Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees debate proposed PUD amendment that would let board modify impact fees
Summary
The Village Board held a first reading on an ordinance to amend the Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay that would give the board authority to modify certain fees for PUD projects. Trustees split on whether the change could lead to inappropriate fee waivers and urged more review.
The Village Board took up a first reading Monday of an ordinance (05272025‑A) that would amend the village’s Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay code to explicitly allow the Village Board to modify development‑impact and related fees for projects within a PUD.
Staff explained the amendment is intended to provide a mechanism to negotiate fee adjustments as part of PUD approvals — for example, to account for unique public‑benefit projects such as senior housing. But several trustees said they were uncomfortable giving a general ability to “waive” or change preset impact fees, arguing such fees fund infrastructure and should be collected unless the board adopts a specific policy change.
Trustee Anne (surname not specified in transcript) said she opposed broad waiver authority and warned the change would create recurring pressure to reduce fees. Another trustee noted prior examples in which the village negotiated developer concessions or used TIF funds to support infrastructure; other members argued flexibility is needed to secure certain key developments. The planning/architectural commission vote on the related item produced a tie and was reported to board members during the discussion.
At the close of the discussion the item was placed on the ordinance reading schedule; no final vote was taken. Staff said the amendment simply creates the option to modify fees — it does not mandate any waiver — and recommended the ordinance proceed through the regular reading and public comment process.
Why it matters: Impact and connection fees fund public infrastructure. The proposed change would create an explicit local negotiation path for developers seeking modifications as part of a negotiated PUD approval; trustees expressed sharply differing views about whether the language would open the door to frequent fee reductions or provide necessary negotiating flexibility for the village.
