Trustees move against incentive for Gas and Wash after engineers find single water main and video‑gaming flag

Trustees on May 19 signaled they would not pursue an incentive agreement for the proposed Gas and Wash development after staff described two central concerns: the subject property is served by a single, non‑looped water main that also serves Asbury Gardens and must be upsized or looped, and the project includes uses—gasoline sales and on‑site video gaming—that village policy lists as disqualifying for incentives.

"The cost of the water main connection is roughly a $111,000," Staff member Steve said, describing engineering findings from WVK Engineering and village engineer Brandon Tonarelli. He explained that the existing single feed creates a redundancy risk: if that main is shut off for repairs, service to both the business and Asbury Gardens could be interrupted. Looping the system would add redundancy.

Staff presented the request conceptually; there was no formal incentive agreement on the table. Staff said potential incentive structures could include a TIF reimbursement for on‑site work or a sales‑tax reimbursement, and that Gas and Wash had indicated space for one or two restaurant vendors and at least one coffee vendor. However, Steve noted the village incentive policy excludes gas stations and businesses with video gaming from eligibility. "So we have two unqualified uses, a gas station and a video gaming establishment," Steve said, describing why the request falls into a gray area under current policy.

Several trustees opposed offering incentives. "I would not be in favor…I didn't vote to approve this development to begin with," a trustee said, citing location and the inclusion of video gaming as reasons to deny incentives. Others pointed out that the developer will have to complete the required upsizing or looping regardless of an incentive; engineering review can require pipe upsizing as a permit condition. Trustee Christiansen and others also emphasized the village's ongoing water‑system modeling to better assess capacity and future approvals.

Staff described potential next steps: proceed with engineering requirements for water service as part of permit review, and consider amending the incentive policy to impose minimum standards for when unqualified uses may petition the board. No formal motion to create an incentive agreement was approved; the board consensus was not to pursue the request as presented.

Ending: The Gas and Wash developer must address required water‑main upgrades to obtain permits; trustees indicated existing policy and the presence of disqualifying uses mean they are unlikely to authorize an incentive for this proposal.