Tag Archives: Historic Preservation Commission

City Council, City of Peoria, History

Further chilling of historic preservation ordinance on tap (Updated)

20 Comments

The City Council is poised to raise the historic landmark application fee 1000% Tuesday night. While the Historic Preservation Commission approved doubling the fee (from $50 to $100), City Staff wants to raise it to $500. They will also increase fees for a Certificate of Appropriateness from $25 to $120 for administrative certificates, and $250 for non-administrative certificates.

The given reason is to increase revenue to the City, but let’s not fool ourselves. This will bring little additional money into city coffers. The real effect (and I believe the intended effect) will be to reduce historic landmark applications and increase the number of unapproved modifications to historic properties. The council has been undermining the historic preservation ordinance more and more blatantly as of late — not designating buildings that are clearly historic, and delisting structures that are already “protected,” meaning nothing is really protected anymore if the political forces are strong enough.

Meanwhile, still waiting in the wings is a rewriting of the ordinance itself, which is slated to be deferred once again on Tuesday.

UPDATE: I have been informed by a reliable source that “the matter of the fee increases for Historic Preservation will be deferred tomorrow night until April.”

City Council, City of Peoria, History

AMVETS finance officer: “It is now time to move on”

6 Comments

The City Council will vote Tuesday on whether to make the AMVETS building an historic landmark. The Historic Preservation Commission is recommending that they do. But it appears that even if the council ultimately votes against preserving the building, plans to move the AMVETS Post 64 to a new location are already kaput. Riverside Church has backed out of their purchase agreement for AMVETS’ current location, and the owners of the proposed new location — the old Penguin Tap in Peoria Heights — have moved on to another potential buyer for the property who offered more money.

So finance officer Joe Sharpe, in a post on AMVETS Post 64’s new blog, is suggesting the group move on and make the most of their current location. It turns out that it isn’t nearly as expensive to improve the building as some have thought; and it also turns out that ADA compliance may not be necessary for the group to make some extra money renting out the building:

A major reason for the move is not having an elevator. Ever since I started coming down to the AMVETS I was told that to have functions open to the public we must have an ADA compliant elevator. I even voted to spend $250,000 to put in a new elevator. We do not need a new elevator. I finally took the time to call the city to find out the facts. Currently we are grandfathered in to not have an ADA compliant elevator for public events. However, to maintain our grandfathered status, renovations to the building over a 30 month period cannot exceed $100,000 This fits into a “one floor at a time” approach. This is how a Peoria building inspector interpreted the law. I am currently waiting to hear back from a gentlemen in Springfield that handles this type of issue specifically. Please [view the code] paragraph B6.

I have taken a plumber and a union carpenter/contractor to look at the third floor. The plumber was impressed with the newer copper water lines and suggested new toilets, bathroom fixtures, and an additional toilet to the men’s room. The carpenter suggested laminate flooring and paint for the walls. I did not receive a written quote from either, but the carpenter believed that if we spent over $15,000 on paint and flooring materials we would be wasting [our] money.

High utilities are another supposed reason to move. So far this year our average CILCO bill has been under $2,000. The roof was cited as another reason to move. I have been on the roof and, although I’m not a roofer its condition looks excellent. The point is that we can easily spend less than $100,000 in order to start renting out the third floor ballroom.

Fixing one floor at a time is not enough by itself. We must hire someone able to maintain and actively promote the building to its fullest potential. I think Liz has taught us that one motivated employee can make a huge difference to the club. I am referring to the dramatic increase in daytime business. Linda currently cannot take on further responsibility required to fill this needed position.

I thank everyone that has put time into the move and I share your frustration caused by recent events. It is now time to move on and not let our fate rest in the hands of others.

Joe Sharpe
Finance Officer

City Council, City of Peoria

No “wonderful development” on agenda for Tuesday

2 Comments

Of course it could be revised on Friday, but as of today there is no “wonderful development” on the agenda for Tuesday’s council meeting. However, there are some other interesting items:

  • AMVETS building landmark status: The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) voted in favor of preserving the AMVETS building (formerly United Duroc building), but the city council informally voted against it when they were polled by the AMVETS before the issue even went to the HPC. So now it’s really a muddled mess. If the council votes for landmark status, the AMVETS will feel disenfranchised as property owners because it will make their building harder to sell. If the council votes against landmark status, it marginalizes the HPC and sets up a precedent of bypassing them altogether. Oh, and it will mean the loss of another historic building, but that’s nothing new. Peoria never has much cared for preservation. I predict the council will not landmark the building, and it will be torn down before the end of the year. The lesson to take away: don’t wait until the last minute to request historic designation.

  • Convenience loan restrictions: The moratorium is about to expire on any new so-called convenience loan establishments from opening. The city has done some research on possible restrictions to keep such establishments from clustering the way they have along University between War Memorial and Forrest Hill. Their recommendation:

    a. Permitting the use of Convenience Cash Businesses, as permitted and/or special uses only in the B1, CG, C1, and C2 zoning districts (Currently permitted in these districts plus 01, 02, and CN).

    b. Distance requirements of a 1500 foot radius from other Convenience Cash businesses (Note that the City has an inventory of 1,681 parcels with appropriate base zoning {B1, CG, C1, and C2}. Of that inventory, 61% or 1026 parcels meet the distance requirements and could be developed with new convenience cash businesses {Map 2}).

    c. If the distance requirements cannot be met business owners would have the option of obtaining Special Use approval.

    The Zoning Commission had some slightly different suggestions, such as requiring the convenience loan establishment to be 1500 feet away from any residential-zoned district, which would leave only two parcels in all of Peoria where a new loan place could locate. No doubt there will be no small amount of discussion on the council floor before a vote is taken on this one.

  • 4 a.m. liquor license area expansion: Most bars in the area have to close at 2 a.m. But there’s a small area downtown where you can get a special subclass of license allowing you to stay open until 4 a.m. The council is considering a pretty major expansion of that area — one that will include the Warehouse District and extend all the way to South Street. Here’s a map of the current license area and the proposed addition:

    This would include the Club Apollo and Excalibur nightclubs. Police Chief Steve Settingsgaard is in favor of the expansion, and the Liquor Commission approved it 5-0. It looks like a shoo-in for approval by the council, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there were a few citizens who ask for the privilege of the floor to try to persuade the council against it.

There will also be more discussion on the 2009 budget. You see the proposed budget by visiting the PeoriaBudget.com website.

City of Peoria, History

HPC: AMVETS should be historic landmark

12 Comments

From the Journal Star:

The Downtown AMVETS building should be considered a historic landmark and preserved for future uses, the city’s historic preservation commission decided this morning.

With a 4-2 vote, the commission endorsed an application from the Central Illinois Landmarks Foundation to landmark the building at 237 NE Monroe St.

The City Council has the final vote on the landmarking status and is scheduled to do so on Nov. 25.

I have mixed feelings about this. I really do. On the one hand, I agree with the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) that this building should be landmarked. After reading the application, I believe a solid case was made for preserving this 1916 building originally known as the United Duroc Building.

But on the other hand, the timing couldn’t have been worse. The AMVETS need to move, and they had their plans all set. They were going to move to the former Penguin Tap in Peoria Heights. Riverside Community Church was going to buy their downtown building, raze it, and build a new children’s wing. All the arrangements had been made and all they needed to do was close the deal. And then this historic preservation request was filed and scuttled everyone’s plans.

That has made for a lot of hard feelings. It’s no small irony that this happened to a veterans group. “Post 64 Commander Richard Mitchell said the vote was ‘another example of rights we fought for being taken away from us,'” reported the Journal Star.

I hope that preservation groups recognize the spot they put people and organizations in when they wait until the last minute to file preservation applications. Instead of waiting until the wrecking ball is at the door, it would be better if these groups were more proactive. There are a finite number of buildings in Peoria that are worthy of historic designation; make a list, submit it, and be done with it.

City of Peoria, History

AMVETS building preservation app deserves public hearing

4 Comments

Thanks to the kindness of City staff members in the City Clerk and Planning & Growth departments, I was able to get a copy of the historic preservation application for the AMVETS building:

Historic Preservation Application for 237 NE Monroe (3.03 MB)

The applicant, Les Kenyon on behalf of the Central Illinois Landmarks Foundation, makes a compelling case for preserving this building, originally known as the United Duroc Building. Here is a summary of his argument from the application:

Built and dedicated in 1916, the United Duroc Bldg. is a Colonial Revival style with significant architectural features that meet criteria #4 and #6. Features include white enamel (glazed) brick and glazed terra cotta; there are elaborate decorative crowns above the dual entrances, fanlight-transom windows, terra cotta cornices, trabeated pilasters with triglyphs and gutta, Palladian windows.

Designed by WH Reeves and built by WM Allen, two key men involved in the design and construction of Peoria’s most notable buildings including Peoria’s City Hall, Spalding Institute, Glen Oak Park Pavilion, St. Augustine Manor, Peoria State Hospital, Mohammed Temple and many others.

The United Duroc building was also home to: the distinguished University Club, Battle Creek Baths and a Comptometer School and publishing company.

The application states that this building meets five out of the nine criteria for historic preservation:

  • #3 — Its identification with a person who significantly contributed to the development of the City, State or Nation.
  • #4 — Its embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style valuable for the study of a period, type, method of construction or use of indigenous materials.
  • #5 — Its identification as the work of a Master Building Designer, architect or landscape architect whose individual work has influenced the development of the city, the state or the nation.
  • #6 — Its embodiment of elements of design, detailing, or craftsmanship that render it architecturally significant.
  • #8 — Its unique location or singular physical characteristics that make it an established or familiar visual feature.

You can read all the details in the application.

I called Les Kenyon today to ask him a couple of questions that came up in my last post. He was kind enough to take my call. I asked him why he hadn’t applied for historic preservation of this building until now — why not anytime in the last 40 years, as some have suggested. He replied that, first of all, the property didn’t come up for sale until just recently, and secondly, there wasn’t an historic preservation ordinance 40 years ago. He said we didn’t get such an ordinance until “5 or 6 years ago.” (Actually, I checked, and the city’s historic preservation ordinance was passed August 15, 1989 — about 19 years ago. Time flies.) He said prior to that time, if you wanted to preserve a building, you had to buy and save it yourself.

I asked him if he and the Central Illinois Landmark Foundation had any plans to be more proactive in requesting historic status for other buildings instead of waiting until they come up for sale or demolition. He said yes, that in fact one of the CILF board members has a list of several historic properties that they are planning to go over at a future meeting and ultimately present to the city council. However, he said they have to be careful about presenting too big of a list because it may alarm some council members who aren’t supporters of historic preservation. He feels it’s more effective to take small steps toward preservation.

And that strategy perhaps best explains why some requests for preservation come at the 11th hour. It’s not that these weren’t worthy buildings in the first place. It’s simply that they are strategic in submitting applications, and sometimes a building that’s on their list comes up for sale or demolition before they’ve gotten to it. Then they have to move it to the top of the list.

Whether or not you think the building should ultimately be preserved, I believe it at least deserves a hearing. I know this will cause some delay of AMVETS’ plans, and that’s regrettable. But once a historic structure is gone, it’s gone forever. I think it’s worth our time (and for a public hearing, we’re talking about less than 45 days) to make sure we’re not going to regret its demolition after it’s too late to do anything about it. Let’s make sure this application is fully vetted, and if the building does not warrant salvaging, so be it.

The Historic Preservation Commission will decide Wednesday morning at their regular meeting, 8:30 a.m. in City Hall Room 400, whether to grant a hearing or not.

City of Peoria, History

Will AMVETS historic preservation request get a hearing?

17 Comments

I reported recently on some historic preservation requests that are wending their way through the system. One of those is the AMVETS building, 237 NE Monroe. That building got some criticism in the comments section of my blog. And according to another reader who e-mailed me over the weekend, there’s an effort underway to kill the proposed historic designation without even so much as a hearing:

Dear Sir

I saw your article about preserving the AMVETS building and wanted to inform you of the following: This upcoming Wednesday the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) will decide if the AMVETS application will receive a public hearing. I am afraid that they are being swayed, for the wrong reasons, to vote against a public hearing.

The building’s application, which can be obtained from the city, to make it historical was put together very well. There are nine criteria to make a building historic and only one of the nine needs to be met to make a designation. The application cites that the building meets 4 of the nine criteria and lists details why, providing pictures and proper research.

Key (although not all) members within the AMVETS do not want this to happen because they are in the process of trying to move the post location and a historic landmark of the building could prevent this. Certain AMVETS officers of the corporation are not sharing this information with the organization’s membership and lobbying the HPC to vote it down on Wednesday.

The point I am trying to make is that the Historic Preservation Commission has an obligation to permit a public hearing on applications that have merit. This building obviously has merit and deserves a public hearing. This will not guarantee the building is land-marked but will ensure its case is heard, as it should be. The buyer of AMVETS has made its intentions clear to eventual raze the building and it would be a shame to see a possible historic landmark torn down without a public hearing.

I request you make this known so that the commission feels pressure to do their job of ensuring applications get a fair public hearing. You may email me with questions and I understand if you do not want to get involved.

Thank you

A concerned citizen and veteran

I still haven’t seen the application, but it does seem reasonable to have a public hearing if the building indeed meets four of the nine criteria for historic designation. It’s not listed on the October agenda published on the city’s website, but this week’s “Issues Update” confirms, “The Historic Preservation Commission will be conducting a preliminary review of an application to Landmark property at 237 NE Monroe on October 22, 2008 instead of November 26, 2008.”

The Historic Preservation Commission meets at 8:30 a.m. this Wednesday.