Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission asks staff to draft new formula to increase developer community contribution fees
Summary
After a land-use consultant outlined a land-value-based fee formula for height and density bonuses, commissioners debated whether the new approach would be equitable or prohibitively expensive for major projects. The commission directed staff to return with a draft ordinance (or resolution) reflecting concerns.
A consultant's proposal to recalculate the village's community contribution fee using land value and bonus square footage rather than the current per-unit or per-10-foot formula prompted a robust debate at the Feb. 17 meeting.
Tony Rescio, the village's land-use consultant, explained the proposed method: convert bonus floor area or bonus units to a price per square foot based on land value, then multiply by the bonus square footage. Using publicly available appraisals and recent purchases as examples, Rescio showed how the same entitlement could yield a substantially larger fee under the new method. He told commissioners an example for one Pagani property produced a fee near $3.0 million under the land-value formula versus about $472,500 using the current, simpler formula.
Mayor Rachel Stryfeld framed the item as an attempt to recapture community value for public projects such as the village hall and public-safety complex: "We need to recoup more dollars to finish building or to start building our village hall and public safety complex," she said. Several commissioners said the proposal could be a useful starting point but asked staff to make the formula more equitable and workable for smaller or older properties.
Commissioner Cervoni warned the formula could be prohibitive to development, citing a $27 million number for another project under certain inputs, while Commissioner Trevone (label 14) said improving the village's negotiating position was an important goal. Commissioners asked staff to clarify how appraised value would be determined and whether recent purchase price, county appraisals or third-party appraisals would be used.
After discussion the mayor moved to direct staff to return with a draft ordinance adopting a community-contribution fee that addresses questions raised at the meeting; the motion was seconded and carried 3–2. Staff said they will return with a code‑amendment draft that includes a formula and provisions allowing negotiation through development agreements and public-benefit offsets.
Commissioners emphasized that any change should be applied prospectively, not retroactively to projects already approved under prior rules.
