City Council Packet 2016 10-29-16 special meeting
AGENDA
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY CONFERENCE ROOM
9:00 a.m.
Saturday, October 29, 2016
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Establishment of Quorum
4. Citizen Comments
5. Business
a. Goal Setting Session
6. Adjournment
United City of Yorkville
800 Game Farm Road
Yorkville, Illinois 60560
Telephone: 630-553-4350
www.yorkville.il.us
Goal Setting Outcomes 2016/2017
Goal Priority Votes Staff Committee(s)
Downtown Planning 1 65 Bart Olson &
Krysti Barksdale‐Noble
Economic
Development
Southside
Development 2 57 Bart Olson &
Krysti Barksdale‐Noble
Economic
Development
Municipal Building
Needs and Planning 3 50
Bart Olson,
Rob Fredrickson,
Rich Hart, Eric Dhuse
Administration, Public
Safety, Public Works
Capital Improvement
Plan 4 42
Bart Olson,
Rob Fredrickson,
Krysti Barksdale‐
Noble, Rich Hart, Eric
Dhuse
Administration,
Economic
Development, Public
Safety, Public Works
Manufacturing
and Industrial
Development
5 33 Krysti Barksdale‐Noble Economic
Development
Vehicle Replacement 5 33
Bart Olson,
Rob Fredrickson,
Rich Hart, Eric Dhuse
Administration, Public
Safety, Public Works
Riverfront Park
Development 7 29 Tim Evans &
Scott Sleezer Park Board
Revenue Growth 8 20 Krysti Barksdale‐Noble Economic
Development
Modernize City Code 8 20 Bart Olson &
Lisa Pickering Administration
Staffing 10 17 Bart Olson &
Rob Fredrickson Administration
YBSD Consolidation 11 15 Bart Olson Administration
Automation and
Technology 12 13 Bart Olson &
Lisa Pickering Administration
Strategic Planning 13 12 Bart Olson Administration
Flat Property Taxes 13
12 Bart Olson &
Rob Fredrickson Administration
Sidewalks and Trails
Funding and Planning 15 11
Bart Olson, Eric Dhuse,
Brad Sanderson &
Rob Fredrickson
Public Works
Filling Storefronts 15 11 Krysti Barksdale‐Noble Economic
Development
Build Program to
General Fund 17 9 Bart Olson &
Krysti Barksdale‐Noble
Economic
Development
Decrease Property
Taxes 17 9 Bart Olson &
Rob Fredrickson Administration
Employee Salary
Survey 17 9 Bart Olson Administration
Committee
Restructure 20 7 Bart Olson Administration
Public Relations and
Outreach 21 7 Bart Olson Administration
Consolidation and
Shared Services 22 6 Bart Olson Administration
Special Events
Planning 23 4 Tim Evans Park Board
AACVB and Marketing 24 2 Bart Olson Administration
Summary
Review of City Council goals from November 2015.
Background
The City Council met in November 2015 to set goals for the upcoming year. The City
Council decided on the goals by listing a variety of goals for the upcoming year, and then casting
votes for priority rankings. Each alderman was allowed to vote for their top ten goals, using a
simple 10-point scale for their five priorities (i.e. top priority received 10 points, second priority
received 9 points, etc.). The list of goals is attached, ranked according to priority.
2015 Goal Progress
Goal 1: Downtown Planning
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 65
Throughout the year, we have completed projects in the downtown and have made
progress on some of the initiatives that were brought to the Economic Development Committee
in July of this year. The memo from that meeting is attached for your reference. Projects entirely
completed are the paving of the Crusade parking lot and west alley and painting of the pump
house. At this time the following items are underway: the Parking Study, the Downtown
Landscape Hill Project plan, replacement of sidewalk and railing on East and West Van Emmon
(RFP is currently being drafted for spring 2017 installation), clean up of 206 Heustis Street in
which a RFP is currently out for bid, and installation of the downtown decorative streetlights that
will be completed in November of this year. Staff recommends that this goal remains a high
priority. For this upcoming year staff proposes that we should start a Façade Improvement
Program, complete a Downtown Streetscape and Signage Plan, and create a Downtown Overlay
District. This is addition to Riverfront Park projects. See Goal 7 for more details.
Memorandum
To: City Council
From: Nicole Kathman, Administrative Intern
CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator
Date: October 10, 2016
Subject: Review of City Council Goals from November 2015
Goal 2: Southside Development
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 57
Our Economic Development Consultant, Lynn Dubajic has continued to focus a major
part of her efforts on the southside of Yorkville. One of her main priorities has been finding a
grocery store to locate south of the river. One grocer completed a market study, but the
demographics and rooftops did not meet their requirements. This door is not completely closed
though as she is currently working with multiple potential grocery operators who are looking
closely at Yorkville. Furthermore, Dunkin Donuts is currently under construction and a gas
station owner is in discussions about this opportunity. Of course this is all not concrete, but we
are optimistic.
Goal 3: Municipal Building Needs and Planning
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 50
An RFP for a building condition survey was published at the end of September and
proposals are due at the end of October. Essentially, the intent of the survey is to identify any
observable maintenance wear and tear, health, safety or ADA violations, any observable
structural issues, and estimates of costs to repair those items. That way based on the results, we
can establish a long-term plan for building maintenance. The scope of the survey not only
includes not only the main municipal buildings, but all smaller structures such as park shelters.
Goal 4: Capital Improvement Plan
Did we satisfy this goal? Yes
What should we do with this goal? Decrease level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 42
At this time we do have a capital improvement plan as developed with the guidance of EEI. This
summary includes the project names and the funding schedule. We think that this is a very good
start as we have identified the priority order of projects and their estimated costs. This could also
be taken further to include the CIP as a part of the budget and feature “project profiles” on each
one including items such as a description, location, and estimated cost. This is something that
would contribute to us receiving GFOA’s Distinguished Budget Presentation Award. Further
progress on this goal can be measured by how many projects are funded each year. With a
growing fund balance, the City Council can increase funding for capital projects in the future
through the budget process.
Goal 5A: Manufacturing and Industrial Development
Did we satisfy this goal? No
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 33
This goal called for bringing in new manufacturing and industrial development. During
this past year we have seen some progress, but mostly related to expansion and reopening. First,
the new Wrigley expansion opened resulting in the creation of 75 new full-time jobs. Next, the
Aurora Textiles plant reopened bringing in just under a 100 jobs to Yorkville. Additionally, we
have seen some smaller uses including a mini-storage facility in the Yorkville Business Park.
Finally, at this time, Lynn Dubajic is working with a major industrial user for potential
development along Eldamain Road. Yorkville was considered previously for the project and is
now back in consideration.
For the Eldamain project and a wider area, staff is studying the potential for an enterprise
zone. Jason Engberg, Senior Planner, has been a significant contributor to past, successful
enterprise zone applications and we have tasked him with compiling materials for an area that
stretches generally from Eldamain Road to the Wrigley property. While the enterprise zone
selection process is a bit of a moving target and there is no guarantee there will be applications
accepted this year, we are preparing the materials so that we are ready to submit as soon as any
application window is opened. Since we have expertise in-house, we do not need any additional
resources for this project.
Goal 5B: Vehicle Replacement
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 33
This goal involves replacing vehicles and small equipment through each department to
decrease equipment down times, decrease repair and maintenance expenditures, and to improve
service delivery. This past year the Police department purchased four new vehicles allowing
them to make significant progress towards being on target with their long-term vehicle
replacement schedule. Furthermore, the Parks department bought a new panel van. The City’s
FY 16 surplus and healthy fund balance reserves makes it likely that the vehicle inventory for all
departments will be improved upon in the FY 18 budget proposal. Staff recommends keeping
this goal a high priority.
Goal 7: Riverfront Park Development
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 29
During this past year, we have made progress on this goal, but much work is left to be
done. March of 2016, City Council approved purchasing playground equipment for Riverfront
Park. The equipment was supposed to be installed during a community build on October 1, but
due to soil inconsistencies that were discovered, the build had to be postponed. Furthermore, the
OSLAD grant for Riverfront Park has been reinstated by the State. The grant will expire on
December 31, 2017 so over the next year, the Parks Department will be focusing on completion
of the included features.
Goal 8A: Revenue Growth
Did we satisfy this goal? No
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 20
This goal consisted of increasing the City’s revenues by introducing new sources of
revenue. Due to the City’s non-home rule status, staff is limited in establishing new types of
revenue, however, there has been increased in already established sources. One prime example is
sales tax. In June 2016, consumer purchase figures were at $300,000, which is the highest
monthly figure ever. Before this the record was broke in December 2015 at $287,000. If the
Home Rule referendum passes in November, we will have much more flexibility in achieving
this goal. One possible option with Home-Rule status would be adding a food and beverage tax,
which could be paired with a reduction in property taxes.
Goal 8B: Modernize City Code
Did we satisfy this goal? No
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 24
A comprehensive review of the City Code has not been completed at this time. That
being said, City staff has piecemeal reviewed certain sections of the code and have made
suggestions for alterations as they see fit. Changes that have occurred in 2016 include: amending
the definition of trade schools and adding them as special uses in the M-1 and M-2
manufacturing districts, updated liter regulations, and changes to parkway maintenance
requirements in regards to weeds. Another area of focus will be a rewrite of the code section that
deals with the water utility. Staff will be working on this in the coming months and is not
requesting any additional priorities.
Goal 10: Staffing
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Increase level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 17
The City’s staff level is near the 2005 figures at 76 full-time employees, and down from
the prerecession highs of around 100 employees. When the recession ended and the economy
picked back up, the City did not rehire vacant positions to offset the extra work. The specific
goal involved looking at ways to increase our staffing levels to meet service demands. However,
funding levels have not allowed the City to hire additional full-time staff in many departments,
as requested by the department heads. Even though that is the overall situation, we have made
progress this past year been made including: filling two full-time Parks Maintenance workers
vacancies due to resignation, replacing the position of Planner I with Senior Planner, and adding
an Interim Assistant City Administrator as well as a part-time seasonal Planning Intern. We are
also working closely with Oswego and Montgomery to create shared positions to address staffing
inefficiencies. We recommend that this priority increases.
Goal 11: YSBD Consolidation
Did we satisfy this goal? No
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 15
After multiple discussions with City staff, YSBD decided to hire a new executive
director. Therefore, this goal was not achieved. Although this is the current situation, staff
recommends keeping this at the same level of priority. This is because we see this consolidation
in our best interest in the long-term so we can control our own destiny from a wastewater
perspective.
Goal 12: Automation and Technology
Did we satisfy this goal? Yes
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 13
Each of the departments is studying or has authorized minor automation and operational
technologies since the last goal setting session. The best way to limit operational costs and
improve services is to invest in automation and technology. A couple of highlighted projects
include the introduction of a new online utility billing payment system and the purchase of ESRI
GIS 10.4 in August. Purchase of this GIS program makes it so that staff can now update and
maintain our GIS mapping and data in-house. Staff recommends that this goal remain a high
priority for City Council.
Goal 13A: Strategic Planning
Did we satisfy this goal? No
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 12
At this time we do not have a formal City-wide strategic plan. This is something that staff
would like to initiate sometime in the next few years, now that the comprehensive plan is
complete. Having overarching general goals tied to department specific goals that link to
performance measurements is a large component considered in the GFOA’s Distinguished
Budget Presentation Award. Staff has already started to make other changes to the document in
anticipation of one day applying for the award.
Goal 13B: Flat Property Taxes
Did we satisfy this goal? No
What should we do with this goal? Remove priority
Priority points (out of 90): 12
The City Council continued to follow the endorsed plan that was passed as a part of the
FY 15 budget to modestly reduce City and library property taxes FY 15 through FY 18. This
resulted in approximately a 1% decrease. This year, staff will be recommending increasing City
property taxes according to CPI and decreasing the non-abated property taxes to $0 total levy.
This may result in a decrease of City-controlled property taxes.
Goal 15A: Sidewalks and Trails Funding and Planning
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 11
Although staff did not make a formal plan by completing a city wide sidewalk survey, we
have continued to invest in sidewalk construction. In fact, we have spent approximately $20,000
for sidewalks in Countryside and $60,000 through Road to Better Roads this year. Under current
IDOT regulations, the City will need to complete a transition plan for ADA accommodations and
requirements (i.e. sidewalk stamped concrete and ramps). Staff is reviewing out-sourcing this
plan at an estimated cost of $35,000 and trying to piece it together over the course of the year
with in-house staff.
Goal 15B.1: Filling Storefronts
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 11
Throughout this past year with the help of our Economic Development consultant Lynn
Dubajic, we have seen positive activity in regards to new businesses interest and startups in all
different areas of the City. New businesses have both been a combination of new building
construction and new occupancies in vacant commercial spaces. Examples of new buildings
include Sherwin Williams, O’Reilly Auto Parts, and Dunkin Donuts. Some instances of new
occupancies in vacant commercial spaces have been OMG Liquor, Crusade Burger Bar, the Law
Office, Barbara Jean’s Grill, and recently Triple 7 Motorsports. At this time, there a multiple
users interested in locating at Kendall Crossing and a junior box has “signed off” on an
agreement at Kendall Marketplace. We recommend this to remain as a City Council priority. In
June 2016, we saw the highest monthly sales tax revenues ever at $300,000. New establishments
can only help boost this number.
Goal 17A: BUILD Program to General Fund
Did we satisfy this goal? No
What should we do with this goal? Remove priority
Priority points (out of 90): 9
At this time, we continue to account for the City’s portion of the BUILD payment by
reducing the corresponding permit revenue. Which funds it is accounted for in is dependent on
the applicable fees that are reduced. The reason we do this is so that we can show the cost (in the
form of forgone revenue) of the BUILD program directly on the financial statements. Since there
is a corresponding charge to expenditures, it has no effect in regards to its impact on the fund
balance. Those fees that come out of City-Wide Capital are supported by the General Fund. At
this time, staff recommends continuing the current accounting practice for the BUILD program.
Goal 17B: Decrease Property Taxes
Did we satisfy this goal? Yes
What should we do with this goal? Remove priority
Priority points (out of 90): 9
The City Council continued to follow the endorsed plan that was passed as a part of the
FY 15 budget to modestly reduce City and library property taxes FY 15 through FY 18. This
resulted in approximately a 1% decrease. This year, staff will be recommending to increase
property taxes according to CPI and decreasing the non-abated property taxes to $0 total levy.
This may result in a decrease of City-controlled property taxes.
Goal 17C: Employee Salary Survey
Did we satisfy this goal? No
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 9
Individual department heads are up to date and are aware of how their staff salaries
compare to those employees of similar communities, but staff has not completed a
comprehensive employee salary survey. It is recommended that we complete this alongside our
planned efforts to review and possibly create a formal compensation plan in the future.
Goal 20A: Committee Restructure
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Remove priority
Priority points (out of 90): 7
This past year, we combined the Planning Commission and the Zoning Board of Appeals
into the Planning and Zoning Commission to create further efficiencies. Even though the City
did not complete a formal review of the other current committees during the year, staff finds the
current committee structure effective and appropriate.
Goal 20B: Public Relations and Outreach points: 7
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 7
Before last year’s goal setting session, staff had just started experimenting with boosted
posts on Facebook. Essentially, a boosted post simply makes it so that the post shows up on the
targeted audience’s timeline on a more regular basis increasing exposure. This year we have had
a lot of success with this initiative. One example is that for Hometown Days related boosted
posts, we spent $185 for a total reach of approximately 84,500. In addition to social media
related marketing and outreach, staff has started to initiate starting a e-blast weekly newsletter
that residents can subscribe to as residents indicated this a communication source they would like
to see. At this time, we are just held up on IT related issues, but we hope to get this started soon.
Goal 22: Consolidation & Shared Services points: 6
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Increase level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 6
Since the release of the CMAP Shared Services Study, staff has been working diligently
with Oswego and Montgomery to identify areas in which we can feasibly join efforts to be both
more effective and efficient at delivering services. A few projects completed and in progress
include an Intergovernmental Agreement for sharing equipment, hiring of a joint Purchasing
Manager with Oswego, joint RFP with Oswego for IT Services, and the Water Study with
Montgomery and Oswego.
Goal 23: Special Events Planning points: 4
Did we satisfy this goal? Yes
What should we do with this goal? Remove priority
Priority points (out of 90): 4
The Parks and Recreation Department currently has a year-long schedule of special
events. At this time, without additional employees, staff is at full capacity for providing
additional programs and events. Staff has seen success with the current line-up of events. This
year’s Hometown Days was very successful.
Goal 24: AACVB and Marketing points: 2
Did we satisfy this goal? Partial Achievement
What should we do with this goal? Same level of priority
Priority points (out of 90): 7
Throughout this past year, staff has explored alternatives of being a member of the
AACVB. We are currently at the crossroad of our options as the AACVB is working on a new
proposal for us to stay. Our three basic options are: stay with the AACVB, become a member of
the Heritage Corridor Convention and Visitors Bureau, or form a commission to oversee the
spending of the hotel/motel taxes. Staff is awaiting the new proposal before making any
recommendations.
Recommendation
This is an informational item.
Summary
Review of early budget requests for FY 18 from department heads.
Background
In past goal setting sessions, City Council members have asked the department heads to go
around the room and give a brief overview of their project priorities for the upcoming year and their
operational and capital needs. Rather than spend time during the meeting going over each request, I
asked department heads to put together their wish list. That list is compiled in the attached spreadsheet,
and it represents a normal year’s worth of first-cut budget requests. Typically, Rob and I will select
these projects based on need and available funding, compare them against City Council goals, wait a few
months to tighten up revenue projects, select a few more requests, and then submit a full budget
proposal to City Council. Also, in a typical year, proposals will be abandoned and submitted at the
deadline; this list is not final or comprehensive.
As a reminder, the five year budget projection in the FY 17 budget has general fund deficits of
$286,000, $533,000, $640,000, $833,000 and $1,000,000 between FY 17 and FY 21 which pairs with a
decrease of fund balance to 10% by FY 21. That is a significant hurdle to funding all of the unfunded
capital improvements plan projects, let alone new operational requests.
Additionally, I asked the departments to put together a list of FY 18 project priorities so that the
City Council would have an early idea of some of the day-to-day projects and priorities we expect to
tackle next year. This was an open-ended request, so most departments have not yet responded to the
request. For your use, I have included the department lists that have been submitted so far.
Community Development
1. Scanning and digitalizing all archived building permit files
2. Scanning and digitalizing all oversized engineering files
3. In-housing GIS services and utilizing the ESRI ArcGIS online portal and smartphone apps.
4. Creating a webpage for commercial and manufacturing available properties.
5. Creating a webpage of Yorkville’s subdivisions with copies of the following: approved
Subdivision plat or concept plans, HOA contact information, approved ordinances, data on new
construction permits issued; etc.
6. Create a development projects webpage including current, pending, and proposed developments
in Yorkville.
7. Strategic annexation of wholly surrounded unincorporated properties in Yorkville.
8. Creating online plan submittal for building permit applications
9. Creating enterprise zones for manufacturing properties in Yorkville/Plano/Kendall County.
10. Issue an RFP for a Subdivision Code Ordinance Update/Unified Development Code
Memorandum
To: City Council
From: Bart Olson, City Administrator
CC:
Date: October 11, 2016
Subject: Goal setting – FY 18 early budget requests
Public Works
1. Work with Community Development to input street lights, street signs, and water shut off boxes
into our GIS database.
2. Complete a sidewalk assessment and condition map
3. Create a dedicated area to display all of our champion signs instead of under the population
signs. Possibly at the intersection of Walnut and 47.
4. Add tree replacements into the Road to Better Roads program.
5. Continue making downtown more pedestrian friendly. Possibly make Hydraulic Ave one way so
the other part of the road could become a larger walking/biking path. Use planters to separate
and provide safety.
6. Repave all City lots as a part of Road to Better Roads.
Parks and Recreation
1. Complete Riverfront Park and Bristol Bay Park improvements as grants were reinstated.
2. Complete Grande Reserve A Park
3. Construct a new recreation programming space facility
4. Continue to upgrade the Parks maintenance facility
5. Work on replacing old equipment and vehicles
6. Expand staffing to better accommodate expanded programming needs and special events.
Recommendation
This is an informational item.
Wh
o
re
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
Wh
a
t
Wh
e
n
Wh
e
r
e
Ho
w
mu
c
h
(n
e
t
)
Why
Ba
r
t
R
T
B
R
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
$
FY
18
am
o
u
n
t
is
hi
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
l
y
lo
w
.
Ba
r
t
A
d
m
i
n
St
a
f
f
FY
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
1
7
5
,
0
0
0
$
Po
s
i
t
i
o
n
s
TB
D
‐
co
u
l
d
be
As
s
i
s
t
a
n
t
,
An
a
l
y
s
t
,
an
d
/
o
r
PT
re
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
i
s
t
Ba
r
t
I
T
in
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
s
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
$
Ex
p
e
c
t
e
d
ne
t
w
o
r
k
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
an
d
up
d
a
t
e
s
Ba
r
t
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
Ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
F
Y
19
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
1
0
0
,
0
0
0
$
Ra
n
d
o
m
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
Ba
r
t
C
a
r
p
e
t
an
d
pa
i
n
t
Ci
t
y
Ha
l
l
F
Y
17
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
3
0
,
0
0
0
$
Er
i
c
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Op
e
r
a
t
o
r
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
7
0
,
0
0
0
$
Ne
e
d
s
fo
r
ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
co
v
e
r
a
g
e
on
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
in
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
Er
i
c
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Me
c
h
a
n
i
c
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
8
0
,
0
0
0
$
Hi
r
e
so
m
e
o
n
e
th
a
t
ha
s
sp
e
c
i
a
l
i
t
i
e
s
Mo
n
t
g
o
m
e
r
y
an
d
Os
w
e
g
o
do not. Use them for certain repairs
Er
i
c
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
Ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
Ch
i
e
f
FY
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
3
0
,
0
0
0
$
Sp
l
i
t
be
t
w
e
e
n
Os
w
e
g
o
an
d
Mo
n
t
g
o
m
e
r
y
Er
i
c
F
o
r
e
s
t
r
y
Op
e
r
a
t
o
r
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
5
5
,
0
0
0
$
Ma
y
b
e
sp
l
i
t
wi
t
h
Os
w
e
g
o
.
Pr
o
b
a
b
l
y
75
0
ho
u
r
s
ju
s
t
i
f
i
e
d
just in plan review and detention basins
Er
i
c
S
a
l
t
St
o
r
a
g
e
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
2
7
5
,
0
0
0
$
Fi
n
i
s
h
DC
E
O
Gr
a
n
t
pr
o
j
e
c
t
Kr
y
s
t
i
I
n
s
p
e
c
t
o
r
s
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
1
5
,
0
0
0
$
St
a
f
f
i
n
g
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
s
to
de
a
l
wi
t
h
gr
o
w
t
h
in
in
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
Ri
c
h
T
w
o
ne
w
po
l
i
c
e
of
f
i
c
e
r
s
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
$
La
r
r
y
,
as
PS
Ch
a
i
r
wa
n
t
e
d
Ri
c
h
to
re
q
u
e
s
t
th
i
s
.
Br
i
n
g
s
us
up to staffing for a traffic unit
Ri
c
h
O
n
e
ne
w
of
f
i
c
e
cl
e
r
k
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
5
0
,
0
0
0
$
Wo
u
l
d
on
l
y
be
ne
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
if
po
l
i
c
e
of
f
i
c
e
r
s
ar
e
ad
d
e
d
(m
o
r
e
reports, etc)
Ri
c
h
T
w
o
ne
w
po
l
i
c
e
ca
r
s
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
1
1
0
,
0
0
0
$
Wo
u
l
d
be
pe
r
ye
a
r
,
wo
u
l
d
br
i
n
g
us
up
to
fu
l
l
sc
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
replacements (one already budgeted, three total for purchase)
Ti
m
B
r
i
s
t
o
l
Ba
y
ea
r
t
h
w
o
r
k
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
6
0
,
0
0
0
$
We
mi
g
h
t
no
t
ha
v
e
en
o
u
g
h
to
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
ou
r
s
e
l
v
e
s
un
d
e
r
deadline.
Er
i
c
J
U
L
I
E
Lo
c
a
t
o
r
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
/
W
a
t
e
r
/
S
e
w
e
r
5
0
,
0
0
0
$
Co
s
t
sp
l
i
t
be
t
w
e
e
n
st
r
e
e
t
s
,
wa
t
e
r
an
d
se
w
e
r
Er
i
c
P
W
Tr
u
c
k
s
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
/
W
a
t
e
r
/
S
e
w
e
r
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
$
Wo
u
l
d
br
i
n
g
fu
l
l
re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
sc
h
e
d
u
l
e
.
Er
i
c
T
o
w
e
r
La
n
e
si
t
e
ex
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
F
Y
18
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
/
W
a
t
e
r
/
S
e
w
e
r
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
$
Lo
n
g
‐te
r
m
fa
c
i
l
i
t
y
us
e
Ti
m
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
F
Y
18
P
a
r
k
s
an
d
Re
c
6
5
,
0
0
0
$
$6
5
,
0
0
0
fi
r
s
t
ye
a
r
,
th
e
n
ne
t
s
ou
t
to
$3
0
,
0
0
0
af
t
e
r
re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
programming takes hold
Ti
m
P
a
v
e
so
u
t
h
si
d
e
to
w
n
sq
u
a
r
e
F
Y
18
P
a
r
k
s
an
d
Re
c
5
,
0
0
0
$
As
p
h
a
l
t
fo
r
th
e
pa
v
e
r
Ti
m
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
la
w
n
m
o
w
e
r
F
Y
18
P
a
r
k
s
an
d
Re
c
5
5
,
0
0
0
$
Mi
g
h
t
go
in
FY
17
Ti
m
R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
pa
n
e
l
va
n
F
Y
18
P
a
r
k
s
an
d
Re
c
2
2
,
0
0
0
$
Re
p
l
a
c
e
s
cu
r
r
e
n
t
va
n
Ti
m
G
a
z
e
b
o
re
b
u
i
l
d
F
Y
18
P
a
r
k
s
an
d
Re
c
5
0
,
0
0
0
$
Ro
o
f
on
l
y
fo
r
$2
0
k
.
Ti
m
B
e
e
c
h
e
r
pl
a
y
g
r
o
u
n
d
F
Y
19
P
a
r
k
s
an
d
Re
c
8
0
,
0
0
0
$
Ti
m
P
a
r
k
s
F1
5
0
F
Y
18
P
a
r
k
s
an
d
Re
c
2
5
,
0
0
0
$
Ti
m
W
o
l
f
St
Ai
r
v
a
c
F
Y
18
P
a
r
k
s
an
d
Re
c
2
5
,
0
0
0
$
Er
i
c
C
o
u
n
t
r
y
s
i
d
e
se
w
e
r
li
f
t
st
a
t
i
o
n
F
Y
18
S
e
w
e
r
5
0
,
0
0
0
$
Re
h
a
b
an
d
in
t
e
r
i
o
r
pa
i
n
t
of
li
f
t
st
a
t
i
o
n
Er
i
c
P
o
r
t
a
b
l
e
se
w
e
r
ca
m
e
r
a
F
Y
18
S
e
w
e
r
5
0
,
0
0
0
$
Ou
t
s
o
u
r
c
e
d
at
$2
5
0
pe
r
ho
u
r
no
w
.
Co
u
l
d
be
sh
a
r
e
d
wi
t
h
Oswego and Montgomery.
Ba
r
t
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
F
Y
18
T
I
F
1
,
5
0
0
,
0
0
0
$
Ti
m
R
i
v
e
r
f
r
o
n
t
pa
r
k
i
n
g
lo
t
F
Y
18
T
I
F
2
0
,
0
0
0
$
As
p
h
a
l
t
fo
r
th
e
pa
v
e
r
Ti
m
A
R
C
Lo
t
pa
v
i
n
g
F
Y
18
T
I
F
2
5
,
0
0
0
$
As
p
h
a
l
t
fo
r
th
e
pa
v
e
r
Ti
m
A
T
&
T
pa
r
k
i
n
g
lo
t
F
Y
18
T
I
F
5
,
0
0
0
$
As
p
h
a
l
t
fo
r
th
e
pa
v
e
r
Ti
m
Ya
k
Sh
a
c
k
pa
r
k
i
n
g
lo
t
F
Y
18
T
I
F
3
1
,
0
0
0
$
As
p
h
a
l
t
fo
r
th
e
pa
v
e
r
Er
i
c
W
e
l
l
re
h
a
b
F
Y
19
W
a
t
e
r
5
,
0
0
0
$
Er
i
c
W
e
l
l
re
h
a
b
F
Y
20
W
a
t
e
r
1
5
0
,
0
0
0
$
Ca
t
‐io
n
me
d
i
a
re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
,
an
d
we
l
l
9 re
h
a
b
Er
i
c
W
e
l
l
re
h
a
b
F
Y
21
W
a
t
e
r
1
1
5
,
0
0
0
$
Ca
t
‐io
n
me
d
i
a
re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
.
Er
i
c
We
l
l
re
h
a
b
FY
22
Wa
t
e
r
15
0
,
0
0
0
$
Ca
t
‐io
n
me
d
i
a
re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
4,
7
2
8
,
0
0
0
$
Summary
An outline of strategies to pursue in the short-term future regarding downtown revitalization as
recommended by staff.
Background
City Council and residents alike have expressed their desire and vision to see enhancements
made to the area of downtown Yorkville. In order to come up with recommendations to
implement, staff has reviewed input and suggestions that has been given through a variety of
means both in the regular yearly practices and throughout the comprehensive planning process.
Below is a compilation of the results.
City Council Goal Setting Session:
In November at the City Council’s Goal setting session, the top ranking goal was “Downtown
Planning.” During the session, key issues to be addressed were composed by the Council. Note
that they are not in any particular order of either ranking or timing.
City Council Downtown Key Issues to Address
Riverfront Park
Riverfront Beautification
Property Maintenance
o Enforcement
o Architectural Standards
Courthouse Hill Aesthetics
o Landscape Architecture
Plans and Quotes
Parking problems
Tourism and Marketing
Brownfield Issues
o Finalize Study
Old Post Office Use
East Alley Improvements
o Utility Replacements
o Parking
o Shared Garbage Facility
o Bury Utilities
City Hall Relocation
Integrate Clark Park and North
Bank to Downtown
Façade Improvements
Pedestrian Improvements and
Connectivity
Handrails
o Provide options with quotes
Business Owner Committee
Special Events
City Rental Buildings- Long
Term Plan
o Maintenance
o Revenue Generation
Wayfinding Signage
Decorative Streetlights Installed
Zipline
Memorandum
To: City Council
From: Nicole Kathman, Administrative Intern
CC: Bart Olson, City Administrator
Date: May 25, 2016
Subject: Downtown Revitalization Strategies Implementation
Comprehensive Plan Strategies Resident Survey:
In fall of 2015, in an effort to generate more resident input, the Lakota Group inquired
community opinion through an online survey. In this questionnaire, participants were asked to
determine a prioritization level for each of the downtown revitalization strategies proposed for
the comprehensive plan. Answer choices were “Not a Priority, Low Priority, Medium Priority,
and High Priority.” Approximately 200 stakeholders provided their input through this manner.
In order to compare the results of each strategy side by side, I have assigned a numeric value to
each answer and calculated the average. Numeric values are 0 for “Priority,” 1 for “Low
Priority,” 2 for “Medium Priority,” and 3 for “High Priority.” Therefore, the higher the average,
the more of a priority it is. I divided the results into “Near-Term Strategies,” Mid-Term
Strategies,” and “Long-Range Strategies” in accordance with the survey. The results in terms of
percentages for each option in addition to comments associated with each question are included
in the attached document that was put together by the Lakota Group. There is also a description
of each strategy.
Average Prioritization of Near-Term Strategies (1-10 years)
Strategy Average
Enhance Hydraulic Street 2.03
Facilitate Building Rehabilitations 2.03
Infill Development along Hydraulic Street 1.99
Create Public Parking Areas 1.98
Clean and Green the “Legacy Block” 1.80
Enhance Fox River Access/Create Kayak Center 1.28
Average Prioritization of Mid-Term Strategies (10-20 years)
Strategy Average
Create Riverfront Park west of Bridge St. 2.01
Expand Riverfront Park to the East 1.99
Enhance Main and Van Emmon Streets 1.94
Infill Development along Hydraulic St. 1.84
Redevelop Industrial Land 1.77
Create a Kendall County Campus 1.05
Average Prioritization of Long-Range Strategies (20+ years)
Strategy Average
Riverfront Trail Extension 2.00
Enhance Van Emmon Street 1.75
Redevelop Land South of Van Emmon Street 1.65
Redevelopment of “Legacy Block” 1.59
Redevelop Land East of Mill Street 1.47
Create Downtown Civic Complex 1.39
2015 City Services Survey:
Although no specific questions were about the downtown were asked in the survey, residents
frequently mentioned revitalizing the downtown. Many of the comments on the subject matter
mentioned aesthetics, addition of trails in the area, and an overall need to better utilize the
riverfront area.
Proposal Narrative:
Overall the strategy is to begin the revitalization of downtown Yorkville by beginning with
Riverfront Park and parking issues. Expanding the park will help make downtown Yorkville a
primary destination for both residents and nonresidents. Parking areas will provide visitors with
convenience in addition to reducing parking as an obstacle. This will make the surrounding area
more attractive to developers.
Simultaneously offering a façade grant program will spur improvements to reduce blight.
Furthermore, adding in additional sidewalks, trails, and signage to make the area more pedestrian
friendly will encourage prolonged visits to the downtown. After we address our current
infrastructure and area is a more appropriate time to then expand new development with cleaning
up the brownfields.
Recommendation for Implementation of Strategies:
Actions already moving forward:
Action 1: Riverfront Park Playground
Description: Installation of the purchased playground equipment for Riverfront Park
approved at the March 22, 2016 City Council Meeting
Estimated Cost: $88,615 ($66,815 City Share and $15,000 Riverfront Park Foundation)
Funding: Parks and Recreation FY 2016 Budget, Riverfront Park Foundation Donation
Action 2: Pumphouse Façade Improvements
Description: Painting the pumphouse so that the exterior matches the exterior of the
former Cobblestone building as planned last year. Installation of a lattice façade to allow
growth of landscaping near building.
Estimated Cost: $12,000
Funding: FY 2017 TIF Funds
Action 3: West Alley Pavement Improvements
Description: Paving the west alley in partnership with Imperial Investments’ paving of
the private parking lots adjacent to the alley.
Estimated Cost: $14,000 net to City, $45,000 gross cost
Funding: FY 2016 TIF Funds
Action 4: West Alley Sidewalk and Fence replacement
Description: Replacement of old sidewalk and installation of a safety rail near the NE
corner of S Main and W Van Emmon
Estimated Cost: $37,000
Funding: FY 2017 TIF Funds
Action 5: East Alley Sidewalk and Fence replacement
Description: Replacement of old sidewalk and installation of a safety railing east of the
Law Office Pub.
Estimated Cost: $20,000
Funding: FY 2017 TIF Funds
Action 6: Decorative Streetlights
Description: Installation of decorative streetlights along Route 47 from approximately
School House Road to Somonauk Street. It is expected the poles will be installed this
fall.
Estimated Cost: ~$616,450 for Phase III Engineering and Construction ($432,098 ITEP
and $184,352)
Funding: ITEP Funds, Downtown TIF Funds, City-Wide Capital Fund
Action 7: Property Maintenance
Description: Continuing to monitor property maintenance violations in the downtown
area.
Estimated Cost: Soft costs, staff time
Funding: General Fund (Community Development Department)
Action 8: Courthouse Hill Landscaping Plan
Description: Concept landscaping plan for a modest improvement to reduce City mowing
costs of hill and improve aesthetics, and a more robust plan that would fit withina future
goal to make the downtown a destination.
Estimated Cost: $5,000
Funding: FY 17 TIF Fund
Action 9: Downtown Tree Replacement
Description: Many trees were removed from the downtown during the Route 47
expansion project. Over the next couple years, we plan on replacing many of the lost
trees in the downtown.
Estimated Cost: $4,000
Funding: FY 17 TIF Fund
Implementation beginning by the end of 2016 within FY 2017 budget:
Action 10: Parking Study
Description: Development of a parking management plan.
Estimated Cost: $19, 000
Funding: FY 2017 TIF Funds
Justification: Completion of a parking study will help determine current and projected
downtown parking needs and the location of potential off-street parking facilities. This
would be the first step in expanding parking in the downtown.
Input Consideration:
City Council Downtown Key Issue: Parking Problems
Comprehensive Plan Draft Implementation Action for the Strategy “Create Public
Parking Areas”
Parking identified as an important priority by residents in Downtown
Revitalization Survey Results.
Action 11: Start Up Downtown Exterior Improvement Program
Description: Grants for owners of existing commercial buildings in the downtown core
with the purpose of encouraging façade and other exterior improvements. In order to be
approved for funds, a project would have to adhere to design guidelines to facilitate a
consistent downtown theme. We envision this program being administratively approved
to allow for an expedited process.
Estimated Cost: Budgetary discretion, each individual project could be between $5,000
and $100,000 depending on scope
Funding: FY 2017 TIF funds
Justification: This program would encourage rehabilitation in order to control and prevent
blight and deterioration within Downtown Yorkville.
Input Consideration:
City Council Downtown Key Issue: Façade Improvements
Comprehensive Plan Draft Implementation Action for the Strategy “Facilitate
Building Rehabilitations and Façade Improvements”
Building Rehabilitation identified as the highest priority in Downtown
Revitalization Survey Results
2015 City Services Survey comments regarding building aesthetics.
Action 12: Paving of South Main Street Parking Lot
Description: Paving the south Main Street parking lot behind the AT&T building to
provide an additional public parking area for access to the ARC Building and the rest of
downtown.
Estimated Cost: Staff time and $5,000 for materials
Funding: FY 2017 TIF Funds and/or Parks and Recreation Fund
Justification: Downtown needs to add accessible off-street parking facilities if it is to
attract new businesses and customers. Replacing gravel with pavement also provides an
aesthetic enhancement.
Input Considerations:
City Council Downtown Key Issue: Parking Problems
Comprehensive Plan Draft Implementation Action for the Strategy “Create Public
Parking Areas”
Parking identified as an important priority by residents in Downtown
Revitalization Survey Results
2015 City Services Survey comments regarding downtown aesthetics
Implementation in short-term future beginning by the end of 2017, financed by $2 million
dollar bond.
Action 13: Build Riverfront Park East
Description: Move forward with building the park plan as approved by OSLAD grant
even without certainty grant is getting reinstated.
Estimated Cost: $400,000
Funding: Bond, possibly refunded by grant
Justification: Public spaces give identity to cities and the riverfront is an area the City has
been incorporating as a focal point. The expansion of the park would allow having larger
events downtown attracting more visitors. In addition, in general, parks have a positive
impact on land values and spurring economic development. Determining the economic
impact of parks is an emerging science and factors that bring direct income, provide
resident savings, and provide environmental savings have been quantified in park systems
across the country. Furthermore, residents see the value in parks as they were the rated
the third highest City service in regards to satisfaction in the 2015 City Services Survey.
Input Consideration:
City Council Downtown Key Issue: Riverfront Park
Riverfront Park Development although encompassed within the goal of
Downtown Planning also was its own separate goal. This goal was ranked 8th out
of 24 goals.
Top two mid-term strategies identified by residents in the Downtown
Revitalization Survey results pertain to the expansion of Riverfront Park.
Action 14: Fully fund Downtown Exterior Improvement Program
See Action 2 under “Implementation beginning by the end of 2016 within FY 2017
budget”
Action 15: Start to create public parking areas
Description: Begin development of public parking areas identified in parking
management plan. Choose selected areas to start off with.
Estimated Cost: Dependent on outcome of study and areas chosen
Funding: Bond
Justification: Downtown needs to add accessible off-street parking facilities if it is to
attract new businesses and customers.
Input Considerations:
City Council Downtown Key Issue: Parking Problems
Comprehensive Plan Draft Implementation Action for the Strategy “Create Public
Parking Areas”
Parking identified as an important priority by residents in Downtown
Revitalization Survey Results
Action 16: Downtown Streetscape Master Plan
Description: Study to determine the type of improvements needed to make Downtown
Yorkville more walkable, such as sidewalks, intersection crossings, and signage. This
would also include the creation of a “brand” image for the Downtown. This “brand”
image would be incorporated into design guidelines for a façade program.
Estimated Cost: $60,000
Funding: Bond
Justification: We need to have a plan before making streetscape improvements in order to
determine where our dollars would be best spent.
Input Consideration:
City Council Downtown Key Issues: Pedestrian Improvements and Connectivity
and Wayfinding signage.
Comprehensive Plan Draft Implementation Action for the Strategy “Enhance
Streetscape Appearances and Improve the Walkability of Hydraulic, Main and
Van Emmon Streets”
Enhance Main and Van Emmon identified as an important priority by residents in
Downtown Revitalization Survey Results
Action 17: East Alley Improvements
Description: This would involve partial replacement and burying of the utilities located in
the east alley, paving the parking lot, and other beautification including items such as:
combining the business garbage facilities and changing the layout to be more
pedestrian/customer friendly.
Estimated Cost: TBD
Funding: Bond
Justification: There has been high number of water main breakages. Paving the parking
lot would create an additional public parking area that would help attract businesses and
visitors to the downtown in addition to adding an aesthetic enhancement.
Input Consideration:
City Council Downtown Key Issue: East Alley Improvements
City Council Downtown Key Issue: Parking Problems
Comprehensive Plan Draft Implementation Action for the Strategy “Create Public
Parking Areas”
Comprehensive Plan Draft Implementation Action for the Strategy “Facilitate
Building Rehabilitations and Façade Improvements”
Building Rehabilitation identified as the highest priority in Downtown
Revitalization Survey Results
Parking identified as an important priority by residents in Downtown
Revitalization Survey Results
2015 City Services Survey comments regarding aesthetics.
Implementation recommendations beyond 2017, financed by future TIF funds:
Action 18: Downtown Streetscape Improvements
Description: Implement selected improvements such as new sidewalks, wayfinding
signage, public art, landscaping planters, and pedestrian lighting as identified in
Downtown Streetscape Master Plan.
Estimated Cost: Dependent on Master Plan outcomes
Funding: Any leftover bond money if applicable and future TIF Funds
Justification: These improvements would increase walkability. Walkability particularly in
a downtown is advantageous. Outlined below are just a few reasons:
Research shows that increases in measures of walkability such as Walk Score
translate into increased property values.
o A 2012 study by the Brookings Institute provides evidence that
neighborhoods with environmental features that facilitate walkability and
attracts pedestrians, have higher rents, property values, and retail
revenues. The economic effects of this infrastructure are also shown in a
2015 report by Smart Growth America outlining case studies of cities that
have completed this type of improvements.
o Numerous studies including a 2009 Study by CEOs for Cities indicates
Walkscore which is a grade out of 100 that reflects the proximity of
establishments increases property values. This infrastructure investment
could attract new businesses to increase this score.
Walkability is becoming increasingly important to buyers. According to a 2013
survey from the National Association of Realtors. “A neighborhood with a mix of
houses, stores and businesses that are easy to walk to is preferred over a
neighborhood with houses only that requires driving to stores and businesses” (60
percent to 35 percent).
Improving walkability will increase opportunities for visitors once downtown to
walk around and visit multiple attractions and businesses, which supports the
local economy.
Input Consideration:
City Council Downtown Key Issues: Pedestrian Improvements and Connectivity
and Wayfinding signage.
Comprehensive Plan Draft Implementation Action for the Strategy “Enhance
Streetscape Appearances and Improve the Walkability of Hydraulic, Main and
Van Emmon Streets”
Enhance Main and Van Emmon identified as an important priority by residents in
Downtown Revitalization Survey Results
Action 19: Make Brownfield in East Alley suitable for development
Description: We need to obtain a letter of no further remediation (NFR) from the IEPA.
This would involve further evaluation and clean up of the Brownfield site east of Route
47 on Hydraulic Ave once a development plan is proposed..
Estimated Cost: $690,000 - $720,000 for full remediation, significantly less depending on
development plan
Funding: Future TIF funds
Justification: Covering the rehabilitation costs for this contaminated site will make it
more desirable and attractive to developers and investors.
Input Consideration:
City Council Downtown Key Issue: Brownfield Issues
Comprehensive Plan Draft Implementation Action for the Strategy “Encourage
Infill Along Hydraulic Street”
Infilling development along Hydraulic Ave identified as significant priority in the
Downtown Revitalization Survey Results.
Funding Scenarios and Outlook
All of the above projects can be funded with TIF increments or a bond. In FY 17, the
entire TIF district is only supposed to generate around $70,000 in increment, and payments to
Imperial Investments for past projects will be around $16,000 for a net amount of $54,000. The
TIF expires in 2029, leaving the City with a conservative estimate of $650,000 in expected net
revenue over the next 12 years. While this is enough to accomplish a few of the items on the list,
it is not enough to accomplish the full TIF plan as approved in 2006. The entire TIF ordinance is
attached for your review, but in general it contemplated:
Category Amount
Analysis, Administration, Studies, Surveys,
Legal, Marketing etc
Property Assembly including Acquisition, Site Prep
and Demolition, Environmental Remediation
$500,000
$10,000,000
Public Works & Improvements, including streets and utilities and public
facilities or capital costs
$15,000,000
Rehabilitation of existing buildings, fixtures and leasehold improvements $10,000,000
Interest Subsidies and/or Affordable Housing Incentives
Relocation Costs
Job Training and Vocational Education
Total Redevelopment Project Costs
$1,000,000
$500,000
$500,000
$37,500,000
To date, the City has only generated a total of $560,000 in TIF increment since 2006, and has
only paid out $44,000. This is a long way off from the planned $37,500,000 in total investment a
decade ago.
The most practical way to complete some of the larger ticket initiatives in the downtown
area would be to sell a bond. An alternate revenue bond would be available to the City, in an
amount at the City’s choosing. A $2,000,000 bond with a 13 year term would yield a debt
service amount of around $225,000 annually. If the City already has around $50,000 per year in
increment, an additional $175,000 per year in increment would need to be generated in order to
meet debt service obligations.
To get an idea of what kind of building would have to be constructed to generate
$150,000 in TIF increment, the mixed-use building in downtown Oswego (pictures attached) that
contains the Taphouse Grill and has various business condos on the upper floors pays around
$76,000 in property taxes annually and sits on ½ acre. If we take that building as a reasonable
model, we would need three of those types of buildings in downtown Yorkville to offset the
annual debt service on a $2m bond.
There are several properties in downtown Yorkville that have one owner for over an acre
where private redevelopment could occur with a willing landowner and developer. The FS
property (owned by Imperial Investments) and the sawmill (owned by Dan Nicholson) are both
around an acre in size. The Vault Gym property (old Old Second building) is over 3 acres in size
and would be a large redevelopment opportunity.
In a scenario where all three of the above properties have a willing landowner and
developer, and get built with a large mixed-use building, similar to the Taphouse building in
Oswego, I would expect planning and construction take 2-3 years. With the assessment of
property on a 3-year rolling basis and a year in arrears, it could be 4-6 years from now before
those fully-developed properties reach the tax rolls and generate significant TIF increment. That
leaves an even shorter window for payback of either a bond or a normal, backloaded TIF
agreement like the agreement that Imperial Investments has. It is my opinion that the City would
have a very small likelihood of financial success due to the term of the TIF and the likelihood of
commercial development on the scale discussed.
Further, the City staff have been in contact with Imperial Investments on a variety of
issues related to their current properties and projects in the downtown. They have pulled a
building permit for the buildings on the FS property, and have entertained different
redevelopment options over the past few years. Because the property has a brownfield and the
TIF ends in 2029, Imperial Investments has let us know that they would not be able to develop
the FS property in full without a TIF extension. It is my opinion that any other developer would
have the same challenges.
TIF extension
The process to extend a TIF is done through the state legislature. It requires a bill
specific to the City’s downtown TIF district to be approved by the state. Typically, the state asks
that every taxing body in the City consent to the extension of the TIF. At that point, the state
usually approves a bill extending the TIF for an additional 12 years. If the City Council feels
that a TIF extension is warranted, the first step would be to approach every other taxing body for
their consent.
Recommendation
Staff recommends:
1) Consent and direction to keep moving forward with Action Items 1-9 and
2) Approval to move forward with Action Items 10-12, including a budget amendment
and/or City Council approval of study documents, if needed and
3) Support to continue studying Action Items 13-19, in preparation for future action and
prioritization by City Council and
4) Feedback on whether there other projects or initiatives to study that are not already
listed in this memo and
5) Approval to move forward with a TIF extension by contacting other taxing bodies to
gauge their willingness to consent to an extension of the TIF to 2041