Loading...
EDC Minutes 2005 10-20-05 APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE,/BOARD Pate 1 of 3 Ott: /�/ 0 (o DATE CORRECTED FROM 9/15/05 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Thursday, October 20, 2005 7:00 pm City Hall Conference Room Present: Mayor Art Prochaska Randy Scott Alderman Marty Munns, Chairman Craig Coffey Alderwoman Valerie Burd Mike Stargardt Alderman Jason Leslie Dallas Ingemunson, Attorney Alderman Joe Besco Sal Reshepi, J & S Developer City Attorney John Wyeth Rich Guerard, Wyndham Deerpoint Lynn Dubajic, YEDC Bill Garrett Julie Hanna Cheryl Watts Jeff Foust The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm by Chairman Munns. 1. Approval/Correction of Minutes: August 18, 2005 6. PC 2005 -43 Daniel Laniosz —10701 Route 71— Annexation and Zoning — There has been a petition to the city to rezone this piece of property to B3. This was voted against by the Zoning Board with a 3 — 4 — 1 vote. B3 is the broadest category, and there are some inappropriate uses for the future. Those uses could be deleted in a development agreement. Alderwoman Burd questioned whether it might be better to say what the Council would approve there rather than what they would not approve. The neighboring resident, Bill Garrett brought his plat of survey. The acreage in question has 2 acres currently zoned agricultural and 1.125 acres currently zoned residential. This resident is asking the residential portion stay residential and is asking for buffering from the commercial that would be next door. Currently the business that is there is under special use in the county. This property currently has 2 violations of ordinances. 1 violation is building without a permit and the other is for some Barb wire fence on the property. Dallas Ingemunson has been representing Mr. Laniosz for some time and Bill Dettmer has reviewed the property and Mr. Laniosz will remove the barb wire. Mayor Prochaska pointed out that current ordinance would require some sort of landscape buffering. Also, the current comprehensive plan does not recognize commercial in that location. This will move on to the COW on November 1 with a list of allowed uses and special uses. 3. Building Permit Reports for August and September 2005 — There was a revised report for September passed out. These will move on to COW on Consent Agenda. i Paae 2 of 3 4. PC 2005 -32 Yorkwood Estates — Annexation and Zoning — The zoning Board voted 8 — 0 in favor of annexation and zoning R2. A tree study will be done in the areas where the trees will be disturbed. The lots on the South end will be 1 /2 acre minimum lots that will be built by custom builders. Some storm water management will be done in the South East corner. There will be a fence near the pasture in the South West corner. The residents in an existing subdivision do not want the road to connect to this new subdivision. All the lots will be a minimum of 12,000 square feet. The utilities will be in the front of the properties. There could be a dormant SSA put in place. Mayor Prochaska would like to see it put on the people's titles that they are within so many yards of an existing dog kennel. This will move on to the November 1 St COW. 5. PC 2005 — 33 Chally Farm - Annexation and Zoning — The Zoning Board voted 8 — 0 for annexation and 6 — 2 for zoning. This would be a PUD with a B2 commercial node. There were concerns from neighboring residents that were present. They did not want to see a road connection into their subdivision because they were concerned that the roads in Pavillion Heights were narrow roads with curves and no streetlights and no sidewalks and people walk and ride their bicycles in the road. The connection road could be a one way street or emergency access only. The residents of Pavillion I Heights were concerned with the lot sizes that would be backing up to their properties, the lot sizes in Pavillion Heights are much larger than the ones that are proposed to be built. Currently there is no buffer planned to go between the subdivisions. The proposed houses would be 2,500 — 3,500 square foot homes. The residents of Pavillion Heights were concerned with storm water runoff. There was also a concern about the commercial area and buffering between the commercial and the existing residential. The residents have previously submitted a petition that meets the 75% of adjoining perimeter and would require the super majority vote of 6 out of 8 Aldermen. A Historical Phase 1 study, required by the state, will be done. An Environmental study will also be done. This will move on to COW on November 1St 7. Discussion of City Initiated Concept Plans — Mayor Prochaska met with Mike Schoppe about a generic concept transportation plan of some areas of the city. It would lay out where the main roads should go. The cost would be recaptured from future developers. Water runoff areas could be identified as well as school sites. The developers could be asked to help build the schools. This would not be as detailed as a preliminary plan. A draft of a policy will go to the next COW on November 1St 8. Plano Boundary Agreement Update — Mayor Roberts would like to see Yorkville adopt the same amendment that Plano did in regards to the realignment of Ashe Road and a subsequent boundary agreement with Sugar Grove. Sugar Grove should be brought in on the discussion. Yorkville will hold off until there is a ruling from the court. 2. Discussion of Future Incentive Programs to Attract Commercial/Industrial Business to Yorkville — On the cover page Items 3 and 4 should be eliminated. The ineligible businesses are not necessarily part of the future for Yorkville. The businesses could be ranked. Lynn Dubajic did some surveying and also obtained a policy from DeKalb. There is a tremendous amount of difference between Yorkville and DeKalb and the policy is not helpful as written. Paae 3 of 3 Under Section 1 of the Policy, Eligible uses of Funds should read Uses that may be considered eligible. The relocation would be if the company was completely brought in from somewhere else, not a 2 location, and the move will cost money. Under Incentive Parameters, #2 may not necessarily be 7 years, the amount of time may be different for each case, but it must have a specific conclusion date. #3 should be clarified or removed. All monies extended by the city shall be subject to reimbursement by the petitioner rather than the developer. The end user will be defined ahead of time. Just because it is applied for does not mean they will receive the incentive. Commercial/Retail is sales tax targeted. Priority businesses would be appliances & electronics (such as Best Buy or Circuit City) Furniture, New car, truck, and motorized vehicles and used luxury cars, department stores, and sporting goods stores. If "Higher End" merchandise is included who decides what high end is? Priority locations do not need each individual intersection defined. It will now read: Priority locations as defined in the Comprehensive plan: Rt 47 commercial nodes, Downtown area, identified by outline of downtown TIF district, US Highway 34 commercial nodes, and Rt 71 commercial nodes. Ineligible businesses will be eliminated. Section 2 will be eliminated. Section 3 refers to Industrial, Service, Manufacturing, and Distribution Developments. The source of rebate is not defined here. It could be in the form of Sales Tax, Real Estate Tax, or Utility Taxes. If they go for this they could get more than if they would apply for a Real Estate Tax Abatement. Could they possibly apply for both? Priority locations would be Yorkville Business Center (near F.E. Wheaton Complex, Fox Industrial Park, and Lincoln Prairie Industrial Park. The Incentive Parameters would mirror the ones for Commercial and Retail. #2 will have a conclusion date, but not necessarily 7 years. #3 should be clarified or deleted. Eligible Activities should be Uses that may be considered eligible. Alderwoman Burd would like to see a similar program for small business. They could receive real estate tax abatements, utility tax abatements. Or it could be part of a pool of overall real estate taxes. The total revenue for a year would have to have a cap. This would be a separate policy. New businesses would be given priority and they would have to generate at least 2 jobs. They could use the money for build out to improve, rehab, or remodel an existing building. This will get cleaned up and brought back next month. 9. Additional Business — Alderwoman Burd asked who should be the liaison to the Chamber Board. It was believed former City Administrator Tony Graff went to those meetings. They are the 3rd Thursday of each month at 7:30 am. Alderman Leslie was volunteered for going to these meetings, and Alderman Munns would be the backup liaison. Alderwoman Burd volunteered to go to the Protect Kendall Now meetings as a liaison, and Alderman Besco would be the backup liaison. The Chamber Board and YEDC is having an event on November 4 from 8 am —11 am in the lower level of the Old Second Bank building. Everyone is encouraged to go. The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 pm. Minutes submitted by Laura Leppert. PLEASE SIGN IN MEETING: Ulc)ooni hl DATE: hD bC. r 070 �0 t�tAME BUSINESS PHONE # I I I I . I