Meeting Agenda CITY OF GENEVA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING LOCATION & TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2016 MEETING HPC INFORMATION Location: 1. Call to Order Geneva City Hall 2. Roll Call Council Chambers 109 James Street 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes September 20, 2016 Geneva, IL 60134 4. HPC Review of Building Permit Applications Time: A. 202 Campbell Street CASE 2016-097 7:00 p.m. Applicant: Jim Vanderveen Application for: Expansion of Parking Lot New Screenwalls at Property Corners Commissioners: Scott Roy, Chairman B. 212 South First Street CASE 2016-108 Applicant: Barb Lennartz, Owner Steve Collins Renewal by Andersen, Contractor Al Hiller Application for: Window Replacement George Salomon Paul Zellmer C. 401 Ford Street CASE 2016-109 Applicant: Safeguard Construction Co., Contractor Carolyn Zinke Application for: Exterior Siding Replacement Staff Liaison: 5. HPC Public Hearings Michael A. Lambert A. 11 North Fifth Street CASE 2016-084 Preservation Planner Applicant: Havlicek Buuilders, Inc., Owner Application for: Front Porch Modifications 630/938.4541 [email protected] B. 810 Dow Avenue CASE 2016-110 Applicant: Martin and Amy Hilmer, Owners Application for: Historic Landmark Designation 6. Secretary’s Report (Staff Updates) 7. Announcements A. From the Commission B. From the Public 8. Adjournment Next meeting November 15, 2016 The Historic Preservation Commission meeting is audio-recorded and summary minutes are taken by a recording secretary. The City of Geneva complies with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Individuals with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting who require accommodations in order to allow them to observe and or participate in this meeting are required to contact the Planning Division at 630/232.0818 at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting to allow the City of Geneva to make reasonable accommodations for those persons. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES 109 James Street Geneva, Illinois 60134 September 20, 2016, 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order Chairman Roy called to order the September 20, 2016 meeting of the Geneva Historic Preservation Commission at 7:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call Present HPC: Chairman Roy, Commissioners Hiller, Salomon, Zellmer, Zinke Absent: Commissioners Collins Staff Present: Historic Preservation Planner Michael Lambert Others Present: Al and Lorraine Oshsner, 627 Campbell St.; Art Jackson, 8S606 Marie St., Big Rock; Colin and Glorianne, Campell, 18 S. Sixth St.; Tim Feeney, 516 Campbell St.; Greg Miller, MH Development Group, 120 N. 2nd St.; Jason Talaue, 416 Stevens St.; Josh Burton, 416 Stevens St.; Mike Dixon, 22 N. Third St. 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes – August 16, 2016 Motion by Commissioner Zellmer, seconded by Commissioner Salomon to approve the August 16, 2016 minutes. Motion carried by voice vote of 4-0-1 (Hiller abstains) 4. HPC Review of Proposed Development Concepts A. 202 Campbell Street (Case No. 2016-097); Applicant: Jim Vanderveen; Expansion of Parking Lot; New Screen Walls at Property Corners. (Applicant was not present.) Preservation Planner Lambert reviewed the petitioner’s proposal which is a proposal to provide additional parking in the street yard of the property. As part of the proposal, there will be 15-inch high screen wall (no details provided) to screen the parking. Per the Historic Preservation Ordinance, the HPC is to comment on improvements affecting zoning requests. Commissioner Hiller appreciated the applicant leaving some of the front greenspace. Regarding the fencing being proposed, Mr. Lambert had no information on what material would be used for the 15- inch screen walls. Chairman Roy and commissioners appeared to be fine with the parking but did want to see the details of the screen wall at the next meeting. B. 627 Campbell Street (Case No. 2016-105); Applicant: Al and Lorraine Ochsner, Owners: Application for Proposed Demolition. Mr. Lambert reported that this request was to investigate any concerns the commissioners may have regarding a proposal to demolish the on- site building. Lambert reviewed the history of the site dating it back to the early 1900s. He, along with other local historians believe the home was mid-19th century and probably was relocated from another site to the current location between 1911 and 1916. Many of the lots located in this area at that time were not developed and would have been located along the industrial spur towards Batavia. Other historical facts about the property over the past 50 years were shared, in brief, by Mr. Lambert. Historic Preservation Commission September 20, 2016 Owners Al and Lorraine Ochsner were present. Mr. Ochsner explained he and his wife were getting older and much maintenance of the house and yard was required by the two of them. The neighborhood was being developed with various townhomes project, which they both viewed as a positive direction for Seventh Street. Mr. Ochsner said that only four single-family homes existed between State Street and South Street along Seventh Street. He described the options that he and his wife were considering: keep the home and sell it as is or sell the property to a contractor to demolish the current home and develop it with townhomes, possibly. He was not sure if the lot could support a townhome development. Per Mr. Lambert, in discussing this matter with the owners, it was determined that only three units could be constructed on the property, per the options available through the zoning code. Per Commissioner Zellmer’s question about the possibility of rotating the main part of the home on the lot and whether it would still be considered contributing, Mr. Lambert explained it probably would depend on how the remainder of the lot was developed. If 75% of the exterior was exposed, the project may qualify for a tax credit. Also, he stated that since the house was already moved once prior, it would play into the evaluation as to whether or not the relocation was damaging to the historic significance of the property. Mr. Lambert pointed out that the structure’s orientation was visually stronger on the Campbell Street block than on the Seventh Street face. He noted the regular rhythm of street-facing residences on Campbell versus those on Seventh Street. Commissioner Hiller shared that most of Seventh Street was “townhouse row” already which he believed was due to developers seeing the value of the historic district and constructing on the fringes of the district. Referring to the project on Campbell Street, he recalled that the commissioners kept the main home on the site but the developer constructed around the historic building. He believed that given the constraints by the Secretary of Interior Standards, the Commission would probably deny a demolition permit but said the petitioners could follow-up with the City Council, who could override the HPC’s recommendation. Additionally, he added that the commissioners would want to see the details of any proposed project prior to demolition. Hiller stated that structures were not usually demolished unless under extenuating circumstances. Mr. Lambert asked the commissioners to consider determining whether the entire building would stay or whether the pre-1945 portions should remain. He suggested a compromise by incorporating the original historic two-story portion but removing the remaining portions, thereby giving the petitioners another option to consider. Commissioner Zellmer mentioned this was why he was interested in seeing if the historic portion of house could be rotated and allow for a more viable lot coverage for another two units. Lambert stated that if the Ochsners were interested in that option, setbacks would have to be considered by the developer and, there was the chance that if the building was rotated, the petitioners would have to sacrifice a non-conforming setback on Seventh Street and would have to develop the site to new setback requirements in accordance with current zoning requirements. Commissioners appeared to be in agreement to remove the post-1945 structures. Chairman Roy discussed that the commission had seen a number of good solutions to renovating older homes and one option would be to keep the older home and have the ability to add two more units, thereby maximizing the value of the lot. Adding to that, Commissioner Zellmer pointed out to the applicants that keeping the historic structure with any new development probably would make it easier for the project to go through the commission again. 5. HPC Review of Building Permit Applications A. 217 S. Second Street, (Case No. 2016-095); Applicant: Marcel Demarteau, Owner; Application for Front Porch Modifications. Mr. Lambert reviewed the proposal on the overhead and 2 Historic Preservation Commission September 20, 2016 indicated the terrace looked original to the home. The existing porch wall was concrete and appeared to be failing with the front spalling and cracking. The concrete steps also appeared to be breaking down, etc. Lambert explained that the owner wanted to replace the brick, concrete/ mortar-washed wall in front of the main slab with a stone veneer to update the appearance of the home. Concept sketches were provided. Per Lambert, the basic form was not changing; only the material was changing. He could not find any examples of terraces with stone walls in front of them because none were located in the historic district. Mr. Arthur Jackson, with Jackson Masonry, was present for the petitioner. Mr. Jackson explained that the deteriorating wall was supporting a floor porch which he envisioned would fail in the near future. He explained how the improvements would be constructed for the new porch. The patio, he confirmed, was fine. Mr. Jackson stated he could repair the steps to a certain point; however, looking to the right of the home where the steps were located, he explained that the wall would be extended out and the stairs fixed because currently it was a “fall risk.” Commissioner Zinke inquired about the height of the wall, wherein Mr.