City Council - Regular Meeting

Alderman Doherty?

Here.

Alderman Bassey? Here. Alderman Davis?

Here.

Alderman Cook?

Here.

Alderman Miller? Here.

Please stand for the pledge. At this moment, we're going to go and do the public comment portion of the meeting. This is for items that are not on the agenda this evening. So does anyone have any public comment? Once again, this is items that are not on the agenda this evening. Okay, see none. Moving on to consent agenda items 5A through E and then 5G through K. I have pulled 5F from the agenda. So I'm looking for a motion to approve 5A through 5E and then also 5G through 5K. Alderman Miller?

I'll make the motion to approve consent agenda items 5A through E and 5G.

Through carry. Through carry. Yep. Okay. Second? Alderman Doherty? Yeah, I'll second that motion. Thank you. Discussion on these items by City Council. See none. Clerk, please call the roll.

Alderman Miller? Yes. Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Boehme? Yes. Alderman Glab? Yes. Alderman Bassey? Yes. Alderman Davis? Yes. Alderman Cook?

Yes.

All right, thank you very much. Next item on the agenda is 6A, preserves of Boone Creek. I am going to change the motion a little bit here. It's going to be subject to full execution of a development agreement. I am looking for a motion to pass an ordinance granting a zoning map amendment, preliminary plan of subdivision, preliminary plan approval for a conditional use permit of the preserves of Boone Creek single family planned unit development. I'm looking for a motion to approve. Alderman Miller.

I'll make a motion to pass ordinance granting a zoning map mimic preliminary plan of subdivision and preliminary plan approval for conditional use permit for the preserves of Boone Creek single family planned unit development.

You said that a lot better than I did. Second. Alderman Doherty. Yeah, I'll second the motion. Thank you. All right. At this time, we're going to go ahead and open it up for public comment. Before we begin the public comment portion of this item, I'd like to remind everyone that each speaker will have three minutes to address the city council to help us conduct an efficient meeting. I also ask that you avoid repeating yourselves of other people that have said the same thing, and this is more just to keep the flow moving for the meeting. I also ask that Whether you support or oppose the item before us, please refrain from outbursts, interruptions, or personal attacks. We value everyone's opportunity to be heard, and we appreciate your cooperation, okay? So I'm going to open up for public comment. No one signed up, so no one wants to really speak, I guess. I'm just kidding. So anyone that would like to speak, you can go ahead and line up on the left side, my left, your right, for the next person. The first person that would like to speak, you can head up to the podium and hit the center button, and the floor will be yours. So does anyone want to make public comment? There you go. The floor is yours, sir. How about that?

Please state your name and address for public record. Okay. Good evening, Mayor, members, City Council. My name is Matt Matusik. I live adjacent to the proposal in our subdivision. Okay, and I'm going to read this because it's just easier. I've got some points I want to get through quickly. Okay, and I understand that McHenry will continue to grow. Most of us here are not opposed to the growth. We are asking for responsible growth that respects the people who already call this community home. Several weeks ago, this proposal was tabled because many of you recognize the same concerns that the residents... raised being that the development is simply too dense and the setbacks from existing homes do not provide adequate respect or privacy to the families who have lived here for years. Reducing the project by Only a couple homes does not meaningfully address those concerns. It changes the numbers on paper, but it does not solve the underlying problem. McHenry wasn't built by national developers. It was built by generations of hardworking middle-class people who bought homes, paid property taxes, volunteered in our schools and organizations, and supported local businesses that make the city better. what it is today. We are the people who have invested our lives here. Lennar's is a successful national company. They will build homes in many communities, but we only have one backyard, one neighborhood, and one place we call home. The responsibility of the city council is not simply to approve development, it is to ensure that the development fits within the existing community. Existing residents should not be expected to sacrifice privacy, quality of life, and character of their neighborhoods so a developer can maximize the number of lots on a piece of property. and respect for existing homeowners are not mutually exclusive. A well-designed subdivision with reasonable density, larger setbacks and meaningful buffers would benefit both new and current residents. I respectfully ask you to remember who elected you and who has invested in this community for decades. Please require Lennar to design a development that fits McHenry and respects the families, excuse me, who are already here. Not ask McHenry's residents to adapt to the most profitable layout of the developer. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Can you state your name and address for the public record?

My name is Jess Kormosh. I live on Englewood Trail. I'm a little nervous. I don't want to follow a map, but here I am. It's a little intimidating getting up here. I didn't bring any landscapers, designers, traffic experts, anybody with me. I brought my friends and my neighbors with me today. Lenard does not owe anything to any of us, but each of you do. We all voted you into these roles. You are our voices and you are our votes. We need new homes, but stacking almost 600 of them onto three active neighborhoods is an odd choice, one I think many of us don't quite understand. We need affordable homes, but looking at these plans, I'm not sure how affordable they will be. I wonder if anyone in this room at the start of this development planning ever spoke to people in their wards and asked them how they'd feel about what will be our largest home development in McHenry. I wonder why you only saw a reduction after we came up and spoke out. After the last meeting, we made our voices clear, spread beyond the room, we saw it on social media, we talked about it with our neighbors. I was proud of our community for speaking up, for proving it wasn't just a small group of us, it was a lot of us. It wasn't just older residents, it was young ones with families, many of which are going to see their quiet neighborhood roads turned into busy connections for a new one. or one that can't utilize a large pool and clubhouse. And many are wondering what the high schools will do when Stonewater students from Wonder Lake are added to the numbers, along with many of the families who will purchase these new homes. Would this mean a new school for us? We asked for a reduction in the volume of homes and they gave us three. We asked for there to be a thoughtful transition between existing neighborhoods, new builds, and we were given four-foot evergreens, three per lot, with the removal of many of the existing trees from our city easements. I still have not given a reason why they are removing all of those. We ask for more consideration regarding entrances and exits from Kern and Bull Valley, and those are going to remain unchanged. We have more questions here than we have answers. Again, this builder owes the people of this town nothing. This is a business deal for them, but each of you do. For those of you who haven't made up your mind, I urge you to push back and ask for more. You're here to ensure we are doing what's best for the people of McHenry and the city. If this is approved as it stands, you are setting a precedent that any future builder can push our land to the limits to maximize their profits. Thank you.

Anyone else like to make a public comment? All right. Go ahead.

Hi, I'm Carol Harrington, 505 Brookwood Trail. And I would like to comment that at the last meeting, Lenar said it would be two houses per acre. Well, I don't think they took out the parks, the parking lot, the pool, the clubhouse, the trails, the roads, and the unbuildable creek that is not even allowed to be to be built on. So what is the real number of houses per acre? That's a big question I have. And I find it very insulting that the new plan is only reduced by three houses, a few evergreens and a quarter acre, little tot park or whatever. I just think it's insulting to the council and the residents. And I was hoping we would have a berm. I don't think they did anything for the houses behind Brookwood. There's nothing that was changed in that plan there. I looked online. It looks like there are lots of lawsuits against this builder in Florida, Minnesota, South Carolina, and Texas. I saw that. This is to the best of my knowledge. You never know what's true and not true. And I do think that It was stated online, if this is true, that 40 people out of 30,000 doesn't mean that this is a good thing for McHenry. But one person on the council thinks it is against all of these other people. And just because they're not all here doesn't mean they approve of it. So that's what I would kind of like to say. Thank you. Thank you.

Dale Morin, 6703 Bull Valley Road, directly across the street from the linear project. I do not live in the city of McHenry. I live in Nunda Township on Incorporated McHenry County. But this is going to adversely affect the ones of us who do live right there, including our friends who live in the one acre old Adams home, the brick home that Clarence and his wife built in 1969. The neighborhood is still too dense. It's been said three times now or four times that three house Pretty lame, really. One of my biggest concerns besides the whole traffic thing, because Bull Valley Road, motorcycles, racing car, you know, race car, people speed down that road like crazy, and they do the same thing on current. But I'm not addressing the traffic things at this time. I don't know if you guys all dealt with that already or you've been told. The biggest thing, I think, is the rental units that – Lanier tends to lump together and sell their unsold homes for rental investment property. I think what I'm really concerned about is crime. People are going to be moving in these new affordable starter homes from Chicago and suburbs. And we're going to end up with gang members from other areas that are going to come in and pick up where they left off with new recruitments. So there's a lot of things going on here. I mentioned before when I spoke one or two times before you guys that when they put in Legend Lakes, our groundwater with our wells all the way across everybody who lives around there was adversely affected. And I just filled up a little pool for my grandkids on the 4th of July, and I got yellow water now where I never had it before. And it's... I'm on a well. So I know this is city water coming in, but I've also read studies about, and I think somebody testified a few meetings ago about the amount of water that the community takes. And that was his profession in one of the counter cities close to the city. So water is another thing. I know you got big mains and there's what six wells that McHenry uses, but it is groundwater and deep water in it and it's going to affect the water tables. Thank you, thank you.

Anyone else? OK, so moving on Council. Any questions, comments regarding this item? Okay. Lenar, would you like to present anything, make any comments? Sure. The floor is yours.

Thank you, Mayor and Alderman. Lisa Wagner here, and we have our whole LNR team in the back. If anyone has any questions, I want to make sure we had people answer questions if you had anything to ask about the development. As has already been mentioned, and you all know from your packets, We did take your comments thoughtfully. We did go back and make changes to the plan. We do think that the plan works for the community. It has a lot of benefits for the residents. And we think that we can continue to expand and bring new homes to the city and continue that will be a benefit to everyone. As the plan commissions had mentioned, the rooftops are necessary for commercial. With regard to our plan itself, I thought I would just let Rich Olson very quickly go through the modifications, although I know you already have them in your packets. So Rich is our landscape planner architect from Gary R. Webb and Associates.

Thank you again, Rich Olson with Gary R. Webb and Associates. First of all, I just want to thank the folks for their comments, and I want to be very respectful of those and appreciative of that. We're here to propose a very positive plan that I think stands alone by itself. We'd just like to point out that what we put forward here has been very well thought out. We've walked through the plan before. We've talked about all the open space, how they connect, and how they're thoughtfully placed throughout the community. It's a master plan that is something that we're very proud of and that we think that is something that the residents here will be very proud of. And there are benefits for the community at large as well from the standpoint of the pathways and trails and connections that we proposed. Yes, we did modify the western boundary to be have those lots a little bit more sizable to the lots that are adjacent to them. And that was a small reduction in the lots for sure. We also added a buffer along the eastern boundary line. Those lots are already larger. There's approximately a 20-foot area there that we've added landscape to. And those trees, we can talk about the sizing of them and what you would propose for those trees, as well as add the park. And the park sizing is very semantical. We can draw different lines to make it larger, smaller. But we have proposed it, and we definitely plan to make that an amenity for those areas. And finally, I'd just like to say that, you know, Lenar put a lot of thought into this. They didn't come to you and over-densify this plan. We could have had many more lots. We don't do that. They don't do that. They came forward with a plan that was very respectful of the land, very respectful of preservation of the land, the trees, the wetlands, and they don't play those games where you come in with more lots and then make lots smaller or downsize lots. They came with a plan that they're very proud of. I've been doing this for a very long time. I'm very proud of this plan. This is a plan that is a master plan that is something that is modern. And it's something that I think is very well thought out with how the open spaces are placed throughout the plan. And then the notes that you see there for the individual parks, those don't take into account the linkages between those parks and the areas that those represent. So those parks are They may say, for example, two acres, but the areas that link those parks are even much greater in size. You don't see that in most master plan communities. You don't see how that these parks are placed in a way that every resident has the ability to have access to those spaces and be able to walk out their doors in close proximity. and be able to then coalesce into a large space in the center, which is the clubhouse, which serves as the heart and the soul of this community with all the amenities that that has. And of course, those then lead off in branches out throughout the community to create green spaces that people don't have to cross that many roads. So I think we can all come to an agreement that the plan itself is very well thought through and very well designed. Now, the semantics of all the other things, you can take that for what it's worth. We think this is a great plan, and we stand behind it 100%. We'd love to be here. Lennar is... has put a lot of effort into this and they would love to be here and we'd love to be great neighbors to you guys and build some homes for people to live. And those homes take a significant amount of effort to create with the infrastructure, with the amenities, and you do have to have a certain amount of density We haven't maxed out the density here. We've placed the density where we think is the right spot and the right location, and we think that those amenities then are being paid for by those residents, and that makes an attainable home. The infrastructure has to be done, has to be paid for. The amenities have to be done in a way that people will want to be there. You can create bigger lots, then you get less amenities. You have less lots, you have less amenities. We think we've got a great plan, and we hope you support it. Thank you. I'm obviously open to any questions that you may have for sure. Any questions, comments by council for Lennar?

All right. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Appreciate it.

So as the mayor indicated when he made his agenda comment that this item is subject to full execution of a development agreement and the motion is to adopt the proposed ordinance granting a zoning map amendment, preliminary plan of subdivision and preliminary plan approval for conditional use permit for the preserves of Boone Creek.

Thank you. So at this time, any questions, comments by council? See none? Alderman Glatton, go ahead.

Okay. To our attorney, basically, if this is approved by the council, we will see what? A final plat and that's about it?

Final plat and a development agreement.

I'm sorry?

Final plat and a development agreement.

And a development agreement. Okay. So there basically will be very many changes.

Not from the preliminary plat.

Right. And I just look at this and I think to myself, one of the things I thought of yesterday, and I've been thinking about this for the last two weeks, and it hit me yesterday. Number one, the fact that we're looking at a concept plan basically here. We never got a regular drawing with the layouts of every lot and whatnot that when you get a printout that shows the lot sizes and everything else, every individual. And one of the things that I looked at was the extension of Winding Creek. I remember with Dartmoor, I wasn't on the council, but I was out the crowd when they were first talking about the Dartmoor Bridge and everything else. And think about it. It was mentioned at that time, oh, we had this east-west road always planned in the city that we were going to have between Bull Valley and 120. However, the first thing they allowed was the developer to build driveways on that road. But I thought we smartened up years later with Boone Creek, at least the road had no driveways on the west side of the creek. Now we have Winding Creek, and we have the same situation with driveways all down Winding Creek, and we're going to extend it, and yet we're going to extend it. We're going to have driveways all the way down. So haven't we learned? I mean, we learned almost 30 years ago when we approved Boone Creek, but we're not learning it here. I mean, why? Because why were there driveways on Dartmoor in the first place? Because developers don't want to build a road that they can't build houses on. And that's how they take and they grow up all these plans. The max for the minimum. The max, you know, when you talk about smaller lots, narrower lots, what does that mean? That means the fact that they have to take and run less... less infrastructure as far as water lines and sewer lines and streets and everything else per house. Yet you're not going to tell me that they're going to sell any houses over there for affordable housing. That's going to be under 320, $350,000. I'm sure that that's probably going to be the starting range because we have homes out here that, uh, that sell for that, uh, that are 30 years old. I mean, uh, to me, I was hoping to see a single family subdivision to where we would have homes that, that people could take and, and move into that could afford to, to make it their first home. And with all this, and then, then you add on the, uh, All the HOA fees, believe me, I've dealt with HOAs now for 35, almost 40 years. And I can tell you right now that there's a cost to HOAs. I mean, you take a look at that pool. That pool is very expensive. Granted, for the amount of homes that they've got on there, it won't be quite as expensive per house. But still got to be looking at $300, $400 a month at the end for all the different homes. areas. What have we got certain areas to where you're going to have the association just to manicure the lawns because people don't want to take care of the lawns. Well, they're going to wind up paying for all that. And it's not the type of a subdivision that fits in with the harmony of what we have here in McHenry. It's a totally different type of development. You know, Lennar might be a great national developer, doesn't mean that they're the best builder for the city of McHenry. It's the best for them, not for us. And I think one of the residents had mentioned that, and that's the thing. We need to look at what's best for the city of McHenry. And I take a look at this and I say to myself, it's gonna cost us more in schools. It's gonna cost us more in... eventually widening roads and connecting roads. And granted, we need development. We need to move forward. But again, I voted against this when Gerstad brought it in because I thought it was too dense at that time. And that was, again, I mean, when we did the annexation agreement, that was a concept plan. That was before any kind of engineering was done. and they took out the commercial now of what was supposed to be on the corners and they added 50 more homes. Well, but again, Georgetown probably wouldn't have been able to get his 450 homes in with, or his 550 homes after engineering. You take a look at the engineering and, The acreage that they saved as far as the commercial is all eaten up with just detention ponds. That's your open space is a detention ponds. And as far as the Long Boom Creek, you're not gonna be able to build Long Boom Creek. Everybody knows the type of soils that are over there. They're not advantageous to development. So I take a look at this. And again, I think it's a slap in the face. The fact that you reduced three homes and added a park. And again, you talk about the parks, you know, it's just added costs to the homeowners over there where the city does have parks out there, not that far away. I just think to some extent there needs to be a lot more creativity and a lot less density than what we're looking at here. I mean, we're looking at what, 50 foot lots in a lot of areas, 50 foot. It's not a lot, you know, and it's not like they're building a two-bedroom home with a one-car garage. You know, I mean, even Whispering Oaks with all the retirement homes that were built out there had wider lots than that. It reminds me of back when I grew up in the city of Chicago, because that's exactly what it looks like in some of these blocks, being that tight, that tight. little gangways in between. So I will leave it to discussion for everybody else.

Any other comments by city council?

When this development was first presented in November of 2024 for discussion only, Lenar told council the intended purpose was to provide affordable home ownership. At that meeting, Lenar stated, quote, affordability is a concern of ours because if we're not affordable, we're not selling homes, end quote. And quote, if we can't build an affordable home, I'm wasting everybody's time here, end quote. When directly asked by then, Alderman Santee, who I see is here, if Lennar would be keeping the clubhouse internally, Lennar stated, quote, that ends up getting managed by the association, end quote. Because the intended purpose was to provide affordable home ownership, my only real concern was the pickleball courts because of excessive noise. An outdoor swimming pool was not in the original concept plan, but if it was, I would have requested it that it be removed as well due to the high cost of maintenance and insurance and the questionable benefit of one outdoor swimming pool being shared by nearly 600 homes. Because this development was intended to provide affordable home ownership. Council initially supported Lennar working with the city to move forward. It is important to note initial support for a conceptual plan does not compel or require council to ultimately approve. An example of this is last year's proposed solar farm along current. the conceptual presentation had majority support from council, but was ultimately unanimously voted against. Since November, 2024, after speaking to more residents and researching Lennar's business practices, I have requested multiple times that density be lowered, a significant greenbelt barrier be added between existing and new homes, and expensive HOA parks be removed in favor of open space public parks to ensure affordability. At the June one council meeting, five council members voted to table the vote for the purpose of the city working with Lennar on an improved site plan that addressed the residents concerns and council's concerns. Reducing the density by three homes or 0.5% and planting two to three trees on select lots is an insult to the city and more importantly, our residents. The addition of a park to the east side of Boone Creek was already included as a condition of the approval in the ordinance presented to council on June 1. This is not a new adjustment. That park was previously included in the November 2024 conceptual plan. At that time, the park was 2.8 acres. The plan is now 0.25 acres. We question how our housing market has become so unaffordable and the answer is because cities allow it. There's no urgency to develop this land and Lenard does not own this land. We all know the next phase of this land will be residential, but that does not mean the city is required to approve any residential development because council has ultimate discretion. If this development passes, we will be to blame when the promised affordable home ownership does not happen. That includes every elected official, especially those who had the authority to demand changes and did not. When first-time homeowners are forced to compete with institutional investors for available housing in this development, we will be to blame. because we now know in August 2025, Lennar launched the Lennar Investment Marketplace, a digital marketplace for landlords to purchase new Lennar homes as rental investments in bulk, if wanted, keeping the average selling price high. When promised of affordability is not the reality, we will be to be to blame. because we know these private HOA parks filled with expensive to maintain and ensure amenities will come at a significant cost to the residents once turned over to the HOA. When monthly fees become so expensive that residents default and risk losing their homes, we will be to blame because we now know in addition to the HOA fees, and the maintenance-free fees for the home targeted at senior citizens, Lennar plans to maintain ownership of the private clubhouse and private outdoor swimming pool, and they will set and collect these typically mandatory fees. We know that this development will not fulfill its intended purpose of affordable home ownership. It could reasonably worsen the affordable crisis. I would imagine Lennar spent a significant amount of money on these plans, but we do not work for Lennar. And I am more concerned about the finances of our neighbors than I am about a corporation whose CEO, per public disclosures, received nearly $30 million in total compensation last fiscal year. I am voting no.

Any other city council comments, questions? Lenar, would you like to respond to any of that before we go for a vote?

Yes, just a couple comments. I'm not sure where the idea has come up or conclusion has come up that Lenar is going to own the pool, the clubhouse, and the courts. infinity and charge for those. They are not. They don't in any HOAs. They haven't in any HOAs. And I I will just have to say that as a practical matter, maybe just a misunderstanding of the way it works in a development like this, where the developer constructs the improvements, he constructs the HOA amenities. And then over the course of time, he does establish the budget. establishes a budget early on so that people know what they have to pay for. And there are significant disclosures in the sales documents. And as a practical matter, they will maintain those amenities. They will build them. They will maintain those amenities until a certain percentage of people own the homes. And then there is a turnover of the the control of the association to the residents. All of the amenities at the time of the turnover are deeded to the association. The ownership is not retained by the developer. And in addition, there's a fair number of statutes and law in Illinois that controls this kind of turnover. It controls how much money the developer needs to leave and in a reserve account, the developer can't just turn it over with zero dollars available to the HOA. And so, Lennar will not own the clubhouse after the sale of all the homes. They will not own the courts. They will not own the parks. They will be owned by the members. And the members will elect their own board of directors at a meeting of the members. And it's a democratic process just like this. where each year there'll be an annual meeting of members, they'll elect directors, and the directors then will oversee the control of the association, and they also often will have a management company that has professionals that can take on the obligation to hire contractors and maintain the project. But all of these requirements, there's disclosures in the documents. The people are well aware that they are having to pay an association. The budgets are created to make sure that those can be maintained so people know ahead of time what they're getting themselves in for. Would it never benefit Lennar to do a bait and switch with assessments with new owners because they would ultimately never end up selling homes for the same reason that people say they see lawsuits, et cetera. So I think it's important. I just assume there was some misunderstanding, but... Lennar will not own and charge fees for the pool, the clubhouse, the use of the courts, etc. So just wanted to clear that up. Yeah, thank you.

And I think I want to reiterate a fact that, yes, we have been working with the city for over a year now. What that means is a lot of study went into this and I don't want it to sound like This is just a sketch plan or anything. There is a preliminary plat in your package that's subject to approval. It's all dimensioned out. The setbacks and so forth are spelled out in there. There's a preliminary engineering plan. The city engineer and their consultant has reviewed these documents and many other questions. quite thoroughly, okay? We didn't get here without those folks lending their expertise on behalf of the city to get us here. So there is the one thing about the preliminary plat, it does set forth those developmental requirements and bulk standards that are set forth in those documents. So I want you to just understand that that work has been done. And I think regarding... What our goal is here, we build to sell homes. Our model cannot be the same as what you see in Florida. There's no real market for massive rental homes and BRBs or whatever you call them, short-term rentals. That being said... That's not our goal, but we don't presume to regulate our home buyers any more than you would any other home in town. As far as affordability goes, can you by chance pull up the presentation that we sent over? Is there any way you can get that last? Just go to the last page. I think he talked through the first few pages. If you can zoom in a little bit. That middle section in blue is actually an affordable section. And our goal is to make that affordable to actually We've got three different products here. We're trying to appeal to several homebuyers, sets of homebuyers. That blue in there is going to be homes with two to three bedrooms built on a slab. They are, I think, all two-car garages. And starting from 1,170 feet to about 2,200 square feet. So the goal there is to be affordable. Will we be, you know... What the exact price is, I couldn't tell you at this moment, but is it around $300,000? Probably is. I mean, it's about as good as you can do in the market, in the Illinois market. And we're talking about all these requests and requirements. All this does, this does affect the price that we're able to deliver homes. I mean, everything that we do here, everything we add, It affects it. And density, too. We would much rather dedicate open spaces to community areas where the areas make a difference. You can see that's a big park. That's a big open space. Instead of giving everybody five or 10 extra feet on their home site, as a whole, you don't even notice it. So we'd rather have a place, a community, where you go, People come in and they're like, I want to live here, okay? That's where our goal is here. And how you pay for the clubhouse and the six parks, is you have enough people to pay for it. If you don't, then things stop being viable. So to answer your question, that is definitely a goal. Not every home in here is quote unquote super affordable. But we realize this is a problem here in Illinois. And part of it is permit fees, property taxes, and the like. When we have... Uh, 596 homes. Yeah, that does spread out the cost of these parks in the clubhouse. When you're presumed to think that the city wanted to take care of any of these things. So, so we're, we're fine with that. And, and, you know, when we build as many homes as we do. We know what people are looking for, and we're confident that we can sell those homes. So, again, I think this is a showcase community. Rich and his team and my engineer, our engineers here, have done a phenomenal job. It's not easy. That job isn't easy, and we want to not only appeal to you, but the homebuyers that come to McHenry. We want them to make them citizens and go shopping downtown, keep your businesses active. I think that's going to be a huge effect on, you know, your downtown and turnover down there and everything else. So I just want to iterate that this is, you know, I mean, it's like a – living thing you know one thing leads to another and but again all this is has been heavily studied we have the some of the best in the industry here they were here to they've been here from the beginning so there's so many documents and so many studies and so many engineering documents that They're there, and they've been reviewed, and they're there for you. But we're not a sketch plan anymore, you know. So I think that's all I really wanted to say unless there was any specific questions.

Any questions by council?

Go ahead. Yeah, one of the questions I've got is there's a lot of detention ponds. Where is all this water going? It detains the water, but the water is going somewhere. It's not sitting on the property.

Yeah. I could bring in the engineer up and talk to you better than me. I could explain it, but I think Madeline would do a better job than I would. Here she comes. Thank you.

I heard detention came running.

Where does it go?

Hi, Madeline Larman with Maggie Consultants. So yes, every time we build a detention basin, you're required to discharge it at the same location it is currently going to. So for the majority of the site, it all essentially ends up at Boone Creek currently, and that is where it will go next. with the development as well. The exception to that would be the three detention basins in the northwest quadrant, the two closest to Legend Lakes, and the other one at the corner there. Again, studied the ridge line, existing drainage pattern, you're not allowed to change existing drainage patterns, so we have to maintain those. We regulate the water, reduce the runoff via the detention basin, and those will discharge accordingly to provided existing storm sewer infrastructure.

Can I add something? You know, the real reason for the tension areas is to protect the downstream from massive charges during stormwater events. For instance, if a farm was frozen in the spring, all of a sudden the water runs off all at the same time and, you know, it gets in the creek and Downstream users are definitely impacted. So what they do is they put a sized pipe in there, and the flow is very steady. It's longer, but it's not a big rush of water.

Any other questions, comments? All right. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Thank you, everyone.

All right. Trish, please call the roll.

Other woman, Miller. Yes. Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Boehme? Yes. Alderman Glab?

No.

Alderman Bassey?

No.

Alderman Davis?

Yes.

Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Okay. That item has passed. Five verse two. All right. Lenar, we'll work with you on this project. we'll make sure that we make sure we protect the residents around it so thank you

All right, we'll go ahead and start.

All right, we're gonna continue 6B.

For a mini excavator purchase, motion to authorize staff to proceed with the purchase of a mini excavator and trailer from McCann in the amount of $61,815, including trade-in credit plus title and dock fees. I'm looking for a motion to approve. Alderman Miller.

I'll make the motion to approve with the purchase of a new mini excavator, which is really cute, and the trailer that matches. from McCann in the amount of $61,815, including the trading credit, title, and dock fees.

Thank you. Second? Alderman Bainey?

I'll second the motion for the cute mini excavator.

Thank you. Discussion on this item? See none. Trish, please call the roll.

Alderman Miller? Yes. Alderman Bainey? Yes. Alderman Glab? Yes. Alderman Doherty? Yes. Alderman Bassey? Yes. Alderman Davis? Yes. Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Thank you. Next item on the agenda is 6C, polymer feed unit purchase. Motion to authorize the purchase of a GPT polymer feed unit as outlined in fiscal year 26-27 capital investment plan for a total of $35,629 plus freight charges. Looking for a motion to approve. Alderman Glab. Motion. Second. Alderman Glab for a motion. Second by Alderman Davis. Any discussion on this item? Alderman Miller.

Along with garbage, I become the poop expert. So thank you, Director Adams, for giving us the opportunity to learn more about polymers. I spent three and a half hours with an engineer over the weekend. learning what this is, and it was kind of interesting. So thank you very much.

Any other discussion? No? Clerk, please call.

Alderman Glab?

Yes.

Alderman Davis?

Yes.

Alderman Baney? Yes. Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Bassey? Yes. Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Alderman Miller? Yes.

Thank you, counsel. Next item on the agenda is 6D, a dump truck purchase. I'm looking for a motion to authorize the staff to execute, one, a contract with Rush Truck Centers in the amount of $115,456, and two, a sales order with Bonnell INDUSTRIES OF DIXON, ILLINOIS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $158,833.61 FOR THE PROCURMENT OF A FULLY EQUIPPED INTERNATIONAL DUMP TRUCK WITH A PLOW AND ALL NECESSARY EQUIPMENT FOR A TOTAL OF $274,289.61. ALDERMAN COOK? I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION. THANK YOU. SECOND? ALDERMAN GLAM? ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS SIDE BY CITY COUNCIL? ALDERMAN GLAM?

Yeah, number one, when we talk all necessary equipment, how many leaves can you fit in the dump truck?

That wasn't part of the criteria when we specced this truck.

Add it on.

Any other discussion?

No, but you can spread it really good.

All right. Clerk, please call the roll.

Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Alderman Glab?

Yes.

Alderman Bainey? Yes. Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Bassey? Yes. Alderman Davis? Yes. Alderman Miller? Yes.

Thank you, council. No discussion items this evening. Any staff reports? Just the packet that you guys all received. I have no mayor's report. City council comments? Alderman Bainey?

I just want to say when I was reading the updates that are always provided to us after staff meetings, I don't say this enough, but I just think it's amazing how much training our police officers are going through as a whole and all the events that they are conducting through the community. And in addition, all the things that they did to make Fiesta Days another success. And just want to say thank you to our police department for staying on top of things, staying well trained and continuing to be the best around.

Yeah, and I, adding to that, acknowledge both Bill and Russ, your departments, all your efforts over the week. It's definitely a lot of work and you did fabulous. Thank you. Any other comments? Alderman Miller.

Yeah, and I'll echo the same. Fiesta Days, although it's a chamber event, it certainly requires our partnership. So kudos to Bill, his crew, Russ, his crew, and more importantly, Chief Burke and their crew. Without the police out there, I can't imagine what this would be like, particularly yesterday for the parade. Although I think the turnout was a little light for the parade, there were more kids than I think I've ever seen rushing into the street and having police presence. as frequent as we had them was helping keeping them safe. So it's been a busy 10 days. And it's all hands on deck, even though it's a chamber event. And I just want to give everybody kudos for showing up and doing the work because our community enjoys it. Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other comments? One Davis.

Yeah, just to kind of echo what everybody else said, I think you guys did an amazing job. One thing that we did notice with the barricades and stuff, while I thought that it might – people would just ignore them and kind of go over them and stuff, I think everybody stayed back. It helped widen the streets and made it a little safer that way, especially when – I didn't drive this year, but typically I drive and – with the kids coming out, it makes it a little hairy and stuff. So I think it worked out well. So thank you.

Any other comments by city council?

I thought it went really good. My grandkids and everything had a lot of fun throwing candy. They made sure that it was going toward the barricades so the little ones would not run out. So ESCAPED WITH MINOR INJURIES, AND IT WORKED OUT PRETTY GOOD. SO IT WAS A FUN TIME. AND I THANK THE COMMERCE FOR THAT. OH, AND EVERYBODY ELSE THAT VOLUNTEERED AND EVERYTHING. THEY ALL DID A HELL OF A JOB. A MOTION? GO AHEAD.

YEAH, I WAS JUST GOING TO BRING UP THE FACT THAT I THINK THE CROWD WAS A LITTLE SPARSE THIS YEAR COMPARED TO NORMAL. Unfortunately, I think it was because of the scare of the pollution and the air and everything else. And that was a shame because it was a beautiful day. But one of the things I noticed is it's amazing how many people had dogs out there. There's a ton of dog lovers out there and very well. Every one of them was very well behaved. No incidents or anything else. And some of them close to each other. And yet. I think the dog owners did a great job as far as training their dogs. With that, I'll make a motion to adjourn. Go ahead.

I just wanted to thank the McHenry Riverwalk Foundation and again, Bill Hobson. If you've not seen the mural, it's moving and takes your breath away. when you think of all those little pieces and how the artists put them all together to make that mosaic amazing. So I encourage all of our residents, if you haven't been down to Miller Point, please go down there and see the mural. It is truly a piece of art to be proud of. So thank you, Bill. Thank you, McKenna Riverwalk Foundation. What a great addition to our community. Thank you.

All right. Motion to approve by Alderman Glemm. Our motion to adjourn by Alderman Glemm. I approve with your... Second. Alderman Doherty? Second. Please call the roll.

Alderman Glab? Yes. Alderman Doherty?

Yes.

Alderman Bainey? Yes. Alderman Bassey? Yes. Alderman Davis?

Yes.

Alderman Cook?

Yes.

Alderman Miller? Yes.

Thank you, everyone. Have a good evening.