No more flag lots

Council voted unanimously tonight to amend the muni code so as to ban further flag lots in Downers Grove. Commissioner Tully said he was looking forward to this day for seven years, and he had much to do with shepherding the ban through to approval.

Pierce Downer’s Heritage Alliance came out early in support of this ban, citing four main reasons, which we wrote up and sent in to the Village Manager for inclusion in the public record.

My comments tonight are as a director of the Pierce Downer’s Heritage Alliance. We have written a letter, agreed to unanimously by the board, to support the ordinance before you tonight banning flag lots from Downers Grove. It’s nice for us all, residents and government to be together on the right side of this issue at hand here tonight.

The stated purpose of flag lots in our current code – to provide best use for irregularly shaped lots – is no longer applicable. The historical use of flag lots – to provide rural areas with development opportunities – no longer applies here either.

By eliminating flag lots the village will realize several benefits:

• Trees will be preserved that would have fallen from construction. This inadvertent but welcome presage of a private tree ordinance would prevent unwarranted clear cutting of property for what council clearly acknowledges is unwarranted development. As supporters of our nature areas and for supporting education about our surrounding nature, such as the Little Sprouts Park District program for 1^st graders we help fund each year, PDHA are pleased by this tree preservation.
• Stormwater problems will not be aggravated in the neighborhood by removing said trees, and also by making a large percentage of the former backyard impermeable, as well as paving an impermeable driveway of considerable size. “Do no further harm” should be a watch phrase of future development, and this is a strong clear first step to codify that simple yet laudable goal.
• Property values will be enhanced rather than reduced, as the neighborhood character is protected rather than compromised. Deep lots with private back yards have a proven extra value. A large backyard area also adds desirable character to a neighborhood. Having a house next door or two doors down in the neighborhood’s backyard area reduces privacy, reduces value of the neighbors’ property and the EAV of the entire block, and negatively impacts the character of the neighborhood.
• As Commissioner Neustadt has already ably pointed out, the safety of the particular flag house, neighbors houses, and the neighborhood are compromised with unwarranted flag lot development.

Pierce Downer’s Heritage Alliance has provided a letter to the Village Manager which, while it need not be read here now, we would request be placed in the public minutes, as written, to show our unanimous support for what staff is recommending, for the language of the ordinance amendments as presented before council for your consideration and, hopefully, for council’s passage tonight.

On behalf of the Pierce Downer’s Heritage Alliance, I thank you for your time, consideration, and hopefully for your approval of this ordinance tonight.

So that was a win situation for both residents and government. A hat tip to staff for being responsible to the public trust.

Heritage Tree Ordinance Part 3

Some residents say we do not need any ordinance, that there is no problem with clear cutting property. Even lawyers suddenly do not remember definitions of words like unwarranted when facing the complexity of a simple ordinance.

I would ask this: Do you live next to a clear cut lot that was built out and now, as a direct result, have water problems? I have talked directly to residents who do now have water problems, and they do live next to, or near, property that has been clear cut and built out. It is not a coincidence: it is a direct connection.

Since it did not happen to me, there is no problem, and no need for a solution, is a novel, but not new, way to look at things.

Trees are irrefutably linked to reduction of flooding. To think otherwise is to deny the suns' rise in the east. The village is asking taxpayers to shell out $340 million to fix all the past water flooding problems caused by innocent ignorance and willful irresponsibility. To then not try and minimize future problems in even the smallest way is fiscally and socially irresponsible.

Heritage Tree Ordinance Part 2

"Go away. We're busy."

The Village Manager and staff have decided the “Heritage Tree Ordinance” (HTO) is not going to happen right now. Unless someone on council takes exception to it, it will be left on the back burner. That is too bad. We need a responsible, moderate, heritage tree ordinance now, so we can measure and adjust it if needed in the future.

First and foremost, this is not a case of the Village barging in and stealing property rights. Why? Because we do not have a problem with tree removals outside of construction. We should not fix what is not broken. This is not a property rights issue. Residents consistently rank protecting and maintaining trees and tree canopies as a top concern.

A decently written conservative HTO for private property should only affect trees on private property in four situations:
1) If a demolition permit is requested;
2) If a major addition is undertaken;
3) If a new subdivision is planned (not likely anymore); and
4) As part of the Planned Unit Development process.

Trees have a very real fiscal and environmental function and impact. Trees affect air quality, reduce the urban heat island effect, reduce energy demands, assist with stormwater management, benefit public health (emotional and physical), and have a positive economic impact on property values in a community.

Trees make money.

Trees are good business. Very large trees are very good business. Large trees increase property values. Ask any realtor: all other things being equal, which sells for more; house with big trees, or house with no trees? It is not a coincidence that many realtor initiated redevelopment projects save trees where they can. Big trees add a sense of permanence and quality to any home. A McMansion set in big trees looks less like a McMansion.

Maybe a realtor can add a comment on that, but one of the reasons we have higher property values is the tree canopy.

Trees save us from ourselves.

6CO2+5H2O = C6H10O5 + 6O2
Read Part 1 for more. The conversion of carbon dioxide to oxygen is extremely efficient. Plugging the numbers into the equation, 600 gallons of water that a big tree can absorb in one day, about 2 ½ tons, combines with about 7 ½ tons of carbon dioxide and gives off about 5 ½ tons of oxygen, transpires a variable amount of water as water vapor (why it is cooler under the tree) and adds a ton or so to the weight of the tree above and below ground. Did I mention trees are huge carbon sinks?

Quit stalling.

Staff does not feel staff is up to this right now. Come back in six months. That's stalling. Nothing will have changed in 6 months. The village will be neck deep in construction, up to their eyeballs in anothger excuse to do nothing. This relates directly to our poor current building and construction codes. I would urge the council to direct staff to do a bit of multitasking, and come up with a modest proposal that covers the four points outlined above. It would require only minor modification of the original proposal written over three years ago. Staff does not have to reinvent a totally new ordinance. They have even done the homework of looking at the key features of more than a dozen other cities and villages that already have this type of ordinance. We do not need a grand slam home run, we just need to get on base.

We do not need perfect that covers every contingency, we need a solid ordinance that gives us a starting point, that gives the village a mechanism to preserve trees that should be preserved, that clearly lays out expectations of builders, that protects trees that have been around for far longer than we have, and have every right to be around far longer than we will.

Interview With Mayor Sandack

Note: This started as an offshoot of discussions and postings here and at DGreport.com. I specifically would like to thank everyone who participated with questions, whether I used them or not.

We all can have different opinions, but in the end we all have something akin to affection for the village we live in: that is why we care, and that is why we share common ground.

Mayor Sandack, thank you for participating in this on-line interview, and let’s jump right in.

What do you see as the top three agenda items for 2008 now that stormwater is being addressed?

Storm-water implementation; other important capital projects like roads, sidewalks and water-lines; Village budget; and the Belmont Underpass (yes, I know that’s four).

What’s been the toughest campaign promise to follow up on?

The revised ethics ordinance was fairly challenging as there was some spirited debate. But that’s a good thing—high-minded policy discussion is what our Village deserves on important matters.

Is your leadership style more like:

Seahawks QB Matt Hasselbeck, or Captain Jean luc Picard?

Why would anyone suggest these two?

What is your early take on the PACE circulator plan?

Conceptually it is interesting. But from a financial perspective I believe it may well be impossible to implement without being cost prohibitive. I am not jumping to any conclusions and will wait for all of the information. Admittedly, I am skeptical it is doable as conceived.

What’s your favorite beer at Emmitt’s?

1 a.m., and the other ale (can’t remember its name).

Do the people you work with ever razz you about being a mayor?

Sure. That’s natural, isn’t it?

Will we ever see a Belmont underpass?

I believe so and am working feverishly on it. See the article I wrote for The Grover if you want a thumbnail sketch of the history and present status.

Thank you, Mayor, that ends our interview…and now,

The Lightening Round! 20 Questions!!!

1. Ready?

No. But have at it.

Correct.

2. Mayor of Woodridge?

Mayor William F. Murphy.

Correct.

3. What item was purchased for fire and police vehicles in 2006, but that the village hopes never get used?

AED’s Automated Electronic Defribulators. If they get used that means it’s a life and death situation. They been used successfully and they are affectionately called the “George Board” after my friend, George Nicholaou.

Correct.

4. Population of Downers Grove?

50,616 give or take.

Correct.

5. Airspeed of a fully laden swallow?

African or European?

Correct.

6. Who said “The great thing in this world is not so much where you stand, as in what direction you are moving.”?

Oliver Wendell Holmes

Correct.

7. What kind of car do you really want?

An American well-used one. My wife rides in luxury, not me.

Incorrect. You want a used Yugo with racing stripes.

Wait, no I don’t…

8. Think you will ever grow your beard back?

That depends. My wife prefers that I don’t so it may not re-appear.

Correct.

9. Mayor of Lombard?

William J. Mueller.

Incorrect, Lombard does not have a Mayor, they have a Village President.

That’s a trick question.

Correct.

10. Sox or Cubs?

People who know me well know the answer. Pass.

Correct.

11. When was the last time you saw a liar with his pants on fire?

Never?

Correct.

12. Is U of I the best school ever or what?

Yes.

Incorrect. School of Rock is the answer I was looking for.

13. If you were Matt Hasselbeck, and council was your offensive line, how many times would you get sacked by the NY Giants?

Many times.

Correct.

14. What is it about Chad Walz?

Chad, who?

Correct.

15. How many TIF Districts in Downers Grove?

Two.

16. How many alternate fuels does DG use in their fleet?

Four

17. How many eggs in a half dozen?

Six

18. What number comes after 7?

Eight

19. Who do we appreciate?

Quite a few, my family, friends, our village…

Correct.

20. Will you accept this certificate of good sportsmanship for the first ever DGreport official officials interview?

Can’t. That would violate our ethics policy. Thanks anyway.

Correct.

17 out of 20 correct with one bonus correct question. That sets a very high bar for the next official interview. Your pick: who would you like to see next?

Is it okay if I get back to you on that?

Silver Lining to Economic Trouble

Interest rates are ratcheting down as the Fed tries to avoid a total economy meltdown.

That's good news for us here in DG as staff and council wind their way along the stormwater issue. Bids will go out for a financial consultant to shepherd bringing $25 million in bond debt onto the books for stormwater projects.

Interest rates, and bond rates, are at significant lows. Serendipity works, and the luck of timing will save the village millions in interest payments. This is also a great time to take a look at any other bond issues we have out there, with an eye towards lowering the rate and the amount of interest paid.

Good news for DG in the midst of bad news on the economy.

Hit’s, Misses, and a Great Idea

Hits

Applying for FEMA grant money.

On two 2008 storm water related projects the village is an applicant for FEMA grant money, to the tune of a couple million bucks. There’s also the opportunity to be a sub-applicant to the state for more of the same FEMA money. FEMA has nation-wide funds of about $25 million annually for precisely this type of work, and the state gets a minimum $500,000 extra to dole out as it sees fit. Starting during Mayor Krajewski’s term, our village government got pretty good at writing for grant requests and filling applications (way, WAY harder than it sounds).

Last year all of the federal money was granted, but like I said, our village staff is pretty good at putting together a grant request, plus we have the detailed engineering study and can produce proper plans documenting what’s to be done. FEMA likes that.

In 2007, the state awarded only a bit over $100K of the $500K available. That left almost $400K unused. We could use that each year easy. I emailed VM Pavlicek and asked if we are applying both as an applicant (for federal money) and as a sub-applicant (for state funds), and Megan is supposed to get back to me.

Home Rule Sales Tax (HRST) Hike

Tuesday council approved raising our HRST based take from ½ cent to ¾ cent. Technically, they’re raising it 50%. It does have a sunset clause and “become null and void at the end of the debt service issued for stormwater related improvements.”

Each ¼ cent of Home Rules Sales Tax currently generates $2,300,000.

Misses

Non specific Tele-Tax hike.

They also approved a 1% hike in the telecommunications tax, from 5% to 6%, a 20% raise in the rate.

The proposed increase will take effect on July 1, 2008. Revenue generated by this increase in FY08 is estimated to be $410,000, which will be used to fund expenditures in the Capital Projects Fund. The full year revenue generated by this tax increase for FY09 is estimated to be $820,000.

There is no sunset clause for this tax hike, because it fuels the Capital Projects Fund. The money can be spent on whatever the village says, whether it be sewers or streets...or a new Fleet Services building, a new Police Station, or a new Civic Center.

A Great Idea

Linda Kunze reads minds.

Staff has been working on this one off-radar, but it’s a great idea and deserves to see the light of day.

I’ve been talking about a single downtown waste hauler since the last election; then we can do recycling downtown, cut down on garbage truck traffic, and we could make our alleys and business rear areas look a lot better. The village could also place recycling cans around downtown; permanent ones instead of the temporary ones we see at downtown events.

Talk about a topic no one wanted to hear.

Linda Kunze, Downtown Manager of the Downers Grove Downtown Management Corporation, thinks it’s a great idea, is in a position to do something about it, and is pushing forward. The village has committed to build a total of three common dumpster areas around downtown, to centralize and clean up collection areas, making it very easy for downtown commercial businesses to recycle just like we do at our curbs every week.

This means tons of paper, cans glass, all going to recycling instead of to landfills, and we get cleaner looking alleyways. That opens the possibility for further development. Check Naperville’s downtown: there are a couple areas where there are backyard restaurant patios, and rear-facing clusters of shops on former alleys. I’m not saying that’s what will happen, I’m saying those types of things become possible.

The first centralized collection area goes in this spring, the two additional units the following year. Downtown Downers Grove will get the businesses invested in the concept and use. Council can help move things along by making it clear they support this, and expect businesses to get on board.

This is just one example of recycling bins. Here's another where local artists design and build recycling receptacles out of recycled materials. The possibilities are many.

Bravo, Ms. Kunze.

So when do we say "That’s enough"?

Like most guys, I subscribe to the hypothesis that when a project is 80% done, it’s done. From then on, it’s just clean up. Employing the rule of 80/20 to the stormwater issue, we should be able to get to that 80% finished plateau for about $68 million. The last 20%, the clean up, will cost the remaining $272 million.

So I guess my question is this:

Do we really want it all done? Do we really want every possible problem, no matter how small or how expensive it may be, to be completely addressed? Maybe there is just some areas of town, like 40^th and Glendenning, that need to be open unbuildable land forever, regardless of how much developers want to build. Maybe these are areas where public condemnation needs to occur for the better good. I can think of a couple homes that should be bought by the village and torn down, and the lots left empty.

I know: Mark, getting cold feet? No stomach for the tough decisions?

There’s plenty of cheap shots to be taken on this one, but I won’t be taking them on anyone thinking maybe $340 million is a little pricey. Maybe, like our other taxing bodies have found along the way, there’s a plan B that needs to be examined before we jump headlong into a 30 year commitment that may end up with at least $300 million in additional interest costs.

I'm in for the 80% done at 20% cost. If only that worked in real life, eh?

Watershed Improvement Plan 2007 - Adopted.

The full report is in 15 parts.