committee of the whole - daily herald

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

Monday, March 26, 2012 7:00 p.m.

City Hall Council Chambers

109 James Street Geneva, IL 60134

AGENDA

1. Call to Order 2. Consider Consent Agenda *3. Approve Committee of the Whole Minutes from March 12, 2012. 4. Items of Business a. Recommend Approval of Requests by Geneva Chamber of Commerce for Street Closures and Use of City Services Related to Swedish Days Festival June 19-24, 2012. b. Recommend Approval of Draft Resolution Authorizing Amended Intergovernmental Agreement for Traffic and Parking Control Between the City of Geneva and Geneva Community Unit School District 304. c. Recommend Draft Resolution Authorizing Director of Public Works to Execute Illinois Joint Purchasing Requisition for 2012/13 Bulk Salt Purchase. d. Recommend Draft Resolution Rejecting Bids for 2012 Sidewalk Trip Hazard Sawing Project. e. Recommend Draft Resolution Amending Res. 2002-07 to Allow Wall Signs on West Façade of Building B of Shoppes of Geneva Commons – Tom & Eddie’s Restaurant at 1042 Commons Drive. f. Recommend Draft Ordinance Extending Special Use Granted by Ord. 2011-25 to Operate a Bed and Breakfast Inn at 109 Peyton Street to April 18, 2013. g. Recommend Approval of Request to Operate a Food Cart on a Temporary Basis at Past Basket Located at 200 S. Third Street.

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MTG. MARCH 26, 2012 h. Recommend Approval of Request to Operate Outdoor Gardening/Greenery Sales on a Temporary Basis at Past Basket Located at 200 S. Third Street. i. Consider Appeal of the February 21, 2012 Decision of the Historic Preservation Commission to Deny Project at 502-14 W. State Street (including proposed demolition of Pure Oil Building). 5. New Business 6. Upcoming Meetings: Special Committee of the Whole: April 30, 2012. 7. Adjournment

Committee of the Whole Minutes – March 12, 2012 Page 1

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MINUTES March 12, 2012

Present: Mayor Burns, Ald. Brown, Cummings, Dantino, Flanagan, Hill, Kilburg, Maladra, Marks, Singer, Vogelsberg (chair) Also Present: McKittrick, Dawkins, Mexin, Nash, Passarelli, Untch, Divita, Dinges, Dahl 1. Call to Order Ald. Vogelsberg called the meeting to order at 7:02pm noting all were present. 2. Consider Consent Agenda Moved by Ald. Hill, second by Ald. Singer V/V: 10-0 Motion carried. *3. Approve Committee of the Whole Minutes from February 27, 2012. Approved on Consent Agenda 4. Items of Business a. Oath of Office for Police Officer David Zeigler. Clerk Landberg administered the oath to Mr. Zeigler. Mayor Burns introduced Zeigler to the council and Zeigler in turn introduced his family. b. Recommend Approval of Request for Use of Right-of-Ways for Children’s Benefit League Tag Days April 13-14, 2012. Moved by Ald. Marks, second by Ald. Kilburg V/V: 10-0 Motion carried. c. Recommend Approval of Draft Resolution Authorizing Publication of Updated Zoning Map. Moved by Ald. Hill, second by Ald. Brown V/V: 10-0 Motion carried. d. Recommend Approval of Draft Resolution Authorizing Purchase of Primary Cable for River Lane Underground Cable Replacement Program. Moved by Ald. Flanagan, second by Ald. Maladra V/V: 10-0 Motion carried. e. Recommend Approval of Certificate of Completions for On-Cor and Living Well Cancer Center. Moved by Ald. Marks, second by Ald. Flanagan V/V: 10-0 Motion carried. f. Recommend Approval of Draft Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Collective Bargaining Agreement Between the City of Geneva and the Fraternal Order of Police Labor Council. Moved by Ald. Hill, second by Ald. Maladra V/V: 10-0 Motion carried.

Committee of the Whole Minutes – March 12, 2012 Page 2

g. Presentation of 2011/12 Miscellaneous Budgets. Admin. McKittrick provided a Powerpoint and narrative explaining the proposed miscellaneous budgets for FY 2012/13. McKittrick went though each fund balance and explained any changes or special items of interest. On a question from Ald. Marks, McKittrick stated that the city-funded portion of IMRF is 100% funded. McKittrick confirmed that cemetery work was budgeted to be outsourced and bids would be solicited in May. Ald. Dantino stated that he would like to see employees contribute more for their health insurance. McKittrick noted the many union contracts that the City was entered into and was not confident this could be achieved. Jim Radecki, 2258 Newport Ave., asked council to consider asking the citizen via referendum if they were still in favor of the tax for the Mental Health Board funding. Radecki stated it had been many years since the referendum to adopt the tax and felt it would be a good idea to poll the citizens once again to see if this was a good use of their tax dollars. There was consensus from the council to discuss this policy at a future meeting. Colin Campbell, 18 S. Sixth, expressed his opinion that the need for the appropriation is evident in the community and hoped that the council would not eliminate the funding. h. Recommend Approval of 2012/13 Miscellaneous Budgets as Presented and Public Hearing on April 16, 2012. Moved by Ald. Hill, second by Ald. Singer V/V: 10-0 Motion carried. 5. New Business Ald. Singer thanked Ald. Flanagan and the Beautification Committee for hosting the “Pasta for Posies” fundraiser on March 7, 2012. 6. Upcoming Meetings: Special Committee of the Whole: March 19, 2012. 7. Closed Session on Collective Negotiating Matters Between the Public Body and Its Employees or

Their Representatives. Motion by Ald. Marks, second by Ald. Singer. AYES: 10 NAYS: 0 Motion carried. The meeting was adjourned to closed session at 8:20pm. The meeting returned to open session at 8:41pm on a motion by Ald. Marks, second by Ald. Brown AYES: 10 NAYS: 0 Motion carried. 8. Adjournment On a motion by Ald. Marks, second by Ald. Singer, the meeting was adjourned by unanimous voice vote at 8:41pm.

AGENDA ITEM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Agenda Item: 2012 Swedish Days Request from the Geneva Chamber of Commerce

Presenter & Title: Ellen Divita, Director of Economic Development

Date: March 26, 2012

Please Check Appropriate Box: X Committee of the Whole Meeting X Special Committee of the Whole Meeting X City Council Meeting Special City Council Meeting Public Hearing Other -

Estimated Cost: Budgeted? YES

X NO If NO, please explain how the item will be funded: Executive Summary: The annual Swedish Days event is planned for Tuesday, June 19, 2012–Sunday, June 24, 2012. Preparation activities begin on Sunday June 17th. The Chamber is requesting these street closures and city services: Late May/Early June Public Works to put street pole banners up. Sunday, June 17 James Street (south side) parking lane marked off for canopy set-up

on Monday morning.

Kane County Courthouse entrances should be barricaded for the carnival to begin moving in on Sunday night.

Sign posts need to be removed from the corner of Third and James both SW and SE corners so concession booths can move into place.

Monday, June 18 4th Street closed from James to State for the Power Quad and one

other potential static display.

Stage will be moved onto the east side Third (between James to Campbell) early in the morning before businesses open so the Park District can use it for Battle of the Bands.

Electric Division to bring power to concessions booths.

Electric Division to bring power to the stage.

All concessions, sponsors, portable restrooms and roll offs are moved into place. A map of booth locations will be provided as soon as it is complete.

Tues., June 19 – Sat. June 23 Third Street to be closed between James St and Campbell St for

stage entertainment on Tuesday at 5:00 PM, Wednesday at 4:30 PM, Thursday at 5:30 PM, Friday at 11:00 AM, and Saturday at 8:00 AM. On Friday, Third Street will also be used for Kid’s Day and entertainment throughout the day and evening. On Saturday, Third

Street will be closed for the Park District 3 x 3 Basketball tournament, followed by evening stage entertainment.

Entertainment closes down by 10:00 PM each night.

Public Works to place trash boxes around the events.

The Chamber also requests the possible closing of Campbell Street from Third Street to Fourth for a sponsor display for the entire week. The City approves the blocking of Campbell Street, between Third Street and Fourth Street, to vehicular traffic is permitted provided an 18 foot wide unobstructed emergency access is maintained and the Police and Fire departments have reviewed and approved the final set up of displays.

Note, there is no craft show on Hamilton this year. Sat. June 23 Third Street from Campbell to James will be closed all day with the

“3 on 3” tournament in the morning and the entertainment at night. From James to State, instead of the Fire Department display, a Zip Line ride will be offered from 4PM to 8PM. Extra time is needed for set up and take down, so the request is for street closure from 3PM to 9PM..

Sat. June 23 – Sun. June 24 New this year, close 4th Street from State Street north to Hamilton

Street, a new event, Sweden Väg will put the Swedish back in Swedish Days. The street will remain closed until closing of the Festival on Sunday evening.

Sun.June 24 The Parade steps off at 1:00 at Center and Anderson, proceeding

south to State Street; east on State Street to Third Street and south on Third Street, disbanding at the train station. This allows units to travel on Route 31 north or south to leave town.

In June of 2012 the City expects to have street improvement projects in the vicinity of the parade staging, specifically on Center Street from Logan to Anderson Boulevard. Therefore, depending on status of the project (which is weather dependent) staging of the parade may be subject to change. This has occurred in the past. The Chamber will work with Fire and Police and Public Works representatives to choose the best route, prior to the parade.

The insurance certificate will be forthcoming. The Chamber has requested City Public Works make one new sign to indicate the the location of the Swedish Väg events (replacing the whimsical sign for Craft Show). The request for additional City Services (water, electric, barricades) is detailed in the attached application. Therefore, the City recommends approval to the event application for 2012 Swedish Days Festival and and use of specified City properties subject to the following:

An 18 foot wide unobstructed emergency access shall be maintained on all streets unless

specifically waived by the Police and Fire Departments.

The use of Fourth Street between State and Hamilton is permitted to be blocked using the same footprint as the Festival of the Vine food tent.

The blocking of Campbell Street, between Third Street and Fourth Street, to vehicular

traffic is permitted provided an 18 foot wide unobstructed emergency access is maintained and the Police and Fire departments have reviewed and approved the final set up of displays.

The blocking of Fourth Street, between State Street and James Street, to vehicular traffic

is permitted provided an 18 foot wide unobstructed emergency access is maintained and the Police and Fire departments have reviewed and approved the final set up of displays.

The Chamber will speak to all businesses located adjacent to static displays to explain locations.

Details on any needed modification of staging for the Parade will be agreed upon in

advance of the event.

Attachments: (please list)

Letter of request from Geneva Chamber President Jean Gaines. Special Events Application Map of street closures Map of Swedish Väg Activities on 4th, north of State Street Information on new Zip Line ride

Recommendation / Suggested Action: (briefly explain) Approve the Chamber of Commerce 2012 Swedish Days Requests as presented above, subject to final review of street closures and displays and Parade staging areas.


Agenda Item: Amended Intergovernmental Agreement for Traffic and Parking Control between the City of Geneva and Geneva Community Unit School District 304

Presenter & Title: Mary McKittrick, City Administrator


Please Check Appropriate Box: X Committee of the Whole Meeting Special Committee of the Whole Meeting X City Council Meeting Special City Council Meeting Public Hearing Other -

Estimated Cost: N/A

Budgeted? YES NO

If NO, please explain how the item will be funded: N/A Executive Summary: This is an amended intergovernmental agreement between the City and Geneva School District 304 to expand the existing 2006 agreement to cover all of the District’s schools within City limits since the number of schools has increased since the prior agreement. The existing and amended agreements provide for traffic and parking regulations to be enforced by the City’s Police Department and Fire Department. Resolution Amended and restated intergovernmental agreement for traffic and parking regulation

between the City and Geneva Community Unit School District 304 Recommendation / Suggested Action: (briefly explain) Recommend approval of the resolution authorizing the Mayor and Clerk to execute an amended and restated intergovernmental agreement for traffic and parking control at all Geneva Community Unit School District 304 schools within City limits.

RESOLUTION NO. 2012-

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR TRAFFIC AND PARKING REGULATION

BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF GENEVA AND THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF GENEVA COMMUNITY UNIT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 304

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GENEVA, KANE

COUNTY, ILLINOIS, as follows:

SECTION 1: That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of

the City of Geneva, the Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement for Traffic and Parking

Regulation By and Between the City of Geneva and the Board of Education of Geneva Community

Unit School District No. 304 in the form attached hereto at Exhibit “A”.

SECTION 2: This Resolution shall become effective from and after its passage as in

accordance with law.

PASSED by the City Council of the City of Geneva, Kane County, Illinois, this 2nd day of

April, 2012.

AYES: ____ NAYS: ____ ABSENT: ____ ABSTAINING: ____ HOLDING OFFICE: ____

Approved by me this 2nd day of April, 2012.

Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk

2

WHEREAS, the 2006 IGA provided for amendments at any time by the further

mutual written agreement of the parties, duly executed by their respective duly-

authorized representatives; and

WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend and restate the 2006 IGA by expanding

the definition of “PARKING AREA” as defined in the 2006 IGA to include safety zones

and fire lanes at and contiguous to the following schools, in addition to those listed in

the 2006 IGA :

Geneva Community High School 416 McKinley Avenue, Geneva, Illinois 60134

Williamsburg Elementary School 1812 Williamsburg, Geneva, Illinois 60134

Harrison Street School 201 North Harrison Street, Geneva, Illinois 60134

Western Avenue School 1500 Western Avenue, Geneva, Illinois 60134

Heartland Elementary School 3300 Heartland Drive, Geneva, Illinois 60134

WHEREAS, the District has requested that the City regulate the parking and

traffic at and affecting safety zones and fire lanes located in the parking lots and

contiguous areas (hereinafter referred to as “PARKING AREA”) to all of the school

campuses located within the corporate boundaries of the CITY and as specifically listed

in this Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises hereinafter made,

the City and District hereby amend and restate the 2006 IGA as follows:

3

1. The Recitals set forth above are incorporated herein as if fully set forth in

this paragraph 1.

2. “PARKING AREA” as herein defined shall include the safety zones and

fire lanes located in the parking lots at and contiguous to:

Geneva Community High School 416 Kinley Avenue, Geneva, Illinois 60134

Geneva Middle School, South Campus 1415 ing Drive, Geneva, Illinois 60134

Geneva Middle School, North Campus 1357 Viking Drive, Geneva, Illinois 60134

Williamsburg Elementary School

1812 Williamsburg, Geneva, Illinois 60134



Heartland Elementary School 3300 rtland Drive, Geneva, Illinois 60134

Such additional parking lots at schools which may be constructed hereafter and are located with the corporate limits of the CITY.

3. The City shall:

a. Designate safety zones and fire lanes in the PARKING AREA on all school campuses of the DISTRICT located within the corporate limits of the CITY, pursuant to Section 11-209(a)(7) of the Illinois Vehicle Code;

b. Designate the location of traffic and parking signs in the PARKING

AREA, provided the DISTRICT purchases, installs and maintains such signs that prohibit, regulate, restrict and/or limit the stopping, standing or parking of vehicles in designated safety zones and fire lanes, all in accordance with local and state laws and regulations.

4

The signs will be designed in accordance with the uniform sign specifications required by the State of Illinois.

c. Designate the location of traffic and parking signs in the PARKING

AREA, provided the DISTRICT purchases, installs and maintains such signs as being safety zones and fire lanes indicating that vehicles parked or abandoned in the designated safety zones and fire lanes during public emergencies, or found unattended in the designated safety zones and fire lanes, will be removed and payment of reasonable charges for such removal and storage of the vehicle shall be borne by its owner or operator. The signs will be designed in accordance with the uniform sign specifications required by the State of Illinois.

d. Enter upon the PARKING AREA, by and through the officers and

employees of its Police Department, to patrol and enforce the traffic and parking restrictions in the designated safety zones and fire lanes in the PARKING AREA;

e. Provide for the removal and storage of vehicles parked in the

designated safety zones and fire lanes in the PARKING AREA (i) where they have become an unreasonable obstruction to traffic, and/or (ii) where stopping, standing or parking is prohibited, and for the payment of reasonable charges for such removal and storage by the owner or operator of such vehicle, pursuant to Section 11-209(a)(8);

f. Bear the cost of maintaining and enforcing traffic and parking

regulations, except for the signs, in the PARKING AREA; and g. Collect and retain as its sole and exclusive property all fines

imposed and received for enforcement of traffic and parking violations in the PARKING AREA.

4. This Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement shall become

effective upon the approval and execution thereof by the last party hereto.

5. This Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement may be

executed in multiple, identical counterparts, and all said counterparts shall, taken

together, constitute an integrated Amended Agreement.

5

6. The City and the District have authorized, by Resolution or Ordinance, the

execution of this Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement as an exercise

of their respective intergovernmental cooperation authority under the Constitution of the

State of Illinois, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act and Section 11-209 of the

Illinois Vehicle Code.

7. This Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement shall be

recorded in the Office of the Kane County Recorded and no regulation made pursuant

to this Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement shall be effective or

enforceable until 3 days after this Amended Agreement is so recorded.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, on this _____ day of ____________, 2012, the parties

hereto fixed their seals.

CITY OF GENEVA, ILLINOIS BOARD OF EDUCATION OF GENEVA COMMUNITY UNIT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 304

By: By:

Mayor President

ATTEST: ATTEST:

By: By:

Clerk Secretary

AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR TRAFFIC AND PARKING REGULATION BY AND BETWEEN

THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF GENEVA COMMUNITY UNIT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 304, KANE COUNTY, ILLINOIS,

AND THE CITY OF GENEVA, KANE COUNTY, ILLINOIS

WHEREAS, GENEVA COMMUNITY UNIT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 304, Kane

County, Illinois (hereinafter referred to as “DISTRICT’) , a public school district , and the

CITYOF GENEVA, Kane County, Illinois (hereinafter referred to as “CITY”), a non-home

rule unit of local government, are authorized pursuant to Seciton10 of Article VII of the

Constitution of the State of Illinois (Ill. Const. Art. VII, Sec. 10) and Section 3 of the

Intergovernmental Cooperation Act (5 ILCS 220/3) to contract or otherwise associate

among themselves to obtain or share services and to exercise any powers or functions

not prohibited by law which either one of them is authorized by law to perform; and

WHEREAS, on or about September 26, 2006, Geneva Community Unit School

District No. 304, Kane County, Illinois (hereinafter referred to as “District”) and the City

of Geneva, Kane County, Illinois (hereinafter referred to as “City”), entered into an

Intergovernmental Agreement (hereafter referred to as “2006 IGA”)for traffic and parking

regulations, as authorized under the provisions of the Illinois Vehicle Code (hereinafter

referred to as “CODE” [625 ILCS 5/1 et. seq.]) for the Geneva Middle School, South

Campus located at 1415 Viking Drive and the Geneva Middle School, North Campus,

located at 1357 Viking Drive, both located within the corporate boundaries of the CITY;

and

2

WHEREAS, the 2006 IGA provided for amendments at any time by the further

mutual written agreement of the parties, duly executed by their respective duly-

authorized representatives; and

WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend and restate the 2006 IGA by expanding

the definition of “PARKING AREA” as defined in the 2006 IGA to include safety zones

and fire lanes at and contiguous to the following schools, in addition to those listed in

the 2006 IGA :


Williamsburg Elementary School 1812 Williamsburg, Geneva, Illinois 60134




WHEREAS, the District has requested that the City regulate the parking and

traffic at and affecting safety zones and fire lanes located in the parking lots and

contiguous areas (hereinafter referred to as “PARKING AREA”) to all of the school

campuses located within the corporate boundaries of the CITY and as specifically listed

in this Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises hereinafter made,

the City and District hereby amend and restate the 2006 IGA as follows:

3

1. The Recitals set forth above are incorporated herein as if fully set forth in

this paragraph 1.

2. “PARKING AREA” as herein defined shall include the safety zones and

fire lanes located in the parking lots at and contiguous to:


Geneva Middle School, South Campus 1415 Viking Drive, Geneva, Illinois 60134

Geneva Middle School, North Campus 1357 Viking Drive, Geneva, Illinois 60134

Williamsburg Elementary School

1812 Williamsburg, Geneva, Illinois 60134




Such additional parking lots at schools which may be constructed hereafter and are located with the corporate limits of the CITY.

3. The City shall:

a. Designate safety zones and fire lanes in the PARKING AREA on all school campuses of the DISTRICT located within the corporate limits of the CITY, pursuant to Section 11-209(a)(7) of the Illinois Vehicle Code;

b. Designate the location of traffic and parking signs in the PARKING

AREA, provided the DISTRICT purchases, installs and maintains such signs that prohibit, regulate, restrict and/or limit the stopping, standing or parking of vehicles in designated safety zones and fire lanes, all in accordance with local and state laws and regulations.

4

The signs will be designed in accordance with the uniform sign specifications required by the State of Illinois.

c. Designate the location of traffic and parking signs in the PARKING

AREA, provided the DISTRICT purchases, installs and maintains such signs as being safety zones and fire lanes indicating that vehicles parked or abandoned in the designated safety zones and fire lanes during public emergencies, or found unattended in the designated safety zones and fire lanes, will be removed and payment of reasonable charges for such removal and storage of the vehicle shall be borne by its owner or operator. The signs will be designed in accordance with the uniform sign specifications required by the State of Illinois.

d. Enter upon the PARKING AREA, by and through the officers and

employees of its Police Department, to patrol and enforce the traffic and parking restrictions in the designated safety zones and fire lanes in the PARKING AREA;

e. Provide for the removal and storage of vehicles parked in the

designated safety zones and fire lanes in the PARKING AREA (i) where they have become an unreasonable obstruction to traffic, and/or (ii) where stopping, standing or parking is prohibited, and for the payment of reasonable charges for such removal and storage by the owner or operator of such vehicle, pursuant to Section 11-209(a)(8);

f. Bear the cost of maintaining and enforcing traffic and parking

regulations, except for the signs, in the PARKING AREA; and g. Collect and retain as its sole and exclusive property all fines

imposed and received for enforcement of traffic and parking violations in the PARKING AREA.

4. This Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement shall become

effective upon the approval and execution thereof by the last party hereto.

5. This Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement may be

executed in multiple, identical counterparts, and all said counterparts shall, taken

together, constitute an integrated Amended Agreement.

5

6. The City and the District have authorized, by Resolution or Ordinance, the

execution of this Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement as an exercise

of their respective intergovernmental cooperation authority under the Constitution of the

State of Illinois, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act and Section 11-209 of the

Illinois Vehicle Code.

7. This Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement shall be

recorded in the Office of the Kane County Recorded and no regulation made pursuant

to this Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement shall be effective or

enforceable until 3 days after this Amended Agreement is so recorded.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, on this _____ day of ____________, 2012, the parties

hereto fixed their seals.

CITY OF GENEVA, ILLINOIS BOARD OF EDUCATION OF GENEVA COMMUNITY UNIT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 304

By: By:

Mayor President

ATTEST: ATTEST:

By: By:

Clerk Secretary


Agenda Item: Bulk Rock Salt Contract Renewal for FY 2012-13

Presenter & Title: Dan Dinges, Director of Public Works Pam Broviak, City Engineer Asst. DPW



Estimated Cost: $135,000 Budgeted? X YES NO

If NO, please explain how the item will be funded: Executive Summary: The City of Geneva has been purchasing its salt for the winter season through the Illinois Department of Central Management Services joint purchasing program. They have requested that we submit our road salt quantity for next year (2012-13 Winter Season) by March 30, 2012. Based on the unusually mild winter this year our salt shed is full (>2,000 T) therefore we are recommended lowering our commitment to 1,500 tons. Last year’s commitment was 2,200 tons. The contract requires us to purchase a minimum of our commitment (1,500 T) but allows for us to increase our quantity by 20% should we need additional salt. The cost of salt this year was $59.87. The renewal guarantees the price cannot increase by more than 5%. We will find out the price after they have gone through and received pricing, usually in August. I attached some information regarding the past several years’ snow storm cost summary. Attachments: (please list) • Snow Storm Summary • Resolution Recommendation / Suggested Action: (briefly explain) Staff recommends that City Council authorize the Director of Public Works to execute the Illinois Joint Purchasing Requisition.

RESOLUTION NO. 2012-__

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF CONTRACT WITH ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT

SERVICES FOR BULK ROCK SALT



SECTION 1: That the Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to execute, on

behalf of the City of Geneva, the Contract with the Illinois Department of Central Management

Services relating to the purchase of bulk rock salt for winter operations.



__

PASSED by the City Council of the City of Geneva, Kane County, Illinois, this 2nd day of

April, 2012.

AYES: __ NAYS: __ ABSENT: __ ABSTAINING: __ HOLDING OFFICE:

Approved by me this ____ day of __________, 2012.

Mayor

ATTEST:

lerk City C

FY 2011-12 Snow Storm SummaryBudget 485,655.00$ YTD thru Feb 236,517.00$

Event Date Snow Amount Salt Used Estimated Cost1 11/10/2011 0.00 0.00 -$ 2 12/8/2011 0.50 61.50 5,150.20$ 3 12/17/2011 1.50 77.25 6,747.15$ 4 12/22/2011 0.00 0.00 489.00$ 5 12/29/2011 0.00 2.25 275.65$ 6 1/12/2012 5.00 263.94 28,591.06$ 7 1/17/2012 0.50 129.25 10,023.66$ 8 1/19/2012 0.25 54.00 3,837.56$ 9 1/20/2012 5.50 192.75 23,250.27$ 10 1/22/2012 0.00 21.75 1,897.11$ 11 1/27/2012 1.00 65.25 5,395.89$ 12 1/29/2012 0.25 38.25 2,933.72$ 13 2/10/2012 0.75 110.25 8,541.63$ 14 2/13/2012 0.50 63.00 5,273.06$ 15 2/21/2012 0.50 21.00 1,883.33$ 16 2/23/2012 3.00 103.50 11,196.30$ 17 3/2/2012 2.00 39.75 3,491.02$ 18 3/4/2012 0.50 14.25 1,453.71$

21.75 1257.94 120,430.29$

FY 2010-11 Snow Storm SummaryActual 433,395.00$

Events 31 Blizzard 2/1-2/2Total Snow 54.5"Total Salt UsedPlow Events 12 Salt Events 16

FY 2009-10 Snow Storm SummaryActual 445,300.00$

EventsTotal Snow 54.5"Total Salt UsedPlow Events 12 Salt Events 16


Agenda Item: 2012 Sidewalk Trip Hazard Sawing Project

Presenter & Title: Pam Broviak, P.E. City Engineer/Assistant Director of Public Works

Date: 3-20-12

Please Check Appropriate Box: x Committee of the Whole Meeting Special Committee of the Whole Meeting x City Council Meeting Special City Council Meeting Public Hearing Other -

Estimated Cost: $40,000 Budgeted? FY 2011-12 YES NO

If NO, please explain how the item will be funded: Executive Summary: On March 15, 2012 bids were opened for the above subject improvements. Two bids were opened and are summarized on the attached page.

It is recommended that all bids be rejected and we will rebid later this summer during fiscal year 2012-2013.

Attachments: (please list)

• Bid Tabulation • Resolution

Recommendation / Suggested Action: (briefly explain) In consideration of the above information, I respectively recommend that the Geneva City Council reject all bids for the 2012 Sidewalk Trip Hazard Sawing Project at the April 2, 2012 City Council Meeting.

City of Geneva2012 Sidewalk Trip Hazard Sawing Project BID TABDate of Bid Opening: 3-16-12 11:00 AM

Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price Total

TRIP HAZARD SAW CUTTING IN-FT 1,600 25.00$ 40,000.00$ 23.00$ 36,800.00$ 22.00$ 35,200.00$

Total = $40,000.00 Total = $36,800.00 Total = $35,200.00

DescriptionPlan Engineer's Estimate

Safe Step, LLC Hortonville, WI

apparent low bidder

Sidewalk Savers, LLC Wauwatosa, WI

RESOLUTION NO. 20__-__

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REJECTION OF ALL BIDS for 2012 Sidewalk Trip Hazard Sawing Project



SECTION 1: That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to reject all bids, on

behalf of the City of Geneva, for the “2012 Sidewalk Trip Hazard Sawing Project”.



PASSED by the City Council of the City of Geneva, Kane County, Illinois, this ____ day of

_________, 2012

AYES: __ NAYS: __ ABSENT: __ ABSTAINING: __ HOLDING OFFICE: __

Approved by me this ____ day of __________, 2012.

Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk


Agenda Item:

Consideration of an amendment to Resolution 2002-07 (Final PUD/Site Plan Approval for Lots 1 and 3 of the Shoppes of Geneva Commons) – Request to allow wall signs on the west façade of Building B, specifically for Tom & Eddie’s restaurant located at 1042 Commons Drive.

Presenter & Title: Dick Untch, Community Development Director David DeGroot, City Planner


Please Check Appropriate Box: X Committee of the Whole Meeting Special Committee of the Whole Meeting City Council Meeting Special City Council Meeting Public Hearing Other -

Estimated Cost: $0 Budgeted? YES NO

Executive Summary: In February of 1996 the City Council approved Ordinance 96-27, which granted a Special Use for the Fisher Farms Planned Unit Development (PUD). The PUD established zoning and development standards for nine (9) residential neighborhoods and five (5) commercial areas. Specific regulations were established for each commercial area, including sign regulations. The sign regulations established for Commercial Area “A” (Geneva Commons & The Shoppes at Geneva Commons) allow wall signs to be placed on building facades directed toward a public right-of-way. Tom & Eddie’s Restaurant (1042 Commons Drive) is located within Commercial Area “A”. The restaurant would like to place a wall sign on the west building façade facing Commons Drive. Commons Drive is a private drive and not a public right-of-way. Therefore, the requested wall sign on the west building façade is not permitted. The reason for the applicant’s request is to help direct customers to the restaurant from the interior of the shopping center. Tom & Eddie’s has received complaints from customers who have experienced difficulty finding the restaurant’s location within the shopping center. The restaurant also feels that it is at a competitive disadvantage because many other restaurants and businesses in the shopping center have wall signs facing Commons Drive. Other restaurants and businesses in the shopping center requested and were granted relief through the Final PUD process to allow wall signs facing Commons Drive. Tom & Eddie’s is requesting an amendment to the Final PUD for Building B in Commercial Area “A” to allow tenants within the building to place a wall sign on the west building façade facing Commons Drive. Attachments: (please list) Memorandum Draft Resolution Recommendation / Suggested Action: (briefly explain) At its meeting on March 26, 2012 the Plan Commission recommended approval of the applicant’s request to amend Section 4D of Ordinance 2002-07 to allow wall signs to be displayed on the west façade of Building B in the Shoppes at Geneva Commons, as presented in the attached draft resolution. Staff also recommends approval of the request as presented in the attached draft resolution.

Figure 1. Location Map. Prepared by Geneva Planning Division, February 2012.

BACKGROUND

In February of 1996 the City Council approved Ordinance 96-27, which granted a Special Use for the Fisher Farms Planned Unit Development (PUD). The Fisher Farms PUD consists of a mix of residential and commercial development. The PUD established zoning and development standards for nine (9) residential neighborhoods and five (5) commercial areas. Specific regulations were established for each commercial area, including sign regulations. The sign regulations established for Commercial Area “A” (Geneva Commons & The Shoppes at Geneva Commons) allow wall signs to be placed on building facades directed toward a public right-of-way. Tom & Eddie’s Restaurant (1042 Commons Drive) is located within Commercial Area “A”. Please see Figure 1 above. The

GENEVA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

Community Development Department Report

Applicant

Cherle Link of Tom & Eddie’s

Property Owner

Michael Pokorny

Location

1042 Commons Drive

Request

An amendment to the Final PUD/Site Plan approval for the Shoppes of Geneva Commons to allow wall signs on the west façade of Building B

Recommendation

At its meeting on March 8, 2012 the Plan Commission recommended approval subject to the conditions listed on page 5 of this report

Staff Liaison

David DeGroot City Planner Phone: (630) 232-0814 Email: [email protected]

MARCH 26, 2012

FINAL PUD AMENDMENT TOM & EDDIE’S

1042 COMMONS DR

Geneva Committee of the Whole Page 2 of 4 Final PUD Amendment: Tom & Eddie’s

restaurant would like to place a wall sign on the west building façade facing Commons Drive. Please see Figure 2 for a picture of the desired sign location. Commons Drive is a private drive and not a public right-of-way. Therefore, the requested wall sign on the west building façade is not permitted.

Figure 2. Tom & Eddie’s Restaurant (1042 Commons Drive) - west building façade. Photograph taken by Geneva Planning Division, February 2012.

The reason for the applicant’s request is to help direct customers to the restaurant from the interior of the shopping center. Tom & Eddie’s has received complaints from customers who have experienced difficulty finding the restaurant’s location within the shopping center. The restaurant also feels that it is at a competitive disadvantage because many other restaurants and businesses in the shopping center have wall signs facing Commons Drive, explained below.

Existing Wall Signs Facing Commons Drive

Commercial Area “A” of the Fisher Farms Preliminary PUD was developed in three (3) phases: Geneva Commons, The Shoppes at Geneva Commons – Phase I, and The Shoppes at Geneva Commons – Phase II. Tom & Eddie’s is located within Building B of the Shoppes at Geneva Commons – Phase I. Each development phase was granted Final PUD approval, which required review by the Plan Commission and approval by the City Council. As set forth in Section 11-9-6B of the Zoning Ordinance, Final PUD plans are required to include a master sign plan. The master sign plans for Geneva Commons and The Shoppes at Geneva Commons – Phase II each deviated from the Preliminary PUD sign regulations to allow for wall signs facing Commons Drive. However, the Final PUD and master sign plan for the

Desired Sign Location


Shoppes at Geneva Commons - Phase I adopted the wall sign regulations set forth in the Preliminary PUD , thereby prohibiting wall signs on the west building façade of the building Tom & Eddie’s is located in (known as Building B of the Shoppes at Geneva Commons – Phase I). As shown in Figure 3 below and in the pictures in Figure 4 on the following page, the result is that Building B of the Shoppes at Geneva Commons – Phase I is the only out lot building in Commercial Area “A” that does not have wall signs facing Commons Drive.

Figure 3. Wall Sign Regulations by Development Phase for Commercial Area “A” of the Fisher Farms Planned Unit Development. Prepared by the Geneva Planning Division, March 2012.

REQUEST

The applicant is specifically requesting to amend Section 4(Conditions of Approval) of Resolution 2002-07(Final PUD/Site Plan Approval for Lots 1 and 3 of the Shoppes of Geneva Commons) to allow wall signs on the west façade of Building B, as shown below. Proposed additions are shown in bold font.

The final business identification building wall sign standards as set forth in the Fisher Farms PUD (Ordinance 96-27). Except that each tenant in Building B shall also be permitted to have one (1) wall sign on the west building façade. Such signs shall not exceed twenty (20) square feet in area.

Fisher Farms Preliminary PUD Approval -

wall signs permitted only when facing a public

steet

Final PUD Approvals that deviated from the

Preliminary PUD to allow wall signs facing Commons Drive

Geneva Commons

Claddagh Irish Pub California Pizza Kitchen

Eye Boutique + more

Shoppes at Geneva Commons - Phase II

Bank of America Buffalo Wild Wings

Red Lobster

Final PUD Approvals that adopted the Preliminary PUD wall sign regulations

Shoppes at Geneva Commons - Phase I

Tom & Eddie's Jimmy John's Game Stop

+ more


Figure 4. Wall signs facing Commons Drive in Commercial Area “A” of the Fisher Farms PUD. Photographs taken by Geneva Planning Division, February 29, 2012.

Buffalo Wild Wings, wall sign on west building façade Bank of America, wall sign on west building façade facing facing Commons Drive. Approved as part of the Final PUD Commons Drive. Approved as part of the Final PUD for for Phase II of the Shoppes at Geneva Commons. Phase II of the Shoppes at Geneva Commons.

Red Lobster, wall sign on west building façade facing Claddagh Irish Pub, wall sign on west building façade Commons Drive. Approved as part of the Final PUD for facing Commons Drive. Approved as part of the Final Phase II of the Shoppes at Geneva Commons. PUD for Geneva Commons.

REVIEW COMMNETS

Staff does not have any objections to the applicant’s proposed amendment to allow wall signs on the west façade of Building B in the Shoppes at Geneva Commons – Phase I. The Preliminary PUD requirement for wall signs to be directed toward a public right-of-way was established prior to any specific development plans being proposed for Commercial Area “A”. The restriction may have been put in place to prevent wall signs from facing west toward the planned residential neighborhoods. Walls signs on the west façade of the building Tom & Eddie’s is located in would face the interior of the Shoppes at Geneva Commons and would not be visible from any residential property. It may also not have been anticipated that a private drive would be constructed to serve out lots within Commercial


Area “A”. However, today Commercial Area “A” is completely built out and the building Tom & Eddie’s is located in is the only out lot building that does not have wall signs facing Commons Drive.

RECOMMENDATION

At its meeting on March 8, 2012 the Plan Commission recommended approval of the applicant’s request to amend Section 4D of Ordinance 2002-07 to allow wall signs to be displayed on the west façade of Building B in the Shoppes at Geneva Commons, subject to the following conditions:

1. Each tenant shall be permitted to have one (1) wall sign on the west building façade. 2. Wall signs located on the west building façade shall not exceed twenty (20) square feet in area. 3. Wall signs located on the west building façade shall only be located along the tenant space the sign

identifies.

REVIEW/APPROVAL PROCESS: NEXT STEPS*

1. April 2, 2012 – City Council consideration of request

*This timeline is provided for informational purposes only, exact dates are subject to change.

ATTACHMENTS

Draft Resolution

Resolution 2012-__ Page 1 of 2

RESOLUTION 2012-XX AN ORDINANCE AMENDING RESOLUTION 2002-07 RELATING TO WALL SIGNS ON THE WEST

FACABE OF BUILDING B IN THE SHOPPES AT GENEVA COMMONS PHASE I - 1002 TO 1096 COMMONS DRIVE

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Geneva approved Resolution 2002-07 on April 15,

2002; and

WHEREAS, Resolution 2002-07 granted Final PUD/Site Plan Approval for Lots 1 & 3 of the Shoppes at Geneva Commons – Phase I; and

WHEREAS, Section 4D (Conditions of Approval) of Resolution 2002-07 required that the wall signs for the SUBJECT REALTY comply with the regulations established in Ordinance 96-27 (Fisher Farms Preliminary PUD); and

WHEREAS, Ordinance 96-27 restricts wall signs to building façades fronting on a public right-of-way; and

WHEREAS, the applicant, Tom & Eddie’s Restaurant, with the consent of the property owner, filed a request to amend Section 4D of Resolution 2002-07 of allow wall signs on the west façade of Building B in the Shoppes of Geneva Commons; and

WHEREAS, the Geneva Plan Commission considered the request at its meeting on March 8, 2012

and unanimously recommended approval as presented herein; and WHEREAS, the Geneva Committee of Whole received the recommendation of the Plan

Commission and considered the same on March 26, 2012;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GENEVA, KANE COUNTY, ILLINOIS, as follows: SECTION 1: AMENDMENTS TO THE FINAL PUD/SITE PLAN FOR LOTS 1 & 3 OF THE SHOPPES AT

GENEVA COMMONS Section 4D (Conditions of Approval) of Resolution 2002-07 (Final PUD/Site Plan Approval for Lots 1 and 3 of the Shoppes at Geneva Commons) is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

“The final business identification building wall sign standards as set forth in the Fisher Farms PUD (Ordinance 96-27). Except that each tenant in Building B shall also be permitted to have one (1) wall sign on the west building façade. Such signs shall not exceed twenty (20) square feet in area and shall only be located along the tenant space the sign identifies.”

SECTION 2: CONVEYANCES Nothing contained in this Resolution shall be construed to restrict or limit the right of the property owner to sell or convey any portion of the SUBJECT REALTY, whether improved or unimproved, and to transfer or assign any or all of their respective rights and duties under this Resolution, provided such sale, conveyance, transfer and assignment is subject to the provisions of this Resolution.

Resolution 2012-__ Page 2 of 2

SECTION 3: PREAMBLES AND EXHIBITS The preamble set forth at the beginning of this Resolution, and the exhibits attached hereto, are incorporated herein by this reference and shall constitute substantive provisions of this Resolution. SECTION 4: EFFECTIVE DATE That this Resolution shall become effective from and after its passage and approval in accordance with law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Geneva, Kane County, Illinois, this ____ day of __________ 2012. AYES: ____ NAYS: ____ ABSENT: ____ ABSTAINING: ____ HOLDING OFFICE: ____ APPROVED by me as Mayor of the City of Geneva, Kane County, Illinois, this _____ day of __________ 2012.

________________________________________________ Mayor

ATTEST: ___________________________________________

City Clerk


Agenda Item:

Extension of a Special Use granted by Ordinance 2011-25: Request to extend the Special Use granted by Ordinance 2011-25 (to operate a bed and breakfast inn at 109 Peyton Street) to April 18, 2013

Presenter & Title: Dick Untch, Director of Community Development David DeGroot, City Planner




Executive Summary: On April 18, 2011 the City Council approved Ordinance 2011-25 granting a Special Use for a bed and breakfast inn to operate at 109 Peyton Street. The approved project is divided into two phases. Phase I includes the conversion of the existing two-story duplex into a four-bedroom bed and breakfast. No changes are proposed to the exterior of the building during Phase I. However, Phase I does include expansion of the existing driveway to provide two additional off-street parking spaces and widening of the existing driveway apron to match the existing width of the driveway at the property line. Phase II of the project involves removal and replacement of the existing two-car garage and the addition of a second story above the garage. The additional area would be used as living space for the owner, thereby freeing up a fifth bedroom for overnight guests. As set forth in Section 11-14-4I of the Geneva Zoning Ordinance, the authorization for a Special Use lapses after one year unless a building permit has been issued and construction has commenced. The applicant is requesting an extension of the approval granted by Ordinance 2011-25 since it will expire on April 18, 2012 and she does not anticipate being able to begin construction by that date. The applicant has requested to extend that deadline by one year until April 18, 2013. Attachments: (please list) Draft Ordinance Recommendation / Suggested Action: (briefly explain) Department staff is supportive of the request to extend the Special Use granted by Ordinance 2011-25 for a bed and breakfast inn to operate at 109 Peyton Street, as presented in the attached draft ordinance. The applicant and department staff will be present at the Committee of the Whole meeting to answer any questions you may have.

ORDINANCE 2012-__

AN ORDINANCE TO EXTEND THE CONDITIONAL SPECIAL USE APPROVAL GRANTED BY ORDINANCE 2011-25 TO APRIL 18, 2013, RELATED TO THE OPERATION OF A BED AND BREAKFAST INN

AT 109 PEYTON STREET, LOCATED IN THE R3 MEDIUM TO HIGH DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Geneva approved Ordinance 2011-25 on

April 18, 2011; and

WHEREAS, Ordinance 2011-25 granted a conditional Special Use for a bed and breakfast inn to operate at 109 Peyton Street (subject property); and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 11-14-4I of the Geneva City Code (Zoning Ordinance), Special Use approval automatically lapses one year after its approval if a building permit has not been issued and construction has not commenced; and

WHEREAS, On March 19, 2012 the owner of the subject property requested a one year extension of the term of Special Use approval; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 11-14-4I of the Geneva City Code (Zoning Ordinance), the City Council may extend the term of a Special Use approval by ordinance; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Geneva, Kane County, Illinois, as follows: SECTION 1: That no building permit has been issued for the approved project nor has construction commenced for the property located at 109 Peyton Street. The City Council extends the Special Use for a period of one year to April 18, 2013. All plans and specifications as listed in Ordinance 2011-25 shall remain in full force and effect during this extension period. SECTION 2: That this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and shall be published by the City Clerk in pamphlet form. SECTION 3: EFFECTIVE DATE That this Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and approval in accordance with law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Geneva, Kane County, Illinois, this ____day of _________, 2012. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAINING: HOLDING OFFICE: 10

APPROVED by me as Mayor of the City of Geneva, Kane County, Illinois, this _____ day of __________, 2012. Mayor ATTEST:

City Clerk


Agenda Item: Authorize, on a temporary basis, a food cart at the Past Basket property located at 200 South Third Street.

Presenter & Title: Dustin Schultze, Building Commissioner




If NO, please explain how the item will be funded: Executive Summary: The Building Division has recently received a request to operate a portable food cart on private property for the purpose of selling food. A temporary permit was approved for a different vender at this property by the City Council last year granting permission to operate from June to November. This request is for June10,2012 to October 1,2012. Staff is currently working on an ordinance that will address the specifics of temporary outdoor sales. This process has taken more time than expected since this item affects approximately 9 different sections of the City Code. We have formed a group that is researching other communities and trying to draft a possible ordinance that will be beneficial to the City, its business owners, and its residents. Until such time as a draft ordinance is presented to the City Council by staff, we are seeking your approval to allow the Building Commissioner to authorize such uses with the recommendation of the City Council. This specific request is for one vendor with one cart on private property for a limited time of June 10, 2012 to October 1, 2012 including a permit fee of $100.00 for such duration.

Attachments: (please list) • Permit application and site plan.

Recommendation / Suggested Action: (briefly explain) Approve a request for a permit to establish a food cart on private property at 200 South Third Street from June 10,2012 to October 1, 2012 at a cost of $100.00 For Office Use Only:

Agenda Item Number:


Agenda Item: Authorize, on a temporary basis, outdoor sales at the Past Basket property located at 200 South Third Street.

Presenter & Title: Dustin Schultze, Building Commissioner




If NO, please explain how the item will be funded: Executive Summary: The Building Division has recently received a request to operate temporary outdoor sales on private property. This temporary permit is being requested at two different times this calendar year. Staff is currently working on an ordinance that will address the specifics of temporary outdoor sales. This process has taken more time than expected since this item affects approximately 9 different sections of the City code. Staff is in the process of researching other communities and drafting an ordinance that will be beneficial to the City, its business owners, and its residents. Until such time as a draft ordinance is presented to the City Council by staff, we are seeking your approval to allow the Building Commissioner to authorize such uses with approval from the City Council. This specific request is for one vendor for outdoor sales on private property for a limited time of April 1st, 2012 to June 10th, 2012 and October 1, 2012to December 31, 2012 including a permit fee of $100.00 for each block of time.

Attachments: (please list) • Permit application and site plan

Recommendation / Suggested Action: (briefly explain) Approve a request for 2 permits to establish temporary outdoor sales on private property at 200 South Third Street from April 1st, 2012 to June 10th, 2012 and October 1,2012to December 31, 2012 including a permit fee of $100.00 for each block of time. For Office Use Only:

Agenda Item Number:


Agenda Item: Consider the appeal of the February 21, 2012 decision of the Historic Preservation Commission to deny project at 502-14 W. State Street (including the proposed demolition of the Pure Oil Gas Station building at 502 W. State St.)

Presenter & Title: Dick Untch / Karla Kaulfuss



Estimated Cost: N/A Budgeted? YES NO

If NO, please explain how the item will be funded:Executive Summary: On March 5, 2012 Staff received an email message from the applicant, Joe Stanton, requesting the appeal of the Historic PreservationCommission’s February 21, 2012 decision to deny the proposed bank project at 514 W. State Street – voting 5-1 to deny the project. The project includes the demolition of the buildings at 502 W. State (Pure Oil Gas Station) and 12 S. Fifth Street and building an addition to and exterior modifications of the building at 514 W. State Street.

Built in 1937, the historic Pure Oil Gas Station building is rated “Significant” in the Geneva Historic District. The structures at 12 S. Fifth Street and 514 W. State Street are rated “Non-Contributing”.

HPC ACTION In summary, the HPC denied the project’s permit application (which includes the demolition of a significant-rated structure). The HPC felt that the project did not meet the SOI Standards, and other approaches to the use of the Pure Oil Gas Station building and property were possible that deserved further exploration. The Commission recognized that the costs outlined for the rehabilitation of the Pure Oil Building were significant and that adaptation of the building as a bank drive-thru was problematic for banking operations.

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE – APPROACH TO REVIEWING APPEAL During its review and consideration of the subject appeal, the City Council should focus its attention on the first of the ten SOI Standards (attached herein), and determine if a reasonable effort has been made by the applicant to find a compatible use that would require minimal changes to the building. Is the list of potential compatible uses of the building so limited and the costs of rehabilitation for those uses so great, that demolition is warranted? Are the technical and economic feasibility problems described by the applicant persuasive enough to warrant demolition of the building?

CITY CODE & APPEAL The city code provisions pertaining to an appeal of the HPC’s decision under Section 10-6-6 (E) outlines the appeal process and how the City Council shall affirm or reverse the commission’s determination as follows:

E. If the commission fails to grant approval of the applicant's request, or if the applicant objects to the commission's determination, then the applicant may request, in writing, to the director of community development that an appeal of the commission's decision be made to the city council. Both the applicant and the commission have the right to be heard at the appeal.

Within thirty (30) days after such an appeal is made, the city council shall, by resolution, affirm or reverse the commission's determination according to the applicable standards set forth in this chapter. In accordance with said standards, the city council may also modify the commission's determination. A reversal or modification of the commission's determination shall be approved by a vote of two thirds (2/3) of the aldermen of the city council holding office.

See staff memo for additional information. Attachments: (please list)� The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation � (SOI Standards)Packet prepared for the February 21, 2012 Historic Preservation Commission meeting � Applicant’s statement at February 21, 2012 HPC meeting � Additional drawings/renderings provided at February 21, 2012 HPC meeting � Email message from Mr. Stanton requesting an appeal � Minutes from February 21, 2012 HPC Meeting Recommendation / Suggested Action: (briefly explain)N/A

City of Geneva Community Development Department

Memorandum

To: Mayor Burns and the Geneva Committee of the Whole

From: Community Development Department


Meeting: March 26, 2012 Committee of the Whole Meeting

Subject: Consider the appeal of the February 21, 2012 decision of the Historic Preservation Commission to deny project at 502-14 W. State Street (including the proposed demolition of the Pure Oil Gas Station building at 502 W. State St.) – Supplemental Information

This memo is in response to the following questions that have been raised by Aldermen pertaining to the upcoming city council review of the request to appeal the decision of the Historic Preservation Commission:

� What review standards should be used by the City Council during its consideration of the appeal? � Is the City Council bound to precisely follow the HPC’s standards in its decision?

SUBJECT APPEAL The applicant, Joe Stanton, has requested an appeal of the February 21, 2012 decision of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) to deny his project. The project includes the demolition of the Pure Oil Gas Station building at 502 West State, the demolition of the commercial building at 12 S. Fifth Street, and the construction of an addition to and exterior modifications of the building at 514 West State Street. The Pure Oil Gas Station is rated “significant” in the Geneva Historic District; and both 12 S. Fifth Street and 514 West State Street are rated “non-contributing” in the Historic District. The review of the appeal will be heard this Monday, March 26th at the Committee of the Whole meeting.

APPLICABILITY OF THE SOI STANDARDS TO THE SUBJECT DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION AND APPEAL As you can see (attached), the SOI Standards outline the following: finding a compatible use that requires minimal changes to the building; not destroying distinctive characteristics of the building; maintaining buildings and building changes as a product of their own time; repairing historic materials and details; sensitively treating the building when considering cleaning; protecting archeological resources; and designing rehabilitation projects or additions which do not damage or obscure the historic building.

The SOI standard that applies to the review of Mr. Stanton’s project – which includes the proposed demolition of an historic structure (the Pure Oil Gas Station building) – is Standard 1. The remaining Standards provide guidance on how to address alterations or additions to a building (the existence of the building is implicit). If a building is proposed for demolition, the remainder of the SOI Standards, beyond Standard 1, become moot (unless archaeological resources are affected).

Memorandum to Mayor Burns and the Committee of the Whole Appeal of February 21, 2012 Decision of the HPC

Page 2 of 2

REASONABLE EFFORTS TO COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS & ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY Implicit in the Standards is the idea that they are applied in a “reasonable manner” or that “every reasonable effort” should be made to comply with the Standards when considering a project on a historic property.

If an applicant cannot provide a compatible use for a property requiring minimal change or alteration to the building, structure, site and environment, then the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate why a compatible use cannot be found. In this application, as well as other permit applications that the HPC has reviewed, the HPC has required the applicant to demonstrate why a compatible use cannot be provided or why repair or rehabilitation is not financial feasible. The applicant submits detailed information on the structural condition of the building, cost estimates for rehabilitation of the building for that specific use, and an assessment as to the economic feasibility, or lack thereof, of rehabilitation.The applicant is also asked to provide any other information that may be useful to the HPC in their review and consideration of the project.

While there is not a standard that directly addresses economic and technical feasibility, consideration of economic and technical feasibility is implicit in the application of the SOI Standards – and each Standard should be reasonably applied. If economic and technical feasibility were not a necessary consideration, every historic building would be required to be preserved and repaired – even though it wouldn’t always be financially prudent to do so. Therefore, if ‘economic and technical feasibility’ were not considered by the reviewing body, every applicant would then be required to preserve and maintain historic structures no matter the cost. Inherent in the Standards is the premise that they should not mandate but, rather, guide preservation.

THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION

City of Geneva Geneva Historic Preservation Commission 22 S. First Street Geneva, IL 60134 630/938.4541 [email protected]

Page 1 of 1

The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for RehabilitationThe Standards (Department of Interior regulations, 36 CFR 67) pertain to historic buildings of all materials, construction types, sizes, and occupancy and encompass the exterior and the interior, related landscape features and the building's site and environment as well as attached, adjacent, or related new construction. The Standards are to be applied to specific rehabilitation projects in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility.

1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment.

2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.

3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.

4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.

5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved.

6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.

8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken.

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

From http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/TPS/tax/rhb/stand.htm

PACKET FROM FEBRUARY 21, 2012 HPC MEETING

��

�� !!��

� � �

��"��#$�#%$#�� !&� ��!�'��(%#)*��+

$#�*��+�,�!��($&)*��

� � �Applicant:�Joe�Stanton�Wintrust�Bank��HPC�Review�Case�#:�2012�004��Permit�Review:�HPC�review�of�proposed�demolition�of�502�West�State�&�12�S.�Fifth�Streets,�exterior�rehabilitation�of�514�W.�State�Street��Staff�Analysis�See�Staff�Report��Staff�Liaison:�Karla�Kaulfuss�Preservation�Planner�630/938.4541�[email protected]�

� BACKGROUND��

Applicants�are�proposing�to�demolish�two�buildings,�and�modify�and�add�on�to�one�building�for�a�bank�with�a�drive�thru�facility.��The�proposed�demolitions�include�the�Pure�Oil�Gas�Station�building,�most�recently�known�as�the�Pure�Gardener,�located�at�502�West�State�and�the�former�residential�building,�now�office�building,�located�at�12�South�Fifth�Street.��An�addition�is�proposed�that�will�be�attached�to�the�commercial�building�located�at�514�W.�State�Street�and�a�surface�parking�lot�will�be�created�in�place�of�12�South�Fifth�Street.��The�addition�will�provide�the�proposed�building�user,�Wintrust�Bank,�with�three�drive�thru�lanes�for�bank�use.��The�exterior�of�514�W.�State�Street�will�also�undergo�modification.�

�Subject�Site�–�502�14�W.�State�Street��

�Subject�Site�–�12�S.�Fifth�Street��

�

� �

�

�

Agenda�Item�4C:�502�W.�State�&�12�S.�Fifth�Streets,�514�W.�State�StreetPage�2�of�7� HPC�Review�of�Building�Permit�for�Demolitions�&�Exterior�Rehabilitation�BUILDING�DATA/HISTORY��

��

�ATTACHMENTS:�

� Fact�Finding�on�Permit�Application’s�Compliance�with�SOI�Standards�� Permit�&�HPC�Review�Applications�� Photographs�of�existing�buildings�� Exhibit�A�–�Existing�Building�Site�Exhibit�� Exhibit�B�–�Proposed�Site�Plan�� Exhibit�C�–�Preliminary�Landscape�Plan�� Exhibit�D�–�Proposed�Modifications�to�514�W.�State,�North�Elevation�+�Design�for�Drive�Thru�Addition�� Exhibit�E�–�Proposed�Modifications�to�514�W.�State,�East�Elevation�+�Design�for�Drive�Thru�Addition�� Exhibit�F�–�Design�details�

��STAFF�ANALYSIS��502�West�State�Street�History�Built�as�a�gasoline�filling�station�by�the�Pure�Oil�Gas�Company�c.�1935,�the�building�is�an�excellent�example�of�roadside�architecture.��The�building�is�one�of�the�distinct�types�of�gas�station�buildings�built�at�that�time.��Its�design�was�used�to�market�the�Pure�Oil�services�in�the�1920s�&�1930s,�and�to�create�its�niche�in�marketing�services�to�motorists.��Likely�designed�by�Carl�Petersen,�architect�for�Pure�Oil,�the�stations�were�meant�to�be�smaller�in�size,�like�a�residential�building,�so�that�they�easily�fit�into�residential�neighborhoods.��The�architecture,�English�Cottage�or�Tudor�Revival�style,�closely�mimicked�the�trend�of�the�Tudor�Revival�style�used�in�residential�architecture�in�the�

��BUILDING�DATA/�HISTORY:�502�W.�State�Street��Built:�� c.�1935�Rating:� Significant�Style:� Tudor�Revival��Description:� �Originally�built�as�a�gas�station�for�the�Pure�Oil�Company,�more�recently�the�building�has�served�as�a�service�station�and�home�to�Pure�Gardener,�a�gardening�and�gift�store.��

BUILDING�DATA/�HISTORY:�12�S.�Fifth�Street��Built:�� c.�1890�Rating:� Non�Contributing�Style:� No�Style��Description:� �Originally�the�building�was�built�as�a�‘twin’�to�the�building�once�located�at�524�W.�State�that�was�moved�to�202�N.�Sixth�Street.��The�building�has�been�changed�over�the�years,�lessening�its�original�historic�integrity.�

BUILDING�DATA/�HISTORY:�514�W.�State�Street��Built:�� 2002�Rating:� Non�Contributing�Style:� No�Style��Description:� �Built�in�2002�after�the�residential�building�originally�located�at�this�site�was�moved�to�119�N.�Second�Street.��

Agenda�Item�4C:�502�W.�State�&�12�S.�Fifth�Streets,�514�W.�State�StreetPage�3�of�7� HPC�Review�of�Building�Permit�for�Demolitions�&�Exterior�Rehabilitation�late�1920s�–�think�of�the�Tudor�Revival�structures�at�405�S.�First�Street�(1929)�and�120�N.�Second�Street�in�Geneva�(1931).��This�style�of�Pure�Oil�station�includes�the�distinct�white,�painted�brick�walls�with�blue�tile�roof�–the�royal�blue�color�was�used�in�Pure�Oil’s�logo.��Other�characteristic�architectural�elements�include�the�protruding�brickwork�on�the�exterior�walls,�the�steeply�pitched�roof,�round�arched�front�door,�shutters,�and�chimney�–�all�helping�the�commercial�building�appearance�to�seem�more�familiar,�just�like�home!��The�historic�Pure�Oil�Station�building,�is�an�iconic�building�in�Geneva.��It�is�a�significant�historic�building�in�Geneva’s�Historic�District.��Over�its�72�year�history,�the�building�has�been�added�onto�at�the�rear�(not�sure�of�the�date)�and�has�served�as�an�automotive�service�station�and�repair�shop,�and�most�recently�as�home�to�the�gardening�store,�the�Pure�Gardener.��Other�Pure�Oil�Stations�According�to�the�website,�agilitynut.com�other�Pure�Oil�stations�in�Illinois�remain�in�the�following�locations:��Glenview,�Zion,�Maywood,�Evanston,�Highland�Park,�Aurora.��Below�are�photographs�of�some�of�those�stations�and�their�uses.��The�photograph�on�the�bottom�right�illustrates�a�Pure�Oil�station�in�Saratoga�Springs,�New�York�which�was�moved�to�a�new�site�and�is�now�home�to�a�bread�shop.��

� � �From�left�to�right:��(Left)�Glenview,�Illinois.��Now�used�as�a�Dentist’s�office.��(courtesy�of�agilitynut.com)�(Middle)�Evanston,�IL.��Now�home�to�auto�repair�company.��(courtesy:��agilitynut.com)�(Right)�Maywood,�Illinois.��Home�to�fast�food�operator.��

� �From�left�to�right:��(Left)�Aurora,�Illinois.��Recently�UHaul�location�(courtesy�of�agilitynut.com.)�(Middle)�Zion,�IL.��Now�home�to�“It’s�All�Good�Coffee�&�Espresso”��(courtesy:��agilitynut.com)�(Right)�Saratoga�Springs,�NY�–�now�home�to�a�bread�store,�this�building�was�built�in�1933�and�was�faced�with�demolition�in�1976�and�was�moved;�it�has�had�a�variety�of�uses�over�its�history.��These�photographs�highlight�the�distinctive�architectural�style�that�Pure�Oil�Stations�have�and�how�the�buildings�have�been�successfully�adapted�to�serve�other�uses.��Analysis�of�the�Project�According�to�the�building�condition�report�provided�by�the�applicant,�the�building�has�physical�deficiencies�like�cracking�masonry�walls,�peeling�paint,�and�insufficient�HVAC�systems,�but�the�building�is�structurally�sound.�High�costs�for�rehabilitation�are�noted�and�these�costs�are�not�insignificant.��There�are�operational�problems�in�adapting�the�building’s�bays�for�drive�thru�banking,�making�the�proposed�use�not�the�best�fit�for�this�historic�building.��

Agenda�Item�4C:�502�W.�State�&�12�S.�Fifth�Streets,�514�W.�State�StreetPage�4�of�7� HPC�Review�of�Building�Permit�for�Demolitions�&�Exterior�Rehabilitation��Has�a�reasonable�effort�been�made�to�find�a�compatible�use�for�the�building?��This�question�has�not�been�sufficiently�answered.��A�compatible�use�would�mean�that�an�adaptive�use�or�rehabilitation�project�would�align�with�the�first�standard�of�the�Secretary�of�the�Interior’s�Standards.��Standard�One�calls�for�maintaining�the�historic�use�of�the�building�or�finding�a�use�which�will�require�minimal�changes�to�the�building.��The�proposed�use�–�a�bank�facility�with�drive�thru�and�parking��makes�it�necessary�to�demolish�the�building.��According�to�the�applicant,�the�Pure�Oil�building�was�studied�for�adaptive�use�–�the�bays�of�the�gas�station�building�were�considered�for�the�bank’s�drive�thru�lanes.��The�applicant�has�indicated�“this�does�not�work�because�adequate�vehicle�queue�space�could�not�be�provided”,�along�with�other�problems,�however,�no�sketches�or�analyses�have�been�provided�to�show�why�this�approach�would�not�work.��The�building�is�located�in�the�B2�Business�District�and�over�85�different�uses�are�permitted�on�the�property�per�the�zoning�ordinance.��There�are�also�20�special�uses�that�may�be�allowed,�if�successfully�completing�the�Plan�Commission�and�City�Council�review�and�approval�process.��There�are�many�uses�that�may�be�considered�for�adaptive�re�use�of�the�building.��The�proposed�bank’s�drive�thru�facility�requires�a�special�use�permit,�therefore�the�proposed�bank�project�must�be�reviewed�and�approved�by�the�Plan�Commission�and�City�Council.��An�application�for�a�special�use�permit�must�meet�all�9�special�use�standards.�As�shown�on�the�site�plan,�the�existing�automobile�queue�provides�4�cars�and�a�5�car�queue�is�required�by�city�code.��In�addition�to�the�special�use�permit�review,�a�variation�petition�must�be�submitted�for�the�proposed�4�car�queue�length�and�considered�by�the�Zoning�Board�of�Appeals.��The�property�is�also�benefitted�by�its�B2�Zoning�because�there�are�no�required�minimum�building�setbacks.��This�offers�the�potential�to�expand�the�building�and�create�a�viable�plan�for�the�building’s�future.��Moving�or�dismantling�the�building�may�also�be�possible,�although�locating�a�new�site�and�a�storage�facility�may�be�challenging.��The�building�is�a�unique�structure�in�Geneva,�but�is�preservation�worth�more�than�the�benefits�the�proposed�development�would�bring?��The�proposed�development�would�expand�the�rear�parking�lot�extending�it�from�South�Fifth�Street�to�South�Sixth�Streets,�improve�vehicular�circulation,�and�provide�drive�thru�banking�convenience�to�customers�in�downtown�Geneva.��Certainly,�the�building�requires�attention�and�is�in�need�of�repair�–�the�condition�of�its�environmental�systems�and�utilities�warrant�their�updating��especially�if�the�building�is�considered�for�adaptive�use.��However,�these�types�of�building�deficiencies�are�not�unusual�in�historic�buildings.��Demolition�of�12�South�Fifth�Street�The�building�located�at�12�S.�Fifth�Street�is�listed�as�non�contributing�to�the�historic�district.��The�building�has�been�altered�over�the�years,�so�its�demolition�would�not�be�considered�a�loss�of�a�historic�building.��However,�the�massing�and�height�of�the�structure�represents�the�pattern�of�growth�and�development�in�the�historic�district.��Replacing�the�building�with�a�surface�parking�interrupts�the�historic�pattern�on�this�block�and�perpetuates�the�commercialization�of�West�State�Street�southward.��Modifications�&�Addition�to�514�West�State�Street�514�West�State�Street�was�built�in�2004.��The�proposed�modifications�to�the�building�exterior�include�adding�architectural�features�that�echo�details�of�historic�architecture.��The�SOI�Standards�are�clear�about�not�adding�conjectural�features�or�elements�from�other�historic�properties.��The�changes�proposed�come�close�to�replicating�historic�styles�but�the�building�is�likely�to�be�discernible�as�newer�construction�even�as�it�ages.��

Agenda�Item�4C:�502�W.�State�&�12�S.�Fifth�Streets,�514�W.�State�StreetPage�5�of�7� HPC�Review�of�Building�Permit�for�Demolitions�&�Exterior�Rehabilitation�CONCLUSION�The�demolition�of�the�Pure�Oil�building�should�be�avoided�unless�compelling�information�is�provided�detailing�that�the�building�cannot�be�part�of�an�economically�viable�adaptive�re�use�plan.��Based�on�the�information�provided,�it�appears�the�building�could�be�adapted�for�another�use.��More�information�is�needed�to�support�the�proposed�demolition�of�the�building.��Evidence�should�be�provided�showing�that�every�effort�has�been�made�to�secure�a�more�compatible�use�for�the�building�than�a�bank.��In�pursuing�the�proposed�bank�use,�sketches�and�further�information�should�be�provided�illustrating�how�the�applicant�analyzed�the�adaptive�re�use�potential�of�the�building�and�why�it�will�not�work�for�the�proposed�use.��In�conclusion,�there�are�benefits�to�the�project�and�there�are�benefits�to�retaining�the�historic�property.��Project�benefits�include�better�vehicular�circulation�and�more�parking.��Preservation�benefits�include�retaining�a�historic�structure�important�to�Geneva’s�history.��PHOTOGRAPHS��

�Above:��Building�Site�with�502�West�State,�514�West�State�and�12�S.�Fifth�Street�(behind)��

�� Above:��(left)�partial�view�of�12�S.�Fifth�Street�and�rear�view�of�502�West�State�Street�and�(right)�view�of�existing�driveway�and�12�S.�Fifth�Street�at�left�and�502�&�514�W.�State�Street��

Agenda�Item�4C:�502�W.�State�&�12�S.�Fifth�Streets,�514�W.�State�StreetPage�6�of�7� HPC�Review�of�Building�Permit�for�Demolitions�&�Exterior�Rehabilitation��

� �� Above:��(left)�view�of�roof;�(middle)�detail�of�projecting�brick�façade�wall;�(right)�existing�casement�window�and�shutters��

��Above:��(left)�view�looking�into�first�bay;�(right)�view�of�back�wall��

�� Above:��(left)�photograph�of�most�of�the�front�elevation;�(right)�westernmost�bay��

Agenda�Item�4C:�502�W.�State�&�12�S.�Fifth�Streets,�514�W.�State�StreetPage�7�of�7� HPC�Review�of�Building�Permit�for�Demolitions�&�Exterior�Rehabilitation�

� �Above:��(left)�space�between�the�514�West�State�and�502�West�State;�(right)�12�S.�Fifth�Street��

�Above:��(left)�garage�of�12�S.�Fifth�Street;�(right)�514�West�State�Street��

February�21,�2012� Agenda�Item�#4C�–�Demolitions�of�502�W.�State�&�12�S.�Fifth�Streets,�Addition�to�&�Exterior�Rehabilitation�of�514�W.�State�Street�

�HPC��FINDING�OF�FACT�&�ANALYSIS�OF�SOI�STANDARDS�

�

STAFF�ANALYSIS�&�FACT�FINDING�ON�APPLICATION’S�COMPLIANCE�WITH��THE�SECRETARY�OF�THE�INTERIOR’S�STANDARDS�FOR�REHABILITATION�

1. A�property�shall�be�used�for�its�historic�purpose�or�be�placed�in�a�new�use�that�requires�minimal�change�to�the�defining�characteristics�of�the�building�and�its�site�and�environment.��

The�proposed�use�for�the�site�is�for�a�bank�with�a�drive�thru�teller�and�ATM�facility.��As�proposed,�the�bank�requires�the�demolition�of�the�historic�Pure�Oil�building�at�502�West�State.��Many�other�uses,�permitted�in�this�zoning�district,�could�be�explored�that�would�only�minimally�change�the�building.��While�the�building�at�12�S.�Fifth�street�is�rated�non�contributing,�as�it�has�been�heavily�altered,�removal�of�the�building�would�eliminate�an�existing�building�in�the�neighborhood�fabric.��

2. The�historic�character�of�a�property�shall�be�retained�and�preserved.�The�removal�of�historic�materials�or�alteration�of�features�and�spaces�that�characterize�a�property�shall�be�avoided.��

The�demolition�of�the�historic�building�at�502�W.�State�Street�will�remove�its�historic�character�and�permanently�alter�its�features.��

3. Each�property�shall�be�recognized�as�a�physical�record�of�its�time,�place,�and�use.�Changes�that�create�a�false�sense�of�historical�development,�such�as�adding�conjectural�features�or�architectural�elements�from�other�buildings,�shall�not�be�undertaken.��

The�applied�details�proposed�for�the�exterior�rehabilitation�of�514�West�State�Street�alter�the�exterior�design.��While�the�design�elements�echo�the�past�they�should�be�discernible�in�the�future.��

4. Most�properties�change�over�time;�those�changes�that�have�acquired�historic�significance�in�their�own�right�shall�be�retained�and�preserved.��

The�rear�portion�of�the�gas�station�building�appears�to�have�an�addition�and�the�building�was�enlarged�at�some�point.��The�addition�and�the�station�itself�should�be�retained�and�preserved.�

5. Distinctive�features,�finishes,�and�construction�techniques�or�examples�of�craftsmanship�that�characterize�a�property�shall�be�preserved.��

Demolishing�the�structure�at�502�W.�State�will�remove�this�architectural�example�of�distinctive�features,�finishes,�and�craftsmanship.��The�building�is�an�excellent�example�of�1930s�roadside�architecture.��

6. Deteriorated�historic�features�shall�be�repaired�rather�than�replaced.�Where�the�severity�of�deterioration�requires�replacement�of�a�distinctive�feature,�the�new�feature�shall�match�the�old�in�design,�color,�texture,�and�other�visual�qualities�and,�where�possible,�materials.�Replacement�of�missing�features�shall�be�substantiated�by�documentary,�physical,�or�pictorial�evidence.��

The�building�condition�report,�supplied�by�the�applicant,�indicates�that�some�of�the�building’s�materials�are�deteriorated.��However,�cracking�masonry�walls�and�peeling�paint�do�not�warrant�demolition.��Repair�of�these�materials�as�well�as�an�expansion�of�the�building�could�be�considered�to�preserve�the�historic�structure,�rather�than�demolish�it.��

7. Chemical�or�physical�treatments,�such�as�sandblasting,�that�cause�damage�to�historic�materials�shall�not�be�used.�The�surface�cleaning�of�structures,�if�appropriate,�shall�be�undertaken�using�the�gentlest�means�possible.��

No�chemical�or�physical�treatments�are�proposed�for�the�historic�building.�

8. Significant�archeological�resources�affected�by�a�project�shall�be�protected�and�preserved.�If�such�resources�must�be�disturbed,�mitigation�measures�shall�be�undertaken.��

Staff�is�not�aware�that�any�archeological�resources�will�be�affected.�

9. New�additions,�exterior�alterations,�or�related�new�construction�shall�not�destroy�historic�materials�that�characterize�the�property.�The�new�work�shall�be�differentiated�from�the�old�and�shall�be�compatible�with�the�massing,�size,�scale,�and�architectural�features�to�protect�the�historic�integrity�of�the�property�and�its�environment.��

Demolishing�the�historic�building�to�erect�a�drive�thru�facility�addition�will�permanently�destroy�and�remove�a�historic�property.��

10. New�additions�and�adjacent�or�related�new�construction�shall�be�undertaken�in�such�a�manner�that�if�removed�in�the�future,�the�essential�form�and�integrity�of�the�historic�property�and�its�environment�would�be�unimpaired.�

N/A�

�

APPLICANT’S STATEMENTS FROM FEBRUARY 21, 2012

HPC MEETING

DRAWINGS & SKETCHES SUBMITTED AT FEBRUARY 21, 2012

HPC MEETING

EMAIL MESSAGE REQUESTING APPEAL OF HPC DECISION

1

Kaulfuss, Karla

From: Joe Stanton [[email protected]]Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 4:28 PMTo: Schultze, DustinCc: McKittrick, Mary; Untch, Dick; Kaulfuss, Karla; Burns, KevinSubject: 502 West State Street

Hi Dustin, I would like to be put on the agenda of the March 26 Committee of the Whole meeting in order to appeal the decission of the Historic Preservation Commission in regards to the demolition of 502 West State Street. Is there anything specific you need from me? Joe

Joe Stanton, President

Fagans Incorporated524 West State Street Geneva, Illinois 60134

[email protected]

MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 21, 2012 HPC MEETING

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTESPublic Works Training Room

1800 South Street, Geneva, Illinois February 21, 2012, 7:00 p.m.

1. Call to Order Chairman Roy called the February 21, 2012 meeting of the Geneva Historic Preservation Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. The protocol for the meeting was explained. Chairman Roy stated the meeting was not a public hearing.

2. Roll Call Present HPC: Chairman Roy, Commissioners Adams, Andersson, Bruno, Hiller, Wehrmeister, Zinke; Absent: Commissioner Adams; Others Present: Community Development Dir. Untch; Historic Planner Karla Kaulfuss; Plan Commissioners Moffat and Stevenson; and Recording Secretary Celeste Weilandt

3. Approval of the October 18, 2011 MinutesCommissioner Wehrmeister moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Commissioner Bruno. Motion carried by voice vote of 6-0.

4. HPC Review of Building Permit Applications - Review a. 225 W. State Street (Case No. 2012-002)

Applicant: Icon Identity Solutions (for 5/3rd Bank)Application for: Exterior Rehabilitation/Sign

Applicant, Mr. Brian Jones with Icon Identity Solutions and representing Fifth-Third Bank (the “Bank”), discussed that the Bank was doing an entire re-branding of its branches to a new sign program. Reviewing the proposal on the overhead, Mr. Jones said he was proposing to remove the existing awning and letters, restore the wood paneling behind the awning, and install a panel sign with no illuminated letters but with goose neck lights. Per a question, he stated he would be repairing the plywood but to date, did not know what was beneath the plywood. He intends to patch and paint (white) what currently is there. He will not be returning to the original transom. Per another question, the colors fairly matched what was being presented, noting the blue color will be a “sapphire blue.” Asked why the awning did not extend the width of the storefront, Mr. Jones explained it was for aesthetic purposes and to keep the logo centered on the panel. As to the sign construction, the letters will be one-quarter inch aluminum, pin-mounted, and bolted to the panel. The panel will be one-quarter aluminum, two-inches thick, and behind it will be a frame bolted to the wall. The letters will be pure white and one-quarter inch off of the panel.

The sign will be attached using a lag bolt which will go through the frame behind the sign and bolted into the wall. Commissioner Andersson expressed concern that if an original façade exists beneath the plywood, she preferred it not to be damaged, since she did not know how it was attached. Mr. Jones stated he could look behind the plywood to make sure he was not drilling into whatever façade was there. In the event the plywood was deficient, Mr. Jones said it would be removed and replaced with like material. Asked if consideration was made to look at the material behind so see if a transom or façade existed to see what was preferable, Mr. Jones offered to speak to the bank. Hiller also felt there was an opportunity for the petitioner to use the building to the east as a bit of a starting-off point for the new design since it already had a beautiful street presence on the building to the east. Mr. Jones offered to look again. Per a question on lighting, Mr. Jones stated he was using the 12-inch diameter gooseneck lighting, which would be bronze in color and wired behind the wall to an existing exterior electrical source.

In closing, Mr. Jones stated the address number would be relocated to the transom above the door in vinyl letters. He was not what font was used for the address number. Commissioner Wehrmeister preferred he use the same font as the Fifth Third Bank font.

Public comments: None.

Commissioner Bruno moved to accept the project as presented with the condition that the gooseneck lighting be bronze; that consideration be given to analyze whether there may be a salvageable historic transom feature behind the plywood, and, if so, then staff review it; consider matching the fonts between the address and the primary sign; that the fasteners used to attach the sign do not damage any historic materials. Seconded by Commission Andersson. Roll call:

Aye: Andersson, Bruno, Hiller, Wehrmeister, Zinke, Roy Nay: None MOTION CARRIED. VOTE: 6-0

Historic Preservation Commission February 21, 2012

2

b. 30 W. State Street (Case No. 2012-003)Applicant: Lindsey De Los Santos Application for: Porch and Fence Mr. Paul Zellmer, 418 S. Sixth Street, Geneva, introduced himself as the architect for Lindsey De Los Santos, owner of Sergio’s Cantina. Proposed was a new deck off of the southeast corner of the existing parking area and is to include a shade sail structure. The new deck will be located below the existing deck and at the level of the landing of the existing stairs at the south end of the concrete deck. The deck will include open railings with a 3-foot 6-inch high solid railing around it. Elevations were presented on the overhead. While black and sage were chosen as the original colors, the owner may be changing the colors to sage and tan or all sage or all tan -- neutral colors. Color samples were presented to the commissioners. The remainder of the deck will be stained a natural color with an open cable railing with painted cream-colored posts.

The relocated towable dumpsters will have a surrounding six-foot wooden privacy fence which will be located on the Route 31 side of the building but they will not be visible from Route 31.

Mr. Zellmer responded to staff’s comment regarding the difficult maneuver for the third parking stall, explaining that only three stalls exist and the owner usually uses that one all day.

Dir. Untch explained that the zoning ordinance required that the number of parking spaces that existed on the site as of July 16, 2001 be retained and needed to be functional as it pertained to the three spaces, and it was helpful that the owner was using the space. Regarding the third parking space, Mr. Zellmer pointed out that within that third parking space existed a loading zone for deliveries to the business. Dir Untch reiterated that the applicant needed to make clear to the city’s Building Division that the three spaces were functional and could be accessed by the public. Reconfiguring the parking lot did not appear to be an issue, as voiced by Mr. Zellmer. Elevations were briefly discussed.

Chairman Roy opened up the meeting to public comment.

Ms. Martha Swateck, 22 W. State Street, adjacent owner, stated that her building had sustained damage as a result of a vehicle losing its brakes and traveling through a portion of her building. Also, she had complained prior about the loud music. Per her question, the far north end of the proposed deck would be flush with the back of her building. Asked if there was going to be music played on the new deck, Mr. Zellmer stated that music can be played and as long as the owner met the city’s ordinance.

Commissioner Wehrmeister moved to approve the plans, as submitted; seconded by Commissioner Bruno. Roll call:

Aye: Andersson, Bruno, Hiller, Wehrmeister, Zinke, Roy Nay: None MOTION CARRIED. VOTE: 6-0

c. 502-514 W. State Street, 12 S. Fifth Street (Case No. 2012-004)Applicant: Joe Stanton Application for: Demolition of 502 W. State Street and 12 S. Fifth Street, Exterior Rehabilitation and Addition to 514 S. State Street

Applicant Joe Stanton, 524 State Street, Geneva, discussed that staff had asked him to provide more history of the building and what brought him to this point. He discussed the history of the original Pure Oil service station owned by the Clark brothers up to his purchase of the building on November 1, 2006. He stated he purchased the station to protect his investment in the building next door -- 514 W. State Street. While the property at 502 W. State was zoned B2, which allowed for a building to be built to the lot line, by purchasing the lot, Mr. Stanton said he protected the windows on the east façade of the 514 building from being covered up. Mr. Stanton stated he was told by city staff, after he purchased the service station, that the property would have to conform with the current building codes and safety standards, and would require a new emergency exit.

Continuing, he discussed that the Pure Gardener moved in shortly after that. In May 2007 Mr. Stanton discussed that he worked on a new plan to move the building forward on the lot but it was impossible. He considered removing the lower half of the building to move it but the proximity to the building next-door, the condition of the exterior brickwork/walls, etc., made the collapse of the building, during a move, very likely. He discussed the structural challenges required, the updated renovations needed for the interior and exterior, the financial costs and the utility challenges that the relocation invited, with a total cost of $285,000 not including build-out and site improvements, which could total $360,000.00. To meet the financial challenges, Mr. Stanton stated he would need a tenant paying approximately $34.00 a square foot and pass-throughs just to break even, which was double the existing rate and was cost prohibitive. The limiting square footage of the building was a detriment.

Creating a possible restaurant and combining it with the 101 unit of the 514 W. State building was also considered, thereby spreading the expense across more square footage. However, he said combining the two created greater


3

expenses, i.e., a security and alarm system. His fifth plan considered keeping the 514 building as the St. Charles Bank but keeping the 502 station as the bank’s drive-through, with the three bay doors as the drive-through lanes, which was considerably less than the $360,000 estimate. A parking lot would be created in the rear from Fifth Street to Sixth Street adding 50 or more parking stalls to become available to the public after 5:00 p.m.

Mr. Stanton felt the combination of the two sites was perfect and it kept the corner open and could possibly rejuvenate the area but he stated that the architects retained by St. Charles Bank & Trust found the fifth plan was not feasible. With this last plan being presented, he stated it was not the perfect scenario but it was needed. He asked that the commissioners keep in mind it was five years in the making. He acknowledged that the Historic Preservation Commission always recommended that demolition be avoided unless no economically viable adaptive use could be found. He believed he made that case with this application.

Mr. Jeff Lietz, with CBG Architects, Naperville, Illinois, discussed his background in historical projects. He agreed that the goal was to preserve what existed and not to demolish. After reviewing the property, he said a property assessment was drafted, noting that the building was sustainable but there was water damage on the flat roof, along with interior renovations to meet codes, or, approximately $312,000 in costs, not including the finished interior work. The question was what adaptable use could the building provide?

After reviewing the location of the building on-site, The St. Charles Bank determined that when entering from the far western State Street curb cut (1 of 2 cuts), it would require widening and would challenge parking on State Street. The stacking of vehicles posed a safety concern with pedestrians on the sidewalk. Additionally, there would be structural challenges of breaking through the walls for the teller/transaction window and floor grading modifications. Entering off of Fifth Street near the intersection and creating a drive aisle down south of the space was also considered but because of the building situated on the site, car stacking would back up into the drive aisles. Additionally, coming from the south and entering the teller lane from the south did not allow for drivers to access the transaction window because the teller was located on the right-hand side and drivers could not reach the drawer. Because of the required modifications, the main area became obsolete and an addition would have to be added onto the 514 building so that a teller could utilize the transaction drawer.

Reviewing the site plan, Mr. Lietz stated the latest plan called for removing the historic Pure Oil station and placing the drive-thru station 8 feet forward of the existing station, thereby allowing four cars to stack on the two outer lanes and three cars to stack in the inner lane. The drive aisle would be widened to allow two-way traffic plus 7 spaces of parking, resulting in a total of 21 parking spaces added to the downtown district. It would also create a drive aisle with parking from Fifth Street to Sixth Street. Mr. Lietz reviewed the landscaping plans which would be pedestrian-friendly with added green space between the pedestrian traffic and the drive-thru traffic.

Elevations of the proposed building were presented, noting the new building would be brick with stone accents and emulate the adjacent building. The building materials would include three colors of brick (browns, charcoals), same stones, and steel storefront systems. While he understood there was a zero lot line, the property would be open and provide parking to the downtown area.

Mr. Tom Hanson, President of St. Charles Bank & Trust (the “Bank”), introduced himself and discussed that his bank opened a branch in the Pepper Valley strip mall in November 2006 and has since tripled the deposit base and outgrown the space. He was looking to locate permanently in the Geneva downtown area. Mr. Hanson reviewed the history of the project starting back with his involvement with Mr. Stanton. He explained that he could not “make the numbers work on the existing building” for the Bank’s purposes. If he used the site, it had to be substantial enough and accommodate the Bank’s state of the art equipment.

While Commissioner Bruno commented that the design of the new construction was attractive, he referenced staff’s Findings of Fact, stating the project violated everything pertinent in the Secretary of Interior Standards in terms of an iconic historic building and the fact that it made it into Geneva literature. Bruno recalled there were previous statements made that the building would be protected but, in fact, those statements appeared shallow in that there was a willing tenant to stay in the building He would not be able to support demolition. Asked what a realistic use for this project was over the next five years should the proposal be rejected by the commission, Mr. Stanton stated that the current use would not extend into the future and while the maintenance had been kept up with no acceptable use, he did not know what other tenant could be placed in the building and it would sit vacant. He did not foresee the current tenant remaining in the building for the next 10 years. The economy was tough and he was already subsidizing the tenant as it could not support the corner. Mr. Stanton then asked the commissioners to consider if the Pure Gardener been located at the Shell or Mobil stations across the street, would those two buildings have problems getting permission to be demolished if Pure Gardener was a tenant on their property. He asked that the commissioners focus on the building and the rehab.

Asked what research Mr. Stanton did to prove that when Pure Gardener leaves that he will be unable to find another tenant, Mr. Stanton explained that from his leasing experience within Geneva, tenants were looking for a space did not want to invest $250,000 in renovations. They want the owner to do it. Other challenges were voiced by Mr. Stanton. Asked where the current tenants would go, Mr. Stanton explained he was researching a place on State Street for Pure Gardener; the Art Box and photographer would be relocated to one of his other properties.


4

Asked how Mr. Stanton arrived at his financial estimates, specifically a $35,000 remediation cost, Mr. Lietz stated it was based on experience and the size of building using an evaluation service called Marshall Swift, a manual based on region, locality and time. Examples followed by Mr. Lietz. Hiller concurred that the commission was bound by the Secretary of Interior Standards and the petitioner did not meet quite a few of the standards. To him, the city was lucky to have the station with it located on the Lincoln Highway, and as such, it was unfortunate that the petitioner could not find a way to adaptively reuse the building. Mr. Stanton agreed but stated he looked at other options over the years and moving the building was impossible. He commented on his own involvement in historic preservation and moving buildings over the years but also stated that if there was no reasonable adaptable reuse, he should be allowed the relief.

Commissioner Hiller commented that he had seen other Pure Oil stations moved and questioned whether it had to do with foundations since their construction was based on the same model. Mr. Lietz stated he tried to research the Sarasota Springs station that was included as an example in the packet but he did not know the means in how the brick building was moved or when it was done. To move a brick building coming off of a cement slab, Mr. Stanton explained the challenges involved and the precarious preparation, prior and after the move.

Commissioner Wehrmeister had concerns about Mr. Stanton limiting his uses, suggesting there were other viable uses that existed, citing the dry cleaners across the street. Again, Mr. Stanton reviewed the utility challenges to the site and spreading those costs over the gross 2,076 square footage of the gas station versus a 30,000 square foot building. He believed the building could be moved but the costs involved were unrealistic. Commissioner Zinke asked if Mr. Stanton could wait more years to which he said he could not because he could not afford to carry the building anymore. Zinke mentioned that, given the building is historic, maybe there was the possibility of someone else who could wait, reminding Mr. Stanton that once the building was demolished it was gone forever. Mr. Stanton, however, reminded the commission that he researched his projects thoroughly and did his due diligence. Two years from now, he stated his option may not be viable. He believed that to be turned down because “something may come up in the future” was unfair to say. He also believed if he put the station up for sale, he would have an upside-down sale and why would he sell it for greater debt on top of what he already had?

Commissioner Andersson stated she was unconvinced that no adaptive reuse could be found, given the prime location, great curb appeal, and it being a beautiful building in its own right. She questioned Mr. Stanton’s figures and mentioned that exceptions existed for accessibility codes to historic buildings, not to mention the tax credits for commercial enterprises when restoring historic buildings. Andersson mentioned the fact that while Mr. Stanton had been working on the project for six years, it was the first time the Historic Preservation Commission first heard of it. She would not go against the Secretary of Interior Standards. While Mr. Stanton understood, he also cited the larger square footage projects he worked on where the debt was justified as compared to the proposal being discussed. Andersson understood his points, but pointed out that multiple sites existed in Geneva that were not viable but became viable: Fifth and Hamilton; the Queen Anne relocation; and the cleaners across the street. Again, Mr. Stanton reiterated the economic changes occurring over the years, the increased costs involved, and explained it was not reasonable to think someone would spend the money to purchase the building.

Regarding the rationale for razing 12 S. Fifth Street, Mr. Stanton conveyed that it allowed for more parking to be added and that by demolishing the property, it squared out the property to make it one constant parking lot from Fifth Street to Sixth Street. Additionally, sewer and water would not have to be brought in with a drive-thru. Zinke voiced concern about demolishing a second historic structure.

Chairman Roy agreed with the other commissioners about supporting the Secretary of Interior Standards but added that an economic situation existed which made it very difficult for the petitioner. He recalled the petitioner’s rational for the purchase of the station was to put windows in the adjacent building but he questioned what kind of studies went into making the corner viable at that time. Mr. Stanton stated he did not have the luxury of considering studies for the corner because his building was built and the windows were installed, assuming the gas station would remain. However, he said after the owner sold the station, he purchased the property solely in order to protect his $2MM investment. It took him from November 1 to early March to get a tenant in and then once in, he started to look at his other options. Mr. Stanton summarized that rents were decreasing and it did not matter who purchased the building because they would be in the same position as he was before this commission. He respected the commissioners for their connection to the standards but he had to look at it from a dollars and cents perspective.

Chairman Roy discussed the challenges before the commission and it being the first commission to review the proposal. Mr. Stanton added that the proposal still had to go through two other committees as it related to the special use and meeting the vehicle stacking. Even if the proposal was approved, Mr. Stanton said the station would not go down without a plan to move forward.


5

Dir. Untch appreciated Mr. Stanton’s efforts on his proposal and acknowledged that the Pure Gardener was a use that worked well with the subject building. However, it seemed to him that the drive-through lanes would not involve conditioned space and could be outdoor space, and, that the improvement costs associated with getting the building up to code for the drive-through would be something different from the costs shared with the commission. Asked how would the costs for rehabilitation differ if the petitioner was not talking about finished interior space, Mr. Stanton responded that it would change but his first problem was, could the building be used now where it sits and have the three bays used as the drive-thru, to which Mr. Stanton stated they could not. Even if the building remained alone, he stated creating an outdoor area would require reinforcement and the remaining building to the east would still need to be brought up to code. Again, more expenses due to less square footage.

Mr. Stanton reminded everyone that it took a number of years but at the very first meeting with St. Charles Bank, he explained the Bank wanted to use the existing gas station and the architecture firm’s charge was to make the project work. He was very disappointed when he found out it could not work and the plans had to be altered. In closing, Mr. Stanton discussed that he was very conscious of the history behind the gas station, noting he had a lot of the original documents to the gas station.

Dir Untch recalled that he discussed with Mr. Stanton whether the five-space queue was the right number of spaces in the queue length, wherein Mr. Stanton stated that the queue requirements in most towns were probably obsolete. Again, he discussed the options he considered for including the building in the rear and really wanted to use the building as the drive-throughs. Dir. Untch understood and mentioned that it appeared the applicant was determined to add a certain amount of parking to the site to meet the Bank’s needs and otherwise. Dir Untch believed more options existed for creating additional floor area ratio on the site because of the zero setback, possibly to the east or to the south, but that he could not add much square footage to the site to make it economical. However, Mr. Stanton stated he could take the 2076 sq. feet and spread it out to 6,000 sq. feet or at least double it, based on where it could be put.

Mr. Lietz interjected, stating that Dir. Untch’s suggestion of altering the façade went against the Secretary of Interior Standards; however, Dir. Untch clarified that the petitioner could incorporate a large building south of the existing building. Mr. Stanton concurred, only if the rear house could be relocated, stating some parking could be added, but the problem was that an additional $400,000 was being added to the project to purchase the property to supply not nearly enough parking for the square footage that was added in. Another option that Dir Untch mentioned was that possibly the City Council could provide a cash contribution for the parking requirement. However, Mr. Stanton thought it would be short-sighted as a landlord to pay cash to get an obligation resolved when his obligation was to get parking for his tenants. Dir Untch believed staff and the commission had not seen a scenario that had gone through such mechanics. Mr. Stanton reiterated that staff could come up with many ideas that were just extensions of what had already been considered.

In closing, Dir. Untch agreed the case before the commission was difficult and he reminded the commissioners whether the petitioner had found a use that was compatible with the historic structure under the Secretary of Interior Standards. He agreed the issue could be argued but he believed there was more room for analysis in certain areas.

Asked if one of Mr. Stanton’s options was to consider razing the bays and keeping the existing building as a compromise, Mr. Stanton stated it was never an option and the issue was, what would happen with the remaining part of the building? Personally, Bruno preferred more time to consider the project. Mr. Hanson, bank president, injected and stated he invested a lot of money and time in the project and was at the point to make a business decision. He wanted a vote. Chairman Roy and Bruno appreciated the efforts made by all parties involved.

The chairman opened up the meeting to public comment reminding the public to limit their comments to the building and not to be repetitive. Andersson appreciated those in attendance for coming out tonight.

Ms. Terry Emma, 827 Foxwood Circle, Geneva, as Executive Director of the Geneva History Center and as a third generation Genevan, discussed her appreciation for Mr. Stanton’s work on the proposal, for preserving various homes in Geneva, and agreed he appreciated the character of the community. She, too, read part of the article written in the 1937 Geneva Republican regarding the Pure Oil station. However, she presented a photo of the station in 1939 noting that most of the changes must have been on the interior as the station looked the same as it does now. Ms. Emma pointed out that August Wilson was the general contractor for the building and it may have been one of his last projects. She appreciated why Mr. Stanton purchased the building initially but believed more research should have been done before it was purchased and asked that Mr. Stanton not do something that he would regret, since the economy could pick up. She asked that the Bank consider the vacant US Bank sitting on Third Street already with a drive-through. She discussed that she rarely travels inside a bank nowadays because everything is done on-line. She urged the petitioner to reconsider and offered to assist the applicant.

Mr. Colin Campbell, 18 S. Sixth Street, said he did some research on the business models for banks which appeared to be changing to on-line banking noting that over 67% of today’s population was using on-line banking with the younger than 30 age using it 90%. Due to the use of technology he reported the next move in banking was to move away from bricks and mortar banks because there would be no economic support for them. He feared that if the Pure Oil station was lost, another abandoned eye sore will exist there 15 years later.


6

Ms. Mary Stegenhaven (phonetic spelling), an Andover Lane resident, stated the presentations were very professional and she could appreciate the building but after working inside the building, she proceeded to explain that there was no insulation in the building and she used heaters. She worked in warm heavy clothing. She stated the building was constructed as a gas station and she could appreciate its architecture and history but stated not every building could be saved. She believed Mr. Stanton had been very patient and had worked on the project several years. She did not want to see the building demolished either but asked how long did he have to wait for a “what if scenario”. She was surprised the proposal was another bank.

Ms. Leslie Juby, 316 Peyton Street, stated one of the reasons she moved here was because of the old historic architecture. She found it ironic that the architect stated the design of the new building reflected the context and the character of its buildings and stay with traditional architecture values, yet he was tearing down the very thing that he was trying to emulate. She believed that if the site did not work out, the applicant should exercise his right to sell the property to someone who will take the time to do the adaptive use. Ms. Juby begged Mr. Stanton to reconsider another location and while she thanked him for the other things he has done for Geneva, she suggested that he sell the property to a caretaker -- someone who will care for a historic property.

Ms. Glorianne Campbell, 18 S. Sixth Street, referenced the Geneva Chamber’s brochure depicting the Pure Oil gas station on its front cover. As she has stated before, she reminded the attendees that there was a treasure in the community -- the city’s architecture, its uniqueness and quaintness. She stated people come to Geneva to look at the architecture of its buildings, to see the Pure Oil station, the Little Traveler, etc. She stated that “once it’s gone, it’s gone folks.” Ms. Campbell discussed the history of the Clark family that owned the gas stations in Geneva and the history of the Pure Oil stations being used for other uses. While she appreciated Mr. Stanton’s reasons, she agreed it would be a travesty if the building was demolished, citing some of the historical facts of the building when it was designed. She reminded that the building was on the Lincoln Highway.

Ms. Carla Hibbard, 128 N. Second Street, said she lives in a historic building and was stunned that this building was even being discussed. She reminded everyone of the city’s tax base and that people come to Geneva to shop in cute remodeled homes that have been reused. It was part of the city’s charm and people did not come to Geneva to “bank”. She suggested using one of the two existing vacant bank buildings instead.

Ms. Noel Brooks, 729 Cambridge Drive, Batavia, IL. Ms. Brooks stated she banks at St. Charles Bank & Trust and thinks it is a great bank but believed it was a bad use of the bank’s name and its presence in the community, as it stands now. She appreciated Mr. Stanton’s financial concerns about the property and stated he was feeling the same as many residential property owners were feeling -- being upside-down on a property that he could not sell. However, the building was a significant historic property located on the Lincoln Highway. From the feedback she heard, many of the residents did not want to see another bank property in downtown since there were empty banks sitting and could be used instead.

Mr. Craig McClain, 502 W. State Street, after hearing all of the comments and the work that has gone into the project, he urged the commission to accept the proposal with the exception of the demolition of the Pure Oil building. He believed a $15 billion dollar organization -- the Bank -- had a “golden” opportunity to come into Geneva and have Mr. Stanton’s building, include the parking lot behind the Pure Gardener, and be supportive and instrumental in the saving of “such a gem we have”. He noted the Private Bank across the street was doing fine without a drive-through.

Ms. Julie Hillary, 302 Richards Street, as a resident and the managing editor of Retail Minded, a newly launched magazine, produced a copy of the magazine and stated that in it is an article discussing Geneva, which states it is ideal for small business centers and its reuse of buildings, which gives the community its charm. The article depicts a photograph of the Pure Gardener and Ms. Hillary stated it was chosen because of its unique architecture. She urged that the building not be demolished because the architecture was important to the charm of the community.

Ms. Jean McGowan, 227 N. Cambridge Drive, never attended a historic preservation meeting before and she was surprised to hear the financial information being presented. However, she wanted the goal to be on historical preservation. She loved the building, would be sad if it went, and did not want to see another big box bank on State Street. She emphasized that it sat on the historic Lincoln Highway and that people would come to see the station and be disappointed when seeing a bank in its place.

Commission Wehrmeister asked staff what information the applicant may be able to provide in 30 days, wherein Mr. Hanson, with the St. Charles Bank & Trust, stated he was looking to have a decision. Mr. Stanton stated he reached out to people for ideas that he had not thought of and believed anything suggested would probably be a variation of what was already considered.


7

Chairman Roy clarified that tonight’s vote did not stop the application. Dir. Untch acknowledged the applicant doing his due diligence to make the project work but the issue was that on the one hand there was the preservation objective weighing against the petitioner figuring out a way to make the property a viable business location and the parking demand.

Commissioner Andersson moved to approve the proposal for the demolition of 502 W. State Street and the demolition of 12 S. Fifth Street, and the exterior modification and addition to 514 W. State Street, as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Zinke. Roll call:

Aye: Wehrmeister Nay: Andersson (citing Secretary of Interior Standard Nos. 1, 2, 5, 9) Bruno (citing Secretary of Interior Standard Nos. 1, 2, 5, 9) Hiller (citing Secretary of Interior Standard Nos. 1, 2, 5, 9) Zinke Chairman Roy

MOTION FAILED. VOTE: 1-5

Mr. Hansen stated he believed the comments were fair.

(The commissioners took a short break at 9:43 p.m.; reconvened at 9:50 p.m.)

5. Secretary’s Report (Staff Update) Planner Kaulfuss stated that in light of the above discussion, she would have prepared more information but did not. Zinke mentioned that she came across a children’s book entitled “Imogene’s Last Stand” by Candice Fleming, which discusses a child’s attempt to stop the demolition of a historic building.

6. New Business

a. From the Commission:Wehrmeister said he counted 20 empty storefronts downtown. Dir. Untch added his comments about a potential tenant for 302 W. State Street and discussed Economic Development Dir. Ellen Divita’s continued work in the downtown area.

b. From the Public: Resident, Mr. Campbell, thanked the commission for its hard work tonight.

7. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. on motion by Commissioner Bruno, seconded by Commissioner Andersson. Motion carried unanimously by voice vote of 6-0.

committee of the whole - daily herald

Documents