Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation Berry House topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

St. Charles council denies demolition permit for 217 Cedar Avenue (Berry House)

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Saint Charles City Council voted 7–3 on Aug. 4 to deny a certificate of appropriateness for demolition of 217 Cedar Avenue, known as the Berry House, after months of negotiations and public comment urging preservation or relocation.

On Aug. 4, 2025, the Saint Charles City Council voted 7–3 to deny a resolution that would have granted a certificate of appropriateness and allowed demolition of the dwelling at 217 Cedar Avenue, commonly referred to as the Berry House.

The vote came after Mayor Clint Hall reviewed three months of negotiations and described three options the council had pursued since the item last appeared on the agenda May 12: a sale at fair market value to a buyer who would preserve the house; sale or donation to an entity that could move the house; or sale of the property to the city. “Nobody has been sitting on their hands since May 12,” Mayor Clint Hall said, adding that council members and community representatives had met repeatedly in search of a “win‑win” solution.

The case drew a substantial audience and multiple speakers during public comment. Arthur Lemke, a member of the Second Ward who said he helped revise the city’s historic preservation ordinance, urged continued efforts to find relocation or preservation options: “My hope is that we can move forward with this and maybe still have one of those options that we talked about,” Lemke said. Mayor Hall said the council would continue to seek solutions regardless of the vote.

Council debate focused on competing values of individual structures versus neighborhood character. Alderman Munn said she respected residents who revere the city’s history and that those considerations would influence her vote. “There is a uniqueness to specific pieces of history in this city,” she said. Alderman Stohlman framed his vote around the surrounding district, noting several demolitions already and saying another loss “can make a difference” to the neighborhood’s character.

Roll call on the certificate of appropriateness produced the 7–3 result. The transcript roll call recorded: Salcedo — No; Paul — No; Vanguard — Yes; Munn — No; Guillem — Yes; Bowman — No; Petrolo — No; Wormald — No; Fesner — No; Wagner — Yes. The mayor announced that by a vote of 7 to 3, the certificate for demolition had been denied.

Mayor Hall urged continued engagement from all sides and described the vote as not the end of the matter: “No matter what the vote is tonight, I know that the city is committed to continuing to work together with both sides to continue to try to figure out if we can achieve that goal of win‑win,” he said.

Next steps were not specified during the meeting; the council did not adopt a formal follow‑up motion on alternatives such as a city purchase or relocation plan. Several council members said they remain available to discuss options with residents and stakeholders.