The Docket · Government Meeting · DKT-2026-000649

On the agenda: Rolling Meadows meeting — data center (Feb 17)

Past ⚠ Agenda Watch Rolling Meadows, Illinois · Tuesday, February 17, 2026 — 7 months ago

About this record

The published agenda for this February 17 meeting contains: "data center", "Data center". The meeting has passed; the record and its outcome live here permanently.

WhenTuesday, February 17, 2026
Check the agenda document for the meeting time.

WhereRolling Meadows, Illinois

Money$58 million was at stake

On the record“data center”“Data center”

The agenda, word for word

Government public record — the full text of the published document, archived August 12, 2026. Gold highlighting of key terms is ours, not the original’s. Read the original document ↗

89 pages · scroll to read

Page 1 of 89

AGENDA
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
City Hall – Council Chambers
3600 Kirchoff Road
Rolling Meadows, IL 60008

February 17, 2026
7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER

1. Review of Proposed Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Districts: "Keystone and Algonquin"
and "Orchard and Algonquin”
2. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process for the Algonquin Road and Golf Road
Corridors
3. Presentation of Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Launch
PUBLIC COMMENT
CLOSED SESSION
ADJOURNMENT

Page 2 of 89

Committee of the Whole – February 17, 2026
1)

Review of Proposed Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Districts:
"Keystone and Algonquin" and "Orchard and Algonquin"

Background & Summary: Following the Committee of the Whole’s discussion in July
2025, the City has begun to study the establishment of two new Tax Increment
Financing (TIF) Districts along the Algonquin Road corridor. These areas have
experienced significant disinvestment over recent years appear to be eligible for TIF
designation as "conservation areas" under the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation
Redevelopment Act. (For more information about TIF and the Act, please see the prior
Committee of the Whole memorandum).
On February 6, 2026, copies of eligibility reports and draft redevelopment plans were
filed in the office of the City Clerk. These documents, which were prepared by the
City’s consultant, S.B. Friedman, propose to redevelop these areas as follows:
•

Keystone and Algonquin TIF Area: Focuses on revitalizing the eastern portion
of the corridor, including a shopping center requiring facade and parking lot
repairs along with long vacant property at the end of Keystone Court.

•

Orchard and Algonquin TIF Area: Target the highly visible western gateway
near the I-90/Route 53 interchange, notably encompassing the former
Holidome hotel property, the "gold" office building at 3601 Algonquin Road, and
the sites of the proposed QuikTrip and redeveloped Armanetti liquor store.

Financial Impact & Goals: Approval of these TIFs is intended to provide funds for
public improvements, building rehabilitation, property assembly, and other eligible
redevelopment costs to spur private investment that would not occur but-for the
creation of the TIF district. For the Orchard and Algonquin RPA, the estimated eligible
redevelopment project costs that could be generated over the life of the TIF is $58
million. For the Keystone and Algonquin RPA, the estimated eligible redevelopment
costs that could be generated over the life of the TIF is $52 million. The cost to the
City’s general fund is essentially zero as the revenue generated by the new tax
increment is captured to pay for any eligible project costs.
Proposed TIF District Approval Timeline:
•

February 6, 2026: Final TIF redevelopment plans were filed with the City Clerk.

•

February 17, 2026: Study session held to review the proposed TIF districts.

•

February 24, 2026: City Council adoption of the resolution setting the time and
place for the Joint Review Board (JRB) meeting and the public hearing.

•

March 17, 2026: Convening of the Joint Review Board to receive community
feedback.

•

March 19-30, 2026: Publication and mailing of official public hearing notices to
taxpayers and relevant taxing districts.

•

April 14, 2026: Public hearing conducted by the City Council to receive
community feedback.

Page 3 of 89

•

April 28, 2026: Anticipated final City Council approval and adoption of the TIF
districts.

Requested Action: Members of the project team from S.B. Friedman will provide an
informational update presentation to the Committee of the Whole. No action is
requested by the City Council at this meeting.
Keystone and Algonquin TIF Area

Orchard and Algonquin TIF Area

Page 4 of 89

CITY OF ROLLING MEADOWS, IL

Algonquin & Keystone
Redevelopment Project Area

Tax Increment Financing District
Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan and Project
FINAL REPORT | January 23, 2026

Page 5 of 89

CITY OF ROLLING MEADOWS, IL

ALGONQUIN & KEYSTONE
Redevelopment Project Area
Tax Increment Financing District
Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan and Project
January 23, 2026

SB FRIEDMAN DEVELOPMENT ADVISORS, LLC
70 W. Madison St, Suite 3700, Chicago, IL 60602
T: 312.424.4250 F: 312.424.4262 E: [email protected]
Contact: Geoff Dickinson
T: 312.384.2404 E: [email protected]

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 6 of 89

CITY OF ROLLING MEADOWS, IL

Algonquin & Keystone Redevelopment Project Area
Tax Increment Financing District
Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan and Project
Table of Contents

SECTION

PAGE

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Eligibility Report ........................................................................................................................................................................... 9
3. Redevelopment Plan and Project ......................................................................................................................................... 20
Appendix 1: Limitations of the Eligibility Report and Consultant Responsibilities ...................................................... 31
Appendix 2: Glossary..................................................................................................................................................................... 32
Appendix 3: Algonquin & Keystone Proposed RPA Boundary Legal Description ...................................................... 35
Appendix 4: List of PINs in Algonquin & Keystone Proposed RPA ................................................................................. 36
LIST OF MAPS

PAGE

Map 1: Community Context .......................................................................................................................................................... 5
Map 2: Proposed RPA Boundary ................................................................................................................................................. 6
Map 3: Vacant and Improved Land ............................................................................................................................................ 7
Map 4: Existing Land Use ............................................................................................................................................................... 8
Map 5: Vacant Eligibility Factor (Two-Factor) .........................................................................................................................17
Map 6: Age of Structures ............................................................................................................................................................. 18
Map 7: Improved Land Factor: Deterioration ........................................................................................................................ 19
Map 8: Proposed Future Land Use ........................................................................................................................................... 22

SB FRIEDMAN DEVELOPMENT ADVISORS, LLC
70 W. Madison St, Suite 3700, Chicago, IL 60602
T: 312.424.4250 F: 312.424.4262 E: [email protected]
www.sbfriedman.com

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 7 of 89

1. Introduction
The Algonquin & Keystone Redevelopment Project Area (“Algonquin & Keystone RPA” or the “RPA”) is located
along one of the main commercial and business corridors in City of Rolling Meadows (the “City”). The area has
historically been a hub for business activity, even prior to Algonquin Road’s identification as a key commercial
corridor in the City’s first Comprehensive Plan in 1993. While the area is still a core part of the City’s commercial
ecosystem, there are significant existing retail and office vacancies. Returning these properties to productive
uses and investing in infrastructure that will support further redevelopment are top priorities for the City.
The City seeks to establish a tax increment financing (TIF) district to serve as an economic development tool
and promote redevelopment and revitalization along Algonquin Road near its intersection with Keystone
Court. The City engaged SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC (SB Friedman) in 2025 to conduct a
redevelopment project area eligibility study and prepare a redevelopment plan and project for the proposed
TIF district.
This document serves as the Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan and Project (together, the “Report”) for
the proposed Algonquin & Keystone Redevelopment Project Area (“Algonquin & Keystone RPA” or the “RPA”).
Section 2 of the Report, the Eligibility Report, details the eligibility factors found within the proposed RPA in
support of its designation as a “blighted area” for vacant land and a “conservation area” for improved land,
within the definitions set forth in the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4‐1 et seq., as amended (the “Act”). Section 3 of this Report, the Redevelopment Plan and Project, (the
“Redevelopment Plan”), outlines the comprehensive program to revitalize the proposed RPA, as required by
the Act.

Redevelopment Project Area
The proposed Algonquin & Keystone RPA is located within the City of Rolling Meadows in Cook County (the
“County”), as shown on Map 1. The proposed Algonquin & Keystone RPA consists of approximately 21 tax
parcels (16 improved parcels, 4 vacant parcels, and 1 right-of-way parcel) and 11 buildings. It comprises
approximately 27 acres of land, of which approximately 2 acres are vacant, 22 acres are improved, and 3 acres
are right-of-way. The parcels included in the proposed RPA are roughly bounded by Algonquin Road, Carriage
Way Drive, South Old Wilke Road, and Salt Creek, as illustrated in Map 2. SB Friedman’s analysis was completed
for both vacant parcels and improved parcels, as shown in Map 3. Based on SB Friedman’s research, the
proposed RPA currently consists of a mix of commercial and vacant land uses, as shown in Map 4.

Determination of Eligibility
This Report concludes that the proposed Algonquin & Keystone RPA is eligible for designation as a “blighted
area” for vacant land and as a “conservation area” for improved land, per the Act. Vacant land is any real
property without industrial, commercial or residential buildings, and has not been used for commercial
agricultural purposes in the past five years. For the purposes of analysis, in a previously developed area, parcels
that include side yards or parking lots related to an adjacent building are considered improved.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 8 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

VACANT PARCELS: BLIGHTED AREA FINDINGS
Per SB Friedman’s analysis, the vacant portion of the proposed RPA is eligible as a “blighted area” under the
two-factor test outlined in the Act. For the two-factor finding, these factors are defined under the Act at 65
ILCS 5/11‐74.4‐3 (a) and (b) and are more fully described in Appendix 2.

TWO-FACTOR ELIGIBILITY
Further, SB Friedman’s analysis indicated that the following two factors were found to be present to a
meaningful extent and reasonably distributed throughout the proposed RPA:
1.
2.

Lack of Growth in Equalized Assessed Value (“EAV”); and
Deterioration of Structures or Site Improvements in Neighboring Areas Adjacent to Vacant Land.

Thus, the vacant parcels in the proposed RPA satisfy the two-factor test and the vacant portion of the proposed
RPA is found to be blighted.

IMPROVED PARCELS: CONSERVATION AREA FINDINGS
For the improved land within the proposed RPA, data from the Cook County Assessor indicated that 91% of
primary structures in the proposed RPA are aged 35 years or older. This satisfies the requirement that 50% or
more of the structures in the area have an age of 35 years or more. Further, the following six (6) eligibility
factors have been found to be present to a meaningful extent and reasonably distributed throughout the
proposed RPA:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Lack of Growth in Equalized Assessed Value (“EAV”);
Deterioration;
Excessive Vacancies;
Presence of Structures below Minimum Code Standards;
Inadequate Utilities; and
Lack of Community Planning.

These factors are defined under the Act at 65 ILCS 5/11‐74.4‐3-(a) and (b) and are more fully described in
Appendix 2.
Based on the age of primary structures in the proposed RPA and the presence of six (6) eligibility factors, the
improved parcels in the proposed RPA qualify under a “conservation area” finding (age of structures plus at
least three eligibility factors).

SUMMARY OF ELIGIBILITY FINDINGS
SB Friedman found that the vacant portion of the proposed RPA qualifies as a “blighted area” under the twofactor test, and the improved portion of the proposed RPA qualifies as a “conservation area,” with 91% of the
primary structures within the proposed RPA at least 35 years of age or older and six (6) of the thirteen (13)
eligibility factors were found to be present to a meaningful extent and reasonably distributed within the
proposed RPA.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 9 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

These conditions hinder the potential to redevelop the proposed RPA and capitalize on its unique attributes.
The proposed RPA will benefit from a strategy that addresses aged buildings, deterioration, excessive
vacancies, and associated infrastructure to facilitate the overall improvement of its physical condition.

Redevelopment Plan Goal, Objectives and Strategy
GOAL. The overall goal of the Redevelopment Plan is to reduce or eliminate conditions that qualify the
proposed RPA as a vacant “blighted area” and an improved “conservation area”, and to provide the direction
and mechanisms necessary to redevelop the proposed RPA as a vibrant mixed-use district. Redevelopment of
the proposed RPA is intended to revitalize the area, strengthen the economic base, and enhance the City’s
overall quality of life.
OBJECTIVES. The following six (6) objectives support the overall goal of revitalization of the proposed RPA:
1.

Facilitate the physical improvement and/or rehabilitation of existing structures and façades within
the proposed RPA, and encourage the construction of new commercial development, where
appropriate;

Foster the replacement, repair, construction and/or improvement of public infrastructure, where
needed, to create an environment conducive to private investment;

Facilitate the renovation or construction of stormwater management systems and flood control
within the proposed RPA;

Provide resources for streetscaping, landscaping and signage to improve the image, attractiveness
and accessibility of the proposed RPA, create a cohesive identity for the proposed RPA and
surrounding area, and provide for buffering between different land uses and screening of
unattractive service facilities such as parking lots and loading areas, where appropriate;

Facilitate the assembly and preparation, including demolition and environmental clean-up, where
necessary, and marketing of available sites in the proposed RPA for redevelopment and new
development by providing resources as allowed by the Act; and

Support the goals and objectives of other overlapping plans, including the City of Rolling
Meadows Comprehensive Plan published in 2019 (the “2019 Comprehensive Plan”), the 2026
amendment and subsequent plans;

Coordinate available federal, state and local resources to further the goals of this Redevelopment
Plan;

STRATEGY. Redevelopment of the proposed RPA is to be achieved through an integrated and comprehensive
strategy that leverages public resources to stimulate additional private investment. The underlying strategy is
to use TIF, as well as other funding sources, to reinforce and encourage further private investment.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 10 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Financial Plan
ELIGIBLE COSTS. The Act outlines several categories of expenditures that can be funded using incremental
property taxes. These expenditures, referred to as eligible redevelopment project costs, include all reasonable
or necessary costs incurred or estimated to be incurred and any such costs incidental to this Redevelopment
Plan pursuant to the Act.
ESTIMATED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT COSTS. The estimated eligible redevelopment project costs of this
Redevelopment Plan are $52 million. The total of eligible redevelopment project costs provides an upper limit
on expenditures that are to be funded using tax increment revenues, exclusive of capitalized interest, issuance
costs, interest and other financing costs.
EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE OF PROPERTIES IN THE PROPOSED RPA. The 2024 EAV (the most recent
year in which assessed values and the equalization factor were available) of all taxable parcels in the proposed
RPA is $14,384,649. By tax year 2049 (collection year 2050), the total taxable EAV for the proposed RPA is
anticipated to be approximately $43 million.

Required Tests and Findings
The required conditions for the adoption of this Redevelopment Plan are found to be present within the
proposed Algonquin & Keystone RPA:
1.

The proposed RPA is 27 acres in size and thus satisfies the requirement that it be at least 1.5 acres;

Limited private investment has occurred in the proposed Algonquin & Keystone RPA over the last
five years;

Without the support of public resources, the redevelopment objectives for the proposed RPA
would most likely not be realized. Accordingly, “but for” the designation of a TIF district, these
projects would be unlikely to occur on their own;

The proposed Algonquin & Keystone RPA includes only those contiguous parcels of real property
that are expected to benefit substantially from the proposed Redevelopment Plan;

The Redevelopment Plan conforms to and proposes land uses that are consistent with the 2019
Comprehensive Plan and 2026 amendment;

The City certifies that no displacement will occur as a result of activities pursuant to this
Redevelopment Plan. Therefore, a Housing Impact Study is not required under the Act; and

The Redevelopment Plan is estimated be completed, and all obligations issued to finance
redevelopment costs shall be retired no later than December 31, 2049, if the ordinances
establishing the proposed RPA are adopted during 2050.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 11 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Map 1: Context

CITY OF
ROLLING
MEADOWS

PROPOSED
RPA
Municipal Boundary
Proposed RPA Boundary
Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 12 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

MEADOWBROOK INDUSTRIAL CT

S OLD WILKE RD

Map 2: Proposed RPA Boundary

RPA Parcels
Proposed RPA Boundary
Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 13 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

MEADOWBROOK INDUSTRIAL CT

S OLD WILKE RD

Map 3: Vacant and Improved Parcels in Proposed RPA

Vacant Parcels
Improved Parcels
Proposed RPA Boundary
Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 14 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

MEADOWBROOK INDUSTRIAL CT

S OLD WILKE RD

Map 4: Existing Land Use

Commercial

Multifamily

RPA Parcels

Vacant

Proposed RPA Boundary
Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 15 of 89

2. Eligibility Report
This report concludes that the proposed Algonquin & Keystone RPA is eligible for designation as a “blighted
area” for vacant land and as a “conservation area” for improved land, per the Act.

Provisions of the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act
Under the Act, two (2) primary avenues exist to establish eligibility for an area to permit the use of TIF for
redevelopment: declaring an area as a “blighted area” and/or a “conservation area.” “Blighted areas” are those
improved or vacant areas with blighting influences that are impacting the public safety, health, morals, or
welfare of the community, and are substantially impairing the growth of the tax base in the area. “Conservation
areas” are those improved areas that are deteriorating and declining and soon may become blighted. A
description of the statutory provisions of the Act is provided below.

Factors for Vacant Land
According to the Act, there are two ways by which vacant land can be designated as “blighted.” One way is to
find that at least two (2) of six (6) factors from the “Two-Factor Test” are present to a meaningful extent and
reasonably distributed throughout the proposed RPA. The second way is to find at least one (1) of the six (6)
factors under the “One-Factor Test” is present to a meaningful extent and reasonably distributed throughout
the proposed RPA.

TWO-FACTOR TEST
Under the provisions of the “blighted area” section of the Act, if the land is vacant, an area qualifies as “blighted’
if a combination of two (2) or more of the following factors may be identified, which combine to impact the
sound growth of the proposed RPA.
•
•
•
•
•
•

Obsolete Platting of Vacant Land
Diversity of Ownership
Tax and Special Assessment Delinquencies
Deterioration of Structures or Site Improvements in Neighboring Areas adjacent to the Vacant Land
Environmental Contamination
Lack of Growth in EAV

ONE-FACTOR TEST
Under the provisions of the “blighted area” section of the Act, if the land is vacant, an area qualifies as “blighted”
if one (1) or more of the following factors is found.
•
•
•
•

The area contains unused quarries, strip mines or strip mine ponds;
The area contains unused rail yards, rail track or railroad rights-of-way;
The area, prior to its designation, is subject to or contributes to chronic flooding;
The area contains unused or illegal dumping sites;

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 16 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

•
•

The area was designated as a town center prior to January 1, 1982, is between 50 and 100 acres, and
is 75% vacant land; or
The area qualified as blighted prior to becoming vacant.

Factors for Improved Areas
According to the Act, “blighted areas” for improved land must demonstrate at least five (5) of the following
eligibility factors, which threaten the health, safety, morals or welfare of the proposed district. “Conservation
areas” must have a minimum of 50% of the total structures within the area aged 35 years or older, plus a
combination of three (3) or more additional eligibility factors that are detrimental to the public safety, health,
morals or welfare, and that could result in such an area becoming a “blighted area.” The following are eligibility
factors for improved areas:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Dilapidation
Obsolescence
Deterioration
Presence of Structures below Minimum
Code Standards
Illegal Use of Individual Structures
Excessive Vacancies
Lack of Ventilation, Light or Sanitary
Facilities

•
•

•
•
•
•

Inadequate Utilities
Excessive Land Coverage and
Overcrowding of Structures and
Community Facilities
Deleterious Land Use or Layout
Environmental Clean-Up
Lack of Community Planning
Lack of Growth in EAV

A definition of each factor is provided in Appendix 2.

Methodology Overview
SB Friedman conducted the following analyses to determine whether the proposed Algonquin & Keystone RPA
is eligible for designation as a “blighted area” for vacant land and as a “conservation area” for improved land,
per the Act:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Parcel-by-parcel field observations and photography documenting external property conditions;
Analysis of historical EAV trends for the last six years (five year-to-year periods) for which data are
available and final (2019-2024) from the Cook County Assessor’s Office;
Review of building age data from the Cook County Assessor’s Office;
Review of parcel-level GIS shapefile data provided by the County;
Review of commercial real estate data from CoStar;
Review of building permit records (2020-2025);
Review of a memorandum provided by the City regarding locations, ages and conditions of water,
stormwater and sanitary sewer infrastructure; and
Review of current (2019) and first (1993) comprehensive plans and the 2026 amendment provided by
the City.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 17 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

map of the proposed RPA to determine which factors were present to a meaningful extent and reasonably
distributed throughout the proposed RPA.

Blighted Area Findings: Vacant Parcels
Per SB Friedman’s analysis, the vacant portion of the proposed RPA is eligible to be designated as a “blighted
area” per the two-factor findings. These two findings are detailed below and shown in Map 5 at the end of
this eligibility section.

TWO-FACTOR BLIGHTED FINDING
The following two factors were found to be present:

LACK OF GROWTH IN EAV

The Act defines lack of growth in EAV one or more of the following conditions being true. The total EAV of
the vacant portion of the redevelopment project area under evaluation either declined for at least three (3) of
the last five (5) year-to-year periods; increased at an annual rate that was less than the balance of the City for
at least three (3) of the past five (5) year-to-year periods; or increased at an annual rate that was less than the
Consumer Price Index for at least three (3) of the past (5) year-to-year periods. A full definition is provided in
Appendix 2.
SB Friedman tabulated the EAV history of all vacant parcels in the proposed RPA for the previous six years (five
year‐to‐year periods) using data provided by the Cook County Assessor and Cook County Clerk. The most
recent year for which final information was available was 2024. SB Friedman’s analysis identified a lack of EAV
growth within the vacant portion of the proposed RPA in accordance with the following criteria, as defined in
the Act:
1.

The EAV growth rate of the proposed vacant RPA parcels has been less than the growth rate of
the Consumer Price Index for six (6) of the last five (5) year‐to‐year periods.

This eligibility factor is present to a meaningful extent and assessed area-wide throughout the vacant portion
of the proposed Algonquin & Keystone RPA. A summary of SB Friedman’s findings is presented in Table 1.
Table 1: Annual Percentage Change in EAV, 2019-2024
2019
2020
Vacant Proposed RPA Parcels
$0.26 M
$0.29 M
EAV
Percent Change
--10.5%
Change in CPI [1]

Vacant Proposed RPA Parcels Growth Less Than CPI

---

1.1%

---

2021

2022

2023

2024

$0.27 M

$0.26 M

$0.27 M

-6.8%

-2.2%
7.6%

2.7%

3.3%

0.6%

YES

4.2%

3.5%

[1] Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers and all items, in the Chicago-Naperville-Elgin area, not seasonally adjusted.
Source: Cook County Assessor; SB Friedman; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI data for Chicago-Naperville-Elgin area

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 18 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

DETERIORATION OF STRUCTURES OR SITE IMPROVEMENTS IN NEIGHBORING AREAS
ADJACENT TO THE VACANT LAND

According to the Act, evidence of structural or site improvement deterioration and disinvestment in the area
adjacent to the vacant land may substantiate why new development has not previously occurred on the vacant
parcels.
All four vacant parcels in the RPA are adjacent to parcels or public rights-of-way exhibiting deterioration, as
shown in Map 5. Surface improvement deterioration was the most common, including deterioration of streets
and parking lots. Catalogued surface improvement included cracks in infrastructure, alligatoring of pavement,
and cracking and crumbling of curbs and sidewalks. Building deterioration included missing fascia and roof
damage. Deterioration of surface improvements and buildings can make it appear as though the proposed
RPA lacks investment and can make it more difficult to attract new businesses or consumers. The factor was
found to be meaningfully present and reasonably distributed throughout the proposed RPA.

Conservation Area Findings: Improved Parcels
Based on the conditions found within the proposed RPA at the completion of SB Friedman’s research, it has
been determined that the improved land within the proposed RPA meets the eligibility requirements of the
Act to be classified as a “conservation area.” Of the 11 primary structures in the proposed RPA, 10 structures
(91%) are 35 years of age or older, as they were constructed before 1990. Map 6 shows the location of primary
structures that are 35 years or older. SB Friedman’s research indicates that the following six (6) factors are
present to a meaningful extent and reasonably distributed throughout the proposed RPA:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Lack of Growth in EAV
Deterioration
Presence of Structures below Minimum Code Standards
Inadequate Utilities
Lack of Community Planning
Excessive Vacancies

Each eligibility factor that is present to a meaningful extent and reasonably distributed throughout the
proposed RPA is summarized below.

LACK OF GROWTH IN EAV

The Act defines lack of growth in EAV as having the total EAV of the improved portion of the proposed RPA
under evaluation either decline for at least three (3) of the last five (5) year-to-year periods; or increase at an
annual rate that was less than the balance of the City for at least three (3) of the past five (5) year-to-year
periods; or increase at an annual rate that was less than the Consumer Price Index for at least three (3) of the
past (5) year-to-year periods. A full definition is provided in Appendix 2.
SB Friedman tabulated the EAV history of all proposed improved RPA tax parcels for the previous five year‐to‐
year periods using EAV data provided by the Cook County Assessor. The most recent year for which final
information was available was 2024. SB Friedman’s analysis identified a lack of EAV growth within the proposed
RPA in accordance with the following criteria, as defined in the Act:
SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 19 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

1.
2.

The EAV growth rate of the proposed improved RPA parcels has been less than the growth rate of
the balance of the City for three (3) of the last five (5) year-to-year periods; and
The EAV growth rate for the proposed improved RPA parcels has been less than the growth rate
of the Consumer Price Index for three (3) of the last five (5) year‐to‐year periods.

This eligibility factor is present to a meaningful extent and assessed area-wide throughout the improved
portion of the proposed Algonquin & Keystone RPA. A summary of SB Friedman’s findings is presented in
Table 2.
Table 2: Percentage Change in Annual EAV, 2019-2024
2019
2020
Improved Study Area Parcels
$13.6 M
$14.8 M
EAV
Percent Change
--8.8%
City EAV Less Proposed
$922.8 M
$929.1 M
Improved RPA Parcels
Change in City EAV Less
--0.7%
Proposed Improved RPA Parcels
Proposed Improved RPA
Parcels - Growth Less Than
--NO
City
Change in CPI [1]

Proposed Improved RPA
Parcels - Growth Less Than CPI

2021

2022

2023

2024

$12.9 M

$13.9 M

$14.0 M

$14.1 M

-13.4%

8.1%

0.9%

0.6%

$858.4 M

$987.9 M

$998.8 M

$999.7 M

-7.6%

15.1%

1.1%

0.1%

YES

---

1.1%

4.2%

7.6%

3.3%

3.5%

---

YES

DETERIORATION

The Act defines deterioration as defects including, but not limited to, major defects in the secondary building
components such as doors, windows, porches, gutters and downspouts, and fascia. With respect to surface
improvements, that the condition of roadways, alleys, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, off-street parking, and surface
storage areas evidence deterioration including but not limited to, surface cracking, crumbling, potholes,
depressions, loose paving material, and weeds protruding through paved surfaces.
Physical deterioration was observed on 12 parcels of 16 improved parcels (75% of improved parcels) as shown
in Map 7. The most common form of deterioration was on surface improvements, including streets, parking
lots and alleys. Catalogued surface improvement deterioration included cracks in infrastructure, alligatoring of
pavement, and cracking and/or crumbling of curbs and/or sidewalks. Building deterioration included
stairstepping in brick, cracked foundations, missing fascia, and water damage. Deterioration of buildings and
surface improvements can make it appear as though the proposed RPA lacks investment and can make it more
difficult to attract new businesses or consumers. This factor was found to be meaningfully present and
reasonably distributed throughout the proposed RPA.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 20 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

INADEQUATE UTILITIES

The Act defines inadequate utilities as underground and overhead utilities, such as storm sewers and storm
drainage, sanitary sewers, water lines, and gas, telephone and electrical services, which are:
1.
2.
3.

Of insufficient capacity to serve the uses in the redevelopment project area;
Deteriorated, antiquated, obsolete or in disrepair; or
Lacking within the redevelopment project area.

Based on the memorandum provided by the City’s Public Works Department, 100% of the improved parcels
within the proposed RPA have insufficient storm sewer capacity, with storm sewer systems built on average 45
years ago. All parcels do not meet current design standards for volume control or stormwater detention
pursuant to the Metropolitan Water Reclamation Districts Watershed Management Ordinance requirements.
Based on these conditions, the inadequate utilities factor was found to be present to a meaningful extent and
reasonably distributed throughout the improved parcels in the proposed RPA.

PRESENCE OF STRUCTURES BELOW MINIMUM CODE STANDARDS

Per the Act, structures below minimum code standards are those that do not meet applicable standards of
zoning, subdivision, building, fire and other governmental codes. The principal purpose of such codes is to
protect the health and safety of the public, including building occupants, pedestrians and occupants of
neighboring structures.
Based on the memorandum provided by the City’s Public Works Department, stormwater infrastructure serving
100% of the parcels within the proposed RPA does not meet current design standards for volume control or
stormwater detention pursuant to the Metropolitan Water Reclamation Districts Watershed Management
Ordinance requirements. Based on these conditions, the presence of structures below minimum code factor
was found to be present to a meaningful extent and reasonably distributed throughout the proposed RPA.

LACK OF COMMUNITY PLANNING

Lack of community planning within the proposed RPA is an area-wide factor not necessarily attributable to any
one parcel. The Act provides that “Lack of Community Planning” can be found in areas that have been
developed without the benefit of a comprehensive plan, and as a result, have seen negative consequences.
Examples of negative consequences include: incompatible land use relationships, inadequate street layout,
improper subdivision, parcels of inadequate shape and size to meet contemporary development standards, or
other related conditions.
The City was incorporated in 1955 but did not produce a comprehensive plan until 1993, by which time 91%
(10 of 11) of the buildings in the proposed RPA had been constructed. Per the City’s 1993 Comprehensive Plan,
the proposed RPA is in the Algonquin Road corridor, which the City should “undertake a redevelopment and
design process” for, and “explore the means to improve the corridor both aesthetically and functionally.” The
lack of planning involved in the development of the proposed RPA has resulted in the following adverse
outcomes identified in the City’s most recent 2019 Comprehensive Plan:

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 21 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

•
•
•

Many curb cuts and a lack of cross (property) access, which inhibit both vehicular and pedestrian
traffic;
Few pedestrian crosswalks and no bike facilities; and
A lack of consistent character due to the mix of uses, many of which are “older and potentially
obsolete” or “reaching the end of their economic viability”.

The 2019 Plan reiterates a need for redevelopment of the area, citing an opportunity for “corridor enhancement
and increased economic development in the City.” This factor is evaluated area-wide and is found to be present
to a meaningful extent throughout the proposed RPA.

EXCESSIVE VACANCIES

The Act defines excessive vacancies as the presence of buildings that are unoccupied or under-utilized and
that represent an adverse influence on the area because of the frequency, extent or duration of the vacancies.
As of October 2025 data from CoStar, the proposed RPA has an overall commercial vacancy rate of 32.9%. The
relatively high vacancy rate within the proposed RPA is driven by both office vacancy (a 57% vacancy rate) and
retail vacancy (a 7.2% vacancy rate). The proposed RPA is located within the Algonquin Road Corridor, which
was identified in the City’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan as a key commercial sub area alongside three other areas:
the Kirchoff Road Corridor District, the Northwest Industrial District, and the Golf Road Corridor. SB Friedman
assessed the commercial vacancy rate across portions of these key sub areas that include a similar land use
mix to the proposed RPA. The portions of these sub areas assessed by SB Friedman and shown in Table 3 are:
1.
2.
3.

The commercial area including and adjoining the triangle formed by Algonquin Road, Golf Road, and
New Wilke Road;
The commercial area along Kirchoff Road around its intersection with Meadow Drive; and
The commercial area including and adjoining the triangle formed by Golf, Arlington Heights, and
Algonquin Roads

The proposed RPA’s overall commercial vacancy rate, office vacancy rate, and retail vacancy rate are higher
than the vacancy rates of all three comparable areas, as shown in Table 3 below. Additionally, the overall
commercial vacancy rate, office vacancy rate, and retail vacancy rate in the proposed RPA are higher than the
vacancy rates of the City overall (less the RPA parcels). Thus, we find that vacancy within the proposed RPA
represents an adverse influence on the area due to the extent of vacancies and we conclude that this eligibility
factor is present to a meaningful extent for the proposed RPA.
Table 3: Vacancy in the Algonquin & Keystone RPA and Comparable Commercial Corridors

Overall Commercial
Vacancy Rate
Office Vacancy Rate
Retail Vacancy Rate
Source: CoStar, SB Friedman

Proposed
Algonquin &
Keystone RPA

1. New Wilke Rd,
Algonquin Rd, and
Golf Rd

2. Kirchoff Rd

3. Golf Rd,
Arlington Heights
Rd, Algonquin Rd

32.9%

16.2%

1.6%

3.6%

57.0%

35.2%

3.0%

7.2%

4.0%

1.6%

3.1%

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 22 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Summary of Findings
SB Friedman has found that the proposed RPA qualifies to be designated as a “blighted area” for vacant land
and as a “conservation area” for improved land. The vacant land is eligible under a two-factor test due to a
lack of growth in EAV and deterioration of structures or site improvements in neighboring areas adjacent to
the vacant land. The improved land is eligible as a “conservation area”, with 91% of the structures within the
proposed RPA at least 35 years of age or older, and six (6) of the thirteen (13) eligibility factors present to a
meaningful extent and reasonably distributed within the proposed RPA.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 23 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

MEADOWBROOK INDUSTRIAL CT

S OLD WILKE RD

Map 5: Vacant Land Two-Factor: Deterioration of Structures or Site Improvements Adjacent to the Vacant
Land

Deterioration

Improved Parcels

Proposed RPA Boundary

Vacant Parcels

Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 24 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

MEADOWBROOK INDUSTRIAL CT

S OLD WILKE RD

Map 6: Improved Land Factor: Age of Structures

RPA Parcels

Primary Structure Aged 35 Years or Older

Proposed RPA Boundary

Primary Structure Aged Less Than 35 Years

Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 25 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

MEADOWBROOK INDUSTRIAL CT

S OLD WILKE RD

Map 7: Improved Land Factor: Deterioration

Deterioration

Improved Parcels

Proposed RPA Boundary

Vacant Parcels

Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 26 of 89

3. Redevelopment Plan and Project
This document describes the comprehensive redevelopment program proposed to be undertaken by the City
to create an environment in which private investment can reasonably occur. The redevelopment program will
be implemented over the life of the proposed RPA. If a redevelopment project is successful, various new
projects will be undertaken that will assist in alleviating blighting conditions and promoting rehabilitation and
development in the proposed RPA.

Redevelopment Needs of the Proposed RPA
Currently, the proposed RPA is comprised of vacant land and aged buildings that are characterized by a failure
to meet current code standards, a lack of growth in property values, deterioration, excessive vacancies,
inadequate utilities, and a lack of community planning. These conditions reduce the value of the properties in
the area and make the proposed RPA less competitive, overall, with property in other communities, thus
limiting local area employment and development opportunities, and contributing to the lack of new investment
in the proposed RPA.
The existing conditions for the proposed RPA suggest six (6) major redevelopment needs:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Capital improvements that further the objectives set forth in this Redevelopment Plan;
Site preparation, environmental remediation and stormwater management;
Redevelopment of underutilized parcels;
Streetscape and infrastructure improvements, including utilities;
Rehabilitation of existing buildings; and
Resources for commercial, residential, public/private institutional, community facility, park/open
space, and utility development.

The goals, objectives and strategies discussed below have been developed to address these needs and
facilitate the sustainable redevelopment of the proposed RPA.

GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGY
GOAL. The overall goal of the Redevelopment Plan is to reduce or eliminate conditions that qualify the
proposed RPA as a vacant blighted area and an improved “conservation area”, and to provide the direction
and mechanisms necessary to redevelop the proposed RPA as a vibrant commercial district. Redevelopment
of the proposed RPA is intended to revitalize the area, strengthen the economic base, and enhance the City’s
overall quality of life.
OBJECTIVES. The following six (6) objectives support the overall goal of revitalization of the proposed RPA:
1.

Facilitate the physical improvement and/or rehabilitation of existing structures and façades within
the proposed RPA, and encourage the construction of new commercial development, where
appropriate;

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 27 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Foster the replacement, repair, construction and/or improvement of public infrastructure where
needed, to create an environment conducive to private investment;

Facilitate the renovation or construction of stormwater management systems and flood control
within the proposed RPA;

Support the goals and objectives of other overlapping plans, including the City’s 2019
Comprehensive Plan, the 2026 amendment and subsequent plans;

Coordinate available federal, state and local resources to further the goals of this Redevelopment
Plan;

Proposed Future Land Use
The proposed future land use of the proposed RPA, as shown in Map 8, reflects the objectives of this
Redevelopment Plan. For the purposes of this plan, the mixed-use designation is meant to allow for a variety
of uses throughout the proposed RPA in a manner that is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and
2026 amendment. The mixed-use designation allows for the following land uses within the proposed RPA:
•
•
•
•

Commercial
Office
Business Park
Residential

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 28 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

MEADOWBROOK INDUSTRIAL CT

S OLD WILKE RD

Map 8: Proposed Future Land Use

Mixed-Use
RPA Parcels
Proposed RPA Boundary
Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

Financial Plan
ELIGIBLE COSTS
The Act outlines several categories of expenditures that can be funded using tax increment revenues. These
expenditures, referred to as eligible redevelopment project costs, include all reasonable or necessary costs
incurred or estimated to be incurred, and any such costs incidental to this Redevelopment Plan pursuant to
the Act. The City may also reimburse private entities for certain costs incurred in the development and/or
redevelopment process. Such costs may include, without limitation, the following:
1.

Costs of studies, surveys, development of plans and specifications, and implementation and
administration of the redevelopment plan including, but not limited to, staff and professional service
costs for architectural, engineering, legal, financial, planning or other services (excluding lobbying

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 29 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

expenses), provided that no charges for professional services are based on a percentage of the tax
increment collected, as more fully set forth in 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(q)(1).
2.

The costs of marketing sites within the redevelopment project area to prospective businesses,
developers and investors.

Property assembly costs, including but not limited to, acquisition of land and other property, real or
personal, or rights or interests therein, demolition of buildings, site preparation, site improvements
that serve as an engineered barrier addressing ground-level or below-ground environmental
contamination, including, but not limited to parking lots and other concrete or asphalt barriers, and
the clearing and grading of land as more fully set forth in 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(q)(2).

Costs of rehabilitation, reconstruction, or repair or remodeling of existing public or private buildings,
fixtures and leasehold improvements, as more fully set forth in 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(q)(3); and the costs
of replacing an existing public building if pursuant to the implementation of a redevelopment project,
the existing public building is to be demolished to use the site for private investment or devoted to a
different use requiring private investment.

Costs of the construction of public works or improvements, subject to the limitations in Section 1174.4-3(q)(4) of the Act.

Costs of job training and retraining projects, including the costs of “welfare to work” programs
implemented by businesses located within the redevelopment project area, as more fully set forth in
65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(q)(5).

Financing costs, including but not limited to all necessary and incidental expenses related to the
issuance of obligations and which may include payment of interest on any obligations issued
hereunder including interest accruing during the estimated period of construction of any
redevelopment project for which such obligations are issued and for not exceeding 36 months
thereafter and including reasonable reserves related thereto.

To the extent the municipality by written agreement accepts and approves the same, all or a portion
of a taxing district’s capital costs resulting from the redevelopment project necessarily incurred or to
be incurred within a taxing district in furtherance of the objectives of this Redevelopment Plan.

An elementary, secondary or unit school district’s increased per pupil tuition costs attributable to net
new pupils added to the district living in assisted housing units will be reimbursed, as further defined
in the Act.

10.

A library district’s increased per patron costs attributable to net new persons eligible to obtain a library
card living in assisted housing units, as further defined in the Act.

11.

Relocation costs to the extent that the municipality determines that relocation costs shall be paid or is
required to make payment of relocation costs by federal or state law, or by Section 11-74.4-3(n)(7) of
the Act.

12.

Payment in lieu of taxes, as defined in the Act.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 30 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

13.

Costs of job training, retraining, advanced vocational education or career education, including, but
not limited to, courses in occupational, semi-technical or technical fields leading directly to
employment, incurred by one or more taxing districts, as more fully set forth in 65 ILCS 5/11-74.43(q)(10).

14.

Interest costs incurred by a developer, as more fully set forth in 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(q)(11), related to
the construction, renovation or rehabilitation of a redevelopment project provided that:
a.

Such costs are to be paid directly from the special tax allocation fund established, pursuant
to the Act;

Such payments in any one year may not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the annual interest
costs incurred by the developer with regard to the development project during that year;

If there are not sufficient funds available in the special tax allocation fund to make the payment
pursuant to this provision, then the amounts so due shall accrue and be payable when
sufficient funds are available in the special tax allocation fund;

The total of such interest payments paid, pursuant to the Act, may not exceed thirty percent
(30%) of the total of: (i) cost paid or incurred by the developer for the redevelopment project;
and (ii) redevelopment project costs excluding any property assembly costs and any
relocation costs incurred by the municipality, pursuant to the Act;

For the financing of rehabilitated or new housing for low-income households and very lowincome households, as defined in Section 3 of the Illinois Affordable Housing Act, the
percentage of seventy-five percent (75%) shall be substituted for thirty percent (30%) in
subparagraphs 14b and 14d above; and

Instead of the interest costs described above in paragraphs 14b and 14d, a municipality may
pay from tax incremental revenues up to fifty percent (50%) of the cost of construction,
renovation and rehabilitation of new housing units (for ownership or rental) to be occupied
by low-income households and very low-income households, as defined in Section 3 of the
Illinois Affordable Housing Act, as more fully described in the Act. If the units are part of a
residential redevelopment project that includes units not affordable to low- and very lowincome households, only the low- and very low-income units shall be eligible for this benefit
under the Act.

Unless explicitly provided in the Act, the cost of construction of new privately-owned buildings shall not be an
eligible redevelopment project cost.
If a Special Service Area is established pursuant to the Special Service Area Tax Act, 35 ILCS 235/0.01 et seq.,
then any tax increment revenues derived from the tax imposed pursuant to the Special Service Area Tax Act
may be used within the redevelopment project area for the purposes permitted by the Special Service Area
Tax Act as well as the purposes permitted by the Act.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 31 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

ESTIMATED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT COSTS
The total eligible redevelopment project costs define an upper expenditure limit that may be funded using tax
increment revenues, exclusive of capitalized interest, issuance costs, interest, and other financing costs. The
totals of line items are not intended to place a limit on the described expenditures. Adjustments to the
estimated line-item costs are expected and may be made administratively by the City without amendment to
this Redevelopment Plan, either increasing or decreasing line item costs because of changed redevelopment
costs and needs. Each individual project cost will be re-evaluated in light of projected private development
and resulting incremental tax revenues as it is considered for public financing under the provisions of the Act.
The estimated eligible costs of this Redevelopment Plan are shown in Table 4.
Additional funding in the form of state and federal grants, private developer contributions, and other outside
sources may be pursued by the City as a means of financing improvements and facilities within the proposed
RPA.
Table 4: Estimated TIF-Eligible Redevelopment Project Costs

Eligible Expense [1]

Administration and Professional Service Costs
Site Marketing Costs
Property Assembly and Site Preparation Costs
Costs of Building Rehabilitation
Costs of Construction of Public Works or Improvements
Costs of Job Training or Retraining (Businesses)
Financing Costs
Taxing District Capital Costs
Relocation Costs
Costs of Job Training (Community College)
Interest Costs (Developer or Property Owner)
TOTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT COSTS [2] [3] [4]

[1] Described in more detail in Eligible Costs Section.

Estimated Project Costs
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$11,000,000
$15,300,000
$20,000,000
$50,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
1,000,000
$50,000
$600,000
$52,000,000

[2] Total Redevelopment Project Costs exclude any additional financing costs, including any interest expense, capitalized interest,
costs of issuance, and costs associated with optional redemptions. These costs are subject to prevailing market conditions and are
in addition to Total Redevelopment Project Costs.
[3] The amount of the Total Redevelopment Project Costs that can be incurred in the proposed RPA may be reduced by the
amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in contiguous RPAs, or those separated from the proposed RPA only by a public
right-of-way, that are permitted under the Act to be paid, and are paid, from incremental property taxes generated in the proposed
RPA, but may not be reduced by the amount of redevelopment project costs incurred in the proposed RPA that are paid from
incremental property taxes generated in contiguous RPAs or those separated from the proposed RPA only by a public right-ofway.
[4] All costs are in 2026 dollars and may be increased by 5% after adjusting for annual inflation reflected in the Consumer Price
Index (CPI), published by the U.S. Department of Labor. In addition to the above stated costs, each issue of obligations issued to
finance a phase of the Redevelopment Plan may include an amount of proceeds sufficient to pay customary and reasonable
charges associated with the issuance of such obligations, including interest costs.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 32 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

PHASING, SCHEDULING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT, AND ESTIMATED DATES OF COMPLETION
Each private project within the proposed RPA receiving TIF benefits shall be governed by the terms of a written
redevelopment agreement entered into by a designated developer and the City of Rolling Meadows. This
Redevelopment Plan is estimated to be completed, and all obligations issued to finance redevelopment costs
are estimated to be retired, no later than December 31 of the year in which the payment to the City provided
in the Act is to be made with respect to ad valorem taxes levied in the twenty-third calendar year following the
year in which the ordinance approving this proposed RPA is adopted. This Redevelopment Plan is estimated
to be completed, and all obligations issued to finance redevelopment costs shall be retired no later than
December 31, 2050 if the ordinances establishing the proposed RPA are adopted during 2026.

SOURCES OF FUNDS TO PAY COSTS
Funds necessary to pay for redevelopment project costs and/or municipal obligations, which may be issued or
incurred to pay for such costs, are to be derived principally from tax increment revenues and/or proceeds from
municipal obligations, which have as a repayment source tax increment revenue. To secure the issuance of
these obligations and the developer’s performance of redevelopment agreement obligations, the City may
require the utilization of guarantees, deposits, reserves, and/or other forms of security made available by
private sector developers. The City may incur redevelopment project costs that are paid from the funds of the
City other than incremental taxes, and the City then may be reimbursed for such costs from incremental taxes.
The tax increment revenue, which will be used to fund tax increment obligations and eligible redevelopment
project costs, shall be the incremental real property tax revenues. Incremental real property tax revenue is
attributable to the increase of the current EAV of each taxable lot, block, tract or parcel of real property in the
proposed RPA over and above the certified initial EAV of each such property.
Other sources of funds, which may be used to pay for development costs and associated obligations issued or
incurred, include land disposition proceeds, state and federal grants, investment income, private investor and
financial institution funds, and other sources of funds and revenues as the municipality and developer may
deem appropriate.
The proposed RPA may be or become contiguous to or be separated only by a public right-of-way from, other
redevelopment areas created under the Act (65 ILCS 5/11 74.4 4 et. seq.). The City may utilize net incremental
property tax revenues received from the proposed RPA to pay eligible redevelopment project costs, or
obligations issued to pay such costs, in other contiguous redevelopment project areas, or those separated only
by a public right-of-way, and vice versa. The amount of revenue from the proposed RPA made available to
support such contiguous redevelopment project areas, or those separated only by a public right-of-way, when
added to all amounts used to pay eligible redevelopment project costs within the proposed RPA, shall not at
any time exceed the Total Redevelopment Project Costs described in Table 4 of this Redevelopment Plan.

ISSUANCE OF OBLIGATIONS
To finance project costs, the City may issue bonds or obligations secured by the anticipated tax increment
revenue generated within the proposed RPA, or such other bonds or obligations as the City may deem as
appropriate. The City may require the utilization of guarantees, deposits or other forms of security made
available by private sector developers to secure such obligations. In addition, the City may provide other legally
permissible credit enhancements to any obligations issued pursuant to the Act.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 33 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

All obligations issued by the City pursuant to this Redevelopment Plan and the Act shall be retired within the
timeframe described under “Phasing, Scheduling of the Redevelopment, and Estimated Dates of Completion”
above. Also, the final maturity date of any such obligations that are issued may not be later than 20 years from
their respective dates of issue. One or more of a series of obligations may be sold at one or more times in
order to implement this Redevelopment Plan. The amounts payable in any year as principal and interest on all
obligations issued by the City shall not exceed the amounts available from tax increment revenues, or other
sources of funds, if any, as may be provided by ordinance. Obligations may be of parity or senior/junior lien
nature. Obligations issued may be serial or term maturities, and may or may not be subject to mandatory,
sinking fund or optional redemptions.
In addition to paying redevelopment project costs, tax increment revenues may be used for the scheduled
and/or early retirement of obligations, and for reserves and bond sinking funds.

MOST RECENT EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE OF PROPERTIES IN THE PROPOSED RPA
The purpose of identifying the most recent EAV of the proposed RPA is to provide an estimate of the initial
EAV for the purpose of annually calculating the incremental EAV and incremental property taxes of the
proposed RPA. The 2024 EAV (the most recent year in which final assessed values and equalization factor were
available) of all taxable parcels in the proposed RPA is $14,384,649. This total EAV amount by property index
number (“PIN”) is summarized in Appendix 4. The EAV is subject to verification by the Cook County Assessor’s
Office. After verification, the final figure shall be certified by the Cook County Clerk, and shall become the
“Certified Initial EAV” from which all incremental property taxes in the proposed RPA will be calculated by the
County.

ANTICIPATED EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE
By tax year 2049 (collection year 2050), the total taxable EAV for the proposed RPA is anticipated to be
approximately $43 million.

Impact of the Redevelopment Project
This Redevelopment Plan is expected to have short- and long-term financial impacts on the affected taxing
districts. During the period when TIF is utilized, real estate tax increment revenues from the increases in EAV
over and above the Certified Initial EAV (established at the time of adoption of this document) may be used
to pay eligible redevelopment project costs for the proposed RPA. To the extent that real property tax
increment is not required for such purposes, revenues shall be declared surplus and become available for
distribution annually to area taxing districts in the manner provided by the Act. At the time when the proposed
RPA is no longer in place under the Act, the real estate tax revenues resulting from the redevelopment of the
proposed RPA will be distributed to all taxing districts levying taxes against property located in the proposed
RPA. These revenues will then be available for use by the affected taxing districts.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 34 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

DEMAND ON TAXING DISTRICT SERVICES AND PROGRAMS TO ADDRESS FINANCIAL AND SERVICE
IMPACT
In 1994, the Act was amended to require an assessment of any financial impact of a redevelopment project
area on, or any increased demand for service from, any taxing district affected by the redevelopment plan, and
a description of any program to address such financial impacts or increased demand.
Replacement of vacant and underutilized buildings and sites with active and more intensive uses may result in
additional demands on services and facilities provided by the districts. Given the preliminary nature of this
Redevelopment Plan, specific fiscal impacts on the taxing districts and increases in demand for services
provided by those districts cannot accurately be assessed within the scope of this Plan. At this time, no special
programs are proposed for these taxing districts. The City intends to monitor development in the area and
should demand increase, the City intends to work with the affected taxing districts to determine what, if any,
program is necessary to provide adequate services.
The following taxing districts presently levy taxes on properties within the proposed RPA:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Arlington Heights Township High School District 214
City of Rolling Meadows
Cook County
Cook County Consolidated Elections
Elk Grove General Assistance
Elk Grove Township
Elk Grove Township Road Fund
Forest Preserve District of Cook County
Harper Community College District 512
Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago
Northwest Mosquito Abatement District
Palatine Community Consolidated School District 15
Rolling Meadows Library Fund
Rolling Meadows Park District

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 35 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Required Tests and Findings
As a part of establishing the proposed RPA, the following additional findings must be made:

FINDING 1: LACK OF GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THROUGH PRIVATE INVESTMENT
The City is required to evaluate whether the redevelopment project area has been subject to growth and
development through private investment and must substantiate a finding of lack of such investment. Limited
private investment has occurred in the proposed Algonquin & Keystone RPA during the past five years (20202025), as demonstrated by the following:

•

LACK OF GROWTH IN EAV. In order to assess whether the proposed RPA has been subject to growth
and private investment, SB Friedman analyzed growth in property taxable value in the rest of the City
and compared that growth to the trends within the proposed RPA. Between 2019 and 2024, EAV
increased an aggregate 3.4% across all properties within the proposed RPA. Within the City, excluding
the proposed RPA, values increased by 8.3% between 2019 and 2024. Thus, based on this data, the
proposed RPA has significantly lagged behind the rest of the City and has not been subject to growth
and development through investment by private enterprise.

Finding: The proposed RPA, on the whole, has not been subject to growth and development through investment
by private enterprise.

FINDING 2: “BUT FOR...” REQUIREMENT
The City is required to find that the redevelopment project area would not reasonably be anticipated to be
developed without the adoption of this Redevelopment Plan.
Without the support of public resources, the redevelopment objectives for the proposed RPA would most likely
not be realized. The investments required to update and maintain buildings exhibiting deterioration,
inadequate utilities, a lack of planning, and that are below minimum code throughout the proposed Algonquin
& Keystone RPA are extensive and costly, and the private market, on its own, has shown little ability to absorb
all of these costs. Public resources to assist with public improvements and project-specific development costs
are essential to leverage private investment and facilitate area-wide redevelopment.

Finding: But for the adoption of this Redevelopment Plan, critical resources will be lacking to support the

redevelopment of the proposed RPA, and the proposed RPA would not reasonably be anticipated to be developed
without the adoption of this Redevelopment Plan.

FINDING 3: CONTIGUITY AND SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT
No redevelopment project area can be designated unless a plan and project are approved prior to the
designation of the area; and the area can only include those contiguous parcels that are to be substantially
benefited by the proposed redevelopment project improvements.

Finding: The proposed RPA includes only those contiguous parcels of real property that are expected to benefit
substantially from this Redevelopment Plan.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 36 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

FINDING 4: CONFORMANCE TO THE PLANS OF THE CITY
The redevelopment plan must conform to the comprehensive plan for the development of the municipality as
a whole.
This Redevelopment Plan’s proposed future land uses within the RPA align with the 2019 Comprehensive Plan’s
proposed commercial, multifamily and office future land uses for the area. An Amendment to the 2019
Comprehensive Plan also identifies mixed-use as a future land use for the area. Additionally, the goals of this
Redevelopment Plan align with the goals stated in the 2019 Comprehensive Plan, including to encourage crossaccess linkages between sites to ease traffic and enhance connectivity,” “identify opportunities for bike and
pedestrian amenities,” and make “unifying public right-of-way improvements” throughout the corridor. All
aspects of this Redevelopment Plan are in agreement with, but subservient to, plans made in the City’s 2019
Plan and subsequent amendments.

Finding: The Algonquin & Keystone Redevelopment Plan conforms to and proposes predominant land uses that
are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and 2026 amendment.
FINDING 5: HOUSING IMPACT AND RELATED MATTERS
As set forth in the Act, if a redevelopment plan for a redevelopment project area would result in the
displacement of residents from 10 or more inhabited residential units, or if the redevelopment project area
contains 75 or more inhabited residential units and a municipality is unable to certify that no displacement will
occur, the municipality must prepare a Housing Impact Study and incorporate the study into the
Redevelopment Plan and Project document.

Finding: The City hereby certifies that no displacement will occur as a result of activities pursuant to this
Redevelopment Plan. Therefore, a Housing Impact Study is not required under the Act.
FINDING 6: ESTIMATED DATES OF COMPLETION
As set forth in the Act, the redevelopment plan must establish the estimated dates of completion of the
redevelopment project and retirement of obligations issued to finance redevelopment project costs.

Finding: The estimated dates of completion of the project and retirement of obligations are described in “Phasing

and Scheduling of the Redevelopment” above. This Redevelopment Plan is estimated to be completed, and all
obligations issued to finance redevelopment costs shall be retired no later than December 31, 2050, if the
ordinances establishing the proposed RPA are adopted during 2026.

Provisions for Amending Action Plan
This Redevelopment Plan and Project document may be amended pursuant to the provisions of the Act.

Commitment to Fair Employment Practices and an Affirmative Action Plan
The City of Rolling Meadows hereby affirms its commitment to fair employment practices and an affirmative
action plan.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 37 of 89

Appendix 1: Limitations of the Eligibility Report and
Consultant Responsibilities
The Eligibility Report covers events and conditions that were determined to support the designation of the
proposed Redevelopment Project Area (“RPA” or “TIF District”) as a “conservation or blighted area” under the
Act at the completion of our field research in September 2025 and not thereafter. These events or conditions
include, without limitation, governmental actions and additional developments.
This Eligibility Report, Redevelopment Plan and Project (the “Report”) summarizes the analysis and findings of
the consultant’s work, which, unless otherwise noted, is solely the responsibility of SB Friedman. The City is
entitled to rely on the findings and conclusions of the Report in designating the proposed RPA as a
redevelopment project area under the Act. SB Friedman has prepared the Report with the understanding that
the City would rely: (1) on the findings and conclusions of this Redevelopment Plan in proceeding with the
designation of RPA and the adoption and implementation of this Redevelopment Plan; and (2) on the fact that
SB Friedman has obtained the necessary information including, without limitation, information relating to the
equalized assessed value of parcels comprising the proposed RPA, so that the Report will comply with the Act
and that the proposed RPA can be designated as a redevelopment project area in compliance with the Act.
The Report is based on estimates, assumptions and other information developed from research of the market,
knowledge of the industry, and meetings during which we obtained certain information. The sources of
information and bases of the estimates and assumptions are stated in the Report. Some assumptions inevitably
will not materialize, and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. Therefore, actual results achieved
will necessarily vary from those described in our Report, and the variations may be material.
The terms of this engagement are such that we have no obligation to revise the Report to reflect events or
conditions which occur subsequent to the date of the Report. These events or conditions include, without
limitation, economic growth trends, governmental actions, additional competitive developments, interest rates
and other market factors. However, we will be available to discuss the necessity for revision in view of changes
in economic or market factors.
Preliminary Tax Increment Financing (TIF) projections were prepared for the purpose of estimating the
approximate level of increment that could be generated by proposed projects and other properties within the
proposed TIF District boundary and from inflationary increases in value. These projections were intended to
provide an estimate of the final equalized assessed value (EAV) of the proposed TIF District.
As such, our report and the preliminary projections prepared under this engagement are intended solely for
the City’s information, for the purpose of establishing a TIF District. These projections should not be relied
upon for purposes of evaluating potential debt obligations or by any other person, firm or corporation, or for
any other purposes. Neither the Report nor its contents, nor any reference to our Firm, may be included or
quoted in any offering circular or registration statement, appraisal, sales brochure, prospectus, loan or other
agreement or document intended for use in obtaining funds from individual investors, without prior written
consent.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 38 of 89

Appendix 2: Glossary
Factors for Vacant Land – One Factor Test
Under the provisions of the “blighted area” section of the Act, if the land is vacant, an area qualifies as “blighted”
if one (1) or more of the following factors is found to be present to a meaningful extent.
•
•
•
•
•
•

The area contains unused quarries, strip mines or strip mine ponds;
The area contains unused rail yards, rail track, or railroad rights-of-way;
The area, prior to its designation, is subject to or contributes to chronic flooding;
The area contains unused or illegal dumping sites;
The area was designated as a town center prior to January 1, 1982, is between 50 and 100 acres, and
is 75% vacant land; or
The area qualified as blighted prior to becoming vacant.

Factors for Vacant Land – Two Factor Test
Obsolete Platting of Vacant Land. This includes parcels of limited or narrow size, or configurations of parcels
of irregular size or shape that would be difficult to develop on a planned basis and in a manner compatible
with contemporary standards and requirements, or platting that failed to create rights-of-ways for streets or
alleys or that created inadequate right-of-way widths for streets, alleys or other public rights-of-way, or that
omitted easements for public utilities.
Diversity of Ownership. Diversity of ownership is when adjacent properties are owned by multiple parties.
This factor applies when diversity of ownership of parcels of vacant land is sufficient in number to retard or
impede the ability to assemble the land for development.
Tax and Special Assessment Delinquencies. Tax and special assessment delinquencies exist or the property
has been the subject of tax sales under the Property Tax Code within the last five years.
Deterioration of Structures or Site Improvements in Neighboring Areas adjacent to the Vacant Land.
Evidence of structural deterioration and area disinvestment in blocks adjacent to the vacant land may
substantiate why new development had not previously occurred on the vacant parcels.
Environmental Contamination. The area has incurred Illinois Environmental Protection Agency or United
States Environmental Protection Agency remediation costs for, or a study conducted by an independent
consultant recognized as having expertise in environmental remediation, has determined a need for, the cleanup of hazardous waste, hazardous substances or underground storage tanks required by state or federal law,
provided that the remediation costs constitute a material impediment to the development or redevelopment
of the redevelopment project area.
Lack of Growth in Equalized Assessed Value. The total equalized assessed value (“EAV”) of the proposed
redevelopment project area has declined for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years prior to the year in
which the redevelopment project area is designated; or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 39 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

balance of the municipality for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available; or
is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published
by the United States Department of Labor or successor agency for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years
prior to the year in which the redevelopment project area is designated.

Factors for Improved Land
Dilapidation. An advanced state of disrepair or neglect of necessary repairs to the primary structural
components of buildings or improvements in such a combination that a documented building condition
analysis determines that major repair is required or the defects are so serious and so extensive that the
buildings must be removed.
Obsolescence. The condition or process of falling into disuse. Structures have become ill-suited for the original
use.
Deterioration. With respect to buildings, defects including but not limited to, major defects in the secondary
building components such as doors, windows, porches, gutters and downspouts, and fascia. With respect to
surface improvements, that the condition of roadways, alleys, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, off-street parking, and
surface storage areas evidence deterioration including but not limited to, surface cracking, crumbling, potholes,
depressions, loose paving material and weeds protruding through paved surfaces.
Presence of Structures below Minimum Code Standards. All structures that do not meet the standards of
zoning, subdivision, building, fire and other governmental codes applicable to property, but not including
housing and property maintenance codes.
Illegal Use of Individual Structures. The use of structures in violation of the applicable federal, state or local
laws, exclusive of those applicable to the Presence of Structures below Minimum Code Standards.
Excessive Vacancies. The presence of buildings that are unoccupied or underutilized and that represent an
adverse influence on the area because of the frequency, extent or duration of the vacancies.
Lack of Ventilation, Light or Sanitary Facilities. The absence of adequate ventilation for light or air circulation
in spaces or rooms without windows, or that require the removal of dust, odor, gas, smoke, or other noxious
airborne materials. Inadequate natural light and ventilation means the absence of skylights or windows for
interior spaces or rooms and improper window sizes and amounts by room area to window area ratios.
Inadequate sanitary facilities refers to the absence or inadequacy of garbage storage and enclosure, bathroom
facilities, hot water and kitchens, and structural inadequacies preventing ingress and egress to and from all
rooms and units within a building.
Inadequate Utilities. Underground and overhead utilities, such as storm sewers and storm drainage, sanitary
sewers, water lines, and gas, telephone, and electrical services that are shown to be inadequate. Inadequate
utilities are those that are: (i) of insufficient capacity to serve the uses in the redevelopment project area, (ii)
deteriorated, antiquated, obsolete, or in disrepair, or (iii) lacking within the redevelopment project area.
Excessive Land Coverage and Overcrowding of Structures and Community Facilities. The over-intensive
use of property and the crowding of buildings and accessory facilities onto a site. Examples of problem
conditions warranting the designation of an area as one exhibiting excessive land coverage are: (i) the presence

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 40 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Keystone RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

of buildings either improperly situated on parcels or located on parcels of inadequate size and shape in relation
to present-day standards of development for health and safety, and (ii) the presence of multiple buildings on
a single parcel. For there to be a finding of excessive land coverage, these parcels must exhibit one or more of
the following conditions: insufficient provision for light and air within or around buildings, increased threat of
spread of fire due to the close proximity of buildings, lack of adequate or proper access to a public right-ofway, lack of reasonably required off-street parking, or inadequate provision for loading and service.
Deleterious Land Use or Layout. The existence of incompatible land use relationships, buildings occupied by
inappropriate mixed-uses, or uses considered to be noxious, offensive or unsuitable for the surrounding area.
Environmental Clean-Up. The proposed redevelopment project area has incurred Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency or United States Environmental Protection Agency remediation costs for, or a study
conducted by an independent consultant recognized as having expertise in environmental remediation has
determined a need for, the clean-up of hazardous waste, hazardous substances, or underground storage tanks
required by state or federal law, provided that the remediation costs constitute a material impediment to the
development or redevelopment of the redevelopment project area.
Lack of Community Planning. The proposed redevelopment project area was developed prior to or without
the benefit or guidance of a community plan. This means that the development occurred prior to the adoption
by the municipality of a comprehensive or other community plan, or that the plan was not followed at the time
of the area’s development. This factor must be documented by evidence of adverse or incompatible land use
relationships, inadequate street layout, improper subdivision, parcels of inadequate shape and size to meet
contemporary development standards, or other evidence demonstrating an absence of effective community
planning.
Lack of Growth in Equalized Assessed Value. The total equalized assessed value of the proposed
redevelopment project area has declined for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years prior to the year in
which the redevelopment project area is designated; or is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the
balance of the municipality for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years for which information is available; or
is increasing at an annual rate that is less than the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published
by the United States Department of Labor or successor agency for three (3) of the last five (5) calendar years
prior to the year in which the redevelopment project area is designated.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 41 of 89

Appendix 3: Proposed
Algonquin & Keystone RPA
Boundary Legal Description
OF PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS:
THAT PART OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 11 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN IN COOK
COUNTY, ILLINOIS, BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1 IN ELIZABETH
PLACE RESUBDIVISION AS RECORDED OCTOBER 8, 1996 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 96765523, SAID NORTHWEST CORNER
ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF MEADOWBROOK DRIVE; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID
EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF MEADOWBROOK DRIVE TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 2 IN SAID ELIZABETH
PLACE RESUBDIVISION, SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF
MEADOWBROOK SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED MARCH 24, 1981 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 25815283; THENCE
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF MEADOWBROOK SUBDIVISION TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER
THEREOF, SAID NORTHWEST CORNER ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 8; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER TO A POINT OPPOSITE AND
ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 IN TEKTRONIX CONSOLIDATION AS RECORDED APRIL 6, 1982 AS
DOCUMENT NUMBER 26193710; THENCE WESTERLY TO SAID SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 IN TEKTRONIX
CONSOLIDATION; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 IN TEKTRONIX CONSOLIDATION TO
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER ALSO BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THREE
FOUNTAINS AT PLUM GROVE SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED JULY 8, 1968 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 20543261;
THENCE NORTHERLY, NORTHWESTERLY AND NORTHERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID THREE FOUNTAINS AT
PLUM GROVE SUBDIVISION AND THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHTOF-WAY LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
OF ALGONQUIN ROAD TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT A IN ALGONQUIN PARK UNIT NUMBER 2 AS RECORDED
JULY 23, 1963 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 18861678, SAID SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT A ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE
NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF A DEDICATION BY DEED NUMBER 18852020; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE EASTERLY
LINE OF SAID LOT A IN ALGONQUIN PARK UNIT NUMBER 2 TO A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY EXTENSION OF A
LINE THAT 160.0 FEET NORTHEASTERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH SAID NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
ALGONQUIN ROAD AS DEDICATED BY PLAT OF DEDICATION RECORDED FEBRUARY 2, 1933 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER
11195778; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY EXTENSION AND PARALLEL LINE TO A POINT ON A
LINE BEING PERPENDICULAR TO SAID NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD AT A POINT BEING
175 FEET NORTHWESTERLY OF A POINT ON THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WEBER DRIVE (A.K.A. OLD WILKE ROAD)
AS MEASURED ON SAID NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG
SAID PERPENDICULAR LINE TO A POINT ON A LINE BEING PERPENDICULAR TO SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
WEBER DRIVE AT A POINT BEING 175 FEET NORTHERLY OF SAID NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ALGONQUIN
ROAD AS MEASURED ON SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WEBER DRIVE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID
PERPENDICULAR LINE TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF
SAID SECTION 8; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE EAST
HALF OF SAID SECTION 8 TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID ALGONQUIN ROAD;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD TO THE MOST
NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 1 IN ELIZABETH PLACE RESUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE MOST
EASTERLY WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 1 LINE OF SAID LOT 1 TO A POINT ON A NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT 1 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 42 of 89

Appendix 4: List of PINs in Proposed
Algonquin & Keystone RPA
Record #

2024 EAV

08083010340000

$1,268,866

08081230130000

$591,716

08081230170000

$1,268,202

08083010260000

08081060100000

08081230180000

08084020420000

08081230160000

4
6
7

08083010700000

$47,390
$0

$91,381

$66,350

08081230150000

$221,333

08084020430000

$531,216

08084040010000

08083010720000

12
14
16

$250,010

08081230100000

$2,081,039

08084020160000

08083010690000

$742,860
$710,307

$154,337

08083010450000

$460,069

08084020200000

$1,394,081

08083010680000

$1,818,577

18
20

08083010440000

08082080030000

TOTAL

$370,498

$2,316,417

$14,384,649

Source: Cook County, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 43 of 89

CITY OF ROLLING MEADOWS, IL

Algonquin & Orchard
Redevelopment Project Area

Tax Increment Financing District
Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan and Project
FINAL REPORT | January 23, 2026

Page 44 of 89

CITY OF ROLLING MEADOWS, IL

ALGONQUIN & ORCHARD
Redevelopment Project Area
Tax Increment Financing District
Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan and Project
January 23, 2026

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 45 of 89

CITY OF ROLLING MEADOWS, IL

Algonquin & Orchard Redevelopment Project Area
Tax Increment Financing District
Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan and Project
Table of Contents

SECTION

PAGE

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Eligibility Report ........................................................................................................................................................................... 8
3. Redevelopment Plan and Project ......................................................................................................................................... 15
Appendix 1: Limitations of the Eligibility Report and Consultant Responsibilities ...................................................... 26
Appendix 2: Glossary..................................................................................................................................................................... 27
Appendix 3: Algonquin & Orchard Proposed RPA Boundary Legal Description ........................................................ 29
Appendix 4: List of PINs in Algonquin & Orchard Proposed RPA ................................................................................... 31
LIST OF MAPS

PAGE

Map 1: Community Context .......................................................................................................................................................... 5
Map 2: Proposed RPA Boundary ................................................................................................................................................. 6
Map 3: Existing Land Use ............................................................................................................................................................... 7
Map 4: Age of Structures ............................................................................................................................................................. 13
Map 5: Improved Land Factor: Deterioration ........................................................................................................................ 14
Map 6: Proposed Future Land Use ............................................................................................................................................17

SB FRIEDMAN DEVELOPMENT ADVISORS, LLC
70 W. Madison St, Suite 3700, Chicago, IL 60602
T: 312.424.4250 F: 312.424.4262 E: [email protected]
www.sbfriedman.com

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 46 of 89

1. Introduction
The Algonquin & Orchard Redevelopment Project Area (“Algonquin & Orchard RPA” or the “RPA”) is located
along one of the main commercial and business corridors in City of Rolling Meadows (the “City”). The area has
historically been a hub for business activity, even prior to Algonquin Road’s identification as a key commercial
corridor in the City’s first Comprehensive Plan in 1993. While the area is still a core part of the City’s commercial
ecosystem, several businesses have closed in recent years. These business closures have resulted in large,
highly visible vacancies — most notably, the former Holidome hotel property — with some buildings remaining
vacant for extended periods of time. Returning these properties to productive uses is a top redevelopment
priority for the City.
The City seeks to establish a tax increment financing (TIF) district to serve as an economic development tool
and promote redevelopment and revitalization within the proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA. The City
engaged SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC (SB Friedman) in 2025 to conduct a redevelopment project
area eligibility study and prepare a redevelopment plan and project for the proposed RPA.
This document serves as the Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan and Project (together, the “Report”) for
the proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA. Section 2 of the Report, the Eligibility Report, details the eligibility
factors found within the proposed RPA in support of its designation as a “conservation area” for improved
land, within the definitions set forth in the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Redevelopment Act, 65 ILCS 5/1174.4‐-1 et seq., as amended (the “Act”). Section 3 of this Report, the Redevelopment Plan and Project, (the
“Redevelopment Plan”), outlines the comprehensive program to revitalize the proposed RPA, as required by
the Act.

Redevelopment Project Area
The proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA is located within the City of Rolling Meadows in Cook County (the
“County”), as shown on Map 1. The proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA consists of approximately 14 tax
parcels (13 improved parcels and 1 right-of-way parcel) and 8 buildings. It comprises approximately 59 acres
of land, of which approximately 40 acres are improved, and approximately 18 acres are right-of-way. The
parcels included in the proposed RPA are roughly bounded by Algonquin Road to the north, Tollview Drive to
the east, Arbor Road to the west, and Interstate 90 to the south, as illustrated in Map 2. Based on SB Friedman’s
research, the proposed RPA currently consists of a mix of commercial uses, as shown in Map 3.

Determination of Eligibility
This Report concludes that the proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA is eligible for designation as a
“conservation area” for improved land, per the Act.

IMPROVED PARCELS: CONSERVATION AREA FINDINGS
Data from the Cook County Assessor indicated that 88% of primary structures in the proposed RPA are aged
35 years or older. This satisfies the requirement that 50% or more of the structures in the area have an age of

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 47 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

35 years or more. Further, the following five (5) eligibility factors have been found to be present to a meaningful
extent and reasonably distributed throughout the proposed RPA:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Lack of Growth in Equalized Assessed Value (“EAV”);
Deterioration;
Lack of Community Planning;
Presence of Structures below Minimum Code Standards; and
Inadequate Utilities.

These factors are defined under the Act at 65 ILCS 5/11‐74.4‐3-(a) and (b) and are more fully described in
Appendix 2.
Based on the age of primary structures in the proposed RPA and the presence of five (5) eligibility factors, the
proposed RPA qualifies under a “conservation area” finding (age of structures plus at least three eligibility
factors).

SUMMARY OF ELIGIBILITY FINDINGS
SB Friedman found that the proposed RPA qualifies as a “conservation area,” with 88% of the primary structures
within the proposed RPA at least 35 years of age or older, and five (5) of the thirteen (13) eligibility factors were
found to be present to a meaningful extent and reasonably distributed within the proposed RPA.
These conditions hinder the potential to redevelop the proposed RPA and capitalize on its unique attributes.
The proposed RPA will benefit from a strategy that addresses aged buildings, deterioration, and lack of
community planning to facilitate the overall improvement of its physical condition.

Redevelopment Plan Goal, Objectives and Strategy
GOAL. The overall goal of the Redevelopment Plan is to reduce or eliminate conditions that qualify the
proposed RPA as an improved “conservation area”, and to provide the direction and mechanisms necessary to
redevelop the proposed RPA as a vibrant commercial district. Redevelopment of the proposed RPA is intended
to revitalize the area, strengthen the economic base, and enhance the City’s overall quality of life.
OBJECTIVES. The following seven (7) objectives support the overall goal of revitalization of the proposed RPA:
1.

Facilitate the physical improvement and/or rehabilitation of existing structures and façades within
the proposed RPA, and encourage the construction of new commercial development, where
appropriate;

Foster the replacement, repair, construction and/or improvement of public infrastructure, where
needed, to create an environment conducive to private investment;

Facilitate the renovation or construction of stormwater management systems and flood control
within the proposed RPA;

Provide resources for streetscaping, landscaping and signage to improve the image, attractiveness
and accessibility of the proposed RPA, create a cohesive identity for the proposed RPA and

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 48 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

surrounding area, and provide for buffering between different land uses and screening of
unattractive service facilities such as parking lots and loading areas, where appropriate;
5.

Support the goals and objectives of other overlapping plans, including the City of Rolling
Meadows Comprehensive Plan published in 2019 (the “2019 Comprehensive Plan”), 2026
amendment and subsequent plans;

Coordinate available federal, state and local resources to further the goals of this Redevelopment
Plan;

Financial Plan
ELIGIBLE COSTS. The Act outlines several categories of expenditures that can be funded using incremental
property taxes. These expenditures, referred to as eligible redevelopment project costs, include all reasonable
or necessary costs incurred or estimated to be incurred and any such costs incidental to this Redevelopment
Plan pursuant to the Act.
ESTIMATED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT COSTS. The estimated eligible redevelopment project costs of this
Redevelopment Plan are $58 million. The total of eligible redevelopment project costs provides an upper limit
on expenditures that are to be funded using tax increment revenues, exclusive of capitalized interest, issuance
costs, interest and other financing costs.
EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE OF PROPERTIES IN THE PROPOSED RPA. The 2024 EAV (the most recent
year in which assessed values and the equalization factor were available) of all taxable parcels in the proposed
RPA is $27,851,432. By tax year 2049 (collection year 2050), the total taxable EAV for the proposed RPA is
anticipated to be approximately $61 million.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 49 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Required Tests and Findings
The required conditions for the adoption of this Redevelopment Plan are found to be present within the
proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA:
1.

The proposed RPA is 59 acres in size and thus satisfies the requirement that it be at least 1.5 acres;

Limited private investment has occurred in the proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA over the last
five years;

The proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA includes only those contiguous parcels of real property
that are expected to benefit substantially from the proposed Redevelopment Plan;

The Redevelopment Plan conforms to and proposes land uses that are consistent with the 2019
Comprehensive Plan and 2026 amendment;

There are no housing units within the proposed RPA. Therefore, a Housing Impact Study is not
required under the Act; and

The Redevelopment Plan is estimated be completed, and all obligations issued to finance
redevelopment costs shall be retired no later than December 31, 2050, if the ordinances
establishing the proposed RPA are adopted during 2026.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 50 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Map 1: Context

CITY OF
ROLLING
MEADOWS
PROPOSED
RPA

Municipal Boundary
Proposed RPA Boundary
Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 51 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Map 2: Proposed RPA Boundary

RPA Parcels
Proposed RPA Boundary
Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 52 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Map 3: Existing Land Use

Commercial
Proposed RPA Boundary
Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 53 of 89

2. Eligibility Report
This report concludes that the proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA is eligible for designation as a “conservation
area” for improved land, per the Act.

Dilapidation
Obsolescence
Deterioration
Presence of Structures below Minimum
Code Standards
Illegal Use of Individual Structures
Excessive Vacancies
Lack of Ventilation, Light or Sanitary
Facilities

•
•

•
•
•
•

A definition of each factor is provided in Appendix 2.

Methodology Overview
SB Friedman conducted the following analyses to determine whether the proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA
is eligible for designation as a “conservation area” for improved land, per the Act:
•
•
•

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 54 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

•
•
•
•

Review of parcel-level GIS shapefile data provided by the County;
Review of building permit records (2020-2025);
Review of a memorandum provided by the City regarding locations, ages and conditions of water,
stormwater and sanitary sewer infrastructure; and
Review of current (2019) and first (1993) comprehensive plans and 2026 amendment provided by the
City.

SB Friedman examined all parcels for qualification factors consistent with requirements of the Act.
SB Friedman analyzed the presence or absence of each eligibility factor on a building-by-building, parcel-byparcel basis and/or aggregate basis as applicable. The building and parcel information was then plotted on a
map of the proposed RPA to determine which factors were present to a meaningful extent and reasonably
distributed throughout the proposed RPA.

Conservation Area Findings: Improved Parcels
Based on the conditions found within the proposed RPA at the completion of SB Friedman’s research, it has
been determined that the land within the proposed RPA meets the eligibility requirements of the Act to be
classified as a “conservation area.” Of the 8 primary structures in the proposed RPA, 7 structures (88%) are 35
years of age or older, as they were constructed before 1990. Map 4 shows the location of primary structures
that are 35 years or older. SB Friedman’s research indicates that the following five (5) factors are present to a
meaningful extent and reasonably distributed throughout the proposed RPA:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Lack of Growth in EAV
Deterioration
Presence of Structures below Minimum Code Standards
Inadequate Utilities
Lack of Community Planning

Each eligibility factor that is present to a meaningful extent and reasonably distributed throughout the
proposed RPA is summarized below.

LACK OF GROWTH IN EAV

The Act defines lack of growth in EAV as having the total EAV of the proposed RPA under evaluation either
decline for at least three (3) of the last five (5) year-to-year periods; or increase at an annual rate that was less
than the balance of the City for at least three (3) of the past five (5) year-to-year periods; or increase at an
annual rate that was less than the Consumer Price Index for at least three (3) of the past (5) year-to-year
periods. A full definition is provided in Appendix 2.
SB Friedman tabulated the EAV history of all proposed RPA tax parcels for the previous five year‐to‐year
periods using EAV data provided by the Cook County Assessor. The most recent year for which final
information was available was 2024. SB Friedman’s analysis identified a lack of EAV growth within the proposed
RPA in accordance with the following criteria, as defined in the Act:
1.

The total EAV of the proposed improved RPA parcels has declined for three (3) of the last five (5)
year‐to‐year periods;

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 55 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

2.
3.

This eligibility factor is present to a meaningful extent and assessed area-wide throughout the Algonquin &
Orchard RPA. A summary of SB Friedman’s findings is presented in Table 1.
Table 1: Percentage Change in Annual EAV, 2019-2024
2019
2020
Study Area Parcels
$31.0 M
$25.9 M
EAV
Percent Change
---16.3%
Study Area Parcels --YES
Decline in EAV
City EAV Less
Proposed RPA Parcels
Change in City EAV
Less Proposed RPA
Parcels
Proposed RPA Parcels
– Growth Less Than
City
Change in CPI [1]

Proposed Improved
RPA Parcels - Growth
Less Than CPI

2021

2022

2023

2024

$21.2 M

$25.9 M

$28.4 M

$27.9 M

-18.1%

22.1%

9.4%

-1.8%

YES

$905.4 M

$918.0 M

$850.0 M

$975.9 M

$984.5 M

$986.0 M

---

1.4%

-7.4%

14.8%

0.9%

0.2%

---

YES

---

1.1%

4.2%

7.6%

3.3%

3.5%

---

YES

DETERIORATION

The Act defines deterioration as defects including, but not limited to, major defects in the secondary building
components such as doors, windows, porches, gutters and downspouts, and fascia. With respect to surface
improvements, that the condition of roadways, alleys, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, off-street parking, and surface
storage areas evidence deterioration including but not limited to, surface cracking, crumbling, potholes,
depressions, loose paving material, and weeds protruding through paved surfaces.
Physical deterioration was observed on 12 parcels of 13 parcels (92% of improved parcels) as shown in Map 5.
The most common form of deterioration was on surface improvements, including streets, parking lots and
alleys. Catalogued surface improvement deterioration included cracks in infrastructure, alligatoring of
pavement, cracking of sidewalks, and crumbling of curbs. Building deterioration included stairstepping in brick
and cinderblock, water damage, broken windows, and missing and/or deteriorating siding and roofing.
Deterioration of buildings and surface improvements can make it appear as though the proposed RPA lacks
investment and can make it more difficult to attract new businesses or consumers. This factor was found to be
meaningfully present and reasonably distributed throughout the proposed RPA.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 56 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

INADEQUATE UTILITIES

Of insufficient capacity to serve the uses in the redevelopment project area;
Deteriorated, antiquated, obsolete or in disrepair; or
Lacking within the redevelopment project area.

Based on the memorandum provided by the City’s Public Works Department, all of the parcels within the
proposed RPA have insufficient storm sewer capacity, with storm sewer systems built on average 50-60 years
ago. All parcels do not meet current design standards for volume control or stormwater detention pursuant to
the Metropolitan Water Reclamation Districts Watershed Management Ordinance requirements.. Based on
these conditions, the inadequate utilities factor was found to be present to a meaningful extent and reasonably
distributed throughout the improved parcels in the proposed RPA.

PRESENCE OF STRUCTURES BELOW MINIMUM CODE STANDARDS

Per the Act, structures below minimum code standards are those that do not meet applicable standards of
zoning, subdivision, building, fire and other governmental codes. The principal purpose of such codes is to
protect the health and safety of the public, including building occupants, pedestrians and occupants of
neighboring structures.
Based on the memorandum provided by the City’s Public Works Department, all of the parcels within the
proposed RPA do not meet current design standards for volume control or stormwater detention pursuant to
the Metropolitan Water Reclamation Districts Watershed Management Ordinance requirements. Based on
these conditions, the presence of structures below minimum code factor was found to be present to a
meaningful extent and reasonably distributed throughout the proposed RPA.

LACK OF COMMUNITY PLANNING

Lack of community planning within the proposed RPA is an area-wide factor not necessarily attributable to any
one parcel. The Act provides that “Lack of Community Planning” can be found in areas that have been
developed without the benefit of a comprehensive plan, and as a result, have seen negative consequences.
Examples of negative consequences include: incompatible land use relationships, inadequate street layout,
improper subdivision, parcels of inadequate shape and size to meet contemporary development standards, or
other related conditions.
The City was incorporated in 1955 but did not produce a comprehensive plan until 1993, by which time 100%
(8 of 8) of the buildings in the proposed RPA today had been constructed. Per the City’s 1993 Comprehensive
Plan, the proposed RPA is in the Algonquin Road corridor, which the City should “undertake a redevelopment
and design process” for, and “explore the means to improve the corridor both aesthetically and functionally.”
The lack of planning involved in the development of the proposed RPA has resulted in the following adverse
outcomes identified in the City’s most recent 2019 Comprehensive Plan:
•

Many curb cuts and a lack of cross (property) access, which inhibit both vehicular and pedestrian
traffic;

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 57 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

•
•

Few pedestrian crosswalks and no bike facilities; and
A lack of consistent character due to the mix of uses, many of which are “older and potentially
obsolete” or “reaching the end of their economic viability.”

Summary of Findings
SB Friedman has found that the proposed RPA qualifies to be designated as a “conservation area” for improved
land. The improved land is eligible as a “conservation area”, with 88% of the structures within the proposed
RPA at least 35 years of age or older, and five (5) of the thirteen (13) eligibility factors present to a meaningful
extent and reasonably distributed within the proposed RPA.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 58 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Map 4: Age of Structures

Primary Structure Aged 35 Years or Older
Primary Structure Aged Less than 35 Years
RPA Parcels
Proposed RPA Boundary
Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 59 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Map 5: Improved Land Factor: Deterioration

Deterioration
Parcels
Proposed RPA Boundary
Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 60 of 89

Redevelopment Needs of the Proposed RPA
Currently, the proposed RPA is comprised of aged buildings that are characterized by a failure to meet current
code standards, a lack of growth in property values, deterioration, inadequate utilities, and a lack of community
planning. These conditions reduce the value of the properties in the area and make the proposed RPA less
competitive, overall, with property in other communities, thus limiting local area employment and development
opportunities, and contributing to the lack of new investment in the proposed RPA.
The existing conditions for the proposed RPA suggest six (6) major redevelopment needs:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

The goals, objectives and strategies discussed below have been developed to address these needs and
facilitate the sustainable redevelopment of the proposed RPA.

GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGY
GOAL. The overall goal of the Redevelopment Plan is to reduce or eliminate conditions that qualify the
proposed RPA as an improved “conservation area”, and to provide the direction and mechanisms necessary to
redevelop the proposed RPA as a vibrant commercial district. Redevelopment of the proposed RPA is intended
to revitalize the area, strengthen the economic base, and enhance the City’s overall quality of life.
OBJECTIVES. The following six (6) objectives support the overall goal of revitalization of the proposed RPA:
1.

Facilitate the physical improvement and/or rehabilitation of existing structures and façades within
the proposed RPA, and encourage the construction of new commercial uses, where appropriate;

Foster the replacement, repair, construction and/or improvement of public infrastructure where
needed, to create an environment conducive to private investment;

Facilitate the renovation or construction of stormwater management systems and flood control
within the proposed RPA;

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 61 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Support the goals and objectives of other overlapping plans, including the City’s 2019
Comprehensive Plan, 2026 amendment and subsequent plans;

Coordinate available federal, state and local resources to further the goals of this Redevelopment
Plan;

Proposed Future Land Use
The proposed future land use of the proposed RPA, as shown in Map 6, reflects the objectives of this
Redevelopment Plan. For the purposes of this plan, the mixed-use designation is meant to allow for a variety
of uses throughout the proposed RPA, in a manner that is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and
2026 amendment. The mixed-use designation allows for the following land uses within the proposed RPA:
•
•
•

Commercial
Office
Residential

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 62 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

Map 6: Proposed Future Land Use

Mixed-Use
RPA Parcels
Proposed RPA Boundary
Source: City of Rolling Meadows, Cook County, Esri, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 63 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

expenses), provided that no charges for professional services are based on a percentage of the tax
increment collected, as more fully set forth in 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(q)(1).
2.

The costs of marketing sites within the redevelopment project area to prospective businesses,
developers and investors.

Costs of the construction of public works or improvements, subject to the limitations in Section 1174.4-3(q)(4) of the Act.

10.

A library district’s increased per patron costs attributable to net new persons eligible to obtain a library
card living in assisted housing units, as further defined in the Act.

11.

12.

Payment in lieu of taxes, as defined in the Act.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 64 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

13.

14.

Interest costs incurred by a developer, as more fully set forth in 65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-3(q)(11), related to
the construction, renovation or rehabilitation of a redevelopment project provided that:
a.

Such costs are to be paid directly from the special tax allocation fund established, pursuant
to the Act;

Such payments in any one year may not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the annual interest
costs incurred by the developer with regard to the development project during that year;

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 65 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

ESTIMATED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT COSTS
The total eligible redevelopment project costs define an upper expenditure limit that may be funded using tax
increment revenues, exclusive of capitalized interest, issuance costs, interest, and other financing costs. The
totals of line items are not intended to place a limit on the described expenditures. Adjustments to the
estimated line-item costs are expected and may be made administratively by the City without amendment to
this Redevelopment Plan, either increasing or decreasing line item costs because of changed redevelopment
costs and needs. Each individual project cost will be re-evaluated in light of projected private development
and resulting incremental tax revenues as it is considered for public financing under the provisions of the Act.
The estimated eligible costs of this Redevelopment Plan are shown in Table 2.
Additional funding in the form of state and federal grants, private developer contributions, and other outside
sources may be pursued by the City as a means of financing improvements and facilities within the proposed
RPA.
Table 2: Estimated TIF-Eligible Redevelopment Project Costs

Eligible Expense [1]

[1] Described in more detail in Eligible Costs Section.

Estimated Project Costs
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$15,000,000
$15,800,000
$20,000,000
$50,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$50,000
$600,000
$58,000,000

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 66 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 67 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

MOST RECENT EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE OF PROPERTIES IN THE PROPOSED RPA
The purpose of identifying the most recent EAV of the proposed RPA is to provide an estimate of the initial
EAV for the purpose of annually calculating the incremental EAV and incremental property taxes of the
proposed RPA. The 2024 EAV (the most recent year in which final assessed values and equalization factor were
available) of all taxable parcels in the proposed RPA is $27,851,432 This total EAV amount by property index
number (“PIN”) is summarized in Appendix 4. The EAV is subject to verification by the Cook County Assessor’s
Office. After verification, the final figure shall be certified by the Cook County Clerk, and shall become the
“Certified Initial EAV” from which all incremental property taxes in the proposed RPA will be calculated by the
County.

ANTICIPATED EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE
By tax year 2049 (collection year 2050), the total taxable EAV for the proposed RPA is anticipated to be
approximately $61 million.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 68 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

DEMAND ON TAXING DISTRICT SERVICES AND PROGRAMS TO ADDRESS FINANCIAL AND SERVICE
IMPACT
In 1994, the Act was amended to require an assessment of any financial impact of a redevelopment project
area on, or any increased demand for service from, any taxing district affected by the redevelopment plan, and
a description of any program to address such financial impacts or increased demand.
Replacement of vacant and underutilized buildings and sites with active and more intensive uses may result in
additional demands on services and facilities provided by the districts. Given the preliminary nature of this
Redevelopment Plan, specific fiscal impacts on the taxing districts and increases in demand for services
provided by those districts cannot accurately be assessed within the scope of this Plan. At this time, no special
programs are proposed for these taxing districts. The City intends to monitor development in the area and
should demand increase, the City intends to work with the affected taxing districts to determine what, if any,
program is necessary to provide adequate services.
The following levy taxes on properties within the proposed RPA:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Arlington Heights Township High School District 214
City of Rolling Meadows
Cook County
Cook County Consolidated Elections
Elk Grove General Assistance
Elk Grove Township
Elk Grove Township Road Fund
Forest Preserve District of Cook County
Harper Community College District 512
Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago
Northwest Mosquito Abatement District
Palatine Community Consolidated School District 15
Palatine Township High School 211
Rolling Meadows Library Fund
Rolling Meadows Park District
Schaumburg Community Consolidated School District 54
Schaumburg General Assistance
Schaumburg Mental Health District
Schaumburg Township
Schaumburg Township Road and Bridge

Required Tests and Findings
As a part of establishing the proposed RPA, the following additional findings must be made:

Page 69 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

private investment has occurred in the proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA during the past five years (20202025), as demonstrated by the following:
•

EAV TRENDS. Change in property value is one of the strongest indicators that an area is suffering
from decline and a lack of private investment. As outlined in the preceding sections and shown in
Table 1 above, the proposed RPA as a whole has declined for three of the last five year-to-year periods.
Thus, the proposed RPA has not been subject to growth and development through investment by
private enterprise.

•

LIMITED CONSTRUCTION-RELATED PERMIT ACTIVITY. Building permit data provided by the City
indicates that there has been approximately $2,700,000 in investment related to commercial
improvements over the past five years. However, most of this investment was made as a result of code
enforcement actions by the City. The investment has not been substantial enough to result in increased
EAV in the majority of parcels (72%) in the RPA receiving building permits in the last five years, nor to
reverse the overall trend of declining EAV in the proposed RPA. Thus, the proposed RPA has not been
subject to growth and development through investment by private enterprise.

Finding: The proposed RPA, on the whole, has not been subject to growth and development through investment
by private enterprise.

FINDING 2: “BUT FOR...” REQUIREMENT
The City is required to find that the redevelopment project area would not reasonably be anticipated to be
developed without the adoption of this Redevelopment Plan.
Without the support of public resources, the redevelopment objectives for the proposed RPA would most likely
not be realized. The investments required to update and maintain buildings exhibiting deterioration,
inadequate utilities, a lack of planning, and that are below minimum code throughout the proposed Algonquin
& Orchard RPA are extensive and costly, and the private market, on its own, has shown little ability to absorb
all of these costs. Public resources to assist with public improvements and project-specific development costs
are essential to leverage private investment and facilitate area-wide redevelopment.

Finding: But for the adoption of this Redevelopment Plan, critical resources will be lacking to support the

redevelopment of the proposed RPA, and the proposed RPA would not reasonably be anticipated to be developed
without the adoption of this Redevelopment Plan.

Finding: The proposed RPA includes only those contiguous parcels of real property that are expected to benefit

substantially from this Redevelopment Plan.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 70 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

FINDING 4: CONFORMANCE TO THE PLANS OF THE CITY
The redevelopment plan must conform to the comprehensive plan for the development of the municipality as
a whole.
This Redevelopment Plan’s proposed future land uses within the RPA align with the 2019 Comprehensive Plan’s
proposed commercial and office future land uses for the area. An Amendment to the 2019 Comprehensive
Plan also identifies mixed-use as a future land use for the area. Additionally, the goals of this Redevelopment
Plan align with the goals stated in the 2019 Comprehensive Plan, including to “encourage cross-access linkages
between sites to ease traffic and enhance connectivity,” “identify opportunities for bike and pedestrian
amenities,” and make “unifying public right-of-way improvements” throughout the corridor. All aspects of this
Redevelopment Plan are in agreement with, but subservient to, plans made in the City’s 2019 Plan and
subsequent amendments.

Finding: The Algonquin & Orchard Redevelopment Plan conforms to and proposes predominant land uses that
are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and 2026 amendment.
FINDING 5: HOUSING IMPACT AND RELATED MATTERS
As set forth in the Act, if a redevelopment plan for a redevelopment project area would result in the
displacement of residents from 10 or more inhabited residential units, or if the redevelopment project area
contains 75 or more inhabited residential units and a municipality is unable to certify that no displacement will
occur, the municipality must prepare a Housing Impact Study and incorporate the study into the
Redevelopment Plan and Project document.

Finding: SB Friedman found no housing units within the proposed RPA. Therefore, a Housing Impact Study is not
required under the Act.
FINDING 6: ESTIMATED DATES OF COMPLETION
As set forth in the Act, the redevelopment plan must establish the estimated dates of completion of the
redevelopment project and retirement of obligations issued to finance redevelopment project costs.

Finding: The estimated dates of completion of the project and retirement of obligations are described in “Phasing

Provisions for Amending Action Plan
This Redevelopment Plan and Project document may be amended pursuant to the provisions of the Act.

Commitment to Fair Employment Practices and an Affirmative Action Plan
The City of Rolling Meadows hereby affirms its commitment to fair employment practices and an affirmative
action plan.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 71 of 89

Appendix 1: Limitations of the Eligibility Report and
Consultant Responsibilities
The Eligibility Report covers events and conditions that were determined to support the designation of the
proposed Redevelopment Project Area (“RPA” or “TIF District”) as a “conservation area” under the Act at the
completion of our field research in September 2025 and not thereafter. These events or conditions include,
without limitation, governmental actions and additional developments.
This Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan and Project (the “Report”) summarizes the analysis and findings
of the consultant’s work, which, unless otherwise noted, is solely the responsibility of SB Friedman. The City is
entitled to rely on the findings and conclusions of the Report in designating the proposed RPA as a
redevelopment project area under the Act. SB Friedman has prepared the Report with the understanding that
the City would rely: (1) on the findings and conclusions of this Redevelopment Plan in proceeding with the
designation of RPA and the adoption and implementation of this Redevelopment Plan; and (2) on the fact that
SB Friedman has obtained the necessary information including, without limitation, information relating to the
equalized assessed value of parcels comprising the proposed RPA, so that the Report will comply with the Act
and that the proposed RPA can be designated as a redevelopment project area in compliance with the Act.
The Report is based on estimates, assumptions and other information developed from research of the market,
knowledge of the industry, and meetings during which we obtained certain information. The sources of
information and bases of the estimates and assumptions are stated in the Report. Some assumptions inevitably
will not materialize, and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. Therefore, actual results achieved
will necessarily vary from those described in our Report, and the variations may be material.
The terms of this engagement are such that we have no obligation to revise the Report to reflect events or
conditions which occur subsequent to the date of the Report. These events or conditions include, without
limitation, economic growth trends, governmental actions, additional competitive developments, interest rates
and other market factors. However, we will be available to discuss the necessity for revision in view of changes
in economic or market factors.
Preliminary Tax Increment Financing (TIF) projections were prepared for the purpose of estimating the
approximate level of increment that could be generated by proposed projects and other properties within the
proposed TIF District boundary and from inflationary increases in value. These projections were intended to
provide an estimate of the final equalized assessed value (EAV) of the proposed TIF District.
As such, our report and the preliminary projections prepared under this engagement are intended solely for
the City’s information, for the purpose of establishing a TIF District. These projections should not be relied
upon for purposes of evaluating potential debt obligations or by any other person, firm or corporation, or for
any other purposes. Neither the Report nor its contents, nor any reference to our Firm, may be included or
quoted in any offering circular or registration statement, appraisal, sales brochure, prospectus, loan or other
agreement or document intended for use in obtaining funds from individual investors, without prior written
consent.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 72 of 89

Appendix 2: Glossary
Factors for Improved Land
Dilapidation. An advanced state of disrepair or neglect of necessary repairs to the primary structural
components of buildings or improvements in such a combination that a documented building condition
analysis determines that major repair is required or the defects are so serious and so extensive that the
buildings must be removed.
Obsolescence. The condition or process of falling into disuse. Structures have become ill-suited for the original
use.
Deterioration. With respect to buildings, defects including but not limited to, major defects in the secondary
building components such as doors, windows, porches, gutters and downspouts, and fascia. With respect to
surface improvements, that the condition of roadways, alleys, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, off-street parking, and
surface storage areas evidence deterioration including but not limited to, surface cracking, crumbling, potholes,
depressions, loose paving material and weeds protruding through paved surfaces.
Presence of Structures below Minimum Code Standards. All structures that do not meet the standards of
zoning, subdivision, building, fire and other governmental codes applicable to property, but not including
housing and property maintenance codes.
Illegal Use of Individual Structures. The use of structures in violation of the applicable federal, state or local
laws, exclusive of those applicable to the Presence of Structures below Minimum Code Standards.
Excessive Vacancies. The presence of buildings that are unoccupied or underutilized and that represent an
adverse influence on the area because of the frequency, extent or duration of the vacancies.
Lack of Ventilation, Light or Sanitary Facilities. The absence of adequate ventilation for light or air circulation
in spaces or rooms without windows, or that require the removal of dust, odor, gas, smoke, or other noxious
airborne materials. Inadequate natural light and ventilation means the absence of skylights or windows for
interior spaces or rooms and improper window sizes and amounts by room area to window area ratios.
Inadequate sanitary facilities refers to the absence or inadequacy of garbage storage and enclosure, bathroom
facilities, hot water and kitchens, and structural inadequacies preventing ingress and egress to and from all
rooms and units within a building.
Inadequate Utilities. Underground and overhead utilities, such as storm sewers and storm drainage, sanitary
sewers, water lines, and gas, telephone, and electrical services that are shown to be inadequate. Inadequate
utilities are those that are: (i) of insufficient capacity to serve the uses in the redevelopment project area, (ii)
deteriorated, antiquated, obsolete, or in disrepair, or (iii) lacking within the redevelopment project area.
Excessive Land Coverage and Overcrowding of Structures and Community Facilities. The over-intensive
use of property and the crowding of buildings and accessory facilities onto a site. Examples of problem
conditions warranting the designation of an area as one exhibiting excessive land coverage are: (i) the presence

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 73 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 74 of 89

Appendix 3: Proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA
Boundary Legal Description
OF PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS:
THAT PART OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 11 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN AND PART OF
THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 10 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN
IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT
2 IN ROLLING MEADOWS INDUSTRIAL CENTER UNIT 1 BEING A SUBDIVISION IN SECTIONS 7 AND 8 IN SAID TOWNSHIP
41 NORTH, RANGE 11 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED
SEPTEMBER 20, 1965, AS DOCUMENT NO. 19592045, SAID POINT BEING 125.0 FEET WESTERLY OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY
CORNER OF SAID LOT 2 AS MEASURED ON SAID SOUTHERLY LINE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE
AND EASTERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF TOLLVIEW DRIVE;
THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND NORTHERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO A POINT
ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD (A.K.A. IL ROUTE 62); THENCE NORTHWESTERLY
ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER
TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE ORIGINAL 100 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY SAID ALGONQUIN ROAD AS RECORDED
JANUARY 30, 1933, AS DOCUMENT NO. 11194083; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO POINT ON
THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST ALGONQUIN FRONTAGE
ROAD; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION AND WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE
ALGONQUIN SOUTHWEST FRONTAGE ROAD TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE SOUTHERLY, SOUTHEASTERLY, EASTERLY
AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST FRONTAGE
ROAD TO A POINT ON THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ARBOR DRIVE AS DEDICATED BY RAMBLIN ROSE ESTATES
SUBDIVISION UNIT NO. 1, BEING A SUBDIVISION IN SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH,
RANGE 10 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED MARCH 1, 1965,
AS DOCUMENT NO. 19394286; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ARBOR DRIVE TO A
POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHWESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF QT 4423 ADDITION
SUBDIVISION, BEING A SUBDIVISION IN SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 12, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF
RECORDED APRIL 15, 2025, AS DOCUMENT NO. 2510521020; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY
EXTENSION AND SOUTHERLY LINE OF QT 4423 ADDITION TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER THEREOF, SAID
SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER BEING A POINT ON WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 7; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID WEST
LINE OF SECTION 7 AND THE WEST LINE OF LOT 1 IN RAMBLIN ROSE ESTATES UNIT NO. 2 SUBDIVISION, BEING A
SUBDIVISION IN SAID SECTION 7, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED AUGUST 24, 1967, AS DOCUMENT
NO. 20240596 TO A POINT BEING 217 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 1 IN RAMBLIN
ROSE ESTATES UNIT NO. 2 SUBDIVISION AS MEASURED ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF LOT 1; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY
ALONG A LINE THAT DEFLECTS 89 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 05 SECONDS TO THE RIGHT FROM SAID WEST LINE OF LOT 1
TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ILLINOIS ROUTE 53 AS WIDENED BY CONDEMNATION CASE
NO. 62-S-21132; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG A LINE TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID
ILLINOIS ROUTE 53 AS WIDENED, SAID POINT BEING 444 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
SAID ALGONQUIN ROAD AS WIDENED AND AS MEASURED ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ILLINOIS
ROUTE 53; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY AND SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF ILLINOIS ROUTE
53 AS WIDENED TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE JANE ADAMS TOLLWAY (A.K.A.
INTERSTATE 90) AS WIDENED BY CONDEMNATION CASE NO. 68-L-15757; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID
NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE JANE ADAMS TOLLWAY TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 11 IN
SAID ROLLING MEADOWS INDUSTRIAL CENTER UNIT 1 SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE
OF LOT 11 TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER THEREOF;

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 75 of 89

City of Rolling Meadows / Algonquin & Orchard RPA – Eligibility Report and Redevelopment Plan

THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG A RADIAL LINE TO A POINT ON SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF TOLLVIEW
DRIVE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF TOLLVIEW DRIVE TO A POINT ON THE
EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 1 IN SAID ROLLING MEADOWS INDUSTRIAL CENTER UNIT 1
SUBDIVISION; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID THE EASTERLY EXTENSION AND SOUTHERLY LINE TO A POINT 280 FEET
WESTERLY OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 1 AS MEASURED ON SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 1; THENCE
NORTHERLY ALONG A LINE BEING PERPENDICULAR TO SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 1, 230 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY
ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 1, 155 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG A LINE BEING
PERPENDICULAR TO SAID PARALLEL LINE, 204.42 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 76 of 89

Appendix 4: List of PINs in
Proposed Algonquin & Orchard RPA
Record #

2024 EAV

08072050091001

$2,219,330

08072030030000

08072030110000

2
4

08074010050000

08072030060000

08072040040000

08072030080000

6
8
10
11

08072050080000

$784,061
$86,339

$253,801

$776,047

$6,900,581

08072040020000

$4,168,649

08074040010000

$5,251,266

08072050070000

08072040050000

08074020090000

07122030100000

TOTAL

$207,889
$957,928

$4,527,038

$1,470,362.81
$248,140

$27,851,432

Source: Cook County, SB Friedman

SB Friedman Development Advisors, LLC

Page 77 of 89

Committee of the Whole – February 17, 2026
2)

Discussion of Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process
for the Algonquin Road and Golf Road Corridors

Background & Summary
Staff proposes update the 2019 Comprehensive Plan to align with current economic
conditions and redevelopment pressures. While the 2019 plan provided a strong
foundation, recent shifts like the rise of data centers, corporate campus
consolidation, as well as shifts in commercial, office and residential real estate
markets, necessitate targeted updates to Subarea 3 (Golf Road) and Subarea 4
(Algonquin Road) within the City’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan. Some of these changes
also support the proposed TIF districts on Algonquin Road.
Key Planning Considerations
The following ideas and themes were presented to the Planning and Zoning
Commission at their February 2026 meeting as the foundation for a forthcoming
Comprehensive Plan Amendment:
•

Reinvestment in Aging Assets: Using new tools to support shopping centers
and residential condominiums that currently exhibit "best use" but require
modernization.

•

Office Repositioning: Formally recognizing the shift from traditional office
space to specialized uses, such as the transition of the Atrium Office Center
into a possible data center/technology park.

•

Corporate Consolidation: Supporting the continued expansion of the A.J.
Gallagher campus and the maintenance of Continental Towers as Class A
office space.

•

Incompatible Development Control: Ensuring new residential development is
located in areas deemed appropriate for areas surrounded by commercial or
industrial character.

Subarea 4: Algonquin Road Corridor (TIF Alignment)
The updates for this corridor are time-sensitive, as state law requires land use
designations to be in effect prior to or simultaneous with the approval of the two
proposed TIF districts. Proposed changes will provide more flexibility to future
developments that might be incentivized by these TIF areas.
•

Orchard/Algonquin: Focus on the former Holidome/Holiday Inn site,
Crossroads of Commerce PUD, and the QuikTrip/Armanetti redevelopment.

•

Keystone/Algonquin: Addressing development pressure on Keystone Court
and Plum Creek, alongside improvement potential for the Southland Shopping
Center.

Page 78 of 89

Subarea 3: Golf Road Corridor
This corridor has seen significant transformation since 2019. Proposed updates will
reflect the City’s land use policy and a desire for:
•

Connectivity: Improvements to Busse Woods connectivity and strengthening
east-west pedestrian/bike connections.

•

Gateway Improvements: Enhancing visibility and signage for shopping
centers and corporate gateways.

•

Mixed-Use Integration: Recognizing the potential for mixed-use residential
and commercial at the 1600 Corporate Center to link the New Wilke/Golf
junction to the Marketplace of Rolling Meadows.

Public Outreach & Approval Timeline
Staff has proposed a limited but transparent outreach plan for these amendments:
•

Notification: Direct mail notice to property owners with a proposed change in
Future Land Use Designation and those within the Rt 53 - Golf - Tollway
triangle.

•

Timeline: The PZC is expected to begin formal consideration in March or April
2026, with a goal to recommend the Algonquin Road changes to the City
Council by April to meet the TIF implementation schedule.

In addition to this process, the TIF designation process has a separate public
engagement process by statute (discussed in the previous agenda item).
Requested Action: Staff will provide an informational update presentation. At the
conclusion of the presentation and any questions, the City Council is asked to direct
Staff to proceed as proposed or with any modifications.

Page 79 of 89

2/12/2026

Planning and Zoning Commission
February 3, 2026

Workshop Item: Comprehensive Plan Amendment

Page 80 of 89

2/12/2026

Comprehensive Plan Progress
2019

Plan Adopted

2020-2025

Implementation Highlights

• Sense of Place: Build upon successful community events
• People: Strengthen east-west connections – correct USPS
addresses in west Rolling Meadows
• Great Place to Be:
• Adopt new comprehensive zoning rules
• Adopt new façade incentive program
• Adopt development standards for key sub-areas
(TC Town Center District)

Comprehensive Plan Progress
2020-2025

Implementation Highlights (cont’d)

• Getting Around:
• Fill several gaps in the bike and pedestrian network
(Shared-use paths – Hicks, Industrial, Euclid)
• Establish Complete Streets policy (nationally recognized)
• Environment & Infrastructure:
• Expand education about green infrastructure
and Salt Creek
• Improve educational use of Salt Creek Marsh
• Identify multi-property drainage solutions
(Park Avenue Storm Sewer)

Page 81 of 89

2/12/2026

Comprehensive Plan Progress & Updates
2025

Kirchoff Road Corridor Study (Area 1)

• Redevelopment of old Fire Station 13
• Redevelopment of vacant parcel
in front of Meadows Square Townhomes
• Redevelopment of parcel across from City Hall
2026

Northwest Industrial District (Area 2) – On Hold

2026

Golf Road (Area 3) and Algonquin Road (Area 4)

2027

Bicycle-Pedestrian Study
Kicking off now through CMAP award

Future TBD – Other Topical Areas

Subarea 3: Golf Road Corridor
Atrium redevelopment, data
center/technology park

Gallagher campus,
consolidations,
Meadows Club
redevelopment

Pacifica
Redevelopment
1600 Golf,
potential
redevelopment

Busse Woods
connectivity
improvement

Continental Towers,
outlot or site
redevelopment
potential

Shopping Center
visibility/gateway
improvements

Page 82 of 89

2/12/2026

Subarea 3: Golf Road Corridor
•

Southwest corner of Golf and Algonquin

Subarea 3: Golf Road Corridor
•

Continental Towers

Page 83 of 89

2/12/2026

Subarea 3: Golf Road Corridor
•

1600 Golf & Pacifica on Golf Development Site

Subarea 3: Golf Road Corridor
•

AJ Gallagher Campus

Page 84 of 89

2/12/2026

Subarea 3: Golf Road Corridor
•

Atrium Office Site & other Office/Light Industrial Uses

Subarea 4: Algonquin Road Corridor
Two Proposed TIF Districts – Expected Adoption ~April 2026
Financial incentives for public and private improvements,
rehabilitation, or redevelopment.
Orchard/Algonquin
•

Holidome & Holiday Inn, Crossroads of
Commerce PUD, QuikTrip/Armanetti

Keystone/Algonquin
•

Development pressure and potential change of use on
some sites (Keystone Ct, Plum Creek), improvement
potential on others (Southland Shopping Center)

Page 85 of 89

2/12/2026

Subarea 4: Algonquin Road Corridor

Subarea 4: Algonquin Road Corridor
•

Southland Shopping Center, East Lake and Coach Light Condominiums

Page 86 of 89

2/12/2026

Big Themes
• Support reinvestment in aging properties exhibiting best use with new tools:
• Shopping centers
• Residential condominiums
• Support continued repositioning and redevelopment of office properties
• Atrium

Data center / technology park

• A.J. Gallagher

Consolidation and expansion

• Continental Towers

Class A Office

• Others

(Crossroads of Commerce, 1600 Golf, other small & medium)
• Reflect these trends where they are already underway
• Pacifica
• Stadium Club (QuikTrip)
• Control residential development in incompatible areas

Process Recommendation
• Changes are limited in scope
• Need to recommend Algonquin Road changes by April for TIF Plans
• May be ready to start PZC consideration in March or April
• Proposed public outreach plan
• Front page of City website
• Mail notice & outreach (none required by law)
• Property owners with a changed Future Land Use Designation
• Property owners in Rt 53 - Golf – Tollway triangle
• Establishment of TIF districts involves separate process by statute
• Seeking feedback on this approach

Page 87 of 89

2/12/2026

Questions?

Page 88 of 89

Committee of the Whole – February 17, 2026
3)

Presentation of Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Launch

Background & Summary
The City of Rolling Meadows has been awarded a Technical Assistance Grant from
the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) to develop a comprehensive
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. This initiative is designed to evaluate the City’s current
non-motorized transportation network, identifying critical gaps in connectivity and
barriers to accessibility.
The final plan will provide a data-driven roadmap for infrastructure improvements,
ensuring a safer and more integrated environment for cyclists and pedestrians
throughout the community. The Plan is expected to be presented for adoption as an
amendment to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan in February 2027, following a 12month process for community engagement, fact finding, data analysis, and drafting.
As part of the start of the planning process, CMAP has recommended convening a
diverse working group of local stakeholders that will, through their feedback, guide
CMAP and Staff by:
•

Providing local expertise during the assessment phase.

•

Reviewing draft recommendations for network improvements.

•

Supporting alignment of the Plan with the needs of residents, business owners,
and regional transit goals.

The proposed working group members are as follows:
Bicycle Pedestrian Plan Working Group
Name

Sector/Representation

Miranda Shein

Resident

Nick Troy

Rolling Meadows Park District Director

Jack Bower

Rolling Meadows Library Executive Director

Robb Zbierski

Bicycle Industry Professional/Advocate

Teddy Troy

Student, Rolling Meadows High School

Joannie Thomas

Teacher at Willow Bend
Member, Environmental Committee

Chris Morkert

Resident

Page 89 of 89

Brian Larson

Advocate; NWMC Transportation Program
Associate

Johnny Zavala

Business Owner, Los Laureles

Unless desired, convening of the working group by Staff does not require City Council
action. The working group is an informal advisory group to the City’s Community
Development Department and would have no decision-making authority.
Requested Action: A representative from CMAP will provide an informational update
presentation to the Committee of the Whole. At the conclusion of the presentation
and any questions, the City Council is asked to direct Staff to proceed as proposed or
with any modifications.

Read the agenda documentPrimary source ↗

The government’s own published record — read it yourself, then decide what to do about it.

Data centers in Rolling MeadowsLocal report →

The facilities, the coverage, and the local record for this community.

Outcome

Not yet recorded. The record stays open — outcomes are added as minutes and vote results are published.

Provenance

Where this record came from. Every source is listed, permanently.

Agenda Watch · Aug 12, 2026

Permanent ID DKT-2026-000649 — this record is never deleted.

Record history

Every change to this record, logged as it happened.

Aug 12, 2026 Filed on the Docket
Aug 12, 2026 Full document archived — public record

← The full Docket · every meeting, vote, and action on the permanent record · also in the National Record Index.

On the agenda: Rolling Meadows meeting — data center (Feb 17)

The agenda, word for word

Provenance

Record history

More on the Docket in Illinois