Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Transfer Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Riverside board backs streamlined property-transfer process; staff to keep 'certificate of compliance' name
Summary
Planner Siren presented proposed changes to the village’s property-transfer process, commonly known as the certificate of compliance, and asked trustees whether to require inspections and additional pre-closing information.
Planner Siren presented proposed changes to the village’s property-transfer process, commonly known as the certificate of compliance, and asked trustees whether they prefer a streamlined approach or to require additional pre-closing inspections and zoning details.
The nut graf: staff recommended Option A — retain the established "certificate of compliance" name (to avoid changing procedures with the Cook County Clerk’s recording division) and streamline the process by removing required interior inspections unless staff needs to confirm a specific code violation. The village would still collect property-survey information and would provide additional zoning or landmark information to buyers after closing or upon request; trustees supported that recommendation.
Siren told the board that the process currently serves two primary purposes: ensuring village debts on the property are paid and collecting a property survey useful to both the village and buyers. Staff proposes inspecting properties only when necessary to confirm that a code violation has been resolved or when a buyer requests a zoning review that requires inspection. Siren said including zoning measurements (building coverage and impervious-surface coverage) on the certificate would require an inspection and more staff time; hence the three options presented to the board:
- Option A: Keep certificate name; provide required basic items only; make optional or post-closing distribution of additional property information (staff recommendation). - Option B: Add low-staff-time additional property information to the certificate given before closing. - Option C: Add both additional property information and zoning details on the certificate, which would require on-site inspections and more staff time.
Siren recommended Option A as the fastest and most predictable approach. Staff noted it can send detailed property information (landmark status, flood zone, special zoning allowances, nonconforming uses, lead service-line information) to buyers after closing or provide it before closing on request. Planner Siren and Village Manager Francis said keeping the existing certificate name avoids months of reworking procedures with the Cook County Clerk’s Recording Division, referencing the village’s prior six-month effort in 2016 to establish the current process.
After discussion—during which trustees asked about examples such as ADA accommodations recorded on title and how nonconforming driveways are handled—the board agreed to proceed with Option A and directed staff to prepare ordinances and procedures reflecting that approach. Staff will amend municipal-code sections that reference the certificate of compliance and later amend zoning-code language that requires Planning and Zoning Commission and Preservation Commission review.
Outcome: direction to staff to pursue the streamlined Option A, keep the "certificate of compliance" name to preserve the current Cook County recording workflow, offer additional property information post-closing or upon request, and prepare ordinance language for review.
