From Crystal Lake’s watchdog Donald Kountz:
Critique of Water’s Edge
The Business District Plan for The Water’s Edge Business District has serious errors and omissions.
Correcting the errors are critical to the understanding the Business District Plan.
The Public Notice published in the Northwest Herald on May 16, 2025 and May 30, 2025 includes an
incomplete list of P.I.N.s for the lots to be incorporated in the Business District.
In accordance with the instructions published in the Northwest Herald, I am filing written objections to
the Business District Plan for The Water’s Edge Business District.
This document is undated.
Hereafter referred to as “The Business District Plan”, that Teska Associates, Inc. prepared under contract to the City of Crystal Lake.
An undated document presents serious logistics issues to the citizens of Crystal Lake when reviewing and commenting, and it presents legal issues in the determination if the proper documentation was available during the entire review period, start to end.
The authors should know better.
Between the date of the first publication of the Public Hearing and the date of the hearing, the boundaries of the business district were changed as shown on the map found on page 5.
Under 65 ILCS 5/11-74.3.2(d)(i) alter the exterior boundaries of the proposed business district, … made by the municipality only after the municipality by ordinance fixes a time and place for, gives notice by
publication of, and conducts a public hearing pursuant to the procedures set forth hereinabove.
Because the exterior boundaries have been changed a new Public Notice of Public Hearing must be set
according to Illinois law.
On page 5 of The Business District Plan, it includes a Legal Description of the Territory and includes the
P.I.N.s.
Below the legal description a map of the Business District Area is shown and identifies in light blue, the boundaries of the business district. However, the boundaries include land that is not listed in the P.I.N.s above.
The Business District Plan correctly identifies 65 ILCS 5/11-74-3-1 et seq. as the law to establish a
Business District.
However, beginning on page 6 The Business District Plan incorrectly uses the “Tax Increment Allocation
Redevelopment Act” Definitions found in 65 ILCS 5/11-74-4.3 to define blight for a Business District.
While this is a nice history lesson on the establishment of the TIF it has NO bearing on the Business
District.
Additionally, a physical inspection of the business district area shows NONE of the conditions in The Business District Plan nor Appendix A exist today.
The proper definitions are found in 65 ILCS 5/11-74.3-5.
The definitions are NOT the same.
From “Sec. 11-74.3-5. “Blighted area” means an area that is a blighted area which, by reason of the
predominance of defective, non-existent, or inadequate street layout, unsanitary or unsafe conditions,
deterioration of site improvements, improper subdivision or obsolete platting, or the existence of
conditions which endanger life or property by fire or other causes, or any combination of these factors,
retards the provision of housing accommodations or constitutes an economic or social liability, an
economic underutilization of the area, or a menace to public health, safety, morals or welfare.”
Not only has the plat(s) of the development of the TIF eliminated the “predominance of defective, non-existent, or inadequate street layout”, the construction of Phase 1 of The Water’s Edge has put in new roads and/or modified or updated existing roads.
Water’s Edge Phase 1 has eliminated inadequate street layout.
Water’s Edge Phase 1 has eliminated all unsanitary or unsafe conditions.
The current fenced areas are to prevent individuals access from on going construction activities.
Water’s Edge Phase 1 has made major site improvements and has changed the entire plat.
Hence there are no deterioration of site improvements, improper subdivision or obsolete platting.
Water’s Edge Phase 1 has eliminated all conditions which endanger life or property by fire or other causes by demolition of questionable buildings.
Water’s Edge Phase 1’s primary objective was the construction of new rental housing.
Construction continues with families moving in to the completed units.
This eliminates retards the provision of housing accommodations or constitutes an economic or social liability.
To assess an economic underutilization of the area, you cannot use four undeveloped lots on Northwest
Highway U.S. Route 14 to imply a condition when within 450 feet of the property in question three businesses were recently built from the ground up with NO tax payer funding nor incentives.
Taking a larger look at the adjacent land to the business district, it is not possible to establish any case
where the development or lack of development in Water’s Edge Phase 2 and 3 without the establishment of a business district eliminates a menace to public health, safety, morals or welfare when the menace does not exist today.
Based on
1) The Business Plan NOT providing any existing documentation the area within the proposed business district is a “Blighted area” under the definitions found in 65 ILCS 5/11-74-3-5,
2) The Business Plan relying on the WRONG definition for “Blighted area” from Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act” Definitions found in 65 ILCS 5/11-74-4.3 and 3) the undated, draft Business District Plan for the Water’s Edge Business District is NOT sufficient for the Crystal Lake City Council to act under 65 ILCS 5/11-74.3-3 (10) and 65 ILCS 5/11-74.3-3 (11) for the establishment of an ordinance finding the business district is a blighted area.
Finally, because the exterior boundaries have been changed a new Public Notice of Public Hearing must be set according to Illinois law for a future date.
I certify that these written objections were hand delivered to the City Clerk of Crystal Lake’s Office in
City Hall located at 100 W. Woodstock St. during normal business hours and before 7 p.m. on Tuesday,
June 3, 2025.
