Minutes of the DeKalb County
Regional Planning Commission

1. Roll Call -- Mr. Nicklas called for the roll, and all members were present except Mr. Pardridge from Shabbona and Mr. Ragan from Lee.

2. Approval of Agenda -- Mr. Bellah moved to approve the agenda, seconded by Mr. Rasmussen, and the motion passed unanimously.

3. Approval of Minutes -- Mr. Thompson moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Mr. Todd, and the motion passed unanimously.

Report on "Zoning 101" Seminar -- Mr. Miller reported that the "Zoning 101" Seminar conducted on March 6, 2004, under the sponsorship of the Regional Planning Commission, was well-attended, with 60 or so attendees from the majority of the municipalities in the County, as well as several County Board members. He stated that positive feedback on the content of the seminar had been received from several persons and that the information presented seemed timely. He also noted that there was a wide range of information presented, which precluded in-depth discussions on any one topic. He suggested that the RPC may wish to sponsor future seminars where one or two of the topics could be reviewed more thoroughly.

Mr. Gentile agreed that additional seminars would be helpful, especially if they were more focused on specific issues or areas of interest. Mr. Bellah concurred, noting that the amount of growth occurring throughout the County made the material very timely and important. Mr. Nicklas stated that one alderman from Sycamore had suggested a "Zoning 102" that could include more audience participation, with attendees receiving materials in advance and preparing to take part in exercises. The presenter could walk the participants through scenarios related to the topic and throw in unexpected wrinkles.

Mr. Miller agreed that this could be done, and suggested that there could be role-playing, where certain people represent the developer, others the plan commission or village board, etc. He stated that key to this idea would be to identify when it would be scheduled to take place.

Mr. Nicklas suggested further refinements to the role-playing idea, suggesting it could be in three stages with questions and answers in-between. He suggested the RPC could aim for this to take place in the early Fall after schools have re-opened.

Mr. Altmaier suggested the seminar could feature both an instruction period, perhaps the first hour, followed by the role-playing through scenarios. He also stated that the outline provided for the "Zoning 101" seminar would be used by elected and appointed officials in Kingston, and expressed support for the idea of further seminars focusing on specific topics.

Mr. Luker expressed concern that whatever information the RPC gathers and instructions it puts together should somehow be preserved so that it is available to future plan commission members and other elected and appointed officials. He noted that the people serving on the RPC won’t always be there, and there will always be turn-over at the plan commission and village board levels. There was general agreement with this point expressed by other Commission members.

Mr. Nicklas suggested that the idea of further informational seminars be placed on the agenda for the May, 2004 meeting of the RPC.

A discussion followed regarding how the RPC could make the information and expertise it has acquired available to the municipalities.

Mr. Gentile asked whether the RPC could have a sub-committee that could serve as an orientation group intended to help new municipal plan commissioners and elected officials understand the basics of planning, zoning and development-related issues. Such a sub-committee, consisting of three or four of the Commission members, could help these new elected and appointed officials understand what the RPC is, what it does and how it can help, and could be available to meet with such officials as requested.

Mr. Thompson inquired whether the individual municipalities should be surveyed to determine what information or topics they would find informative or useful.

Mr. Nicklas suggested the "Zoning 101" outline could be mailed out again with a cover memo asking municipal representatives on what topics they would like to focus. Mr. Luker observed that many people don’t know what question to ask.

Mr. Miller suggested that the RPC members themselves could help there individual municipalities by explaining what the RPC can do for them in terms of providing information, orientation and basic planning and zoning instruction. The information and instruction could come from both RPC members and staff.

Mr. Luker noted that RPC members may not get a positive reaction from other elected and appointed officials, who could question their agenda. Ms. Aldis noted that the RPC could end up "preaching to the choir," rather than to individuals who could truly benefit from the information.

After further discussion, Mr. Nicklas suggested that the item be tabled for now, but taken up at the next RPC meeting.

5. Growth Management Tools -- Mr. Miller noted that, at its last meeting, the RPC wanted to discuss growth management tools. He provided a memorandum that included a list of potential tools, and noted that any one of them could entail considerable research and discussion. Rather than try to provide information on all of them at once, he asked the RPC which one(s) it wished to take up.

In reviewing the list, Mr. Nicklas noted that comprehensive plans are only as good as the way in which they are implemented, and that most municipalities have zoning ordinances. He stated that impact fees are a hot topic right now for municipalities, and that Sycamore has adopted the "subdivision build-out schedule," which limits the number of housing starts per development per year, as a growth management tool.

Mr. Thompson and Mr. Gentile noted that the "subdivision build-out schedule" was the only new technique on the list.

Mr. Nicklas noted that the use of impact fees is new for several communities. Mr. Luker agreed, and asserted that many communities are not clear on what the law allows when it comes to using impact fees, what they are, and whether they are an option outside of an annexation agreement. Ms. Aldis stated that, when it comes to impact fees, it boils down to whether or not the municipality is or is not a home-rule community. Mr. Rasmussen stated that the key for impact fees is that they must be directly and specifically attributable to the individual development. Mr. Bellah agreed, and noted that some school districts don’t understand this and think that impact fees can be of any amount desired. Mr. Miller agreed that many communities are discussing impact fees right now, and reminded the Commission that it had collected impact fee information in 2002. That information is still being used, and could stand to be updated. Mr. Thompson asked whether higher impact fees can be required of subsequent developments. Ms. Aldis responded that it depends on the research conducted for each project. Mr. Miller added that the same formulae for generating various impact fees can be used, but the actual figures must be specific to the individual development.

Looking at the list of potential growth management tools, Mr. Rasmussen noted that a tool not listed is "growth boundaries." He stated that is may not be a good tool, as it has the consequence of causing property values within the growth boundary to skyrocket, but it is a tool. Mr. Nicklas stated that, good or bad, Sycamore has adopted, as part of its new comprehensive plan, what amounts to a growth boundary.

Mr. Altmaier noted that "Unified Development Ordinance" was not on the list. Mr. Nicklas responded that a UDO simply combines zoning and subdivision into one document. Mr. Miller added that L.E.S.A. and grading/stormwater management regulations can also be included.

Mr. Rasmussen handed out a publication from "Zoning Practice" that discusses preservation of gravel/rural roads as a growth management tool. He noted that it concludes that if a community sees the value of a scenic route along a gravel road, it should resist paving that road and allowing development beyond one house per every 32 acres. Mr. Miller added that some states have recognized the value of the rural, agricultural roads and deliberately encouraged "agri-tainment," which includes deliberately not paving the gravel road so as to discourage traffic and help maintain the rural aesthetic.

Mr. Miller suggested that the RPC should select which of these potential growth tools it wishes to investigate, and also decide what it wants to do with whatever it learns. He stated that the selected tool(s) could be on the May, 2004 agenda and accompanied by an initial staff report that would address the tools. Subsequently, the RPC may wish to turn the item into an instructional seminar.

It was agreed that the RPC would select the growth management tool and format for its investigation and dissemination at its next meeting.

6. Municipal Development Projects:

Mr. Todd stated that the Rte. 30 project through Waterman has started, and that the trees along the highway are all gone. He said the first phase of the project will focus on stormwater management that will address some flooding in the downtown. Mr. Todd stated that Waterman is continuing negotiations with two residential subdivisions, Deerfield Crossing, which is going through the "final touches," and Greenridge, which is scheduled for preliminary plan review next Tuesday. He stated that the two projects combined would add 689 single-family homes and 180 townhomes to the Village. Finally, Mr. Todd said the Village is finishing the work on its T.I.F. district.

Mr. Rasmussen stated that DeKalb is looking at two mega-projects, both being warehouses. One would be a 1.5 million square-foot Lowe’s warehouse, along with a 200,000 square-foot mill works that would make doors and windows for Lowe’s, and could employ 700 persons. DeKalb is competing with Janesville, WS over this project. The other is being called "Temecula," and would consist of a 1,357,000 square-foot warehouse and 37,000 square-foot office, and may ultimately employ 1,000 workers. DeKalb seems to be the frontrunner for this project. Finally, he stated that there will be a workshop on April 19, 2004 for the city council to look at two grocery store proposals. The potential stumbling block for both is the need for liquor licenses. Both would deviate somewhat from the City’s comprehensive plan, but could be accommodated if they come through as promised.

Mr. Luker asked how DeKalb deals with businesses leaving their current site and occupying a new one in the city. What does the city do with the old site? Mr. Rasmussen responded that such turn-over is part of the normal cycle, and that new users are sought for the old building. He also noted that DeKalb is nearly done with Sycamore Road development. He added that the City’s economic development efforts have begun to focus on finding the businesses that are looking for a market the size of DeKalb, rather than trying to attract the biggest or best known names.

Mr. Bellah stated that the grain bin at the end of Kirkland has been demolished, which is the loss of a landmark for some residents. He stated that a developer out of Orland Park has an option on 1,135 acres located on the west side of the Village, and has stated that developers out of New York State have contacted him about acquiring his option.

Mr. Allen stated that the new hotel/convention center on the east side of Sandwich is moving along. The project is three-stories tall and includes 60 rooms and a hall with a 300-person capacity. He stated that the City’s economic development coordinator is marketing the outlots associated with this project. Mr. Allen stated that, now that the City’s new sanitary sewage plant is finished, the city needs to look at running lines to the west. Finally, he said the City is being approached by two or three developers a week, but that Sandwich is not interested in more houses right now, but rather wants commercial and industrial development.

Mr. Steimel said that, as the new representative from the County, he is in a listening mode right now. He informed the RPC that Bob Pritchard, who formerly represented the County on the Commission, is quite busy down in Springfield in his capacity as State Representative. He also stated that the amount of growth he is hearing about is eye-opening.

Mr. Altmaier stated that there are no new development projects in Kingston, but that an old, abandoned warehouse had been demolished, which improves the look of the downtown. The hope is that the site will be developed with commercial uses. There is also a possible annexation of 30 - 35 acres to the Village.

Ms. Morphey indicated that, in Somonauk, they are finishing up the utility plan. The Prairie View Subdivision is progressing, and the developer has already sold 30 - 34 lots. Three developers are looking at one of the nearby farms and the Village is hoping to put a road through that farm as a by-pass. Finally, Somonauk may get a new clothing store and two new pizza restaurants.

Mr. Luker stated that Hinckley is scheduled for improvements on Rte. 30 in 2005. As for residential development, and new proposal has been submitted for a 66-acre parcel on the north side of the Village, and another 100-unit subdivision is going through Final Plat stage.

Mr. Gentile informed the RPC that 84 Lumber wants to build a truss plant in the City. Also, they are getting close to closing a deal for a Brown’s Country Market grocery store. A seven-acre commercial property has been approved on the east side of town, and the City is getting some in-fill development in the form of restaurants that want to come in.

Ms. Aldis stated that most of the new street lights are now operating in Cortland along Somonauk Road. The next road projects will be at Rte. 38 and Somonauk, and Rte. 38 and Loves Road. The Town’s planner indicated that Cortland potentially has 3,600 housing units in various planning stages. Some of these projects have been annexed, some are just in the talking stage. Cortland will be turning to Mr. Nicklas to tell the Town about subdivision build-out schedules to help manage this growth. The Town still has not settled its sanitary sewage plant issues related to contiguity, build-out and irrigation. Ms. Aldis stated that Cortland wants to have the growth plan in place before the sewer plan is finished in order to help control the growth. Mr. Rasmussen interjected that growth may be slowed due to the fact that construction materials, steel and lumber, have risen in costs by 50%. Ms. Aldis noted that the pressure for growth is still high, citing a house in Kirkland that sold for $300,000.

Mr. Thompson indicated that Malta is progressing with its two large residential projects that are being done by Eagle Homes. Prairie Springs has completed its detention pond and the grading for roads, and recently approached the Village Board for approval to construct six model homes. The public hearing for the other project, Settlers Landing, is scheduled for April 8, 2004, and that project is going well. He passed along that the Village Clerk has said three or four developers have made inquiries at the Village in the past three months, and that an abutting farm owner is being asked by developers to sell.

Mr. Nicklas stated that there is a new owner of the former K-Mart site in Sycamore, but that he paid a high price for the property and so may not be in a rush to make improvements and seek a new user. He opined that Sycamore has the roof-tops now and so is getting more interest from commercial developers. He also said that the number of new houses is causing some anxiety over the management of growth. He will be interested to see what will come of the recent non-binding referendum calling for growth to be halted, especially given that certain industrial and commercial developers have indicated that, if the City says "no" to more residences, it will be like saying "no" to new commercial and industrial too. Ms. Aldis inquired as to how one educates the public that stopping new housing does not mean that taxes won’t go up? Mr. Nicklas answered that you try to reach out to the public, get them to be aware of public meetings and to participate. Finally, Mr. Nicklas indicated that he is close to completing the draft of Sycamore’s new UDO, based on the format of the model UDO but with a lot of cutting and pasting. Mr. Miller interjected that he too is close to being done with the County’s revisions to its Zoning Ordinance, but that his approach was to stick with the County’s format and cut and paste useful parts of the model UDO. He suggested that he and Mr. Nicklas could make the two versions available to the RPC and perhaps make a presentation on what they learned in the process.

7. Illinois APA 2003 Award Nomination -- Mr. Miller explained that he has nominated the DeKalb County Unified Comprehensive Plan for an award through the Illinois Chapter of the American Planning Association. He stated that the inter-governmental cooperation that resulted in the plan is unique in Illinois, and that he felt the Plan had a good chance of winning and award. He explained that certain planning professionals from other jurisdictions outside of the DeKalb, upon hearing about the Unified Comprehensive Plan, have stated that the project is "amazing." Mr. Miller opined that the project may even be worthy of attention on a national level. He said he would keep the Commission informed of the outcome of the nomination.

Commission’s November Meeting Date -- Mr. Miller explained that the regular, bi-monthly schedule of meetings would have the RPC meet on November 25, 2004, Thanksgiving Day. Following discussion, it was agreed that the Commission would meet on October 28, 2004, as the last meeting of the year.

9. Adjournment – The next meeting of the Regional Planning Commission will be on May 27, 2004. Mr. Altmaier, noting the two-month separation between meetings, asked if the draft minutes could be distributed to the RPC for review within a couple of weeks, rather than waiting until one week before the next meeting. Mr. Miller agreed that this could be done. Mr. Thompson moved to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Bellah, and the motion carried unanimously.