Grants restore CBD luster
In January 2009, the Village Council adopted a Façade Improvement Program for Downtown Downers Grove. Up to $100,000 each year is designated from TIF funds for the program. The program is a dollar for dollar matching grant program and requires that a project complies with the Downtown Design Guidelines to receive funding from the Village.
A total of $15,000 is available for a façade-only project, and an additional $40,000 is available for façade projects that include life safety and accessibility improvements. If an owner is requesting less than $10,000 from the Village and complying with the Design Guidelines, the Village Manager may approve the grant. If a project is requesting more than $10,000 from the Village, ADRB review and Council approval are required.
The first grant was for under $10,000. $9,999 to be exact, but that’s what staff was kind of expecting, helping downtown businesses doll themselves up to make the central business district a nice place to shop, keep it a nice place to shop, and lend a little help to newcomers who need to change out the street fronts to fit their needs. Just another way DG is aggressively pursuing business opportunities.
There are two applications coming before council Tuesday. The first one, mainly for the new Toscana’s (Italian mainly to-go) built on the west side of Rocca’s, is pretty straightforward, and staff is recommending granting half of the requested amount. Again keep in mind, this is dollar for dollar matching program, so staff is recommending half of the dollar for dollar amount, $11,500.
That was then...
The grant request at 5123 Main Street is the other project requesting grant money. That was the Herbert’s Mens Shop, and required, basically, a full bore gut and upgrade to become a restaurant, Gatto’s Italian Restaurant & Bar.
In this particular case, the property owner is requesting a $55,000 grant for the work that was completed at 5123 Main Street last year. The request is the maximum amount that can be requested under the grant program. The petitioner is requesting the $15,000 for façade improvements and $40,000 for additional improvements, which includes life safety and ADA accessibility improvements. Given the dollar for dollar nature, the owner put at least $110,000 into the building on the way to turning it into a restaurant.
The interior improvements included new kitchen facilities, accessible restrooms, bar, seating area, fire alarms and sprinklers. The exterior improvements included new facades, including the primary west façade along Main Street. The west facade is primarily an Exterior Insulation Finishing System (EIFS) with flagstone accents. The façade is detailed with flagstone accents, awnings, protruding lights and a new sign.
Here’s the part where it gets confusing.
The property owner completed the façade and building improvements in November 2008, well before the program was even initiated, and applied for the grant in January 2009 following Village Council approval of the Design Guidelines and Façade Improvement Grant Program. Given the process for submitting grant requests, it meant the owner met with staff (or should have met with staff) to go over the program request.
Staff believes the request does not comply with the Village’s Design Guidelines. Specifically, the project incorporated the use of a discouraged material, EIFS, as the primary façade material. Staff also believes the use of the tinted windows is not consistent with the Design Guidelines.
An example of an EIFS façade.
Some of you may recall EIFS. It’s had it’s share of problems, and it’s share of notoriety in DG. Properly applied with moisture drainage provisions, an EIFS system is much like synthetic stucco. Styrofoam pieces can be easily incorporated into the design to make expensive looking details at fairly low cost. EIFS can also contribute to reducing energy loss, as it is a multiple layer system applied over rigid exterior insulation. BASF, a leading supplier of various EIFS product, has warranties that run up to 10 years for EIFS, which isn’t very long. It’s reasonably cost efficient to fix and/or replace.
But EIFS is classed as a discouraged material by staff, wording the Architectural Design Review Board (ADRB) objected to when the program was designed; they thought only encouraged materials should be listed so as to not limit projects. The confusing part? The owner should have known about this at some point before he used it, but he did his project before the program existed, so he couldn’t have known.
The ADRB disagreed with staff’s analysis and recommendation. The Board received the petition and made the following findings:
- The tinted windows allow pedestrians to see inside the building and are consistent with the Design Guidelines.
- The requirement for knee walls did not apply to this application due to the open-air dining doors.
- The project is consistent with the surrounding buildings.
- The original façade materials were not historic and did not merit preservation.
Based on these findings, the ADRB believes the project complies with the Design Guidelines. ADRB Chair Mike Davenport has been consistent on that point.
Which brings up the next confusing part. The project was planned and executed well before the Façade Improvement Program began, so in a sense it’s a grandfathered project. If that precedent is set, to include projects done before the program began, what would stop any business that ever did a façade improvement from asking for some of that grant money? Emmit’s dropped some serious $$ when they moved in and remodeled. So did Wine Cellar, and Starbuck’s, and Stillwater, and on and on. Where’s the cutoff? I hear Pierce Downer had this project, and his descendants are looking for some grant money to help reimburse…
Commissioner Sean Durkin stated at last week’s workshop session discussion that the project should get a maximum of $15,000 total. Commissioner Waldack supported staffs recommendation, and questioned the suitability and long term wear characteristics of EIFS. I could not tell you what Schnell said, but she was on a squawk box and I doubt many could understand her, but she’ll get her say Tuesday night.
Staff revised their recommendation from last week for Tuesday’s meeting, listing eligible façade improvements as $55,151, and life safety improvements as $30, 035. Based on those figures, the grant amounts would be $15,000 for façade improvements (the maximum allowed under the program), and $15,017.50 (50% dollar for dollar match) for life safety improvements, totalling a grant request of $30,017.50.
