At last night's Aurora City Council meeting, Mr. Leonard Stoeker, a frequent contributor to this blog and near west side resident, demonstrated why questioning government's intrusion and poor public policy could result in changes.
"This process sets up a condition wherein a single person, even over the objections of every other property owner to be included within a proposed historic district, can have an area designated as a historic district," - Leonard
City of Aurora staff (Jan Mangers) and some near west side residents (Shirley Flaherty) have been trying to instigate a historic district designation that would result in reduced property rights combined with micromanagement by the city.
Alderman Rick Lawrence agreed the ordinance needs to be reviewed and possibly changed. And, perhaps since Aurora Mayor Tom Weisner has been reading this blog, he agreed with Alderman Lawrence and Leonard that the ordinance may need to be reviewed.
We'll let Leonard lead the discussion on this issue, but we congratulate him for standing up and speaking out on this important threat that can happen to many other neighborhoods. We hope when Weisner reads this, he understands that any effort to pursue historic districts in the meantime will be a very bad idea.
"This process sets up a condition wherein a single person, even over the objections of every other property owner to be included within a proposed historic district, can have an area designated as a historic district," - Leonard
City of Aurora staff (Jan Mangers) and some near west side residents (Shirley Flaherty) have been trying to instigate a historic district designation that would result in reduced property rights combined with micromanagement by the city.
Alderman Rick Lawrence agreed the ordinance needs to be reviewed and possibly changed. And, perhaps since Aurora Mayor Tom Weisner has been reading this blog, he agreed with Alderman Lawrence and Leonard that the ordinance may need to be reviewed.
We'll let Leonard lead the discussion on this issue, but we congratulate him for standing up and speaking out on this important threat that can happen to many other neighborhoods. We hope when Weisner reads this, he understands that any effort to pursue historic districts in the meantime will be a very bad idea.
33 comments:
I also think the ordinance should be changed (by the way, what committee of the city council deals with changes or introducing new ordinances?).
Those neighborhoods that have these districts are already stuck with the problem, but what need is there to add ANY additional neighborhood from here? Shouldn't we abolish the whole concept?
Government Operations Committee,which is composed of Ald. Hart-Burns, Kifowit and Lawrence, generally handles the introduction of new ordinances.
Apparently Shirley Flaherty did not make her $6,500 contribution to Weisner's campaign fund to guarantee the historic district.
Leonard, how much did you contribute?:)(Just kidding)
Abolish the whole ordinance.
As stated last night in my letter to the Mayor and Aldermen, I and other property owners in the neighbor hood were quite shocked at what we found when we read the Preservation Ordinance of the City of Aurora.
I highly recommend that everyone read the Preservation Ordinance. It can be found as Chapter 37 of the City of Aurora Code of Ordinances. To find it go the City’s web site and on the first page of that site you will find a link to the Code of Ordinances near the top of that page.
When looking at this issue we have to push aside all of the anecdotal comment and hearsay and examine only the words on the paper to try to determine what they mean.
With that in mind the question is not what the Director and the Historic Preservation Commission is doing or not doing in terms of enforcement. The question is what power does the commission have irrespective of how the commission is operating or enforcing that power today? So what can the commission do? It is nothing more or less than that.
The first inquiry is how does a historic district designation get started and who or what can apply for historic district designation in the first place?
The Preservation Ordinance states as follows:
“Sec. 37-61. Application.
(a) The commission, by a three-fifths vote of all members, or any person, group of persons or association, may apply for a landmark, historical district or urban conservation district designation for property and improvements located within the corporate limits of the city.”
In pertinent part this ordinance clearly states that, “any person may apply for a historical district designation”.
Believe it or not it is that simple. Any person can apply for historic district designation whether or not they live in the neighborhood or whether or not they are even residents of Aurora. Believe it, this ordinance will allow any person even non-residents of Aurora to so apply.
So to have standing to apply for historic district designation the applicant does not have to be a property nor live in the neighborhood nor live in the City of Aurora nor live in the State of Illinois nor even the United States for that matter.
The above, in my opinion is a problem of Titanic proportions.
So I ask anyone reading this. Are you interested in having someone outside of your neighborhood, a person that has no direct connection with the neighborhood and its well being, someone that may not even a resident of this City and may not even be a property owner familiar with all of the trials and tribulations of property ownership coming into your neighborhood and doing like this to you, even over your objections?
To any right minded self respecting person that has the ability to make any of his or her own decisions in life without looking to government to solve their problems, how can the answer to that question be anything other than no?
This is not all, there is more.
Leonard.
Your logic is interesting.
as a lawyer, you also know that any one individual can file a suit. So what?
Read the ordinance again, It says any one person can apply. You fail to acknowledge that there is a process. The citizens who sit on the commission are not strangers, they are you neighbors
How is this different than any other governmental body operates?
Oh yes, I forgot, you hate all government. Pretty funny that someone who is a lawyer hates law.
It's very interesting that a lawyer hates the law so much. The logic is strained.
Leonard knows that any one person can also file a suit in court. Should we rewrite that law too?
The application is just the beginning of the process. The people who sit on the commission are not strangers, they are your neighbors.
How is that different than any other governmental body?
Leonard, get a life!!!
Obvious it is different in that they are not elected!
Abolish City council, or at least most of them!
And the Mayor and his goon squad staff of lazy, good for nothing bums that run this town.
All commissions are volunteers. What do you have against that? Take a look at what we have that have been elected. Sorry lot !
The commissions are appointed by the Mayor. There is no qualifications needed to be on any commission. The commissioner do not answer to anyone but the Mayor. They are not elected but affect policy and ordinances of the city.
It is also has nothing to do with who is incharge now and how they may or may not handle things. It is what the ordinance says and the power it gives to anyone if they choose to enforce it. The way this ordinance is written the individual property owner has very little power or rights and a minority of people can impose their wishes on them. No one is saying that all Historical districts should abolished or there should never be another one. The ordinance should be written that has protection for the people who don't want it and a way to get rid of one if the majority of people don't want it anymore.
Irrespective of what you and others may believe law is not necessarily law. Just because someone was able to write words on a paper and convince the City Council that it was good and proper and would withstand scrutiny, constitutional or otherwise does not a good law make.
As to government we have a duty as citizens to question what government is doing.
Anyone that knows me at all also knows that I am not a person looking for notoriety, visibility or any other type of attention. I am a person that will live and let live and you leave me alone and I will leave you alone. That kind of sounds like a rule that is referenced as fairly golden. Would you have me come along and impress onto you regulations that you did not want?
By the way, government and law are fairly different concepts.
Probably not.
So now that we know who can start the process for the designation of an historic district we need to know what that process is. On the surface that process appears to be innocuous enough.
In this instance I am not going to insert a quotation of the ordinance as it would take up too much space. So look to Chapter 37-62 and 37-63 of the City of Aurora Code of Ordinances.
In short the process goes something like this.
1. Application filed, as discussed in a prior post.
2. A preliminary review of the application at the next regular meeting of the commission.
3. The commission shall decide whether application merits a public hearing. If the application does not merit a public hearing a formal denial of the application shall be entered.
4. If the application merits further consideration a public hearing shall be held within the next forty-five (45) days. The hearing may be continued.
5. The executive director shall notify the applicant and owner of the subject property as to the date, time, place and purpose of the public hearing.
6. The commission shall grant, deny or modify the requested designation within thirty (30) days after the public hearing.
7. A decision granting a designation may be appealed to the city council by an owner of the subject property in writing within fifteen (15) days after the commission's decision.
8. If an appeal is not filed within such time the decision of the commission shall be final.
Notice that the applicant and the Commission have been working on the application quite some time prior to the public hearing, probably not less than 75 days and, in the case of an historic district probably quite a bit longer than that. To accumulate all of the data required for the application for each property contained in an historic district would take an individual quite a long time.
Also, notice that there is no obligation on the part of the Preservation Commission or the Director to give notice to the owner of the property, tax payer, the very people that will be subjected to regulation by the Preservation Commission, until 15 days prior to the public hearing.
Is that meaningful due process? Are the property owning, tax paying people who will be subjected to the regulation of the Preservation Commission being given real notice of what is about to happen to their rights as property owners in sufficient time to allow those property owning, tax paying people to educate themselves, prepare a case and defend themselves against this process, should they choose to do so.
I suggest that in light of the length of time that the applicant and commission may have worked together on the application that this notice provision is deficient.
You decide for yourself.
Wrong again Leonard. The application contains the notice and preference of the owner or owners. Two mailings went out in order to allow for property owner to respond. It is customary to hold an informational meeting prior to making application. The property owner is the first contact before any application is valid and can be presented to the commission. A far cry from your interpretation of "15 days."
You were notified about three months before the informational meeting occurred.
Thou speakest with forked tongue.
Has anybody realized that NO APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED? Whats the fuss about?
The Westside Historic District was designated in 1972. The area was recognized as worthy of designation, but it has deteriorated considerably in the first two blocks because there was no local control. Historic designation is a tool for stabilization. What are you afraid of?
It is clear to me there is an inequitable process for a historic district. It can be imposed on a whole neighborhood despite the majority of the neigbhorhood's objection.
I find it interesting that on the City of Aurora's website, it never lists who are all these people that have power over our lives.
If it weren't for the "fuss" then the historic district would be quietly forced on the neighborhood.
At the Council meeting I spoke about the Preservation Ordinance and only the Preservation Ordinance. I am not aware that I said a single word about any application.
At this point I am not concerned with the application. My focus in on the Preservation Ordinance itself and what it allows and does not allow with respect to historic districts, their creation and management. By the way, the ordinance does not require informational meetings.
Any notices that may have been sent regarding the recent events are again not the focus of my comments at the Council meeting.
Whether or not the meeting at the church was informational or not is probably subject to the interpretation of each person present. What I saw was a series of people that did not present information other than trying to make statements as to how wonderful historic districts are. That is opinion not information. We have differing opinions on that issue.
If I am wrong about the wording contained within the ordinance with respect to notice to the property owners please show me.
I found it interesting that the only thing Weisner can say when faced with a situation is "Let's have a community group to work on this". I commend Rick Lawrence for getting it to the right committee, not a community group where it will disappear, and get the City to look at this ordinance. This is what our Aldermen are supposed to do, he should stop trying to get around the system! Keep on him Rick, he'll try to hide this issue somewhere, because if he can't take credit for something, then he doesn't want it done. The Mayor is a Smuck!
Read the brief filed by Our Savior Lutheran Church to the Shirley Flaherty and Al Signorelli landmark application for Our Savior's Coach House. That brief was filed on appeal to the Aurora City Council. The City Council did not hear the appeal because the Corporation Counsel intervened and agreed that notice was not posted on the affected property.
Anonymous 6/28/2006 5:14 PM
You wrote:
“The Westside Historic District was designated in 1972. The area was recognized as worthy of designation, but it has deteriorated considerably in the first two blocks because there was no local control. Historic designation is a tool for stabilization.”
My first question, What exactly is the deterioration are you writing about? When we know just what it is we may be able to ascertain the correct course of action.
After we learn just what it is that is deteriorated then we can see who or what has the power and authority to deal with the deterioration.
Please tell me and all of the readers of this blog just what power and authority the Preservation Commission has to remedy the deterioration which you are going to list?
Can the commission order an owner paint his or her building?
Can the commission cause an owner to repair the stairs or windows or the roof or anything else?
Can the commission initiate, on its own authority, any action to force anyone to do anything prior to the owner applying for a building permit?
I think that you will find that the Commission cannot do any of the above and that its authority and powers are limited to and triggered by the act of a person applying for a building permit.
If I am wrong I truly am interested to know the true and correct answer backed up by facts.
What follows is the complete and unabridged list of Powers and Duties of the Preservation Commission.
Everyone reading this can make there own assessment of whether or not the commission has affirmative power to correct the deterioration that is alleged to exist at the east two blocks of the proposed district.
Sec. 37-23. Powers and duties.
The commission may:
(1) Designate landmarks, historical districts and urban conservation districts within the corporate limits of the city in accordance with the procedures and standards set forth in this chapter.
(2) Issue, modify or deny certificates of appropriateness and economic hardship in accordance with the procedures and criteria set forth in this chapter.
(3) Adopt rules and regulations, including such guidelines as may be deemed necessary for review of applications for certificates of appropriateness.
(4) Keep a register of all property and improvements which have been designated for preservation under this chapter. This register shall include the information required of each designation, along with the appropriate maps.
(5) Provide financial and technical assistance to the owners of property and improvements which have been designated for preservation.
(6) Retain, upon approval by the city council, such specialists as may be required from time to time.
(7) Engage in mutual cooperation with other city departments and commissions on matters affecting the property and improvements which have been designated for preservation.
(8) Make suggestions and recommendations relative to the nomination of designated property and improvements to state and national registers.
(9) Perform any and all functions which will foster the marking and maintenance of designated property and improvements in accordance with the respect to which they are entitled and as will aid the public in visiting such areas with convenience and in appropriate surroundings.
(10) Recommend the city's acquisition by donation, purchase or eminent domain of a fee or lesser interest in designated property and improvements, including but not limited to easements, covenants and leasehold interests; and to reconstruct, maintain, operate or transfer such property so acquired, all in accordance with the purposes, procedures and standards set forth in this chapter.
(11) Induce by contract or other consideration the creation of covenants or restrictions binding on land.
(12) Receive funds from federal, state and private sources for deposit in a separate account of the city to be referred to as the preservation fund, which funds shall only be loaned or expended by the commission with approval of the city council for such purposes as are herein set forth; if the commission is dissolved, then any amounts remaining in the fund shall be applied by the city council to further the purposes of this chapter. If any amounts remain in the fund after a period of one (1) year following the commission's dissolution, then such funds may be applied by the city council for such general corporate purposes as it may deem appropriate.
(13) Recommend the city's acquisition by donation, purchase or eminent domain of a fee or lesser interest in property which is within the public view and adjacent to or immediately surrounding designated property and improvements, the alteration, clearance or maintenance of which is important for the proper preservation and use of the designated property and improvements.
(14) Recommend the issuance of revenue bonds by the corporate authorities.
(15) Cooperate with other governmental bodies or agencies and not-for-profit organizations with purposes similar to those set forth in this chapter, including but not limited to the execution of contracts and the conveyance of property whether by purchase or donation.
(Code 1969, § 37-7)
Govern (oops, you hate that word) the number, placement and size of signs, enforce (oops) screening of dumpsters, restrict the bastardiztion of facades, therfore maintaining design integrity of structure and control (oops again) the type and placement of fences (like the ugly at Our Savior Lutherans property line), just to name a few.
Anonymous at 6/30/2006 4:58 AM, said
“Govern (oops, you hate that word) the number, placement and size of signs, enforce (oops) screening of dumpsters, restrict the bastardiztion of facades, therfore maintaining design integrity of structure and control (oops again) the type and placement of fences (like the ugly at Our Savior Lutherans property line), just to name a few.”
With respect to signs see Chapter 41 of the Aurora Code of Ordinances, entitled, “Signs”
Chapter 41 reads in part:
Sec. 41-1. Purposes. This article is adopted in relation to the establishment of minimum regulations for the design, construction, alteration, repair, removal, maintenance and use of signs within the city
Sec. 41-13. Enforcement.
All enforcement of the provisions of this article shall be in compliance with the building code, as amended.
(Ord. No. O03-159, § 1, 12-9-03)
With respect to dumpsters see the Property Maintenance Code at, I believe section 305.3.2 entitled, “Containers Required” you will find that dumpsters are regulated. The online code was somewhat unclear as to the section numbers etc. so I am using what was on the screen as a reference.
With respect to fences you will find that they are regulated in zoning, building codes as well as other places in the City’s Code of Ordinances.
With respect to structural integrity look to the building codes that is why we have building codes.
It would seem that the real issue has been missed again.
The issue and question from my prior post was and remains; Can the commission or the director go out and affirmatively control signs or dumpsters or any other similar complaint that you or I may have?
I suggest to you that the answer is not. In addition I suggest to you that there are other people and departments that are charged with such tasks and given the authority to do just that.
All true, But with a different set of guidelines and without esthetics.
Why do we have 5 neons on a house? It's because it is not against the present code.
Why do we have an inappropriate (butt ugly) fence next to a mansion? Again, not against the present code.
Why are dumpsters unscreened? Because there is no design review committee (Preservation entity) to speak for the neighborhood.
Historic designation would have taken care of this.
Just a comment on the Government Operations Committee. I believe that it would be a conflict of interest for Alderman Lawrence to sit on a committee that reviews the Preservation Guidline as he was one of the ringleaders behind the mob who disrupted the informational meeting at the church.
He met with them previously and led them astray. Not very honest!!
I continue to be amazed at what I did not say at the city council meeting last Tuesday.
At no time did I speak about the preservation guidelines.
At this point the issues involved do not include the guidelines.
The proponents of the histoic district are quick to ckaim that the opponents are using misinformation. I think that you need to police yourself in that regard.
I have yet to see anyone of you people that are afraid to identify yourselves write anything that directs itself to the real issues.
Are you afraid of the reality of Historic Districts and their administration?
Maybe the administration of historic districts is now going to be coming into the light. Are you afraid of operating in the light as you are afraid of your own identity?
If you do not have the intestinal fortitude to stand up, be counted and identify yourself, well you be the judge.
The scare tactics used by Leonard and Alderman Lawrence only have effect on the uninformed and the stupid. We can solve the uninformed problem, stupid can't be changed.
If I were to identify myself, I too might be called a "Nazi" and
have people sent to my house just as was done to Flaherty.
Nice try !!
Dear openlineblog, You usually do more extensive research on issues than on this one.
I don't think you have both sides on this. Talk to some of us who have Historic Designation and see how is really effects the stability of a neighborhood.
Some will say, "nothings changed, what good is it." Thats the true test. It stays beautiful>
Historic Districts Suck! period end of story. If being a good neighbor takes regulation from a bunch of busy budy old hags we should have no part in it. Look what we have with the near east side historic district? Crime, Ill kept homes, prostitues, drug dealers and over crowded homes with a bunch of illegals. So the busy buddies look the other way on them and then bitch at me because I want to put in a non brick walk way!
What a bunch of F{}(%$ the can all kiss my @$$!
Don't let them do it to you folks. It won't change anything and your neighborhood is already nice. All it will do is give some power to a bunch of power starved boobs that think they no more than you and what is best for your property.
Dear 10:14 PM, what contribution have you made to reduce crime in your neighborhood? Perhaps you have some suggestions for those of us who need your help.
To 10:14,
Power starved boobs, busy body old hags, kiss your @$$, etc. ???
Shame on you !! Does your mother know you talk like that?
I own a gun legally of course and I know how to use it @$$H0))E
.
Cool it M.M.
.
Post a Comment