Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Redevelopment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers present two plans for former Pheasant Run; $3.3M TIF request disclosed
Summary
Developers for the Shops at Pheasant Run presented two mixed‑use concept plans for the 34‑acre site and disclosed a Part 2 TIF assistance request of $3,300,000 to help cover extraordinary remediation and infrastructure costs. Council expressed broad support for redevelopment but raised concerns about drive‑thru concentration and incentives for routine uses; no action was taken.
Developers seeking to redevelop the remaining 34 acres of the former Pheasant Run resort presented two concept site plans and told the Planning and Development Committee they will seek a planned unit development (PUD) to allow site flexibility and certain zoning deviations.
The applicant, represented by attorney Peter Necastro of DLA Piper, said the two concept plans differ primarily in how the eastern parcels would be used: Option 1 shows a single lot car dealership; Option 2 shows a gas station and convenience store plus one additional use. “The project will create a regional asset offering shopping, dining and recreation amenities, anchoring the Route 64 commercial corridor,” Necastro said during the presentation.
Why it matters: the site is within the Pheasant Run TIF district and the applicant has submitted a Part 2 TIF application. Derek (staff) told the committee that “the amount is $3,300,000 that they’re requesting,” a sum the developer said is targeted at TIF‑eligible horizontal costs such as environmental remediation, demolition and infrastructure upgrades.
Developers and their consultants described the site as unanchored retail with 12–15 lots depending on the end users and emphasized the need for leasing flexibility. Equity Development representatives said they have several commitments for parcels but need PUD relief to market remaining pads. Ivan Okoff (Equity) told the committee that major cost drivers include electrical distribution upgrades, demolition of tank infrastructure and substantial earthwork; he said horizontal infrastructure alone is estimated at about $16,000,000 and that the projected total spend on the development (excluding the dealership) could be roughly $58,000,000.
Committee concerns: multiple alderpersons said they support redeveloping what has been an eyesore but urged limits on subsidizing ordinary commercial uses. Members repeatedly raised traffic and design concerns and questioned whether the site should include many drive‑thru restaurants, car washes or additional banks. Committee members favored elements that would make the site a distinctive gateway to Saint Charles — more pedestrian amenities, public art and design consistency — and suggested prioritizing public‑benefit expenditures from any TIF award for remediation and infrastructure rather than tenant build‑outs.
Applicant response: Spaceco’s Brett Duffy described planned backbone infrastructure (access drives, sidewalks, and perimeter landscaping) and said traffic and pedestrian connections would be coordinated with IDOT and neighboring developments. The development team said drive‑thru allowances are being requested to preserve leasing flexibility and that some high‑volume drive‑thru users help make deals financially viable, which can, in turn, subsidize extraordinary cleanup and utility costs.
Next steps: this was a concept‑level review; developers said they will refine plans to reflect Plan Commission comments and would return with formal PUD, subdivision and site‑plan applications as end users are identified. The committee took no action on the concept plan.
