McHenry Times

City of Woodstock City Council Met Feb. 16.

Here is the minutes provided by the council:

A regular meeting of the Woodstock City Council was called to order at 7:00 PM, by Mayor Sager in the Council Chambers at Woodstock City Hall. Mayor Sager noted this meeting of the Woodstock City Council is being held under the Governor’s Emergency Declaration with Council members attending remotely and those attending at City Hall observing social distancing. He stated it is being livestreamed as is the City’s policy, including livestreaming of the Councilmembers who are attending remotely. Inviting all to participate, Mayor Sager explained the procedures to be used by the City Council, City Staff, and the Public to join today’s meeting, including how comments may be made and questions asked. Mayor Sager explained the Consent Calendar.

A roll call was taken.

COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS: Mayor Brian Sager

COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT ATTENDING REMOTELY: Darrin Flynn, Lisa Lohmeyer, Wendy Piersall, Jim Prindiville, Gordon Tebo, and Michael Turner.

COUNCIL ABSENT: None

STAFF PRESENT IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS: City Manager Roscoe Stelford and City Clerk Cindy Smiley.

STAFF ATTENDING REMOTELY: Assistant City Manager/Finance Director Paul Christensen, City Attorney Ruth Schlossberg, IT Director Dan McElmeel, Public Works Director Christina Betz, Building and Zoning Director Joe Napolitano, Economic Development Director Garrett Anderson, and City Planner Darrell Moore.

Mayor Sager noted the presence of a quorum under the revised rules of the Governor during this COVID-19 emergency. City Clerk Smiley confirmed the agenda before the Council is a true and correct copy of the published agenda.

III. FLOOR DISCUSSION

A. Real Woodstock Presentation

Mayor Sager welcomed Chamber Director Danielle Gulli to make the quarterly report for Real Woodstock.

Ms. Gulli stated the last report was made in October where information was provided for activities over the summer. She noted this evening’s report will cover October 2020 through February 2021 and stated metrics have been developed to measure the impact of Real Woodstock’s programs.

She first provided information on Real Woodstock’s social media platforms including the website, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and also its newsletter. She noted the website had almost 20,000 unique visitors, describing the devices from which the traffic is coming and the how people are finding Real Woodstock on the Internet. Ms. Gulli stated Real Woodstock has 12,496 Facebook followers as of February 2021 and compared this to other forms of media. She described Real Woodstock’s Instagram followers, describing the growth in this platform. Ms. Gulli noted YouTube views and new subscribers is up 999% in the last quarter describing the external sources that led people to Real Woodstock’s YouTube. She stated Real Woodstock had 15 Newsletter campaigns, with 958,040 emails being sent.

Ms. Gulli then talked about some of the specific Real Woodstock projects. She noted the Legend of the Pickle, which had a great response from local residents and was a co-op between Claussen Pickles and the Chamber. She also provided information on Holiday Lights and the Welcome to Woodstock Gift Bag program.

Ms. Gulli then discussed the Shop Local Marketing program urging all to go to the YouTube Channel and watch the video, which reached over 20,000 people in December. She noted part of taking over from the agency was to drive engagement, noting this is a way to drive people to shop local. Ms. Gulli talked about the Shop, Save, and Win campaign, which brought people to shop in Woodstock with the help of the City.

Ms. Gulli provide information on the advertising campaigns initiated by Real Woodstock on Star 105.5 with commercials and live broadcasts and with ads in The Woodstock Independent, providing examples of these.

She noted the various Groundhog Day promotions including a Walking Tour on YouTube and various promotional materials that are available at the Chamber and Read Between the Lynes. She then provided information on a YouTuber who came to Woodstock to make a behind the scenes video on the making of the Groundhog Day movie. She stated the video, “Beyond the Backlot,” had 36,000 views for the 9-minute video, with 509,400 impressions. Ms. Gulli then talked about the Groundhog Day live broadcast, noting this was the first time this was ever done and was a massive undertaking. She stated this had a total reach of 72,270, with 6,806 engagements, and media attendance by ABC, FOX, WGN, NBC, CBS, Star 105.5, Beyond the Backlot, Northwest Herald, and Woodstock Independent.

Ms. Gulli stated 8,000 copies of the 2020 Woodstock Business and Community Guide were distributed, with it also available digitally.

She stated Real Woodstock’s new website was launched on February 15th with a mobile friendly design that included self-populating events. She then talked about future projects for 2021, including tent cards, stickers, and posters. She noted new kiosk maps, a visitor guide, and vacant storefront signage were also in the works. Ms. Gulli introduced Randall McDaniels from McDaniels Marketing who will be working with Real Woodstock. Mr. McDaniels noted how pleased he is to be working with Real Woodstock and the Chamber, giving an overview of his firm’s experience. He stated it is hoped to see more people live and work in Woodstock. Ms. Gulli stated it is planned to focus on key City services and programs, talking about an ad that will appear in The Woodstock Independent on the Woodstock Recreation Department.

Mayor Sager thanked Ms. Gulli for a great presentation, stating it was very informative. He stated it is exciting to hear about all of the new developments Real Woodstock is undertaking. Councilwoman Piersall commended Ms. Gulli for getting a system in place to identify return on investment and the ability to measure Real Woodstock’s impact. Councilman Flynn, who serves as VP of Real Woodstock’s Board, noted under Ms. Gulli’s guidance, bringing this in-house has been a tremendous transformation in the level of community engagement. Councilman Turner recognized Ms. Gulli and the board for the evolution of Real Woodstock. He opined Ms. Gulli’s leadership has made a massive difference, applauding the connection that is being made with Mr. McDaniels. He stated as it exits COVID-19 this initiative will put Woodstock in a unique position for the things it is trying to achieve. Councilwoman Lohmeyer thanked Ms. Gulli for the frequent reports.

Mayor Sager again thanked Ms. Gulli and the members of Real Woodstock, stating he is looking forward to the next report.

B. Public Comment

There were no comments forthcoming from the Public.

C. Council Comments

Mayor Sager commended and thanked City Staff for its remarkable job in dealing with the cold and snow, noting they have been out 24 hours a day during this time. He particularly expressed appreciation to the Department of Public Works and the Woodstock Police Department.

IV. CONSENT AGENDA

Motion by J. Prindiville, second by D. Flynn, to approve the Consent Agenda.

In response to a question from Mayor Sager, the following item was removed from the Consent Agenda by the City Council or the Public:

Item D-4 – Ordinance – Special Use Permit – Collie Flower Farm by Councilman Turner at the request of Attorney Steve Cuda.

In response to a question from Mayor Sager, the following questions were forthcoming from the Public or the City Council concerning items remaining on the Consent Agenda:

Item D—5 – Old Courthouse and Sheriff’s House Historic Tax Credit Project Councilman Flynn asked if there has been any recent communication with those who submitted RFPs to see if there have been any changes. Mr. Moore stated he has been in contact with each prospective tenant and all have reiterated their intent to stay with the project. Councilman Flynn asked if the amount of space requested and the intended use of the space remain the same. Mr. Moore stated Ethereal is still looking at using the same amount of square footage, but are considering uses different than originally proposed or are considering perhaps rolling in uses over time.

Mayor Sager affirmed the Consent Agenda to include items A through D-3 and D-5 as follows:

A. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

February 2, 2021 City Council Meeting

B. WARRANTS #3941 #3942

C. MINUTES AND REPORTS

Cultural and Social Awareness Minutes January 11, 2021 Board of Library Trustees January 14, 2021

Human Resources Monthly Report December 2020 Human Resources Monthly Report January 2021

Woodstock Police Department Monthly/Annual Report December 2020 Department of Public Works Monthly Report December 2020

D. MANAGER’S REPORT NO. 173:

1. Ordinance – Liquor and Gaming Fee Amendments – Approval of Ordinance 21-O-12, identified as Document 1, An Ordinance Approving a Reduction to Certain Liquor and Gaming License Fees for Fiscal Year 2021/2022.

2. Ordinance – Code Amending Remote Participation in Public Meetings - Approval of Ordinance 21-O-13, identified as Document 2, An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1.5.7 of the City Code for the City of Woodstock, Illinois Regarding Remote Participation in Public Meetings.

3. Agreement – School Resource Officers for District 200 – Authorization for the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Police/High School Liaison Agreement with Woodstock Community Unit School District 200.

5. Old Courthouse and Sheriff’s House Historic Tax Credit Project – Approval by the City Council of the following actions:

a) Ratification of the creation of the Fund (the Woodstock Courthouse Historic Preservation Fund, Inc.) and the actions taken to date by the City Administration on behalf of that entity, including the appointment of the existing directors for the entity; b) Authorization of the creation and registration of the Taxable Subsidiary (tentatively to be named the Woodstock Historic Courthouse and Sheriff’s House, LLC) and the JV LLC (tentatively to be named the Woodstock Historic Courthouse and Sheriff’s House Joint Venture, LLC) (or such other names as the City Manager deems appropriate) and authorize the City Manager to execute any documents necessary for that purpose; and

c) Authorization of the City Manager to approve any changes to the Fund, the Taxable Subsidiary and the JV LLC as may be necessary to make any of them suitable for participation in the City’s historic tax credit transaction, both in anticipation of a potential tax credit investment situation and following any approval by the City Council to enter into

such an investment. This authority will include authority to execute any documents that may be needed, authorize changes to any of their organizing or registration documents, authorize changes to their tax status, and otherwise authorize changes to their documentation or registration.

A roll call vote was taken on items A through D-3 and D-5.

Ayes: D. Flynn, L. Lohmeyer, W. Piersall, J. Prindiville, G. Tebo, M. Turner, and Mayor B. Sager. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: none. Motion carried.

Item D-4 – Ordinance – Special Use Permit – Collie Flower Farm

Noting this item was removed at the request of Councilman Turner, Mayor Sager recognized Councilman Turner.

Councilman Turner expressed appreciation for the level of detail contained in the Staff Report and the extensive discussion on the part by the Plan Commission. Noting he does not come into this meeting with a preset vote, he stated he is interested in hearing from the parties involved and Council discussion. Councilman Turner noted Council gets into differences of opinion between two neighbors and believes that one of the more important things Council does is to listen to the sides and vote based on what is best for the community. He stated he looked forward to hearing from the City Attorney on this issue, including any ramifications on the City.

Mayor Sager invited the petitioner to make a presentation and provide their opening comments.

Liz Cardella, petitioner, stated there were some questions brought up at the Plan Commission meeting, opining these issues have been addressed. She stated her belief that she has created something beautiful, investing a lot and noting a lot of education went into her business. She stated her farm is something beautiful and unique that will be an asset to the community.

In response to a question from Mayor Sager, Ms. Cardella stated Colin McConnell from Baxter and Woodman is present regarding wetland issues.

Ms. Cardella stated there are two issues. First, to be allowed to continue what she has been doing. She stated there were no complaints previously. Ms. Cardella stated she did not know she needed a Special Use Permit (SUP) and is trying to correct that. She stated second is the request to remove the trees within the preservation easement.

Tyler Wilke, attorney representing the petitioner, stated this is a 3.9-acre parcel located off Alpine Lane, describing the parcel and noting its rural feel. He stated the petitioner first had a hobby farm and found that it became a growing business. Mr. Wilke stated upon realizing she needed a SUP, she submitted an application to the City, noting she is asking that Council allow this use. He stated they have looked at the UDO and believe they have met the criteria. He stated the petitioner has worked diligently with Staff to address the issues that were raised and asked that the SUP be allowed.

Colin McConnell, from Baxter and Woodman, stated he grew up in Woodstock and now lives in Wonder Lake. He stated he has been doing wetland delineation in Woodstock and around Chicago for 20 years. Mr. McConnell stated Ms. Cardella asked him to do an environmental assessment on the property west of her home. He stated there are really no wetland issues on the property in the area where she wishes to put the raised beds. Mr. McConnell talked about the environment, stating it is a woodland environment. He noted Ms. Cardella is proposing to keep six nice trees and remove the elm trees, which are considered to be undesirable. He stated she is proposing to keep the trees along the lane that form a barrier and will keep a shagbark hickory within the area, working around the desirable trees to make her requested improvements. Mr. McConnell described the various invasive trees that are in that area which she proposes to remove.

Mayor Sager stated it must be acknowledged that the petitioner knows that a SUP should have been applied for previously and this was a mistake or oversite, which she is trying to correct. He noted the remaining question is whether or not, because a tree easement is there, should there be any clearing done. He opened the floor to Council questions.

In response to a question from Councilman Tebo, Ms. Cardella stated she has looked for land to replace that which she lost, noting there is land available, but that it is difficult to start over. She stated she has more water needs than can be accommodated by other sites. She stated she would like to use her own property to grow and the opportunity to have her own business on her own property is most appealing, noting her husband is retiring and has health issues.

Mayor Sager asked if Dr. Stumpf or Mr. Cuda wished to make any comments.

Steve Cuda, attorney for Dr. David Stumpf, stated Dr. and Mrs. Stumpf are objecting to the petitioner’s request for a SUP and to her request to clear cut trees, which is contrary to the tree easement, noting where Dr. Stumpf lives in relation to the petitioner.

Mr. Cuda stated the Plan Commission met and discussed this and, by a vote of 7-1, voted against the petitioner’s request. He urged the City Council to follow the recommendation of the Plan Commission, whose discussion was thoughtful and thorough. Mr. Cuda stated the Chairman and Mr. Napolitano ensured that everyone was given an opportunity to ask questions and express concerns and opinions. He asked that Council pay particular attention to the comments in the meeting minutes, noting the Commission felt the request did not meet the criteria in the UDO and does not comply with existing City ordinances. Mr. Cuda stated there is also a state statute that give neighbors a voice in issues involving a tree easement, noting the easement should be encouraged and enforced and not dismissed. Mr. Cuda opined it would set a negative precedent to ignore the Commission’s action and asked that Council vote “no” tonight.

Ms. Cardella stated she has spoken with the Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD), asking about plantings around the pond, and was told all gardening, tilling, and landscaping are allowed in the conservation easement.

Dr. Stumpf noted the Plan Commission vote was 7-1 against Ms. Cardella’s proposal, stating they did not discuss the conditions, as there was a consensus it would not be approved, opining, therefore, the conditions have not been thoroughly discussed. He urged Council to vote against the SUP.

Noting the Plan Commission’s comments that the SUP request did not meet the intent of the City’s ordinances, and was, therefore, ineligible for consideration, Mayor Sager asked Staff to address this concern. Mr. Napolitano stated there are criteria in the UDO that are to be evaluated when the Plan Commission and the City Council are considering a SUP. He outlined these criteria as found in the Staff report on Page 237 of the packet, noting they can be considered subjectively. Mr. Napolitano stated Staff looked at these and it is their opinion that with conditions, the criteria can be met, noting the Plan Commission disagreed with this position. He stated these are the criteria that should be considered when deciding on a SUP.

In response to questions from Council, Ms. Schlossberg stated a Special Use is a use that is permitted in a zoning district, as it has a unique impact and, if that can be addressed, the SUP is granted. She stated it is not true that just because someone does not want a special use, it is not approved, noting the legal standard is if the criteria can be met, it is a permitted use. She stated if low-impact agriculture is in the City Code and its use can be addressed, it can be permitted, noting this is the legal framework which should be considered. Concerning whether there were any issues associated with the use not being previously permitted resulting in a violation, Ms. Schlossberg stated there were no issues with this. She stated the third issue is the tree easement, noting for whatever reason in this private document the City was made the arbiter, but there are no standards, and the City has no legal obligation to decide whether or not the trees can come out. She stated there are no criteria to decide this other than the City has the authority.

Mayor Sager noted questions were raised that conditions have not been considered independently by the Plan Commission, because it was the perception that they were not heading in that direction. He stated in the Staff report; however, there are established conditions that have been addressed with the petitioner. In response to a question from Mayor Sager, Ms. Cardella confirmed these have been discussed with her and that she is willing to accept the conditions set by Staff as they are put forth this evening.

Mr. Napolitano read the 10 conditions being proposed and set forth in the proposed ordinance and provided the following information as to why they are appropriate:

1) Cultivation shall be limited to specialty and ornamental flowers and the like. He noted the petitioner will be allowed to grow flowers and plants she is growing now.

2) No retail sales shall occur from the Subject Property. Mr. Napolitano stated the petitioner is not doing this now and will not be allowed to under the SUP.

3) No mechanical equipment or vehicles associated with the agricultural activities shall occur prior to 8:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m. daily. Mr. Napolitano stated there was some concern expressed relating to the tractor, which is used infrequently, with this condition imposed to alleviate this concern. 4) Farm tours shall be allowed provided they are booked in advance by appointment only, are limited to no more than two times per month, from April to September, and do not exceed 20 persons. Carpooling/ride sharing shall be encouraged and no parking on or adjacent to Alpine Lane shall be permitted.

5) Additional screening shall be provided along the south and west property lines using a combination of new and existing vegetation as well as woven privacy screens to block views of the existing greenhouse. Mr. Napolitano stated there was concerns expressed by Mr. Thomas, as the greenhouse is within his view, noting there are proposals to block this from his view.

6) Tree removal shall be permitted in accordance with the arborist report, Exhibit F to the petition, except that trees identified as 4, 5, 6, 9, and 12 shall not be removed.

7) A full National Resources Inventory shall be provided to the City. Mr. Napolitano stated a National Resources Inventory is done by the Soil and Water Conservation District and would provide additional information on the resources on the site.

8) The petitioner shall work with the City Engineer and take measures to minimize areas of soil disturbance and impacts on wetlands, if any, during construction of new raised beds in the area of expansion. Stating this condition addressed a concern that was raised, Mr. Napolitano noted Council heard from a wetland expert tonight, noting there is not a wetland in this area. He stated the petitioner has indicated she will minimize disturbance, noting the steps she will take so the soil is not disturbed.

9) The petitioner shall continue, to the greatest extent possible, to use organic farming methods without pesticides or herbicides. Mr. Napolitano stated Ms. Cardella has stated these are practices she currently uses and that she will continue to use good sustainable practices to allow farming here. 10) Open burning of landscape waste removed from the Subject Property shall be allowed one-time only, provided said burning is coordinated with the City and WFRD to establish an appropriate date, time, location, and provide notification to abutting property owners. Mr. Napolitano noted burns are allowed in other areas under certain conditions and stated it is proposed this would be treated in the same way, including working with the Woodstock Fire/Rescue District.

Mr. Napolitano noted these are the 10 conditions proposed for the SUP, stating they were all discussed at the Plan Commission meeting. Mayor Sager clarified the Plan Commission did not take action on the conditions, with Mr. Napolitano noting they did not take action on them, but did discuss them.

In response to a question from Mayor Sager, Mr. Napolitano stated past records were checked and no complaints were found prior to the request for the SUP.

Mayor Sager asked for additional comments from the petitioner, Mr. Cuda, and Dr. Stumpf.

Mr. Cuda wished to comment on Condition #5, opining it needs to be “tweaked” per objections from the neighbors. He opined they should be involved in discussions with Ms. Cardella and City Staff because they are the ones impacted. He suggested this be sent back to the Plan Commission for further discussion by them. He would like to see language included, stating that additional screening would be resolved with input from the neighbors and approval by City Staff.

Dr. Stumpf noted there is a significant drop in the landscape, opining screening is not possible. He disagreed that the SUP criteria have been met, noting the Plan Commission spent a lot of time talking about this and also disagreed. He opined the NRI should be reviewed and approved, not just submitted. Dr. Stumpf suggested Council vote against this request.

Mayor Sager concurred with Councilman Turner’s previous statement that there was much information contained in the Staff report, thanking Staff for their thoroughness. He stated it appears one of the largest concerns of the neighbors is the screening, noting he understands this is an issue.

Mayor Sager wished to discuss the Tree Conservation Easement that was put into effect prior to the current owner’s acquisition of her property, but is in perpetuity, noting there is a responsibility of the buyer to be aware of the requirements of the easement. He opined there is a degree of subjectivity to the easement and it is open to interpretation. He stated all can admit there are “trash” trees, dead trees, and trees that are or will be falling over, noting one would expect good stewardship of the Easement and would include cleanup of these trees. He stated that does not diminish the idea that neighbors have a right to a degree of screening, opining this is an area that must be considered.

Mr. Wilke stated his clients have gone over the requirements of the SUP and believe the concerns raised by the Plan Commission have been remedied by the 10 conditions. He opined the issue for the Plan Commission is the Tree Easement. He stated, as pointed out by Ms. Schlossberg, the City and the City Council hold the conservation rights. Mr. Wilke stated one of the biggest concerns seemed to be the negative effect on property values and that the loss of privacy would negatively affect the valuation. He stated all the adjoining property values have gone up and continue to rise, noting the Board of Review looks at this and no decreases to neighboring property values has occurred. He stated good screening is a value, but opined there has not been a negative effect to the neighbors’ property values due to Ms. Cardella’s use.

Councilman Tebo stated the condition with which he is most concerned is #5, opining this issue should be resolved mutually.

Noting he visited the site this week, Councilman Prindiville asked if the view of the greenhouse is what is trying to be screened from a far distance away. Mayor Sager stated it is not the intent to eliminate the view, but to provide a certain amount of screening that would address the issue of the removal of the trees and scrub. He stated this could be accomplished in several ways and could be on the petitioner’s side or by the petitioner providing a combination of things for the neighbors to install on their side of the property lines, opining this was Mr. Cuda’s idea when he suggested referring this to Staff for resolution between the Cardellas and the neighbors.

Councilwoman Piersall opined this discussion is similar to that held about the Groundhog Day house, with much of what the petitioner is asking being allowed on the Groundhog property. She expressed appreciation for the focus on screening.

Councilman Turner agreed there are parallels with the Groundhog Day house. He expressed respect for the work of the Plan Commission and their thoroughness in addressing this issue, noting they are their own set of individuals who take their approaches. He stated these should not be ignored, but opined there is a need for the Council to be more broad. He opined this does not mean one is better than the other, but noted this is part of the process. Councilman Turner stated it is very important to follow the Unified Development Ordinance and noted the attorney he is bound to is the City Attorney.

Councilman Turner stated one of the things he looks at is the way a flower farm is a unique part of the City and its value to the community. He noted he is also cognizant of the other property owners, stating for him screening is the biggest issue. He opined growing flowers is one of the least noxious items to come before the Council and is a beautiful use. He stated he sees both sides, opining there is tremendous subjectivity. Opining screening is appropriate, Councilman Turner stated perhaps it is appropriate to get some input from the neighbors, although he does not feel they should be able to veto it.

In response to a question from Councilman Turner, Ms. Schlossberg stated once there is a SUP in place, the conditions that are imposed will regulate the development, noting the City can enforce and manage under it.

After further review of the pictures, Councilman Prindiville opined condition #5 addresses the screening on the south lot line and is comfortable with that. He stated he still is not sure what is trying to be accomplished with screening along the west property line, but stated he is comfortable with Staff’s recommendation overall.

Councilwoman Lohmeyer expressed appreciation for all views, noting the Plan Commission vetted a lot and Staff put together a thorough report. She opined the petitioners have a great operation and have been forthright in saying they are willing to go through with the conditions. She stated she also understands the neighbors may not want to see this and may not want changes to their property. She opined this comes down to a privacy matter and how can the neighbors be helped with screening.

Dr. Stumpf stated he did make a complaint about the cutting down of the trees before the SUP application. He stated the screening on the south side is what the pictures are of, noting he has not gotten good pictures of the west side, which is the side that has already been damaged. He opined the value of his property has decreased. Dr. Stumpf noted the Plan Commission agreed privacy was important to property values. He agreed there are junk trees, but wished to note there are valuable trees in this area as well. He stated the petitioner has already cut down trees, opining they will cut down more. Opining this will impact his view and the value of his property, he objects to proceeding with this.

Dr. Stumpf opined there can be no meaningful discussion with Ms. Cardella, stating he is not optimistic an agreement can be reached about screening. He stated he does not object to having the flowers grown as they are now, but does object to more trees being cut down in the area, noting that is important to them.

Wishing to address Dr. Stumpf’s comments, Mr. Wilke stated those are in the area north of the area being cleared. He stated the power lines run through this section and ComEd cleared those trees after the lines had been brought down by them. He stated this is allowed in the Tree Conservation Easement to address power needs.

Mr. Wilke also wished to address screening, noting Ms. Cardella addressed this as part of the Staff Report. He stated she put forth three ideas for screening prior to the Plan Commission meeting, detailing these three proposals and noting they were provided to the Plan Commission as well.

In response to a question from Councilman Prindiville, Mr. McConnell stated there is a discharge of the detention basin for Westwood Acres south of the property line, noting it is not a wetland area.

Motion by M. Turner, second by W. Piersall, to approve Ordinance 21-O-14, identified as Document 4, An Ordinance Issuing a Special Use Permit to allow Low-Intensity Agricultural Uses at 1104 Alpine Lane, Woodstock, IL, adopting Staff Findings as the City’s Findings and accepting the conditions as identified in the Staff Report and included in Document #4 with the exception of condition #5 which is amended as follows:

5) Additional practical screening shall be provided using a combination of new and existing vegetation, privacy screens, and/or fencing to enhance neighbors’ views and privacy as reviewed by Staff and in discussion with neighboring property owners. Further, if a resolution cannot be derived through Staff and neighboring property owner discussions with the petitioner it will be returned to the Plan Commission for their consideration of Condition 5.

In response to a question from Mayor Sager, Ms. Cardella expressed agreement with the proposed action.

In response to a question from Mayor Sager concerning additional comments, Dr. Stumpf asked that the issue be separated.

Mayor Sager expressed appreciation for Dr. Stumpf’s comments. He noted it is up to the Council to divide the question. He opined Council has considered this and the conditions laid out in the motion does address the concerns expressed. Councilman Turner agreed with keeping the question as a single motion and not dividing it.

There was no further public comment forthcoming.

There were no comments or questions forthcoming from the Council concerning the motion.

A roll call vote was taken on the motion. Ayes: D. Flynn, L. Lohmeyer, W. Piersall, J. Prindiville, G. Tebo, M. Turner, and Mayor B. Sager. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: none. Motion carried.

Mayor Sager thanked all involved, noting he looks forward to the collaborative effort between the neighbors, Staff, and the petitioner.

V. DISCUSSION ITEMS

1. Old Courthouse – Geothermal System

Mr. Moore provided Council with an update on the Old Courthouse Project, referring to the Staff report and showing depictions of the latest floor plans. He talked about the jail cells in the lower level of the Sheriff’s House, which is proposed to be utilized by the Public House. He stated it is acceptable, per the Historic Tax Credits, to keep one row of these cells intact and move them to another area of the building. He noted the new restrooms proposed for this area will not be accessible from the bar at the request of the Public House.

Mr. Moore showed floor plans of other areas intended for the ice cream shop and the library’s maker space/community center and retail space. He provided information on the restrooms proposed for the other areas of the buildings and noted the new mechanical space that has been added. Mr. Moore stated the area in the upper floor of the Sheriff’s House may not be a stand-alone restaurant. He talked about changes made in the Old Courthouse to make areas more attractive to weddings and noted the former Judge’s Chambers will be used for storage, but can also be the location for a stage when needed, talking about how this entire area is being made more functional. He showed Architect Gary Anderson’s understanding of what is under the ceiling in the Courtroom and how this is proposed to be restored, providing a depiction of what this room could look like in use. Mr. Moore then showed a depiction of the new exterior addition.

Mr. Moore then moved on to discuss the proposed geothermal system. He noted this is possible without having to devote a lot of space for mechanical equipment and that it will save money in the long run. He stated Council is being asked tonight on whether Council would be willing to explore branching a potential geothermal system under the road and into the northwest corner of the Park in the Square. He noted Gary Anderson stated this solution would be cheaper and less disruptive to buildings and to the Square than drilling wells underneath the streets. Mr. Moore provided information about how the system will work and what will need to be done on the Square, opining more research will be required. He noted the question before the City Council is if it is appropriate to consider this portion of the park to be used for this system, noting the lines are trenched about four to five feet deep and would not harm any existing vegetation or trees, but would restrict building on this corner of the Park in the Square.

Thanking Staff for the review of the building, Mayor Sager stated the question is the geothermal system. He stated he is a strong fan of researching additional energy options and is very strongly supportive of this possible system.

Councilman Turner stated he does not object to a geothermal system, noting his wish to be kept abreast on disruption and how long it will take. He opined a downside could be any damage and asked for a follow-up on why the project is moving east instead of into Jackson Street for example. He stated it must be the right fiscal choice and not just a green choice and be both energy efficient and economical. He stated the City must make sure it is being done for the right reason.

Councilman Turner opined what was just reviewed in Mr. Moore’s update looks great, noting he still must be convinced of the business side of this solution, and that there is financial backing to make this work before any money is spent.

Expressing appreciation for Councilman Turner’s comments, Mayor Sager noted the question this evening is whether Council is willing to look at a geothermal system located in the Square, agreeing it must be efficient and economical. Mayor Sager opined going into the park would be easier than going into the street or a parking lot, stating disruption is an appropriate question to be asking, noting the City has committed to keep the Square open.

Councilman Flynn noted the location of irrigation and electrical in the park which must be taken into consideration concerning cost and disruption, noting time is a disruption. Mr. Moore stated the Park has been surveyed for electrical, etc. He noted Mr. Anderson’s estimate for total time to install the system would be three weeks.

Mr. Christensen noted the plan was to receive conceptual approval this evening and then come back with details at a future meeting. Mayor Sager agreed any final approval would require much more detail.

Opining geothermal is a great concept, Councilman Prindiville suggested Mr. Moore and Mr. Stelford gather more information from an expert as to whether the Square is the best place for the wells, noting this will be a long-term investment that needs to be maintained. He suggested talking with people who are designing, installing, and maintaining these systems to get their opinion on the best approach.

Agreeing more information is needed, Mayor Sager opined this is an imaginative approach. He asked if Council is supportive of considering placing this in an area of the Square, pending receipt of more detailed information from experts.

Councilwoman Piersall stated this is based upon recommendations from Gary Anderson who has much experience with geothermal systems, noting the idea was vetted by the Old Courthouse Commission.

Councilwoman Lohmeyer stated she is fully supportive of a geothermal system and has no concerns with placing it on the Square. She opined it is an efficient use of space and will add to the Old Courthouse.

Councilman Turner stated he is absolutely willing to look at a geothermal system, opining the final decision should be made by the City Council. He took issue with Mr. Moore’s previous comments that plans are nearly set in stone, opining there is still a business element that he must be comfortable with. 

Mayor Sager described his experience at Rock Valley College which has a huge geothermal system to provide energy to the facility in an economic and energy efficient manner.

Councilman Tebo opined Council would be remiss if it did not consider this.

In response to a question from Mayor Sager, it was the consensus of the City Council that it is open to the idea of a geothermal system using the Park in the Square with the caveat that Staff and Gary Anderson come back with more information for final approval by Council.

Mayor Sager stated staff has a green light to investigate using the Square as a possible location for a geothermal system.

2. Merger of Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals

Mayor Sager noted the purpose of looking at this, including consideration of changes in membership to the ZBA and vacancies in various Boards and Commissions. He stated many communities combine the function of the ZBA into the Plan Commission. Mayor Sager noted the Plan Commission has dealt with some of these issues and the merging of these two bodies could be accommodated at this time, stating the purpose of tonight’s discussion is to see if Council is agreeable to this approach.

In response to a question from Mayor Sager, Mr. Napolitano stated Staff is supportive of combining these two commissions.

In response to a question from Mayor Sager, there were no concerns expressed by the City Council.

Mayor Sager stated if Council is supportive, the approach would be to come back to Council for consideration of an enabling ordinance to accommodate this change.

Councilman Turner expressed support of combining these two commissions. He opined the Mayor has done a great job of managing the Commissions and expressed agreement with his recommendation.

Mayor Sager stated the ordinance would be rewritten and individuals currently serving on the ZBA offered the opportunity to serve on one of the vacancies on other Commissions. He also stated his intent to sunset the Old Courthouse and Sheriff’s House Advisory Commission at the end of 2021, as its mission is coming to an end, and described some of the openings on other Boards and Commissions and his intent to reduce the number of members in certain bodies.

Without objection, Council expressed support for the revisions to the City’s Boards and Commissions as indicated by Mayor Sager.

VI. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

There were no additions or deletions to the Future Agenda Items.

Dr. Stumpf requested the opportunity to offer comments to the City Council about an item not on the agenda. He stated Mayor Sager has performed excellently as the Mayor of Woodstock for 16 years. Noting he and Mayor Sager both come from an academic environment where it is the tradition for retiring members to be honored for their service with a special appointment, Dr. Stumpf suggested Mayor Sager be honored with the appointment as Mayor Emeritus as he steps down.

Mayor Sager thanked Dr. Stumpf for his comments and thoughtful words.

VII. ADJOURN

Motion by W. Piersall, second by D. Flynn, to adjourn this City Council meeting to the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting to be held at 7:00 PM on Tuesday, March 2, 2021 in the Council Chambers at City Hall.

Ayes: D. Flynn, L. Lohmeyer, W. Piersall, J. Prindiville, G. Tebo, M. Turner, and Mayor B. Sager. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Absentees: none. Motion carried.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 PM.

https://www.woodstockil.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/city_council/meeting/42771/f_-_02-16-21_city_council_minutes.pdf