern Illinois have actually used this tool. The following figure provides an overview of how the 61 municipalities that were established prior to the release of the IDOR reporting database currently share this data. Figure 3. Sales tax rebate data collection for 61 municipalities This figure only includes municipalities from which CMAP was able to obtain data. As a result, it is heavily weighted toward municipalities that provide data in accessible ways, such as through their annual budgets or CAFRs. However, just 23 out of the 61 municipalities provided key information like the name of the business as well as information about the terms of the agreement in their CAFR or budget. For savvier members of the public, much of this information could be found by reading publicly-accessible council or board meeting minutes. Local Economic Page 20 Development Incentives CMAP was unable to obtain a comprehensive source for property tax abatements. IDOR has information on the annual amount of property taxes abated aggregated by county. Only Will County provides a list of abatements by parcel and taxing district. CMAP was also able to obtain information about several other property tax abatements from newspaper articles as well as directly from a limited number of taxing districts like Lake County. CMAP also has information on all parcels receiving an incentive class through the Cook County Assessor’s Office, including the location, the taxpayer name, the assessed value, the size of the land and the building, as well as specific details about the improvements to the property. Prevalence of local economic development incentives Overall, the majority of municipalities in the region, 202 out of 284, are known to have deployed at least one of these four incentive tools in recent years. The figure below shows numbers of municipalities with a current TIF district, a known use of sales tax rebates since 1996, a current Cook County property tax incentive class, and/or a known current property tax abatement. Again, due to data limitations, this figure does not represent the full universe of local economic development incentives. Rather it is meant simply as a snapshot of the municipalities in the region that utilize incentives. Local Economic Page 21 Development Incentives Figure 4. Number of municipalities known to have used locally-based incentives, 1996-2013 Tax Increment Finance districts The use of TIF is extremely common in northeastern Illinois. Figure 5 provides an overview of the 157 municipalities that currently have TIF districts.20 The map breaks down this information further by showing the incremental EAV within TIF districts relative to the total EAV within the municipality. This shows how much of the municipality’s property tax base is dedicated to generating revenues for its TIF districts. Most municipalities with TIF have only one district and the tax increment accounts for less than 5 percent of EAV. In 20 municipalities 20 Newer TIF districts may not yet have expenditures on development projects. Local Economic Page 22 Development Incentives (including the City of Chicago and 19 suburban municipalities), TIF accounts for 10 to 30 percent of the total EAV. This represents a substantial proportion of a municipality’s EAV, and thus may lead to higher tax rates over time for overlapping jurisdictions. On the more extreme end, incremental TIF EAV accounts for more than half of the base in four municipalities. This means that the current incremental EAV for the TIF district is greater than the regular EAV, and the TIF district has a larger tax base than the municipality and any other taxing district that generates revenues from property within that municipality. Figure 6 summarizes public TIF expenditures per capita between 2000 and 2010, by municipality, showing a range of $0 for TIF districts that have not yet begun to spend their revenue or have not yet generated incremental revenue, up to $117,238 in expenditures per capita made on economic development or infrastructure projects within the TIF district from incremental revenues generated. Overall, spending totaled $2.6 billion during the period. Local Economic Page 23 Development Incentives Figure 5. TIF incremental EAV relative to total EAV, by municipality, 2010 Local Economic Page 24 Development Incentives Figure 6. TIF funds expended between 2000 and 2010, per capita Local Economic Page 25 Development Incentives Sales tax rebates Based on available information, at least 137 municipalities (and one county) are known to have utilized sales tax rebates since 1996. These municipalities were identified based on CMAP’s research of past and current sales tax rebate agreements as well as information on all current agreements made available via Public Act 97-0976. The following map provides an overview of the municipalities that CMAP determined have past or current sales tax rebate agreements. Figure 7. Municipalities known to have utilized sales tax rebates since 1996 Local Economic Page 26 Development Incentives Prior to the availability of the database on all current sales tax rebate agreements, CMAP identified 138 sales tax rebate agreements across 62 local governments. From its primary research on sales tax rebates, CMAP was able to determine which development types typically receive these incentives. Not surprisingly, retail makes up most, though not all, of these development types. Of the 138 total agreements identified, 45 (33 percent) were used for auto or other vehicle dealerships. Supercenter/discount stores, shopping centers, home improvement stores and other large retailers also received a large percentage of sales tax rebates, and in recent years, grocery stores have become a more common recipient of sales tax rebates. Furthermore, some agreements are made with sales offices and distribution centers that generate sales tax. The following table provides an overview of the types of sales tax rebates identified by CMAP, as well as the average total rebate amount provided to each developer or business. A portion of these developments may have received other incentives in addition to the sales tax rebates. Table 3. Sales tax rebate agreements and average amounts by development type Local Economic Page 27 Development Incentives Property tax abatements Based on available data, property tax abatements appear to be less widespread in the region than other types of incentives. CMAP has not identified a comprehensive set of examples throughout the region because, while IDOR provides data on abatement totals by county, publicly available information on individual agreements is limited. Property tax abatements appear to be used most frequently for industrial properties. Sometimes property tax abatements are used in conjunction with other types of incentives, like sales tax rebates. The following table provides a summary of general abatements used in the region in 2009, relative to the total amount of property taxes extended to taxpayers by all local governments, by county. Table 4. General authority property tax abatements for tax year 2009 A single development receiving a property tax abatement will typically be awarded abatements from more than one taxing district. Because abatements are typically applied as a flat percentage of the tax bill, the value of the abatement is typically higher for taxing districts with higher tax levies. Just as most property tax revenues go to school districts, the value of abatements provided is also highest for school districts. Counties, municipalities, and to a lesser extent, townships and special districts, also provide general abatements to property owners. Property tax incentive classes In Cook County, property tax incentive classes are widely utilized. In 2011, 2,440 commercial or industrial buildings had an incentive class in 83 municipalities (out of 134 total municipalities either completely or partially in Cook County).21 The popularity of the incentive classes is one indicator that the Cook County property tax assessment classification system adversely affects the tax burden for businesses. To the extent that communities provide commercial and industrial taxpayers with incentive classes, they can change this dynamic somewhat by shifting the tax burden back toward residential properties as well as other commercial/industrial properties not receiving this incentive. 21 Analysis of data from Cook County Assessor Local Economic Page 28 Development Incentives The following map provides an overview of the estimated market value of commercial and industrial incentive class parcels relative to the estimated market value of all commercial and industrial parcels, by municipality. All of the municipalities with more than half of their commercial and industrial property in an incentive class are in an Enterprise Zone, a specific area targeted by the State of Illinois for tax rebates, exemptions, and other incentives to stimulate business development and retention. Most Enterprise Zones encourage municipalities to offer incentive classes to property owners. Local Economic Page 29 Development Incentives Figure 8. Estimated market value of commercial/industrial incentive class properties as a percent of total commercial and industrial market value, by municipality, 2011 The use of incentive classes has become more prevalent in recent years. The number of commercial and industrial properties in Cook County receiving an incentive class has increased 35.5 percent, and incentive class properties share of total estimated market value of commercial and industrial properties increased from 3.5 percent to 5.8 percent between 2007 and 2011. Local Economic Page 30 Development Incentives Implications Economic development incentives are widely used in northeastern Illinois. Clearly, there is an interest among northeastern Illinois communities in attracting and retaining economic development, and communities believe that utilizing incentives will make them a more viable location. In some cases (sales tax rebates and TIF funding) this results in a direct financial outlay to businesses and developers. For property tax incentive classes, and to some extent property tax abatements, the tax burden is reduced for businesses and developers, and that burden is shifted to other taxpayers. In all cases, the incentive, as well as the resources used to negotiate the incentive, represents an investment in economic development outside of ongoing public services and capital projects. Incentives also promote specific land uses within the region’s communities, with potential long-term impacts. TIF use in the region is pervasive and around 5 percent of the region’s total property tax base goes toward generating revenue for public and private development projects in these specific areas. For some communities, TIF accounts for a large portion of the overall resources for capital projects. Maintaining and replacing capital infrastructure is a basic function of municipalities and, while municipalities’ resources to fund capital improvements may be constrained by political or economic factors, the need for substantial use of TIF for funding capital improvements may indicate that sufficient municipal funding for capital improvements had not been set aside over the long term. For sales tax rebates, extensive use indicates that significant amounts of sales tax revenue are being paid to private developers and businesses. Communities receive a portion of state sales tax revenue generated within their borders. This situation motivates municipalities to provide sales tax rebates, because if they cannot attract the sales tax-generating establishment, they receive no sales tax revenue. However, the purpose of state sales tax revenue sharing is to provide resources for the public services that support the sales-tax generating development. The provision of sales tax rebates means that a portion of the revenues are being paid to private firms rather than being used for public services. Either the rebates result in unmet public service needs, or the sales tax revenue generated was beyond the amount needed to cover public service needs within the community that attracted the retailer. The prevalence of Cook County incentive classes indicates that the property tax assessment classification system impedes economic development in many communities in Cook County. The tax burden shift created by classification results in businesses in Cook County shouldering more of the property tax burden than residents. This disproportionate burden does not exist in the collar counties. To the extent that communities provide all commercial and industrial taxpayers with incentive classes, they remove this tax burden shift. Lastly, limited data availability makes it difficult to determine exactly how many local governments are utilizing incentive tools, though a rough order of magnitude can be determined using other methods. Most communities in northeastern Illinois are utilizing incentives, but many are not providing taxpayers with complete documentation of how this Local Economic Page 31 Development Incentives public money is being spent. Transparency is essential to good governance and accountability, but the transparency of data on local incentives is uneven. Like disclosing any other budgetary or financial reporting of local government expenditures of tax revenues, it is important to provide taxpayers with a full accounting of the incentives used for economic development projects and the incentives provided to businesses and developers. Structure of incentive agreements The structure of incentive agreements varies across incentive type and the development itself. The exception is the structure of Cook County property tax incentive classes, which all provide the same assessment reduction from 25 percent of market value to 10 percent of market value. In addition, many developments receive multiple incentives, which may include state or federal incentives. Using the 40 case studies, the following summarizes the common structures of TIF, sales tax rebate agreements, and property tax abatements, across the region. Tax Increment Financing In the case studies analyzed by CMAP, TIF agreements provided or committed a wide range of funding ($380,000 to $26 million) for private developments. The amount of funding depended on the size of the project, the level of public improvements provided, and the extent that development in the TIF district has actually occurred and generated incremental revenue. Unlike other incentives, TIF funding to a project is not limited to the amount of property or sales tax revenue generated by the development receiving funds. Any incremental property tax revenue generated within the TIF district can be used to fund a project. Figure 9 provides an overview of TIF funding provided or committed to developments in the case studies. Figure 9. Amount of TIF funding provided or committed in CMAP case studies Local Economic Page 32 Development Incentives How have municipalities used clawbacks in incentive agreements? Several of the agreements reviewed for the case studies included clawback provisions. Clawbacks allow communities to ensure that their goals for the incentive are met, such as long- term occupancy of a property or additional jobs. For example, Downers Grove required Bill Kay Nissan to purchase the property, remodel the property, install a public sidewalk, and continue to operate the dealership on the property for at least 12 years. If Bill Kay Nissan ceased to operate during years 1 through 3 of the agreement, all sales tax rebate and TIF reimbursement must be repaid. The repayment amount dropped to 75 percent during years 4 and 5 and 50 percent during years 5 through 10. For the Chicago Manufacturing Campus, the City required Ford to operate the assembly plant and provide at least 750 jobs for a ten-year period at the supplier park, and lease at least 75 percent of the supplier campus during the initial ten- year period. In addition, for a 60-month period (not required to be consecutive) during the ten years, at least 1,000 jobs must be provided. Clorox received property tax abatements from eight taxing districts to locate in Minooka in 2006. The abatements required the company to stay until 2012. When the company relocated to University Park in 2011, they were required to repay the $773,000. TIF spending tended to be larger than spending for other incentives. Case studies receiving only TIF and no other local incentives accounted for 16 of the 40 case studies, but for more than half of the amounts spent or committed. In contrast, sales tax rebates (alone or in tandem with another incentive) accounted for 17 case studies, but the amount spent, committed, or projected to be spent was only half of TIF. In part, this may be a result of the incomplete data on amounts spent and committed for sales tax rebates. Property tax abatements and incentive classes tended to provide smaller amounts than TIF and sales tax rebates. To some extent, many TIFs have more capacity to generate revenue than the amounts provided to other incentive types. They tend to have boundaries larger than the size of any particular development project and funds are generated over a 23-year period. When municipalities provide TIF funding to a private or non-profit entity, they create a redevelopment agreement (RDA) that governs the amount of TIF funds provided and any requirements that a developer or non-profit must meet to receive those funds. Other taxing bodies can also receive TIF funds for capital projects, via an RDA or memorandum of understanding. An RDA will provide details on the development project, as well as what aspects of the development project will be paid for with TIF funds. A private developer may also be subject to requirements such as the type of development to be constructed, the size of buildings, amount of parking, affordable housing units, number of jobs retained or created, consideration of community residents for jobs, or the amount of open space. Some agreements include clawback provisions that require developers to repay TIF funds if these requirements are not met or prevent developers from receiving TIF funds at all. The developer may be paid with the incremental property taxes generated by the TIF, or incremental property taxes may be used to pay off a bond issued to provide funding for the project, or both. Payments to the developer may be made at once or as project milestones are met, such as the completion of a building. Agreements are structured such that the municipality is not required to utilize its general revenues if the revenues generated by the TIF are insufficient to meet funding commitments. Local Economic Page 33 Development Incentives However, TIF funds can be expended in many ways beyond directly assisting a private development. For example, TIFs can fund district-wide infrastructure improvements, assist overlapping taxing districts with capital projects, be used to assemble land, or improve problematic sites prior to any prospective development projects. In the latter cases, a developer may subsequently be sold that land at a price that meets market constraints but is below the cost of improvements done by the municipality. This is effectively a TIF subsidy, but may not generate an RDA or other contract requiring specific developer improvements in exchange for the land cost write-down, although statute does require that the municipality pass an ordinance approving the sale. Alternatively, a municipality may utilize TIF funds to complete improvements like streetscaping, storm sewer improvements, street repaving, or other projects. These projects can improve an area’s attractiveness to private development, but will not lead to an RDA with subsequent private developers. Figure 10 indicates common TIF funding and RDA scenarios. Local Economic Page 34 Development Incentives Figure 10. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and Redevelopment Agreement (RDA) scenarios Note: This graphic outlines several common ways in which developers can receive a TIF subsidy and how community stipulations regarding project outcomes may impact the conditions attached to that subsidy. Indirect subsidies like infrastructure improvements are covered in the top third, and processes for direct TIF assistance are covered in the bottom third. Land write-downs and remediation activities may be direct or indirect subsidies, depending upon the agreement structure, and are covered in the middle of the chart. Sales tax rebate agreements Sales tax rebates are typically structured by rebating a set proportion of sales tax revenues for a period of years, or until a certain maximum rebate is met. In some agreements, the retailer must meet a certain sales threshold before the municipality will rebate the sales taxes. In some cases, the developer requests reimbursement for an infrastructure improvement, and the Local Economic Page 35 Development Incentives reimbursement is made by the municipality through the sales tax rebate. In other cases, municipalities use rebates as an incentive to attract or retain a business or development that may have instead located elsewhere. The following table provides an overview of some typical components of sales tax rebates among the 17 case studies that received them. Table 5. Components of 17 sales tax rebate agreements Some sales tax rebate agreements have clawback provisions. Such provisions require the business or developer to repay incentive funds if certain requirements, such as remaining in the community for a certain number of years, are not met. Property tax abatements Property tax abatements tend to follow similar structures. Property tax abatements are typically provided to a taxpayer by more than one taxing district. The structure of the agreement takes the form of a simple percentage of property taxes abated for a period of years, but the proportion of the abatement as well as the term may be different across taxing districts. The term of the abatement ranged from three to eight years in the case studies. In two of the case studies, 50 percent was abated for five years. In three other cases, the proportion abated decreased annually, in two cases going from 75 percent, to 50 percent, to 25 percent of property taxes, and in another case, going from 50 percent and gradually decreasing to 10 percent over the course of eight years. Property tax abatements may also include clawback provisions. The most common property tax abatements are statutorily limited to $4 million. Implications The structure of incentive agreements varies widely across incentive types, developments, and communities. This variation impacts the amount and duration of funding provided as well as the potential outcomes for municipalities. For example, the value of an incentive class is limited by the fact that they last for just 12 years if they are not renewed. On the other hand, TIF funding is generated over the course of 23 years, a period over which a substantial amount of funding can be generated. TIF funding is also generated for an area that is often larger than a specific development project and is generated from the entire aggregate property tax rate. Sales tax rebates and property tax abatements typically provide lower levels of funding to developments than TIF because they usually last for significantly less than 23 years or are Local Economic Page 36 Development Incentives derived from tax bases and/or rates that are lower than the composite property tax rate used for TIF. However, several sales tax rebates have very large terms and no maximum rebate. In these cases, communities are committing to provide high levels of funds to businesses and developers; over time, these funding levels could reach well beyond the amounts provided through TIF. Moreover, there are no statutory criteria regarding how businesses and firms must use their sales tax rebates, unlike TIF, which requires that funds go toward public improvements or statutorily-defined private development costs. However, TIFs can be used to support private sector development in many ways that are not easy to track, such as land consolidation with a lower-than-cost sale to a developer. While these types of actions are still taken to achieve a public good, such as redevelopment, they are less transparent than RDAs because they are not explicitly tracked and reported. Over time, TIF funds and sales tax rebates have the potential to fund a substantial portion of a private development project. While this may be desirable in unique cases to support a specific public good, substantial diversion of public funds to private development projects should be undertaken only when the project meets key long-term planning goals and could not otherwise be achieved. Local governments do have the ability to design TIF, sales tax rebate, and property tax abatement agreements in a manner that ensures that the funding is used to benefit the community. Local governments can include requirements in any rebate or TIF agreement, such as requiring the business or firm to stay in the community for a certain number of years, hire community residents, generate a specific level of tax revenue, or construct an infrastructure project. Tying funding to desired outcomes, gives local governments a certain amount of control over the investments they are making in private development. However, long-term local government funding commitments are often paired with shorter-term commitments by the private sector because businesses cannot necessarily commit to operating over the long-term. Even with clawback provisions, providing an incentive does not guarantee any particular short- term or long-term outcome, only that a municipality’s potential loss is minimized. However, municipalities do not always exercise their ability to include these provisions, which can result in a loss of public funds. Local policies governing locally-based economic development incentives While state statute governs some aspects of local economic development incentives, some local governments have policies governing how economic development incentives are used within their community. The policies typically include criteria that must be met by developments to receive incentives such as adding additional jobs, increased sales tax revenue, construction of public improvements, minimum capital investments, or evidence of a financial gap in the development project’s costs. Policies also sometimes include limitations on the amount of Local Economic Page 37 Development Incentives incentives that can be provided. The following section describes some examples of these policies and guidelines. Some communities have policies that limit the value of the incentives that can be provided to developments. For example, Chicago TIF funding cannot not exceed $5,000 per job created or retained within the central business district or $10,000 per job created or retained outside of the central business district, although these limits are subject to change based on special merit considerations. Both Homer Glen 22 and Highland Park23 provide sales tax rebates for a maximum of ten years. Both limit rebates to 50 percent of revenues, but in Highland Park, the amount may be reduced to the extent that new revenues will replace revenues generated by previous or existing businesses. Also in Highland Park, existing businesses can receive a 75 percent rebate of incremental sales tax revenues generated above the prior year . St. Charles has a different method for limiting incentive amounts for TIF funding and sales tax rebates; assistance cannot exceed 75 percent of the total projected revenue for the development.24 Many communities also include criteria that developments must meet in order to receive incentives. As part of a related CMAP research project, 20 communities were interviewed about their use of fiscal impact analyses when considering land use decisions. The vast majority of communities interviewed indicated that a request for incentives generated the need for a fiscal impact analysis and/or an analysis of the return on investment that a community receives in exchange for providing an incentive. Policies that include criteria tend to address specific attributes of the development or the expected results of the development in terms of additional jobs or increased tax revenue. For example, Highland Park only provides sales tax rebates for new businesses that make a minimum capital investment of $250,000 or existing businesses that generate at least $1 million in taxable sales annually. Crystal Lake has criteria for sales tax rebates that depend on the type of development. Auto dealerships must have at least $5 million in taxable sales and project costs of at least $250,000 for new dealerships and $1 million for existing auto dealerships.25 In other communities, like Tinley Park, there are several ways that a development can meet criteria for receiving an incentive, including economic, fiscal, or meeting the community’s targeted development needs. 22 Village of Homer Glen Board of Trustees Meeting, January 22, 2013, http://www.homerglenil.org/homerglenil/MinutesFolder/MinsBoard/BoardMinutes2013/M13-0122- BoardMeetingMinutes.pdf 23 City of Highland Park, Sales Tax Rebate Program Guidelines to Facility Business Attraction and Retention, http://www.cityhpil.com/documents/3/sales%20tax%20rebate%20guidelines%20-%20revised%202012.pdf 24 City of St. Charles Economic Incentive Policy 2009-4, March 2, 2009, http://www.stcharlesil.gov/sites/default/files/codebook/policies/2009-04/p200904.pdf 25 City of Crystal Lake, Incentives, http://www.crystallake.org/index.aspx?page=133 Local Economic Page 38 Development Incentives In addition, some communities, like St. Charles, only provide sales tax rebates to developments that would not be financially feasible but for the incentive. Similarly, Yorkville 26 requires that developments have a defined gap between project costs and project revenues. Some communities indicate that developments receiving incentives must be consistent with planning goals. Highland Park requires developments to be consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan, while other communities like Chicago and St. Charles mention several planning goals that a development could meet, like the rehabilitation of historic structures or streetscape enhancement. Fewer policies address the potential market viability of a development. Park Forest27 requires that developments prove financial feasibility and that the development team have a minimum level of experience and commitment to the project. Without independent assessment of market feasibility, communities may invest in developments that have a high potential of failure. In these cases, communities may be required to invest additional funds to remediate the impacts of a failed development. In the community interviews, several communities indicated that businesses and developers have come to expect incentives like sales and property tax abatements, and expressed the concern that if a community is unwilling to provide these funds, businesses will locate in a neighboring community. In fact, acknowledgement of this issue was found in St. Charles’ incentive policy. The policy states that that it is not the City’s intent that these incentives be used to relocate sales tax-generating establishments from neighboring communities or to allow requests for incentives “to induce a bidding war for City funds.” Just a few incentive policies were studied for this report, but many communities throughout the region have policies governing incentives. In the community interviews referenced above, several communities expressed the need for establishment of internal policies regarding incentives, such as placing maximums on the amount of funds available to a project or limiting incentives to expansion of existing businesses. Having policies in place is important to ensuring that any incentives provided for development are in line with established community goals. In addition, established procedures for analysis can ensure that communities determine the impact of the development prior to providing an incentive. St. Charles’ policy states that developments that receive incentives must not place extraordinary demands on the City’s infrastructure or services, which would likely have to be determined through fiscal impact analysis. Overall, most local policies studied set out to limit incentive amounts or ensure that incentives were only provided to developments that would result in particular outcomes for the 26 City of Yorkville, Resolution No. 2008-46, Economic Incentive Policy, http://www.yorkville.il.us/docs/Economic_Incentive_Policy.pdf 27 Village of Park Forest, Development Incentive Policy, http://www.villageofparkforest.com/clientuploads/Economic_Development/IncentivePolicy.pdf?PHPSESSID=2028d6 Local Economic Page 39 Development Incentives community. However, for any new development, residents of other communities may be employed at the business, may buy goods or service from the business, or may be involved in the production of goods that are sold at the business. Customers or employees may cross multiple jurisdictions to travel to the new development, burdening transportation and infrastructure networks in adjacent communities. Sometimes, the development itself is even relocating from a different community. From a regional perspective, these are key impacts, as other communities are always involved in a development’s economic structure in some manner. Yet, the policies examined for this report did not consider how a project will impact other neighboring communities, including public service impacts on neighboring communities and whether the business was relocating from a nearby community. Goals of incentives from the community perspective From the case studies, CMAP was able to determine some of the goals that communities have stated for using economic development incentives. While these goals vary, commonalities emerge. The most frequent expectations from the local community’s perspective are to grow the overall tax base, create jobs, and improve infrastructure, either on or adjacent to the site. While some of the incentives in the case studies were used for infill redevelopment of existing underutilized sites, others were provided for new greenfield development. The goals stated in incentive agreements are also commonly found in municipal comprehensive plans, but it is unclear from most incentive agreements and ordinances if there is a direct connection between provision of an incentive and planned goals. Within the case study set, approximately half of the retail, office, and industrial development case studies included stated economic and fiscal goals. Economic goals included increasing employment, and were accomplished either through direct subsidies or funding of infrastructure improvements on behalf of a development project. Infrastructure was part of all case studies where TIF funding was provided. Incentives for infill development A number of the incentives provided to case study developments were used to encourage infill development in existing communities. For example, the Klee Building in Chicago was redeveloped using $1.2 million in TIF funds. Redevelopment was completed in 2007, resulting in 64 residential units (13 affordable), and 20,000 square feet of retail and office space. The total development cost was $18.7 million, which includes rehabilitating the Klee Building, demolishing three other neighboring buildings, and constructing two new buildings to complement the Klee Building. Local Economic Page 40 Development Incentives In several case studies, sales tax rebates were used to fund infrastructure projects. Sales tax rebates tend to fund infrastructure work required to support the new development, such as road, utility, traffic signal, landscaping, façade improvements, and stormwater detention work. These infrastructure improvements are required by local jurisdictions to ensure that the project does not degrade existing infrastructure networks. To make a site more attractive to developers, communities provide reimbursements for these required infrastructure improvements through sales tax rebates. TIF funds can be used for similar improvements if the area also meets blight conditions, but are often targeted toward more unusual costs such as environmental remediation, stabilizing poor soil conditions, or land assembly in a previously-developed area. The intent of funding these kinds of projects is to encourage desired development on sites that have costs and/or risks well above that which the market would normally bear. Incentives are typically used to encourage certain types of land uses or implement any number of stated planning goals, from affordable housing and transit oriented development to shopping centers and industrial parks. Figure 11 analyzes the stated land use goals across 27 case studies where this information was provided, and organizes the results by development type and whether the development is considered infill. The majority of the case studies involved infill developments of various types, from mixed-use, transit-oriented development to retail. A lesser percentage involved non-infill land that is undeveloped, or greenfield development. Incentives for brownfield development Many of the incentives provided to case study developments were used to encourage development where extraordinary development costs made the site less attractive to developers. In Broadview, a 63-acre parcel previously served as a parts distribution warehouse, but had been vacant since 1992. The 22nd & 17th Avenue TIF district was established in 1993 to attract developers to the site. Broadview Village Square opened in 1994 at a cost of $65 million. Anchors include a SuperTarget and a Home Depot. A $23 million bond was issued to pay for site preparation including demolition and remediation. Local Economic Page 41 Development Incentives Figure 11. Use of incentives by stated land use goal Some communities have found that incentives can help catalyze infill development or make difficult sites more attractive to a developer or business. Incentives can also fill the gap between development costs and market prices for residential developments, including affordable housing and mixed use developments. Higher costs associated with these types of development include environmental remediation, decked or underground parking, site assembly in an area with many landowners, higher construction costs for multi-story development, and higher market risk for some component of a mixed-use development. That being said, incentives are also utilized for undeveloped sites that do not necessarily have these extraordinary development costs. In these cases, the goal from the community’s perspective is to expand the tax or economic base through a major new development like a shopping center or a distribution center. New development often requires costly new transportation and utility infrastructure investment as well as long term maintenance paid for by the municipality. Providing incentives on top of these additional costs represents a major investment of taxpayer dollars toward development that will require continuing support in terms of public services. Relationship to community plans Local comprehensive plans help provide a long range community vision and strategy and represent a major investment of time and energy. They generally outline land use, economic, transportation, infrastructure and other goals that relate directly to those outlined in many of the incentive agreements. CMAP recently analyzed the content of the comprehensive plans for 219 of the region’s communities.28 This analysis found that a significant majority of the region’s 28 The analysis was completed in 2009. The analysis set was comprised of all plans which were published 1990 or later and for which copies could be obtained. For additional information, see http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/moving- forward/human-capital-in-detail/-/asset_publisher/Q4En/blog/a-look-inside-metropolitan-chicago%E2%80%99s- existing-local-plans/276584?isMovingForward=1 Local Economic Page 42 Development Incentives comprehensive plans have a heavy or moderate focus on economic development and explore other topics related to specific land use goals. However, comparatively few discussed specific incentives to implement these goals. Figure 12. Goals and incentives addressed in CMAP region comprehensive plans, 2009 While the general goals of incentive agreements and comprehensive plans often coincide, it is unclear if incentives are being utilized to implement specific recommendations of a community’s comprehensive plan or if their use is more reactive. Sales tax rebates and property tax abatements require no connection to a community plan or strategy, and incentive classes and TIF funds, while limited in the types of areas in which they can be provided, are similarly separate from the planning process. As described in the section on local incentive policies, communities in the region have approached guidelines for the provision of incentives in a variety of ways, some of which include a required connection to the community plan. When municipalities make the decision to support a specific development or employer by providing an incentive, it is critical that this investment of public dollars supports community goals and community land use plans. Aligning incentives with community plans builds on the analysis and public input that went into the plan, and ensures that public dollars are being invested in outcomes and land use patterns that are desired over the long term. Local Economic Page 43 Development Incentives Regional economic impact of industries receiving local incentives Local economic development incentives have been used to attract or retain a wide variety of businesses, including retail, auto dealerships, corporate office, manufacturing and warehousing industries. Incentives often represent considerable investments for local governments. From the local perspective, these deals can work to implement a wide variety of planning goals; however the economic benefit for the region at large is much less clear. These incentives are offered to businesses with the expectation of growing the local tax base or providing job opportunities. The provision of these incentives is oftentimes driven by the structure of the overall state and local tax system, which rewards certain types of developments more than others. One of the central public policy issues under exploration by CMAP is the common disconnect between local fiscal benefit (as measured by the growth in one local tax base) and the regional economic benefit (as measured by output and wages.) The case studies include a number of different types of firms, all of which have varying levels of regional impact. Employment multipliers are one tool to show the extent that an expansion of one industry supports additional economic activity within the region. For example, a job multiplier of 2.7 suggests that the increase of one job in a specific industry leads to an additional 1.7 jobs in the regional economy. CMAP used an input-output model developed by Economic Modeling Specialists Inc. (EMSI), which is specifically tailored to produce data on metropolitan Chicago. The following chart provides an overview of job multipliers for the region for various industries included in the case studies. These industries also provide varying levels of wages, which are illustrated on the subsequent chart. Local Economic Page 44 Development Incentives Figure 13. Jobs multiplier by selected industries, 2012 Figure 14. U.S. average annual wages by industry, 2012 Local Economic Page 45 Development Incentives At the low point, one retail job supports only an estimated additional 0.3-0.9 jobs. These jobs also provide very low wages. Similarly, warehousing jobs have lower multipliers and lower wages. On the other hand, manufacturing and corporate offices have much higher multipliers and higher wages. However, this trend was not exhibited for new car dealers, which had lower economic multipliers, but higher average wages. Furthermore, additional jobs in industries with high multipliers, like manufacturing, tend to support jobs in industries with lower multipliers. However, the reverse is not true; industries with lower economic multipliers tend not to support jobs in industries with higher economic multipliers. The following chart provides three examples of the number of additional jobs that would be supported in the region if 100 jobs were added in a motor vehicle supplier manufacturing facility, a department store, and a corporate office. For example, an additional department store with 100 employees supports 42 jobs in other industries within the region, two of which are in manufacturing. At the same time, an additional motor vehicle supplier manufacturing facility with 100 employees supports an additional 183 jobs in other industries, including 39 in other manufacturing industries and 17 in retail. Corporate offices also support jobs in other industries. If an additional 100 corporate office jobs were created in the region, 170 other jobs would be supported, including 19 in retail. Figure 15. Number of additional jobs supported in the region from an increase of 100 jobs in selected manufacturing, retail, or office development types, by sector, 2012 Based on the available data, it appears that many local governments are targeting incentives based upon local tax revenues rather than overall economic impact. For example, based on data from the set of 137 sales tax rebate agreements, it appears that on a per-case basis, local governments are spending or committing significant amounts of incentive dollars to firms that may generate sales tax revenues, but have low jobs multipliers and/or low wages. For example, sales tax rebates averaged by type of retailer for retail ranged from $2.5 million for home improvement stores to $3.8 million for discount stores. Local Economic Page 46 Development Incentives While providing incentives to office or manufacturing developments may provide better economic benefits, they often do not provide the same level of tax revenue as a retail development, which provides sales tax revenue in addition to property tax revenue. However, the difference between economic and fiscal benefit is that the economic impact spills across municipal borders while the fiscal impact of a development is limited to the local government accruing the revenue . As a result, there is a disincentive to investing in developments that produce wider economic benefits, but that may not provide the same level of tax revenue as a sales-tax generating establishment. Some developments may not produce high levels of tax revenue, but provide a substantial level of economic benefits to the region and can support economic development across sectors. For example, manufacturing in particular tends to support additional jobs within the industry as well as in other industries within its supply chains. Manufacturers are also an important source of innovation, in that they rely heavily on research and development. In fact, 85 percent of private research and development in northeastern Illinois comes from the region’s manufacturing cluster.29 Industries like manufacturing also leverage the geographic and infrastructure advantages of the region’s extensive freight network, as well as its highly skilled workforce. How local economic development incentives influence site selection The purpose of most local economic development incentives is to influence business site selection, but these tools represent only one factor among many in these decisions. Locally- based incentives can serve to offset higher taxes or high costs for land and site improvements. They typically work to incentivize development in a particular location rather than counteract any larger-scale metropolitan market or labor force considerations. The case studies indicate that many of these deals involve “intraregional” (within northeastern Illinois) moves or the expansion of an existing business. Only rarely do these types of tools work to lure a firm from another state or other part of the country.30 This is consistent with the findings of various academic studies showing that tax differences are more effective at influencing site selection within regions than across regions.31 29 CMAP, Manufacturing Cluster Drill-Down, 2013, http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/policy/drill-downs/manufacturing 30 Given that northeastern Illinois shares state borders with Wisconsin and Indiana, there is some limited evidence from the case studies that these local tools have been used to attract or retain a business within Illinois. 31 See: Ernest Goss and Philip Peters, “The Effect of State and Local Taxes on Economic Development: A Meta- Analysis,” Southern Economic Journal 62, no. 2 (1995): 320-333; Michael Wasylenko, “Taxation and Economic Development: The State of the Economic Literature,” New England Economic Review (March/April 1997): 38-52; Robert Lynch, “Re-thinking Growth Strategies: How State and Local Taxes and Services Affect Economic Development,” Economic Policy Institute, (2004). Local Economic Page 47 Development Incentives Of the 40 case studies analyzed, 21 involved incentives provided to specific businesses, rather than to developers. The following chart provides an overview of the businesses receiving incentives, and whether the development was part of a national firm’s market expansion or whether it was a firm moving or expanding within the region. 19 of the 21 businesses receiving incentives were either moving from another place in the metropolitan region or expanding their market. The following chart breaks down these case studies by development type and by the primary incentive received by the business. Figure 16. Incentives to businesses by type and nature of development Use of incentives for businesses located in northeastern Illinois Abt Electronics moved to Glenview from Morton Grove in 2002. A sales tax rebate for the development was approved in 2000. In 2008, the Village extended the rebate agreement for an additional 15-year period because Abt was approaching its maximum rebate of $11 million under the 2000 agreement. Under the 2008 agreement, which will expire in 2023, the sales threshold was dropped to $75 million and the maximum was removed. The stated reasons for extending the agreement included that Abt has been a significant employment and sales tax revenue generator. They have allowed the Village to lessen its dependence on a property tax levy. Also, according to the Village Board Report, Abt indicated several factors that may result in the store relocating to another community, such as the increase in the Cook County sales tax, nearby road work, and the economy. Local Economic Page 48 Development Incentives The next chart breaks down the 19 intraregional moves and market expansions by development type and the incentive used. More than half of the case studies illustrated in Figure 17 were retail developments or distribution centers. Figure 17. Number of case studies using incentives for an intraregional move, for the expansion of an existing business, or for a national firm’s market expansion, by primary incentive used and development type Retail site selection Incentives to a retail development in a regional or sub-regional market area that is already attractive for development help determine the precise location where the development will locate, but not whether the retail development will come to the region at all. For retailers, a preferred market area has a stable or growing population matching the retailer’s target demographic groups, and there must be a market opportunity in the form of a lack of competition or a market niche that is not being fulfilled.32 Additionally, a retailer will consider costs of expansion, such as developing new warehouse or distribution facilities to serve its new stores, creating a market presence through advertising, and similar hard and soft expansion costs. The retailer will also evaluate the presence and current success of similar retailers in the expansion area. These are larger, regional factors that individual communities cannot directly control. 32 William M. Bowen, Kimberly Winson-Geideman, and Robert A. Simmons, “Financing Public Investment in Retail Development,” in Financing Economic Development in the 21st Century, ed. Sammis B. White, Richard D. Bingham, and Edward W. Hill (Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc, 2003), 250-265. Local Economic Page 49 Development Incentives As shown in Figure 18, selection of a retail site within a larger market area involves many factors. At base, these involve a combination of market requirements and initial development costs. Market requirements include: proximity to customers that meet a retailer’s age, income, lifestage, and lifestyle requirements; spatial relationship to competing retailers and a brand’s other stores; and, potentially, location in a retail cluster. There are also factors that affect the visibility of a site, such as traffic levels, access considerations, and visibility from the roadway or within a development. Lastly, the costs of each site will vary due to a number of factors, including lease or purchase costs; necessary site improvements such as site preparation, demolition, improvement of existing infrastructure and/or brownfield remediation; required improvements to adjacent public infrastructure such as roads or water mains; and, local costs such as property taxes or utility taxes. A retailer will seek to locate at a site that meets its demographic, traffic, and access requirements and provides the best cost value. Development incentives have an impact on the retail site location process by reducing the cost of initial site improvements and/or local taxes over the long term. This does not create a better market for a retailer, but instead makes an individual site more attractive by reducing standard costs or by paying for extraordinary costs that market-rate development does not normally take on, like brownfield remediation. Thus, incentives may affect retail development at a particular site, but would not necessarily result in additional retailers in a particular market area. How do retailers plan expansions? Mariano’s, a supermarket brand under Roundy’s, has recently constructed a number of new grocery stores within the Chicago region. They plan to continue their expansion due to the opportunities they see in the greater Chicago area market. According to the company’s recent filing with the federal Securities Exchange Commission: We entered the Chicago market in July 2010 through the opening of our first Mariano's Fresh Market store in Arlington Heights, Illinois. As of November 1, 2011, we have opened four stores in the Chicago market, which, since opening, have generated higher average weekly net sales per store compared to stores in our other markets. Given its favorable competitive dynamics and attractive demographics, including a large population and average household income that exceeds the national average, we believe the Chicago market provides us with a compelling expansion opportunity. We expect to open four to five stores per year in the Chicago market over the next five years, and have secured six leases for future stores in attractive locations as of November 1, 2011. Roundy’s Corporation, “Form S-1: Registration Statement under The Securities Act Of 1933,” December 5, 2011, http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1536035/000104746911009884 /a2206531zs-1.htm Local Economic Page 50 Development Incentives Figure 18. Retailer regional market and site selection considerations Industrial, warehousing, and office site selection For industrial and office development, site selection is based on a complex set of factors involving transportation infrastructure, workforce considerations, and access to customers or suppliers. An area of the metropolitan region would have to satisfy the firm’s criteria on these factors if the region were to be considered at all. If the region is being considered for an industrial or office facility, local incentives could play a role in the specific location within the region that is chosen. Site selection for manufacturing facilities involves factors such as the labor market, the skill level of the workforce, labor costs, transportation costs, utility costs, and the proximity of suppliers and consumers. Because most of the costs involved in a manufacturing facility are for supplier inputs and labor, taxes and incentives account for a very small portion of the overall Local Economic Page 51 Development Incentives cost of facility operations.33 Thus, incentives may not be a deciding factor until a particular region is identified for a location. After a region is selected, more significant costs such as labor and transportation costs are going to vary less across sites, resulting in local taxes and incentives becoming the variable cost. Similar factors exist for warehousing facilities, although a site’s location within the firm’s logistics network is an important factor. Location for corporate offices also depends on factors such as the labor market, skill level of workforce, labor costs, access to transportation, the public services available for employees and their families, and quality of life considerations. These factors are considered typically under a multi-stage process, where geographic areas are selected first, followed by identification of various sites within the selected geographic areas.34 If a firm was to consider northeastern Illinois for a corporate office, identified sites within northeastern Illinois and other regions under consideration would be evaluated on a number of factors, including qualify of life factors, taxes, issues related to the site, and any incentives offered. Alignment between local government and business goals Local economic development efforts can help improve the tax base and the quality of life for residents. The economic development incentive tools researched for this report come into play when local governments believe that a business or developer requires a financial incentive to 33 Daphne A. Kenyon, Adam H. Langley, and Bethany P. Paquin. Rethinking Property Tax Incentives for Business (Cambridge, Mass: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 2012), http://www.lincolninst.edu/pubs/2024_Rethinking- Property-Tax-Incentives-for-Business 34 Joseph S. Rabianski, James R. DeLisle and Neil G. Carn, “Corporate Real Estate Site Selection: A Community- Specific Information Framework,” Journal of Real Estate Research 22, no. 1/2 (2001): 165-197. Locating logistics and warehouse facilities Clarius Park Joliet, a speculative logistics facility being constructed near I-80, I-55 and intermodal facilities, is capitalizing on the Chicago region’s assets with regard to transportation access. Developer Kevin D. Matzke said of the project location: On a national level, Chicago factors into almost every large industrial user’s logistics model due to its large population, geographic centrality and the fact that all Class 1 rail lines converge in Chicago. On a regional level, Joliet makes perfect sense, since it is located less than 50 miles from downtown Chicago, it is the crossing point between Interstates 55 and 80, and it is located very close to both the BNSF and UP intermodal facilities. Joliet is one of several communities in the immediate area of the I-55/I-80 interchange that are experiencing substantial new industrial development. This area has added 26 million square feet of industrial development since 2000, with 21 million more square feet currently proposed. National Real Estate Investor, “Construction of $70M Clarius Park Joliet Underway, First Building Delivery Slated for 1Q 2013,” August 12. 2012, http://nreionline.com/midwest/construction-70m-clarius-park-joliet- underway-first-building-delivery-slated-1q-2013; CMAP analysis of CoStar data Local Economic Page 52 Development Incentives locate in the community. At the same time, businesses and developers desire these financial incentives from local governments. Businesses exist to maximize profits, and receiving an outlay of public funding reduces the cost of development for the business. Businesses are typically in an advantageous position to negotiate incentives with local governments. They may have several sites to choose from, and may obtain incentive offers from multiple communities in the region. This puts communities in the difficult position of competing against each other for economic development opportunities, many of which are from businesses or developers that intend to select a site in northeastern Illinois and are simply choosing from several specific sites in the region. Only the business knows the level of public funding that is required for them to develop a particular site and whether an incentive is required for the development at all. Some communities require proof that there is a financial gap that must be met for a development to receive incentives, although in some cases that proof is only provided by the developer being evaluated. As a result, many communities provide incentives without knowing whether the development would have occurred regardless of the incentive or what kinds of incentives were offered by other communities. Undoubtedly, northeastern Illinois has real redevelopment needs. Many areas of the region have vast amounts of available infill land, and these areas may also be experiencing a depressed economic base or a low tax base. These areas would benefit from additional economic development efforts, some of which may be in the form of incentives. At the same time, this report has shown that many of these incentive deals involve new greenfield developments which typically do not have extraordinary development costs. Some communities are spending public funding and other resources competing over these developments. From a regional perspective, these kinds of deals are problematic because the business likely would have located in the region regardless of these efforts. Unfortunately, local governments are in a difficult position. If they do not offer economic development incentives, some businesses may decide to locate in a neighboring community that does provide an incentive. There are benefits associated with being selected for a development, such as an increased property tax base, and depending on the type of development, increased sales tax revenue, additional retail options in underserved areas, or closer employment opportunities for residents. While the community must also bear costs associated with the development, such as public service and infrastructure costs, neighboring communities may also have to incur some of these additional costs, but without receiving additional tax revenue that may be generated in part by their own residents. Local governments operate largely under state law, which provides local governments the ability to use tax revenue to incentivize development projects. A policy environment where any community has the ability to provide incentives to businesses encourages competition among communities rather than cooperation. If even one community offers an economic development incentive, it would be at an advantage relative to a similar community not offering one. Local Economic Page 53 Development Incentives Fostering an environment where local resources are targeted toward collaborative efforts would require reforms to the statutes that encourage incentive competition. Conclusion: Supporting GO TO 2040 Local economic development incentives play a major role within the overall economic development landscape of northeastern Illinois. These incentives have been used to attract or retain a wide variety of commercial, industrial, and residential uses including retail, auto dealerships, corporate offices, manufacturing, warehousing, mixed-use, and affordable housing developments. CMAP analyzes local incentives from the perspective of GO TO 2040, the region’s comprehensive plan that links transportation, land use, the natural environment, economic prosperity, housing, and human and community development. The plan encourages strategies that support investment in existing communities, maintain the region’s existing infrastructure, and encourage sustainable economic growth and efficient governance. Communities often utilize local incentives for goals that align with GO TO 2040, such as redeveloping an underutilized site, developing affordable housing, or meeting other key reinvestment goals. Specifically, redevelopment can require the consolidation of many small parcels under separate ownership, remediation of environmental contamination, rehabilitation of existing structures, or an upgrade of public infrastructure. In these cases, incentives can bridge the gap between market prices and high redevelopment costs, meeting both public goals and private investment needs. On the other hand, communities often use local incentives to compete over new developments on undeveloped land that typically do not have extraordinary development costs. While GO TO 2040 acknowledges that some greenfield development will occur, the plan does not prioritize the associated expenditure of limited public resources toward these ends. GO TO 2040 also emphasizes efficient governance and access to information. Unfortunately, limited data availability often makes it difficult to determine exactly how many local governments are utilizing incentive tools. Like disclosing any other budgetary or financial reporting of local government expenditures of tax revenues, it is important for state and local governments to provide taxpayers with a full accounting of the incentives used for economic development projects. Local communities often provide incentives without knowledge of whether the development would have occurred anyway. Businesses are typically in an advantageous position to negotiate incentives with local governments— they may have several sites to choose from and may receive incentive offers from multiple communities in the region. This situation puts communities in the difficult position of competing against each other for economic Local Economic Page 54 Development Incentives development opportunities, many of which involve businesses or developers that intend to select a site in northeastern Illinois and are choosing from several specific sites in the region. GO TO 2040 strongly supports coordination between communities. Intergovernmental approaches are often the best way to solve planning problems in economic development. Employing incentives to compete with other communities over development often runs contrary to this strategy. Collaborative efforts can help communities to gain efficiencies, share information, and strategically invest scarce public funds. Moving forward, fostering a collaborative environment to facilitate economic development would better utilize public resources and would benefit the region as a whole. Local Economic Page 55 Development Incentives Appendix: Case study summaries Case studies are organized according to incentive type and location. When more than one incentive type was utilized, the case study is classified by the incentive type that provided the most funding. Sales tax rebates Cook County Abt Electronics, Village of Glenview Figure 19. Abt Electronics Source: flickr user Zol87 Abt Electronics moved to Glenview from Morton Grove in 2002. A sales tax rebate for the development was approved in 2000. According to a Village Board Report, the original agreement allowed for a 50-percent sales tax rebate for 15 years up to a maximum of $11 million, after a sales threshold of $100 million in sales. In 2008, the Village extended the rebate agreement for an additional 15-year period because Abt was approaching its maximum rebate Local Economic Page 56 Development Incentives under the 2000 agreement. Under the 2008 agreement, which will expire in 2023, the sales threshold was dropped to $75 million and the maximum was removed. Also under the agreement, the Village is guaranteed a taxable sales base of $275 million in years 1 through 5 and $250 million in years 6-15. In addition, Abt must maintain at least 900 employees at the facilities in years one through five, 750 in years six through 10 and 600 in years 10 through 15. If these provision is not met, Abt will have to pay back all of the rebates received during the previous five years. The reason for extending the agreement was multi-fold. Abt has been a significant employment and sales tax revenue generator. They have allowed the Village to lessen its dependence on a property tax levy. Also, according to the Village Board Report, Abt indicated several factors that may result in the store relocating to another community, such as the increase in the Cook County sales tax, nearby road work, and the economy. Abt Electronics currently employs 1,100 and at least $15 million has been paid under this agreement to date. Source: Village of Glenview, Village Board Report on Consideration of a Resolution authorizing an addendum to the economic development agreement between the Village of Glenview and Abt Electronics, September 2, 2008; various Village of Glenview Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, 2006 through 2011 Matteson Auto Mall, Village of Matteson In 1997, the Village of Matteson entered into an agreement with Miller Consolidated to develop an auto mall on an undeveloped site. The agreement followed the loss of an Oldsmobile dealership, although it is unclear where that dealership was located. Matteson Auto Mall was completed in 2001 on a 102-acre, 25-parcel piece of undeveloped land purchased from Marathon Oil. The mall was built at a cost of $36.9 million. Miller sold half of the parcels to auto dealerships and leased three parcels for other uses. Ten auto dealerships were constructed and operating in the mall at its peak. In the middle of the mall, there is a conservation area with nature trails and wet lands. The Village provided significant site improvements, including sewer, water main, street lights, streets, sidewalks, landscaping, detention, and wetland creation for the mall. Initially, three dealerships from other areas in southland relocated to the mall, generating complaints that the large incentives provided by taxpayers pitted communities against each other. Today, seven dealerships are currently still in operation, with three vacant dealerships. In addition, several other parcels are currently vacant. Sales tax rebates ranging from 50 percent to 60 percent for 20 years were provided to all dealerships, with a clause that each dealership had to sell a minimum number of cars to receive the rebate. Matteson also issued $3.5 million in bonds to pay for public improvements. In Local Economic Page 57 Development Incentives addition, several taxing bodies provided a 50 percent property tax abatement for 10 years, up to a maximum of $4 million as limited by statute, to several of the dealerships. Rich Township High School District 227 provided the property tax abatement to the initial dealerships. Elementary School District 159 provided abatements to dealerships constructed during both phases of the project. Two dealerships that did not receive an abatement received a property tax incentive Class 8. In 2009, a TIF district was established for just the vacant parcels in the mall to encourage development on the vacant parcels, although there has not yet been any funding provided from development projects through the TIF district. Source: Email communication with the Village of Matteson, February 20, 2013; Charles Stanley, “Matteson Gives Green Light to Huge Car-lot Complex,” Chicago Tribune, June 18, 1997; Marilyn Thomas, “Suburbs Cry In Pain Over Tax-revenue Drain that’s Matteson's Gain,” Chicago Tribune, November 19, 1998 DuPage County Caputo’s, Village of Addison Caputo’s Market moved from another shopping center in Addison to this location in the Lake Mill Plaza Shopping Center. They rehabbed the new location, which is about twice the size of their original location. The rehab was completed in 2007 at a cost of $5 million. Caputo’s also later resurfaced the shopping center parking lot and renovated the façade of the whole shopping center. The incentive was provided because Caputo’s had been renting in another shopping center, and wanted to move to a larger facility, which this move allowed them to do. In addition, an incentive was provided for improvements to the shopping center. Caputo’s received 50 percent of sales tax revenue generated over the amount generated in 2002 for five years or until $200,000 is met. This agreement existed from 2004 to 2008, and a second agreement was made covering 2009 through 2013, with the same structure, and with a maximum of $600,000. The rebate would only be provided if the entire shopping center was rented out, the façade renovated, and the parking lot resurfaced by 2007. These conditions were met in 2006. Source: Email communication with the Village of Addison, February 1, 2013; Village of Addison Budget and Financial Plan, May 1, 2009 – April 30, 2010. Lowe’s, Village of Carol Stream In 2003, the Village approved a sales tax rebate agreement with Lowe’s for a 163,000 square foot store to be built on undeveloped land. The site required $2 million in preparation, including stormwater detention, wetlands mitigation, and landscaping to shield the property from a residential area nearby. Under the agreement, 70 percent of sales tax revenue goes to Lowe’s for 15 years, after the first $100,000, which goes to the Village, with a $700,000 maximum. To date, $560,709 has been paid to Lowe’s. Local Economic Page 58 Development Incentives Source: Village of Carol Stream Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended April 30, 2012; Annemarie Mannion, “Carol Stream OKs Lowe’s store tax breaks,” Chicago Tribune, July 23, 2003 Lee Lumber, City of Oakbrook Terrace Lee Lumber is a building materials and lumber business that operates several showrooms in northeast Illinois and northwest Indiana. In 2003, Lee Lumber opened a window, door, and cabinet showroom and credit department in a shopping center. As a result, all sales involving a credit application were sourced to Oakbrook Terrace. The 2003 agreement provided a sales tax rebate of 70 percent for 10 years with an automatic renewal of an additional 10 years unless either Lee Lumber or the City provides notice not to renew. The agreement assumes that Lee Lumber’s business has closed if taxable credit sales sourced in the City fall below $5 million a year. In addition, if Lee Lumber relocates outside of the City during the initial 10-year period, then they must repay Oakbrook Terrace a portion of the rebate. According to the agreement, the City provided incentives because the company stated it would otherwise not locate its “single order-acceptance point” and corporate headquarters in the City. In 2011, the showroom closed and in 2012, the credit department moved to the Chicago corporate office. Plato’s Closet is now operating in the space. Source: City of Oakbrook Terrace Ordinance No 02 – 45, An ordinance approving an economic incentive agreement with Lee Lumber and Building Materials Corp; Economic Incentive Agreement between the City of Oakbrook Terrace and Lee Lumber and Building Materials, Corp, December 19, 2002; City of Oakbrook Terrace Annual Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2012-2013; City of Oakbrook Terrace, Minutes of the Regular City Council and Committee of the Whole meeting, June 26, 2012. Kane County Gander Mountain, City of Geneva This area had been annexed by the City of Geneva in 1993. In 2003, Gander Mountain redeveloped a vacant Big Kmart, which closed in 2002 along with 284 other Kmart stores. This was the company’s third store in Illinois, with the others in Peoria and Rockford. It is unclear when Big Kmart was built, but the adjacent shopping center was built in 1997. The incentive agreement was signed in 2003. In years 1 and 2, Gander Mountain received no rebate. In years 3 through 7, if annual gross sales were less than or equal to $23,750,000, Gander Mountain received a 25-percent sales tax rebate. If annual sales exceeded that amount, Gander Mountain received a 50-percent rebate. In exchange, Gander Mountain was required to make façade improvements and site improvements. During the term of the incentive agreement, rebates totaled $145,000. In addition, Kane County planned to make improvements to Randall Road totaling $482,000 using sales tax revenue collections. According to the agreement, the City provided the incentives because the development will meet service needs of residents, increase economic opportunities and conditions, increase employment opportunities, and enhance the tax base. Local Economic Page 59 Development Incentives Source: Development Economic Incentive and Reimbursement Agreement City Of Geneva & Gander Mountain Company, March 17, 2003; Telephone communication with the City of Geneva, February 5, 2013; Barbara Kois, “Outdoors retailer to open store,” Chicago Tribune, November 14, 2002 Geneva Commons, City of Geneva Figure 20. Geneva Commons Source: Jaffe Company The Geneva Commons Lifestyle Shopping Center opened in 2003 with 610,979 square feet of retail space. Geneva annexed this property in 1996. Anchor tenants include Dick’s Sporting Goods and Barnes & Noble. Currently, 68 out of 82 spaces are occupied. The agreement was made in 2002 for a sales tax rebate of 25 percent to the developer for 7 and one half years from the date the first store opens or up to $1,677,482. The rebate is meant to reimburse for various roadway improvements and landscaping. As stated in the agreement, the development would not be economically viable without the incentive, and the development will service the needs of residents, increase economic opportunities, enhance commercial economic conditions, stimulate commercial growth, and enhance the tax base of Geneva. Source: Restated Development Economic Incentive and Reimbursement Agreement City of Geneva and Geneva Retail Company, LLC., April 10, 2002; Summary of Geneva Sales Tax Rebates; Geneva Commons website, http://www.shopgenevacommons.com, accessed May 1, 2013 Local Economic Page 60 Development Incentives Kendall County Oswego Commons, Village of Oswego Figure 21. Oswego Commons Source: Ryan Company This shopping center was constructed in 2001 on an undeveloped parcel, and houses a Home Depot, Target, Dominick’s, Kohl’s, and several restaurants. It is 500,000 square feet with 1,375 parking spaces. The Kohl’s was constructed in 2006. A sales tax rebate agreement was made in 2002, providing a 70-percent sales tax rebate in the first two years, 75 percent in years 3 and 4, 50 percent in years 5 through 7, and a 25-percent rebate in years 8 through 10. There is no maximum. CMAP estimates that rebates may have reached $3.4 million. Kohl’s received a separate rebate of 50 percent of sales tax revenues for 10 years, up to $1 million. The Village’s budget stated that incentives were provided to pay for infrastructure improvements and “to ensure the Village would secure bringing these large retail facilities to Oswego.” Infrastructure improvements included widening of U.S. 34 as well as public utility upgrades. Local Economic Page 61 Development Incentives Source: Village of Oswego Fiscal Year 2008/2009 Budget; Village of Oswego, Illinois Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended April 30, 2007; Village of Oswego, Illinois Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended April 30, 2009 Lake County Peapod, Village of Lake Zurich Peapod is an Internet grocery that started in 1989 in Skokie. It has since expanded nationally. In 2001, Peapod completed a new 93,750 square foot distribution center in Lake Zurich, which functions as the point of sale for all Peapod deliveries originating from it. The building was constructed in a new industrial park that was being built on undeveloped land that had been newly annexed by Lake Zurich. The incentive agreement was signed in 1999. Peapod receives 50 percent of sales tax revenue generated over a sales threshold for 30 years. The sales threshold was $6 million in 2000, and grows annually with CPI for all urban consumers for the Chicago area. The reasons for providing the rebate stated in the ordinance include that the property has been vacant (undeveloped), the project will create employment opportunities, the project will enhance the Village’s revenues and tax base, and that the project would not be possible without the incentive. Between 2005 and 2012, $2.4 million was paid to Peapod (data for 1999 through 2004 was unavailable). Source: Village of Lake Zurich Resolution No. 99-03-01A, A Resolution Approving and Authorizing Execution of an Economic Incentive Agreement with Beacon Home Direct, Inc, March 1, 1999 CDW Computer Centers, Village of Mettawa and Village of Vernon Hills CDW Computer Centers is a computer and technology sales company headquartered in Vernon Hills. The retail showroom is also located in Vernon Hills, although most sales are through telephone and online orders. CDW’s Mettawa office opened in 2002. The Mettawa office had approximately $100 million in sales in fiscal year 2011. Mettawa is a small village, with 547 residents. It has few commercial businesses, but is home to the Lake Forest Oasis on the I-94 Tollway. After coming to an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Lake Forest regarding annexing the Oasis property owned by the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority (Tollway), Mettawa shares 50 percent of the sales tax revenue generated by the Oasis with Lake Forest. Together, the Oasis and CDW represent 70 percent of the total sales tax revenues in the Village. Under the sales tax rebate agreement, CDW gets 50 percent of the sales tax revenues generated at the Mettawa office until 2098. It is unclear when the initial agreement was signed, but it was amended in 2002, and then amended again in 2004. It is unclear why Mettawa offered a sales tax rebate. Vernon Hills, who also provided a sales tax rebate, indicated at the time that they were concerned that CDW may move or expand in another municipality because other municipalities provide incentives such as TIFs and sales tax rebates. Local Economic Page 62 Development Incentives When CDW moved its corporate headquarters to Vernon Hills in 1997, it received a sales tax rebate. It opened an additional facility in Vernon Hills in 2000. In the amended version of the rebate agreement, CDW receives 50 percent of sales tax revenue until July 31, 2019, assuming Vernon Hills collects at least $2 million. If sales taxes fall below $2 million, but are above $650,000, the rebate is 35 percent, for sales tax receipts between $500,000 and $650,000, the rebate is 20 percent, and below $500,000, there is no rebate. Source: Village of Mettawa Annual Financial Report Year Ended April 30, 2010; Village of Mettawa Annual Financial Report Year Ended April 30, 2011; Village of Vernon Hills, Minutes of the Committee of the Whole, September 7, 1999, http://www.vernonhills.org/village/minutes/1999/0907COW.htm Will County Romeoville Crossings, Village of Romeoville The shopping center was constructed in 2007 on an undeveloped parcel at a cost of approximately $35 million. The shopping center houses a Wal-Mart, Firestone Tire, and an Autozone. A Sam’s Club is expected to open in fall 2013. Most of the smaller parcels in the shopping center are currently vacant. The Wal-Mart is expected to have annual gross sales of more than $60 million. The incentive agreement began in 2008 when Wal-Mart opened. The developer receives 50 percent of sales tax revenues up to a maximum of $5.1 million. The maximum is increased by $100,000 if two sit-down restaurants (one of which can be substituted for two fast casual restaurants) apply for building permits. There are no sit-down restaurants in the shopping center currently. Initially, the rebate was to last for seven years, but the time limit was later removed because revenues in the early years had been impacted by the economic downturn. The developer was required to reserve three locations in the shopping center for sit-down restaurants for three years. There can be no more than two banks or financial institutions and no arcades, no laundromats, pawnshops, currency exchanges, tattoo parlors, tobacco stores, or dollar stores in the shopping center. Also, the developer was required to make off-site road improvements, as well as other infrastructure and façade improvements. According to the agreement, the Village provided incentives because the developer stated that the development would not have otherwise occurred, the Village’s population has increased but there is not a large presence of “nationally-recognized retail stores” to serve them, and new retail development needs to generate substantial sales tax revenues for the Village so a property tax increase is not required. Source: Village of Romeoville Request for Village Board Action, An Ordinance Authorizing the Executive of an Economic Incentive Agreement, August 10, 2007; Economic Incentive Agreement between the Village of Romeoville and Air-Web LLC. Local Economic Page 63 Development Incentives Brookside Marketplace, Village of Tinley Park Figure 22. Brookside Marketplace Source: Village of Tinley Park The shopping center opened in 2008 on an undeveloped parcel near I-80. The 455,853 square foot, 2,500 parking space development cost $74 million. Tenants include retail and restaurants such as SuperTarget, Michael’s, Best Buy, Ross, and Kohl’s. The Village of Tinley Park provided a sales tax rebate of 50 percent of revenues after a $75,000 threshold for 10 years or until $5 million is rebated. In addition, the Village reimbursed the developer for infrastructure costs totaling $4.0 million. This included costs of roadways, bridges, traffic signals, landscaping, lighting, and utilities. Tinley Park’s incentive policy lists reasons that a potential incentive would be considered. The list includes several criteria that could be met by this project, including the creation of at least 25 full-time jobs paying more than the area’s average wage with full benefits and retail sales of at least $5 million. Source: Village of Tinley Park, Economic Development and Incentive Policies, October 18, 2011; Tinley Park Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended April 30, 2011; Email communication with the Village of Tinley Park, February 11, 2013 Local Economic Page 64 Development Incentives Tax Increment Financing Cook County Broadview Village Square, Village of Broadview The 63-acre parcel previously served as a parts distribution warehouse for the Illinois-based Komatsu Dresser Company, but the warehouse had been vacant since 1992 when the operation was moved to Tennessee. The 22nd & 17th Avenue TIF district was established in 1993 to attract developers to the site, which is adjacent to the North Riverside border. Broadview Village Square opened in 1994 at a cost of $65 million. Anchors include a SuperTarget and a Home Depot. A $23 million bond was issued to pay for site preparation including demolition and remediation. Source: Robert Lundin, “Broadview’s Retail Plaza a Hard Sell,” Chicago Tribune, December 5, 1994; “Komatsu to close Broadview plant,” Chicago Sun-Times, October 7, 1991; Village of Broadview Financial Statements As of and for the Year Ended April 30, 2012 Stateline Industrial Area, Calumet City In 1988, Calumet City started a planning and implementation process to address the growing number of vacant, former industrial and commercial properties on State Street and State Line Avenue at the City’s eastern boundary. The community is built out completely, so the goal of redevelopment was to increase the tax base, bring new jobs, and attract retail to the community. This area is located in a TIF district (designated in 1994) and an Enterprise Zone. The redevelopment area is primarily used for warehousing and distribution activities, but also has some retail. Development primarily occurred between 1998 and 2008. Property tax revenues doubled from $362,000 to $777,000, despite the lower assessment levels as a result of the incentive classes. Various developments received $4,050,000 in TIF funding as well as property tax incentive classes 6 and 8. In addition, a U.S. EPA grant totaling $200,000 and an Illinois EPA grant of $88,305 was awarded. Additionally, land acquisition in 1994 was funded through TIF-backed bonds totaling $13 million. Nearly all of the parcels originally purchased by the City have been redeveloped. The reason for providing the incentives was that the area required site remediation and preparation, including removing 30 underground storage tanks and clean up of environmental contamination. Source: S.B. Friedman and Company, “Fiscal Analysis of Brownfield Redevelopment,” March 10, 2009, http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/20583/9080cfc5-7482-46a6-b0cd-cb42aea24781 United Airlines, City of Chicago United was headquartered in Elk Grove Township. As part of an effort to consolidate real estate assets, the company considered moving to San Francisco, Denver, or Chicago. An agreement was made in 2007 for the company to move its corporate headquarters to 77 West Wacker Drive in Chicago. The agreement included $5,475,000 TIF funding for redeveloping the Local Economic Page 65 Development Incentives office space as well as a maximum of $10 million in fuel tax rebates. United also received a $1 million grant from the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity. The agreement required United to stay for ten years, relocate 365 FTEs to this location, retain at least 325 FTEs during the ten-year period, and occupy at least 137,000 square feet for 15 years. Project costs totaled $23.0 million. United received the funds from the TIF but only received 2 percent of the fuel tax rebates because they stopped sourcing fuel to that location. Later, United decided to relocate its operational headquarters, and considered several locations, including two in the City of Chicago and two in suburban locations in the region. The company ultimately went with Willis Tower, after receiving an offer of TIF funding. In addition, United moved its corporate headquarters to Willis Tower from the 77 West Wacker Drive site. The agreement provides United with $25,889,768, which includes $24,389,768 in TIF funds and $1.5 million in TIF funding for job training. The first payment to United would be for $2,400 per FTE relocated to Willis, up to $3 million, but the company would only receive the funds if at least 1,000 employees were located. The second payment will be up to $6 million, with the first payment deducted. For the following eight years, United will receive 1/8th of the remaining TIF amount including interest, annually. United also received a $10 million grant, payable over five years. United will have to relocate a minimum of 2,500 FTE positions to Willis Tower, and retain this number of positions for ten years, and occupy at least 400,000 square feet. Redevelopment costs for the company will range from $64.0 million to $71.8 million, depending on the amount of office space redeveloped. United is currently leasing 830,000 square feet in Willis Tower. Even though the City of Chicago stated that the agreement from 77 West Wacker Drive could have been shifted to Willis Tower, United returned the TIF funds to the City following the move out of the 77 West Wacker Drive location. It is unclear why United returned this incentive, because they have 4,000 employees in Willis Tower, which is more than the job requirements of the two agreements combined. Source: Community Development Commission of the City of Chicago Resolution No. 06- CDC- 73, Authority To Negotiate A Redevelopment Agreement With United Air Lines, Inc. within the Central Loop Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Project Area, and to Recommend To the City Council of the City of Chicago the Designation of United Air Lines, Inc. as the Developer, September 12, 2006; United Air Lines Redevelopment Agreement By and Between The City of Chicago And UAL Corporation and United Air Lines, Inc., October 31, 2007; Staff Report to the Community Development Commission Requesting Developer Designation September 8, 2009; United Air Lines Redevelopment Agreement by and between The City of Chicago and UAL Corporation and United Air Lines, Inc., November 19, 2009; Gregory Karp, “United returns TIF funds to city,” Chicago Tribune, November 12, 2012. Chicago Manufacturing Campus, Hegewisch, City of Chicago The 3.5 million square foot Ford assembly plant has been operating at 26th and Torrence Ave since 1925. A TIF district was established in 1994 to support infrastructure work and environmental remediation for potential industrial development projects. In 2001, an agreement was made between Ford and CenterPoint Properties Trust to develop an adjacent Local Economic Page 66 Development Incentives property for suppliers to the plant. According to materials provided by the City, Ford was also considering a supplier campus for Atlanta, from which they also solicited an incentive package. The Chicago Manufacturing Campus opened one half-mile from the plant on a 155-acre site in 2004 with twelve suppliers. Having suppliers nearby was expected to enhance efficiencies and reduce transportation costs for Ford and its suppliers. The campus and related infrastructure cost $288 million. The campus, which was formerly a steel mill, includes four multi-tenant buildings with 1.7 million square feet. The suppliers intended to employ 1,400 people. At the time of the agreement, Ford had been employing 2,200, and following the opening of the campus, added an additional 400 employees. A redevelopment agreement in 2003 provided TIF funding totaling $17,183,334, while a grant from the City of Chicago provided $4.8 million. These funds were used to pay for the land remediation and site preparation costs involved in preparing the campus. In addition, a separate infrastructure agreement was made in 2003 for off-site infrastructure improvements to benefit the plant and the supplier campus, including $30 million in roadway realignments and upgrades, and $170 million in new bridges and grade separations at the rail lines. These improvements are expected to be completed by 2015. The railroads and Ford contributed $10 million to the improvements, while the remaining $190 million was funded through City of Chicago general obligations bonds, the State’s Illinois First capital program, Federal Highway Administration funds, and the TIF district provided $1 million. In addition, the area is in an Enterprise Zone, which resulted in a sales tax abatement of $726,256 and a designation of a Class 6 incentive class, which reduced property taxes. The agreements required Ford to operate the assembly plant and provide at least 750 jobs for a ten-year period at the supplier park, and lease at least 75 percent of the supplier campus during the initial ten-year period. In addition, for a 60-month period (not required to be consecutive) during the ten years, at least 1,000 jobs must be provided. Even as other Ford assembly plants in the Midwest have closed in recent years, Ford continues to invest in its Chicago plant. The national economic recession resulted in the Ford plant going down to one shift in 2008, but in 2010, it was announced that a second shift would be again added to the facility, resulting in 1,200 jobs. In 2011, a third shift was added, resulting in another 1,200 jobs. However, news reports have indicated that laid-off transfers from Ford plants in other states may be used to fill many of those jobs. Currently, the Ford plant employs an estimated 4,000. While the supplier park at one point employed 1,400, some of the suppliers closed during the recession. Approximately 400 were employed at the supplier park as of 2010. Source: Kate MacArthur, “New jobs at Chicago Ford plant will go to out-of-towners first,” Crain’s Chicago Business, November 7, 2011; 2011 Annual Tax Increment Finance Report, 126th and Torrence Redevelopment Project Area; CMAP analysis of CoStar data; Chicago Manufacturing Campus Infrastructure Agreement Dated as of March 21, 2003, http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/dcd/tif/T_010_ChicagoManufacutringCampu sRDA.pdf; Chicago Manufacturing Campus Redevelopment Agreement, March 21, 2003; Andrea Local Economic Page 67 Development Incentives Holecek, “Visteon to close its local doors,” Times of Northwest Indiana, September 26, 2006, http://www.nwitimes.com/business/local/visteon-to-close-its-local-doors/article_b9e98b5d-0c80- 56fe-a9dc-f86ce084004f.html; Kathleen Kerwin, “Ford To Suppliers: Let's Get Cozier,” BloombergBusinessweek Magazine, September 19, 2004, http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2004-09- 19/ford-to-suppliers-lets-get-cozier; Stephen Kronfeld, “CenterPoint and Ford join forces,” CoStar Group, January 17, 2002; Andrew Deichler, “Ford Unveils New Explorer, Launches Chicago Expansion,” CoStar Group, July 26, 2010; Ford, “Chicago Manufacturing Campus Opens With Suppliers Manufacturing Just- In-Time Inventory,” August 10, 2004, http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=18911. Klee Building, Portage Park, City of Chicago Figure 23. Klee Building Source: flickr user Mark 2400 The Irving Cicero TIF district was established in 1996 to redevelop the 6-corner intersection of Irving Park, Cicero, and Milwaukee. The City of Chicago bought the Klee building from the owner for $1.8 million using eminent domain. In 2005, an agreement was made to create a mixed-use retail and residential redevelopment. Redevelopment was done in 2007, resulting in 64 units (13 affordable), and 20,000 square feet of retail space, which houses a Vitamin Shoppe, a Pearle Vision, Accelerated Rehab Centers, a chiropractic office, and two remaining commercial Local Economic Page 68 Development Incentives spaces. The development includes 69 underground parking spaces for the residential units and 23 surface spaces for retail customers. The project received $1,163,000 in TIF funds for the $18,718,699 development. This includes rehabbing the Klee Building, demolishing three other neighboring buildings, and constructing two new buildings to complement the Klee Building (one that is 5 stories like the Klee building, and the other a single story retail building). The project anticipated to create 20 full and part time jobs through the retail component. The agreement requires the developer to use its best efforts to maintain a minimum of 20 full-time and part-time positions for ten years. Source: Chicago Klee Development LLC Redevelopment Agreement dated as of January 14, 2005 by and between the City of Chicago and Chicago Klee Development LLC; Jeanette Almada, “$20M Deal Would Bring Retail, Housing to Six Corners,” Chicago Tribune, January 25, 2004; Jeanette Almada, “Six Corners Project Advances,” Chicago Tribune, March 21, 2004; Grant Pick, “Six Corners at the Crossroads,” Chicago Reader, November 6, 2003. Southgate Market, Near West Side, City of Chicago Figure 24. Southgate Market Source: S.B. Friedman and Company The Jefferson/Roosevelt TIF district was established in 2000. The developer of Southgate Market reconstructed the Taylor Street viaduct as well as access ramps to the viaduct from a Local Economic Page 69 Development Incentives parking garage for the shopping center. The agreement stated that the developer reconstructed the viaduct instead of CDOT because the construction schedule of the center conflicted with the schedule for the reconstruction of the viaduct. It is unclear when CDOT would have reconstructed the viaduct. The TIF funds totaling $6.5 million were used to pay back the developer for the construction of the viaduct. Funds from other TIF districts (River South and Canal/Congress) were also used. This area had extraordinary site challenges due to the old viaduct and the proximity to the railroad. Southgate Market opened in 2007. It is a retail center that houses 15 stores including a Marshall’s, Whole Foods, and Petsmart. Source: Redevelopment Agreement by and between The City of Chicago and Canal/Taylor Central LLC, November 1, 2005 Food 4 Less, West Englewood, City of Chicago The 69th and Ashland TIF district was established in 2004 in the economically depressed West Englewood neighborhood. Of the area’s 63 tax parcels, 54 percent were vacant at the time the district was established. The area included a 7-acre property that formerly housed a CTA bus barn. The bus barn was demolished in 1998. The former site of the CTA bus barn was redeveloped into a retail center, which includes 400 parking spaces, a Food 4 Less, a gas station, two banks, a RadioShack, and several other stores. The Food4Less opened in 2006 at a development cost of $11,878,878, and the remainder of the retail center opened in 2006 at a cost of $6,419,268. Food4Less and the developer attempted to purchase the property from the CTA in 2002, but there were unanticipated environmental remediation problems that required significant additional funding. TIF funds totaling $1,925,000 were provided to the developers to fund the unexpected environmental cleanup costs as well as increased construction costs that resulted from a delay in the schedule. Source: Resolution No. 04- CDC-14 Authority To Negotiate Redevelopment Agreements With Ralph's Grocery Company And Finch Limited Partnership Within The 69th/Ashland TIF Redevelopment Project Area, And To Recommend To The City Council Of The City Of Chicago The Designation Of Ralph's Grocery Company And Finch Limited Partnership As Developers, September 14, 2004; Designation Of Ralph's Grocery Company, Doing Business As Food 4 Less Midwest, As Project Developer, Authorization For Execution Of Redevelopment Agreement And Issuance Of Tax Increment Allocation Note (69th/Ashland Redevelopment Project) For Construction And Operation Of Grocery Store And Related Facilities At 1601 West 69th Street, February 9, 2005 McGrath Acura, Village of Morton Grove The Waukegan Road TIF District was established in 1995. The area previously housed several blighted motels, a Walgreen’s, and a bank. The Walgreen’s and the bank were redeveloped after initial land assembly. Later, a redevelopment agreement for an Oldsmobile dealership was created, but this agreement was voided when the Oldsmobile brand was canceled. The Village reacquired the property, and sold the site to the developer of McGrath Acura. McGrath Acura was completed in 2004 at a cost of $16,106,738. The site required several improvements, such as storm water detention, perimeter fencing, and site landscaping. The Local Economic Page 70 Development Incentives incentive agreements were made in 2002 to reimburse developer for site improvements. TIF funding totaling $4,106,738 was provided. In addition, a sales tax rebate was provided for 6 years with a maximum of $500,000. Every year, a maximum of 1/6th of the $500,000 will be rebated, unless sales tax revenues fall short of this. If so, the agreement will continue for an additional two years. For the sales tax rebate, if the dealership leaves within four years of the end of the agreement, they must pay the rebate back. If they leave between four and eight years after the end of the agreement, they owe half of the rebate back to the Village. Source: Village of Morton Grove, Ordinance 02-01 Authorizing a Redevelopment Agreement for the Waukegan Road TIF District Redevelopment Area B, January 28, 2002; Waukegan Road TIF Redevelopment District Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Report Park Ridge Uptown, City of Park Ridge Figure 25. Park Ridge Uptown Copyright OKW Architects, Inc. Uptown Park Ridge is a mixed-use residential and retail development in downtown Park Ridge. Prior to redevelopment, there were two auto dealerships and a water reservoir on the other side of a six-way intersection from the City’s central business district. Prior to establishing the TIF, the City purchased the two dealerships at a cost of $5.3 million, and determined that that water reservoir should be moved because it was leaking. The Uptown TIF district was designated in 2003. Local Economic Page 71 Development Incentives The $123.7 million development was completed in three phases between 2005 and 2009. The project is a mixed use walkable development including 189 residential market rate units and 70,000 square feet of retail space. Retailers include Trader Joe’s, clothing stores, and restaurants. The condominiums are substantially sold-out and the retail space is leased. A fourth phase on the site of the Napleton Cadillac has not yet occurred, although the dealership was demolished. As of 2004, expected revenues for the project, include TIF revenues totaling $44.9 million, new sales tax revenue totaling $14.3 million, and revenues from land sales totaling $9.5 million. TIF funds were used because the old water reservoir and two former car dealerships caused major site preparation and land assembly challenges. In addition, the six-way intersection caused traffic management issues. Of the total development cost, $16,808,000 in TIF funds were spent on various costs, including infrastructure (sitework, street, sidewalk, lighting, utility, streetscaping, roadway and signals, public parking (structured and surface)). Of the 652 parking spaces, most are private for residential or retail spots, but 100 public spaces were built with TIF funds. In addition, the City is sharing TIF funds with the park district and the school districts totaling $13.2 million. For the new water reservoir, the City issued bonds totaling $16,770,000. $4.9 million will be paid with TIF funds and sales tax revenues, and the remainder will be paid with water revenues. However, due to declining property values in recent years, TIF incremental property tax revenue has been insufficient to cover debt service on the bonds and the intergovernmental payments to the park and school districts. To date, the TIF district has borrowed more than $5.0 million from the general fund. Projections indicate that loans from the City’s general fund may be required in future years. Source: Annual Tax Increment Finance Report, Uptown TIF, FY2010, FY 2011, and FY2012; Uptown TIF Strategic Plan, June 24, 2013, http://www.parkridge.us/assets/1/Events/The%20Uptown%20TIF%20Strategic%20Plan.pdf; Redevelopment Agreement dated January 5, 2005 by and between the City of Park Ridge and PRC Partners, LLC; City of Park Ridge, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended April 30, 2012; SB Friedman Development Advisors, Shops and Residences of Uptown Park Ridge summary, http://sbfriedman.com/sites/default/files/James%20Felt%20Award_Summary.pdf. Local Economic Page 72 Development Incentives Whistler Crossing, Village of Riverdale Figure 26. Whistler Crossing Source: Metropolitan Planning Council Pacesetter was a privately-owned 397-unit townhouse development. The units eventually fell into disrepair, and a neighboring shopping center had closed down, all contributing to blight in the area. In addition, the layout of the development resulted in isolation from the rest of the Village, as well as problems with access for public safety vehicles. A TIF district was established to rehabilitate the area and ensure that affordable housing would remain available for those residents that had utilized Housing Choice Vouchers. The redevelopment project began in 2007, with the goal to convert the area to a mixed-income and mixed-use community including both for-sale and rental housing options. The area received LEED-ND certification, which means that it was recognized for integrating smart growth and green building principles into a cohesive neighborhood design. The new Local Economic Page 73 Development Incentives development currently has 106 affordable rental units, 24 rental market rate units, and a grocery store. This is a multi-phase project, and only phase I is complete. This $38 million redevelopment and rehab project received $1.6 million in TIF funding which went toward redeveloping the residential units as well as toward infrastructure improvements like streets, sidewalk, and alleys. The project also received $10,940,000 in other incentives, including Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity grants, Illinois Housing Development Authority grants, a federal HOME grant, as well as tax credits including the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit and the Federal Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit. Source: Annual Tax Increment Finance Report, FY2010, 138th Stewart TIF 4; Urban Land Institute Chicago, Riverdale, Illinois A Vision for the PaceSetter Neighborhood, 2003 Technical Assistance Panel; Karin Sommer, “Groundbreaking for Pacesetter/Whistler Crossing Redevelopment Project on November 13,” Metropolitan Planning Council, November 21, 2007 Phoenix Lake Business Park, Village of Streamwood This area had been vacant prior to the establishment of the TIF district in 2001. However, the land was zoned for industrial. The area is surrounded by Phoenix Lake to the south, residential to the north and west, and retail to the east. The cost of improvements to the land is high because wetland on the site had become a dumping site. The 41-acre development has seven lots. Five of the seven lots have been developed and sold. Total development costs have been $22,550,240 so far. The developer is being reimbursed $1.5 million to construct a street that runs through the middle of the industrial park, with 70 percent of the TIF revenue generated annually going toward this reimbursement. In addition, the remaining 30 percent of the TIF revenue will go toward reimbursing the Village for $1.5 million that had been paid out of the Village’s operating funds for other street construction. In addition, it appears that the property is eligible for a Class 6 incentive class. Source: Village Of Streamwood Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For The Year Ended December 31, 2011; Tony Perri, “Work at new TIF site to start,” Chicago Tribune, October 07, 2001; Tony Perri, “Business Park is Finally a Go,” Chicago Tribune, November 20, 2001; Village of Streamwood, 2013 Budget Executive Summary; Annual Tax Increment Finance Report, FY2010, Buttitta Drive/Francis Ave Local Economic Page 74 Development Incentives Prairie Park, Village of Wheeling Figure 27. Prairie Park Source: Smith Family Construction The North Milwaukee Avenue/Lake-Cook Road TIF district was established in 2003 and expanded in 2007 in an area that contained a mix of improved and vacant land. The area was found to include both blighted parcels as well as parcels that qualified as a conservation area. In 2004, the Village made a redevelopment agreement with a developer to construct the Prairie Park at Wheeling, which was to be a five-building condominium development with 306 units. During the economic recession that began in 2007, the development ran into financial problems, which resulted in additional funding from the Village. The development has cost $91.7 million, although a planned fifth building has not been built. It is estimated that the development may cost $124.2 million. To date, 62 units in the constructed buildings remain unsold. Other projects in this TIF district have included a Westin Hotel (a $125 million project that utilized $23 million in TIF funding) as well as infrastructure improvements. TIF funds were provided to aid in environmental cleanup, mitigate chronic flooding, convert existing land uses to mixed-use residential/commercial developments, encourage development on vacant properties that previously housed condemned buildings, fund infrastructure improvements, and provide for open space and landscaping. In 2004, the Village agreed to provide TIF funds totaling $3 million. The Village agreed to provide an additional $1.5 million in 2006. Originally, $775,969.28 was to be paid once buildings 4 and 5 were constructed. In 2009, this was modified; instead, half of this would be provided immediately to the developer, and the other half would be provided upon completion of the clubhouse. In 2010, the Village Local Economic Page 75 Development Incentives provided additional TIF funds totaling $6 million to help the developer avoid foreclosure of the property. Of the $6 million, $2.5 million was tied to the completion of the clubhouse, ring road, and infrastructure. An additional $3.5 million will be paid as condo units are sold. Because there were not sufficient funds in the TIF district, the Village had to take out a revenue bond for the $2.5 million. To date, just 15 more units sold, so of the $3.5 million, only $450,000 has been paid out. The developer has recently asked for the rest of the $3.5 million from the Village, but the Village was not willing to provide it. Source: Village of Wheeling, Further Expanded Redevelopment Project Area, Amended May 2008; Village of Wheeling, FY2011 Annual Tax Increment Finance Report; Redevelopment Agreement For The Prairie Park Development Comprising A Part Of The North TIF District Of The Village Of Wheeling, April 2, 2004; First Amendment to the Redevelopment Agreement for the Prairie Park Development Comprising a part of the North TIF District of the Village of Wheeling, June 15, 2006; Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Agreement for the Prairie Park Development Comprising a part of the North TIF District of the Village of Wheeling, February 9, 2009; Village of Wheeling, Board Meeting, January 21, 2013, http://www.wheelingil.gov/webcasts/VB/2013/Jan_21_2013/Default.html; An Ordinance Approving and Authorizing the Village President and Clerk to Execute a Restated Redevelopment Agreement for the Prairie Park Development Comprising a Part of the North TIF District of the Village of Wheeling, July 12, 2010; Minutes Of The Regular Meeting Of The President And Board Of Trustees Of The Village Of Wheeling, June 21, 2010; Sheila Ahern, “Wheeling votes to give developer $6.5 million,” Daily Herald, July 13, 2010. DuPage County Bill Kay Nissan, Village of Downers Grove The Ogden Avenue corridor is primarily commercial, and is home to several auto dealerships. A TIF district was established in 2001, and, in 2010, the Ogden Avenue Site Improvement Strategy (OASIS) program was established to provide businesses a matching grant for certain site improve ments, such as landscaping, façade improvements, stormwater facilities, and transportation infrastructure improvements. In addition, TIF funds as well as CMAQ and STP funds have been used to pay for sidewalk, curb cut construction, and curb cut reductions in the corridor. In addition, the Village provided sales tax rebates to several auto dealerships over the past decade (both within and outside of the TIF district). Bill Kay Nissan, who was leasing its auto dealership, purchased the property, renovated the façade, and remodeled the showroom in 2005. A combination of a sales tax rebate and TIF funds were provided to reimburse Bill Kay Nissan for its costs in purchasing the property. The agreement includes a sales tax rebate of 25 percent for seven years on sales above a $25 million base. The agreement also provides an annual payment of $35,000 for ten years from the TIF, unless after the seven year period is over the sales tax rebates totaled less than $250,000. If that is the case, then the TIF payments are increased to $45,000 for the final three years. The agreement requires the Bill Kay Nissan to purchase the property, remodel the property, install a public sidewalk, and continue to operate the dealership on the property for at least 12 Local Economic Page 76 Development Incentives years. If Bill Kay Nissan ceases to operate during years 1 through 3 of the agreement, all sales tax rebate and TIF reimbursement must be repaid. The repayment amount drops to 75 percent during years 4 and 5 and 50 percent during years 5 through 10. According to the agreement, the purpose of providing the incentives was to prevent blight, encourage development to enhance the local tax base, generate increased tax revenues, and stimulate employment within the TIF district. Source: Redevelopment/Sales Tax Rebate Agreement Between The Village Of Downers Grove and J.K. Pontiac D/B/A Bill Kay Nissan, February 15, 2005; Annual TIF Report Year Ending December 31, 2010, Ogden Avenue TIF Corridor Block 300, City of Elmhurst The Elmhurst Central Business District TIF district was established in 1986, and extended for another 12 years in 2004, although as part of the extension, parcels in Block 300 were released from the original project area in 2006 and 2007. In addition to property tax increment, this TIF district also receives incremental sales tax revenue. A plan for a subarea of the central business district, Block 300, called for redevelopment of a bank building for mixed uses as well as multi- family residential development. A mixed-use rehabilitation of the bank building and a new condominium building with 122 units were completed in 2005 at a cost of $34,291,310. TIF funds totaling $1,141,810 were used to fund streets, sidewalks, landscaping, utilities, and streetscaping. Source: City of Elmhurst FY2010 Annual Tax Increment Finance Report; City of Elmhurst, Downtown Plan, February 2006; City of Elmhurst, Market Assessment, April 2007 Kane County ALDI, City of Geneva Figure 28. ALDI Source: Geneva Patch Local Economic Page 77 Development Incentives A TIF district was established in a commercial corridor on East State Street under eligibility as a conservation area. The corridor is a half mile from the central business district in Geneva. Since the TIF was established in 2000, several retail and other commercial establishments, including CVS and ALDI, have located in the district. The area in the district had significant site issues and required parcel assembly and environmental remediation. The ALDI was completed in 2007 and contributed to the significant improvements that have been made in the corridor. The development cost $3,050,000. The TIF provided $450,000 of the total development cost. In addition, ALDI received a sales tax rebate in 2008 of 50 percent of revenues for ten years or up to a maximum of $300,000. Source: Annual Tax Increment Finance Report FY2010, East State Street TIF District; East State Street Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Project and Plan, December 1, 1999; City of Geneva, Summary of Geneva Sales Tax Rebates Spring Hill Gateway, Village of West Dundee This shopping center is adjacent to the Spring Hill Mall, and has struggled with vacant storefronts and a poor layout with an inward orientation from the road, resulting in poor visibility. A TIF district was established in 2008 to redevelop the Spring Hill Gateway as well as 11 other properties in the area. Other projects in the TIF district include an L.A. Fitness constructed on a former Toys R Us site. At the time the TIF district was established, the vacancy rate for Spring Hill Gateway was 40 percent. Since the TIF district was established, the completion of the improvements to Spring Hill Gateway and the attraction of additional tenants were stalled as a result of the property going through foreclosure. The east side of the center is now out of foreclosure and owned by the bank. It is currently under contract to a new developer who will be proposing additional work as part of the redevelopment plan. The west side of the center has been transferred to a new owner and is being marketed for lease, but there is continued litigation with respect to the foreclosure. Projects are budgeted at $30.6 million. Thus far, the TIF has expended $4 million on infrastructure improvements and land assembly, while $12 million in private funds has been spent on project costs such as construction of new storefronts facing the street and new signage. The TIF funds were actually a transfer from the Village’s operating budget, and the Village is waiting to be repaid from TIF revenues. Source: Jacob Hurwith, “WD ends fiscal year in black,”The Courier-News October 19, 2010; Annual Tax Increment Finance Report FY2010, West Dundee; Email communication with the Village of West Dundee, February 01, 2013 and June 26, 2013 Local Economic Page 78 Development Incentives Lake County Lincolnshire Downtown, Village of Lincolnshire The Village’s only TIF district was established in 1989, and was created to develop a downtown area. At the time of the TIF district’s establishment, much of the area was undeveloped. The development includes a commercial “village green” area as well a 2-building condominium development housing 62 units. TIF funds totaling $7,845,539 were spent on the development. Source: Village of Lincolnshire FY2010 TIF Report; Village of Lincolnshire Comprehensive Plan Update, 2012 McHenry County Woodstock Station, City of Woodstock The project area was formerly Woodstock Die Casting, which closed in 1990. The City acquired the property in 1993, demolished the buildings in 1997 and performed environmental remediation on the land. A TIF district was established in 1997 to assist with the redevelopment of the site and the surrounding downtown area. This 11-acre, proposed transit-oriented development is adjacent to the Woodstock Metra Station. To date, approximately $2.5 million has been spent on projects including the installation of water and sewer lines, street construction, the resurfacing the commuter parking lot and streetscaping. Plans for commercial uses, condominiums, and town houses stalled when the property went into foreclosure in 2009. At that time, ten townhouses had been built by the developer. Another developers’ plans for senior housing on the property were recently considered by the planning commission, but were withdrawn due to local concerns regarding the design, proposed age restrictions, and density of the project. Source: Annual Tax Increment Finance Report FY2010, City of Woodstock Downtown TIF Redevelopment Project Area; City Of Woodstock Plan Commission Minutes, February 23, 2012; City of Woodstock, Fiscal Year 2012/2013 Annual Budget; Woodstock Environmental Plan, 2010 Will County Bailly Ridge, Village of Monee TIF district #3 was designated in 2001 on undeveloped parcels adjacent to an I-57 interchange. The Bailly Ridge Corporate Center is a 412-acre park for distribution, industrial, office, and retail. The development cost has cost $23.3 million thus far, but most of the buildings have not yet been constructed. Various developers have received funding from the TIF in the form of property tax reimbursements, totaling $1.5 million in FY2012. TNT Logistics, who leases a 718,725 square foot warehouse to distribute Michelin tires, received $4.6 million in TIF funds. An adjacent 431,600 square foot building remains vacant about 40 percent vacant. Aside from these 60 acres, the rest of the 412-acre park primarily remains undeveloped. Local Economic Page 79 Development Incentives Source: Village of Monee TIF district reports, FY2010 and FY2012; Micah Maidenberg, “Developer slammed with lawsuits on far suburban projects,” ChicagoRealEstateDaily.com, February 6, 2013 Property tax abatements and incentive classes Cook County Cloverhill Bakeries, Town of Cicero Cloverhill Bakery is located in Chicago, but decided to move distribution facilities from Chicago to Cicero in 2010 in order to expand its distribution facility, which could not be expanded in the Chicago location. When the distribution facility and its 40 employees moved to Cicero, the company received an incentive Class 6, which over the first three years of the 12-year incentive period saved the company approximately $1.9 million in property taxes. Over the entire incentive period (which could be renewed), savings could total $7.1 million. Source: S.B. Friedman Development Advisors analysis of Cook County Assessor data; Sandra Anderson, “Cloverhill Bakery moving distribution center to Cicero,” The Mark News Online, October 19, 2010; “Chicago business to expand in Cicero,” Town of Cicero News Wire, October 12, 2010 Sahloul Plaza, City of Harvey This 11,550 square foot shopping center was constructed in 2007. Several sites in this center remain vacant. The Class 8 incentive was provided in 2007, and has saved the property owner $358,300 thus far, and is estimated to save $780,613 over the 12-year period. Source: S.B. Friedman Development Advisors analysis of Cook County Assessor data Robert James Sales, City of Oak Forest The building was constructed in 2002 for a distribution center for Robert James Sales, a process pipes distribution company that is headquartered in Buffalo, New York. This was an undeveloped parcel primarily surrounded by other industrial and commercial buildings, with undeveloped land to the south, where a shopping center was eventually constructed. The company employs 12 in this location, and expanded its warehouse capacity in 2012. The Class 8 incentive was provided starting with tax year 2004. Properties within Bremen Township are eligible for Class 8 designation, which is for areas in need of revitalization, because it is part of the South Suburban Tax Reactivation Program. Thus far, the value of the incentive has totaled $667,729, and is estimated to reach $852,033 over the 12-year period. Source: S.B. Friedman Development Advisors analysis of Cook County Assessor data; rjsales.com Grundy County (Aux Sable Township) Clorox, Village of Minooka On a site off of I-80 and Minooka Road, an industrial area has been developed since 2000. The entire area was previously farmland, and mostly remains farmland. Other companies that have Local Economic Page 80 Development Incentives located warehouses here include Kellogg’s, Alberto Culver, BMW, Electrolux, Macy’s, and Grainger. Many of these companies also received property tax abatements. Clorox received a property tax abatement for building an 849,691 square foot warehouse on an undeveloped site in 2006. The reason for providing incentives to Clorox was to encourage the company to move to Minooka. Clorox was given a 75-percent property tax abatement the first year, the second year 50 percent, and the third year 25 percent from 2007 to 2009, totaling $773,000. Abatements were provided by Grundy County, the Village of Minooka, Aux Sable Township, Aux Sable Road and Bridge, Minooka Fire Protection District, Minooka High School, Minooka Grade School and Joliet Junior College. Clorox was required to stay until 2012 or forfeit the abatement. Clorox moved into the facility 2007, but moved out in 2011 in favor of a new, 1.35 million square foot distribution center in University Park. The stated reason for the move was that they needed additional space. Clorox repaid the abated funds after moving because the agreement required the company to stay until 2012. University Park approved the use of TIF funds for the company after taxes are paid on the new building. Under this new agreement, 165 people would be employed in the facility with a minimum of 20 percent being University Park residents. Clorox employs 165 at the University Park facility. Source: Todd J. Behme, “Clorox looks to build big warehouse in south suburbs,” ChicagoRealEstateDaily.com, March 24, 2010; Kris Stadalsky, “Early exit from Minooka will cost Clorox,” Joliet Herald News, March 5, 2011; CoStar Lake County Medline, Village of Libertyville Medline, which is headquartered in Lake County, built a new distribution center in Libertyville in 2007. Medline received property tax abatements from Lake County, Fremont School District 79, and Mundelein Consolidated High School District 120. Medline will receive a 50-percent abatement for 2011 through 2015, a 40-percent abatement in 2016, 30 percent in 2017, 20 percent in 2018, and 10 percent in 2019, at a maximum of $4 million as required by statute. In addition, the company received Employer Training Investment Program grants totaling $140,775. The reason provided by the local governments for offering the abatement was to create and retain jobs. The property tax abatement required a minimum of 600,000 square feet and a minimum of 100 employees, with at least 50 employees being residents of Lake County. If Medline does not employ at least 50 Lake County residents for the full term of the tax abatement within five years of the initiation of the abatement term, Medline has to repay all abated taxes. Source: Real Property Tax Abatement Agreement, Medline Industries, Inc., March 28, 2007; Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity Local Economic Page 81 Development Incentives McHenry County Marengo Entertainment Center, City of Marengo The Marengo Entertainment Center, which houses a bowling alley and restaurant, was built in 2010 at a cost of $4 million. The City of Marengo, the Marengo Rescue Squad, Marengo Park District, Marengo-Union Library District, Marengo Fire District, Marengo Community High School District 154, and Marengo-Union Elementary School District 165 all provided a 75 percent property tax abatement for 2011, a 50 percent abatement for 2012, and a 25 percent abatement for 2013 on the taxes levied on the improvements to the property. This abatement totaled $18,288 in tax year 2011 and approximately $13,000 in tax year 2012. In addition, the City of Marengo provided a 10 percent sales tax rebate for three years estimated to total $600 and a 10 percent reduction in building permit fees expected to total $2,504. Source: Marengo Economic Development Commission; Marengo City Council, Regular Meeting Minutes, July 27, 2009; McHenry County 2011 Abatement Report; CMAP analysis of McHenry County Treasurer data Will County Dollar Tree Distribution Center, City of Joliet Figure 29. Dollar Tree Distribution Center Source: CoStar In 2004, Dollar Tree opened a 1.2 million square foot distribution center in Joliet on farmland near the intersection of I-55 and I-80 and an intermodal transportation center in Elwood. The $70 million distribution center replaced another in the Chicago area. The facility intended to retain 150 employees from the original facility and add an additional 50 employees. The City of Joliet, Will County, Joliet Township High School District 204, and Laraway Elementary School District 70-C provided 50 percent property tax abatements for five years, 2005 through 2009. Local Economic Page 82 Development Incentives The abatements totaled $2,472,740. In addition, the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity provided a $1.5 million incentive package, including $500,000 for site improvements, According to media reports, Dollar Tree issued a press release stating it was choosing among sites in Illinois and northwest Indiana, and that that incentives from state and local governments would be a factor in the decision. Source: Dollar Tree, “Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. To Break Ground for Two New Distribution Centers,” May 12, 2003; Karen Mellen, “Dollar store seeks Joliet deal,” Chicago Tribune, February 4, 2003; Ken O’Brien, “Retailer picks Joliet for $75 million warehouse,” Chicago Tribune, April 12, 2003; Will County Clerk Panduit, Village of Tinley Park Figure 30. Panduit Source: Village of Tinley Park The Panduit Corporation has been located in Tinley Park since its founding in 1966. The company produces industrial plastic and electronic components. It has several offices and manufacturing facilities in the Will County area. Sales sourced at the headquarters location totals approximately $40 million annually, resulting in sales tax revenues to the Village. Local Economic Page 83 Development Incentives The company completed a new 500,000 square foot corporate headquarters in 2010 on undeveloped land in the Will County section of Tinley Park. The company had 500 employees in its corporate office, but built the new campus to accommodate 1,200. Approximately 1,000 employees work at the new headquarters. It is unclear whether any of these employees were transferred from other facilities within the region. The former office and manufacturing facility in Tinley Park continues some activities, but Panduit indicated that these activities will be relocated. Panduit is considering options for how to utilize this facility. The stated purpose of providing incentives was to encourage the company to retain its headquarters location in Tinley Park. Incentives included a sales tax rebate from the Village of Tinley Park, and property tax abatements from Will County, Summit Hill School District, Lincoln-way High School District, and the Village. These incentives totaled $417,748 in 2011. The incentives offered by the Village included a 50 percent sales tax rebate for ten years with no maximum and an abatement of a portion of property taxes in excess of $26,000 with a maximum of $2.2 million over 20 years. Will County abated 50 percent of property taxes for five years, and the school districts also provided a property tax abatement for five years. In addition, state incentives totaling $350,000 were received through the Large Business Development Program and Employer Training Investment Program. Source: Will County; Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity; Village of Tinley Park, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, FY2012; Telephone communication with Village of Tinley Park, February 11, 2013; Will County Board Meeting Minutes, March 20, 2008; Tinley Park, Illinois Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended April 30, 2012 Dow Chemical Company, City of Wilmington This industrial site is surrounded by farmland and residential areas and had been vacant since 1999. It was previously occupied by Johnson & Johnson, which employed 412 workers. That plant had opened in 1960, and was Wilmington’s largest employer. Johnson & Johnson had been offered tax incentives to stay, but merged its operations with a plant in Montreal. In 2003, Dow Chemical moved its facility in Crest Hill to this Wilmington site, and also merged its operations with two Canadian plants. The plant has a staff of 100. The company received property tax abatements for 10 years, totaling $511,136 thus far. The abatement is on the increase in tax revenue generated from the base year. The percentage abated is 100 percent of the increase for the first five years, and this percentage decreases annually for the second half of the ten-year period. Districts providing the abatement include the Island Park District, Wilmington Library District, City of Wilmington, and Unit School District 209. Source: Will County; City of Wilmington Ordinance No. 1509, An Ordinance Approving an Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Wilmington and the Dow Chemical Company; Stanley Ziemba, “Johnson & Johnson, 412 Jobs to Leave City,” Chicago Tribune, January 13, 1999, http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1999-01-13/news/9901130206_1_wilmington-plant-new-jobs-personal- products; Pat Harper, “Dow Chemical to move to Wilmington,” The Herald News, November 20, 2002 The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) is the region’s official comprehensive planning organization. Its GO TO 2040 planning campaign is helping the region’s seven counties and 284 communities to implement strategies that address transportation, housing, economic development, open space, the environment, and other quality of life issues. 233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 800 Chicago, IL 60606 312.454 0400 info@cmap.illinois.gov www.cmap.illinois.gov FY14-0009