DeKalb Times

City of Sycamore Growth Management Ad Hoc Committee met Oct. 30.

Here is the minutes provided by the committee:

ROLL CALL

Mayor Curt Lang called the meeting to order at 5:00 pm. Those members present were City Manager Brian Gregory, City Council Representative Alan Bauer, School Board Representative Jim Dombek, Government Affairs Director Alex Finke, Park Board Representative Ted Strack, Public Library Director Monica Dombrowski, Planning & Zoning Commissioner Bill Davey, Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Rose Treml, Sycamore Economic Development Commissioner Chad Jewett, DeKalb County Economic Development Corporation Representative Dave Juday, and DeKalb County Building & Development Association Representative Russ Smith,

Approval of Agenda

Motion

Alex Finke moved to approve the agenda and Rose Treml seconded the motion.

Voice Vote

Mayor Lang called for a voice vote to approve the agenda and all members present voted aye.

Approval of Minutes of August 7, 2019

Motion

Ted Strack moved to approve the minutes of August 7, 2019 and Alex Finke seconded the motion. 

Voice Vote

Mayor Lang called for a voice vote to approve the agenda and all members present voted aye.

Public Comment - None New Business

A. Review of Land Values and Resulting Fee Adjustments

City Manager Brian Gregory recapped the last meeting and how the committee was comfortable with a single appraisal and that all members expressed unanimous support in favor of using Jeff Jacobson of Jacobson and Associates. Jeff Jacobson, the principal, provided the appraisal and it suggests that an acre of improved land in Sycamore, as of December 31, 2018, is $92,000. Based on land values of $83,500 per improved acre on December 31, 2012 (15%), $98,000 on December 31, 2015 (35%), and $92,000 on December 31, 2018 (50%), the value of an acre of improved land using the agreed formula is $92,825. This represents a decline of 6.59% from the number established three years ago at $99,375. Ultimately, what will happen, is after the committee discusses this, the respective taxing bodies would go back and enter this number into their formula and present those formulas and fee calculations at the next meeting. We would ask the Ad Hoc Committee to make a recommendation to the City Council. These land cash ordinances allow the School District and Park District to take land for either future school or park site in lieu of cash or a cash contribution that’s laid out in the formula which is paid per household as each one comes for permitting. The City Council would be responsible for enacting or amending the ordinance that currently is on the books.

Ted Strack said to clarify for the Park District that in the past, they had a second appraisal for flood plain acres. His thought is that they could apply the same reduction to that appraisal as the improved acre. The number would go down by the same amount.

Brian Gregory said they will talk more about it as they move through it, but said as the second item on the agenda, the Park District requested that the definition of land be clarified to essentially say that they are not interested in taking the flood plain land or any land use for detention or retention. Therefore, the improved land, based on what Ted provided, is the only thing the Park District would be interested to take. The unimproved acre wouldn’t come into play if this definition is changed.

Ted Strack said to clarify, they believe that 50% of the park land acres are in the flood plain and about 50% out of the flood plain. When they valued their land, they put 50% of the value based on this kind of a number and 50% based on an appraised value for flood plain acres. His suggestion is to reduce the valuation by the same percentage instead of getting a second appraisal. The other issue is that they are just trying to clarify what a desirable acre of land is versus undesirable. It doesn’t mean that the Park District wouldn’t take an undesirable acre. They are just trying to make people aware that they can’t do anything with a flood plain acre but have grass on it. They want an acre of land they can put a diamond or building on or improve. He is just saying what is desirable and what is undesirable.

City Manager Brian Gregory said it looks at trying to maintain the ratio per the current population as to if there is this many acres out of the flood plain and this many in the flood plain. They would take that same ration and lower the number which should work in that regard.

Bill Davey asked why they would have to value flood plains if the Park District doesn’t want flood plain land.

Ted Strack said to be fair to all parties, citizens, builders, and taxpayers, is that there is a certain ratio that exists of existing park land. The purpose, in his eyes, of an impact fee, is if the population increases 10% then in theory, the park lands should increase by 10%. That 10% should be in a similar ratio as to what exists today at 50% flood plain and 50% non-flood plain otherwise it’s overburdening a developer by saying it has to be all non-flood plain acres.

Brian Gregory said they would like to eventually move that ratio slightly more toward something that has improvable options. If that was the only way they went about looking forward and they didn’t at least factor in the ratio that it is today, we would be taking that burden and putting it all on future development.

Ted Strack said that is an accurate summary.

Bill Davey said he is unclear because he thought Ted wanted to change the definition of land preclude flood plain.

Ted Strack says undesirable acres doesn’t mean the Park District wouldn’t take them. The definition is just saying they would rather not. This is a land/cash ordinance so you can give land or give cash. Most of the time the developers will give the cash but sometimes they give land or both.

Bill Davey asked what the appraisal valued of the flood plain last time.

Ted Strack said probably 20-25% of this value.

Russ Smith said asked Ted if their formula has both of those land values in it.

Ted Strack said yes, he’s trying to make the point that if the improved acres are coming down 6.59%, then let’s just drop it the same percentage instead of getting an appraisal on the flood plain acres.

Russ Smith said that is fair and that he appreciates Ted bringing it up in fairness.

Bill Davey confirmed that the definition doesn’t preclude flood plains but just that it’s not desirable. Russ Smith asked Brian Gregory about the number of permits going down.

Brian Gregory said that there were 35 single family permits at the end of September and the last few years it has ended at 50 permits but anticipates we would see low to mid 40’s this year. He added that the unimproved land value from three years ago was $18,525 so we could reduce that by 6.59% and that would be what the park would use in that formula.

Bill Davey said that it is subjective so it depends on the park board’s desire at that time whether they take the flood plain land or not.

Ted Strack said absolutely and it depends 100% on who is on the park board whether they are willing to accept it.

Brian Gregory said they expect the impact fees to reduce based on the variable reducing and should be commensurate with the 6.59%. The goal would be to get these in place in the next four to six weeks so that they are effective January 1st. Ted Strack asked if Brian will send the revision to the taxing bodies so they can vote on it. Brian Gregory said yes and those taxing bodies can run the numbers and hopefully all concur.

Motion

Alan Bauer moved to accept the appraisal and to adjust the land value down 6.59% to a new total of $92,825 and Bill Davey seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

Mayor Lang called for a roll call vote and Curt Lang, Brian Gregory, Alan Bauer, Jim Dombek, Alex Finke, Ted Strack, Monica Dombrowski, Bill Davey, Rose Treml, Chad Jewett, Dave Juday, and Russ Smith voted aye. Motion carried 12-0.

B. Review of Definition of Land Related to the Park District Land Cash Ordinance

Brian Gregory said the Park is aiming at taking desirable land rather than those, as previously mentions, have liabilities that come with them.

Jim Dombek said the concept behind the definition of land is great and necessary. The problem he has is the way it is drafted changes the overall definition of land but gives the Park District the ability to have all this input on those decisions but it doesn’t apply to other districts that might be accepting land in lieu of cash. He doesn’t want the Park District to approve the School Districts decision to accept land in lieu of cash. There needs to be some general language, that the body that will be accepting the land in lieu of cash would have, for input on an approval.

Brian Gregory said they could accomplish that. It was brought forward as a formal introduction as Ted Strack brought this up at the last meeting. He said they haven’t talked with the Park District yet about this and there may be a few things from the City or Attorney standpoint. He said they try to work with the taxing bodies and wants to make sure they all know what they are getting, what it means, and that the City wants their input before they go forward on a project. He said that the Park and School Districts are represented on the Planning and Zoning Commission. In addition to all working together, he encouraged the taxing bodies to voice the needs and provide input, as things come up through the process.

Ted Strack said Park District would be fine with any type of adjustment like that as it makes sense.

Reports of Ad Hoc Committee Members - None 

Other Issues

Next meeting- In November TBD

Adjournment

Motion

Alex Finke moved to adjourn the meeting at 5:27 p.m. and Russ Smith seconded the motion.

Voice Vote

Mayor Lang called for a voice vote to approve the motion and all members present voted aye.

https://cityofsycamore.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/ahgrowth20191030m.pdf