HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 8/26/2008 - Community Development Committee _ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Tuesday,August 26, 2008
`- Alderrnen's Conference Room, 7:00 p.m.
In Attendance: Committee Members: Chairman Alderman Condon, Alderman Santi,
Alderman Glal�, and Alderman Wimmer. Absent: None. Staff: Deputy City Administrator
Martin, City Planner Kolner and Deputy City Clerk Kunzer.
Also in Attendance: Landmark Commissioners: Patrick Wirtz, Kaaren Gies, and Gerhard
Rosenberg.
Chairman Alderman Condon called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Public Inuut
No one spoke during the time set aside for public input.
Discussion• Amending the Historic Preservation Ordinance
Deputy City Administrator Martin noted the City's Historic Preservation Ordmance is 10 years
old and should be reviewed at this time. Staff has examined the Ordinance and has noted several
areas which niight be considered for updating, amendment, alteration or deletion. Staff would
like input from the Committee as well as the Landmark Commission regarding proposed
modifications to the ordinance.
Deputy City Administrator Martin summarized Staff's su�gestions regarding proposed
L-- updates/amendments. The first area discussed was Article II Section 2 Powers and Authorities.
Deputy City ��dministrator Martin stated Staff believes a reduction by attrition of the number of
Landmark C��mmissioners might be appropriate, particularly since it is difficult for the
Commission to realize a quorum on a regular basis due to member absence. Typically, the City's
commissians contain seven members. Staff suggests the Landmark Commission be reduced to
seven members.
Landmark Commissioners in attendance raised concerns regarding a proposed reduction in the
number of commissioners. They vocalized the need to maintain the twelve-member Commission.
The Commission has much to do and requires all of their cunent slate of inembership to
accomplish their work. Lengthy discussion occurred regarding this issue.
Aldermen Wimmer and Glab concurred with the Landmark Commissioners and opined the
number of commissioners should remain at twelve.
Discussion then occurred regarding the language allowing a student representative on the
Commission having a one-year term. Staff suggested eliminating the reference to the student
representativ� as there is not a minimum age requirement for Commission membership.
Chairman C��ndon expressed a desire to remove the student representative language, as the
Commission would then be able to fill a Commission vacancy more easily.
�
e �
� Community Development Committee Meeting
� August 26, 2008
Page 2
It was the con�ensus of the Committee to leave the language as-is regarding the reference to a
student member on the Landmark Commission.
Deputy City A dministrator Martin stated there are many duties included in Article II of the
Ordinance which are not currently applicable to the Commission. He suggested Staff meet with
Landmark Commissioners to review the stated duties to determine what changes should be made
to more accurately reflect the actual duties and responsibilities of the Commission.
Discussion followed regarding several of the listed duties. It was suggested the Commission
should provide the City Council with an annual report outlining the Commission's
accomplishments each year. This item is included in the Ordinance, but no reports have been
provided to date.
Planner Kolner suggested it would be beneficial to both the Commission and the Council to view
a list of Comm�ssion accomplishments each year. Aldermen Glab and Santi concurred.
Landmark Commission Chairman Wirtz suggested he could meet with Staff to create a list of
accomplishments during the past year. This report could be presented in writing or in person to
Council each year.
L— Planner Kolner noted several general amendments Staff would recommend to make the language
of the Ordinance more consistent with other City ordinances. All references to the Commission
"approving", "authorizing" or "determining" should be changed to "recommend" or "provide a
recommendatian" to the City Council regarding approval, denial, etc.
Following an inquiry by Commissioner Gies, Deputy City Administrator Martin stated the
Certificate af F;conomic Hardship information required in Article IV(3)(B)iii would be amended
to require the "current assessed valuation" of the subject property as opposed to the "estimated
market value" which would be difficult to determine without requiring an appraisal of the
property.
Commissioner Gies also noted a typographical error in the Penalties section of the Ordinance.
Deputy City Administrator Martin acknowledged the Penalty for violation of the provisions of
the Ordinance should be between $50 and $750 for each offense.
Planner Kolner stated Staff recommends removal of all references to "color" within the
Ordinance as �:he perception of the general public is that a historical preservation ordinance
attempts to co�itrol everything within a preservation district, including what color buildings can
be painted. A lengthy discussion followed. The Landmark Commissioners expressed strong
feelings regard ing the need to include "color" as one of the restrictions in the approval criteria
for a Certificate of Appropriateness. They stressed it is imperative to include color selection in
determining the appropriateness of possible building improvements. In order to maintain the
�
Community Development Committee Meeting
� August 26, 2008
Page 3
authenticity of historical structures, building colors must complement the structure's historical
integrity.
Alderman Glab concurred with the commissioners and noted that other neighboring communities
have discoverf:d the error of non-restrictive color choices when repairing, improving or
renovating older structures. He opined color review and control is necessary.
Chairman Condon suggested Deputy City Administrator Martin meet with representatives of the
Landmark Commission to review the Preservation Plan and Designation of Landmark and
Preservation Di strict portions of the Ordinance.
Chairman Condon fuRher suggested that rather than going over the Ordinance line by line at this
time, Staff could meet with Commission representatives to suggest Ordinance modifications and
amendments. The proposed modified Ordinance could then be brought back to the Community
Development Committee for review and further discussion prior to making a recommendation to
Council for adoption.
Members of thf�Landmark Commission departed at 7:40 p.m.
Discussion: CreatinS a Communitv Art Program
L— Deputy City Administrator Martin noted the Committee at its July 22, 2008 meeting directed
Staff to research how other municipalities have advanced the placement of public artwork in
their communities. Staff contacted the Illinois Arts Council to inquire as to potential financial
resources, as well as the City of Carbondale and the City of Joliet to obtain information about the
development of their public art programs. A synopsis of the information obtained from Joliet and
Carbondale, as well as Naperville and Aurora was included in the Staff Report for this Agenda
Item.
Deputy City Administrator Martin stated grant monies are available from the Illinois Arts
Council. However, applications must be made through local participatory tourism councils. The
City of McHenry would not be able to make application to the Illinois Arts Council on its own.
Deputy City Administrator Martin reported the McHenry Riverwalk Foundation is attempting to
implement a similar project and would like to install public art along the Riverwalk. It is Staff's
recommendation at this time to hold off on further investigation of the creation of a community
art program so as to avoid duplication of McHenry Riverwalk Foundation ef�orts.
Alderman Winimer concurred with Staff and suggested waiting to see how the McHenry
Riverwalk Fou�idation proceeds with their project.
Aldermen Glab and Santi agreed with Alderman Wimmer.
�
Community De�velopment Committee Meeting
� August 26, 20C�8
Page 4
Planner Kolne�• stated a portion of the community art program could be the City's sponsoring a
photo contest. The photos could be used to increase the stock in the City's photo gallery.
Chairman Condon expressed her disappointment in delaying the implementation of a community
art program. She expressed concern if the City waits for Riverwalk development/redevelopment
to proceed, it could be a long time. She noted places for art to be displayed could develop all
over town. Chairman Condon suggested there are grants and other avenues which could be
pursued to obtain public art for the community. She noted there are a lot of options available that
would not be cost-prohibitive.
Planner Kolner noted language could be inserted in the Core Downtown Sub-Area Plan stating
that the City i�rtends to display public art in the downtown area. In this way, the issue of public
art would be placed before the community in an official capacity, incorporated into the text of
the Core Dow�rtown Sub-Area Plan.
Alderman Glab expressed concern that Staff is being overextended. He opined the City does not
have the fund� to implement the community art program at this time.
Chairman Condon suggested Staff leave this issue on the list of future projects to be considered
and that it be revisited again in late 2009 at a Committee meeting.
�
Discussion: Core Downtown Sub-Area Plan
Deputy City Administrator Martin stated the development of the Core Downtown Sub-Area Plan
is the next pllase of the community sub-area plans. The CDSAP includes Green Street and
Riverside Drive commercial districts and adjacent properties. Phase I in planning for the
development of the CDSAP incorporates two community design workshops in order to solicit
public feedback and ideas.
Deputy City .�dministrator Martin went over the power point presentation outlining Phase I of
the planning process for CDSAP:
1. Present proposal of Core Downtown Sub-Area Plan, including its proposed boundary, to
Community Development Committee;
2. Host Community Design Workshops with property owners within the CDSAP;
3. Provide public input/community feedback to the Committee;
4. Draft and refine vision statement for the Plan.
Deputy City Administrator Martin stated the plan boundary is very similar to the TIF District
with a couple of exceptions. One of the goals of the plan is to tie the Green Street and Riverside
Drive commercial districts together.
Alderman W mmer stated the goal of the Plan should be to create McHenry's version of the
Woodstock ��quare. He inquired how the proposed boundary was established. Deputy City
`.
Community Development Committee Meeting
� August 26, 2008
Pa�e 5
Administrator Martin responded the plan mostly followed the TIF District boundary. The
character of the downtown was taken into consideration. Areas immediately adjacent to the
proposed boundary, such as Third Street, were deemed to be more highway commercial in
nafure, as opposed to downtown commercial.
Alderman Glab suggested the Committee should determine its vision for the plan prior to
obtaining community input. The Committee must determine if the City is heading in the right
direction. The City has not realized much redevelopment in the downtown areas. He expressed
concern that the City's redevelopment of the downtown would make McHenry resemble every
other community. McHenry's downtown could lose its uniqueness and character and would
blend in with what every other community has to offer. He opposed luring chain stores/shops to
the downtown area.
Planner Kolne�- suggested Staff required the CDSAP boundary to be established first. The
Committee coi�ld then develop its vision for the Plan simultaneously with Staff hosting the
Community Design Workshops to obtain public input.
Deputy City Administrator Martin noted Route 31 North has a different identity than the Core
Downtown Area. While chain stores are a staple of Route 31 North, the downtown area has a
unique character/flavor which should be retained.
�
Chairman Condon stated she is comfortable with the CDSAP boundary as proposed. She noted,
however, having gone through the development of the Main Street Sub-Area Plan and the
Crystal Lake Sub-Area Plan, the Committee was able to get consent with the way it was handled
through open house presentations to the public. Chairman Condon stated she liked the idea of
beginning with the Community Design Workshops but noted it is important that Committee
members come to the October meeting prepared with their ideas and vision for the area as well.
She further suggested that Staff should list their ideas for the Plan prior to hearing public
comment at the design workshops. Chairman Condon expressed her support of the process
outlined in Phase I of the plan development. She encouraged Committee members and Staff to
put their thaughts regarding the Plan on paper prior to the design workshops.
Planner Kolner noted the workshop participants would be the property owners of the affected
parcels.
It was the cons�snsus of the Committee to accept the Core Downtown Sub-Area Plan boundary as
presented and t�move forward with Phase I of the plan development process as outlined.
Discussion: Neon Si�ns
Deputy City A�iministrator Martin stated it has come to the attention of the Committee there are
a large number of neon signs being installed in the business community. Neon signs are currently
prohibited unless they are installed as interior window signs. As such, no permit is required and
�
Community Development Committee Meeting
� August 26, 2008
Page 6
no regulations currently apply. A survey of neighboring communities indicated neon signs are
addressed in several different ways: they are not permitted; the number of signs per business is
restricted; or the amount of window coverage is limited. Staff is seeking direction from the
Committee if,�nd how neon signs should be regulated in the City.
Alderman Santi suggested a window coverage limit of 30%per window.
Alderman Glab suggested a limit on the amount of area on the window, but to also include an
overall percentage of coverage per total amount of window area.
Discussion followed regarding various ways to figure the percentage of allowable window
coverage with neon signs. It was also suggested the City could limit the number of neon signs
allowed per business. Lengthy discussion continued.
Alderman Gl��b suggested the amount of neon signs could be based on the building frontage,
similax to hovv wall signs are currently being calculated. If neon signs were added to the sign
ordinance table, and a permit was required, the number and amount of signs/signage could then
be controlled.
Staff was directed to prepare proposed amendments to the sign ordinance for the Committee's
`- consideration at its next meeting.
Staff Reuort
Deputy City 9dministrator Martin reported Staff has been working with potential developers of
the northeast corner of Pearl Street/Richmond Road intersection and the Fuhler Property at the
northwest corner of Ringwood Road and Elm Street.
Staff has scheduled a meeting with the County regarding the Justen Funeral Home access onto
Charles J. Miller Road.
Staff has also been working with developers regarding the Mitchell Property on Front Street.
Redevelopment of the Whale's Tail is moving along. Las Palmas Restaurant should be open in 4-
6 weeks.
Other Business
Chairman Cc�ndon noted Alderman Peterson has brought to her attention the large amount of
cigarette but�;s along the sidewalk in the downtown area. He has requested that receptacles be
located along; the Riverwalk and downtown areas. This matter will be refened to the Public
Works Comrlittee for consideration.
�
Community Df�velopment Committee Meeting
� August 26, 20(�8
Page 7
Chairman Con 3on noted Staff needs to begin preparation for enforcement of the August 2013
deadline for a ll non-conforming signs to be brought into compliance or pay for an annual
nonconformin� sign permit.
Chairman Condon announced the next meeting is scheduled for October 28, 2008. Agenda items
could include:
Updated Tree Preservation Ordinance
Core Downtown Sub-Area Plan Update
Neon Sign Ordinance
Code Compliance Update
Historic Preservation Ordinance proposed modifications as recommended by the
Landmark Commission.
Adiournment
Motian by Santi, seconded by Glab, to adjourn the meeting at 8:48 p.m.
Aye: Santi, Glab, Wimmer, Condon.
Nay: None.
Absent: None.
Motion canied.
`— Respectfully submitted,
�'
Geri Condon, ('hairman
�