Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1999it E%mnswn Presen-mion Commission \tmiaes - December 21. 1999 Page EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION ' "' MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, December 21,1999 7:M P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: Barbara Gardner, Michael Girard, George HaEk, Michael Imlay. Kirk Ir%%in, and Mark Sarkisian .' " MEMBERS ABSENT: Jessica Deis, Heidi Carey, and Susan Regan OTHERS PRESENT: Howard Kornacki, Jack Suarez Marian Tvtire3e, David WagnL=, Kinga Legg, Ira Salafsky, Joe Putignano, Bryan Hyde•.. Carl Bast, Jasom DeBaker, Ramakant J. Kharel, Coieen Tutton, Thomas amd Ann MCMaIann, Judy Fiske, and Jeanne Lindwall PRESIDING: Mark Sarkisian, Vice -Chair STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz L DETERMINATION OF QUORUM Mark Sarkisian determined a quorum was present and called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. II. COMMUNICATIONS Carlos Ruiz read a letter from Robert Best, attorney. for Evanstonians for Responsible Preservation. The letter, dated December lb, was directed to James Wolinski, Community Development Director. R. Best states that the interim protection of nominated historic districts applies only to demolition or relocation applications, not for alterations or construction (Section 2-9-7 (A)). The lemer concludes that the Preservation Commission does not have jurisdiction over alterations or consuuction. The Cetv's Building Department should not require a Certificafe of Appropriateness for processing building permits and related applications for alteration and construction. In the letter Robert Best requested ctmification of the above matter. Carlos Ruiz said that a copy of the letter was transmitted to Richard Friedm=L City of Evans on Special Counsel, who will prepare a response in consultation with the City's Legal Department and lack Siegel, Corporation Counsel. III. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Review and Technical Assistance Committee (R&TA) 1. 239 Greenwood Street — New surface parking And zoning variation required for the creation of .11C E%anston Presenation Commission !Minutes -December 21, I999 Page 2 two zoning lots. Howard Komacki, owner of239 Greenwood Street, said that he is seeking a Certificate of Appropriateness for a surface -parking slab at the northeast corner of 239 Greenwood Street. the property is within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. Howard Kornacki said that the proposed concrete slab would not be visible from Greenwood Street or Forest Avenue. Commission's Findings Mark Sarkisian asked about the proposed lots 1 and 2. Carlos Ruiz said that currently the property is on one lot of record and one zoning lot. He said that Mr. Kornacki would like to create two zoning lots on one lot of record. C. Ruiz said that the Zoning Board of Appeals would be interested in the Przsers-ation Commission's findings on the implications of that type when creating two zoning lots on one lot of record. Carlos Ruiz asked if the coach house and the main house are used as residences. Howard Kornacki said yes. C. Ruiz said if an invisible line is drawn to create two zoning lots, there %%ill still be two residences. Mark Sarkisian asked if the proposed surfacing material for the parking slab is Unilock material. Howard Kornacki said yes. George Halik moved that the Commission accept the proposed parking area of approximately 623 S.F. as proposed. Kirk Irwin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Michael Girard asked ifthe.intent is to have only one lot under the Zoning Ordinance. Barbara Gardner said the intention is to subdivide. Carlos Ruiz said that there is a difference between an actual subdivision and the creation of two zoning lots. C. Ruiz said that he had asked Marc Mylott, Zoning Planner, how one could determine ownership of a zoning lot. Marc Mylott told him that one could use the legal description of the zoning lot to determine ownership. Mark Sarkisian asked if there is two tax numbers. C. Ruiz said no. He added that tax numbers are not used to identifti- parcels. Kirk lruzn said that the proposed zoning lots would change the calculations for lot coverage. C. Ruiz said that he understood that the proposed lot 2 is within the minimum required lot size. He added that the existing coach house does not exceed the 30 percent lot coverage for an R-1 zone. Carlos Ruiz asked H. Kornacki how the proposed creation of two zoning lots would work. H. Kw=cki said that there would be two separate tax numbers. He said lot 2 meets the requirement of 7200 S.F. and the coverage is 30 percent. H. Komacki said that he might eventually like to sell the coach house. He said that it still will make the large house on a lot 100' x 225'. Barbara Gardner said that she understood that Mr. Komacki wanted to subdivide the property into two parcels. Carlos Ruiz said that Mr. Kornacki is proposing two zoning lots on one lot of record. B. Gardner asked if in order to sell the second lot. H. Komacki has to subdivide first. C. Ruiz said he did not know the answer for that question. Kirk Irwin asked if H. Komacki has to subdivide first in order to accomplish his goals. Carlos Ruiz said that the role of the Commission is to determine whether or not, as presented. the proposed zoning lot would. have an adverse effect on the property. Evanston Preservation Commimion Minutes -December 21. 1999 Page 3 Jack Suarez, resident at 239 Greenwood Street, said that he thought that the purpose of'the aneeting was to deal with the parking slab. He said that until they ha►r the parking slab they would not Ne able to do anything else. Barbara Uardner said that the Commission does not have to deal with the proposed second zoning lot vet. Mark Sarkisian said that the Commission's role is not to review the zoning requirements. M. Sarkisian said that the Commission is expected to vote on a proposal zenfing change on the property in terms of zoning lots. M_ Sarkisian said that he did not sire a big issue wish the proposed two zoning lots. He said that, unless somebody sees an issue ►►ith the proposed zoning Iots, he would like to move on. George Halik moved that the Commission accept the di►ision of the lot into two lots as prcgxmcd. Barbara Gardner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously_ 2. 2233 Orrington Avenue - One-story side addition Marian Tweede, representing the architect (Rockwell & Associates) and David Wagner, owner of the house at 2233 Orrington, presented plans for a one-story side addition to the house. The ....,....:� is an Evanston Landmark. David Wagner said that the project is for an addition to the kitchen. The addition involves a family room, a fireplace and closet space. M. Tweede said the addition finish would be stucco aiffi copper details. She said that the base of the building is concrete. The addition would have a set back on the north elevation from the existing exterior wall. Commission's Findings George Halik said that the project meets the standards for review. He moved to accept the project as shown on the drawings because it does meet the standards (of construction). The motion seconded by Barbara Gardner, passed unanimously. 3. 1609 Forest Place - Demolition of existing two -car garage, construction of two -car garage Kinga Legg. owner and architect, presented plans for the demolition of an existing two -car garage and the construction of a new two -car garage at 1608 Forest Place. The property is located within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. Kinga Legg said the garage was built 60 years ago and it is structurally not sound. She said that the garage does not have electricity. K. Legg said that she would like to demolish the garage, leave the concrete slab, and build the new two -car garage. She said that the lot coverage would be 35 percent, requiring a minor zoning variance. Commission's Findings Mark Sarkisian asked Carlos Ruiz to describe the existing garage. C. Ruiz said the existing garage is a common garage in bad structural shape. He said that the new garage would be an improvement to the rear of the property. C. Ruiz said that the only issue is that Ms. Legg proposed vinyl siding instead of wood siding. K. Legg said that the proposed garage vinyl siding would match the vinyl sidling on the house. Ev=ston Preservation Commission Nihmaes - December 21. 1999 Page Carlos Ruiz read section 6-15-11-5 (a, b, and c) of the Zoning Ordinance. This section relades to the role of the Preservation Commission when dealing with Evanston Landmarks and properties within a historic district requiring a zoning variance. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission recommend approval of 35 percent lot coverap as existing. George Halik seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the proposal for the garage demolition as presented as meeting the standards of demolition and approve the construction of a new garage as meeting the standards for construction- Kirk Irwin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 4. 580 Ingleside Park - Second story rear addition Joe Putignano, builder, presented plans for a rear addition at 580 Ingleside Park. The property is located within the proposed Northeast Evanston Historic District. Ira Salafsky, owner, said that the second story rear addition is for a new bedroom and a bathroom. 1. Salafsky said that the rear elevation matches the design of the front elevation. Commission's Findings Kirk Irwin asked Carlos Ruiz about the purview of the Commission regarding the proposed addition - Carlos Ruiz said that the addition is visible from the alley, a public right of way. Commission members agreed that the proposed addition was well designed. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the project as presented as meeting the standards for construction. George Halik seconded the motion. The motion pissed unanimously. 5. 2425 Lincoln Street -One story addition and new garage, removing existing sun room Brian Hyde, architect, Carl Bast, and Jason DeBaker presented plans for a one-story addition. construction of a new garage and removing a sunroom at 2425 Lincoln Street. The property is an Evanston Landmark. Brian Hyde said the project consists of removing the existing sunroom, adding a kitchen addition, a mudroom, and laundry room. Also turning the attached two -car garage into a new family room and build a detached two -car garage. Commission's Findings Carlos Ruiz asked Bryan Hyde if the proposed addition is within the allowable 30 percent lot coverage and required setbacks. B. Hyde said yes. The rear setback for the garage is 3.5 feet and the side yard setback is 5 feet. Mark Sarkisian asked about the side yard addition. B. Hyde said that the design calls for a French door out to the terrace. M. Sarkisian asked about the plans for the existing garage area. B. Hyde said that the plans call for a fireplace into the family room, a chimney would replace an existing window opening. The new chimney resembles the design of the existing chimney on the Lincoln Street side. George Halik asked about the new windows. B. Hyde said that the existing windows are true divided Evanston Preservation Commission Mites - December 21. 1999 PW 5 light steel windows. B. 1lyde said that the new windows would be wood windows with aluminum cladding and with simulated divided lights. B. Hyde said that the existing kitchen window would be reused and face the Lincoln Street side. A new window within a closet facing the rear is a casement with simulated divided lights. The window- facing towards the garage is a casement with simulated lights. Carlos Ruiz asked how many new windows are on the main facade and risible from the street. B. Hyde said that the new windows are on the recessed addition visible from Lincoln Street. C. Ruiz asked about the dimensions of muntins and mullions. B. Hyde said that muntins and mullions would closely match the dimensions of existing muntins and mullions. Mark Sarkisian asked if any Commission member had an issue with the new wood windows with aluminum clad compared with the existing steel windows. No one raised an objection to the proposed new windows. M. Sarkisian praised the project overall. Brian Hyde asked what would be the options if the slate roof over the house needed to be replaced. He said that his clients would like the garage roofing material to be the 40-}ear asphalt architectural shingles. Barbara Gardner said that asphalt shingles would change the appearance of the house. George Halik suggested the use of synthetic slate roofing material if replacement of the existing slate roofing material is necessary. Carlos Ruiz suggested repairing the slate roof of the main house and using the synthetic slate roofing material on the new garage. B. Hyde said that the repair of the slate roof is too costly and the replacement cost estimate is in the six figures. C. Ruiz said that all the information regarding cost should be documented so that the Commission could make an informed decision. B. Hyde said that if the cost of synthetic slate is not considerably more than asphalt shingles. it would be a viable option. Carlos Ruiz offer to see samples of proposed roofing materials. He mentioned that salvaging the good slates and reusing them might be another option. B. Hyde said that reputable roofers determined that only 25% of the existing slate would be salvageable. C. Ruiz suggested that the roofing material replacement might be a good candidate for the Property Tax Assessment Freeze Program. Michael Girard moved that Commission accept the proposal for the demolition of the existing sunroom as meeting the requirements for demolition; approve the construction of a new garage and addition to main house. The approval is subject to submittal of roofing samples to Carlos Ruiz with the option of obtaining the approval of three Commissioners if necessary. Barbara Gardner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 6. 619 Church Street - New awning for restaurant Ramakant Kharel, restaurant owner, presented plans for a new awning for a new restaurant at 618 Church Street. The property (The Carlson Building is an Evanston landmark) is an Evanston Landmark. R. Kharel said the proposed awning would match the design and material of existing awning of an adjacent restaurant (La Grotta). Commission's Findings George Halik asked how many feet would the canopy project from the face of the building. R. Kharel said that the proposed awning would project three feet. Carlos Ruiz said that he visited the site. He saw an existing projecting sign from the previous business that the applicant plans to cover with the new awning. The sign on the awning would conform to the sign ordinance_ Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - December 21, 1999 Page 6 Mark Sarkisian asked the dimensions of the awning. R. Kharei said that the awning is 16'- 6" long. George Halik moved that the Commission accept the proposed m-ning as presented and drawn as meeting the standards for alteration. The motion. seconded by Barbara Gardner. posed unanimous4% 7. 802 Ingleside Place - Alteration to existing garage Colleen Tutton, owner, presented plans to expand her existing garage into a n%v-car garage at 802 Ingleside Place. The property is within the proposed Northeast E-vanston Historic District. Colleen Tutton said that the proposed garage would match the architecture and exterior stucco finish of the main house. Commission's Findings Kirk Irwin asked what kind of door is the existing garage door. C. Tunon said that the garage does not have a door. She said that the proposed garage door would be a standard door and located on the reversed side of the existing garage opening. George Halik asked about a detail on the garage elevation. C. Tutton said that the detail shown on the elevation drawings is a wood detail that occurs in the main house. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plans for the garage as submitted at 802 Ingleside Place as meeting the standard for alteration. Michael Imlay seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Commission members thanked C. Tutton for saving the garage. IV. NEW BUSINESS Election of Preservation Commission officers for the calendar year 2000 Carlos Ruiz said that typically an ad hoc Committee would be farmed to contact each member of the Commission and asked for their interest to be the next Chair, Vice -Chair, and Secretary of the Commission for the new calendar year. The election would be held at the beginning of the meeting (January 19, 2000). George Halik asked if there are any restrictions on the current officers. C. Ruiz said no. However, one restriction would be if the term of a Commissioner couldn't be renewed. Marie Sarkisian asked if anybody else besides the current officers is interested in being nominated. Barbara Gardner asked M. Sarkisian and Kirk Irwin how they felt about their current positions. M. Sarkisian and K. Irwin said that they feel fine about being the Vice -Chair and Secretary respectively. unless someone else would like to assume such responsibility. M. Sarkisian asked if Jessica Deis would be interested in being the Chair again. C. Ruiz said he did not know about J. Deis' plans, M. Sarkisian said he would contact members of the Commission to find out about their interest of becoming an officer. B. Gardner agreed to assist M. Sarkisian in this task. V. NEW ISSUES Carlos Ruiz said that Judy Fiske left a message requesting to be given the opportunity to address the Commission at this meeting. He said that he returned the phone call and left J. Fiske a message that the Commission's meeting is a public meeting and that anyone is welcome to address the Commission. Evanston Preseraflon Commission Minutes - December 21. 1999 Page 7 Judy Fiske addressed the Commission by saying that Melissa Wmane. Alderpet-mm at the lasa City Council meeting of the Century, moved her and made her think about historic preservation 3. Fiske said that she would like to end the last Preservation Commission meeting of the Century with a ,%"e of confidence, wishing Commission members a very happy and healthy new year. Commissikm members thanked J. Fiske for her good wishes. VI. STAFF REPORT 319-320 Dempster Street - Rear rehabilitation Carlos Ruiz said that Commission members received a copy of the plans for 318-320 Dempster Street for the rehabilitation of the rear of the house. The property is located within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. C. Ruiz said that at the request of the architect (Stephen Knutson) he faxed the plans to Kirk Irwin requesting his opinion on whether the Commission should review the proposed rchabilitat cam K. Irwin's opinion was that the proposed rehabilitation was an extension of the proposed rehabilitation work approved by the Commission in November 1999. His opinion was that the project did not need to be in front of the Commission again. C. Ruiz said that he had concurred with K. Irwin and issued the Certificate of Appropriateness to the proposed work. Members of the Commission agreed with K. Irwin and C. Ruiz determination. M. Sarkisian asked if any other member of the audience wished tarspeak. Thomas and Ann McMahon wished the Commission the best. Commission members thanked Mr. and Mrs. McMahon for their good wishes. VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS Carlos Ruiz said that at the end of the last session of the public hearing regarding the nomination of the proposed Northeast Evanston Historic District, the Commission announced the fourth session for January 13, 2000, at 7:30 p.m., at the City Council Chambers. George HaIik asked what was expected to happen at the fourth session of the public hearing. C. Ruiz said that there are at least twenty people who signed to speak in opposition to the nomination. If time allows the rebuttal will follow the citizen's comments. The next step is the deliberation by the Preservation Commission regarding the nomination. Kirk Irvin asked if Northwestern University would submit a written statement about their position regarding the proposed historic district. C. Ruiz said that he had not heard anything form Northwestern University. Mark Sarkisian said that the next session of the public hearing is very important_ G. Halik said that all Commissioners should get the transcripts. C. Ruiz said the transcripts would be available to all Commission members. George Halik suggested that at the end of the deliberation, each Commission member should write a statement indicating why he or she is voting one way or the other. C. Ruiz said that he would send a memorandum to Commission members with G. Halik's suggestion. K. Irwin said that if the citizen's comments are concluded and all written statements are received, the Commission members could review Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes -December 21, 19" Page 8 the written statements and transcripts before the next session of the public hearing. Commission members discussed about the 35 days, after the closing of the hearing, that the Commission has to report to City Council if the Commission recommends approval of the proposed historic district. Kirk Irwin said that a benefit of Commission members «citing their thoughts would be a vaincn record on the subject. George Malik asked if the recommendation of the Commission requires a simple majority vote of those present Carlos Ruiz said yes. He added that six Commissioners present constitute a quorum. Kirk Irwin asked what would happen if there is a tie. C. Ruiz said he %vuld refer the question to Richard Friedman, Special Counsel for the City of Evanston. Carlos Ruiz announced that the next Commission meeting is Tuesday. January 18, 2000, in room 2403. Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue- Vill. ADJOURNMENT With no further items on the agenda, George Ralik moved to adjourn -the meeting at 9:00 p.m. Kirk Irwin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. ReApcetfully submitted: Carlos Ruiz Zfioo'C Senior Planner/Presery rdinator Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — November 16, 1999 Page 1 EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, November 16, I999 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: Heidi Carey, Jessica Deis, Barbara Gardner, Michael Girard, Lynne Heidt, Kirk Irwin, Susan Regan, and Mark Sarkisian MEMBERS ABSENT: George Ralik, Michael Imlay OTHERS PRESENT: Richard Friedman, Geoffrey Bushor, Steven Liska, Steve Kmdwn, Mike Radis, Donna Magnuson, John Salazar, Thomas Smiciklas, John Holbert, Tom McMahon, Ann McMahon, Chris Mekus, Raul Amezquita, Rob Sierzega, Jim McWilliams, Denis Drennan, Charlotte Omohundro, Bob Best (other members in the audience were not identified) PRESIDING: Jessica Deis STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz I. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM Jessica Deis, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m., a quorum being present. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Jessica Deis announced that the minutes of the Commission's previous meeting %%711 be available at the next Commission meeting. III. COMMUNICATIONS Jessica Deis read for the record letters from Anne O. Earle, Judy Fiske, and Mary McWilliams, all of them announcing their immediate resignation as an Associate Members of the Evanston Preservation Commission. A. Earle, J. Fiske and M. McWilliams indicated in their respective letters that they had not been appointed as Associate Members for a number of years. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — November 16, 1999 Page 2 IV. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Review and Technical Assistance Committee 1. 318-320 Dempster Street - Rehabilitation of main house and replacement of fiat roof for gable roof Stephen Knutson, architect and Geoffrey Bushor, owner, presented plans for the rehabilitation of 318-320 Dempster Street. The property is within the Evanston Ridge Historic District. S- Knutson said that they had obtained a copy of the original building permit signed by Daniel Burnham. S. Knutson said that the plans called for cedar shingles on the roof, replacement of the front porch based on original remaining pieces of the porch and from old photographs, and, Lbe , replacement of two glass block windows with wood double hung divided light windows. S. Knutson said that they would like install elliptical windows at the attic gable as seen in old photographs, and replace the basement windows with eight light wood sash windows. S. Knutson said that the rear wing of the house had a flat roof and parapet, and it was damaged considerably. S. Knutson said that the flat roof seemed out of character and they would like to replace it with a gable roof. Commission Findings Barbara Gardner commended the owner and architect for the proposed rehabilitation. Kirk Lavin asked about the gables of the dormers. Geoffrey Bushor said that the form of the dormer roofs would not change from the existing roof form. Susan Regan asked about the finish material at the gable on the wing. S. Knutson said that they were not going to put wood shingles at that location, because it was a single gable instead of a gambrel roof. Jessica Deis praised the owner for a beautiful rehabilitation. Geoffrey Bushor said that they were still researching the color of the original house. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the project as presented as meeting the standards for alteration. Michael Girard seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 2. 630 Davis Street - Installation of ATM Mike Radis, Donna Magnuson, and John Salazar presented plans for the installation of an ATM machine at the Chandler's Building, 630 Davis Street; the property is an Evanston Landmark. M. Radis said that La Salle Bank was proposing an ATM that had always been shown on the original plans. The ATM would be facing the west and would be located next to the main entrance. Donna Magnuson of La Salle Bank said the ATM was their standard unit as well as the signage that were required by regulation. John Salazar, contractor said that the surround of the ATM was black fiber glass. the piece above the ATM machine was a back illuminated panel 1 S; a fiber glass material in bronze color to match the color of the existing storefront window Evanston Presenation Commission Minutes — November 16, 1999 Page 3 mullion. Mike Radis said the framing system of the glass storefront would stay the same. The glass pmel itself would come out. Commission's Findings Heidi Carey asked for clarification of the proposed location. M. Radis showed on an elevation that the ATM would be located on the first glass panel, north of the main entrance facing west. Mark Sarldsian asked about the panel above the ATM machine. John Salazar said that it was fiberglass panel. M. Sarkisian said that the quality of the building was quite nice, and that the panel selection was important. M. Radis said that color of the panel matched the window frame color. Jessica Deis read standards 9 and 10 for alteration. She said that the proposed work met those standards. Carlos Ruiz asked if the existing glass panel could be saved and stored for future use. Mike Radis said that the glass panel would be saved and stored on location_ Heidi Carey asked if the ATM could be located inside the vestibule. M. Radis said they did not want to allow 24-hour access into the lobby space. They would rather have the ATM machine facing into the plaza for visibility, exposure and safety masons. C. Ruiz said that he had raised the same question while visiting the site. He said it became clear that the lobby was a private area and that the ATM would be located on the contemporary facade of the building. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plans as subnvtted as meeting standards 9 and 10 for review of alteration. Lynne Heidt seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 3. 630 Davis Street - Installation of awnings and signage Mike Radis said that Pot Belly's restaurant, would be located in the space that had a mezlanine. Thomas Smiciklas said there were three forms of signage and canopies. On the court yard side (plaza) they wold have the traditional fabric canopy for Pot Belly's. a green fabric with red stripes and white signage. On the west facade of the original building they would have a Plexiglas and neon signage in white and visible through the glass. Commission's Findings Barbara Gardner asked if the signage would be installed behind the window. Mike Radis said that their criterion was that nothing would be applied on the building face at all. All signage had to occur behind the glass and awnings could occur on the facades facing the plaza. B. Gardner asked if other businesses would be required to match the proposed awnings. M. Radis said they would like to offer the opportunity to those businesses to have an independent look. They would have to have approval from the Commission. Carlos Ruiz said that those businesses should at Ieast match the canopy material and dimensions. M. Radis agreed and said that the future canopies would be consistent with the proposed canopy dimensions including Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — November 16, 1999 Page 4 profile. shape, form and material. Jessica Deis asked about the logo sign illumination. Thomas Smiciklas said the logo sign was internally list, the light source %,.us within the box. Jessica asked about the neon light. T- Smiciklas said it would be white and visible at night. Carlos Ruiz asked if the architect for Pot Belly's looked at the City of Evanston Sign Ordinance. T. Smiciklas said that they would do that. Heidi Carey moved that the Commission accept the proposed canopy and signage as meeting all applicable standards for alteration. Barbara Gardner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Carlos Ruiz complemented David Street Land Company for the excellent rehabilitation of the historic building. Jessica Deis also praised the developer for a job well done. 4. 2643 Orrington Avenue - Demolition of existing garage, construction of kitchen extension and mud room John Holbert, architect, presented plans for the demolition of an existing garage and the construction of a kitchen extension and mud room at 2643 Orrington Avenue. The property is within the proposed Northeast Evanston Historic District. John Holbert said the interior width of the existing garage was 8'-10". The owners would like to remove the existing garage and rebuilt it to conform to the zoning ordinance. The rebuilt space would be used as an entry and as an extension of the kitchen. The exterior of the extension would match the exterior of the existing house. The proposed French door would match an.,,. , existing French door. Commission's Findings Jessica Deis asked if the foot print dimensions of the proposed extension were the same as the existing garage. John Holbert said, "No." He added that the extension was smaller than the existing garage. Carlos Ruiz asked if the proposed transom would match the existing transom. J. Holbert said, "Yes." J. Holbert said that the door mullions would be changed to closely match the existing French doors. Kirk Irwin said that the gutter and downspout were used as a design clement to provide a horizontal line. K. Irwin said that the gutters had to be sloped from the center point down. Jessica Deis read the standards for review of demolition. The Commission found that the proposed demolition of the existing garage met all the standards for demolition. Michael Girard moved that the Commission accept the proposal for demolition of the existing garage as meeting all five standards for demolition. The motion, seconded by Barbara Gardner. passed unanimously. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — November 16. 1999 Page 5 Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the plans as presented with the minor change of the mullions of the French door to match the existing French door, as meeting the standards for alteration. Lynne Heidi seconded the motion. The motion passed unnaiewu*. 5. 5 Milburn Park - Demolition of existing house and construction of new home Ann and Tom McMahon, owners, and John Holbert_ architect presented plans for the demolition of an existing house and the construction of a new house on the same lot at 5 Milburn Park. The property is within the proposed Northeast Evanston Historic District. John Holbert said that he began to talk to the McMahons about three years ago. He said that initially he tried to make the existing conditions work. J. Holbert said as when he began to work on the project it became evident that it would be difficult to «-ork with the existing house for several and distinct unusual conditions on the site. The house was built on a fell that was not stable soil. The foundation was not design for the current conditions. J. Holbert said that the existing retaining wall bordered the south side of the lighthouse and it was failing. He said the only thing they could do was to rebuild it. The existing retaining wall had moved about a foot and the garage was falling and separating from the house. The existing family room addition was breaking out towards the lake. J. Holbert said that walking around the house, one could sec stress cracks. J. Holbert said that from aesthetic, economic, and planning viewpoints, it did not make sense to retain the existing house. John Holbert said that they were proposing to demolish the existing structure and build a new house. J. Holbert said that the schematic design of the new house took into account the very unusual site with an unbelievable and unique vista of the iake. J. Holbert said that site had an incredible small urban environment. J. Holbert described the design of the proposed "L" shaped plan of the house. J. Holbert said the house was three steps above the ground same as the other houses on the area. The neighboring houses are all two stories. The design of the house took queues from the neighboring houses as far as height, massing. scale and materials. The urban front of the house was a slender two-stor}• structure where the rest of the house followed up on that design. J. Holbert said the new house was sited more towards the south than the existing house but maintaining the same setback. The new siting would open up the vista of the lake from Milburn Park. J. Holbert said that the new retaining wall would be a seamless dune. John Holbert said that the neighbors had seen the plans. The \icMahons had not received any objections. A petition from the neighbors was submitted in support of the proposed plans. Thomas McMahon said that the new house would have the same square footage as the existing house. J. Holbert said that the proposed house was only 3.000 to 3.500 square feet. Commission' Findings Jessica Deis asked how the new retaining wall was going to be treated. John Holbert said that there was enough distance from the house to the lot line to maintain a reasonable slope or angle. J. Deis said a seamless retaining wall working with the lighthouse property would be terrific. T. McMahon said that was their intent. Ann McMahon said that they had helped to clean up the Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — November 16. 1999 Page 6 lighthouse site and that they would like to work with Ekan Terras (Keeper of the lighthouse) to improve the area. J. Deis said that incorporating the landscaping of the lighthouse with the site of the new house would be mutually beneficial. Heidi Carey asked about the height of the new house relative to the neighboring houses. John Holbert said the height of the new house w-as about the same as neighboring houses but taller than the existing house. Michael Girard asked about a portion of the house showing brackets of simulated half timbers. J. Holbert said they were brackets and the finish material would be cedar shingles. M. Girard asked how schematic the plans were. J. Holbert said that the plans were close to be final. Thomas McMahon said they were ready to go with the plans subject to the Commission's review. Kirk Irwin asked if the plans were to stabilize the soil and then demolish the existing house. John Holbert said that he had work only in one house where the soil was not stable and in that instance the soil was removed and filled in with gravel. IC Irwin asked if they had any alternate plans if the cost of stabilizing to soil became economically not feasible. J. Holbert said he knew a contractor who would be able to make it work economically. Thomas McMahon said that they were aware of that issue. He said that they would live in the new house the rest of their lives. He said the lake could move in and out, being av-ure of that. they would make a first class job and make sure that it would work. Mark Sarkisian said that the project was a terrific solution to the site. He said that this site was one of the most significant sites in Evanston. M. Sarkisian said that not overbuilding on the site was important. M. Sarkisian said that some of the details needed to be worked out such as the location of windows. He asked if the Carmen stone base was similar to the stone that one could see in the neighborhood. John Holbert said, "Yes." He added that the base would be stone veneer. Jessica Deis said what had been presented was a schematic design. She said that the Commission would like to have a look to the final plans when available. Kirk Irwin said that when walking on Milburn Park one could sense the scale of the existing buildings. K. Irwin said the architects of those houses made those large houses appear small. He said that John. Holbert was able to bring that quality into the plans by expressing the way the eaves and gables were detailed, as well as the detailing of the stone. Jessica Deis said that the proposal had t-wo-phases. Phase one being the demolition of the existing house, and phase two being the construction of the new house. J. Deis read the five standards for demolition: 1. "Whether the property, structure or object is ofsuch historic, cultural, architectural or archaeological significance that its demolition would be detrimental to the public interest and contrary to the general welfare of the people of the City and the State. " Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — November 16. 1999 Page 7 Jessica Deis concurred with the applicant that the hou.�r %m-. not FxMicularly characteristic ofaM one significant style. It was a nice house, but it t» not an rrceptional house or r%Vn a good house in any particular way. J. Deis said that the house did not have a Iarticular signit'twrtcr because of its age. The Preservation Ordinance did not six-cify a particular time frame- t w a structure to assume significance. Kirk Irwin a:�reed with J. Deis' assessment. 1. ""ether the property, structure or object cartrihutes to the distinc tine historic. t7dri rut. architectural or archeological character of the district as a whole aml should he prr_arrvunl for the benefit of the people of the Cin• and the State. " Jessica Deis said she would argue that the house by %irtue of being a ranehltracke& or other_ was almost out of harmony with the rest of the neighborhood. The proposed house was ultimately a nicer blend with the established neighborhood. J. Deis said that the area was a lovely little community bounded by the lighthouse. J. Deis said that when looking at the context of the stone buildings; the existing house looked almost like an anomaly in the neighborhood. 3. "Whether demolition of the property, structure or object would he contrary to the propose and intent of this Chapter and to the objectives of the historic preservation jar the applicable district. " Kirk Irwin said that it would be appropriate to note that the applicants submitted a letter frorn a structural engineer referring to the structural condition of the existing house and the fact that it was under -designed structurally. Jessica Deis said that the Commission would always ask for an engineer's opinion for any demolition situation. The applicants had provided such opinion. 4. "Whether the property, structure or object is of such old, unusual or uncommon desika texture, and/or material that it could not be reproduced without great difficulty and/or expense. Barbara Gardner said that standard 4 -was not applicable. S. "Except in cases where the owner has no plans for a period of up to five (5) years to replace an existing landmark or property, structure or object in a district, no certificate of appropriateness shall be issued until plans for a replacement structure or object have been reviewed and approved by the Commission " Kirk Irwin said that the Commission received a schematic design. Carlos Ruiz said that one dray to look at the application was as a conceptual proposal that required the demolition of the existing house and the construction of the new house. C. Ruiz said that as the architect pointed out, the proposal was schematic. The applicants needed to make decisions in terms of the materials, and engineering reports. C. Ruiz said another way would be to grant the demolition because it appeared imminent that the house was not structurally sound. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — November 16, 1999 Page 8 Thomas McMahon said that they needed the Commission's approval on the demolition permit T. McMahon said that this was an expensive process. He paraphrased the ordinance. "... no certificate of appropriateness shall be issued until plans for a replacement structuuv or object hone been reviewed and approved... " T. McMahon said that they did have plans and certainly thee would be happy to come back and get subsequent approval of the plans. John Holbert said the final plans would look very much as the plans presented to the Commission. Mark Sarkisian said that he felt that there is enough information with the schematic plans, even though all the details have not been sorted out. Richard Friedman said that there is little risk to the Preservation Commission on the procedure because the risk was entirely on the McMahon if the subsequent plans did not conform to what they have shown today. They would be without a replacement structure. R. Friedman said that what the McMahons have said was that their definite plans would conform to what they had shown the Commission. Jessica Deis said that Commissioners understood that in the design process there were some unresolved issues, but the height was not going to change drastically, window openings needed to be fine tuned. J. Deis said that in spirit and general context; the schematic drawings were very similar to what the final house would be. Susan Regan said that the plans were clearly thought through, it was a pleasure to see such tight and clean plan. She said she could not imagine changing the plans. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission to accept the request for demolition as meeting the standards for demolition. Susan Regan seconded the motion. Discussion: Carlos Ruiz suggested that the motion include that the Commission received an eng!nwes report about the condition of the existing house. Barbara Gardner amended her motion adding that the applicants presented plans for replacement and also a structural engineer had determined that the house was not structurally sound. Kirk Irwin seconded the amendment. The motion passed unanimously as amended. Richard Friedman asked John Holbert to leave a copy of the neighbor's petition. R. Friedman thanked the McMahon and J. Holbert for the petition that layout the support for their request addressing the criteria. R. Friedman said that it was very helpful for the Commission to understand the basis for their request and the application of the facts to that standard. Jessica Deis said that the application was well presented, clear and easy to follow. She added that the applicants had addressed all the issues and questions. Barbara Gardner asked if it would be necessary for the applicant to come back in front of the Commission with their final plans for the new house. Jessica Deis said that the Commission would typically request to see the final plans for permit. J. Deis asked should three Commissioners and Carlos Ruiz review the final plans. Mark Sarkisian said that the three Commissioners should be architects and that the plans did not have to come back to the Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — November 16. 1999 Page 9 Commission unless major changes had occurmd. J. Deis said that the applicant %+vcAd submit to Carlos Ruiz the plans for the new house and C. Ruiz would contact thrm Commissioners for their comments. Jessica Deis read the seventeen standards; of construction: I. Height: Height shall be visually compatible with properties. structures, sites, public "'MT. objects and places to which it is visibiv related. The Commission found that the design of the proposed new house complied with standard i . 2. Proportion of Front Facade: The relationship of the width to the height of the front elevation shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites. public ways, objects and places to which it is visually related. The Commission found that the design of the proposed new house complied with standard 2. 3. Proportion of Openings: The relationship of the width to height of windows and doors shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects and placex to which the building is visually related. Jessica Deis said that the proposed elevation relates to the neighboring buildings, Michael Girard asked if above the garage there was a hill clear story. John Holbert said, "Yes." Commission members agreed that generally standard 3 was met. 4. Rhythm of Solids to Voids in Front Facades: The relationship of solids to voids in the front facade of a structure shall be visually compatible with properties. structures, sites. public ways, objects and places to ► -hich it is visually related. Jessica Deis said that the relationship of solid to voids was very well handled. S. Rhythm of Spacing and Structures on Streets: The relationship of a structure or object to the open space between it and adjoining structures or objects shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects and places to which it is visually related. The Commission found that the design of the proposed new house cotpUed with standard 5. 6. Rhythm of Entrance Porches. Storefront Recesses and Other Projections: The relationship of entrances and other projections to sidewalks shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways. objects and places to which it is visually related. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — November 16, 1999 Page to Heidi Carey asked if the garage projected more than other garages is the immediate neighborhood. John Holbert said, "No." Carlos Ruiz said that the [creation of the new house was appropriate for the site. The garage orientation did not set new precedent in the neighborhood. 7. Relationship of Afaterials and Texture: The relationship of the materials and texture of the facade shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the structures to which it is visually related. The Commission found that the design of the proposed new house complied with standard 7. 8. Roof Shapes: The roof shape of a structure shall he visually eDm patible with the structures to which it is visually related The Commission found that the design of the proposed new house complied with standard S. 9. Walls of Continuity: Facades and property and site structures, such as masonry walls, fences and landscape masses, shall, when it is a characteristic of the area, form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street, to ensure visual compatibility with the properties, strucW es, sites, public ways, objects and places to which such elements are rLnAally related The Commission found that the design of the proposed new house complied with standard 9. 10. Scale of a Structure: The size and mass of structures in relations to open spaces, windows, door openings, porches and balconies shall be visually corrrpatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects and places to which they are visually related The Commission found that the design of the proposed new house complied with standard 10. 11. Directional Erpression of Front Elevation: A structure shall be visually compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects and places to which it is visually related in its directional character, whether this be vertical character. horizontal character or nondirecdonal character. The Commission found that the design of the proposed new house complied with standard 11. 12. Original Qualities: The distinguishing original qualities or character of a property. structure, site or object and its environment shall not be destroyed The alteration of arty historic or material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible. Jessica Deis said that the new house related very sensibly to the open space, the beach and its environment. 13. Archaeological Resources: Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archaeological resources affected by, or adjacent to any project. Evanston Preservation Commission J Minutes —November 16. 1999 Page 11 The Commission found that standard 13 was not applicable to the proposed new house. 14. Contemporary Design: Contemporary design for additions to existing properties shall not be discouraged when such additions do not destroy significant historic, cultural or architectural material, and such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material and claracter of the property, neighborhood or environment. The Commission found that standard 14 was not applicable to the proposed new house. 15. New Additions: Wherever possible, new additions to structures or objects shall be done in such a manner that ifsuch additions were to be removed in the future, the essenrW form and integrity ofthe structure would be unimpaired The Commission found that standard 15 was not applicable to the proposed new house. 16. New Construction: 1n considering new construction, the Commission shall not impose a requirement for the use ofa single architectural style or period though it may impose a requirement jar compatibility. Jessica Deis said that the previous discussion would reflect that. 17. Signs. Any sign that is readily visible from a public street shall not be incongruous to the historic character of the landmark or the district. Recommendations regarding signs are advisory only and may be referred to the Sign Review and Appeals Board for consideration. The Commission found that standard 17 was not applicable to the proposed new house. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the schematic plans as presented and that the architect would submit final drawings to Carlos Ruiz for distribution to three architects Commissioners for final approval. She added to her motion that the plans met all the standards for new construction. Heidi Carey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 6. 115 Dempster Street - Replacement of porch on west side, entry portico on south side and sun rooms on east side Chris Mekus and Raul Amezquita, architects presented plans for the replacement of a porch, an entry portico and sun rooms at 115 Dempster Street. The property is an Evanston Landmark within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. Chris Mekus said the house was built around 1911 with a sister house to the west. An addition to the front entry was built in 1929. A second addition to the east of the house was built in 1959. He said the current owner would like to bring back the house to its original character. Chris Mek-us said that they had the actual sketches drawn by Ernest Mayo. the architect of the house. The proposed work would reflect the same character envisioned by Ernest Mayo. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes —November 16, 1999 Page 12 Continuing with his presentation, Chris Mekus said that with the Ernest Mayo's sketches they had made an interpretation of the east end. On the first floor they proposed a sun room with four interior columns and an exterior masonry comer. The stone columns were carried out to and enclosed the second floor sun room, similar to the original sketches. The difference was that the original sketches showed an open second story. The new design showed the second story enclosed with endows. Chris Mekus said that they would also replace the wood columns in front with stone columns and redo the porch on the west end. The new balusters would be stone. Commission's Findings Kirk Irwin asked if the new columns would have the entasis as shown on the original sketches. Chris Mekus said the columns would be straight. Carlos Ruiz said that during prior conversations with the architects it was concluded that it would be difficult to frame the windows between columns with entasis. Kirk Irwin said that for an Ernest Mayo house next to the lake and with the original drawings, he was concerned that it would not look right without the tapered columns. Susan Regan agreed with Kirk Irwin. Michael Girard said that the new drawings showed that the window lights were aligned; a filler between the columns would be needed regardless. Mark Sarkisian said he agreed with the suggestions already made by Commissioners. Kirk Irwin encouraged Chris Mekus to continue paying attention to architectural details. Jessica Deis said that the east end of the building would not visible. Barbara Gardner said that the east end would be visible from the beach, particularly the second story. Jessica Deis agreed. Carlos Ruiz asked Chris Mekus how difficult would be to follow the Commission's suggestions. Chris Mekus said that it would be too difficult because the columns would be costume made. Kirk Irwin moved that the Commission recommend approval with the stipulation that the east elevation be drawn with the two-story columns indicated with an enmsis. The drawing would be submitted to three architects on the Commission for final review and subsequent approval. K. Irwin motioned that the proposal met all applicable standards for review of alteration. Michael Girard seconded the motion. The motion passed. Vote: S ayes. I nay. James McWilliams from the audience asked if a copy of the drawings could be submitted to the Evanston Historical Society. Chris Mekus said that he would make that request to the owner. 7. 2426 Lincolnwood Drive - Demolition of existing garage, construction of new masonry garage Rob Sierzega, architect presented plans for demolition of the existing garage and the construction of a new masonry garage at 2426 Lincolnwood Drive. The property is an Evanston Landmark. Rob Sierzega said that his clients would like to have a two -car garage to mimic the house that would replace the existing one -car garage. He said that because the zoning height limitation he designed had designed a garage with very steeped roof and high gables. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes -- November 16, 1999 Page 13 Commission's Findings Mark Sarkisian asked if the existing garage %tiers built in the 1960s. Rob Sierra mid, "Yes." Michael Girard asked if the roof proposed garage roof height could be increased. Carlos Ruiz said that if there was some evidence that the garage needed to be higher, perhaps there would some consideration from the zoning regulations. Rob Sierzega said the maximum 17.6' height worked well for the owner. Mark Sarkisian asked if a two -door garage would be better than a one -door garage. Rob Sierzega said that the garage would have to be 5' wider, leaving no room for a future patio. Barbara Gardner said that there was a company in Wisconsin that could mimic a historic garage door. Rob Sierzega said that the new door would be facing the alley and not the patio. The historic garage doors are about $5,000 more expensive than a regular door. Jessica Deis said that the existing garage w-as an aluminum sided structure. Michael Girard moved that the Commission accept the proposal for demolition for the existing garage as . meeting the standards for demolition. Lynne Heidt seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plans for the construction of a new garage as meeting the standards for construction Kirk Irwin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. V. OLD BUSINESS Carlos Ruiz said that one issue that the Commission discussed at the last Commission meeting was the Awards Program. He said because the current activity taking place regarding the nomination of the Northeast Evanston Historic District, he found it difficult to coordinate the program. Carlos Ruiz proposed that the Commission consider postponing the awards program until early next year. Jessica Deis said that she was sorry that the awards program needed to be postponed, but that she understood the circumstances. VI. STAFF REPORT Carlos Ruiz said that the Commission held an informational meeting on Thursday, November 11, 1999. He said that the meeting was well attended by the public. The Commission had the opportunity to present to the community how it operates and reviews projects. The Commission received some comments from the public as well. Carlos Ruiz announced that the Commission would hold a public hearing on Wednesday, November 17, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., City Council Chambers, regarding the nomination of the Northeast Evanston Historic District as a local historic district. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes —November 16, 1999 Page 14 VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS Carlos Ruiz announced that the next regular Preservation Commission meeting mould be Tuesday, December 21, 1999, Room 2403, Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Evanston, Illinois 60201. VIII. ADJOURNMENT With no fimher business on the agenda, Jessica Deis adjourned the meeting at 9:15 pin. Respectfully Submitted: Carlos D. Ruiz Senior Planner/P a - n Coordinator Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — October 19. 1999 Page l EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMI%11S,�ION MEETING NIINUT1;S Tuesd3kv, October 19, 19" 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: Heidi Carev Jessica Deis, Barbara Gardner. Michael Girani, Lynne Heidt, Michael Imlay, Kirk lruin. Sum Regan, and \13rk Sarkisian MEMBERS ABSENT: George Halik OTHERS PRESENT: Edwin Bates, Robert Best, Sherri Butala, Judy Fiske, Andrew Fiske, Robert Atkins, Tofu McMahon, Denis Drennan, Alien Ramsier, Ivette Meltzer, Thomas A. Heinz, Reinhold Weiss, Alice Conner, Richard Zielinski (other individuals in the audience were not identified) PRESIDING: Jessica Deis STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz 1. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM Jessica Deis, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m., a quorum being present. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Jessica Deis announced that the minutes of the Commission's previous meeting will be available on November 17, 1999, 111. COMMUNICATIONS Letter from Thomas McMahon and Evanstonians for Responsible Preservation, October 8, 1999. The letter had a commentary regarding the draft of the City of Evanston General Comprthensive Plan. IV. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Review and Technical Assistant Committee 1. 1407 Elmwood Avenue - Exterior alterations, window replacement and exterior wood shingles Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — October 19, 1999 Page 2 Tom Heinz, architect presented plans for exterior alteration including replacement of windows and wood shingles replacement at 1407 Elmwood Avenue. The property is an Evanston Landmark. T. Heinz said that the owners of the property wanted to add a bedroom with a bathroom on a very large area on the third floor. T. Heinz said it appeared that, originally, there was a large room on the third floor that occupied about 20 to 30 percent of the space. The new bedroom and bathroom required a new window of a certain size for light, ventilation and for the egress requirements. T. Heinz said that the owners would also like to put an office on a space, which was raised above the floor level about 5 to 7 feet. They would like to add more natural light to that space by rising the archway and adding one more unit of lighting, keeping it symmetrical, as it was on the north side gable. A second window would be added with a wooden hood over the top of the other two windows. He said that there was a secondary single window on the gable on the south side of the building. Tom Heinz said the owners would like to replace the existing rotted wood shingles with new wood shingles and also replace the missing shingles at ends of the cmcrior walls. T. Heinz said the rotted windows on the front fagade were single pane with aluminum storm windows. The aluminum storm windows would be removed and new double pane insulated glass wood windows would be installed. All of the side windows would be operable casements. Commission's Findings Barbara Gardner asked if the window below the curved window was a casement window. !T. Heinz said the window was a fixed window. The six sidelights were casement windows. Jessica Deis asked if the moldings would be preserved when the window enlargement was done. T. Heinz said the wood window would be replaced in kind if it were not in good condition. Michael Imlay asked if the north side of the building related to the south side. T. Heinz said that on the south side, there were additional small square windows installed at some point above the arch. The original existing windows on the north gable and south gable were deep set almost a foot from the front surface. The newer windows on the south elevation were on the surface; the glass was on the same plane as the shingles. Jessica Deis said that the project had addressed appropriately the standards for review of alteration, particularly standard 5. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the project as presented as meeting the standards, specifically standard 5 for review of alteration. Heidi Carey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimoush•_ 2. 642 Forest Avenue - Exterior alterations, new dormer, enlargement of existing dormer, reframing of existing dormer, new roof, and stucco finish. Susan Regan recused from the Commission discussion and vote because she was the architect for 642 Forest Avenue. Carlos Ruiz said that last year a similar situation occurred with another Commissioner. The City's Legal Department rendered an opinion whereby a Commissioner could present a project as long as the Commissioner recused herself or himself from the Commission's discussion and vote. The Commission could then review the project like any other project. The Commissioner recusing herself or himself could not vote or express an Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — October 19, 1999 Page 3 opinion about the project. Susan Regan said that her client could not be present and her only employee at her office could not attend the meeting either. Susan Regan passed out revisions of the material submitted earlier to the Commission. S. Rqpm said that the existing third floor of the house was unfinished. There was an existing dormer an the front and another dormer on the south of the house that were very low hipped dormers. She added that the height to the existing ridge was very low. S. Regan said that there was an existing stair to the third floor. Her client would like to get more headroom in the space and get more natural light_ The project called for doing a larger dormer to the south and reconstructing the front dormer and adding a dormer to the north. The project would increase the headroom with gabled dormer. The front dormer would be the same width as the existing dormer. with narrower and taller windows. The side dormers would be gabled for more headroom with a French casement window in the middle, and flanked by casement windows on the sides. The exterior would be stucco to match the existing stucco finish_ S. Regan said that Carlos Ruiz had suggested lowering the ridge of the side dormers as the existing front dormer. She said that she could not do that because the way the roof was structured and the need for additional height would not allow it. Commission's Findings Mark Sarkisian asked about the windows divided lights. Susan Regan said that the owner added divided lights to those windows after an addition was completed in 1992. The bay window had storm windows that made it appear as having double hung windows, but the windows were in fact casement windows with some leading. Susan Regan said that the new windows were casement Marvin wood windows with simulated divided lights. Michael Girard asked if the existing dormers were lower than the proposed dormers. S. Regan said the height was being raised to get headroom. Barbara Gardner asked about the revised drawings. S. Regan said that the change was adding more divided lights on the windows and raising the front gable window sill. Barbara Gardner moved that the proposal at 642 Forest Avenue be approved as presented as meeting the standards for alteration. Mark Sarkisian seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 3. 921: Ridge Avenue - Demolition of existing garage, construction of new three car garage, enclosing existing rear porch, construction of raised open deck, and replacing existing rear wire fence with stockade wood fence. Reinhold Weiss, owner presented plans for the demolition of an existing garage, the construction of a three -car garage, the enclosure an existing rear porch, the construction of a raised open deck, and the replacement of a rear wire fence with a stockade wood fence. The property is within the Evanston Ridge Historic District. Reinhold Weiss thanked Carlos Ruiz for assisting him in preparing the design of his project, which at the end turn out to be a catalyst between the original house and the character of the Ridge Historic District_ R. Weiss said that in 1986 he had applied for a variance, back when a Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — October 19, 1999 Page a Preservation Commission member had the opinion that the house was already altered beyood recognition from the original design. R. Weiss showed a series of slides to illustrate the condition of the house when he bought it in early 1970s. R. Weiss said that back then the hcuw was literally barely staying together. R. Weiss said that he was a minimalist designer. He said his house was of a post modernist design in the best sense of the word. Reinhold Weiss said that he redesigned the house so that he could do most of the work himsd£ R. Weiss showed details of the front columns, concrete work. %indow details, and new ext xkw finishes. R. Weiss showed slides of the coach house (garage) as seen from the street and the acm porch as seen from the park to the south. Slides showed the adi-anced state of structural deterioration of the garage and the rear porch. Reinhold Weiss said that originally he designed a new garage with a flat roof to replace the existing coach house. R. Weiss said that C. Ruiz suggested to him that his flat roof garage perhaps was not achieving one of the standards of construction related to compatibility to the main house and the historic district. R. Weiss said that he determined that a garage with a gable roof would double the cost of a garage with a flat roof. He said the empty space under a gable roof would be underutilized. R. Weiss said that he went back to an earlier idea of having an attached garage. R. Weiss said that the attached garage would better serve his needs and also better address the concerns of the Commission. Commission Findings Kirk Irwin asked if the existing garage would be demolished. R. Weiss that the demolition of the coach house was a requirement by the Zoning Board of Appeals back in 1986 when he was granted a zoning variance. C. Ruiz said that Bill Hudson, Rehab Specialist for the City, had submitted a letter indicating that the coach house was bevond repair and it was structurally unsafe. R. Weiss added that B. Hudson's letter said that even if the structure was restored, it could not be used as a garage. Jessica Deis read for the record the standards for review of demolition. J. Deis asked if any Commissioner had an objection to the demolition of the garage. No one objected. C. Ruiz read for the record the letter from Bill Hudson, Rehab Specialist. Bill Hudson's letter concluded that the demolition of the coach house was the best course of action due to extreme structural deterioration an imminent collapse of the structure. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the demolition of the garage at 921 Ridge as meeting the standards for demolition. The motion, seconded by Lynn Heidt, passed unanimously. Barbara Gardner said that in the new set of drawings it appeared the new sun porch was smaller than the existing rear porch. R. Weiss said that the proposed sun porch was slightly narrower than the existing sun porch. He added that the proposed room above the attached garage would be his office. Mark Sarkisian said that his first reaction regarding the existing coach house was to preserve it. However, after learning more about its structural condition, he would support the new design for an attached garage. M. Sarkisian said that the new design was in keeping with ter Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes —October 19, 1999 Page 5 overall design philosophy of the house and assuming that the craftsmanship would be contimcd. Kirk Irwin said that the new design appropriately addressed the contemporary design standards of the Preservation Ordinance. K. Irwin said that if the columns had been reviewed back in the 1970s, under the current standards for alteration, he would have not approved such alteration. K. Irwin said he wanted to have his observation in the record so that the Commission decision regarding the design of the existing columns set no precedent. Jessica Deis asked about the exterior materials for the proposed attached garage and addition over the attached garage. R. Weiss said that the first level would be concrete block, the strucnoc above the garage would be wood frame finished with Dryvit. R. Weiss said that he had not decided the brand of windows he would use, but he w•as considering windows by Pella. Susan Regan asked what the material would be under the deck on the south side. R. Weiss he did not decide yet, but what he did not want was a plain looking lattice. He would like to screen the area under the porch with some design and material that was more in keeping with the design of the house. Carlos Ruiz suggested that the Commission could approve the project and allow his office to review the detail of the design and material of the area under the porch. The Commission agreed with C. Ruiz' suggestion. Lynn Heidt said that the project was a contribution to the community even though it did not quite fit in with the preservation ideals. Kirk Irwin said that, on the contrary, the project met the preservation ideals. He said the details shown in the slides and drawings were one of the best details he had seen. Kirk Irwin moved that the Commission approve the proposed attached garage, fence, deck and sunroom at 921 Ridge Avenue. He added that the Commission found upon review of the standards for review of construction. that the applicable standards had been met. He cited standard 1 regarding height, standard 2 regarding proportion of facades, standard 3 regarding proportion of openings. He also cited standard 4 rhythm of solids and voids, standard 7 relationship of materials and texture. standard 8 roof shapes, standard 9 walls on continuity (detailing of the base), and standard 10 scale of the structure. Lynn Heidt seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. V. OLD BUSINESS Approval of the Application Form for the Nomination of an Area for Designation by Ordinance as a Landmark or Historic District Carlos Ruiz said that some changes had been introduced to the application form for the Nomination of an Area for Designation by Ordinance as a Landmark or Historic District. The changes occurred after suggestions were made to the Commission at the last meeting. The most significant change was the clarification of the definition of owner of record under number 3: "The owner of record shall be established by the most current property tax assessment roles as contained by the Assessor's of Cook County." Also, now there was clear distinction between a nomination of a landmark and the nomination of a historic district. There uas also a clarification about the information needed for individual landmark nominations and the information needed Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes —October 19, 1999 Page 6 for historic districts. In the case of historic district nominations the appli=t would need to check what properties were contributing significant structures. The norniaadon form contain in the second page the standards for review (Section 2-9-4). C. Ruiz said that the City's Legal Department had reviewed the proposed nomination form with no comments. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the amended applitmdon form for the nomination of landmarks and historic districts. Heidi Carey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. VI. NEW BUSINESS A. 2831 Sheridan Place — New Detached Garage (Advisory Review*) Jessica Deis said that the property owner of 2831 Sheridan Place asked the Cotrtmission review the potential for the construction of a new detached garage. Alice Conner. Realtor and Richard Zielinski, owner, said that the house at 2831 Sheridan Place was built in 1911. it was the coach house to the mansion next door. The coach house was converted in 1957 into a home. At that time the property was cut up in a number of small properties including the property along the side of 2831 Sheridan Place. R. Zielinski said that when he bought the house in 1988 it was in total disrepair. He rehabilitated the house, with limestone exterior, the root~ copper gutters and !lashing so that its integrity would remain the same. He also renovated the irrb or. R_ Zielinski said that he is now in the process of selling the house. He noted that buyers might want a garage. R. Zielinski said that in 1989 he had a design of a one -car detached garage that was presented to the Commission staff. The amount of work that it was required inside the house was so extensive that they never got around to building the garage. Richard Zielinski said that the idea now is to build a garage that would be a srmll version of the house with a courtyard in between. He said that the question about putting a garage in front of the house is answered because he could not put a garage in the back of the house due to required zoning setbacks. Commission's Findings Lynne Heidt asked if the garage in front would obscure house behind. R. Zielinski said that there was substantial vegetation in front of the house. The house was three stories and it may be obscured to a small degree. Barbara Gardner asked if they would need a zoning variance. R : , Zielinski said. "No." Lynne Heidt asked if the owner needed a zoning variame to put the garage, in front of the house. R. Zielinski said there were other homes in the neighborhood with garages in front. B. Gardner asked if the current owner would guild the proposed garage. R. Zielinski said no because he was moving. B. Gardner said that the proposed garage was a beautiful structure that perhaps a future owner of the property may not be able to build. J. Deis said that the Commission would have the opportunity to review other proposals. J. Deis asked if the proposed location for the garage would remain the same. R. Zielinski said, "Yes." He added that one would come off from Terry Place. J. Deis asked if the proposed garage would be a two -car garage. R. Zielinski said he Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — October 19, 1999 ` Page 7 could not know what a new property owner night want. Carlos Ruiz said that it was important to note for the record the scale, proportion and the mass of the proposed garage. Mark Sarkisian said that the proposed one -car garage was fine at the proposed scale. Alice Conner said that the exterior materials of the proposed garage would match the exterior materials of the existing house. Barbara Gardner said that she would like to state that the one -car garap as submitted was acceptable and that a two -car garage might be more problematic. C. Ruiz said that the record would show that the Commission approved in concept the proposed one -car garage as submitted. J. Deis said that the record would reflect the concerns expressed by Commissioners and that a vote was not required for an advisory review. B. Call for Nominations of Evanston Preservation Awards Carlos Ruiz said he had received inquiries from property owners and architects about the Evanston Preservation Awards. C. Ruiz said that he would like to recommend that the Commission receive and review projects for Preservation Awards. He said if possible he would like to have nominations for the November 16. 1999 meeting, and have the avrards program in front of the City Council November 22, 1999 or January 2000. Commissioners agreed. V11. STAFF REPORT Carlos Ruiz reported to the Commission that Roger Crum, City Manager, had authorized the hiring of Richard F. Friedman, Attorney. R. Friedman would assist and advise the Commission on preservation matters and ensure that the Commission would follow due process in regard to the potential nomination of the Northeast Evanston Historic District for local historic district designation. V111. ANNOUNCEMENTS Jessica Deis announced that the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council, would meet Monday. November 15, 1999, at 7.30 p.m. room 2403 of the Civic Center, regarding the Comprehensive General Plan chapters on institutions and Historic Preservation. Judy Fiske, (from the audience) stated that the Northeast Evanston Historic District Association (NEHDA) would like to submit the nomination of the Northeast Evanston Historic District that evening. Jessica Deis said the nomination form had just been reviewed and approved at that meeting. J. Deis asked if the nomination about to be submitted reflected those revisions. Jud�r Fiske said, "Yes." Thomas McMahon (from the audience) said that the Commission had to determine if the nomination was complete. He said that the public should review the nomination, and since no copy of the nomination was made available to the public, the Commission could not make a determination that night whether the nomination was complete. Robert Atkins (from the audience) said that under section 2-9-5 the initiation of the nomination shall be submitted to tip Commission on a form prepared by the Commission, and it does mention nothing about Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - October 19, 1999 Page 8 completeness. Mr. McMahon disagreed. Jessica Deis asked T. McMahon what did he need- T. McMahon said that he needed a copy of the nomination and at least five business days for review of the nomination so that he could comment on the completeness of the nomination. He added that '►ht completeness of the nomination was a question of conformance with the ordinance. LyzLne Heidt asked the nominators if they could make a copy of the nomination for Tom McMahon. Judy Fiske said. -Yes." Thomas McMahon said that section 2-9-7 would be in place as soon as the Commission accepted the nomination as a completed nomination. He said that the restrictions on section 2-9-7 were very unique. T. McMahon said that they have the right to review the nomination and provide the Commission with comments as to whether it was a completed nomination. T. McMahon said that a determination of a completed nomination form means that it did meet all the requirements of the ordinance with respect to the criteria for the nomination. It also meant that it met the standards by which the Commission needed to make a report to the City Council at the end of the process. Andrew Fiske (from the audience) said that Mr. McMahon's argument was as if it would not be discussion by the public at all. The submission of the nomination was to set the strategy by which the outmost of public opinion could be given. Jessica Deis said that the submission of the nomination gives the Commission an opportunity to set a hearing date, which as far she could tell, both proponents and opponents, of the nomination would like to have to express their opinion. Thomas McMahon said that the Commission should bring the nomination to the attention of the Commission's Attorney. T. McMahon was certain that the Commission's Attorney would advise the Commission that the interim protection provisions required a completeness determination. Barbara Gardner said that the Commission has a nomination that had been presented and the ordinance required the Commission, when a nomination was presented, to set up dates to begin the process. Tom McMahon emphasized that the ordinance required a completed application. B. Gardner said that if the City's Attorney determined that the nomination was not complete, then the timetables would be extended Robert Atkins said that they (NEHDA) put this over for more than a month because they wanted to look carefully the form (nomination). Then the City hired an attorney who would looked over the form and the ordinance and revise it after input from the other side (Evanstonians for Responsible Preservation). He added that the City Attorney came up with the form that was approved today. R. Atkins said that pursuing the revised form; NEHDA had submitted the nomination application that evening. He noted that all the ordinance says was that the Commission was supposed to notify the public within ten days of receipt of the completed forth and the only issue was whether it was complete, that means whether or not there were blanks. R. Atkins said that at that juncture the blanks had been filled in. He suggested that the City Attorney looked at the appIication to determine whether or not there were blanks, if there were none, the Commission could make up a schedule and move up forward. Edwin Bates (from the audience) identified himself as an attorney representing [Mr. or Mrs.] Carlton, who was supposed to be a member of the proposed historic district. He asked Robert Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — October 19, 1999 ; Page 9 Atkins to identify himself. Robert Atkins said he was a homeowner at 2005 Orrington and that he represented himself. Edwin Bates said that as a lawyer he agreed with Tom McMahon. lie suggested giving the public extra notice to built enough foundation. Denis Drennan said that before the Commission accepted officially something that could have any effect on him, he would like someone to check it for its completeness and accuracy. Jessica Deis said that she would like to ask the applicants if they would be able to submit a copy (of the nomination) to Evanstonians for Responsible Preservation (ERP). J. Deis said that the Commission would submit the nomination to Mir. Richard Friedman, Attorney so that he could review the application for completeness and any other aspects he feet was appropriate. He would report back to the Commission within five (5) days. J. Deis said that she would give Mr. McMahon and his organization the same opportunity to put whatever input he had within the same time period. J. Deis said that October 24 if the Commission deemed that it had a completed application, thin the time date of the hearing would be set forth fort -five (45) days from that date. She added that if the Commission deemed that it did not have a completed application, then the applicants would be contacted and asked to make whatever modifications they would need to make. Mark Sarkisian asked Tom McMahon if he needed five (5) days or five (5) working days. Tom McMahon said he needed five (5) days. Lynne Heidt suggested that the Commission accept the nomination and in the event the City Attorney would determine that the nomination was incomplete then additional forty five (45) days be added from the date the nomination was determined to be complete. Tom MacMahon noted that the key issue was the acceptance of a completed nomination. Carlos Ruiz said that he tried to locate a City Attorney that night to assist the Commission on the issue at hand. Tom McMahon asked C. Ruiz if he said that the City Attorney had not review the form (nomination). C. Ruiz said that the City's Legal Counsel reviewed the form and that they were in contact with Richard Friedman. C. Ruiz said that Richard Friedman faxed a letter to the Commission regarding the nomination form that evening. Tom McMahon said that the letter had major impact on his rights. Jessica Deis read for the record a letter from Richard Friedman to Roger Crum , City Manager and Jessica Deis, Chair. Preservation Commission, dated October 19, 1999 (faxed 6:30 p.m.). " I have reviewed the newly revised nomination form prepared for the used of nominators of historic places and districts. I have consulted the Evanston Preservation Ordinance and discuss the form with the Preservation Coordinator and the Chair of the Preservation Commission, I am in the opinion that such form as revised is sufficient for the purposed of the Preservation Ordinance to commence the designation nomination process and satisfy the legal requirements thereof." Tom McMahon noted that the letter was faxed at 6:30 p.m. and that Ms. Judy Fiske submitted the nomination that night. He said that it was obvious that something was happening behind the scenes. He said that the nomination submission that night was a complete surprise. Tom McMahon asked the Commission to slow down and take and step at the time and make a completeness determination. He said the Commission did not represent NEHDA but the entire City of Evanston. Jessica Deis noted that she made earlier a suggestion that seemed to be at least Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — October 19. 1999 Page io partially satisfactory to all parties concerned, therefore she believed the Commission should follow- her recommendation. Lynne Heidt suggested that the Commission set a hearing forty-five (45) days from that night, provided the City Attorney would determine that the submission %as complete. In the event the submission was not complete, then upon completion, forty five (45) days be counted from the day the City Attorney had determined that the nomination was complete. Jessica Deis asked L. Heidt if within that time period the Commission would allow the five (5) business days for any interested parties to comment on the nomination. Lyrme Heidt said she would add five (5) business days to the forty-five (45) days. Robert Atkins said that under the ordinance that the outside was forty-five (45) days from the date of the submission of the completed application. He assumed that that day the clock started running. He said the only question was whether Legal Counsel would review the nomination for a determination. He suggested that the Commission hold the hearing before the forty-five (45) days. Tom McMahon said the he believed that they had the right to make the completeness determination. When the Commission had made the completeness dete7mination, then the clock would start running. He said the Commission could only take action at meetings and that the public had to have the opportunity of advance notice of those meetings. Jessica Deis said she would like to set a date, within the fort five (45) days, for a special meeting to announce that the Commission had received a completed nomination. She said that she understood the concern of being under the umbrella of the Ordinance once the nomination was complete. She added that on the other hand what everybody wanted was an opportunity to a hearing and to look at both sides of the issue. Robert Atkins cited Section 2-9-5 (C) 1 of the Preservation Ordinance and said that owners of record should be notified within ten business days of receipt of the nomination. Jessica Deis asked Carlos Ruiz when the Commission could hold the special meeting and comply with the provisions of the ordinance. Carlos Ruiz said that special meeting could be held after October 29, 1999. Lynne Heidt suggested that the Commission hold a special meeting only after the City Attorney had determined that the application was incomplete. She said that she assumed that the Commission had received a completed application, and if it happened to be an incomplete application then the Commission could revise its plans. Tom McMahon said that the moment the Commission accepted the application something had happened. He said that the application was only filed and the Commission needed to make a determination. Lvnne Heidt said that she assumed that the Commission had done things correctly and according to the timetable, unless the Civy Attorney would advise the Commission otherwise. Judy Fiske said that NEHDA had submitted the nomination to the Natiorml Register of Historic Places which was approved by the Illinois Historic Sites Advisory Council in June of 1999. She said that the National Register nomination was not in for the local district nomination. Judy Fiske said the local district nomination had to meet one of ten criteria in order to be designated a Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes —October 19, 1999 Page t t local landmark district. She said the nomination was focused on those criw is and how. structures, and sites in the historic district applied to those criteria. She said that for the locaf nomination they had paid attention to detail and research as reflected in the National Registar nomination. Judy Fiske said that they N%Tote the local nomination with the Preservation Ordinance at hand. She said that what NEHDA understood was that owners withinthe proposed district would be notified within ten business days after the nomination was submitszd to the Commission. Judy Fiske said that from that moment everyone could review the nomination, not just the McMahon. She said that the McMahons had been involved in the process since February of 1998. She added that the nomination was not a surprise. Judy Fiske said that the public wanted the opportunity to talk about the nomination_ Heidi Carey agreed with Judy Fiskc. She also said that the Commission should let the City Attorney verify the nomination completeness. Heidi Carry said the effect of the nomination on property owners would not go into effect until the City Attorney had determined the completeness of the nomination and at that point the clock would scan ticking, Tom McMahan said that interim protection was something different. He added that the Commission did not have jurisdiction until the Commission made a completeness determination. additional discussion ensued when the Commission could hold a public hearing. Jessica Deis said that that the Commission would have the City Attorney determine that the application was completed within five days starting that evening. Then the Commission could schedule the hearing date. Tom Mctitahon said that the Commission could not set a date for the public hearing until the Commission made a determination that the application was a complete application. Commission members disagreed with Tom McMahon. Jessica Deis emphasized that the Commission was not making a determination that evening. Heidi Carey moved that the Commission present the nomination to the City attorney, and within five days the City Attorney would determined its completeness or not completeness. If it was determined that the application was complete then the Commission would have a hearing %ithin fifteen days, at a date to be set that evening and contingent upon the approval of completeness [by the City Attorney]. Kirk Irwin said that he would like to amend the motion to clarify that Corporation Counsel would make the determination. Carlos Ruiz said that the person [Richard Friedman] assigned to assist the Commission would be consulting with the Citv's Corporation Counsel at a regular basis to make sure that everything the Commission would do was in keeping with the local statutes. Barbara Gardner asked Heidi Carey to restate her motion. Heidi Carey moved that the current nomination presented to the Commission that evening, be presented to Richard Friedman for approval of its completeness or incompleteness. Pending that determination within five (5) business days, the Commission then would set the first hearing within forty five days following that determination. Michael Girard seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Jessica Deis said that the date for the public hearing was subject the City Attorney determination that the application was complete. Discussion ensued to determine the date of the public hearing. The Commission announced that the public hearing would take place on Wednesday, Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — October 19, 1999 Page 12 November 17, 1999 at the City Council Chambers. Michael Girard asked when the nomination becomes a matter of public record. Jessica Deis sdd that the nomination would become part of the public record after the City Attorney had determined its completeness. M. Girard said that earlier that evening Tom McMahon had requested a copy of the nomination. Tom McMahon said he would like to have a copy by the next day. Robert Atkins said that the nomination once submitted to the Commission was a public record. Discussion ensued how copies could be available to the public. Carlos Ruiz said that a copy of the nomination would be available at the City Clerk office and at his office startiag next day. Jessica Deis asked Carlos Ruiz if he had other announcements. Carlos Ruiz announced the Commission's next regular meeting: Tuesday, November 16, at 7:30 p.m., Room 2403, Evans= Civic Center, Evanston, Illinois. He added that the Commission's public hearing for the Northeast Evanston Historic District nomination was scheduled Wednesday, November 17, 1999. City Council Chambers [time to be announced). IX. ADJOURNMENT With no further business in the agenda, Jessica Deis moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:30 p.m. Michael Girard seconded the motion. The motion passed unonimously. Respectfully Submitted: A�t/ - Carlos D. Ruiz Senior Planner/Preservati oordinator G Evanston Preservation Commission DRAFT HOT YET APPROVED Minutes — September 21. 1999 Page I EVANSTON'PRESERVATION COMMISSION Meeting Minutes Tuesday, September 21,1999 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue Evanston, Illinois MEMBERS PRESENT: Jessica Deis, Barbara Gardner, Michael Girard, Lynne Heidi, Kirk Irwin, George Halik MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Imlay, Susan Regan, Mark Sarkisian OTHERS PRESENT: Susan Rundle, Stephen Knutson, Chip and Bridget Schroeder, Caryl Till, Paul Janicki, Marian T%Nvede, Robert Best, Glenn Azuma, Rose Thomas. Reed Hagee, Joe Hagee, Edwin R. Bates, Denis B. Drennan, Barbara Drennan, James Staples, Phyllis Wellis, Jack L. Robbins, Andrew Fiske, Michael Hendershot PRESIDING: Jessica Deis, Chair STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz I. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM Jessica Deis, Chair, determined a quorum was present. She called the meeting to order at approximately 7:33 p.m. She said that under New Business the Commission would consider the nomination form only, not an actual nomination. H. WELCOME TO NEW EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEMBERS I b . Jessica Deis welcomed Lynne Heidi and Michael Girard as newly appointed Commission members. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Barbara Gardner moved that the Tuesday, August 17, 1999 Commission's meeting minates be approved. Kirk Irwin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. EymmmPreserration Commission Minutes — September 21. 1999 Page 2 III. COMMUNICATIONS Jessica Deis informed that the Commission received the following correspondence: 1. August 20, 1999, letter from Ann V. Swallow, Survey and National Register Coordinator, Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, to Mayor Lorraine H. Morton. Subject: Northeast Evanston Historic District bounded by Emerson St., Sherman Ave., Sheridan PI_, Lake Michigan, Sheridan Rd. and Orrington Ave., Evanston, Illinois, entered in the National Register of Historic Places on August 12, 1999. 2. September 1, 1999, letter from Charles O. Dobbins, Jr., Village Manager, Village of Hinsdale, to Roger D. Crum, City Manager. Subject: Statewide bond pool program for historically significant residential properties. 3. September 13, 1999, letter from Evanstonians For Responsible Preservation and Ann and Tom McMahon, to Jessica Deis, Chair, Evanston Preservation. .. . ! , ! , Commission. Subject: Nomination of Northeast Evanston Historic District under Evanston Preservation Ordinance_ 4. September 19, 1999, letter from the Northeast Evanston Historic District Association (received at the meeting) . 1., 5. September 8, 1999, letter from Evanstonians for Responsible Preservation, an open letter to Northeast Evanston homeowners. ! ! ; ! 6. September 20, 1999, letter from Tom McMahon regarding nomination of Northeast Evanston Historic District under Evanston Preservation Ordinance. IV. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Review and Technical Assistance Committee 1. 716 Judson Avenue - Demolition of existing garage, construction of new detached two -car garage Susan Rundle, architect presented plans for the demolition of an existing garage and the construction of a new two -car garage at 716 Judson Avenue. The property is within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. S. Rundle said that the existing garage had been without doors and windows for a long time. The base of the garage was rotted, including the interior supports and exterior cladding and the garage was leaning over the alley. S. Rundle said that the application included a report from a structural engineer and a report from the City of Evanston structural inspector, both indicating that the structure was shut. S. Rundle said her clients would like to demolish the existing garage. She added that the application included the construction of a new two -car garage. S. Rundle said that Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — September 21, 1999 Page 3 the design of the proposed garage was as close as it could get to the existing garage. The shape and slope of the roof match that of the existing garage. S. Rundle said that they would try to save a Maple tree that had overgrown into the garage. The new garage would be 2-feet larger to the south to accommodate two cars. The garage would be cladded in wood to manch the siding of the house and the roof shingles would match that of the house. S. Rundle said that a zoning variance would be needed because the existing gmrage sat on the neighbors lot line to the north and a half a foot into the alley. A rem and side lint Iine setback zoning variance would be required. Commission's Findings: Carlos Ruiz asked if any neighbor had complained about the proposal. S. Rtmde said no. Barbara Gardner said that the neighbor to the north had told her that she was d&ighted with the proposal. Jessica Deis read subsection 2-9-9 (D) standards for review of demolition. Commissioners concluded that the demolition of the existing garage was not in conflict with standards 1, 2, 3, and 4. Standard S did not apply. The proposal also complied with Subsection 2-9-9 (E) the Secretary of the Interior's standards. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the demolition of the e:ciisting garage at 716 Judson Avenue, as it did not meet any of the standards for retention. Heidi Carey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. George Halik moved that the Commission approve the proposed garage at 716 Judson Avenue as meeting the standards for construction I through 17 as described [subsection 2-9-9 (B) standards for review of construction]. Barbara Gardner seconded the motion. The motica passed unanimously. 2. 2920 Lincoln Street - Construction of new detached two -ear garage Stephen Knutson, architect and Chip and Bridget Schroeder, owners presented Mans for a new two -car detached garage at 2920 Lincoln Street. The property is an Evanston Lmdmark. S. Knutson said that the house has a garage within the house. They would like to ronvert that space into a mudroom and a family room and construct a new two -car detached: garage south of the house. The new garage would face Lincolnwood Drive. S. Knutson said tha: they expect using brick matching the house, the roof would be cedar matching the house, and the roof pitch would match the house roof pitch. The garage is located 10-feet west of the ho=,e and 3-feet from the south property line. S. Knutson said that they would like to put «indows on the east elevation and alter a kitchen window. Commission's Findings: Jessica Deis asked if there were any zoning issues. S. Knutson said, `no" Cariots Ruiz asked about the new windows. S. Knutson said that the new windows would be wood windows with Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — September 21. 1999 i Page 4 true divided lights. He added that the garage would have two garage doors reducing the smile on the side street. Kirk Irwin complemented S. Knutson for successfully handling the massing of the new gee. He said the siting of the new garage worked well on Lincolnwood Drive. George Halik moved that the Commission accept the proposed alterations to the existing Landmark as meeting standards 1 through 10 for alterations [subsection 2-9-9 (A) standards for review of alterations]. Barbara Gardner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. George Halik moved that the Commission accept the proposed new garage as meeting the standards 1 through 17 for new construction [subsection 2-9-9 (B) standards for review of construction]. Heidi Carey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 3. 600 Forest Avenue - Rear porch and deck addition Caryl Till, owner presented plans for a rear porch and deck addition at 600 Forest Avenue. The property is within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. C. Till said that her project was approved four years ago in a slightly different guise. The project was not implemented. C. Till said she was back with slightly revised plans. The house was meant to have a porch at the rear that was never built. Commission's Findings: Kirk Irwin asked what was different about the original design. C. Till said that the original poach design was larger and it was a screened porch. The new proposed porch has double hung windows. Jessica Deis said that the visibility of the proposed porch was questionable. Carlos Ruiz said that he discussed that issue with C. Till. She decided to go in front of the Commission. Another factor for being in front of the Commission was that the pre%iously approved design was considerably altered. Jessica Deis asked what material was the exterior finish. C. Till said it was wood siding. C. Ruiz said that he had suggested to C. TilI the use of double hung windows instead of casement windows. George Halik asked why the cedar siding as oppose the brick of the house. C. Till said that she wanted the 9-month Iook and that the wood siding was in keeping with the landscaping around it. Mark Sarkisian asked about the roof details of the building. C. Till said that the roof did not have an overhang but gutters. G. Halik said that the drawings did not show a lot of things. C_ Till said that the builder draw the elevations from the architect drawings of t,1te first design. G. Halik said that the drawings did not show how the porch was going to really look like. C. Till said that she was a very visual person and that she could see the design and that she was fad with the work of her builder. C. Ruiz said that if the Building Division required additional drawings that the Commission would review them. Jessica Deis said that she understood the Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — September 21, 1999 Page 5 design as a cedar summer room. Carlos Ruiz said that he could review the plans again when submitted for permit to the Building Division. Marie Sarkisian said that staff could approve additional drawings. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accepts the project as proposed with the stipuiation that when it goes before the Building Department, if there were additional drawings required that- C. Ruiz had the right to approve those drawings if they met the standards. Marie Sarkisian seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 4. 1012 Judson Avenue - Side and rear yard two-story addition Paul Janicki, architect, presented plans for a side and rear yard two-story addition at 1012 Judson Avenue. The property is within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. P. Janicki showed photographs of the existing house. P. Janicki said the addition was to the rear and side of the Queen Ann style house. The addition consisted of a dining room and family on the first floor a semi -circular (turret form) exerciwJplayroom and a guestroom on the second floor. The exterior would be wood shingles on the second story to match existing wood shingles and wood siding on the first floor to match existing wood siding. The foundation would be painted brick. The windows would be double hung Marvin Magnum windows. The French doors on the west and north elevation would mimic the French doors on the front elevation. Commission's Findings: Kirk Irwin asked if the new turret's comice and eave would match the existing cornice and cave on the house. P. Janicki said the design made the turret less important than the rest of the house, so that the detail is toned down. G. Halik complemented the architect for the design. Commissioners concurred with G. Halik. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the project as presented as meeting the standards 1 through 10 for alteration. Kirk Irwin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 5. 1734 Asbury Avenue - Rear deck addition Marian Tweede of Rockwell Associates, architects, presented plans for a near open deck at 1734 Asbury Avenue. The property is an Evanston Landmark within the Evanston Ridge Historic District. Ni Tweede said that the existing rear enclosed pantry and rear deck would be removed. M. Tweede said that the new open deck would have enlarged posts and the balusters would be turned. The building material for the deck would be cedar wood. Commission's Findings: 1. Deis said the house was a magnificent structure. The proposed deck was an improvement to the existing pantry and deck. The proposed deck was in keeping the scale and grandeur of the house. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — September 2 t, 1999 Page b G. Halik moved that the Commission accept the deck addition as submitted as it met the standards for construction I through 17. M. Sarkisian seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. VI. NEW BUSINESS C] Application form for the Nomination of an Area, Property, Structure, Site or Object for Designation by Ordinance as a Landmark or Historic District. Jessica Deis said that the application form for nomination was in the information packet. She asked Carlos Ruiz how to proceed %%ith the approval process. C. Ruiz said that Robert Best, Attorney, representing Tom and .inn McMahon and Evanstonians for Appropriate Preservation would like to address the Commission regarding the application form. C. Ruiz said the application form would be used for the nomination of any Area. Property, Structure, Site or Object for Designation by Ordinance as a Landmark or Historic District. C. Ruiz said that a nomination form had been used for the nomination of individual Landmarks since 1994. The form had been revised to nominate historic districts also. C. Ruiz described in detail the content of the nomination form. J. Deis asked if Commissioners had any questions or comments about the nomination form. No Commissioner had a question or comment about the nomination form. J. Deis asked Robert Best if he would like to address the Commission. R. Best said he hoped his comments about the nomination form were constructive. R. Best said that the Preservation Ordinance does advice that the owners of record are persons on the real estate tax roles. R. Best said that statement should be articulated in the nomination form, so that someone who would like to nominate a district did not have to engage in the expensive proposition of ordering a title search for every single property in the district. Section 2-9-5 requires the Commission to evaluate the significance, the integrity and the critical features of the properties in the district. The Commission may ask the applicant to articulate the significance, the integrity and the critical features of the properties within the district. R. Best also said that Section 2-9-5 of the Preservation Ordinance, gives the Commission the opportunity to propose design guidelines for the alteration, construction, and relocation of structures in the district, so that if the applicant proposes certain design guidelines developed by the Commission, he suggested that it should be articulated in the application. George Halik asked if the proposed application form was used before for a district. C. Ruiz said that this would the first time that the form might be used for the nomination of district. Barba s Gardner asked what was used for the local Lakeshore and Ridge Historic Districts. C. Ruiz said that those districts were pan of the current ordinance. Prior to I994 the Lakeshore and Ridge Historic Districts were only in the National Register of Historic Places. In response to a question from G. Halik and Michael Imlay, C. Ruiz said that the City's Corporation Counsel had received the proposed nomination form and he expected their comment. Barbara Gardner asked if when referring to section 2-9-5 (E) was R. Best suggesting that the application form had to be approved by City Council? C. Ruiz said that his understanding was that City Council did not have to approve such form. R. Best concurred Evanston Preserr-ation Commission Minutes —September 21, 1999 F aSe 7 with C. Ruiz's assessment. Barbara Gardner said that R. Best also suggested that the every single property within a historic district had to be reviewed by the Commission. She said that when a historic district was proposed, on the basis of a district as a -hole. the proposed district would be voted up or down as a district and not as "800" individual parcels. R. Best said he did not think he said anything to the contrary. Lynne Heidt asked R. Best what was the point of the nomination form. R. Best said that the point of the form was to put the information before the public as to how the properties in a district satisfied the criteria for the district. The Commission's recommendation should not address only the significance, but also the integrity and critical features of the properties in the district, and whether there should be any special design guidelines for the review of alteration, construction, relocation and demolition. Kirk Irwin said that the Commission reviewed projects based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Preservation. They are written into the City's ordinance, and written into Federal and International Law. R. Best said that he v.-as reading the ordinance that said that the Commission could provide design guidelines for review of alteration, construction, demolition or relocation. Carlos Ruiz said that the Commission could adopt additional design guidelines to address specific architectural features or urban design elements that should be preserved and that were not addressed in the regular guidelines. R. Best said that the Commission had the chance to overlay additional guidelines. Jessica Deis clarified that the Commission had the option to create additional guidelines. Carlos Ruiz said that a way of addressing the concerns raised by R. Best and Commission members, would be by attaching section 2-9-5 (E) the nomination form. R. Best said that that was a fair characterization. Carlos Ruiz asked R. Best if he could explain again the issue of owner of record. R. Best said that legally there were many interpretations of owner of record. In some context one must demonstrate who holds the deed of the propem, for example. In another context, the owner of record is the person whose name is listed on the real estate tax records. The Evanston ordinance says the owner of record is the person whose name is listed on the real estate tax records. R. Best said that should be clear in the nomination form. Carlos Ruiz said that the proposed nomination form addressed appropriately the issues of owner of record, the legal description of individually nominated landmarks, and description of boundaries of nominated historic districts. Barbara Gardner asked R. Best if he had any objections to the proposed nomination form. R_ Best said he had recommendations for changes and that he was not opposing the adoption of an application form. He said the ordinance made it clear that the Commission w•as suppose to specify the form for application. so it was appropriate that the Commission adopted a form of an application. Evanston Pmeservation Commission Minutes — September 21. 1999 Page 8 Jean Lindwall from the audience said that she lived at 625 Library Place, she asked that thu- information requesting property owner phone number be removed from the application forrm. She said that some property owners have unlisted phone numbers. Barbara Gardner said that -for an individual landmark nomination the phone number information %vas appropriate, for a hititmoric district nomination it was not. R. Best referring to the proposed nomination form, number 5 (a), suggested to strike "(if diffferent from owners of record)". C. Ruiz said that another change in number 5 (a) was adding (s) aM r applicant, so it would read applicant(s). Denis Drennen from the audience asked if this Commission had done a whole district like tlttis (Northeast Evanston Historic District)? Carlos Ruiz said not this current Commission. Pm%ious Commissions had dealt with nominations to the National Register under the old ordinance.. D. Drennen asked if a complete application had to be done for each ownerlhome within the district? C. Ruiz said the form asked information about each property within the district. Jessica Deiis added that the application included information about each property within the district in one application. C. Ruiz said that the objective was obtaining information about each property whthin the context of a historic district. He added that not all properties were contributing to a hismadc district. Jessica Deis said that the application would tell you the historic record of each pro7terty in the district. D. Drennen asked if there %%w any application for a historic district under the present code. C. Ruiz said, "no." Lynne Heidt asked if it was possible to establish a historic district and afterwards index or characterized the properties or if it was necessary to go house by house, block by block, strut by street, getting all that information, before a district is named? Barbara Gardner said that one lbsd to have that information for a National Register nomination. C. Ruiz said that another reasom for having all the information was to avoid duplication of effort when nominating a district locaigy or in the National Register. C. Ruiz said that without the necessary information the CommissWin could not justify whether a property was significant or not significant. Anne Diener from the audience said that before the Lakeshore Historic District was designaned, there was a campaign within the City where volunteers went into various neighborhoods to survey the area. Volunteers Iooked at the houses, the curbs and landscaping. She said it was: a very interesting project and she assumed the information was used in the nomination of the Lakeshore Historic District. C. Ruiz said that over time the Commission conducted surveys of great portions of the City. information of properties within historic district was available, however sometimes there was no information at all about specific properties. Andrew Fiske from the audience said that he was an attorney and until recently an Evanston resident. He said that R. Best was an experienced and well respect land use attorney. R. Besa was there on behalf of Tom and Ann McMahon and Evanstonians for Responsible Presetvadion. As their representative and attorney his duty was to zealously advocate for his clients. A. Fiic asked the Commission to keep that in mind and seek the advice of the City's Corporation Counsel. R. Best said he had advised to his clients that he would raise issues whether they applied to them or any other client he might represent in the future. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — September 21. 19" Page 9 Robert Atkins from the audience said he resided at 2005 Orrington Avenue_ He said the Commission had heard recommendations from R. Best and C. Ruiz. The Commission wound have plenty of time to hear from proponents and opponents once a nomination was submitYe:d- He suggested that the Commission approve the nomination form that evening. Judy Fiske from the audience said the Commission could by changing the application make the nomination more difficult. J. Fiske said that the Commission was familiar %%ith the Nationag Register nomination and the information that -A-as in it. Jean LindwaIl said that the applicat- nomination should be limited to identiR ing how the proposed district or landmark nominatiian met the criteria for eligibility, rather than writing the Commission's report to the City Cou=l. Carlos Ruiz head section 2-9-5 (E) for the benefit of the Commission members and the audience. He said that in his opinion this information would be beneficial for the nominator and anyotae who would like to review the nomination. Robert Atkins asked if section 2-9-5 (E) would be an attachment to the nomination form and nothing else. C. Ruiz said, `yes." Jessica Deis asked if the expectation «ems that the Commission would approve a nomination farm that evening. She said that after all the letters and after hearing what people said at the meeting, she began to wonder if the Commission should have a lawyer and let City staff review the application form. Barbara Gardner said that the Commission could vote on the application [form] as the Commission saw it, with the contingency that would it be reviewed and approved by Corporation Counsel from the legal point of view. Dorraine Anderson from the audience asked if for the previously designated historic districts had ordinances that had established commonalties for the criteria of designation. C. Ruiz said that the existing local historic districts were established by the existing preservation ordinance and they did not went through the process that apparently the Commission was about to engage with the nomination of a new historic district under the current ordinance. Judy Fiske requested that the approved nomination form be distributed to the nominators as soon as possible. She also asked that the Commission hold a special meeting to adopt the nomination form because waiting for another thirty days would be harmful to the nominators. She added that a lot misinformation was being disseminated in opposition to the nomination_ Jessica Deis suggested setting a meeting date two weeks from that evening. Also communicate with the City's Corporation Counsel and indicate that the Commission needed their input and response based on the information received by the Commission and also their own analysis- The Commission then would be able to have a nomination form that the Commission could vote upon in a meeting that would be within two to three weeks. George Halik requested that Corporation Counsel be present at the Commission's special meeting. The Commission tentatively scheduled a special meeting on Tuesday, October 5, 1999 at 7:30 p.m. to discuss solely the nomination form and consider a vote for approval of the nomination form by the Commission. Evuutm Pmsern-lion Camp Minutes - Septemtxr 2 I. 1999 Page 10 VU. STAFF REPORT C. Ruiz informed the Corimnission that as part of the requirements for maintaining the Certi6ed Local Government status, s..a.ff'or members of the Commission should attend annually a seminar or workshop to enhance the Cornmission's qualifications. He said he mould attend the annual Illinois Preservation Confercnce in Quincy. Illinois, September 20 —23, 1999. C. Ruiz also suggested that the Commission have the necessary rules and procedures in place before a nomination % aas submitted to the Commission. George Halik said that he did not tad that they (the Commissioners) wrre the people to develop the roles and procedures. Lynne Heidt said that by trading the material available from Evanstonians for Responsible Preservation there was not anything that they would not challenge. Lynne Heidt said that the Commission should have approved a nomination form contingent on the [City] Attorneys' review. Commissioners talked about the discussion that took place earlier regarding the nomination farm. George Hack said that since a nomination of a district was never been subrnitted under the current ordinance, he %%-as not sure if even the proposed nomination form was appropriate. Lynne Heidi asked if other Communities had nomination forms that they had utilized successfully. C. Ruiz said that most communities utilized the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. Evanston has its own standards in addition to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. Vill. ANNOUNCEMEINTS Carlos Ruiz announced that the next regular Preservation Commission meeting was scheduled on Tuesday, October 19, 1999, Room 2403, at 7:30 p.m., Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Evanston, Illinois, 60201 1X. ADJOURNMENT With no further business in the agenda, Jessica Deis adjourned the meeting at 9A5 p.m. Respectfully Submitted: Carlos D. Ruiz Senior Planner/Preservati oordinator Date Approved: Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - August 17. 1999 Page I EVANSTON PRESERVATION CONf.%HSSION MEETING NM*trrES Tuesday, August 17. 1999 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: Heidi P. Carey. Jessica Deis, Barbara Gardner, George Halik. Michael Imlay, Kirk lr%,. in, Susan Regan MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Sarkisian OTHERS PRESENT: Eleanor Smith, Rosalie Greenberger, Jill Randell, Phillip A. Pollack, Ann and Tom McMahon. Reinhold Weiss PRESIDING: Jessica Deis, Chair STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER Jessica Deis, Chair called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.. A quorum being present. H. COMMITTEE REPORTS A) Review and Technical Assistance Committee 1. 1239 Asbury Avenue - Replacement of Windows Eleanor Smith, Rosalie Greenberger, Jill Randell and Phillip A. Pollack, all representing Beth Emet Synagogue (the Syymagogue), presented the replacement of windows at 1239 Asbury Avenue. The project was already in progress without an approved Certificate of Appropriateness. The S}ziagogue owns 1239 Asbury Avenue, an Evanston Landmark within the Evanston Ridge Historic District. Eleanor Smith said the origin of the project started about a year ago ui= they invited neighbors to the Synagogue to talk about among other issues the maintenance of 1239 Asbury. The replacement of windov� s started without a COA because those responsible for the project did not know the landmark status of the property. E. Smith said that City staff informed over the telephone to those responsible of the project that a construction permit was not required for the replacement of the windows. Later, the Evanston Preservation Commission (the Commission) informed the Synagogue that the replacement of the wood windows for vinyl windows was in %iolation of the Evanston Historic Preservation Ordinance. E. Smith said that now the S)Ttagogue hopes to collaborate Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - August 17, 1999 Lage 2 with the Commission to Find a solution that would accommodate the money already spent tkir the vinyl windows. She said the replacement of the wood windows for new wood windows would have double the cost of windows replacement. Phillip A. Pollack said that this year the Synagogue celebrates its fifty-year anniversary as a congregation in Evanston. The Synagogue in no way meant to destroy a community asset- The Synagogue did not have any concept that the replacement of windenvs would be a problem or what the Synagogue was doing to the building was not appropriate_ The Synagogue int=as to correct the mistake within reason. Commission's Findings: Jessica Deis asked if they changed any of the window openings. Phillip Pollack said, no. Eleanor Smith said that the original frame of the windows has remained and what was originally a vertical division now is horizontal. J. Deis said that when looki= at standards of alteration 2, and 4, they have changed nothing. Regarding standard 6, J. Deus said that in a situation of necessary replacement the Commission would like to see wood windows. but there is nothing specific that bars vinyl windows. J. Deis said that since the window openings are the same, she would tend to approve the vinyl windows. George Halik asked what operation had the original windows. P. Pollack said it was hard to tell since most windows were painted shut. Barbara Gardner asked if the windows crank out. P. Pollack said that there was some kind of a latch in the middle of the windows. P. Pollack said that the original windows were probably casement windows. B. Gardner said that it appeared that the large windows on the west elevation and the windows on the north elevation had been already changed. She asked if the windows on the east elevation had been also changed P. Pollack said the east elevation has a variety of window styles. P. Pollack said that there is two windows on the south elevation. Kirk Irwin said that the vertical line on the original windows is very important. The double hung windows do change the original character and qualities of the properry. G. Halik agreed with K. Irwin, however, he said that he would like to find a solution to the ct=ent situation. B. Gardner said that the Synagogue was caught in a difficult position since the C-M-'s building code does not require a permit for the replacement of windows. Carlos Ruiz said that it is very clear that the replacement of windows do require a C.A. according to the Preservation Ordinance. E. Smith said that the Synagogue had nothing but good intentions with the renovation of the building. G. Halik said that it is clear that the replacement vinyl windows are in violation of the Preservation Ordinance. G. Halik said that under the mitigating circumstances and miscommunication between City staff and the applicant that he would like to approve the project but he did not know how one could go about it. Carlos Ruiz read a section of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards dealing with window replacement: "...replacing in kind an entire window that is too deteriorated to repair using the same sash and pane from the original windows and other design details, if using the same kind of materials is not technically or economically feasible when replacing windows deteriorated beyond repair then a compatible substitute material may be considered." C. Ruiz said that n,_ Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - August 17, 1999 Ege 3 perhaps the Commission could incorporate the previous language in a motion to approve the vinyl windows. G. Hank said that does not do it for him. He said the issue for him is not the vinyl, but the pattern of the panes of the windows, which is a character issue. G. Halik said if he were to move for approval of the project, the qurstion is in what grounds. C. Ruiz said that the Synagogue was trying to address a community concern. C. Ruiz referred to a letter from the City citing them for maintenance issues. C. Ruiz suggested that the motion should make Clear that the approval is an exception rather than the rule. Heidi Carey said that she agreed with G. Halik, but that she was still concerned with the windows. H. Carey asked how many windows woe not still replaced. E. Smith said that the third story windows and some second story windows were not replaced. G. Halik moved that the Commission accept the application (replacement of wood windows with vinyl windows) not because it meets the standards (of alteration), but because there was an unfortunate communication mishap and the applicant proceeded in good faith, but the applicant did not understand that they had to come before the Commission. G. Halik recommended approval with the comment (condition) that the windows in the third floor be preserved. B. Gardner seconded the motion. Discussion: C. Ruiz said that he did not know as a fact that indeed there was some type of miscommunication between City staff and the applicant. P. Pollack said that the Synagogue was not trying to blame the City staff and that they acknowledge their mistake. B. Gardner suggested that City staff' answering the phone be reminded of the replacement of windows require a C.A.. 'Ilse motion passed unanimously. Vote: 7 ayes, 0 nays. 2. 1243 Maple Avenue - Replacement of wood fence with PVC fence Virginia Holbert, owner, presented an application for a C.A. for the replacement of an existing comer lot wood fence with a PVC (vinyl) fence at 1243 Maple Avenue. The property is within the Evanston Ridge Historic District. V. Holbert showed slides of fences in Evanston and Wilmette. V. Holbert did not initially identified which were wood and which were PVC. V. Holbert said after showing the slides that few people could tell the difference between a wood fence and a PVC fence, unless one would touch the material. V. Holbert said that what really gives PVC away is that it does not age. She said that it is hard to find pristine wood fences with fcrzials in Evanston, that is why she went also to Wilmette. V. Holbert said that she was not sure if she understood the objections to PVC fences. She said a PVC fence replicates a freshly painted wood fence, and it does not age the way a wood fence does. C. Ruiz said that this is the first PVC fence that the Commission is being asked to approve. He said that routinely he would approve replacement of fences in kind (including the material). C. Ruiz said that in his judgement the Commission should have the opportunity to review the first PVC fence. G. Halik asked if the proposed fence is the same style as the existing fence. V. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - August 17, 1999 EW4 Holbert said that the existing fence is a stockade wood fence. C. Ruiz said that the proposed fence is more of a solid traditional style fence. C. Ruiz showed two different samples of PVC fence material, one from the proposed fence and another of a different fence company. C Ruiz pointed out that there was a difference of quality between the two products. Commission's Findings: Jessica Deis said that indeed this is the first PVC fence in front of the Commission. She said that the style of the proposed fence is in keeping with the historic district. J. Deis said that the question in her mind is what is a PVC fence, because there is very few examples of it. She said that the PVC sample that is shiny it looks like plastic and she would veto that product (V. Holbert's proposed PVC fence material does not look as shiny). Michael Imlay said the PVC fence at Sherman Avenue looks shiny. V. Holbert said that sample for her fence looks good. She said all the boards are installed separately with an tongue and grove joint. M. Imlay said it looks good until light reflects out of it and when one gets up close. M. Imlay said if the PVC comes in a duller finish. He said that a duller finish and the color are going to determine whether is going to look like wood or plastic. V. Holbert said that her PVC fence will be white. Heidi Carey asked if there ww a fence on the north side of the property (facing Dempster Street). V. Holbert said yes. Barbara Gardner said that she and her husband had worked recently in a hardware show. She said that there were a lot of displays at the show that had fences around them. They looked at them very closely and she and her husband had to touch and tap the fences to determined whether they were wood or PVC. There was one fence that they were certain it was PVC but it turns out that it was wood painted in shiny paint. B. Gardner said she saw driving around large fences and she can not tell which ones are wood or PVC. B. Gardner said that the proposed PVC fence would be a great improvement to the existing stockade wood fence. George Halik asked if there is a range of quality of the PVC material. He said that in his mind is crucial to determine if PVC is acceptable. C. Ruiz said that the PVC fence on Sherman Avenue had a shine and he could tell it was plastic when he got closer to it. From a greater distance the fence appearance was better. B. Gardner suggested that the contractor install the fence PVC boards with the mat side out. Heidi Carey asked if a different style of fence could be less threatening than the solid PVC fence. B. Gardener said yes, but Dempster Street is a busy street. G. Halik asked if there is a way to find out a range in the quality of PVC fencing material. V. Holbert said that the appearance of PVC fence is also determined by the surrounding setting such as mature planting versus a parking lot. Michael Imlay said that the fence at Sherman Gardens had smaller sections in between post as compare to a wood fence. C. Ruiz noted that time same fence at Sherman Gardens was not rigid, in fact it was wobbly. V. Holbert said that time PVC fence warranty is for twenty (20) years, B. Gardner asked if the new fence would be place at the same location of the existing fence, which is approximately 3' behind the sidewalk. V. Holbert said yes. Virginia Holbert said that they are also proposing a side front fence that used to be a 9' high stockade fence. The new side front new fence would be a 3' picket fence set back further from Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - August 17. 1999 Pale 5 the former 8' high fence. B. Gardener asked if bushes would be planted in front of the fc= cc Dempster Street. V. Holbert said she plans to grown some vines instead. J. Deis said that would be necessary to always specify the product, because she sees a difference between the PVC finial and the PVC board. J. Deis said that she would like to see an exxnpdc of the exact product. C. Ruiz said that perhaps a motion that would give the presier-.-ition coordinator the authority to request an actual sample of the material, make sure that the mars side is facing the street. G. Ralik said that the Commission should establish a standard far PVC fences. An actual sample of the PVC material should be available to determine if it is acceptaKe or not. C. Ruiz asked V. Halbert what were her options in terms of the PVC material. V. Holbert said she did not know-. V. Holbert said that the fence company told her that PVC is okm- in Evanston, what they did not told her is that the Preservation Commission wood approm-e fences in the historic districts. V. Holbert said that she is aware of all other regulations regardirrg fences, but she did not know that PVC would be an issue for historic preservation_ Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plan (PVC fence) as proposed. Thai the proposed PVC fence material is the same as the one at Sherman Gardens. That if there is a side with a mat finish that the mat finish face the street. G. Halik seconded the motion. The motion pissed unaniimously. III.COMMUNICATIONS O Letter from John B. Murphy regarding 2200 Central Street and desire to apply for a certificate of economic hardship. C. Ruiz said that a letter from J. B. Murphy, attorney, enquires about the process for obtaining a Certificate of Economic Hardship (CEH). The Murphy asks if his client could apply directly for a CEH. C. Ruiz explained that an applicant has to apply first for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for alteration, construction. relocation and demolition. if the COA is denied, then the applicant has the option to appeal to the City Council the Commission's denial or apply to the Commission for a CEH. C. Ruiz said that he requested a opinion to the City's legal counsel regarding Murphy's request. C. Ruiz said that he has also requested to legal counsel that the Commission consult with an outside professional expert in matters of teal estate appraisal and preservation law. The standards for establishing economic hardship would require such expertise. J. Deis said that she completely agree with C. Ruiz. I Deis said that until the Commission knows what they want to do it is difficult to determine what constitutes economic hardship. J. Deis entered for the record the following additional communications ❑ A historic suburb divided, Chicago Sun -Times, Monday, July 12, 1999 ❑ Lighthouse to shine as a U.S. landmark, Pioneer Press, Thursday, July 15, 1999 13 Historic district hopefuls proceed despite dissent, Chicago Tribune, Thursday, July 15, 1999 Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes -August 17, 1999 Lage 6 ❑ Fads of preservation aren't worth saving, Pioneer Press, Thursday, July 14. 1999 ❑ Marking land and sea, Chicago Tribune, Monday July 19, 1999 ❑ McMahons deserve apology from critics, Pioneer Press, Thursday, July 29, 1999 ❑ Landmark process creating confusion, Pioneer Press, Thursday, August 5, 1999 ❑ 1 st step to intrusion, Pioneer Press, Thursday, August 12, 1999 IV -OLD BUSINESS 1205 Ridge Avenue - Demolition of existing garage, construction of new two -car garage Jessica Deis said that the Commission received a letter from an architect indicating structural unsoundness, poor roof situation, etc. Also, a new drawing for the garage shows 7/12 roof pitch. Other requirements such as squaring the garage door corners, provide trim around doors, windows and gable, provide thinner vinyl siding, color of vinyl siding would match color of the stucco on the house. B. Gardner said the garage door is up against the north side wall. She objected to the appearance of that section of the garage. C. Ruiz said that the location of the garage door could easily be resolved. J. Deis asked if it was a consensus that all issues raised by the Commission had been addressed by the applicant, except the location of the garage door near the north wall. Commissioners answered yes. IV. NEW BUSINESS New Appointments to the Evanston Preservation Commission expecting coufu motion from City Council. J. Deis announced that Michael Girard, architect, and Lynne Heidt, realtor, were expecting confirmation from the City Council for appointment to the Evanston Preservation Commission. V. STAFF REPORT C. Ruiz said that the 1999 Statewide Preservation Conference is in Quincy, Illinois, September 23-25, t999. He encouraged all commissioners to attend the preservation conference. C. Ruiz informed the Commission that NEHDA has contacted him to inform him that NEHDA is nearing the completion of the nomination of Northeast Evanston Historic District as a local district. NEHDA did not announce a specific date for the submission of the nomination. VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS C. Ruiz announced that the next Commission meeting is Tuesday, September 21, 1999, at 7:30 p.m., Room 2403, Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Evanston, Illinois. 4 Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - August 17, 1999 Eye 7 VI1. ADJOURNMENT B. Gardner moved to adjourn the meeting. At this time Tom McMahon asked clarification regarding NEHDA's upcoming local nomination of Northeast Evansikin Hiswric District J_ Deis asked C. Ruiz to repeat his report_ C. Ruiz said that Judy Fiske of NEHDA informed him that NEHDA is about to complete the local nomination of the Northeast E%rarwon Histuric District J. Fiske did not specify when NEHDA would submit the nomination to the Commission. Ann McMahon asked if the National Register Nomination of the Northeast Evanston Historic District was approved. C. Ruiz said that he did not know at this time the status of such nomination which is pending action from the U.S. Department of the Interior's National Park Service. No other questions were asked. G. Halik seconded the motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Vote: 7 ayes, Q nays. The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted: arlos D. Ruie Senior Planner/Preservation Coordinator �; r Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes -- July 20, 1999 Page 1 EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MiNr'UTES Tuesday, July 20, 1999 730 P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: Jessica Deis, Barbara Gardner, George Halik, Michael Imlay, Kirk Irwin, and Susan Regan MEMBERS ABSENT: Heidi Carey, Mark Sarkisian OTHERS PRESENT: Kathy Burgess, Hans Friedman, Steve Knutson, Michael Whinston, John Maturo, Paul Selden, Kelly Morgan, Gerald Gordon, Sarah Krepp, Joe Harris, Jim Torvik, Michael Girard, Gary Cole, Jeff Bergman. Polly Hawkins PRESIDING: Jessica Deis STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz 1. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM Jessica Deis, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m., a quorum of six (6) Commission members being present. 11. MINUTES Carlos D. Ruiz said that he would be sending the minutes in the mail. 111. COMMUNICATIONS Carlos Ruiz that the Commission members received in their packets two news article from the Chicago Sun -times dated Monday July 12, 1999 "A historic suburb divided" and article from the Chicago Tribune dated Thursday, July 15, 1999 " Historic district hopefuls proceed despite dissent." C. Ruiz said that he also sent copies to members of the City Council. . 1.. " it. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — July 20, 1999 Page 2 IV. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Review and Technical Assistance Committee 1. 1330 Church Street - Addition of a new garage Kathy Burgees, owner, and Hans Friedman, architect presented plans for an addition of a garage at 1330 Church Street. The property is an Evanston Landmark within the Evanston Ridge Historic District. H. Friedman said that his clients have two cars and one small garage. He said that they studied various rooflines for the new two -car garage addition and concluded that the ridge of the garage addition should run east and west. H. Friedman showed pictures of the house to further illustrate his presentation. H. Friedman said that the exterior materials for the garage addition would be the same as the main house and that the garage windows would be replicated from the windows on the main house. K. Burgecs asked that the Commission considered the windows on the east elevation of the garage as an option for security and safety reasons. H. Friedman said that he maintained the pitch of the roof over the garage the same as the main roof over the house. Commission's Findings: Barbara Gardner asked if the roofline of the existing garage would remain. H. Friedman said yes. He said that for zoning reasons they needed to increase the side yard setback from 4' to 5'. "The roof ridge of the existing garage is below the new garage roof ridge. George Halik asked if the owner would consider pushing back the front of the garage addition at the same setback of the existing garage. B. Gardner said that the proposed siting of the garage gives them free access to their back yard. H. Friedman said that having the garage addition forward puts an element to end the main house. Michael Imlay asked if the Elm tree at the entrance would remain. K. Burgees said the entrance would remain as is. 1. Deis asked how much of lot coverage zoning variance is being requested. H. Friedman said approximately 1 1 S.F. G. Halik asked if the garage addition would not be any further from the existing projecting element of the house facing Church Street. H. Friedman said the two elements would align exactly. C. Ruiz asked if the neighbors had any objections to the zoning variance. K. Burgees said no. Kirk Irwin complemented the design of the garage addition. J. Deis referred to the standards of construction 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. She said that the proposed garage addition meet these standards. J. Deis read also relationship of special uses and variation standards. J. Deis said that the proposed garage addition did not have a conflict with special uses and variation standards. George Halik moved that the Commission accept the proposal as submitted as meeting the standards for review of construction. B. Gardener seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Vote: 6 ayes, 0 nays. k�z Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — July 20, 1999 Page 3 2. 911 Edgemere Court - Extension of existing twin -car garage to three -car garage Stephen Knutson, architect presented dra%%ings for an extension of an existing; two -car garage to a three -car garage at 911 Edgemere. The property is in Evanston landmark within the E%mnston Lakeshore Historic District- S. Knutson said that his client Candice Groot has a tuT�­car garage and o%%i s three curs. S. Knutson said that the plans ask to come out 10% 8" from the current garage. S. Knutson said the house is a nice house but he was surprised that the house is indi-Odually designated as an Evanston Landmark. He said that they are going from a large twca-car garage door to three individual garage doors. S. Knutson said that originally the garage door faced west, few years ago the Commission approved to change the garage door to face south. S. Knutson showed pictures of the property and a map of the 900 block of Edgemere Court. He said that he draw a straight line and a line following the contour of the street. He said the houses setbacks are random. Commission's Findings: Michael Imlay noted that the property immediately north seems to project considerably out. S. Knutson said that the proposed garage would project to the face of a sculpture pedestal shown in the pictures. S. Knutson said the most idiosyncratic setback to the proposed garage is the house immediately to the north. Jessica Deis asked if this requires a front setback zoning variation. S. Knutson said yes, he said that it is in the category of minor variation. J. Deis said for the record that the Commission received three letters from neighbors at 930, 943 and 900 Edgemere Court indicating their opposition to the proposed three -car garage. J. Deis asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak about the project. No one in the audience wished to speak. J. Deis said that she spent at least 15 minutes and observed an extraordinary level of pedestrian traffic. She said that the proposed addition would be highly visible for anybody who would pass by. She said a three -car garage in such highly visible location in an area where there is that type of character (a wall with three garage doors) is inappropriate. J. Deis said she has referred to the standards in relation to proportions and relations to the facades of other buildings. J. Deis said that the proposed three -car garage is not appropriate in the neighborhood due to the high level of visibility. B. Gardner concurred with J. Deis. Michael Imlay said that the project is nicely done. However, the letters opposing the project and the degree of encroachment, make it difficult to approve. B. Gardner said that she would feel differently if the applicant would be asking for a garage if non -was there before. J. Deis said that a two -car garage is standard in Evanston. If the applicant had been asking to enlarge a one -car garage to a two -car garage she would also feel differently. She said that the architectural elements are very appropriate. G. Halik read standard S for construction: "Rhythm of spacing and structures on streets. The relationship of a structure or object to the open space between it and adjoining structures or objects shall be visually t Evanston Presen-lion Commission Minutes — JuIv 20. 1999 Page 4 compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects, and places to which is visually related.- G. Halik said the proposed three -tar garage did not meet standard 5. J. Deis said that a two -car garage does not create a hardship to the owner, she said that in fact more cars could be parked on the driveway. J. Deis asked Commission members if there was another way to accommodate a three -car garage on the property. Kirk Irvin said that standards 4 and 5 of construction are very important. He emphasized standard 4. which deals with Rhytm of solids to voids in front facades. He said that a three -car garage with three doors in front of a house was incompatible with the pedestrian scaly. S. Knutson said that in his view the design helps to improve the pedestrian activity by moving off the street a car into a garage. G. Halik said that the application also requires a minor variation where other neighbors have to comply with the zoning regulations. S. Knutson said that some neighboring properties to 911 Edgemere are already exceeding the zoning regulations. M. Imlay said that the design and the arguments presented by S. Knutson an: compelling_ However, he felt that the solution gives to the vehicular traffic. M. Imlay said that he found that difficult to justify. G. Malik moved that the Commission does not approve the application (three -car garage from two -car garage) because it violates standard 5 of constriction. B. Gardner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Vote: 6 ayes, 0 nays. C. Ruiz informed S. Knutson that the applicant has 30 days to appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council. 3. 130 Dempster Street - New driveway and front walk Michael Whinston, owner, presented plans for a new driveway and a front walk at 130 Dempster Street. The property is located within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District_ M. Whinston said that, originally, the house had a one-story attached garage at the west end of the house. After the renovation of the house last year, the location of driveway for the new garage needs relocation. M. Whinston said that they arc also proposing an off the street visitors parking on the west side of the driveway, and a new walkway to the house from the driveway. Commission's Furdings: No discussion ensued after Michael Whinston presentation. George Halik moved that the Commission accept the project as presented, as it meets the standards for alterations. Michael Imlay seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Vote: 6 ayes, 0 nays. 4. 1235 Maple Avenue - Removal of existing porch, replacement of porch in land with a Trip roof above. Paul Selden, owner and John Maturo, contractor presented plans for the removal of an existing f . Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — July 20, 1999 Page 5 porch and the construction of a ncw- porch in kind with a hip roof at 1235 Maple Avenue. The property is within the Evanston Ridge Historic District. C. Ruiz said that the screens shown on the elevation drawings are no longer part of the project P. Selden said the proposed porch would be similar to the original porch based on anecdotal information from his neighbors. J. Mature said that the design of the new porch is very typical to similar homes in the neighborhood Commisslon's Findings: No discussion ensued after Paul Selden and John Maturo presentation. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plans (of the new porch) as presented for alteration. Michael Imlay seconded the motion. Discussion: C. Ruiz asked if the motion could include the standards. B. Gardner said the project meets standard 2 of alteration by rebuilding the proposed porch. J. Deis said the project also meets standard 5. B. Gardner amended her motion to include that the proposed new porch meets standards 2 and 5 of alteration. Kirk Irwin seconded the amendment. The motion passed unanimously as amended. Vote: 6 ayes, 0 nays. 5. 1213 Judson Avenue - Replace 3rd floor front windows and raise them 6" and add half round window above center window Kelly Morgan, owner, presented plans for the replacement of the 3rd floor front windows, raise them 6" and add half round window above center window at 1213 Judson Avenue. The property is located within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. K. Morgan said she would like to replace the existing windows with the same size but raise them up 6" to give more safety to their young children, all less than four and a half years old. K. Morgan said that the new windows are vinyl clad windows which already exist on the building, and add a sun burst over the middle window to be more consistent with the neighboring buildings and bring the new windows flush with the exterior wall. Commission's Findings: G. Halik said that one of the major character giving features of the house are the recessed windows. Jessica Deis agreed. K. Morgan said se would like some advice about the sun burst window. C. Ruiz said that the sun burst window could be flush to the exterior wall and would meet the standards of alteration since it would not be a new architectural element in the context of the neighboring buildings. Susan Regan disagreed, she said that she would prefer a skylight. G. Halik agreed with S. Regan. K. Irwin wondered if originally there was a Palladian window. J. Deis said that to her the recessed windows are the most important element under the gable. K. Irwin said that the exterior and interior detail work might cost too much to do it right. K. t Evanston Presen-ation Commission Minutes - July 20. 1999 Page 6 Morgan said that the Palladian window would be an enhancement to the building. K. Irwin said that it is difficult to work with aluminum siding. G. Halik said that the Commission should offer some direction to the applicant regarding the proposed work. He said that a flat a skylight would be less of a change than the proposed Palladian window. Carlos Ruiz said safety is always a concern for the Commission. He suggested making the house safe from the inside. M. Imlay said that he would recommend not altering the existing architecture of the gable until the aluminum siding is removed sometime in the future. C. Ruiz said that a skylight is reversible feature. B. Gardner moved that the Commission do not approve the project as presented because it does not meet standards of alterations 1 and 2. She also motioned that the Commission approve a skylight on a side of the gable roof that would not be visible from the street and gain approval by staff, and that the vinyl windows be allowed as presented. G. Halik seconded the motion. 6. 1228 Lake Street - Second -story rear/side addition Michelle and Gerald Gordon, owners and Tom Rosengreen, architect, presented plans for a second -story rear/side addition at 1228 Lake Street. The property is an Evanston Landmark within the Evanston Ridge Historic District. G. Gordon said that the proposed second -story addition is over an existing porch. He said that T. Rosengreen and Carlos Ruiz had previously discussed the project. G. Gordon said that T. Rosengreen has put particular attention to detail. The drawings makes two references, the brick work to match the existing brick work, matching existing roof line and shingles. Commission's F-Iiedings: George Halik moved that the Commission approve the project as submitted because it meets the standards for alteration and construction. The motion, seconded by Barbara Gardner, passed unanimously. 7.311 Keeney Street - One-story addition of garage, family room and studio requiring a major zoning variance (two -car garage encroaches into the thirty foot (30') required rear yard) Kirk Irwin recused himself from the discussion and vote due to potential conflict of interest with Harry Weese and Associates, the architects of the project at 311 Keeney Street. Joseph Harris and Sarah Krepp, owners and James Torvik, architect presented drawings for a one-story addition garage, family room and studio at 311 Keeney Street. The property is located within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. James Torvik said that his clients/friends are moving to Evanston for their retirement. J. Torvik said that the house at 311 Keeney Street is between Judson and Forest, the only house on that street block facing south. The house is a brick n Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - July 20. 1999 Page 7 house with white trim and center entry. The prior additions. a sercvn porch and adcn, wautd be rcmoyed. The project includes a family room, an artist's studio for large paintings and a twv- ; garage. The position of the house causes the project to seek for a major zoning variance for the rear yard setback. Carlos Ruiz asked if the neighbors have any objections to the proposed Wring %viance. Joseph Harris said no. James Torvik said that a couple of large trees would be saves by the plan. Commission's JV Indings: Jessica Deis asked why the plan chose for the variance rather than move the additiL.41 closer to the south on the lot. James Torvik said that alternative would have compromised the living room and the relationship of the studio and the family room. J. Deis asked about the east facing elevation, a blank wall would be facing the neighbors. J. Torvik said that the east elevation is a dilemma because his client S. Krepp needs the wall to hang her large paintings. James Torvik said that the roof angle on the addition would match the roof angle of the house, the roof shingles would match the existing roof shingles. The south wall windows are large windows to allow natural light. J. Tonvk said that the exterior finish would be EIFS, which is a stucco like material predominant in the neighborhood. George Halik said that the EIFS would distinguish the new from the old. Carlos Ruiz said that the Commission has not considered favorably the use of EIFS. In some communities of the L.S. EIFS has been banned because many complaints of poor performance. Jessica Deis asked if EIFS is the same as dry -•it. G. Halik said that there are different degrees of quality of EIFS. James Torvik said that cost is an issue to the owners. He said that EIFS or dryvit is progressively replacing stucco finish. C. Ruiz said that EIFS is not replacing stucco in historic districts. J. Deis said that stucco is used a lot in the Northshore and particularly in Evanston. G. Halik said EIFS is not stucco but for this use and distance from the public way, it would not be noticeable. Carlos Ruiz said that if the Commission were to approve the project with EIFS finish. he would like the motion to indicate why in this case the EIFS is acceptable, and why it would not be the same for another project that might be closer to the street or it might be affecting the primary facade of a historic building. C. Ruiz noted that the Commission had denied not longago on another project the replacement of brick and siding for a man-made material that looked like stone. J. Deis agreed with C. Ruiz. However she said that she would consider in this case the use of EIFS for the secondary views that are setback from the facade of the house and views that are on the alley side. Barbara Gardner asked if face brick could be used on the facade visible from the street to match the existing brick on the house. George Halik said that he would disagree with the u-se of face brick. He said that face brick is less honest than the EIFS and that matching; brick is difficult. C. Ruiz said that the Secretary of the Interior's Standards encourage the use of sympathetic Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes —July 20, 1999 Page 8 materials to the original materials that would distinguish the new from the old. He said another w-ay to achieve that Ls by the use of setbacks. Barbara Gardner asked if the floor plan could be tighten a little by putting the utility rooms on the north side of the house. James Torvik said no, because of future resale value the studio could be converted into a mas:.,er bedroom, the bathroom location as proposed is essential for future resale value. Michael lmla% said that EIFS material turns the comer to meet the quasi -traditional house, he said that there is some risk that the north elevation could look too simplistic «ithout some fenestration or colurrxns. James Torvik said landscaping would improve the north elevation. M. Imlay asked about the additional two -car garage. J. Torvik said that the existing one -car garage is inadequate. Jessica Deis said that in this case the two garages are not contiguous and the two - car garage door faces the alley and the one -car garage certainly dates tack. Jessica Deis read the standards for zoning variance as stated in the Zoning Ordinance. Jessica Deis said that the Commission did not see yet window styles and have not decided on exterior finish materials. J. Deis said that the Commission would look upon favorably to true divided light wood windows. M. Imlay said that the new windows should complement the contemporary style of the addition. The Commission discussed how the %%indouvs and exterior finish material could be approved %%ithout delay. It was concluded that the Commission would cause no additional delay since the property owners have to still obtain the zoning variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. George Halik moved that the Commission accept the project as presented because it meets the standards of construction with the caveat that as the project gets developed, details such as materials and selection of windows should be presented to Carlos Ruiz for final approval. Barbara Gardner seconded the motion. Discussion: James Torvik asked if they come back with wood windows with true divided lights, that option would be no contest. However their second choice could be vinyl clad windows with divided lights and their third choice would be windows with not divided lights. J. Deis said that at this time the Commission was not excluding any of the options, it all would depend on the final design. The motion passed unanimously. 8.1106 Elmwood Avenue - Demolition of existing garage, construction of new garage to match architecture of house Michael Girard, owner presented plans for the demotion of an existing garage and the construction of a new garage to match the architecture of the house at 1106 Elmwood Avenue. The property is an Evanston Landmark. Michael Girard said that he owns a two -flat building and he needs three zoning variances to build rt Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — July 20, 1999 Page 9 the new garage. Two of the variances relate to the requined sethucks, the third va: uKv �.'. uld be the parking requirements for a two -flat house. M. Girard said that his intention is ftt m-w garage architecture would match that of the house. M. Girard said t!r3t the house is c►rx humhed fifteen (115) year old house, the existing garage was built its 1922 and- it shows c%xTy bit of wem through the years. M. Girard said that the garage door would have two leaves. Commission's Findings: Jessica Deis read the standards for review of demolition as stated is the Evansnn Prescrr-ation Ordinance. The Commission found that the proposed demolition of the existing age met all the standards of demolition. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accW the proposed demolition of the existing garage as meeting the standards of demolition. Michael Imlay seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the proposal for the new garage, recommending the change of the shingles under the cave and gable of the garage to match the shingles of the gable of the house, as meeting the standards for new construction. The motion, seconded by Kirk Irwin, passed unanimously. 9. 1205 Ridge Avenue - Demolish existing garage - construction of new two-csr garage Jeff Bergman, owner and Gary Cole, attorney presented plans for the demolition of an existing one -car garage and the construction of a two -car garage at 1205 Ridge Avenue. The property is within the Evanston Ridge Historic District. Gary Cole said that his client would like to demolish the existing one -car garage. which is in disrepair, and it is not adequate for the needs of his client. The proposed garage would have a gable roof with a 6/ 12 pitch. The exterior finish would be vinyl siding; the side elevation would have a side door and a sliding window. The garage door is 16' vdde and 7' high and it is off centered. Commission's Findings: Jessica Deis said that the design of the proposed two -car garage seemed inferior to the design of the existing one -car garage. She asked if the existing garage could be restored. Barbara Gardner said that the design of the new garage could more closely follow the standards for review of construction. She said that the proposed vinyl siding was not appropriate for the district_ Gary Cole said that the existing garage is not structurally sound. Barbara Gardner asked if the applicant could provide evidence that the existing garage could not be restored. Jeff Bergman said yes. Jessica Deis read the standards for review of demolition as stated in the Preservation Ordinance. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the demolition of the existing one -car garage because it meets the standards for demolition. Michael Imlay seconded the motion. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes —July 20, 1999 Page 10 Discussion: Jessica Deis said that she would like to ask the applicant provide the Commission %ith an independent report from a qualified person that the garage is beyond restoration. Barbara Gardner amended her motion adding that a structural study or report be submitted by the applicant to Carlos Ruiz, stating that the existing garage is be%;,md repair. Michael Imlay seconded the amendment. The motion passed unanimous,; as amended. The Commission discussed some options regarding the design of the proposed twos -car garage so that it would meet the standards for review of construction. George Halik moved that the Commission accept the construction of the two -car garage with the modifications to the original design as follows: increase pitch of garage roof to 7:12 (gable roof), square off door corners, provide wood trim around doors, windows and gable, provide thinner (weather exposure) vinyl siding to match the color of the stucco exterior finish on the house. Michael Imlay seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 10. 1814 Wesley Avenue - Exterior Alterations Polly Hawkins, architect, presented plans for exterior alterations at 1814 Wesley Avenue. The property is an Evanston Landmark. P. Hawkins said that the project includes the partial demolition of the existing kitchen, the removal of two windows on the first floor and one window on the second floor and the removal of a rear entry. Polly Hawkins said that a new wooden porch and entry and two new windows would be built the on the west rear elevation. The project has a second phase to in dude wooden columns at the rear porch to match the columns at the front porch, replace the siding, on the 1970s addition to match the siding on the house, remove French doors and install instead new two double hung wood windows. Commission's Findings: Jessica asked Deis if any member of the Commission had questions. Being none, she asked for a motion. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the proposed alterations at 1814 Wesley Avenue as submitted, meeting the standards for review of alteration. Kirk Irwin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. V. ANNOUNCEMENTS Carlos Ruiz announced that the next Commission meeting is scheduled on Tuesday, September 21, 1999, at 7:30 p.m. Room 2403. Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue. V1. ADJOURNMENT Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — Juh 20, 1999 Page 1 l With no further business on the agenda, Jessica Deis moved to adjourn the nxvring. Barbara Gardner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimou*. The meeting, adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted: ,rdLu: ;r4, Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 1 EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES Tuesdiiiy. . July 6, 1999 8:30 P I. - Room 2403 Comic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: Heidi P. Carey, Jessica Deis, Barbara Gardner, George Halik. tiGchael Imlay, Kirk Irwin, Susan Regan and Mark Sarkisian MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Janet Kohl PRESIDING: Jessica Deis, Chair STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz 1. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM Jessica Deis called the meeting to order at 8:30 p.m., a quorum being present_ J. Deis said this was a special meeting (a quorum was not present at the regular meeting of June 15, 1999). The Commission had discussed all the projects preciously (June 15, 1999). J. Deis said that there were some questions for a project at 1046 Sheridan Road; for the other projects the Commission members would be prepared to vote. II. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Review and Technical Assistance Committee 1. 1046 Sheridan Road - New corner lot wrought iron fence and landscaping Janet Kohl, owner, presented plans for a new corner lot wrought iron fence and landscaping at 1046 Sheridan Road. The property is an Evanston Landmark. J. Kohl said she would like to put a 4' high wrought iron fence around her property for safety of her child and dogs. She said that her property has a very little back yard. J. Kohl said that there was a fence originally, she found the pier bases and concrete footings of such a fence. J. Kohl showed photographs of other houses in Evanston designed by the same architect (Ernest Mayo) that have wrought iron fences. The design of the fence would be the same as the existing wrought iron crates in front of the windows. Commission's Findings: Barbara Gardner asked J. Kohl if she talked to her Alderman about her plans. J. Kohl said: no. J. _1% Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 2 Kohl said that she contacted all her neighbors around 250' as required by Zoning when requesting a zoning variation. J. Deis asked J. Kohl if she was able to find any other evidence about the house. J. Kohl said. no. She added that she went to the Evanston and Chicago Historical Societies and the Chicago Art Institute. She could not find anything about the house. B. Gardner said that at Caldwell Banker on Sherman Street there is a very old real estate listing from the 1940's. Mark Sarkisian asked what questions were outstanding about the project? Kirk Irwin said that the Commission wondered about the possibility of researching the original fence. he said that there is some indication that masonry piers existed originally. K. Irwin said that the Commission asked the applicant to produce some drawings on top of a photograph showing the fence with piers on front of the house to add some context. K. Irwin said that the Commission members discussed earlier (June 15. 1999) the adjacent properties that also have fences. J. Kohl said she looked in her neighborhood and found that there is either a fence a hedge or a jungle on every property in the surrounding area J. Kohl said that each property on either side of her property have a retaining wall with a hedge that is 4' to 5'. The property across the street has a double hedge with a fence. Across the alley there is a 4' to 5' hedge and on the other side there is a fence with overgrown plantings. J. Kohl said that her property would be the only open property even with the fence. George Halik asked about the Iandscaping. J. Kohl said that the landscape drawing snows the fence with an English garden with many flowers and roses. J. Kohl said she wants the house and the garden to be noticed, not the fence. J. Deis said that she objected earlier to the fence by citing standards of construction 1.5, 6, 7 and 11, that had to do with its relationship to the neighborhood. J. Deis said that in practice she does not dispute the applicant's need for a fence, neither does she dispute that the house would look very nice surrounded by a wrought iron fence. J. Deis said that looking at the standards, and the fence connection to the other visible properties, she believes that hedges were one thing and fences are another thing. G. Halik asked J. Deis if she teas not objecting to the fence but the design of the fence. J. Deis said, no. J. Deis said she was objecting to the fence in that context, because them are no other fences like it within visibility of the subject house. J. Kohl said that there are fences on all four properties surrounding her property. J. Deis said that there are no fences like the proposed one on Sheridan Road. J. Kohl said that there are 6' wooden fences and wire mesh fences. J. Deis said that there were no C high wooden fences on Sheridan Road. J. Kohl said she would be willing to build a retaining wall. G. Halik asked if this type of fence was allowed why would it be a preservation issue? Carlos Ruiz said that the proposed fence had to conform to the Zoning Ordinance and the Preservation Ordinance. J. Deis said that the fence in itself was under the purview of the Commission. J. Kohl said that according to the Zoning Ordinance she could not put a front yard fence without a zoning variance, but she could put a 6' high fence on Sheridan Road, because it would be allowed on her back and side yard. She said that it would be preferable to have a 4' high wrought iron fence covered by a 5' high hedge in front of it, than a 6 high 3e Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 3 solid wood fence or brick veaU. J. Deis asked J. Kohl if she indeed planned to put a 5' high hedge in front of the 4' high %%ToU-d= iron fence. J. Kohl said, yes. J. Deis said that the proposed landscaping would change her mind about the proposed wrought iron fence. C. Ruiz suggested that should the Commission approve the wrought iron fence, then the Commission should also approve the landscaping. B. Gardner asked whether the Commission would get more detail about the design of the ferAce. J_ Kohl said she was waiting for the Commission's decision on the concept of the fence and then develop a more detailed design for it. She passed around drawings of the general design for the wrought iron fence. C. Ruiz said that an overall design of the fence should include the spacing of the piers and the building material. J. Kohl said that the pillars (piers) would be at the front walk up to the front door, at the driveway, and one at each corner. B. Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plans as drawn with 4' (high) wrought iron fence and piers flanking either side of the sidewalk and flanking the driveway. one at the corner of Sheridan Road and Greenleaf Street, and one at the back property line on Sheridan Road, and that there be a hedge in front of the fence as shown in the plans with a minimum height of 3'. G. Hauck seconded the motion. Discussion: Mark Sarkisian said that he has two different drawings for the proposed fence, he was not sure mi&h fence would be built. J. Kohl said that she put something together so one could we a fence with the pillars. Michael Imlay said that the Commission requested the applicant to illustrate her proposal to get a feeling of the project. G. Halik said that the Commission and also the applicant would benefit from an actual drawing of what would be built. G. Halik asked if the Commission could approve the proposed fence in concept? J. Deis said that staff could review the drawings and eocuailt with three Commissioners for final approval. G. Halik moved to amend B. Gardnees motion stating that the Commission was approving the proposed wrought iron fence in concept, based on the sketches the Commission received. The applicant is asked to submit developed drawings for staff review. K. Irwin seconded G. Halik's amendment to B. Gardner's motion. The motion passed as amended unanimously. Vote: 6ayes, 4 nays. 2. 2326 Brown Avenue - Replacing existing rear windows with sliding French doors, am rear cedar wood fence 6' high, and replacing existing asphalt roofing material in kind 2326 Brown Avenue is an Evanston Landmark. Jessica Deis said that the Commission discussed on June 15, 1999, the type of windows. In a straw pole the Commission members present also approved the application as submitted. Kirk Irvin concurred with J. Deis summary of the past x Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 4 discussion about the project. J. Deis asked if anyone had any questions about the proposed project. No questions were asked. B. Gardner moved that the Commission accept the application as presented K. Irn1n seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Vote: 6 ayes, 0 nays. 3. 217 Dempster Street - New two -car garage and workshop 217 Dempster Street is an Evanston Landmark within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. Jessica Deis said that this was a magnificently executed project. The Commission asked the applicant on June 15, 1999, for some written evidence that the existing garage was beyond repair. C. Ruiz said he received photographs on the existing garage that show the garage's stage of deterioration beyond repair. J. Deis said that the straw pole among Commission members present showed that the project would be approved as submitted. J. Deis asked if there was any questions regarding the application. No questions were asked. B. Gardner moved that the Commission approve the plans as presented. K. Im-in seconded the motion. Discussion: C. Ruiz suggested that the motion include the demolition of the existing garage and the construction of the proposed garage. B. Gardner amended her motion and moved that the Commission accept the proposal as presented, which includes the demolition of the old garage and the construction of a new garage as meeting the standards (for demolition and construction). K. Irwin seconded the motion as amended. Discussion: K. Irwin mentioned that the applicant will reuse the existing garage doors inside the house and that the Commission had discussed the scale of the house versus the scale of the out building in terms of the massing and its relationship to the context of that particular block. K. Irwin said that the project received a very favorable review. The motion passed unanimously as amended. Vote: 6 ayes, 0 nays 4. 1203 Forest Avenue - Replace existing leaking flat roof with new copper roof, replace rotten membrane, increase slope slightly, restore balusters as per original drawing 1203 Forest Avenue is an Evanston Landmark within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. Polly Hawkins, owner/architect, had presented the plans on June 15, 1999. J. Deis said that the straw pole among Commissioners was to approve the project as submitted. Michael Imlay clarified that one of the qualifications for approval was the change of the slope of the roof, which, as presented, %kw higher than the balcony in front. The request was to reduce the slope of the green copper roof below the top of the balcony baluster. x Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 5 M. Imlay moved that the Commission accept the propos-sl as submitted %%ith the reduction of the slope of the roof. B. Gardner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Vote: fi a%M 0 nays. 5. 1423 Judson Avenue - New front porch, enclosing existing side yard porch J. Deis said that previously. Commission members also had a discussion about a garage. N1. Imlay had comments about the enclosed side porch. K. Irwin referring to the Commission's review sheet listed three options: Banded windows, no windows at all or windrows puled in from the side columns. K. Irwin said that the applicants were asked to study those three options for the south elevation. J. Deis said the issues were the two windows on the south elevation and the proposed enclosed porch. The Commission agreed to come back to this project later in the meeting. 6. 1905 Sheridan Road - Removal and replacement of existing limestone steps, reconstruction of existing stairs in kind, restoration of existing newel post on each stair, replication of handrail design C. Ruiz said that the applicants determined that the existing limestone material for the stairs was deteriorated beyond repair. The applicants would like to replace all the stone in kind. The original design of the balusters would be retained. K. Irwin said that he had recused himself from any discussion on the project for potential conflict of interest. J. Deis said that there were no objections to what was proposed and the manner in which the applicants were undertaking their work seemed to adhere to all the appropriate standards. The handrail design was a code issue, but as it turned out the original handrail would be retained. B. Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plans as presented with the additional information provided by C. Ruiz as meeting the standards for alteration. Heidi Carey seconded the motion. The motion passed. Vote: 6 ayes, 1 abstention. 7. 11" Michigan Avenue - Family room addition to rear Jessica Deis recused herself from any discussion or vote because she worked in the past for the owners of 1144 h6chigan Avenue. K. Irwin said the project included a rear addition to an existing addition. Commissioners had previously discussed the slopping curve of the roof and agreed that the application would be approved as submitted. K. Irwin moved that the Commission approve the addition to 1144 Michigan, finding that it met all the applicable standards for review of alterations. B. Gardner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. �I Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - July 6, 1999 Page 6 S. 1724 Asbury Avenue - Replacement of existing V high wood stockade side yard fence with an 8' high wood stockade fence (requires zoning fence variation) J. Deis said she went to the site for a second time and concluded that the proposed fence would not be visible, therefore it was not under the pur%iew of the Commission. 9. 1433 Hinman Avenue - Replacement of existing rear fence, new corner lot wrought iron fence 4' high. Proposed fence is set back approximately 12• from the side yard (requires zoning fence variation) J. Deis said that the fence was substantially set back from the property line and sidewalk. The fence was in part hidden by existing evergreens. The proposed fence is a 4* high wrought iron fence. The Commissioners had straw polled to approve the propose fence. K. Irwin said that the property owner had indicated some hardship because he had found a vagrant in his yard. M. Sarkisian asked clarification regarding the wood material. J. Deis said the applicant would also like to install a wood fence between the house and the coach house. The wrought iron fence would come out 2' from the porch and continue at 12' parallel to the sidewalk and then return back to the driveway. B. Gardner moved that the Commission approve the plans as presented as meeting the standards [for construction]. K. Irwin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. At this time J. Deis went back to review 1423 Judson Avenue 5. 1423 Judson Avenue - New front porch, enclosing existing side yard porch J. Deis said that the Commission had received a letter from David Schultz, architect who had analyzed the condition of the garage. D. Schultz cited in his letter that ceiling joists were cracked, doors were inoperable, rake boards were separated, the gable roof was sagging exterior siding was in terrible shape, etc. The applicant had indicated that she would like to build a gage in kind No actual design drawings for the garage were submitted with the application. J. Deis said the Commission needed some documentation of the elevations of the garage. the siding materials. etc. J. Deis said that there were no objections from Commission members for the construction of a new garage but the Commission asked for drawings. J. Deis asked if C. Ruiz had more information on the side porch and windows. C. Ruiz said that the owner did not have a preference for the windows style. The double hung windows seemed appropriate since that window style was predominant on the main house. C. Ruiz said that the applicant was also open about casement windows. M. Imlay said that his comments were about the change from a screen porch to a not very well integrated addition. Commissioners discussed other possibilities regarding the windows for the enclosed porch. M. Imlay said that the Commission members had offered three different alternatives to the architect but he did not react to them. K. Irwin said that the architect needed to consult with his client about the Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - July S, 1999 Page 7 suggestions given by Commission members_ M. Sarkisian said that staff could review the revised drawings for the enclosed porch. J. Deis asked M. Imlay if he had any issues with the demolition of the garage. M Imlay said that he had repaired at least fifty garages like the one being proposed for demolition. He said those garages were not cheap. He said that a good contractor could repair the garage and make it look almost new for the same amount of a new garage. J. Deis asked M. Imlay if he went to see the garage. M. Imlay said he would go a see the garage. J. Deis said that the garage to her looked in bad shape. B. Gardner said that the Commission could specify that the new garage should have the same roof pitch as the existing garage and be sided with wood clapboard siding. M. Sarkisian said that it would be appropriate to ask the property owner how much it would cost to repair the existing garage. J. Deis said that regardless of her opinion about the garage, today anything could be repaired. M_ Sarkisian said that he could argue that the garage could be repaired. C. Ruiz said that the Preservation Ordinance allows subtle changes to structures. B. Gardner said that a new garage could be built to replicate the existing garage writh typical overhead garage doors. J. Deis said that if she had thought that the existing garage was architecturally exceptional in any way, she would have a different view. M. Sarkisian said that he would feel more comfortable if he knew what was going to replace the existing garage. B. Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plan [for the enclosed porch] so that the owner had to choose between the three alternatives for windows suggested by the Commission. The drawings should be submitted to C. Ruiz for final approval. Also, the demolition of the garage be tabled until the Commission saw a drawing of the proposed new garage. Heidi Carey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 20, I999 Commission's Partial Minutes K. Irwin moved that the Commission approve the minutes for April 20, 1999, sections VI to IX. J. Deis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. IV. STAFF REPORT C. Ruiz said that K Irwin he attended a Planning and Development Committee (P&D) meeting for the nomination of the Northeast Evanston Historic District to the National Register. He said that P&D members had questioned whether or not the Commission acted appropriately without the City Council's approval to send a recommendation [to the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency in support of the nomination]. The Commission's position was that it acted appropriately. P&D members requested legal opinions from the City's Corporation Counsel, perhaps with the intention that in the future City Council approve first recommendations issued by the Preservation Commission. x Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - July G, 1999 Page S K. Irwin said that the City's legal counsel supported what the Commission did. C. Ruiz said that their support was verbal and circumstances were different. K. Irwin said that A] Cubbage from Nbcdrwestern University and Tom McMahon prompted the questions from P&D. He said that P&D were responding to comments from them. P&D asked Al Cubbage and Tom McMahon very poignant questions %bo were critical of the process that was used for notification to the general public or how the pmeess was unfolding in public. P&D members asked Al Cubbage and Tom McMahon for suggestions of to how improve public notification so it could be improved in the future. K. Irwin said that Al Cubbage and Tom McMahon did not have any suggestions for P&D. C. Ruiz said that the process for the National Register is completely out of the jurisdiction of the Commission. It is strictly the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency that handles these nominations and they are charged legally to publish the public notice, which they did. The Commission reacted to the request of comment after the nomination was submitted formally. The Commission held a public informational meeting that w-as published in the paper and by direct mailing to owners. The Commission also published in the newspaper the regular meeting when the Commission reviewed the application. The State has its own statutes to follow and they did. B. Gardner said that Mrs. McMahon had attended the first three meetings that the applicants of the district had a year and a half ago. Kirk Irwin reported that Alderman Newman had said that he had a few phone calls from his constituents asking him to look into the condition of buildings west of Sheridan Road owned by Northwestern versus the condition east of Sheridan Road owned by Northwestern Alderman Newman asked Al Cubbage to provide him with a status report on the maintenance of buildings west of Sheridan Road. Kirk Irwin said that Alderman Newman was anticipating Northwestern coming in a future date and wanting to tear down their buildings because of their state of disrepair. Kirk Irwin said that Alderman Newman was on the record asking Northwestern how their building would be repaired. Barbara Gardner said that when discussions occurred for the proposed boundaries for the local to include properties on Sheridan Road, Northwestern was not in favor of that. Alderman Newman said that they had a meeting with Northwestern about those changes. Alderman Newman had said that he viewed Sheridan Road as a gateway into Evanston and the City needed to be a steward for the entire North Shore and the character of it did not change. B. Gardner said that Alderman Newman was in favor on widening the boundaries for the local district. Carlos Ruiz said that according to Mr. Tom McMahon, the Milburn Park neighbors had requested the State determine that the boundaries of National Register district should void, if not his property, the block itself. C. Ruiz said that the State did not go along with Mr. McMahon's request. C. Ruiz said that he believed that local designation would raise the issue again. He said that the questions to legal counsel were whether or not the boundaries could be changed from the National to the local designation. Carlos Ruiz said that one of the criteria for the National Register is that properties should be contiguous. C. Ruiz said that some of the properties on Sheridan Road were not included because there ate parking Evanston Preservation Commission Mintttes - July 6. 1999 Page 9 lots in between. C. Ruiz said that the Cite ordinance dues nat require that properties should be contiguous. He said that would allow inclusion of properties on Sheridan Road. C. Ruiz =id dint maybe the ten property owners in Milburn Park do not want to be in the district, and their Alderman may say go along with the district if it excluded those properties. Barbara Gardner said she could not imagine that happening just because those neighbors object to it. Barbara Gardner said that at the last Commission meeting, which she did not attend, there was a consensus not to answer the letter to the Evanston Review editor. She said she would have agreed at that time, but since Mrs. McMahon in her lew to the newspaper editor had misrepresented the Commission. that the Commission would have the right to correct the record. Kirk Irwin said that he was concerned of responding as a public body in a letter to the editor. Barbara Gardner said that if the Commission did respond, people would think that the letter was right. Carlos Ruiz suggested that instead of responding to the letter, the Commission could address the public explaining the process for review. Kirk Irwin agreed with Carlos Ruiz. Jessica Deis said that another idea was that she would respond as the Chair of the Commission rather than the entire Commission. Barbara Gardner said that she did not Want to let go the misrepresentations against the Commission without responding to them. Mark Sarkisian said that the Commission must be very careful with any response. V. ADJOURNMENT Kirk Irwin moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted: Carlos D. Ruiz Senior Planner/Preservatio oo dinator x EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES Tuesday, May 18,1999 7:30 P.M. — Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: Heidi P. Carey, Jessica Deis. Barbara Gardner, George Halik, Yjrk Irwin, Susan Regan, Mark Sarkisian MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Imlay OTHERS PRESENT: David K. Dixon, Martel Nanasi PRESIDING: Jessica Deis, Chair STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz 1. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM Jessica Deis, Chair, called the meeting to order 7:35 p.m. and determined that a quorum was present. 11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Barbara Gardner moved to approve the October 20, 1998, Commission's meeting minutes. The motion seconded by Kirk Irwin was approved unanimously. Barbara Gardner moved to approve the November 17. 1998, Commission's meeting minutes. The motion seconded by Heidi Carey was approved unanimously. Heidi Carey moved to approve the February 1, 1999, Commission's meeting minutes. The motion seconded by Barbara Gardner was approved unanimously. 111. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Review and Technical Assistance Committee (R&TA) 1. 715 Forest Avenue — Replacing existing brick wainscot and aluminum siding Gaish materials and replace them with non-structural stone finish David Dixon, owner presented plans for replacing the existing brick wainscot and aluminum siding with non-structural stone finish at 715 Forest Avenue. The property is within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. .9 Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - May 18, 1999 Page 2 David Dixon said that he would like to remove the brick wainscot and die aluminum siding frm his Dutch Colonial house. He said that in some places there -*%w w(W siding and stuav ur'xiemewh the existing finish. The existing brick and aluminum siding would be rNmoved down to Lhe sheathing and a galvanized wire lath would be applied over a new 15 pound building on all she: thing_ A f- inch scratch coat would be applied over the wire lath. Final IN, cultured stone would be applied as the exposed finish material. David Dixon said that the front of the house (west elevation), the north elevation and the south elevation would be affected by the proposed work. The chimney would also be affected with the same cultured stone and capped with concrete. A latex modified mortar with a brown buff color dye would be applied between cultured stones and struck in all joints. D. Dixon showed pictwes of homes from the area depicting Dutch Colonial homes and homes with similar exterior stone finish. D. Dixon said that his house was in the Lakeshore Historic District but it was not a Landawk house. Barbara Gardner asked if the brick %-as original to the house. David Dixon said, "Yes_- He added that due to water damage the brick w►as separating from the exterior wall of the house. Jessica Deis asked about the properties of the cultured stone. D. Dixon said that the molds for the cultured stone were made from real stones. Kirk Erwin said he had some concerns about how the cultured stone would look around windows and doors. David Dixon said that that the windows trim would be done in a brick mold and the sills would be real sandstone. He said the cultured stone would add about 1-inch in thickness to the existing 4.5-inch brick. D. Dixon added that there would be a smooth transition from the brick and aluminum siding to the cultured stone. Additional discussion ensued regarding the detail finishes with the cultured stone. Jessica Deis asked could nice clean window openings be achic% d with the cultured stone. D. Dixon said, "Yes." Susan Regan asked about the transition of the existing brick and stucco finish. David Dixon said there was a soldier course of brick at the top of the wainscot that projected out from the brick below, the stucco above was at the same projection as the face of the brick below the project soldier course of brick. George Halik asked if only three sides of the house would be affected. D. Dixon said, "Yes." He added that he planned to build an addition to the rear of the house in the future. He intended to finish the rear of the house then with the cultured stone. Heidi Carey asked Carlos Ruiz if the Commission had projects where the exterior materials had been changed. C. Ruiz said, "No." He said that he had mentioned to David Dixon that his Mposal was going to change the brick. D. Dixon told him that the brick was going to be removed anyw-ay. C. Ruiz said that the standards indicate to repair rather than replace and when replacement was necessary, the replacement should be in kind. He also said that he recommended D. Dixon to recycle the brick. At the end D. Dixon decided to apply for the cultured stone. C. Ruiz said that he suggested D. Dixon that he showed the Commission some examples of other houses that have the L1 Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — May 18. 1999 Page 3 same or similar exterior treatment. Heidi Carey asked David Dixon if there %vere other Dutch Colonial home near his hawse. D. Dixon said that he found two - one was on Burnham Place close to the lake and while he drought it would be a stretch to call it a Dutch Colonial, it was a Victorian house with gambrel roof. Answering a question from Barbara Gardner, David Dixon said that there was another house on Ridge Avenue on the west side of the street — it was not a Dutch Colonial, but it was a Colonial style home. The house w-as stone and the front dormer was siding. The house had a simt`hr treatment to what was proposing for his house. Mark Sarkisian asked David Dixon why not just take the house back to its origirW finish. He acknowledged that the siding %%as kind of a hodge-podge, but noted that D. Dixon might be surprised of the detail that actually was used on the house. M. Sarkisian suggested D. Dixon to work in the reverse direction where he would be working with the house the way it was versus going into some unknown territory. David Dixon said to restore the house to its original state would mean three different siding treatments for the house. He said the house was a very small house, barely 2,000 sq_ Ft. The three different siding, he believed would make it look even smaller than it was. He felt that one solid treatment across the front of the house would help to make it appear larger or closer to its true size. Barbara Gardner pointed out that the house would still have still siding and stone on the front. David Dixon agreed but it would be impossible to put a stone dormer on a house without a masonry wall below it to hold it up. He added that while the cultured stone could be applied structurally with no problems as a nonstructural siding material, visually, it just wouldn't took appropriate. In stone houses when a dormer was applied in this manner wood siding or shingle siding w•as applied to it. Jessica Deis said that she looked and saw that the house was not a landmark, which made her take a different view than if it were a landmark. If it were a landmark she would be adamant about restoring rather than replacing the existing brick. She believed that the Commission %%as certainly open to new materials. She said that one of the things that the Commission looks at was how the house blends into the its context. J. Deis said that she did not have an objection to the proposal. She said the question she would raise was whether a larger amount of the material on the house would not look exactly like stone. She asked David Dixon if had seen the material in a large application. D. Dixon said, "Yes." He said that there was a house on Sheridan Road just near PLma Del Lago, where the foundation was covered with the cultured stone. Kirk Irwin posed the question: Does this proposal change the character of the house (thee house not being a landmark)? K. Irwin said it did change the character of the house. He added that the house had a really nice brick base, with a nice horizontal line at the bay windows. That horizontal band is Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes - May 18. 1999 Page 4 continued all around the side and out that horizontal line the chimney was projected. He said that effect would be gone with the cultured stone on the facade. David Dixon asked what if he duplicated that with a limestone sill all away around the house instead of just under the window. Kirk Irwin said that would tend to mitigate his concern. Heidi Carey asked if David Dixon had considered having the brick only where the brick was. D. Dixon said he had considered it, but the question became what he would put above. H. Carey suggested leaving the siding where it was on the front elevation. D. Dixon said that his hope was to not make a small house look small. He said that with the continuity of material, especially all over the side of the house that it might help to forestall that appearance. He agreed that limestone belt line was a nice detail and might help anchor the house visually. He thought that would not change his objective significantly. Barbara Gardner asked how the cultured stone would be applied to the brick chimney. David Dixon said it could be applied over the brick. The brick would be tuck -pointed then wire lathe would be applied to the brick. D. Dixon said he did not want make his house look like a landmark house but give it a look that would complement the two landmark houses in his block. Mark Sarkisian said he was a little concerned that the house may become a focal point for the wrong reasons. David Dixon suggested keeping in mind that the mortar was going to approximate the color of the cultured stone itself. So the grout lines would not jump ouL The color of the siding was very close to the brick. So there was a continuity of color. Barbara Gardner asked David Dixon if he knew of a house where the entire front had the cultured stone on it. D. Dixon said, "Yes." He added that a very large house, at Indian Hills on Lake Street, looked like it had the original material when it was built forty or fifty years ago, when in fact the material was put on two }ears ago. It looked like real stone. He said he kept missing the house for that reason. Barbara Gardner thought Commissioners were having a lot of problems with the proposed change to the house. She wondered if it would be worthwhile getting the address of the house and allowing Commissioners to go look at it and then perhaps do a voice vote. George Halik asked if that was the issue, of how the cultured stone would look like rather than whether stone should be applied on the brick. Barbara Gardner said she had problems in several areas, one was she could not visualize what it was going to look like and two, she thought the house was quite charming the way it was. She did not think that a 2,000 s.f. house and by applying the stone it was going to become a 3,000 s.f. looking house. B. Gardner said she was really concemed that the project could become a candidate of "remudling" of the month in the Old House Jottmal. Jessica Deis said she wanted to come to a conclusion and read the standards for review of alteration Ar Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — May 18, 1999 Page 5 1.2, 3, and 6. She said that she was not personally adverse to what it was being proposed by she thought that the proposal was not in keeping with standards 1, 2, 3 and 6. Heidi Carey said that the project was not in keeping with the character of the neighborhood either. Jessica Deis said that the Commission did not want to be in the position of preventing David Dixon from making the necessary, changes, alterations and improvements in his house. She asked Commissioners their assistance so that the applicant did not leave the meeting empty handed. J. Deis asked for a straw pole for approving the application as presented. No Commissioner expressed support for the application as presented. Jessica Deis asked suggestions from architect Commissioners for the way the necessary alterations to the house could be handled in accordance to the standards. Mark Sarkisian suggested to David Dixon to give a hard consideration to the three original materials. He said that that the applicant should considered the Commission's review as a strong read of how the proposed material would not meet his expectations on details. David Dixon said that his proposal took four years in the making. He said that he had considered brick until he saw the article in the Old House Journal (OHJ) magazine (January/February 1996, page 291, and saw the houses how they appeared in stone. He said he bought the house based on the potential it had. He did not anticipate the stumbling block he was facing and he was afraid to loose the contractor, and he had pay interests on the money waiting for the project to occur. D. Dixon said that stone was a viable material when his house Kas built. Carlos Ruiz said that the Commission had to work with the standards established by elected officials. He said that it did not matter whether Commissioners like or dislike the proposed material but rather it mattered whether or not met the established criteria. Jessica Deis said that was her dilemma, she did not dislike the material, it simple did not meet the standards. George Halik asked David Dixon what %Nas his goal with the proposed material. D. Dixon said his goal was to make the house look appropriate for the overall design. He referred to the OHJ article that indicated that Dutch Colonial houses were primarily of masonry construction. He said that stone was used by less affluent individuals and brick was used by well to do individuals, David Dixon said that his house and neighborhood were very modest unlike the fabulous homes to the north with exception in his block of one historical Spanish Colonial house. Jessica Deis said that it was apparent that the Commission was not going to be able to approve the application as presented. She suggested that a Committee of Commission member work on the proposal that week. She said she would like to see an example of the cultured stone. Barbara Gardner said that would not change the standards. J. Deis said the applicant needed some direction from the Commission. George Halik said that there were the issues of character and material. Unfortunately, when he .st Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — May 18, 1999 Page 6 looked at the proposal, it changed both, he said. He added that the issues raised by Kirk [rein earlier, they all contributed to character. Then there was the change of material, which was b6cL He said that maybe there was a compromise that would maintain the character or material. Barbara. Gardner suggested using brick or stone at the bottom, using siding on all of the rest. David Dixon said that the front siding was 4.5" and the north and south sides had 8" siding. Carlos Ruiz suggested using the 4.5" siding on all sides when applicable. George Halik said that retaining the siding would maintain the character of the building. Jessica Deis concurred with G. Halik. She cited that standard 2 would be satisfied even with the use of the cultured stone. She added that when the house would be veneered entirely with brick, it would become something else entirely. After additional discussion Commission members asked David Dixon if he would consider replacing the brick with the cultured stone and install siding where it already existed. D_ Dixon asked if the Commission could issue a conditional approval for replacing the masonry areas with new masonry and siding with siding. Jessica Deis said, "Yes." Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission disapproved the project at 715 Forest Avenue as presented as it did not meet standards (for alteration] 1. 2. 3 and 6. A compromise with the cultured stone (replacing] the existing brick and the balance wxauld be 4" to 5" siding on the rest of the house, as it met standard 1, 2, and 6. Heidi Caney seconded the motion. The motion passed. Vote: 6 ayes, 1 nay. Jessica Deis asked David Dixon if he understood what the Commission just had approved D. Dixon asked if he found wood siding underneath if he could leave it in place. Carlos Ruiz said, "Yes." David Dixon asked if his wife approved of the Commission's recommendation if he could obtain the building permit. Carlos Ruiz answered to D. Dixon that he could obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness when the building permit application was submitted with the revisions approved by the Commission. 2. 720 Michigan Avenue — Replacement of exerting porch Mariel Nanasi, owner submitted plans for the replacement of an existing front porch with a new porch at 720 Michigan Avenue. The property is an Evanston Landmark within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. Mariel Nanasi said her front porch was physically rotting, therefore she was proposing a new porch. She said that there were existing vertical curvilinear fascia boards applied on the upper level siding of her house that she would like to incorporate as balusters for the porch railing. M. Nanasi explained that the front elevation drawing showed the curvilinear balusters in an arrangement that perhaps exceeded the 4" maximum space between balusters. The north and side elevation drawings .r Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes —May 18, 1999 Page 7 showed the curvilinear balusters arranged and separated less than 4 Marie] Nanasi said that on the front elevation a new gable %+w added over the main entry am the porch roof. She added that the same curvilinear fascia binds of the second story nvuld be incorporated under the gable. Commission's Findings Jessica Deis asked if the square footage of the promised porch .xw the same a~s the existing porch. Marie] Nanasi said, "Yes." She added that even -thing else vvms alsai the same. J. Deis advised M. Nanasi that the balusters as shown on the front elevation would not meet the building code, because the separation of the balusters exceeded the maximum 4" separation. Jessica Deis said that the proposed curvilinear balusters for the railing, was an interesting idea. However, she would recommend maintaining the existing closely spaced vertical straight balustm.' Barbara Gardner agreed and added that the proposed gable met the standards of alteration. George Halik moved that the Commission accepts the gable as shown and that the balustrade matches the existing balustrade with the railing height to meet the building code. Heidi Carey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. IV. NEW BUSINESS 1"9 Evanston Preservation Awards Carlos Ruiz said that traditionally the Evanston Preservation Awards were held Preservation Week in May. That could not have been accomplished this year. C. Ri iz suggested that in the remaining months the Commission reconsider the categories of the awards program. He %vuld like to include projects that may not be historic preservation projects but may add to the character of Evanston, or may have quality design. He said he was motivated to make his suggestions because he had received inquiries from interested architects and property owners about an awards program not being exclusive for historic preservation projects only. Carlos Ruiz said that he would like to have more participation from Commissioners planning the awards program through a committee. Jessica Deis said she believed that including a new construction category would be a good thing. Commissioners discussed some alternatives for revamping the Preservation Awards Progmm Jessica Deis, Heidi Carey, Kirk Irwin, and Mark Sarkisian volunteered to work on the Preservation Awards Program. Commissioners agreed to meet Monday, May 24, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., at the Noyes Street Cafe. V. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes —May 18. 1999 Page 8 V. OLD BUSINESS A. Letter to Ann V. Swallow, dated May 6,1999, regarding the National Register Nomination of the Northeast Evanston Historic District, roughh• bounded by Emerson Street, Sherman Avenue, Sheridan Place, Lake Michigan, Sheridan Road, and Orrington Avenue Carlos Ruiz referred to the copy of a letter (dated May 6, 19991 regarding the Commission's support of the National Register Nomination of Northeast Evanston Historic District He said that the City Mayor also planned to send her own letter to the State. C. Ruiz said he planned to attend a nosing in DeKalb, Illinois on June 11, 1999 regarding the National Register Nomination. V. STAFF REPORT Save the Cottage Association Meeting, May 16, 1999 — Report Carlos Ruiz repotted on the Save the Cottage Association (SCA) meeting of 4fay 16, 1999. He said that SCA was an organization formed after the Dempster Street Cottage ww demolished. This new preservation advocacy group was looking for preservation projects. Apparently SCA had raised $70,000 to save the Dempster Street Cottage. Most of that money may have to be returned to the donors. C. Ruiz said that members of Northeast Evanston Historic District Association (NEHDA) were present at the SCA meeting asking for their financial support to help with their consultant fees. Barbara Gardner asked if preservation efforts in the west side of Evanston were mentioned. Carlos Ruiz said, "Yes." He added that at the American Planning Association Conference in Seattle, he learned that in Seattle has five historic districts, each one had its own preservation commission each with its own staff. Preservation Commissioners in Seattle were elected. Carlos Ruiz said that one of the current trends in Planning was "citizen participation.- Evanston has its share of citizen participation with projects such as the new development on Church Street and potential redevelopment of Chicago Avenue. C. Ruiz said the Commission could identified contributing structures on Chicago Avenue or nominate existing building for landmark designation such as the Daniel Burnham building on 425 Dempster Street (Montessori School). He said that it was time the Commission regrouped and went back to the committee system, to undertake preservation projects, goals and objectives. Barbara Gardner said that a potential historic district %%zs by St. Francis Hospital, between Dobson Street, Brummel Street, and Harvard Terrace. Jessica Deis asked Commissioners to think for the next meeting three or four projects that would be worthy of attention and preservation oriented. She said that it appeared that there was renewed civic interest. Barbara Gardner said that when the Preservation League of Evanston was active, a lot of programs were done jointly ►dth the Commission. She cited the Cove School project at the eleven hundred block of Forest Avenue and Judson Avenue as a good example of that joint effort B. Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes — May 18, 1999 Page 9 Gardner said that she was sad with the Preservation League being not active because it provided that advocacy that the Commission could not provide. Jessica Deis urged Commissioners to bring to the next meeting suggestions for the awards program. J. Deis noted that there was one remaining item under Old Business. 630-632 Davis Street — Pre-cut sample (The Chandler's Building) Susan Regan reported that Michael Imlay and her approved the pre -cast sample at the site of the Chandler's Building. Carlos Ruiz asked about whether the new windows would match the color of the existing windows. Commissioners hoped that the windows would have one uniformed color. VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS Carlos Ruiz announced that the next Commission meeting had been scheduled Tuesday, Jame 15, 1999, at 7:30 p.m., Room 2403, Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue. VI1. ADJOURNMENT With no further items on the agenda Jessica Deis adjourned the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully Submitted: Carlos D: Ruiz Senior Planner/Pre"adCoordinator Date: VIP Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20, 1999 Page 1 EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMIMISSION MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, April 20, 1999 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: Jessica Deis, Barbara Gardner, Michael Imlay, Kirk Irwin, Susan Regan, Mark Sarkisian MEMBERS ABSENT: Heidi P. Carey, George Halik OTHERS PRESENT: John Voosen, Ellen Galland, Tim Patenode, Ruth McCullaugh, Alex Naylor, Mr. & Mrs. John Walsh, Kevin Daty. Jill Wortmann, Allan Grant, Howard Decker, Ramesh Gulatee, Dared Glover, Dean James Chandler, Marsha Barnett, Len Davis, Al Cubbage, Mary McWilliams, Judy Fiske, Jeanne Lindwall, Anne Earle PRESIDING: Jessica Deis, Chair STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz 1. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM Jessica Deis, Chair, called the meeting to order and determined that a quorum was present 11. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Review and Technical Assistance Committee (R&TA) 1. 806 Ridge Avenue (St. Nicholas Church) - Exterior alterations Kirk Irwin recused himself from any discussion and vote due to potential conflict of interest. John Voosen, architect presented revised drawings for a new rear entrance at 806 Ridge Avenue (St. Nicholas Church), the building is an Evanston Landmark. J Voosen said that back in November of 1998 he presented drawings of a more ambitious project to the Commission. He said that there had been a dramatic reduction in scope of the project. This reduces the impact on the building. He said that previously, a large ramp was proposed to the west elevation from the parking lot. The new Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20, 1999 Page 2 revised plans include a set of stairs and a platform tucked discretely in frant of the new entrance on the west elevation. J. Voosen said that very little would be visible from the alley. The only change that would occur on the building is on the west facade with replacement at the abbess of the three lancet windows by a pair of Gothic doors. Commission's Findings Jessica Deis asked if am- other work was being contemplated on the extrrior of the building. J. Voosen said: no. Susan Regan asked about the detail of the handrail. J. Voosen said the handrail detail is currently being revised. Mark Sarkisian asked if the brick is being salvaged J. Voosen said: yes. M. Sarkisian asked what the newly revised platform would look like. J. Voosen said the ramp is a very simple concrete ramp, with the possibility of reutilizing the salvaged brick for infill. J. Deis informed J. Voosen that for final approval he needed to submit samples of finish materials. M. Sarkisian suggested that staff review the proposed materials. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the project as presented with the requirement that the applicant come back with the materials for the new platform to be approved by staff. If stall has arty questions then it would go to three members of the Commission_ B. Gardner added that the project meets the standards of alteration. M. Sarkisian seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 2. 2325 Hartrey Avenue - Exterior rear alterations Ellen Galland, architect, and 'rim Patenode, owner, presented plans for a one-story rear additiun at 2325 1 Iartrey Avenue. The property is an Evanston Landmark. E. Galland said the proposed one- story addition with a hipped roof would allow the addition of a modem kitchen, the current kitchen would become a small study. The windows in the new kitchen are set in the corners and they are casement windows. The plans call for the removal of a shed entry way. The eaves, widow heads and heights would be lined up. The windows head casing with a crown molding would be duplicated. The windows would have customized divided lights. T. Patenode said they are trying to replicate the details of the old windows on the new windows. Commission's Findings J. Deis said that she had always admired the house. She said the proposed addition was competently done and it is simple and appropriate for what it was intended to be. Kirk; Irwin asked about the window details. E. Galland said the windows are shorter casement windows compared to the existing casement windows. Mark Sarkisian asked what kind of windows are being proposed. E. Galland said the windows are Marvin clad windows with simulated divided lights and insulated glass. M. Sarkisian noted that the number of dividing lights may need to reduced due to the dimensions of the muntin bars. E. GalIand said that the proposed muntin bars are approximately 7/8" wide. T. Patenode agreed to make the necessary adjustments to the number of divided lights. M. Imlay moved to approve the proposed one-story rear addition at 2325 Hartrey Avenue as f Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20. 1999 Page 3 Proposed. M. Imlay stated as part of his motion that the project met all the applicable standards for review of alteration. The motion, seconded by B. Gardner passed unanimously. 3. 630-632 Davis Street -- Exterior alterations and restoration of front facades Carlos Ruiz said that the applicants of 630-632 Davis had complied with the Commissions recommendations regarding exterior alterations and the restoration of front facades. He said that the latest plans showed a change from aluminum windows to wood windows. The existing copper would be retained and the remainder of the plans complied with the Commissior>i s recommendations. All of the above required staff approval only. 4. 617 Library Place - Exterior rear alteration Ruth McCullugh, representing the Institute for Policy Research on Northwestern University, and Ellen Galland, presented drawings for rear alterations at 617 Library Place. The property is an Evanston Landmark, o%%med by Northwestern University. E. Galland said a new professor has been hired and her assistant and some additional people are coming with her. E. Galland said that they had considered an addition going out the current footprint of the building. But zoning and preservation issues made that difficult. In the end they decide to retreat within the existing foot print. The space is currently, a screened porch and an open area behind a firescape where one of the rear entries from the building comes down into it and there is a basement. E. Galland said she struggled how much of the fabric could be maintained, how much of the look of the house. She said that the building does not look much as a residential house at this point. The plans tali for two offices and a new rear entry. She said that they are infilling the existing space. E. Galland said that a smaller version of the brackets that were there will be retained. A narrow version of the brackets would be on either side of the windows. The brick would be brought through. The windows heads and sills are lined up with the existing first floor windows and the proportions are similar. The fire escape would remain. Commission's Findings J. Deis referring to standard one of alterations said that the proposed addition was handled appropriately and the basic integrity of the house still remains intact. B. Gardner agreed with J. Deis. E. Galland said that the brick would be difficult to match. B. Gardner moved that the Commission approve the plans as presented as meeting the standards for alteration. The motion. seconded by Michael Imlay passed unanimously. Vote: 6 ayes, 0 nays. S. 1311 Slain Street - Installation of new skylight (West elevation) Alex Naylor, oikmer, presented revised plans for a new skylight on the west elevation at 1311 Main Ar - Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20, 1999 Page 4 Street. The property is an Evanston Landmark. A. Naylor said the previously he had pmpo'sC4 a skylight on the East elevation. He is now proposing a 3' x 3' skylight on the West elevation- The west side of the building is less visible from the street and the skylight would be set back 20 from the front of the house. A. Naylor said that he looked at standards one, two, nine and ten of alters dorL The skylight is a minimal alteration on a less visible side. He said all the architectural details would remain on the house. The skylight could be easily be removed if needed. He said there is no other location for the skylight on the roof. Commission's Findings Barbara Gardner said that the new location is better than on the East side. J. Deis said she looked closely at both locations, and found that the West side in comparison to the East side is extremely unintrusive. The visibility objections that she had for the East elevation do not hold for the West elevation. Susan Regan moved that the Commission approve the proposal finding that meets the standards of alteration. The motion. seconded by K. Irwin, passed unanimousb,. Vote: 6 ayes, 0 nays. 6. 2736 Hartzell Street - Exterior rear alterations Mr. & Mrs. John Walsh, owners, and their contractor Kevin Daly presented plans for a rear addition at the kitchen and a smaller extension at the master bedroom at 2736 Hartzell Street. The property is an Evanston Landmark. Kevin Daly said that the proposal was an extension to the kitchen on the rear elevation and a small extension in the master bedroom. K. Daly said that the exterior finish would be 5/4" thick cedar siding Aith a thick batten in between. The batten would be raised away from the wall. K. Daly said that there was a flat roof on the front elevation and a small tower flat roof at the rear of the house. He said that they were modeling the rear addition after what was existing on the rear elevation. Kevin Daly said that most of the existing rear elevation w-as a 1940s addition that incorporated a set of windows that was inconsistent with the style of the original windows. He said the roaster bedroom new windows would match the original windows design. f Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20. 199v Page 5 Commission's Findings Barbara Gardner asked why the roof line on the eu..t elevation vas %xinsiderahly shorter on one .side than the other. Kevin Daly said that the existing shed roof would be removed. the migitwl suucwm and rafter would remain. He said that the size of the existing panels would bc• replicated. Jessica Deis said that the house had so many wonderful cralisrnan features that she felt that one of the less interesting aspect of the house was the existing rear addition. She said that the proposed addition picked up very well the original features of the house. Discussion ensued regarding design details on the east, west and north elevations including how the new roofs would be incorporated into the existing roof, the new cave around the parapet wall of the new flat roof, and the exterior finish materials on the addition. Kevin Daly said that it was difficult to design the new addition because it would be projecting from a portion of the existing rear addition. Mark Sarkisian moved that the Commission accept the proposed addition as revised and presented that evening, and that the details of the east elevation be submitted for review by staff and three Commissioners and finding the project met the appropriate standards for alterations. Barbara Gardner seconded the motion. Discussion: Jessica Deis said that as a landscape architect she greatly admired the oak trees on the property. She suggested taking every necessary steps to protect the oak tree at southwest corner of the property, including protecting the trunk, the entire area under the canopy and avoiding any compaction of the soil around the tree. The motion passed unanimously. 7. 411 Grove Street — Exterior rear alteration Jill Wortmann, owner and Allan Grant, architect presented plans for exterior rear alterations at 411 Grove Street. The property is within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. Jill Wortmann said that the rear mudroom and stairway to the basement would be removed. She said that a Y-8" addition to the kitchen with an interior stairway to the basement would be built. Allan Grant said that the proposed addition would extend less than the existing mudroom_ J. Wortmann said that the addition would be partially visible from the public way. Commission's Findings Barbara Gardner asked if the aluminum siding would be removed. Allan Grant said that the portion of the aluminum siding on the east elevation would be remove and replace with the new wood siding. Jill Wortmann said that eventually all the aluminum siding would come off. Jessica Deis said that the proposal was a very minimal alteration with minimal or no effect on the k Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20. I999 Page 6 overall integrity of the house_ Susan Regan moved that the Commission accept the proposal as it met the standards for alteration. Barbara Gardner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 9. 2122 Sheridan Road — Revised design of new connector/addition building Howard Decker, architect, Ramesh Gulatee, senior technician. David Glover and Dean lames Chandler from Seabury-Western Theological Seminary presented revised plans for a connector/additon building at 2122 Sheridan Road. The property is an Evanston Landmark. Howard Decker said throughcKn the evolution of the project. inside and outside aspects of the project needed reconsideration in order to meet budgets and engineering. As a result ofthat there were mm changes that would alter the exterior appearance to the building. He said the first change affected the heads of the windows on the first floor of the north and south elevations. Previously those windows had a round top jack arch as well as the center entry %vas jack arched with multiple regressed time stone entryway. H. Decker said that the mniscd plans squared off those heads. He said that the squared top win&w heads were modeled after the windows on the existing buildings on both sides of the proposed addition. The entries were left as jack arches. H. Decker said that the height, proportion and alignment of the mullions were taken from the adjacent buildings so that they would align up precisely on both elevations. All of the previously proposed limestone, slate and copper would remain. The second change was done to the windows. Howard Decker said the existing condition featured limestone mullions. He showed a sample of a Hope's steel single glazed window with T-bar muntin pattern. H. Decker said that trey were using a Wasaw «indow product with an extruded cap that was as close in profile as possible to the existing condition. He said the plane of the glass would be further setback from the cap. The proposed window had an angled piece replicating the center portion with the T-bar and putt), in the existing muntin pattern. H. Decker said that the muntins would be anodized black. He said the angled piece %vould be anodized to closely resemble the color of the limestone. Commission Findings Jessica Deis asked to see the color of the extruded aluminum angled piece. Howard Decker said the two buildings at either side of the addition had two different limestone finish. He said one had a cooler color limestone, the other had a warmer color limestone. The addition would have a limestone color in the middle of the two existing limestone finishes. The cap would be compatible to that color of the new limestone. Mark Sarkisian said he was not present at the initial presentation. He asked if the removal of exterior materials was a new item. Hov.-ard Decker said. -No.- He said that the two portals would be seen from the inside. I* Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20. 19" Page 7 Jessica Deis said that she did not find conflict with the proposed changes to the windows and Lbe standards for construction. She said the proposal uas a remarkable example of using high. aech materials to match a very old fashion project. Dirk lr«in said that sLukiard 7 for construction malt with materials and texture. He said the applicant's preservation had addressed those issues by u:fiutg compatible materials. Carlos Ruiz complemented flo%%ard Decker for putting back esserAial elements of the original design to the revised proposal. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plan revisions for w-A construction at.2322 Sheridan Road as meeting the standards for review of consruction. Kirk Irwin smnded the mockm The motion passed unanimously. 9. 645 Forest Avenue — Exterior Alterations (Deleted from the agenda) 10. 1217 Judson Avenue -- New two -car garage Marsha Barnett, owner and Len Davis, contractor presented plans for a new two -car garage at 1217 Judson Avenue. The property is within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. Len Davis said that Carlos Ruiz had recommended canvassing the area to find consistent designs to what they had proposed. L. Davis said that the Barnett's had received a citation from the City to remove the existing garage. L. Davis showed pictures to illustrate the deteriorated conditions of the existing garage. The new garage would be similar in design to the existing garage with a hipped roof and slightly smaller 24'x20'. lie said that the new garage would be consistent in design with the adjacent garages. The color of the vinyl siding would be a close match to the existing vinyl siding on the house and the roof would have black asphalt shingles. Commission's Finding Jessica Dies asked about the exposure of the siding. Len Davis said that the new vinyl siding exposure would be 4" exposure, the vinyl exposure on the house appeared to be 5" exposure_ Jessica Deis referred to the standards for review of demolition subsection 2-9-9 (D) of the Evanston Preservation Ordinance and said that the existing garage did not qualify as a structure that should be preserved and not demolished. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the request for demolition [of the existing garage] as meeting the standards [of demolition]. Kirk Irwin seconded the motion. The motion paused unanimously. Barbara Gardner said that the existing garage had a hipped roof but the house had a steeply pitched gable roof, she asked if the roof pitch of the new garage could be revised to be if Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20, 1999 Page 8 compatible with the house roof. Len Davis said that they could ha%e a sale roof with a 612 pitch. Carlos Ruiz asked if the existing garage was original. Marsha Bmnnett said that she did not know. Michael Imlay said that the proposed garage could be found anywhere compared to the garages designed by architects for Evanston homes. Barbara Gardner cited a number of garages with aI higher pitch. Jessica Deis said that in theory she would agree with Nlich3el Imlay, however she thought that the Commission had taken a more eclectic view towards garages. She indicated chat when looking at what was existing in the alley, one would find a tremendous variety of garages. She added that garages were not the predominant views of the properties. nor were the garages the prominent architectural features. J. Deis said that in practice her views point had always been to match the material, color and general form of the house as much as practically possible. She said that she would find the proposed garage acceptable if the roof pitch were enhanced somewhat to reflect the style of the house. Carlos Ruiz asked about the costs for building a gable roof for the garage. Len Davis said when the pitch is at 7/I 2 and higher the cost raise radically. Barbara Gardner said that the Commission had turned down in the recent past garages as the one being proposed. She said that she would prefer a garage with a gable roof that it did not look like the standard garage. Michael Imlay said that there were some details such as the returns and fenestration that did not have to be very expensive. Marsha Barnett said that when she moved to her house some twenty years ago, it was in absolute shambles and she spent thousand of dollars fixing the house. She said that she appreciated the architecture issues and she would be willing to make some adjustments. M. Barnett added that she did not have the money to just build a garage that went with the house. Barbara Gardner asked Marsha Barnett if she could afford to put S 100 to S200 for a gable roof. M. Barnett said, "Yes." Len Davis said that the gable roof for that size building with a ridge perpendicular to the alley would be $550 and a 6/12 pitch would be about S200. Jessica Deis asked Marsha Barnett if a potential raise of the property value and additional storaLae would be an amenable change for her to make. M. Barnett said that she would be contemplating potential additional costs for the concrete slab. Len Davis said that they did not know yet how much would be to remove and pour a new concrete slab. Mark Sarkisian said that in his view changing the pitch of the roof did not amount to significant architectural changes, he would rather concentrate in the details of consmwtion and design. Jessica Deis and Barbara Gardner thought that the change in the roof pitch was substantial. Susan Regan agreed with M. Sarkisian. .at Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20. 1999 Page 9 Jessica Deis said that she did not find the proposed game miih a higher pitch gable rm objectionable. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission. accept the plans for the gam ut:.ut 1217 Judson with a gable roof perpendicular to the ally %Kith a 6112 pitch as meeting the` standards for new construction. J. Deis seconded the motion. Discussion: Michael Inlay asked if the gable would be on the 24' side of the garage. Lem 11mis said, "Yes." Jessica Deis suggested (not required) that the owner consider a treatment &,r the garage of the window that would reflect some element of the house. The motion passed unanimously. Ill. OLD BUSINESS Northeast Evanston Historic District Nomination to be listed in the National Rtgbftr of Historic Places. J. Deis said that last Tuesday, April 13, 1999, the Commission held a public informational meting regarding the proposed Northeast Evanston Historic District. J. Deis asked C. Ruiz to exipiaim the steps of the Commission's review process. C. Ruiz referred to the "Review of Criteria for Historic District Listing in the National R �iimm of Historic Places" form. He said the new form was modeled after the National Register Bu£]-iru the official publication by the National Park Service, to help Preservation Commission's E0 M%iew proposals of this kind. C. Ruiz said that the letter from the Illinois Historic Preservation -A�p=y indicated that the proposed historic district qualified under Criterion C, which is contained im the bulletin. Section IV of the bulletin deals with how to define the categories of historic propK,—:ism and also the definition of a historic district and the criteria for designation. C. Ruiz said as a certified local government the Preservation Commission would re-.icw- the nomination and compare it to the criteria and determine whether or not the Preservation Cormmis on concurs with the State regarding the nomination. C. Ruiz recommended that the ChaiT of the Commission go through the criteria and solicit comments from the Commissioners for each i-xiamia and as a Commission take a vote on each criteria. The Commission could determine how mam_w of the criteria were met and at the end, through a motion. determine whether or not the cri-,criwifor designation was met. J. Deis agreed and proceeded to read each criteria: Concentration. Linkage. & Continuity of Features A district derives Its importance from being a unifted entity, even though it is often compared (0ja wide variety of resources. The identity of a district results from the interrelationship of :its Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes -April 20, 1999 Page 10 resources, which can comry a visual sense of the overall historic environment or be an arrangement of historically or functionally related properties. For example, a district can reflect one principal activity, such as a mill or a ranch. or it can encompass several interrelated activities. such as an area that includes industrial, residential. or commercial buildings, sites. structures, or objects. A district can also be a grouping cif archeological sites related primarily by their common components; these t)pes of districts often will not visually represent a specific historic enviromtew. Commission's Findings B. Gardner said that she thought it met the criteria in terms of it being an area that includes residential buildings and structures. J. Deis said it fulfills the criteria in that it can encompass several interrelated activities. The residential character, the proximity to the business center of Evanston, Long Field as a neighborhood focus for a range of activities throughout its history. B. Gardner said the proposed historic district has the Lighthouse as well as two schools. J. Deis asked for additional comments. None w•as offered. J. Deis took a pole asking if Commissioners felt that the proposed historic district qualifies as an unified entity by having concentration, linkage and continuity of features. All Commissioners agreed %vith J. Deis' statement. ,Ylgniftcance A district must be significant, as well as being an ident fable entity. It must be important for historical, architectural, archeological, engineering, or cultural values. Therefore, districts that are significant will usually meet the last portion of Criterion C plus Criterion A. Criterion B. other portions of Criterion C. or Criterion D. Commission's Findings J. Deis said that the above criterion means that the district has to have a significance of its own as well as being identifiable as a distinct district. C. Ruiz said that Criterion C deals specifically with building characteristics. C. Ruiz paraphrased Criterion C: "... whether or not the properties in the district embody a distinctive characteristic of a type, period, method of construction..." C. Ruiz said that the district has numerous properties that have one or all of the characteristics. K. Irwn emphasized the significance of the district referring to one paragraph in the abstract where the architects who have designed residences in the district were listed. Some of these include Holabitd & Roche, George W. Maher and Howard Van Doren Shaw, Tallmadge & Watson, and Solon S. Beman among others. K. lrwing said these names would add a great deal of significance to the district. C. Ruiz said that the names listed above confirm one of the criteria under design construction, and that it represents the work of a master. The nomination has listed a number of prominent architects. J. Deis said that Criterion C also mentions that a district is eligible if it illustrates the evolution of Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes -April 20. 1099 Page l l historic character of a place over a puticular span of tint. J. Ur,s said that one of th-c d-Lings distinctive about the district is that it wus not built all in Line piece tiler u subdivision, but r4ther it was in filled over time in a range of styles and works of sp<-cific architects. C. Ruiz said Criterion A. B and D are not mentioned by the hIPA prrlin ituiry opinion. J. Deis took a pole of Commissioners finding that the application is in general in agreement with the criteria that are outlined for districts in section C. Titres of Features A district can comprise both features that lack individual distinction and individually distinctive features that serve as focal points. It may even he considered eligible if all the components lade: individual distinction, provided that the grouping achieves significance as a whole within Its historic context. In either case, the majority of components that add to the districls's historic character, even if they are individually undistinguished must possess integrity, as must the district as a whole. A district can contain buildings, structures, sites objects, or open spaces that do not contribute to the significance of the district. The number of noncontributing properties a district can contain yet still convey its sense oflime and place and historical development depends on how these properties affect the district's integrity. In archeological districts, the primary factor to be considered is the effect ofany disturbances on the information potential of the district as a it -hole, Commission's Findings J. Deis said that one thing remarkable of the proposed district is how the vast majority of the structures have individual distinction. There is a very low number of non-contributing buildings. B. Gardner said there are 931 buildings and only 190 of the 931 are non-contributing buildings. J. Deis said that in some cases the contributing structures were extremely significant, being works of very well known architects and already historic landmarks, as in the case of the Lighthouse and Long Field.. B. Gardner said of the primary structures that were built as single family residences only 18 were not kept as single family residences. C. Ruiz suggested to the Commission members that if the}, find that there is any area that the nomination is lacking it should be mentioned. B. Gardner said that the significance of structures is overwhelming. One may be able to pick up some that are not, but compared %with the number of properties in the district it is a Iow percentage. K. Irwin said someone may like to argue that since the district is a Twentieth Century district, it is relatively new, and when compared with other districts in the country, could be considered less historic. K. Irwin said he would argue against that point of view, because of the facts the applicants have articulated in their abstract, given the quality of architecture that was built in the proposed district in the early Twentieth Century, and the international stature of some of the architects that built in the district. K. Irwin said that would mitigate any argument against it being denied based on being a Twentieth Century residential district. J. Deis said that she understood that the National MV Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20. 1999 Page 12 Register does not put any premium on age. C. Ruiz said that the rule for eligible structures is at least 50 years old. K. Irwin said that his point was that if the nomination is sent to Washington D.C. for final designation and when it is compared with a district from the East coast that could dace from the 1600s, his hope was that it would not be denied its significance. C. Ruiz asked if the Commission found that the nomination met the criteria of types and features. The response from the Commissioners was unanimously: yes. Geographical Boundaries A district must be a definable geographic area that can be distinguished from surrounding properties by changes such as density; scale, type, age, style of sites, buildings, structures, and objects, or by documented differences in patterns of historic development or associations. It is seldom defined, however. by the limits of current parcels of ownership, management, or planning boundaries. The boundaries must be based upon a shared relationship among the properties constituting the district. Commission's Findings K. Irvin said that the applicants really did their homework on this area. The applicants went in great detail, for example, how the parking lots affected where the district was allow to go. The applicants made sure that the boundaries were based on a shared relationship among the properties constituting the district. C. Ruiz said for the record the letter to the Commission from Northwestem University opposing their properties being included in the district will be available as public information. C. Ruiz said he had not received any other letter from anyone regarding the proposed district. He said that he received a voice mail message from an individual expressing his opposition to the proposed district, but unfortunately the individual did not leave a name or phone number. B. Gardner said that the property owners opposing the nomination have the opponunitN to send a letter to the iHPA. J. Deis said that as she understands the process, at least 51 percent of the property owners have to appeal in writing to the State. K. Irvin said that the Commission's Chair (J. Deis) made it clear at the April 13, 1999 informational meeting that the Commission would discuss this matter at this meeting, this week. C. Ruiz said that a public notice regarding this meeting (April 20, 1999) was published in the Evanston Review on April 15, 1999, 1. Deis asked the Commissioners if the Commission finds that the application meets the criteria for geographical boundaries in general. Commissioners responded unanimously: yes. Discontivious Districts A district is usually a single geographic area of contiguous historic properties: however. a district can also be composed of tivo or more definable significant areas separated bs• nonsignificant areas A discontiguous district is most appropriate where: ve Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20. 1999 Page 13 • Elements are spatially discrete: • Space between the elements is not related to the significance of the district: and • Visual continuity is not a factor in the signtfrcance. In addition, a canal can be treated as a discontigrmus district when the .n:ctem consists of man-made sections of canal interspersed with sections of river navigation For scattered archeological properties, a discontiguous district is appropriate when the deposits are related to each other through cultural affiliation, period of use, or site t}pe. It is not appropriate to use the discontiguous district format to include an isolated resource or small group of resources which ►vere once connected to the district, bur hm�e since been separated either through demolition or new construction. For example, do not use the discontiguous district format to nominate individual buildings of a downtown commercial district that have become isolated through demolition. Commission's Findings K. Irwin said that the nomination did not skip over parking lots based on the last paragraph referring to discontiguous districts criteria C. Ruiz said at the public informational meeting this issue was raised when one of the residents asked why a few properties on Sheridan Road were not included. He said because some parking Iots separate a few of these properties from the rest of the nearb}- properties they were not included as part of the district. C. Ruiz said in general this criterion does not apply to the district, because it is very solid overall. J. Deis said that based on the Commission's discussion this is a very contiguous district, and that it has been selected particularly to avoid discontinuity. J. Deis said this criterion is not appropriate. J. Deis asked if Commissioners agreed with her last statement. Commissioners agreed unanimously. J. Deis continue reading: Examples of historic districts include: business districts, canal systems. groups of habitation .rites, college campuses, estates and farms with large acreage�numerous properties, industrial complexes. irrigation systems, residential areas. rural village, transportation ner►► orks, rural historic districts Commission' Findings J. Deis said that the district is a residential area Commissioners agreed unanimously. C. Ruiz said with that concludes the Commission's review of the nomination_ He asked that the Commission consider a motion B. Gardner moved that the Preservation Commission concur with the State of Illinois, Evanston Presm-ation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20. 1999 Page 14 recommending that the proposed Northeast Evanston Historic District be placed as a National Historic District. The Preservation Commission authorizes Carlos D. Ruiz to write a letter of support for the Illinois Historic Sites Advisory Council meeting in June, 1999. K. Irwin seconded the motion. C. Ruiz asked if the motion could include the reasons %%k the Commission recommends the proposed Northeast Historic District to be listed in the National Register of Historic Places. B. Gardner amended her motion adding that the nomination meets the criteria for historic district listing based on: concentration, linkage, continuity and features, significance, types of features and geographical boundaries, and that it be identified as a residential district. K. lr«in seconded the motion as amended. The motion passed as amended unanimously. Vote: 6 ayes, 0 nays. M. Sarkisian said that this nomination was an incredible effort and that he personally appreciated the effort that the applicants have given. He said it is a great example of people in the City, that really care about the community. The applicants really deserve the highest regard from him, and the more the community became aware of this effort, the community would feel the same way_ J. Deis asked l4lr. Al Cubbage of Northwestern University if he had anything to say. Mr. Cubbage said the letter from Northwestern University speaks for itself. . IV. STAFF REPORT 630-632 Davis Street (The Chandler's Building) C. Ruiz said that when the Commission received the last revisions to the project, the developer (Heitman Retail Properties) had met the criteria to address the issue of transition between the existing copper detail for the storefronts. The Commission asked the developer for the storefronts to change from aluminum to wood, that all the doors be of the same wood material. C. Ruiz thanked Michael Imlay for drafting a letter that explained how the developer should proceed in terms of the final selection of exterior materials. C. Ruiz said the developers had a ground breaking ceremony two weeks ago for the Chandler's building. He said that it was an important day for historic preservation. The developer (Robert Perlmutter) said publicly that he gained more appreciation of the building as he went through various review processes. V. MISCELLANEOUS J. Deis complemented the members of NEHDA for the thorough and professional job they had perform in preparing the nomination of the Northeast Evanston Historic District. VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS Evanston Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes - April 20, 1999 Page 15 The next Commission meeting is Tuesday, May 19, 1999, at 7:30 p.m., Room 2403, Evanston CMc Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue. VII. ADJOURNMENT With no further items on the agenda, B. Gardner moved to adjourn at 10:00 p.m. J. Deis, seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. Vote: 6 ayes, 0 nays Respectfully Submitted: Carlos D. Rui�JPreservat Coordinator Date:+i Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 — Minutes Page 1 EVANSTON PRESERVATION C051 ISSION MINUTES Tuesday, March 16, 1999 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: Heidi Carey, Jessica Deis, Barbara Gardner, George Halik, Kirk Irwin, Michael Imlay, Susan Regan, and Mark Sarkisian MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Sara Furlan, Liz Reeves, Ann Ziegelmaier, Craig Smith, Elizabeth Gobbi, Healy Rice, Bob Brenner, Paul Hart, Alex Naylor, Don & Sharlene Garfield, Michael Whimston, Sean Gallagher, Jim Beck, Bob Purlmutter, Mike Radis, Nick Belandic, Linda & Al Borcover, Judy Fiske, Jackie & Jim McGuire, Mark Burnene, Mary McWilliams, Anne O. Earle PRESIDING: Jessica Deis, Chair STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz I. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM A quorum being present, Jessica Deis called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. if. COMMUNICATIONS Jessica Deis Chair said that the Commission received a letter from Richard Miller regarding 2332 Bryant Avenue. III. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Review & Technical Assistance Committee (R&7A� 1. 1627 Weslev Avenue. Exterior Alteration and Landscaping Jessica Deis recused herself from the discussion, having been involved in it. Mark Sarkisian, Vice Chair, presided over the meeting at this time. Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 —Minutes Page 2 Susan Furlan of Mariani Landscapes with Liz Reeves, owner. presented plans for landscaping. at 1627 Wesley Avenue. This property is an Evanston Landmark located in the Ridge Historic District. Sara said that the project is concentrated in the back yard. However, in the future the front yard would be landscaped as well. Sara said that there is a garden wall. A book from Marion Hunt shows that the wall was not original to the house and they were hoping to remo-ve the wall in the first phase and they plan to do some planting in that area. Sara said that their request is to be able to remove the wall. Commission 's Findings: Barbara Gardner said that it appears that there was a wall connected to the house at one point - She asked if the plans called for rebuilding that wall. S. Furlan said that the plans do not caLtfor new construction. George Halik asked if the plans called for no wall at all. S. Furlan replied that was correct. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the landscaping plans at 1728 Wesley Avenue, as submitted, as meting the standards for alteration. The motion, seconded by G. Halik, passed unanimously. 2. 600 Emerson Street - Exterior Alterations Jessica Deis recused herself from the discussion due to the fact that her employer is the landscape architect for the project. M. Sarkisian presided the meeting. Ann Ziegelmaier Landscape architect for Northwestern University presented plans for removing the existing landscaping and replace it with a new landscaping design at 600 Emerson Street an Evanston landmark. The project is located at the s/w corner of Emerson Street and Sheridan Road. A. Ziegelmaier said that a donor to Northwestern is sponsoring the landscape restoration and upgrading of the area. A. Ziegelmaier said that currently there is a hedge of Ivies to be removed for a Lenon stone wall, spat wall and pavers with an improved wall casing with planting areas. The Lenon stone would match the existing building with the same details of the wall itself. Commission's Findings: M. Sarkisian asked about the proposed seating wall. Ann Ziegelmaier said the seating wall is parallel, along the edge of the area facing Sheridan Road. C. Ruiz asked if the height of the wall is 18". Ann Ziegelmaier said yes. C. Ruiz asked if any security safety issues have been anticipated. A. Ziegelmaier said no. C. Ruiz said that at SPARC the issue of lighting was raised. A. Ziegelmaier said that the foot-candles are being reviewed. B. Gardner moved the Commission accept the project at 600 Emerson Street as presented, as V Evanston Preservation Commission March 16. 1999 - Minutes Page 3 meeting the Standards for Alteration. The motion. seconded by Heidi Cara, passed unanirnoush% 3. 2319 Asbury A%rnue - l',xteripr Alteration. SidelRear Addition and Partial Demoliti� Lori Cubik. Graig Smith. Architects. and Lmy Gobbi, owner pre-scmed plans for exterior alteration, sideirear yard addition and partial demolition at 2319 Asbury Avenue. The property is an Evanston Landmark. L. Cubik said that the residence is approximately 1.300 sq. ft. It has very small rooms. The addition is approximately 1.200 ft. with a family room, powder room, new master bedroom and an additional bedroom. The style of the house is eclectic mostly reflecting the shingle style, with steeped gables, a hip on the gable roof, simplistic detailing around the windows and porches. The wood shingles extend all the way up of the wall and other complex shapes. The addition keeps the smaller proportion of the addition, similar to the existing elevations. The addition would have the wood shingles to match the existing shingles. On the south facade, the addition is set back to further differentiate %here the addition starts and wfiere the residence ends. The new windows would have the same detailing as the existing windows. The existing windows on the first floor have the muntins just along the top of the double hung windows. The proportion of the window openings in the addition are similar to the existing window openings. The proposed addition does not extend more than other additions on neighboring properties. Commission 's Findings M. Sarkisian said he was concerned about the roofline of the addition as seen from the front elevation. Arch? Said the roofline of the addition extends approximately 1.5' above the existing roofline, providing sufficient ceiling height. C. Smith said the new roofline would be adequately screened by the existing roof. B. Gardner asked why the higher roofline of the addition would not be visible when looking at the front elevation. C. Smith said that to we the higher roof, one has to be at least I OW avmy from the front of the house to be at the right angle to see the higher roof. J. Deis asked to see the slides taken by C. Ruiz. J. Deis said that in her opinion, the addition was skillfully done. However, she was concerned with the height of the addition, and the extent of the addition on one side of the building. J. Deis said that she has stylistic concerns as well. The landmark house is a cottage, and with the addition, the style of the house would change. J. Deis said that the side projection on the north elevation was visible from the street. Michael Imlay said that in his opinion, the architect did a wonderful job, articulating and Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 — Minutes Page 4 breaking up the addition. Instead of big blocks there are gables and ins and outs. After seeing the slides of the existing house and some discussion about the proposed addition, G. HaliksvEd that in his opinion, the higher roof2ine of the addition would not be seen from the street. K_ h%in said that he was comfortable with C. Smith' s remarks about the sight lines of the 1.5' differenm between the new roof and the existing roof. M. Sarkisian said that the addition is a dominam or strong addition to the cottage. B. Gardner said that she did not think that addition is necessarily bad. She pointed out that many houses in Evanston started as small houses and ended with large additions. Some of these houses are considered very significant. C. Smith said that in the context of the existing three neighboring houses, this is still a modest addition. K. Irwin concurred with C. Smith remarks. K. Irwin said that with the proposed addition the structure still reads as a primary and secondary form. Susan Regan said that she wondered if the addition could have been a one-story addition, at least a portion of it. In particular, the north elevation. B. Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plans for the proposed construction as presented at 2319 Asbury, as meeting the standards for construction. The motion, seconded by K. lrv%in, passed unanimously. 4. 2522 Lincoln Street - Exterior Alterations and Rear Addition Healy Rice, architect and Robert Brenner, owner, presented plans for alterations and a rear addition at 2522 Lincoln Street. The property is an Evanston Landmark. R. Brenner said the project went through revisions from the last time it appeared in front of the Commission. The addition follows the integrity of the roofline, the asymmetry and details. Robert Brenner said that the house was built with five bedrooms, two of them on the first floor. The two bedrooms on the first floor have been converted to other uses leaving only three bedrooms on the second floor with one bathroom. The project adds one master bedroom and bathroom. Commissions Findings: J. Deis asked if the angle of the roof of the setback projection had been changed. Healy Rice said the angle had been changed nominally, being slightly higher. The overall projection is I I"the proposed addition goes out 18'. The overall heights had been maintained. The pitch codes down from 2.5' to 2' R. Brenner said the projection is set considerably back on the roof, and the visible from the street is minimized. M. Sarkisian asked about the proposed style of windows. R. Brenner said there are currently sit window styles around the house. The proposed windows are the six over one, which is the most, prominent around the house. H. Rice said the windows are Marvin windows with simulated divided lights (SDL) with space bars, the muntin would have the appearance of a ?I$" true divided Ight muntin. Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 — Minutes Page 5 Michael Imlay asked if the rear porch is new- H. Rice said that the existing rear screened parch would be demolished. The new porch would be built further west. M. Imlay said that the rjew- screened porch did not reflect the character of the main house. 1. Deis pointed out the screen porch is not visible from the public view. Wherefore, it is not the purview- of he Commission. Kirk Irwin asked if he projections on the %first elevation would be visible. J. Deis said that the projections are considerably set back. A debate ensued regarding the purview of the Commission on rear alterations not visible from the public %%ay, including alleys. It was ratified that the Commission is not precluded from providing recommendations in such instances. B. Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plans as presented for alteration at 2522 Lincoln Street as meeting standards. J. Deis seconded the motion. Discussion: M. Sarkisian asked that the motion include that the architect and owner considered the comments trade about the porch and the aesthetics of simple treatment of the treatment of windows. B. Gardner amended her motion as suggested by M. Sarkisian. J. Deis seconded the motion as amended. The motion passed as amended. Vote: 7 ayes, 1 nay (K, Irwin). 5, 1225 Ride Avenue - Front Yard Fence and Drivewav Paul Hart, owner, presented revised plans for a front yard fence and driveway at Ridge Avenue. The property is an Evanston Landmark located within the Evanston Ridge Historic District The Commission requested a detail of the posts and gates, and specification of materials for the driveway. Paul Hart said that the revised design eliminated the gate, brought the low wall and fence closer to the house. P. Hart said a chain link (not included in the plans) will be replaced with a wrought iron fence. Commission's Findings: J. Deis asked about the height of the fence. Paul Han said the fence consists of an I' high limestone wall with a Y wrought iron fence, the remaining of the fence along the side yard is a 6' high fence. The fence is 2' from the sidewalk. This requires a zoning fence variation. C. Ruiz said that the fence should be recessed further from the corner of the house to the west to provide a clean connection between the two. G. Halik asked if other Commissioners had a concern %kith the connection of the 4' high fence with the 6' high fence. J. Deis suggested that the fence steps up from 4' to Y and 6' within the first 24' from the intersection at the sideward property line towards the rear. G. Halik moved that the Commission accept the plan as submitted with the recommendation that the angle of the fence at the front of the house be revised so that it is perpendicular rather than at an angle, the southwest corner of the fence be revised so that the 4' high fence rounds the cor= and then steps up to a taller fence in 8' sections. The motion, seconded by M. Sarkisian, passed unanimously. Evanston Preservation Commission March 16. 1999 — Minutes Page 6 6. 1311 %lain Street - Reroofing and Installation of Skvlieltt. Alex Naylor. owner presented plans for reroofing and installing a skylight on the east side of the roof. The property is an Evanston Landmark. A. Naylor said the roof Would be replaced in kind with asphalt shingles. He said he would like to install a skylight on the east side of the roof. He said at the attic there is a studio apartment. The skylight is setback and it is 4' above the roof. A. Naylor said the skylight is not visible from the front of the house. A. Naylor said that fivgn the porch the skylight is 21' setback and from the house it is 16' setback. He said other repay will be performed identical to what is existing. including the fascia and triple track aluminum storm windows. Commission's Findings: M. Sarkisian asked how visible the skylight would be from the greet. J. Deis said that a large Maple tree in front of the house would probably disguise the skylight when the re is full with foliage. In winter. when the tree is without leavm the skylight would probably be visible. A. Gardner asked if there is only a large room at that level of the house. A. Naylor said that the front windows and dormers do not provide adequate natural lighting to the interior space. M. Sarkisian said he really id no know the real benefit of one small skylight. K. Lmin asked if the skylight could a located behind an existing gable. A. Naylor said that locatioa would be above a hallway. G. Halik asked what standards would be applicable to review the proposed skylight. J. Deis said standards one and two ofalteration would be applicable. Standard two refers to minimal alterations. J. Deis said the new skylight is not necessary. Standard tvb o refers to distinguishing qualities or character that should not a destroyed. J. Deis said a skylight is not in harmony with the character of the building. K. Irwin moved that the Commission recommend approval of the re -roofing portion of the proposal and the storm window installation and recommended disapproval of the skylight The motion, seconded by G. Halik, passed unanimously. 7. 1421 Elinor Place - Front Porch Deck Expansion Don and Charline Gardner, owners, presented plans for the expansion of a front porch deck at 142I EIinor Place. The property is an Evanston Landmark.. D. Gardner said that the front porch is deteriorating. The proposal would allow extending the depth of the front porch by 24'. and erect a low seating wall. The top of that sating wall would be at the same height as the two supporting columns on either side. The W wall would be capped in limestone to match the existing material. The project also includes landscaping. Commission's Findings: J. Deis asked if the proposal includes expanding the brick foundation to the extended porch foundation. D. Gardner said yes. J. Deis said that the proposed expansion of the existing parch is in harmony with the standards of alteration. M. Imlay said that a railing might be hand by the building code. C. Ruiz said the Commission is considering the seat wall only. If a railing is Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 — Minutes Page 7 required, the applicants needed to come back to the Commission. G. Halik moved that the Commission accept the proposal for the porch/parapet extension as presented. The motion, seconded by B. Gardner, passed unanimously. 8. 130 Demnster Street - Exterior Alterations and Front Second Storm Addition Sean Gallagher, architect and Michael Whinston, owner. presented plans for an expanded porch that becomes a dining room and an extension and expansion over the existing garage to MU new bedrooms. Commission's Findings: D. Gardner asked if the Commission had previously approved the sunroom. S. Gallagher said yes. He said that the original proposal was larger with a full basement. The newly proposed sun porch is on the same foundation of the existing sun porch and its being expanded with a bay. S. Gallagher said that in terms of detailing, the project is in keeping of all of the existing materials. The second story addition over the existing garage has the plate stepped down and it has two dormers. M. Sarkisian moved that the Commission accept the proposed alterations and second story addition as presented. The motion, seconded by B. Gardner, passed unanimously. 9. 1002 Judson Avenue - Exterior Alteration and Rehabilitation Jim Beck, owner, presented plans for exterior alterations and rehabilitation at 1002 Judson Avenue. The property is located within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. J. Beck said that the house was built in 1921 by Charles Walls, the interior of the house was designed by Marion Mahoney. J. Beck said that the house looks different from the original because it was remodeled in the 1960's in a Japanese/Oriental style. J. Beck said he intends to rehabilitate the house to the original design with the exception of rebuilding about 114 of a sunroom that wras taken off in the 1960's remodeling. Commission's Findings: Carlos Ruiz asked where the sun porch was located. Jim Beck said the porch is on the can elevation, facing Judson Avenue. An existing canopy over the main entry would be removed, as it is not original to the house. K. Irwin asked if the exterior finish would remain stucco. J. Beck said yes. Jim Beck said that he would also rebuild the landscaping. J. Beck said he plans to install skylights on the west side and visible from the Lee Street elevation. J. Deis suggested that the house could be eligible for landmark designation after the rehabilitation is completed. Jim Beck said that he would consider the suggestion. M. Sarkisian asked if the Commission had enough information with the drawings as presented. C. Ruiz said he was not sure if the design drawings alone would be sufficient to obtain a construction permit. He said that construction drawings are needed as well. Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 — Minutes Page 8 M. Sarkisian moved that the Commission recommend preliminary approval for alterations and rehabilitation at 1002 Judson Avenue as verbally and graphically submitted, and that the final approval be given by staff and three Commissioners upon submission of appropriate drawings to obtain a construction permit. The motion. seconded by B. Gardner, passed unanimously. 10. 630-32 Davis Street - Rehabilitation and Exterior Alterations, Jessica Deis recused herself from the review due to potential conflict of interest. Marie Sarkisian, Vice -Chair presided the meeting. C. Ruiz said that 630-32 Davis Street has been recently designated as an Evanston Landmark. The owners are also applying for Class L classification to Cook County for a tax incentive available to landmark buildings. C. Ruiz said because of that circumstance, he would recommend that the Commission review the proposed rehabilitation and alteration according to the Evanston Preservation Ordinance Standards for alteration and the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation. Robert Perlmutter and Mike Radis, developers, and Nick Belandic of Holabird and Root, Architects, presented plans for alterations and rehabilitation at 630-632 Davis Street. Mike Radis said the three-story building (at the comer of Davis Strut and Sherman Avenue) had been demolished. M. Radis started his presentation with the main facade north and west eleNvions. The limestone exterior finish and steel windows would be restored. The steel windows could be completed restored and painted black as they were originally painted. The first floor storefront has Ieaded or prism glass and they will be restored as well as the copper window frames. The granite base will be cleaned. Four original Chandler's plaques will be reinstalled at their original locations. Large sconce lights will be installed above the plagues. Mike Radis said that the existing condition of the storefront is not as it is shown on the plans. The existing storefront is recessed into the space. The first pane of glass coming from the corner column would remain as is. The recessed portion would be new aluminum frame and glass wall with an aluminum door with a glass light. The middle pane would be restored. M. Radis said that because an exit must be on the Davis Street side, the portion of the existing facade from the one pier to the east has to be removed and a new storefront would be put up on that location. M. Radis pointed out what portions of the existing facade would remain as is. M. Radis said that the west elevation facing Sherman Avenue would be restored and that the mosaic tiles within the recesses would also be kept and restored. Kirk Irwin asked if the upper level steel windows and the copper frame storefronts would be restored. Mike Radis said yes. Michael Imlay wondered if essentially black aluminum is predominant on the new storefronts, why not use just aluminum. M. Radis said that they want to retain the existing copper as much as possible. George Halik agreed with M. Imlay. Carlos Ruiz said that the standards encourage the retention of original materials as much as possible. He also said that The Secretary of the Interior's Standards are in place, since the building is being under consideration for a tax incentive with Cook County. 1:%anston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 — Minutes Page 9 M. Radis said that the new facades are precast. meant to complement the existing building. The panels would be scored to a much larger scale than the scoring on limestone that is on the existing facades. M. Radis showed a sample of the precast panels with the limestone finish. The new windows would be insulated glass, low- E, aluminum frame windows. M. Radis showed a color sample of the aluminum window frame. The mullion pattern is meant to complement the steel window mullions of the existing facades. The first floor storefront is also meant to complement the existing facades by using a sand blasted glass etched pattern design to complement the leaded glass pattern on the existing facades. M. Radis showed a sample of the sand blasted etched glass. The new facade would have a granite base meant to match the existing granite base. M. Radis showed a sample of the granite material. M. Radis said that they are proposing that on the new storefronts, the retailers place awnings on the windows. The awnings would occur below the etched glass. The awnings would have open sides. the canopy would be a fabric material in a burgundy color. Signage would occur on the balance of the awning, non -illuminated and signage behind the glazing only. There would not be attached signage on the building. The sign for the building itself would be a sand blasted rear illuminated panel. Carlos Ruiz asked if the proposed signage and awnings met the Evanston Sign Ordinance. M. Radis said that he did not know. M. Radis said that the parapet of the new facades would be in line with the existing facades. The columns project out from the face of the new facades. Nick Belandic said that the new facades are sympathetic to the historic preservation facades. They are precast panels with vertical pilasters. The precast panels are six inches thick. N. Belandic showed a sample of the precast material and said it is very sympathetic to the existing color and texture of the existing limestone. N. Belandic said that they had considered the use of limestone for the new facades, however, the Indiana L.mestone Institute recommends three inch thick limestone. With the precast the facades would have deep reveals that would be equivalent to the limestone. R. Perlmutter said that the cost of limestone versus precast was almost twice more expensive or about $200,000 premium. Commission's Findings: Mark Sarkisian asked about the profile of the new windows. Mike Radis said that the plans showed a profile of two and a half inches_ M. Sarkisian asked the applicants to talk about the street landscape. Nick Belandic said that the streetscape materials follow the existing City of Evanston streetscape standards. M. Radis said the brick and concrete pavers are a continuation of the existing brick pavers. The trash containers and streetlights are also in keeping with current City of Evanston standards. The planter is at grade and surrounded by a low gate. Michael Imlay said he would like to see larger samples of the proposed materials at the site. He said it is difficult to select materials from drawings. Nick Belandic said that they intend to have mock ups at the site. George Halik asked if the window framing on the existing storefront faade was copper framing. Mike Radis said yes. G. Halik said that the black alurinum windows on Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 -Minutes Page 10 the new facades are not considered historic, even though this material has been used on the building for other adaptations. G. Halik said that to say that the aluminum framing already exists on the building and for that reason to use it everywhere else, is making an existing bad situation even worst. G. Halik asked if the ground floor facade should be all in copper to be historic. G. Hank also asked if it is appropriate to have a dark aluminum mullion on the new windows. G. Halik said that it seems the aluminum material is not historic at all. Robert Perlmutter said that on the Davis Street fagade everything would be as it is, except for two doors. Mike Imlay said that in order to do those two doors. the vestibules would have do be done in aluminum. R. Perlmutter said that was correct, everything else is as it exists except for those two doors. R. Perlmutter emphasized that all that is existing on the Davis Street fa;ade is being maintained, except for the vwo vestibules. One vestibule is for exiting requirements and the other is predicated on the ability to lease the space. Carlos Ruiz read for clarification the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation. Building Exterior- Storefronts, Recommended: "ldent wing, retaining, and preserving storefronts - and their ftrnctional and decorative features - that are important in defining the overall historic character of the budding such as display windows, signs, doors. transoms, kick plates, corner posts, and entablatures " G. Halik said that the definition would require that the storefronts be copper. Barbara Gardner said the aluminum door on Sherman Avenue is not being altered and should stay as is. G. Halik said that is a matter of definition, and asked, does that aluminum contribute to the historic quality of the building: he said no. B. Gardner said that the doorway is not being altered. She said that the only reason the two doorways on David Street fall under that definition is because the doorways are being changed. R. Perlmutter said that standard four for alteration of the Evanston Preservation Ordinance does refer to changes that may have taken over time, and it does not require to bring the structure to its original design. B. Gardner said that when a house is restored The Secretary of the Interior's Standards do not require that the roof, for instance, be restored to original wood shingles. G. Halik said the question is, is it historically significant: and that significant is the word, a subjective word. G. Halik said that his question is if the copper storefront is significant to the building, or is the aluminum significant to the historic nature of the building, or neither of them is significant. Mike Radis said that the door on Davis Street is aluminum. Robert Perlmutter referring to the federal standards said that one could argue that the aluminum is a complementary material that is compatible with the original copper storefront. G. Halik said that he would argue that black aluminum articulated with copper is not compatible. Michael Imlay said that he was concerned that a small portion of the storefront is copper. He asked if there is any latitude within the regulation that would allow black aluminum. R. Perlmutter said that the}, are trying to maintain as much as possible of the existing material. Fie asked if M. Imlay is saying that there is an overriding design issue in retaining pieces and replacing pieces. B. Gardner suggested that Mike Jackson of the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency be consulted about this issue. Carlos Ruiz said that the federal and local standards give enough latitude to allow the Commission to make a Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 -Minutes Page I I determination. Mark Sarkisian asked how Commissioner felt about the aluminum windows above the ground level. George Halik said that he was comfortable with the aluminum windows on the new facades. He said that it would be interesting to investigate the original color of the steel windows and replicate that color on the aluminum windows. G. Halik said that the color black may not be the original color of the steel windows. Mark Sarkisian said that the Commission would recommend that color be researched at the steel windows, instead of just using black color as the overall solution. M. Sarkisain said the Commission is still left with the two entries on the existing elevation (Davis Street) and whether or not the Commission believes that those entrances should be copper or a hybrid (aluminum and copper), since the Sherman Avenue fagade is not going to be changed. Carlos Ruiz referred to The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for storefronts and read: "Replacing in ,find an entire storefront that is too deteriorated to repair - if the overall form and detailing are still evident - using the physical evidence as a model. If using the same material is not technically or economically feasible, then compatible substitute materials may be considered " C. Ruiz said that if a large portion of the storefront is new material and if the aluminum system is compatible then the remaining copper could be removed. G. Halik said he did not think is about quantity, it is about remaining clues to the historic detail of the building. If there is a clue then one should followed that. C. Ruiz said that the standard for rehabilitation also says that if it is not technically or economically feasible, then a compatible material could be used. G. Halik said that if that is the case then it would be different. Mike Radis described again the location of capper on the existing Davis Street facade. Mark Sarkisian asked if the Commission is suggesting that copper be introduced into the Da%id Street fagade, if so, is it everywhere or just the doors themselves or something else. George Halik said that aside from the economic issue, to meet the historic standards, that storefront should be copper. If it is prohibitive economically, then the Commission could talk about other solution. Kirk Irwin and Heidi Carey agreed with G. Halik. Robert Perlmutter said they have spent the additional dollars on what they considered the most important elements. They have focused on the preservation of the existing material as much as possible, in particular the windows, which are the most significant detail in the building. R. Perlmutter said that the storefront is being replaced because the City's building codes are different than they were in 1927, which eliminates one of the doors, therefore eliminates the recessed storefront, and one of the entry doors into the recessed storefront is now taken by the exit door. George Halik said that if cost is an issue, the applicant should consider a more compatible alternative than flat black aluminum on the storefront, an address the historical character of the building. Robert Perlmutter asked if the Commission would consider approval of the project with the condition that it would require them to either present what is the incremental cost in doing the copper storefront, or a design solution that maybe be more sympathetic and still meet Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 — Minutes Page 12 the requirements that are in place. Carlos Ruiz said that the Commission could agree %ith FL Perlmutter's suggestion. Mark Sarkisian read The Secretary of the Interior"s Standards for Rehabilitation: 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be ghwn a new use that requires a minimum change to its distinctive materials. features, spaces, and spatial relationship. The Commission found that the new use of the historic building met standard 1. 2. The historic character of a property would be retained and preserved The removal of distinctive materials or alteration offeatures, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterized a property would be avoided The Commission found that the proposed alterations met standard 2. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place; and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will nor be undertaken. The Commission found that the proposed alterations met standard 3. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. The Commission concluded that any previous changes to the historic buildings did not acquire historic significance S. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved The Commission determined that the proposed project met standard S. b. Deteriorated historic features rill be repaired rather than replaced Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and where possible. materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by &xuwesnary and physical evidence. The Commission found that standard 6 was applicable. The Commission asked the applicant to Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 — Minutes Page 13 research the color of windows. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used The Commission found that the project met standard 7. 8. Archeological resources will he protected and presen•ed in place. !f such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken The Commission found that standard 8 did not apply to the project 9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new ,construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterized the property. The new work shall be differentiatedfrom the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and propartion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. The Commission found that the project met standard 9. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will undertaken in a such manner that, f removed in the future, the essential form and integrity ofthe historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. The Commission found that standard 10 was not applicable. The Commission discussed whether the changes to the storefront with aluminum acquired historic significance. Robert Perlmutter said that the standards say that if something is considered historically significant, it has to be retained. He added, if something is not historically significant, it does not have to be retained or it could still be retained. Kirk Irwin moved that the Commission recommends the proposed modifications and restoration of 630-632 Davis Street, finding that the modifications to the building meet The Secretary of the, Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation that Carlos Ruiz prepare a report of the Commission's deliberations addressed to City Council. Barbara Gardner seconded the motion. Discussion: Mark Sarkisian asked Carlos Ruiz if the Commission was approving the standards in general or approving the project at large. C. Ruiz said the Commission was approving the project at large. George Halik said that the standards say retain and preserve. He said that his argument before was to match the historical significant portion. G. Halik said that the standards do not say Evanston Preservation Commission March 16. 1999 — Minutes Page 14 exactly the same. G. Halik recommended that the developer look at the Davis Street side storefront. Also, look at where a new storefront would come up and place it right into a copper storefront, creating awkward details. G. Halik recommended to take a look at the historic mullion color on the upper floor, and not necessarily go with the black color, just because it matches a 1950's storefront on the floor. Kirk Irwin said that G. Halik's recommendations could be taken care of in the Commission's specific review. The Commission approved the motion unanimously. George Halik moved that the Commission accept the project because it meets The Standards of the Secretary of the Interior and the standards for alteration (Evanston Preservation Ordinance). Recommending that the developer look at the ground floor conditions of the storefront, especially on the Davis Street side, where the new is next to the old and suggest something that is more compatible. Also, research the historic color on the existing mullions and follow the historic color of the mullions on the old and new facades. Barbara Gardner seconded the motion. Discussion: Robert Perlmutter asked for clarification if the motion means that they would try to match the historic color of the steel window mullions on the existing windows and new windows. Mark Sarkisian said yes. Nick Belandic said that his architectural firm restored St. James Cathedral where the original colors were restored to match the original design. He suggested that the developer use a color that is appropriate and defined. Michael Imlay said that a professional window restoration person must do the work. Mark Sarkisain amended the motion stating that the Commission also recommends that a small material muck up be available on site. He added that on all three recommendations, the applicant submit to staff the changes as recommended, and if staff feels they need further review, that three of the Commissioners review the changes as well. Barbara Gardner seconded the amendment. The motion passed as amended unanimously. IV. NEW BUSINESS Northeast Historic District Presentation form the Northeast Historic District Association to discuss the completed nomination of the Northeast Evanston Historic District to the National Register of Historic Places Judy Fiske, of Northeast Evanston Historic District Association (NEHDA), said that NEHDA was ready to present to the Evanston Preservation Commission the finish nomination of the Northeast Evanston Preservation Commission March 16. 1999 —Minutes Page 15 Evanston Historic District to be listed in the Nations! Register of Historic Places. Me numinmion is subject to review and corrections by the Illinois Historic Preservaiii�n Agcnc-.. J. Fiske said that it took NEHDA a year and a half to complete the nomination_ She named Mary McWilliams. Acme Earle, Jim McGuire, Mark Burnette, and Jeanne Kernps Lind%%alL fug City of Evanston i'ngavavation Coordinator, now with Camiros and Associates. J. Lindwall, is the designated author of the nomination, although all the above named persons have %Titten a part of the nomination. except A. Earle who run a workshop sponsored by NEHDA. J. Fiske said the nomination ►%ill he presented to the Illinois Historic Sites Advisory Council (IHSAC) in Jura. 1999. J. Fiske said that because of the City's Certified Local Government status (CLG), the nomination also comes to the Evanston Preservation Commission and to the City Mayor. for their input, hold public hearings, and to determine if meets the National Register guidelines. Without the CLG status, the nomination would have to go directly to IHSAC. J. Fiske said the Northeast Evanston Historic District if approved, would be the largest Evanston Historic District in Evanston listed in the National Register of Historic Places. 1. Fiske said she would talk about the methodology applied to get where they are in the nomination process. J. Fiske said that a year and a half ago the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA) was invited by NEHDA to visit the district. Touring the district with the 114PA was a Iearning experience of how to set the boundaries of the district. The boundaries are in no wail arbitrary. The boundaries tell the story of the district. Houses cannot be in or out of the district on the basis of someone wanting to be in or out of the district. J. Fiske said that the nomination was done using state of the art computerized systems. J. Fiske showed a map of the proposed district with a great percentage of it being contributing buildings. J. Fiske said that out of 546 residences only three residences are considered not contributing to the district. Northwestern University (NU) owns approximately 18 residences within the district. The homes owned by NU on Sheridan Road are not in the district because the IHPA had determined that these buildings should not be included since they are separated from the rest of the district by parking lots. The eastern boundary was drawn around Seabury Western, parking facilities, tennis courts, fraternity house along Lincoln Street. Long Field is included in the district because it is a very important open green space to a historic district. The boundaries include Sheridan Place, excluding new construction post 1950. All properties have been photographed according to the IHPA requirements_ J. Fiske showed a series of slides of residences that are pan of the district and have been identified as markers to determine the boundaries. J. Fiske pointed out that streetscapes are important as well. The IHPA looks for uniform setbacks, building heights, park%-.n-s, and trees planted Slides of non- contributing structures were also shown. The purpose of all the photographs is to show to the IHPA why the boundaries were drawn the way they are. 1. Fiske highlighted the streetscape near Haven Street and Orrington Avenue, built by Victor Carlson, a developer that influenced the development of downtown Evanston. Victor Carlson owned the house at Noyes Street and Orrington Avenue. J. Fiske said that some of the structures in the district were moved to their current sites from other Evanston locations. The multiple uses of buildings within the district were also show, such as the Kendall College buildings, Orrington School, National Louis University, and Roycemore School. Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 -- Minutes Page 16 In terms of open spaces, Long Field provides a vista of the district. the Evanston Lighthouse -cm be seen to the east of Long Field. J. Fiske said that the elevated railroad tracks are a logical boumdov, on the western boundary. J. Fiske showed buildings within the district designed by promunm architects including Ernest Mayo and Talimadge & Watson. J. Fiske said that the IHPA its also interested in secondary structures such as garages and coach houses. J. Fiske said that after the visit from the IHPA, everybody within the district received a flyer fora community meeting in February of 1998. Approximately 100 people attended the meeting. 7'h= workshops followed that meeting to discuss the nomination process, the Assessment Tax Fn:eu Program, and researching the significance of the historic district. These workshops w= at Roycemore School every other Saturday (beginning in February of 1998). Also, the Nor'tlx=st Evanston Historic District Association (NEHDA) was formed. The nomination is privately funded through donations to NEHDA. Also, a house walk conducted in the Fall of 1998 of the sourh end of the district raised more funds. J. Fiske said that all the above -mentioned events served to inform the public about the nomination through an open process. J. Fiske said that once the IHPA set the boundaries, NEHDA hired Susan Benjamin of Historic Certification Consultants. Susan Benjamin also wrote the Suburban Apartment Buildings in Evanston, Illinois, Thematic Resources, listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1994. Susan Benjamin is very familiar with Evanston and the regulations of IHPA. Also. NEHDA counted the structures (931 of them). J. Fiske said that she and other volunteers have been as least seven times in front of these structures, not counting the distribution of flyers. Each one of the buildings was photographed including garages and coach houses. A sheet with information was filled out for every structure. with the street name. the address. what the primary building was like, the height, what the building was made of, the roofing material whether the building was or w-as not contributing, what was the garage like, and whether the structures were or not were Evanston Landmarks. Then NEHDA researched the building permits for all 931 structures. The arttizecx or builder of a structure was recorded from the building permits. Also, the age range of the being was recorded and building permits for alterations were recorded. J. Fiske said that all the dma is compiled in Excel and Access software. Voluminous working notebooks contain the data sheets and photographs. J. Fiske said that the Commission has until May 8, 1999 to comment = the nomination to the IHPA. Mary McWilliams followed Judy Fiske and said that one thing is to nominate a district and arwither thing is to determine why is important. One of the important things about the district is that i7 was developed in the early 1920s. The question then was, why it was developed that late? A'bm NEHDA learned is that the reason this area developed later than other parts of Evanston is besmuse the rail road tracks of what is today Northwestern Union Pacific Railroad were too far from the area. The Northwestern University (NU) Campus developed in the 1890s. Northeast Evanston pcimuir ly was owned and subdivided by NU. M. McWilliams said that development came after the Chncago Transit Authority (CTA) tracks were built. There was a street rail%%av of Sherman Avenue thaw went west on Central Street. The transportation system allowed people other than NU to buy land* build Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 —Minutes Page 17 houses and commute to Chicago. M. McWilliams said that 74 percent of development tonic place betveeen 1947 and 1927. The National Register nomination requires a statement about the context of the district. As far as architecture, the proposed district is comparable to the Evanston Rye and Lakeshore Historic Districts. The same architects that built in those districts built in the pezrposed district. This allows to see a progression of their work throughout the years. hi. McWilliiaims said that Susan Benjamin wrote the description of the buildings type and style in the district. M. McWilliams said that based on her experience working on the other three Evanston Mstoric District, that it is very important to allow the public to be involved in the process. M. McIAViarns encouraged the Preservation Commission to hold a public informational meeting regarcfvng the nomination. J. Fiske said that during NEHDA's meeting and workshops about five people expressd their opposition to the nomination. Most people seemed to be interested because of the signsficance of the area historically and architecturally and the potential tax benefits. Carlos Ruiz asked if Northwestern University (NU) camas contacted about the nomination- J. Fiske said: yes. J. Fiske said that Al Cubbage of NU is very familiar with the nomination. Throuab these contacts J. Fiske said that she learned that NU does not have immediate plans for their properties in the TI and T2 zoning districts. J. Fiske said that NU is not strongly opposed to the disuirt. M. McWilliams said that 51 percent of individual property owners have to protest the nomination in writing to stop the process. If an owner owns more than one property it is still considered as one property owner. She said that for the Lakeshore and Ridge Historic Districts, there were no recorded protests. For the Apartment Buildings Thematic Resources, there were a couple of owners who objected, then their properties were excluded but declared eligible for listing in the National Register. Jessica Deis, said that it was her understanding that the National Register listing is an honorary designation and it does not create binding reN iew• of alterations to buildings. J. Deis asked what does it follow a National Register designation. M. McWilliams said that only local landmarks and districts are subject to the Evanston Historic Preservation Ordinance. If a nomination for local designation is submitted, the National Register nomination would serve as a way of introducing people to the process. J. Fiske said that the workshops were important because people were able to hear what being in a historic district was going to be like. J. Fiske said she did not foresee major opposition to a local designation, except for Northwestern University. J. Deis said than local designation would be the next logical step so that the district would have the same weight and subject to binding review as the other historic districts do. K. Irwin wondered about the treatment of modernist structures within the district. He asked if it would be possible that modernist structures in this district could be considered contributing structures and new structures as well. M. McWilliams said it is possible. She said if the district is designated as a local historic district, then the Commission would review new constructim M. McWilliams said that the cut off date for the national register is 1949, the proposed distric: has a ranch house built in 1946. This is an indication that modernist buildings are important. Evanston Preservation Commission March 16, 1999 — Minutes Page 18 K. Irwin asked would the bridge be a contributing structure to the any. J. Fiske said that on Sheirnan Avenue the boundary line is drawn on the opposite side of Sherman Avenue, that %as to include the original trolley car lines underneath the asphalt. K. Irwin asked if vernacular structures or strucdaal structures that may be included in the districx. J. Deis said that those types of structures may be considered of historic significance. Anne O. Earle said that the district is primarily residential. K. Irwin said that the railroad is part of the justification for the district's existence. K. Irwin said he would like to ask about the archeological standard that it seemed newer applicable. He said that NEHDA's presentation of last year went into some of the pre-historyof this area. He wondered if there are any pre -history objects that need to be preserved and is there any offshore history (underneath the lake) that needs to be documented. J. Deis that she would prefer to hold a vote from the Commission until after a pion has been made public in the spirit of community involvement. J. Deis said that Commissioner would benefit with a little more time to look over the application. J. Deis suggested that the Commission hold a special informational meeting for the presentation to the public of the proposed historic district. The Commission set Tuesday, April 13, 1999, as the date for the special informational meeting. ADJOURNMENT With no further items for discussion in the agenda, B. Gardner moved to adjourn the meeting at 12:10 a.m. (March 17,1999). J. Deis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Respectfully Submitted: arlos D. Rui Senior Planner/Presenrati n Coordinator EVAI STO\ PRESERVATION COWMISSION MINUTTES Tuesday. Februar) 16. 1999 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: Jessica Deis, Barbara Gardner, Nlichael Imlay, Kirk Ir-Ain. Heidi P. Carey, Susan Regan. Mark Sarkisian MEMBERS ABSENT: George Halik OTHERS PRESENT: Nathan Kipnis, Maurice Lemon, Foster Dale, Ellen GaltarA Paul Deutch, Richard and Joan Miller, George Cyrus, Jim Laukkanen. Joel and Leslie Litofl', David Galloway, Robert Perlmutter, Nick Bilandic, Morton W. Johnson, Mike Radis PRESIDING: Jessica Deis. Chair STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz I. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM Jessica Deis called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m., a quorum being present. C. Ruiz introduced Michael Imlay, architect, who was recently appointed as a Commission member. J. Deis welcomed M. Imlay. If. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Review and Technical Assistance Committee (R&TA) 1200 Forest A.Ynue - Rear deck addhion Nathan Kipnis, architect, presented plans for a rear deck addition at 1200 Forest A -*gave. The property is an Evanston Landmark located within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District Carlos Ruiz showed slides of the building. N. Kipnis said a deck would be added on the back of the building. A group of three middle %%-indo«-s would become a door on the center of the new deck. N. Kipnis said the kitchen would be remodeled. He said a limestone deck off the kitchem with brick pavers to match the 6 x 6 brick pavers with a limestone surround and a very omate turn limestone railing system and with some limestone ums would be built. The house is visible from three sides. Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16, 1999 Page 2 Commission's Findings J. Deis asked if a stone wall went around the rear yard. N. Kipnis said, "No." He added that there was a planted hedge and a metal fence that went around it_ Marie Sarkisian asked about the new near door. N. Kipnis said the door would be a Marvin custom door to match the muntin *stern_ The new windows would replace the existing windows in kind. Kirk Irwin asked if the side of the railing would be solid. N. Kipnis said, "Yes." it, J. Deis said that the use of new materials was appropriate and the design was complementary to the existing house. Barbara Gardner and K. Irwin concurred with J. Deis. K. Irwin said ttral the l proposed addition met standards 1, 2 and 5 for review of alteradons. B. Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plans for the addition at 1200 Forest as submitted, finding that it met all applicable standards of alteration. Susan Regan seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 2. 1333 Greenwood Street - Two-story rear addition Maurice Lemon, owner, and Foster Dale, architect presented plans for a two-story rear addition at 1333 Greenwood Street. The property is an Evanston Landmark Located within the Evanston Ridge Historic District. C. Ruiz showed slides of the property depicting the front and rear elevations. M. Lemon said that Stephen J. Jennings designed the house 1893. Originally, the house was across the street and it was moved to its current site in 1957. M. Lemon said that the main structure of the house was the gambrel roof with a gable dormer at the rear. The plan called for setting back the west wall of the addition and push back the addition with a gambrel roof form. This would complete the geometry of the main portion of the house. The addition included an expansion of the basement and kitchen, a new sitting room leading to a porch or to stairs going down. The stairs would have 2"x2" wood balusters, painted to match the front porch. The second floor had a master bedroom, chaster bath and dressing room. The attic would be expanded and match the front of the house. The original wood clapboard exterior material was hidden by aluminum siding. The addition would have wood clapboard exterior siding to match the original siding. The roof would be asphalt shingles. Commission's Findings K. Irwin asked if the new windows would have any mullions or muntins. M. Lemon said, "Yes." He added that the wood windows were double hung. J. Deis said the south elevation had one change by raising a window sill. M Lemon said that window was in the kitchen and it's raised to accommodate the counter height. J. Deis complemented the applicant for the presentation material. She said that the proposed south E%mnston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16, 1999 Page 3 elevation seemed to be more in harmony with the rest of the house. C. Ruiz asked if the Zoning staff had reviewed the lot coverage. M. Lemon said that the proposed addition was under the allowable lot coverage. J. Deis asked about an air conditioning unit on the third level on a %0ndow of the front facade. M. Lemon said they hoped to rclocate the air conditioning unit to a less visible area. Barbra Gardner encouraged M. Lemon to remove the aluminum siding if at all possible. M. In -day concurred with B. Gardner. Heidi Carey moved that the Commission accept the project at 1333 Greenwood Street for a rear addition as proposed. The motion, seconded by Susan Regan, passed unanimously. 3. 647 Judson Avenue - One-story rear addition Paul Deutch, owner, and Ellen Galland, architect presented drawings for a one-story rear addition at 647 Judson Avenue. The property is located within the Evanston Lakeshore k igxoric District. C. Ruiz showed slides of the front and rear of the house. C. Ruiz said that the house had fire damage - Ellen Galland said that she and her client had been working on the house since July 1998 after the fire. Since then her client decided to add a one-story addition with a family room, eating area and mudroom. E. Galland said that the project was providing some order to the rear elevation and addressing some building code issues. The ceiling on the flat roof of the second floor room would be removed. An egress window would be also installed. blew windows would be installed on the south elevation. An interesting feature of the house which it could not be replicated were the true double hung windows that slid up into the wall. Commission's Findings Barbara Gardner said the back of the house looked better with the proposed alterations. E. Galland said that the windows would be Pella «*indows and everything else would match the existing exterior materials such as the stucco finish. Jessica Deis said that no changes %%we proposed on the front of the house. Ellen Galland said that all the windows in the house would be changed to match the existing windows with applied divided lights (LDL). Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plans for the addition and the replacement of windows at 647 Judson Avenue as submitted, finding that it met all the applicable standards for re%icw of alteration. The motion, seconded by M. Sarkisian, passed unanimously. 4. 2338 Bryant Avenue - Side alteration and second -story addition Richard and Joan Miller, owners, and Ellen Galland, architect presented plans for aside alteration and a second -story addition at 2338 Bryant Avenue. The property is an Evanston Landmark. C. Ruiz showed slides of the front, side and rear of the building. Evanston Preservation Commission Minute - February 16, 1999 Page 4 Ellen Galland said the project would improve the interior plan of the house, which was limited by the size, and location of the subject dormers. The project called for French casements, which would open completely with no centerpiece, to meet egress requirement. The new windows would match most of the windows in the house in terms of the size of the lights. On the west elevation, a lower left double hung window would be added. That new window was on the original drawings of the house. Spencer S. Beman, the architect of the house designed the dormer types which vary in shape. According to the Zoning analysis this addition v.-as called a second floor addition, so it did not fall under the dormer requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Ellen Galland said that the new roof shingles would match the existing roof shingles. The knee wall in the current second floor was only 30" tall, limiting the furniture placement. E. Galland said the proposed north addition was in keeping with Beman's houses and it would make it a better house. Commission's Findings In response to a question from M. Sarkisian. Ellen Galland said that the pitch of the roof of the new dormer would match the pitch of the dormer that was by the front door, however it might be a little steeper. E. Galland said that edge of the prolxised dormer would be almost the same distance from the front of the house as the current dormer %vas on the other side. K. Irwin asked if the rest of the windows would be changed. Ellen Galland said, "Yes." E. Galland said that Marvin windows and Pozzi windows representatives took measurements of all the windows. Richard Miller said the existing window mullions were 7/9". the standards mullions today are 3/4". J. Deis asked if the windows would be costume wood frame windows with true divided lights and mullions to match the original windows. E. Galland said. "Yes." She added that they were considering aluminum -clad windows that would snatch the original color. R. Miller said that they had asked the window manufacturers if the profile of the original windows could be matched with the aluminum -clad windows. Mark Sarkisian asked if the windows would be insulated. Richard Miller said the new windows would be thermo pane, double glass window units with mullions applied inside and outside with a spacing between the panes of glass. M. Sarkisian said that he had some concerns with the aluminum -clad windows. M. Imlay said the color was the biggest problem with the aluminum -clad windows, C. Ruiz said another problem with the aluminum -clad windows was that the brick mold could not be matched to the original brick molds. K. Irwin said that he suspected that the difference - between the aluminum -clad windows and wood windows would be very noticeable because the texture of the dark brown stained shingle siding. Jessica Deis asked if any Commissioner would care to snake a motion. M. Sarkisian he would like to resolve first the issue of aluminum -clad window versus wood windows. J. Deis said that the Commission could look at the replacement of all the windows with a product that had applied Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16, 1999 Page 5 muntins 3/4" wide and could put the material undcr review by stair The Commission could also approve now wood windows, but if the applicant chose to look zit aluminum -clad windows, staff would review that choice. Ellen Galland asked if it was common to discou.tzim clad \\indows on landmark hou-m Jessica Deis said that the Commission did not review that many clad windows in the rout. C. Ruiz said that the problem with the house was that it was visible from all sides. On certain properties where windows were located to the rear and not visible, clad windows probably would be acceptable. and the primary facade would be true divided light wood windows. He added that the Commission would adhere to the standards as much as possible and clad windows were not mention as acceptable. M. Sarkisian said that perhaps clad windows could have longer life, but clad windows could actually trap moisture. M. Sarkisian said that wood windows could be stained instead of being painted and still get a beautiful look that may not impose the maintenance problems inherited with paint. M. Sarkisian strongly recommended that the Commission approve wood windows and if there was a change, staff could review and approve the change if appropriate. M. Imlay asked if it would be possible to get the "perfect" clad window. Richard Miller said that Ellen Galland had encouraged them going with the clad windows, but one the contractor suggested to them that they would be very disappointed with clad windows and he recommended to them to go with wood windows. R. Miller said they had struggled with the maintenance of the wood windows for years without success, and the idea of not having to paint muntins was very appealing to them. E. Galland suggested that a compromise could be to have the brick mold in wood and paint it. M. Sarkisian moved to recommend that the project at 2338 Bryant Avenue, be approved with the graphic and verbal testimony, and recommended as part the approval that wlndow�s be wood windows, and if here was a change, it would be reviewed by staff: J. Deis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. S. 418-426 Hamilton Street/ 1121-1143 Hinman Avenue - Addition ofjour balconies George Cyrus, Jim Laukkanen, developers presented plans for the addition of four balconies at 419- 426 Hamilton Street/1121-1143 Hinman Avenue. The property is located within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. C. Ruiz showed slides of the south and east rear facades where the balconies would be built. C. Ruiz said that the restoration of the wood windows %vas in progress. G. Cyrus said that they would like to add four balconies to the rear of the property. The balconies would be visible from the alley. G. Cyrus said that there was some wrought iron between the two buildings that was visible from the street. Two of the balconies would not be visible at all (426 Hamilton Street), the other two were visible from the alley. G. Cyrus said that there would be a Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16, 1999 Page 6 single French door at each balcony. Commission Findings: Carlos Ruiz asked if there was a detail drawing of the French doors. Jim Laukkanen said, "No." He added that there was a detail drawing of the balconies. C. Ruiz asked if the French door design would be sensitive to the design of the existing fenestration. C. Cyrus said, "Yes." He said that the door was highly visible from the inside of the units. Jessica Deis asked if the door would fit in the same window opening at the top and sides. J. L wAkanen said that the existing window was slightly wider and the top would be approximately the same. C. Ruiz asked what would be the material for the doors. J. Laukkancn said it would be wood. Kirk ]-win asked if the steel would be painted. J. Laukkanen said, —Yes*' K. Irwin asked what was the balustrade made out of. J. Laukkanen said wrought iron. K. Irwin said that he would like to see an elevation drawing showing how the doors would look like. Jessica Deis said that the application seemed to be in accordance to the standards of alteration. J. Deis said the Commission would like to see a graphic representation of what the new openings would be. Heidi Carey moved that the Commission accept the plan as proposed pending staff approval of the door elevation entryway. The motion, seconded by Barbara Gardner, paused unanimously. 6. 1223 Maple avenue - Enclosing an existing rear porch Joel and Leslie Litofi', owners, and David Galloway, architect presented plans to enclose an existing rear porch at 1223 Maple Avenue. The property is located within the Evanston Ridge Historic District. Carlos Ruiz showed slides of the property, depicting the existing open porch visible from the alley. David Galloway said the project was part of the kitchen remodeling. The house was clad with aluminum siding. The new addition would be cedar siding to match the profile, exposure and color of the aluminum siding. The fascia board separating the porch from the upper story would be replicated with new construction to delineate the two siding materials. All of the casing around the windows would be wood to match existing casings. The new windows and doors would be wood. The rear porch would be modeled after the design of the front porch. The trim would be painted to match existing trim, the porch deck and the lattice panels would be stained and the wood railing and balusters would be painted to match existing railing and balusters. Joel Litofl'said the proposed French door could be changed to a sliding door to allow additional space in the kitchen. Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16, 1999 Page 7 Commission's Findings: Mark Sarkisian asked why not matching the existing aluminum siding insirad of using cedar siding. D. Galloway said that matching the color of the existing aluminum siding itiould be difficult Michael Imlay said that aluminum siding c%suld tx painted it) match the c ilor of the existing aluminum siding. Leslie Litoff said that using; aluminum siding Nvould entail bringing another contractor. Jessica Deis said that he understood the point made by M. Imlay and M. Sarkicilam However, she did not find anything in the standards that would prcvent the applicants from using cedar siding. M. Sarkisian said that he would recommend matching the new cedar siding with the original wood siding underneath the existing aluminum siding. Mark Sarkisian asked if anyone in the Commission had a comment regarding the proposed sliding doors. Barbara Gardner said that in her opinion the French doors looked betttr. L. Litoffshowed pictures comparing the sliding doors and the French doors. Both doors looked very similar. Susan Regan moved that the Commission accept the proposed alteration to 1223 Maple Avenue, because it met the applicable standards. She added that the door could be a French door or a sliding door. The motion, seconded by Kirk Irwin, passed unanimously. V. OLD BUSINESS 2332 Bryant Avenue - Correspondence from Richard A. Miller, owner of 2338 Bryant Avenue Jessica Deis said for the record that Richard Miller, owner of 2338 Bryant Avenue, was interested in appealing a previous decision by the Commission regarding an addition at 2332 Bryant Avenue. The Commission had received an opinion from the City's Legal Counsel that the Preservation Ordinance did not include an appeal process for a project once it had been approved. The appeal process existed in situations where an application had been denied, and that process was given to the applicant and not to other interested parties. Jessica Deis said that the Commission also received from Arthur Alterson, Assistant Director for Zoning, a memorandum that outlined the zoning process that 2332 Bryant Avenue went through. Richard Miller said that this was a surprise to him. Apparently this was a reference to notes that he gave to Carlos Ruiz R. Miller said these notes were not formal communication- R. Miller said that the Commission would be receiving formal communication from six property owners affected by the project that were going to meeting within few days. R. Miller said he felt awkward that this had come before the Commission before the neighbors had given the Commission what they considered to be letter. Jessica Deis responded to R. Miller that the Commission had receivvd a letter from him and that typically communications are brought up during the course of a meeting. Carlos Ruiz said that the legal opinion was received today and that R Miller would get a letter from Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16, 1999 Page 8 James Wolinski, Director, Community Development Department. V1. NEW BUSINESS Public Hearing Nomination of 630-632 Davis Srreed1573-1575 Sherman Avenue (The Chandler's Buildirw for Eransron Landmark Designation Jessica Deis recused herself from the proceedings stating that she had recently being employed by a company that potentially may have business dealings with the applicant of the nomination. J. Reis asked Mark Sarkisian, Vice -Chair to preside the public hearing. M. Sarkisian read for the record the Commission's Rules and Procedures for public hearing for the nomination of an area, property, structure, site or object for consideration and designation as a landmark or district. Carlos Ruiz said he also had slides of the property and that the Commission members had received a packet of information submitted by the applicant. Mark Sarksian called the public meeting to order at 8:47 p.m. M. Sarkisian said that there was a quorum present of seven Commission members. Carlos Ruiz showed slides of the building at 630-632 Davis Street/1573-1575 Sherman Avenue, the Chandler's Building. C. Ruiz highlighted the architectural details of the main L-shaped building. Robert Perlmutter, of Heitman Retail Properties, said that he was in front of the Commission approximately two weeks ago for an informal presentation of the design concept and feedback and direction from the Commission. R. Perlmutter introduced: Mike Radis, also with Heitman Retail Properties, and responsible for the construction team; Morton Johnson, with Chandler's, the former owner of the lease and holding portion of this property and operator of the store since the early 1900's; and Nick Bilandic with Holabird & Root, architects. Robert Perlmutter said that the packet of information with the nomination included a narrative describing the character and quality of the building and the prominence of the comer at Davis Street and Sherman Avenue and the historic nature of Chandler's and the identity of a particular business on this corner. R. Perlmutter said that their intent was to take the five -story L-shaped building and restore it as it was originally constructed. The three-story building would be tom down. He said that Nick Bilandic included a letter about the structural integrity of that building. R_ Perlmutter said that the plan was to take down the corner building, put a plaza in it's place, restore the five -story building, and at the same time open up the interior elevations with windows and retail fronting on the plaza. Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16, 1999 Page 9 Robert Perlmutter said that their plants are not much different from what was proposed for the Chadler's building way back when they built the original L-shaped building. R. Perlmutter said that historic photos showed a seven -story building on the corner of Danis Street and Sherman Avenue. R. Perlmutter said that their idea was not a new idea in terms in sing the comer building as significant. R. Perlmutter said that they believed that there was architectural and historical significance to the five -story building itself. The architect was a prominent architect (Edgar Ovet Blake). Also, the connection of Chandler's and the particular intersection was also of local importance. Robert Perlmutter said that they brought updated elevations to reflect the exterior elevation on the west and north portions of the building. These elements were significant Kithira the structure. There was a strong desire to restore those elevations as much as possible to the original conditions, particularly the original windows. The direction received from the Commission regarding the interior elevations was that they should be complementary, but not necessarily replicate the two end elevations. R. Perlmutter said that the addition presented to the Commission highlighted that effort. The new windows on the inner facades were a replication in aluminum of the original steel windows. The limestone facades of the original north and west elevations. and the leaded windows above the storefronts would be restored to the extent possible. With the exception of a required exit door and an alcove of a storefront on the north elevation would be restored. On the west elevation would be restored completely. Robert Perlmutter said two ornamental sconces (large light fixtures) on the north and west elevations would be installed to replicate as close as possible the original fixtures. In the interior elevations would be built with a precast concrete of similar sizes and as close as possible to the color of the limestone of the north and west elevations. Robert Perlmutter said that the desire was to landmark the five -story building. The property was on a one lot of record. Mike Radis said the original plaques identifying the Chandler's building would be put back on four locations of the front facades. R. Perlmutter said the glass above the storefronts on the interior elevations would be etched glass to replicate the leaded glass. Mike Radis referred to section drawings for the precast section of the building and section drawling of the new windows. The window design would closely replicate the size of the mullion pattern of the original windows with a horizontal member that protruded further than anything else. The windows have 1" mullions and divided lights with insulated glass. Mark Sarkisian clarified that the hearing was for establishing whether the property was eligible for landmark status, and not review particulars about changes to the building. Carlos Ruiz said that the process for landmark designation was such that the Chandler's building was eligible for landmark designation as is. C. Ruiz said that the applicants should address the criteria for landmark designation and how the Chandler's building met the criteria. C. Ruiz said that since it had been Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16, 1999 Page 10 established that the property was one lot, the landmark designation would apply to the enure property. C. Ruiz said that would have a direct impact on the proposed demolition of the older portion of the building. R_ Perlmutter said that the timing for the project was important because they had a tenant that would occupy the tap three floors by October, 1999. Carlos D. Ruiz suggested that the applicant proceed with the presentation about the property and it's merits for landmark designation. He said that after the closing of the hearing. then the applicant could apply for the demolition of the corner building. Kirk h-win asked if should the Commission recommended designation of the Chandler's building, would that action preclude the applicant from demolishing the corner building because the landmark status nomination would protect that building from demolition. C. Ruiz said that the Commission was dealing wiith the nomination for designation of the Chandler's building and not the demolition of the comer building. He suggested that the applicant submit the nomination for designation of 630-32 Davis Street as an Evanston Landmark. Once the Commission accepted the nomination, then the applicant could apply for the demolition of the comer building. Kirk Irwin said that once the Commission had recommended designation of the property as a landmark to City Council, then the Commission had the authority to review the demolition portion of the proposal. Barbara Gardner asked should the Commission found that the nomination met the standards for designation would that be tying the applicant's hands for demolition. C. Ruiz referred to the Preservation Ordinance subsection 2-9-5 (B) : " A nomination may be withdrawn by the person or persons who submitted the nomination form at any time prior to the Commission scheduling a public hearing under subsection 2-9-5 (Q. Requests for withdrawal of a nomination after the Commission schedules a public hearing shall be granted only upon an affirmative vole of at least eight (8) Commissioners. " Carlos Ruiz concluded that the Commission could review hypothetically the demolition of the corner building since the applicant could withdraw that nomination only before the Commission had scheduled a public hearing. After the Commission had scheduled a public hearing, the withdrawal of an application would be granted only after an affirmative vote of at least eight Commissioners. Nick Bilandic, structural engineer with Holabird and Root said that since 1860 what was now a three-story building started out as a completely different building that had physically changed over the years. The building occupants ranged from a butcher shop to Walgreen's to Chandler's. He said that the three-story building was not structurally safe to today's standards. N. Bilandic said that the three-story building did not meet the criteria of architecturally or historically significant. He said a letter of record was included in the packet. Barbara Gardner said the transformation over time of the three-story building was an ancient version of "Remudling." Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16, 1999 Page I 1 Kirk Irwin read the Standards for Review of Demolition: (D)J. **Whether the property, structure or object is of such historic. cultural, architectural or archaeological significance that its demolition would be detrimental to the public interest and contrary to the general welfare of the people of the City and the State. " Barbara Gardner said that from the historic photographs the only case that could be made w-as that the three-story building was the oldest building in do%%mto«m Evanston, but it was not what was originally built there. Nick Bilandick said that the facade on Sherman Avenue was changed dramatically from the original fagade. Heidi Carey asked when did the third -story was added. Morton Johnson said it was added between 1915-20. He added that by I920 there was not much of the original structure. Kirk Irwin said a more compelling reason to support the demolition of the three-story comer building was the picture showing a seven -story corner building. He said that the existing three-story corner building could be seen as a secondary structure to the L-shaped building. It had less detail and it was of a lower quality in terms of its construction and its structural capacity. Nick Bilandick said that in 1929 Chandler's intended to demolish the three-story structure. Robert Perlmutter asserted that the local newspaper had documented the plans for the seven -story building. Reinforcing his previous statement, Kirk Irwin said by taking away the three-story building, the applicant was responding to the historic context of the overall environment of the Fountain Square area, giving that area back to public use. Barbara Gardner said that architecturally the comer building's third floor was different than the first and second floor, she said that it would be difficult to make a case that the three-story building had architectural significance. Heidi Carey said that despite the fact that it seemed that people always wanted to tear the three-story building down, still it had been there for a long time and still it had been pan of Evanston. Barbara Gardner said that the building had been altered from being a brick structure to being covered with stucco. Kirk Irwin said that standard (D)4 addressed the issue of building materials: (D)4. -Whether the property, structure or object is of such old unusual or uncommon design, texture, and/or material that it could not be reproduced without great difficulty and/or expense. " Kirk Irwin said previews discussion supported the case for demolition He said the corner building was not of an unusual or uncommon design or material. Carlos Ruiz said that under certain circumstances alterations on buildings could acquire their own significance over the years. He said that the applicant's proposal would enhance the five -story building, it would also improve the Evanston Preservation Commission Minute - February- 16. 1999 Page I streetscape of the area. Still the demolition standards could not be ignored Kirk lr ,.in read the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for demolition: "(E) In addition to the above standards. the Commission shall also consider the Secretan• of Interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties' : as amended (Ord 1 ?-0-94) " "Standard 2: The distinguishing original qualities or character of a property, structure. site or object and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historical material or distinctive architectural features shall be avoided when possible. " Kirk Irwin said that the significant building would not be torn douti. Carlos Ruiz said that frorn the historic preservation point of view, history is as significant as architecture. He added that a significant event could have had taken place at the corner building. After more discussion. Commissioners agreed that the proposed demolition of the corner three-story building would not be contrary to standard l for demolition as stated above. (D)2. "Whether the property, structure or object contributes to the distinctive historic, cultural, architectural or archeological character of the district as a whole and should be preserved for the benefit of the people of the City and the State. " Barbara Gardner said that the comer building was not in a district, therefore standard 2 did not apply. Commissioners agreed. (D)3. "Whether demolition of the property, structure or object would be contrary to the purpose and intent of this Chapter and to the objectives of the historic preservation far the applicable district. " Commissioners agreed that standard 3 was not applicable, because the corner building was not in a district. (D),l. "Whether the property, stricture or object is of such old, unusual or uncommon design, texture, and/or material that it could not be reproduced without great difficulty and/or expense." Commissioners agreed that the corner building was not an irreplaceable building. (D)S. "Except in cases where the owner has no plans for a period of up to f tie (S) years to replace an existing landmark or property, structure or object in a district, no certificate of appropriateness shall be issued until plans for a replacement structure or object hate been reviewed and approved by the Commission. " Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16, 1999 Page 13 Commissioners agreed that the applicants did not have plans to replace the comer building- with another building, but instead a plaza would be built. Kirk Ir,,.in reierred buck to the Sccretar%; of the Interior's Standard 2 and said that the applicant was not remo%ing material which was irmpl:t :4t e or distinctive architecturally, and by its removal, the urban fabric surrounding the comer buDding would not be destroyed. He added that to the contrary, the removal of the corner building would be an improvement to the urban fabric. Mark Sarkisian asked if the Commission was giving a general direction to the applicant and ibould the property be designated a landmark, then the Commission would take a formal vote cm the demolition of the corner building. A straw poll was taken regarding the proposed demolitiom Six Commissioners did not object to the demolition of the three-story corner building. Jessica Deis abstained. Carlos Ruiz said that originally the applicant had informed him that there were two separate -lots of record, one for the five -story L-shaped building and the other for the three-story corner building. That evening the applicant informed the Commission that both buildings were on one lot of accord. . Because of that circumstance he asked the applicant to file an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the three-story corner building at the south/east corner of Davis Street and Sherman Avenue. Robert Perlmutter agreed to submit such application - Presentation for Nomination of 630 Davis Street as an Evanston Landmark Robert Purlmutter referred to the criteria for designation saying that criterion 1 related to the building's location as a site of significance. He said that Fountain Square had always been the comer of the downtown in Evanston. He added that the significance of the intersection was illustrated in historical photos showing a number of significant buildings that had been demolished and replaced with 1970s buildings. R_ Perlmutter said that the only remaining building of significance was the Chandler's Building at 630 Davis Street. He also indicated that a historical event %vas General MacArthur's visit through the intersection of Davis Street and Sherman Avenue in 1951. Referring to criterion 2, Robert Purlmutter said that Henry Chandler was an important local figure not only for the business he owned at the Chandler's Building and other buildings around the area, but also because his prominence as an Evanston resident and his philanthropic and political involvement. Regarding criterion 3 for architecture, Robert Purlmutter said that the architecture of the building was significant because it had to be reflective of the Chandler's business, an educational insfinnkxial business. Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16. 1999 Page 14 Robert Perlmutter referring to criterion 4 for the architect's work, said that Edgar Utet Blake designer of the building, ww a prominent Evanston architect who designed around thirty sauctures in Evanston. With those remarks R. Purlmuner concluded his presentation. Commission's Findings Mark Sarkisian asked if anyone had additional comments about the nomination. Heidi Carcysaid that the overall good that would come from revitalizing the five -story building was impor=1 but she did not wanted to dismiss the importance of the original building even though it did not have as much of architectural integ3 ity, still it had witness history. The presentation node about the L- shaped building did apply to the original building as well. Mark Sarkisian stated that the applicant had cited criteria 1, 2, 3 and 4. M. Sarkisian asked if there was any other testimony or evidence in support or in opposition to the nomination. Hearing none, Mark Sarkisian closed the testimony and hearing. Commission's Deliberation Barbara Gardner referring to criterion 1 said that she did not agree that something important had hopped in the particular property. She thought that the nomination met the other criteria 2.3 and 4. Kirk Irwin agreed with B. Gardner. Heidi Carey said that criterion 6 would be more appropriate regarding the association of the L-shaped building with an important cultural or social aspects or events in the history of the City, but the applicant did not include criterion 6. Heidi Carey said that criterion 9 related to the building's unique location or distinctive physical appearance would apply to the L-shaped building. Commissioners agreed with Heidi Carey. Kirk Irwin said that the nomination met subsection 2-9-4 (B) Integrity of Landmarks and Districts. With that last comment Mark Sarkisian closed the Commission's deliberation. Barbara Gardner moved that the property at 630 Davis Street met the standards for designation as an Evanston Landmark. She added to her motion that item (A) I be deleted, but item (A) 6 and (A) 9 and also item (B) of subsection 2-94 be added as meeting the criteria. Mark Saddsian semaded the motion. The motion passed. Vote: 6 aves, I abstention. Carlos Ruiz read the Evanston Preservation Commission's Resolution: To Recommend that the Evanston City Council Grant Evanston Landmark Status To The Property At 630-32 Davis Street/ 1573-75 Sherman Avenue (The Chandler's Building). [A copy of the resolution is attached to the minutes]. Heidi Carey moved that the Commission approve its Resolution [To Recommend that the Ev=tston City Council Grant Evanston Landmark Status To The Property At 630-32 Davis Street/1573-75 Sherman Avenue (The Chandler's Building).] as read by Carlos Ruiz. Kirk Irwin seconded the Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16, 1999 Page 15 motion. The motion passed. Vote: 6 ayes, I abstention. Carlos Ruiz congratulated the applicants for their work and wished them well with their nomination. He said that the Commission would send its adopted resolution to City Council with the hope that the ChandIer's Building would be designated an Evanston Landmark. Robert Perlmutter expressed his appreciation to the Commission for their prompt response to the nomination. Carlos Ruiz reminded the applicants that the Commission had given them some direction as far as proposed alterations and demolition. The Commission would review any proposed alterations and demolition according to the set standards. Application for Demolition of 632 Davis Street (Corner three-story structure) Kirk Irwin read the Standards for Review of Demolitions as stated above. Standard (D)I, Kirk Irwin said that the applicants responded in their application that the demolition of the property would not be detrimental to the public interest or contrary to the general welfare of the people, the City or the State. K. Irwin said that the Commission previously agreed that standard I would support the demolition of the corner building. Standard (D)2, Kirk Irwin said that the applicants responded that the property did not contribute to the distinctive historical, cultural or architectural or archaeological elements of the district. He added that the Commission in previous discussion agreed that standard 2 was not applicable because the building was not a district. Standard (D)3, Kirk Irwin said that the Commission had previously found that standard 3 was not applicable. Standard (D)4, Kirk Irwin said that the Commission had a consensus that standard 4 would support demolition of the comer building. He added that the applicants response %w that the structure was not unusual or uncommon on its design, texture and/or material. Standard (D)5, Kirk Irwin said that the applicants responded that they intended to replace the structure with a plaza for public use. He believed that the Commission had agreed preNiously that standard 5 was not applicable. Standard (E), Kirk Irwin said that the Commission had concluded that architectural features of the L-shaped building would be maintained even with the demolition of the comer building. Barbara Gardner moved that the Commission approve the application for demolition at 632 Davis Street (three-story building) as meeting the criteria for demolition. Kirk Irwin seconded the demolition. The motion passed. Vote: 6 ayes, 1 abstention. Evanston Preservation Commission Minute — February 16. 1999 Page 16 Robert Perlmutter asked about the process of obtaining a construction permit. Carlos Ruiz said that the plans submitted for construction permit should be the same plans submitted to the Commission in order for him to release the Certificate of Appropriateness. At this time Jessica Deis reassumed the Chair. Vill. STAFF REPORT Carlos Ruiz said that he did not have anything to report at that time. Barbara Gardner asked an update regarding the City Budget. Carlos Ruiz said that preservation was not being considered for any cuts. IX. ANNOUNCEMENTS Carlos Ruiz announced that the next Commission meeting was scheduled March 16, 1999, Room 2403, Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Evanston. Illinois 60201. X. ADJOURNMENT With no further business on the agenda, Barbara Gardner moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:30 p.m. Jessica Deis seconded the motion. The motion to adjourn passed unanhnoeudy. Respectfully submitted: r oAh W04e'A."";k C s D. Ruiz Senior Planner/Preserva 'on Date: Evanston Preservation Commission Special Meeting Minutes - February 1, 1999 Page 1 EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, February 1, 1999 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: Heidi P. Carey, Jessica Deis, Barbara Gardner, GW%e Halik, Kirk Irwin. Susan Regan, Mark Sarkisian MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Peter Landon, Terry Unterman, Mike Radis, Robert Perlmutter, Nick Bilandic PRESIDING: Jessica Deis, Chair STAFF: Carlos D. Ruiz I. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM Jessica Deis called the special meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. A quorum being present. J. Deis said that this special meeting is in lieu of the January 19, 1999. Commission meeting, which was canceled due to the Iack of a quorum. Only five members were present at the January meeting, a quorum of six is required. Instead, the Commission's Re,, iew and Technical Assistance Committee (R&TA) held a meeting to review projects with the applicants present. Except for one, R&TA reviewed each project, and then a straw poll %%as taken to determine whether or not the project would get approval at next Commission meeting. J. Deis stated that after the approval ofminutes; the Commission will go over those projects for formal approval. IL APPROVAL OF MINUTES Barbara Gardner moved to approve the December 15, 1998. minutes as submitted. Heidi P. Carey aecanded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Evanston Preservation Commission Special Meeting Minutes - February I, 1999 Page 2 III. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Review and Technical Assistance Committee (R&TA) 1. 1522 Davis Street - New window, storage shed, and wood deck J. Deis said that R&TA did not have a straw pole rote for this particular project. The project has already been built without a certificate of appropriateness from the - Commission. , r " J. Deis said that there were some questions about the shade at the west side of the house. J. Deis stated that she would have recommended changing the rooflinc, because the roof as built detracts from the front facade of the house. Terry Unterman, owner, and Peter Landon, architect, were present to answer questions. P. Landon said that the shed location was determined by the existing use of the space, which is an open storage area. The finish materials of the shed would math the existing finish materials of the house. The height of the doors and windo%vs directly above the shed roof determined the pitch of the roof. P. Landon said that by the time the work is completed the shed would be hardly visible since it is behind an existing fence. Commission's Findings Kirk Irwin suggested elevating the deck and built the storage area underneath. P. Landon said that a deck up in the air was not desirable. J. Deis said in the great scheme of things the shed is not a major detraction. G. Malik said some of the charm of old houses are the unexpected things such as the shed in question. B. Gardner asked how the doors would be finished. P. Landon said the doors would be painted_ Carlos D. Ruiz asked that if the Commission approves the project, he would like the architect provide more detailed drawings with specifications of finish materials. P. Landon agreed to submit the necessary drawings. B. Gardner suggested painting the doors the same color as the shingles. P. Landon apologized to the Commission for not having obtained the certificate of appropriateness before construction began. G. Malik moved to accept the project as presented pre%iously and at this meeting as drawn. Susan Regan seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 2. 2430 Orrington Avenue - New dormer, widening an existing dormer and replacing five windows K. Irwin summarized the proposed project. He said the new dormer design is based on Evanston Preservation Commission Special Meeting ;4iinutes - February 1. I999 Page 3 original drawings, the proposed dormer was actually planned to have been built. Commission's Findings B. Gardner moved to approve the project as it had been presented. K. Irwin seconded the motion. The project passed unanimously. 3. 411 Grove Street -Demolition of existing garage and construction of a nesr garage J. Deis said that the owner of 411 Grove Street stated that his contractor had indicated that the condition of the existing garage was beyond repair. There were serious leaks and roof problems. The contractor advised the owner that it wvould be in his best interest to demolish the existing garage and construct a new garage. The Commission asked the owner to submit a statement from the contractor to that effect. The pitch for the roof would be comparable to the main pitch of the house roof. the siding of the garage would match the siding of the house. The garage would have a single door garage. A double door was discussed, but the width of the lot would not allow accommodating that. The Commission members present at the R&TA meeting agreed that it was legitimate to issue a certificate for the demolition of the existing garage and to also to approve the construction of the new garage as submitted. K. Irwin said the applicant presented two options for the direction of the gable. R&TA recommended that the gable of the garage face the same direction of the gable of the house. J. Deis said that the insurance company indicated to the owner that they would not ensure the present garage. C. Ruiz said that he received information to that effect. Commission's Findings 11. Carey moved that the Commission approve the demolition of the existing garage at 411 Grove Street. B. Gardner seconded the motion. Discussion: H. Carey amended her motion adding that the Commission finds that proposed demolition meets the standards for review of demolition. J. Deis seconded the amendment. The motion passed as amended unanimously. H. Carey moved the Commission accept the plans for the construction of the new garage as proposed for 411 Grove Street. B. Gardner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 4. 1030 Greenleaf - New house Evanston Preservation Commission Special Meeting Minutes - February 1, 1999 Page 4 C. Ruiz said that Tom Rosengrren, the applicant, contacted him and told him that he v4a5 outbid in the purchasing of the property. However, T. Rosengren requested that the Commission move forward with its review. C. Ruiz said that T. Rosengren had proposed to demolish the existing garage and house and proposed the construction of a one-story building with an interior courtyard. The exterior finish materials were brick, wood windows, and asphalt shingles for the roof. Commission members found that the proposed one-story house would be appropriate for the site because it could not be directly visible from the street, and the one-story house would be the appropriate height. C. Ruiz said that the applicant had indicated that the existing structures do not have historic or architectural significance. Members of the Commission who had visited the site concurred with that assessment. K. Irwin said that Commission members asked the applicant if had considered incorporating the existing house into the new house. R&TA determined that the proposed suggestion was less than desirable for the applicant's purposes about the house. J. Deis said that there was additional discussion about the unique location of the existing house, that it did not contribute to the streetscape, which is an important standard that perhaps caused the Commission to review the demolition of the building in a somewhat liberal way. K. Irwin said that R&TA concluded that the proposed house was an appropriate response to the site, an inner land locked parcel, bounded by four alleys without street frontage. Commission's Findings B. Gardner moved that the Commission accept the plans for demolition as meeting the standards for review of demolition for the house and the garage at 1030 Greenleaf Street. H. Carey seconded the motion. Discussion: M. Sarkisian asked C. Ruiz about the picture of the house. B. Gardner said that the picture was an old photograph and that the house had been remodeled over the years. C. Ruiz said that the age of a house is not the only factor to qualify for landmark designation or historic of architectural significance. He found no information that the house %was of historic significance. In fact he house had been moved to its existing location. The motion passed unanimously. B. Gardner moved that the Commission approve the application for new construction of a house on the property at 1030 Greenleaf. H. Carey seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 3. 228 Greenwood Street - One-story rear addition. netts- rear stair, nety bulkhead Evanston Preservation Commission Special Meeting Minutes - Februan- 1. 1999 Page 5 J. Deis said the house is located across the street and do%%m a few doors from the Evanston Historical Society. The beautiful house at 228 Greenwood has a rear facade that is being remodeled. The general consensus of R&TA was that in fact that the remodeling and addition was an improvement to the rear existing facade. J. Deis stated that the existing rear facade is bland and the new addition gives much more direction and character to it. The massing is sensitive and appropriate to the house. K. lrtitin said that there were comments regarding the detail ..-here the wall meets the roof and the beautiful thin line that it is existing in the house. The thin line woWd be duplicated in the addition. The cross sections also illustrated the existing conditions of the interior spaces. Commission's Findings K. Irwin moved that the Commission accept the proposed construction ad 228 Greenwood Street, finding that the proposal meets all applicable standards for review of construction. J. Deis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 6. 2049 Ridge Avenue (The Cradle) -Exterior signs J. Deis said that the applicant had a comprehensive presentation of proposed exterior signage for the building. The graphic material showed the location of all the signs, samples of the materials were also shown, and dimensions of the signs were pro%ided. The general consensus of Commission members was that the signs were well done with appropriate scale to the building and materials also appropriate to the building. K. tr.in stated that the arch on some signs were derived from the arch at the front door. H. Carey said that the diamond shape of some signs was also part of the doorway. K. Irwin said everything that was presented by the design consultants was first rate. Commission's Findings: S. Regan moved that the Commission accept 2049 Ridge Avenue exterior signs proposal ending that it meet all the applicable standards for review of construction. J. Deis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. IV. OFF THE AGENDA ITEM 0 630-632 Dads Street (The Chandler's Building) J. Deis said that she and C. Ruiz attended a meeting in the morning of February 1, 1999, with representatives of Heitman Retail Properties, who have a proposed a project for the Chandler's Building at 630-632 Davis Street. J. Deis said that the developers were Evanston Preservation Commission Special Meeting Minutes - February 1, 1999 Page 5 interested in pursuing landmarks status for the L-shaped building and demolishing the building that is right at the corner of Davis Street and Sherman Avenue. The L-shaped building would be redeveloped as a combination of retail and office Kith an open plaza in front at the street level. Robert Perlmutter, Mike Radis (developers) and Nick Bilandic of Holabird & Root %ere present to answer questions. R. Perlmutter said the Heitman Retail Properties purchased the property at the end of December of 1998. The building and the land were owned by two different entities causing a four-year stalemate at property. Their approach Kos to put less density on the site and to do something quickly. The market conditions in Evanston are right, the proposal is a positive solution for the community to see the building redeveloped. and economically the project could be done in an accelerated basis_ R. Perlmutter said that the 1997 building would be demolished because structurally it is not in good condition. The five -story building was built in 1929. Both building had a connection on the ground floor and third floor, although all the floors arc at different heights. There would be a 2,400 sq. feet outdoor plaza. The total site is around 8,000 sq. feet. The property sits on a five -way intersection with multiple plazas. all with a different style. Their goal is to have a strectscape that would be consistent with the existing downtown strcctscape. Removing the comer building would make the five -story building an architectural feature. It also allows the creation of space that the users want with window frontage. R. Perlmutter said the project has received positive feedback from the City and the public in general. He said that clearly the ends of the building are very attractive. The limestone facade has many details still in good condition. The ground floor windows have small glass block at the top. The layout shows on the ground floor two retail spaces, one facing Sherman Avenue and the plaza. Inside this space there is also a mezzanine original to the building. The other retail space faces Davis Street and the plaza. The Davis Street ground floor elevations needs to be changed to meet exiting needs. An office lobby on Davis Street will also be provided. R. Perlmutter showed one of the original images of the building. There is no wall on the first three stories of 'West or North elevations. The five -story building was built up against the 1897 building. The fourth and fifth floors are cream color brick walls with small windows. The first three floors have to be rebuilt. Originally a new brick wall was considered. Later a precast concrete wall that would closely match the limestone w-as selected. R. Perlmutter showed the materials for the lobby area. The mosaic the scheme would be recreated in similar design than the original. Economically speaking, R. Perlmutter said that their gamble was that the City would be kn Evanston Preservation Commission Special Meeting Minutes - February I. 1999 Page 7 receptive to the project that would reduce density and that the City would help invest in the development if the City thought it was the right project. All this combined with the believe that the market is improving and by taking advantage of that market in a very short window of opportunity the City has been receptive. The Economic Development Committee has supported the idea of funding a substantial part of the plaza cost. In respect to the landmark designation. R. Perlmutter said that the developers would give up development rights with a potential additional financial incentive that could come with the Iandmarking of the building. R. Perlmutter said that timing is also an important issue. They %till start the demolition of the three-story building at the end of February, and the renovation of the five -story building would start in the middle of March. The plan is to be done by October 1, 1999, C. Ruiz said that this morning J. Deis and he met with Judith Aiello. Assistant City Manager, James Wolinski. Director of Community Development Department, Dennis Marino, Assistant Director of Planning, and R. Perlmutter and M. Radis of Heitman Retail Properties. He said that he had stressed to the developers that preserving as much as possible the original design and materials of the building is extremely important to meet the standards for landmark designation. C. Ruiz said for instance. the windows should be restored rather than replaced whenever possible. If replacement is necessary, the replacement should be in kind, meaning the materials and the design should be the same as those of the original windows. C. Ruiz asked R. Perlmutter if the buildings sit on one or two Iots of record. R. Perlmutter said that the buildings stand on two separate lots of record. The buildings were built independently and other than the ground floor connection they did not operate as one building;. C. Ruiz said that if the corner building were on a separate lot of record from the five -story building, then its proposed demolition would not fall under the purview of the Commission. Once the developers apply for landmark designation of the five -story building, any proposed activity affecting the exterior of the building and visible from the public right-of-way, it falls under the purview of the Commission. K_ Irwin said he would like to see the use of brick on the inner west and north facades as opposed to the larger scale of the proposed precast concrete. He said brick would emphasize the contrast between the main facades and the inner facades. R. Perlmutter said on the ground floor would be uniform stone throughout. R. Perlmutter said that they had considered the use of limestone throughout. They concluded that the contrast between the original limestone and the new limestone would be much greater than using precast concrete. R. Perlmutter said one of the things they liked about precast concrete is the coursing would be similar in size to the existing limestone. G. Halik said that it is important to remember that the main facades are what should stand -it Evanston Preservation Commission Special Meeting Minutes - February 1. 1999 Page 8 out and not the inner facades. 4L Sarkisian said the precast concrete could be successfully used for the inner facades. J. Deis concurred with bL Sarkisian. M. Sarkisian said he agreed with C. Ruiz about the windows. He said it would be great if the original windows could be saved including the ground floor windows. R. Perlmutter said that there are some issues regarding the existing windows such as the single glazing and that only some windows are operable. The issue of replicating the design is a matter of cost. The Commission discussed other aspects of the proposed rehabilitation of the Chandler's Building concluding that it seemed the developers were genuinely interested in its appropriate rehabilitation. J. Deis asked Commissioners if they foresee any obstacles to the potential nomination of the Chandler's building as an Evanston Landmark. The Commission members expressed that as long as the developers keep in mind the standards for review of alteration and construction, and the recommendations by staff and members of the Commission regarding the exterior rehabilitation work, that the potential nomination of the building as an Evanston Landmark could be successfully submitted for the Commission's review. J. Deis thanked R. Perlmutter, M_ Radis, and N. Bilandic for sharing with the Commission their intent to nominate the Chandler's Building as an Evanston Landmark. V. ANNOUNCEMENTS C. Ruiz announced the next Commission meeting is February 16, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., Room 2403, Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue. V1. ADJOURNAiENT With no further items on the agenda, J. Deis adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p,m. Respectfully submitted: Carlos D. Ruiz Senior Planner/Preseoaon Date Approved: ' • "' • ..' e_;