Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2017 01 11 Advisory Task Force agenda packet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('7DVN)RUFH0LQXWHV 2 Advisory Task Force on Economic Development Meeting Minutes October 12, 2016 Village Hall, 24401 W. Lockport Street Attendees: Steve Preze, Greg Schaefer, Brian Davis, and Trustee O’Rourke. Staff: Jon Proulx and Jake Melrose. The meeting was called to order at 7:35a.m. by Chairman Greg Schaefer. Harold Oliver, Michael Konrad, Cassie Vaughn, and Troy Strange were absent. Public Comments: None. Business Meeting Motion was made by Steve Preze, second by Brian Davis, to approve the minutes of the July 13, 2016 Meeting. Motion passed 3-0. Jake Melrose introduced the first item of business of the business retention interviews describing the interviews that staff and the advisory task force attended with local employers: Logoplaste, Aerotek, and Entec Polymers. Each employer all showed great growth and possibility for expansions, as well as a desire to stay in the Village. Small business surveying was also discussed in relation to business retention. Jake Melrose provided the task force with a draft of a potential online survey that would be utilized to gain anonymous, pertinent information about the business community as well as how the Village can do better with its services. The task force provided some suggestions for structure and language, but otherwise was supportive of the survey efforts. The next item of business, Incentive Policy, was introduced by Jake Melrose and provided a brief summary of the staff report. A discussion ensued regarding a need to update the current incentive policy. 3 Steve Preze suggested that the incentive policy have a broader scope to ensure that the Village is not restricted to its own policy if a meaningful development is presented but didn’t meet the specific criteria. Chairman Greg Schaefer concurred with Mr. Preze that the incentive policy may be too restrictive and is in need of updating. All in attendance were in favor of amending the policy. Staff will present a new policy at the next task force meeting for their review. The next agenda item, Small Business Saturday, was presented by Jake Melrose stating that Small Business Saturday was an established day on the Saturday after Christmas between Black Friday and Cyber Monday to highlight and promote the small businesses of a community for a day. Staff is currently working with local businesses and the chamber of commerce to promote the initiative. Jake Melrose presented the 2017 Advisory Task Force on Economic Development meeting schedule which will be held on the second Wednesday and quarterly beginning on January 11, 2017. Staff asked if this was still acceptable or if they would like to meet more. Chairman Schaefer stated that the quarterly meeting would still be acceptable and we could meet on an ad hoc basis if warranted. Motion was made by Brian Davis to approve the 2017 schedule for the task force. Steve Preze seconded. Motion passed 3-0. The next agenda item, Showcase Networking Event Recap, was presented by Jake Melrose providing a brief report on the event in September. It was moderately attended and there was competition from Naperville for a similar event on the same day. That said, it was still attended by Naperville brokers. Some feedback was provided in regards to what can be done for 2017. Trustee O’Rourke stated that another community provided a bus trip to its local stakeholders and developers to bring them around to specific areas of interest. Other communities have also done golf outings to gain interest. Staff will look to explore options for a 2017 event. Jon Proulx and Jake Melrose provided a development update to the task force. The following projects are looking to move forward in the coming months: x Wash U Car Wash @ Prairie Creek x Kayak service at Electric Park West x New Circle K gas station x Trolley Barn potential leasing x Development interest of targeted project areas x Cold calling and marketing activities to specific end users As there were no other comments or business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:15am. 4 $GYLVRU\7DVN)RUFHRQ(FRQRPLF 'HYHORSPHQW$JHQGD,WHP5HSRUW $JHQGD,WHP1R 6XEPLWWHGE\-DNH0HOURVH 6XEPLWWLQJ'HSDUWPHQW3ODQQLQJ'HSDUWPHQW 0HHWLQJ'DWH-DQXDU\ 68%-(&7 ,1&(17,9(32/,&< 5HFRPPHQGDWLRQ $77$&+0(176 ('7),QFHQWLYH0HPR 5 OCTOBER 12, 2016 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TASK FORCE VILLAGE OF PLAINFIELD 24401 W. LOCKPORT ST. 2nd FLOOR, CONFERENCE ROOM A SUBJECT: COMMERCIAL INCENTIVE POLICY SUMMARY October 12 2016, the EDTF reviewed the existing incentive policy and possible amendments or changes. It was recommended that staff amend the incentive policy excluding the specific criteria of a particular development and present the guidelines in a more expansive manner. Below is staff’s attempt at creating a more inclusive policy as recommended by the task force. INCENTIVE POLICY The incentive policy previously established provided detailed and specific criteria that in the newer retail market of downsizing footprints may be too restrictive and not conducive to a project that could provide benefits to the Village and a targeted development area. Instead, the proposed incentive policy will be more fluid to allow for the policy to flex with the ever-changing commercial and industrial landscape. The below incentive policy is based off of the review of an economic gap analysis, or “but for” review of a proposed project. Through this, the Village can determine the benefits of the project on a broader, more qualitative scale while calculating the necessary improvements that are needed for the project to move it forward along with the quantitative intangibles of the project. This will allow the Village to utilize incentives for business attraction and/or offsetting development costs that would prohibit the construction of the project but for the incentives provided. 1. Guidelines A. The Village may approve incentive requests that include grants, local sales tax revenue sharing, fee waivers, infrastructure improvements, and property tax rebates. B. The subject project would not move forward at the location “but for”or without the proposed incentive. 6 C. A proforma or financial station of information must be presented indicating the reason for the incentive, i.e. capital gap analysis, lack of profitability. D. The project must comply with all design guidelines and the comprehensive plan. E. The Village will not consider any requests for the waiver of the following fees or charges: recapture fees, utility fees, fees from other taxing districts, or Village consultant review/pass through fees. F. Incentives for adult uses, home occupations, and financial institutions are not allowed. G. The Village will review all proposals on a case by case basis and in no event will prior economic inventive agreements or policies dictate the content of subsequent agreements. H. The terms and conditions of the incentive shall be incorporated into an agreement approved by the Village Board of Trustees. An agreement must be approved prior to the construction of any improvement that is receiving financial assistance. I. Target market areas as so established in this plan will be given priority for incentives. J. Infrastructure improvements that enhance the project and the subject area will be reviewed with more favor as a justification for an incentive agreement. 2. Submittal Requirements All applicants must fill out an incentive application submitted to the Planning Department with the following applicable information: A.Documentation indicating the requests meets the evaluation criteria of this policy. B.Amount of applicant’s investment in the project and project revenues. C.Level and type of incentive requested. D.Business Plan including projected expenses and revenues and detailed development pro forma. E.Plans and drawings showing the proposed project. F. The Village may require additional information and documentation if deemed necessary including financial statements.7 3. Evaluation Criteria The submittal will be reviewed based upon the following criteria. It should be noted that a project may not meet all criteria or perform at a high-level in each field, and that each criteria holds its own qualitative weight on a case-by-case basis. A.Level of benefit to the Village and other taxing bodies. (taxes, infrastructure, etc.) B.Level of circumstances with the property or building characteristics that create challenges or impediments to the development/redevelopment of the project area. C.Number and quality of jobs produced. D.The applicant’s ability to identify the necessity for financial assistance and the “but for”. E.The project’s ability to spur additional economic development within the Village and adjacent project area. F. Level of applicant’s ability to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed project based upon past experience, general reputation, creditworthiness and financial strength. G.Conformity with Village codes, guidelines, and planning documents. TARGET MARKET AREAS These areas will be defined in the economic development strategy plan. Key market areas will also be identified in the plan that will include the historic downtown area, IL Route 59 south corridor, and other areas that are either in more demand than other areas or are not in much demand at all. Again, due to the nature of this policy, these key market areas are not excluded from incentives, but rather priority is simply given to the below. - NEC 119 th Street & IL Route 59 - Prairie Creek Development - Village Center/Downtown Extended - The Boulevard (NWC I55 & US 30) RECOMMENDATION Staff seeks a recommendation from the E.D. Task Force in regards to the proposed amendment to the incentive policy.8 $GYLVRU\7DVN)RUFHRQ(FRQRPLF 'HYHORSPHQW$JHQGD,WHP5HSRUW $JHQGD,WHP1R 6XEPLWWHGE\-DNH0HOURVH 6XEPLWWLQJ'HSDUWPHQW3ODQQLQJ'HSDUWPHQW 0HHWLQJ'DWH-DQXDU\ 68%-(&7 %86,1(665(7(17,21,17(59,(:6 6859(<,1* 5HFRPPHQGDWLRQ $77$&+0(176  9 $GYLVRU\7DVN)RUFHRQ(FRQRPLF 'HYHORSPHQW$JHQGD,WHP5HSRUW $JHQGD,WHP1R 6XEPLWWHGE\-DNH0HOURVH 6XEPLWWLQJ'HSDUWPHQW3ODQQLQJ'HSDUWPHQW 0HHWLQJ'DWH-DQXDU\ 68%-(&7 60$//%86,1(666$785'$< 5HFRPPHQGDWLRQ $77$&+0(176  10 $GYLVRU\7DVN)RUFHRQ(FRQRPLF 'HYHORSPHQW$JHQGD,WHP5HSRUW $JHQGD,WHP1R 6XEPLWWHGE\-DNH0HOURVH 6XEPLWWLQJ'HSDUWPHQW3ODQQLQJ'HSDUWPHQW 0HHWLQJ'DWH-DQXDU\ 68%-(&7 '(9(/230(1783'$7( 5HFRPPHQGDWLRQ $77$&+0(176  11