1. Historic Preservation

This category includes the designation of historic districts and buildings, preservation efforts in both the neighborhoods and downtown areas, and the use of historic preservation ordinances. All three of the cities are older cities that developed independently of Chicago, and thus all have older central business areas along the Fox River (Santell 12/26/00). While historic preservation was not specifically found in any of the growth management literature reviewed. The preservation of the historic downtowns of these cities may help to curb excess growth into the fringe. Across the country, as commercial and residential development moves further into the countryside, people are drawn away from the older, established central areas and downtowns. These areas then lose their economic health, and "the buildings and other historical reminders which define these once bustling places fall into disrepair" ("The Costs of Sprawl" 2). True, the growth to the west of these cities is occurring, and will continue to, but the preservation and rehabilitation of historic homes and buildings will draw both residents and business people to the downtown. All three cities are working on rehabilitating their downtowns and the surrounding historical neighborhoods. While St. Charles probably has the most vibrant downtown, Elgin has been working the hardest on rehabilitation and preservation programs. Saving historic buildings instead of letting them wear down and building new ones on the fringe, may also have tremendous implications for protecting the environment by saving important ecological area-such as farmland or wetlands-from being paved over (Beatley and Manning 212). The preservation of historic areas and landmarks can be regarded as a long-term investment in enhancing a community’s cultural heritage and sense of place (Beatley and Manning 211).

Elgin has three historic districts, St. Charles has two, and Batavia is still working on establishing their historic preservation ordinance. St. Charles’ Downtown Strategy Plan was created by downtown advocates to provide a guide for future development in the downtown area (Downtown St. Charles 1). For the future of Elgin, many residents want to preserve or adaptively reuse historic building and areas, as found in a visual preference survey conducted during one of the City of Elgin’s Comprehensive Plan Neighborhood Workshops (2-3). The Comprehensive Plan of 1983 acknowledged the need for historic preservation in Elgin. One objective cited was to "improve the vitality of the Elgin central business district" (45). The plan also lists Historic Preservation as an important housing issue (55). The plan states, "While mush of the aged housing is experiencing degrees of deterioration, many of the structures have valid historical significance and should be preserved. The need for rehabilitation that recognizes the importance of historic preservation is based not only on the desire to maintain Elgin’s special historic heritage, but on the benefits associated with the provision of diversified living environments and housing choices" (55).

The St. Charles Comprehensive Plan lists the Preservation of the Community Heritage of St. Charles as one of the plan’s goals (3-11). The listed objectives to achieving this goal include encouraging historical and architectural preservation including regulatory changes (3-11). A significant portion of the plan is dedicated to the downtown area; however, there is no mention of historical preservation (9-5). One of the goals mentioned in the downtown section is to facilitate the revitalization of the downtown area, mostly focusing on economic improvements (9-20). One statement located in the Land Use chapter referring to future land use of the city is to "work with the Historic Preservation Commission and encourage architectural and historic preservation efforts" (13-6). This statement is probably the most important in regards to historic preservation activities in the St. Charles, not only because it encourages preservation efforts, but it is mentioned under the future land use section, meaning the city will continue these efforts well into the future of the city. Tom Anderson commented, "St. Charles has realized that the downtown is the core of the community and has thus reinvested in it to keep it viable for the future" (12/29/00).

2. Infill and Redevelopment

The use of infill and redevelopment is closely associated with historic preservation since most infill and redevelopment activities are centered in older downtown areas. The practice is also considered a type of urban containment since communities that utilize urban growth boundaries often work to channel growth and development back into existing urban area (Duncan and Nelson 85). In the case of my study area, this would mean supporting new construction and the adaptive reuse of existing structures in the older downtown sections of the cities. A key element in supporting infill is the promotion of higher density residential development. These higher densities are more cost-effective in providing public services and also result in lower housing costs (Duncan and Nelson 86). The redevelopment of older urban areas, such as historic areas, and the infill of small tracts of land helps to take pressure off growth to the west of the study area. Duncan and Nelson also state, "efficiently facilitated infill and redevelopment is needed to ensure that urban areas remain vital, to respond to changing needs when and where needed, and to help dampen urban sprawl pressures" (148). This statement shows how infill and redevelopment efforts help to lessen growth to the west of my area.

As part of the City of Elgin’s Comprehensive Plan Workshop, "the need for downtown redevelopment" is a top issue of importance to the residents of Elgin (1). Since so many residents expressed a need for this during the workshops, the updated plan for the city will most likely include provisions for redevelopment and infill development of the downtown. The comprehensive plan of 1983 lists "improving the vitality of the Elgin Central Business District" as an objective of economic growth and development (45). The policy for achieving this objective includes developing a plan for strengthening and redeveloping the central business district (45). It took the city 18 years to develop such a plan, but in 2000, the city approved a Riverfront/Center City Masterplan to aid in the redevelopment of the downtown (this was discussed in more detail in chapter 2) (Burnett "Elgin Continues" 1). In the housing section of the comprehensive plan, the impact in the rising costs of housing during the early 1980’s resulted in both a rise in the rehabilitation and expansion of existing structures and the construction of new residential uses in built-up areas (infill projects) (132-133). These rising housing costs appears to have had a positive effect on growth management even 18 years ago. In fact, of four steps listed by the city to accommodate growth, one was to "redevelop portions of the existing city which are in disrepair or functionally obsolete," and another was "to utilize infill development on scattered vacant parcels" (136).

Rita Tungare, community planner for St. Charles, stated one growth management technique as steering new growth in area of existing infrastructure-or infill development (8/15/00). The comprehensive plan promotes the use of compatible residential infill in several residential areas of the city. The city’s Downtown Strategy Plan calls for "quality redevelopment of the downtown area" (2). St. Charles appears to be going in the direction of utilizing infill development in existing neighborhoods and redevelopment of existing structures in the older central business district area.

3. Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB’s)

An urban growth boundary is defined as "a legally enforced dividing line that separates urban land uses such as compact residential and commercial development from rural ones such as farming and large lot residential development" ("Managing Growth" 2). These boundaries serve to protect the non-developed resources that circle the developed area and funnel growth to areas with existing infrastructure ("Sprawl Solutions: Smart Growth" 1). The benefits of successful use of UGB’s include greater predictability of the development process, more cost-effective provision of public services, encouragement of infill and redevelopment of existing urban areas, reduction of urban sprawl, and protection of agricultural land and environmental resources (Duncan and Nelson 73). Land outside of the UGB is often down-zoned to a lower density and the extension of utilities beyond the boundary is often prohibited. Within the boundary, higher density development is encouraged ("Managing Growth" 2). The use of UGB’s has been successful in several communities, most notably in Portland, Oregon (Beatley and Manning 43). In the state of Oregon, cities and towns are required by law to delineate a UGB. The boundary must include enough land to accommodate growth within a twenty-year period, and urban development beyond the growth boundary is not allowed (Beatley and Manning 43). Portland’s boundary has been in place since the 1970’s and has had solid success. Ninety-five percent of new growth occurs within the UGB, and residents recently voted to keep the boundary where it is and accommodate for the growth within the boundary (Beatley and Manning 44). Due to the geographic location of the three cities-dense, suburban development to the east and agricultural areas to the west-the use of UGB’s would be beneficial to help preserve the agricultural land while funneling new growth into the existing urban areas of the cities.

Of the three study cities, Elgin is the one that is definitely not utilizing any form of an urban growth boundary. Elgin’s adoption of the Far West Planning Area Development and Design Guidelines illustrates the city’s willingness to push development further west, while at the same time guiding the growth in a consistent manner. The annexation of 608 acres of land located two miles west of Randall Road for development as large golf course community also proves that the city is encouraging growth to the far west of the city (Sullivan "Hearing" 1). Elgin is actually planning well into the future for new growth and development to the west of the city (Burnett "Planning" sec 1:1). Armstrong believes that it is difficult to say no to development unless the city takes on a no-growth attitude, "and that is really not the attitude of the city and it’s not the attitude of communities, I don’t think, up and down the Fox Valley" (8/10/00). Armstrong also commented on neighboring communities to the south (including St. Charles and Batavia) that have "basically drawn a line by acquiring land out to the west of St. Charles and Geneva for use as open space and treatment of sanitary sewer service. So the current administration has decided to draw the line on growth and development" (8/10/00). Elgin has taken on a much more aggressive attitude towards development to the west of the CBD, but have also taken the initiative to guide this growth in a manner that still works to preserve as much farmland and open space that is feasible (Far West Guide 1).

St. Charles is more conservative than Elgin when it comes to growth to the west of the city. St. Charles recently joined with neighboring Geneva to purchase 480 acres of land on the far west end of the city to be left as open prairie (Coughlin 12/27/00). St. Charles’ growth is also limited by their municipal utility services, which are very expensive to extend further west (Comprehensive Plan 1-7). While St. Charles has not set an urban growth boundary, the comprehensive plan does call for "orderly and balanced growth" that does not threaten the scale and small-town feel of St. Charles that residents enjoy (3-6). The plan also states, "the City’s balance of land uses and population is at a critical juncture. The community is starting to extend to its limits of growth, which are dictated by adjoining jurisdictions and by the limits of water and sewer capacities. Balanced growth needs to be carefully considered when reviewing the future development of St. Charles" (3-7). St. Charles’ approach to growth containment falls in the middle of Elgin and Batavia’s approaches.

4. Impact Fees

Impact Fees are "fees levied against new developments for the purpose of funding local services and/or facilities that become necessary due to the impact of a specific development" (Greater Portland 13). These are fees that are levied at the time a permit for the construction is applied for, and may be levied for all types of construction, including subdivisions, offices, and shopping centers (Platt 302). The revenue that is generated from these fees is put towards the construction of various municipal purposes including roads, sewer and water facilities, police and fire stations, and libraries (Platt 303). The payment of the impact fees essentially establishes a contract between a developer and a local government. In return for the fee, the local government promises to deliver public services (Duncan and Nelson 122). Municipalities may use impact fees as a positive growth management strategy by encouraging growth (through the use of lower fees) in areas already served by public facilities and discouraging growth (through the use of higher fees) in areas without infrastructure (Duncan and Nelson 123). The use of impact fees are an exercise of local government’s broad police power, and thus guidelines have been developed to ensure that there is a "rational nexus" between the regulatory fee and the development (Duncan and Nelson 121). These standards require that the need for new facilities must be created by new development; the amount of fee charged must not exceed a proportionate share of the cost to serve development; and all fee revenues must be spent within a reasonable period of time and in proximity to the fee-paying development (Duncan and Nelson 121). While all three cities use impact fees on new developments, I am looking to see whether their use of such fees is aggressive enough to be considered a growth management technique.

With all the growth to the western edge of the city that Elgin is experiencing, it is no surprise that the city collects impact fees for this development. One of the objectives stated in the Far West Area Plan is to ensure that the cost of development is paid by new development (17). The plan states that the city will "continue to support the established policy to require new development to pay impact fees that are attributable, quantifiable, and directly related to their impact on the public school system, and other capital improvements necessary to provide municipal services" (17). The Far West Area Plan amendment of 1996 specifically states that new development must "pay development impact fees that are attributable quantifiably and directly to the impact of their development on the community with credits against their impact fees, where appropriate" (8). The comprehensive plan of 1983 does not specifically mention the use of impact fees to aid in funding the extension of municipal services into the fringe, but much of the city has expanded into the western fringe since then. Elgin recently proposed doubling their impact fees, which included two new fees that would be assessed to cover the costs of expansion in the area west of Randall Road, with a third fee assessed to build parks city-wide (Burnett "Elgin Contemplates" 1:1). About half of current fees go to schools, with the remainder used to build roads, provide water and sewer service and operate parks and libraries (Burnett "Elgin Contemplates" 1:1). The city decided to re-evaluate their impact fee system with the amounts of annexation and development that are looming in the area west of Randall Road.

The comprehensive plan for St. Charles does not specifically mention the use of impact fees, but they are being used to help fund a new wastewater treatment plant as well as installing new watermain extensions further west-where large amount of residential development is occurring (Tungare 8/15/00). St. Charles has not been as aggressive in increasing their fees as Elgin has been-Elgin’s hikes will bring their fees above those assessed by its neighbors, including St. Charles (Burnett "Elgin Contemplates" 1:2).

5. Cluster Development

Cluster development is practiced in new developments on previously undeveloped land-much like the open land that lies to the west of my study area. It consists of concentrating development on one section of the property to allow for the protection of the remaining parcel as farmland or open space, or to preserve ecologically sensitive areas of land ("Sprawl Solutions" 3). This protected area may be used by the people of the development of for the town as a whole (Greater Portland 7). Clustering may save both the town and the developer money by reducing the amount of road construction needed, as well as lower the cost of extending utilities (Greater Portland 7). Randall Arendt, in his article entitled "Open Space Zoning: What it is and Why it Works," describes conventional zoning as "planned sprawl" because every square foot of each development is converted into front and back yards, streets, sidewalks, or driveways, leaving nothing to become open space (1). His concept of open space zoning is equivalent to clustering, which allows the same overall amount of development that is already permitted, but allows for open space (2).

The comprehensive plan of 1983 for the city of Elgin lists the use of clustering as a result of increased housing costs (133). At this time, it was not the desire to preserve open space that drove the city to use clustering, but a desire to save money. The Far West Planning Area Guide encourages the use of conservation and cluster design techniques with common open space areas (6). The plan allows for minimum lot sizes to be reduced from 10,000 square feet to 8,000 square feet in cluster design subdivisions lending to an increase in the amount of open space. According to the plan, the City Council may also grant a 25% density bonus in conservation/cluster design subdivisions in Low Density Residential areas if six site and architectural design features are included (15). Elgin is actively planning for growth and development to the west of the city, and the encouragement of clustering shows they are taking the initiative to conserve some of the land to the west as open space.

While St. Charles does not suggest the use of clustering in their comprehensive plan, Batavia does encourage this type of development for their Planning Area #12, the area to the west of Randall Road (Comprehensive Plan 39). The plan mandates the use of clustering of residential developments "so as to create a minimum of 33% of usable land for open space within each development, to buffer further development from existing larger tracts, to preserve scenic vistas and to promote economies of scale for developers/builders and the city for future maintenance" (39). This type of mandate illustrates how Batavia is concerned about preserving open space, but is not unwilling to develop the land to the west of the city.

6. Planning Consistent With County and Regional Goals

All three cities are located within the planning jurisdictions of Kane County and the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission. In 1996, the Kane County Development Department produced their 2020 Land Resource Management Plan as an update to the 1982 plan and in response to increased growth pressures (Kane County 3). This plan aggressively addresses the issues of quality of life, water resource management, open space preservation, and environmental protection (3). The plan separates the county into three land use areas: the urban corridor to the far east, the critical growth area in central Kane County, and agricultural/village area to the far west of the county (74). Elgin, St. Charles, and Batavia all lie within the urban corridor, where the county directs most development. According to the Openlands "Under Pressure" report, "Kane County appears to be achieving some success in moderating sprawl from the county-wide perspective. A number of municipalities have entered into boundary agreements with one another, helping avert annexation battles. Several communities are in the process of updating their comprehensive plans to make them more consistent with the county’s" (19). While this document does provide excellent guidelines for growth and development, the municipalities each have their own plan and are not required to follow the Kane County Plan, but the county strives for "a blending between their plan and our plan. On the fringes, where we have this transition between city and countryside-that is what is most important to us. And that is why it is so important to try and fit these plans together" (Santell 12/26/00). Another main goal of Kane County’s plan is to prevent the municipalities from becoming "Anywhere USA." Santell, who first described how one cannot tell whether they are in Schaumburg or Hoffman Estates while driving down Golf Road in Cook County, commented, "Presently, you know when you are in Batavia; you know when you are entering St. Charles. You have some unique feeling for Elgin. And now all of the communities start to bump up to each other, we are losing it" (12/26/00). One of the planning goals stated in the plan is to "work with the various jurisdictions located within Kane County to achieve a shared community vision" (10). It is more important for Elgin, St. Charles, and Batavia to be working with Kane County than with NIPC, since NIPC "governs" the county, and the county in turn "governs" the municipalities. The Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission advocates a Regional Growth Strategy for the region (Ford 1). The plan includes policies for growth management that encourage two priority areas of development: (1) Renewed growth and investment in disinvested areas and continuing investment in maturing areas; and (2) Cost-effective public investment and high standards of environmental protection in conjunction with new development or redevelopment (5).

In Elgin’s Far West Area Plan of 1996, the main objective listed under Regional Land Resource Management is to "ensure that local land resource management strategies are consistent with regional strategies" (5). At the regional level, Elgin endorses the Strategic Plan for Land Resource Management adopted by NIPC in 1992. At the county level, the city will protect prime agricultural land from premature and piecemeal development; encourage major development to occur from the expansion of existing municipal service centers (such as Elgin); and limit the county development outside of the Elgin Planning Area to the infill of existing rural residential patterns of development (5). Strategies to the aforementioned policies include pursuing the endorsement of the regional and county land resource management policies of the Far West Area Plan by NIPC and Kane County; working cooperatively with neighboring municipalities (such as St. Charles and Batavia) towards establishing jurisdictional boundary agreements, toward the provision of an effective and efficient infrastructure in support of the various communities; and toward the establishment of other common planning and development policies; and objecting to any county zoning or subdivision applications within the Elgin Planning Area (5). Elgin’s Far West Planning Area Guidelines were developed with the values of the 2020 Land Resource Management Plan in mind, and the county agrees that the plan "has some good management in it" (Santell 12/26/00).

St. Charles follows Kane County’s plan by maintaining areas as forest preserve, green space, or open space, as sanctioned for in the county plan (Tungare 8/15/00). According to Rita Tungare, planner for St. Charles, "We work very well with the county, and the county has plans for that region, which you would call the fringe. We also work very closely with the county in developing a regional plan-identifying and revisiting our land uses every now and then" (8/15/00). From the county’s perspective, "St. Charles is working on their west gateway area right now, and this transition from country to city. They are probably achieving a little bit less than Batavia in terms of following the county’s plan" (Santell 12/26/00). The St. Charles Comprehensive Plan cites as an objective of the planning area to "work with Kane County and other municipalities to implement joint planning agreement under the local Land Resource Management Planning Act or similar enabling legislation" (2-5). The plan makes no mention of the 2020 Plan, but St. Charles’ plan was released a few months before the county’s plan was.