Geneva aldermen favor owner consent for 'landmarking'

Seven Geneva aldermen want to make it tougher to designate properties as local historic landmarks, or to create new historic districts.

They voted Tuesday at a committee meeting to require a building owner's consent for "landmarking," contrary to what is contained in the city's current law.

The change won't take effect, however, unless the council officially votes on the entire proposed revision of the historic preservation ordinance.

Requiring owner consent goes against the recommendation of the city's historic preservation commission. It was assigned to prepare the revisions to the law, which has not been updated in 20 years. The HPC had recommended instead requiring two-thirds of the council approve of establishing a landmark over the objection of a landowner.

Alderman Tom Simonian and others said they couldn't support imposing something against an owner's wishes. Simonian opposes even starting the application process without the owner's approval.

Proponents had argued the application process provides an opportunity to "educate" owners about the benefits of having their properties landmarked, including things such as tax credits for rehabilitation work and temporary property assessment freezes.

They also said requiring owner consent takes away the city's ability to stop a potential landmark from being demolished. The city used its powers to do so in the case of the Riverbank Laboratories when owners wanted to tear down the complex, and preservation advocates applied for landmark status for it. It is the only time the city has done that.

"We can educate until the cows come home, but it won't matter if a property falls into a disinterested bank's ownership. They don't watch our YouTube channel (city programming). They don't look at our utility bill inserts. They don't watch our city council meetings," said Alderman Mike Bruno, who voted against the measure. Aldermen Tara Burghart and Craig Maladra also voted "no."

Simonian suggested a practice known as "demolition delay" could prevent historically significant buildings from being torn down. Towns that have such laws delay issuing demolition permits several months while they try to talk owners into saving the properties. "I believe the fear is we will lose historic buildings," Alderman Don Cummings said.

Mayor Kevin Burns pointed out that still wouldn't save buildings over an owner's objections. And he said he believes a demolition-delay ordinance would have to apply to all properties in town, not just to landmarks or properties within the current historic district.

The council will resume its review of proposed changes in the ordinance June 22. It will vote on a proposal to require 51 percent of affected landowners positively vote to "opt in" to creating a historic district. The HPC had recommended the opposite, an "opt out" provision. The current law allows the city to create historic districts without either.

Bruno, a former member of the commission, opposes "opt in."

"Such a change would be tantamount. It would be like saying, 'That great and wonderful defining thing that we have done in Geneva (the historic district)? Let's make sure we never do that again,'" he said.