Geneva landmark law may give more say to landowners

Geneva landowners could gain more say over whether their property is named a landmark under changes being considered by city officials.

The city council and the Historic Preservation Commission discussed the proposal Monday night.

The city council, when it adopted a historic preservation plan last year, had misgivings about present practice. Anybody can nominate a property as a landmark, with or without the owner's permission.

Nominations are reviewed by city staff, and if they meet certain criteria, are passed on to the commission. The commission then judges the property and makes a recommendation to the city council, which has the ultimate say.

Properties designated as landmarks have extra restrictions pertaining to demolition, maintenance and changes to their exteriors (replacing or repairing siding or windows, for example). Aldermen Dorothy Flanagan (4th Ward) and Bob Piper (2nd Ward) worry doing historically appropriate work costs owners more than using newer materials, and that could be burdensome.

But "I'm always fighting this idea that preservation costs more," said the city's preservation planner, Karla Kaulfuss.

Aldermen seemed to favor a proposal that would require owner consent for a landmark application to proceed, but give the HPC the authority to overrule an objecting owner if it believes the property has at least two "significant" criteria. Those criteria include whether a historic person lived there or a historic event took place there; whether a "master" worked on the building (such as the locally renowned Wilson Brothers builders); or whether it is threatened by demolition.

Another option, which would require owner consent for all designations, was seen as taking away the commission's teeth. The commission tries to convince owners that preserving a building can be economically feasible and ecologically prudent, as well as contribute to the beauty of the community. And the ability to make changes stops while the landmark designation is considered, something it credits with saving the Riverbank Laboratories buildings from demolition in the 1990s.

"I think we'll never make any headway on preserving our history from here on in" if designation can only be done with owners' consent, said HPC member Mike Bruno.

First Ward Alderman Chuck Brown questioned whether change is needed at all, given that there have been few cases where a landmark was requested by anybody but an owner. But 5th Ward Alderman Craig Maladra pointed out that the council began discussing this issue in early 2008 when neighboring St. Charles was embroiled in a case where neighbors, unhappy with a developer's plan to tear down a house, sought landmark protection for it over the owner's objection.

"Our discussion ... stemmed from the situation in St. Charles that I'm willing to bet dimes to doughnuts they did not see coming," Maladra said.

Mayor Kevin Burns suggested that maybe a supermajority vote by the council be required to overrule an owner's objection.

Similar provisions are being considered for designating neighborhoods as historic districts. The city is studying whether to make a neighborhood off South Batavia Avenue into such a district, and there has been talk of establishing one for the Northwest Addition neighborhood north of State Street in the 1st Ward.

The commission will discuss the matter more at its June 16 meeting, before making a recommendation to the council.