After months of consideration, St. Charles City Council members have denied the owners’ request to demolish a 181-year-old downtown building.

The house at 217 Cedar Ave., known as the Barry House, was built in 1844. Owners have been seeking permission to demolish the home for years in order to convert the property to a parking lot.

The Barry House was owned by Judge William D. Barry in the mid-1800s. Abraham Lincoln was said to have stayed there while visiting Barry, though the history museum’s archives show no record of such a visit from the former president.

The Baker Memorial United Methodist Church in St. Charles, located across the street from the Barry House, has owned the property since 1993 and has been seeking permission to demolish it since 2017, on the basis that the property had become a liability and financial burden.

Because the property is located in a historic district, the church must receive a certificate of appropriateness from the city before planning the demolition.

Residents concerned with preserving the home’s history have showed up to meetings in protest of the owners’ plans to demolish. The landmark home recently made the list of the 2025 Most Endangered Historic Places in Illinois.

The topic has been debated at length at several meetings over the past year, with a great deal of public comment from both sides. While the church says the building’s poor condition makes it uninhabitable and expensive, others, including Historic Preservation Commission Chairperson Kim Malay, have contended the home’s condition resulted from the church’s neglect.

Historic Preservation Commission members denied the church’s certificate of appropriateness request last October.

“I can’t approve a demolition by neglect,” Malay said before the vote.

Planning and Development Committee members, however, recommended approval of the COA in May this year.

Council members last considered the request at the May 19 City Council meeting, where the motion was tabled while owners reviewed an offer to purchase the house.

Church representatives attended the City Council meeting Aug. 4, but no public comment was made before the vote, and representatives left shortly after their request was denied.

The certificate of appropriateness request was denied in a 7-3 vote. Alderpersons Ryan Bongard, Bob Gehm and Steve Weber voted in favor of the certificate.

Before the vote, Mayor Clint Hull made a statement about the work that has been done among the city, the church, preservation groups and residents leading up to the meeting. Hull said the goal was to find a solution that alleviates the church of its financial burden while also preserving the historic home.

“When you make a decision like this ... you understand that people are very passionate on both sides of the issue,” Hull said. “It’s hard to recognize that no matter what the decision is tonight, not everybody is going to be happy, and that weighs on everybody that’s here.”

The mayor said the city had hoped to help facilitate the sale of the property to accomplish one of three scenarios: the property is sold to a buyer who will preserve the home, to a buyer that will relocate the structure, or to the city.

“The most important part is that everybody from both sides were willing to sit down and continue to talk to try and find a solution to the problem,” Hull said. “Unfortunately, despite the best efforts of everyone involved, and despite a lot of hard work, we haven’t been able to achieve any of those three options.”

Hull said he has been asking himself, “What would Judge Barry expect the City Council to do?” He said Barry would want the Council to have done its research, listened to both sides of the issue, deliberated and reflected on the decision and to make their choice transparently.

“As mayor, I can guarantee that the City Council members here tonight have done all that and more,” Hull said before the vote. “Whatever the decision is, I hope that all sides understand that it’s not easy.”

Alderpersons Jayme Muenz and Vicki Spellman also spoke before the vote, citing concerns that condemning the Barry House would set a precedent that would put the city’s historic districts at risk.