HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1989EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Special Meeting
Thursday, January 5, 1989
9:00 A.M. Room 2403
CIVIC CENTER
MEMBERS PRESENT: Anne Earle, David Galloway, Phyllis Horton, Anne McGuire, Mary
McWilliams, James Yeaman
MEMBERS ABSENT: Barbara Buchbinder-Green, Solomon'Hirsh, Carolyn Ripley
STAFF: Gwen Sommers Yant
PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Phyllis Horton, Chair
OTHERS PRESENT: Richard Stillerman, Frances Sebastian, Carrie Jeffers (2400 Park
Place)
Chairman Horton opened the meeting by welcoming the owners and aryl}itect for the proposed
alterations t,, the Evanst,,n Landmark at 2400 Park Place. Anne McGuire, Review and Technical
Assistance Committee chair, then summarized the issues involved with the permit: the need for
additional light in the northern portion of the upper story, the proposal to accomplish same by
installing skylights flanking the central dormer on the structure's fr.,nt facade, and the
replacement of the central dormer's casement windows with clad wind,,ws containing snap -in
muttons.
Mr. Stillerman, Mrs. Sebastian, and Ms. Jeffers then presented the Jriginal drawings for the
house. ,fir. Stillerman explained that he and Mrs. Sebastian had purchased the home fr.,m the
estate of the daughter of the original architect, that they planned to rehabilitate the house with
the intent of future sale, and that their rehabilitation plan called f,r turning the presently
unimproved attic, (comprising the north half of the second story), in-;, three hedr;,am;. The
skylights are proposed in order to give the two end bedrooms added ventilation and a view of Park
Place. Discussion ensued a:; to the positive and negative effects of the skYlight;, particularly
their effect on the character of the primary facade. C:,rnmissi..nej commented that the
skylights were obtrusive and negatively impact the character of the facade. Discussion of
mitigating measures ensued, including reconfiguring the atticsed space to eliminate the need for
the skylights, enlarging the window apenings on the secondary east and facades, or enlarging
the central dormer on the primary facade. A motion to continue ^;7 •.vith the owners and
architect to explore sensitive rneans of meeting their needs, up to da\ h,,Id iirr•::, u•as
unanimously approved. In order to accommodate the owners as and cooperatively as
possible, the Commis.iion :,ffered t,, meet in another special meeting if a .'easible aiternatiye plan
was identified before the next regular Commission meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 A.M.
G'
STAFF:��r.���1
DAT1
25Y12
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Special ,Meeting
,4londay, January 9, 1939
9:00 A.M. Room 2403
CIVIC CENTER
MEMBERS PRESENT: Barbara Buchbinder-Green, Anne Earle, David Gallaway, Mary
McWilliams, Carolyn Ripley, James Yeaman
,MEMBERS ABSENT: SolomOn Hirsh, Phyllis Horton, Anne McGuire
STAFF: Gwen Sommers Yant
PRESIDING OFFICIAL: James Yeaman, Vice -chair
OTHERS PRESENT: Richard Stillerman, Francis Sebastian, Carrie Jeffers (2400 Park
Place)
Mr. Yeaman opened the meeting by welcoming the owners and architect for the 2400 Park Place
prufect and thanking them for their continued cooperation. Following presentation of a revised
permit calling for a pair of dormers to flank the original central dormer on the front facade,
discussion ensued. Ms. Buchbinder-Green queried whether the wind,:,ws in the proposed new
dormers would have true divided lights and whether they would be clad. %is. Jeffers responded
that windows would be wood, unclad, and have true divided lights. In res'p"nse %) a question from
architect Jeffers, discussion followed regarding the appropriate use ,f skylights on historic
structurers. As part of this discussion, the Commission examined a s{etch the building's
original architect, Arthur Howell Knox, depicting a skylight atop the central d.,r„ier. Discussion
c,:,ncludtd with the understanding chat the materials ,:f the new dormer-i : ,_ d rrathe :,riginal
durrner as closely as possible but that their detail would be simplified in arder :,, differentiate
new from old. A motion t:, approve the revised permit was unanimousl} 3aarojvec.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M.
STAFF: t.G,,.,c.�
DATE:
)
25Y I I
I
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Wednesday, February 7, 1989
8:00 P.M. Room 2403
CIVIC CENTER
MEMBERS PRESENT: Barbara Buchbinder-Green, David Galloway, Phyllis Horton, Anne
,McGuire, Vary McWilliams, A. Dan Tarl„ck, Stephen Yas
MEMBERS ABSENT: Anne Earle, Solomon Hirsh, Yeaman, Rol:e:g
STAFF: Gwen Sommers Yant, Vince Adamus
PRESIDING: Phyllis Horton, Chairman
OTHERS PRESENT: George Cyrus, Michael Gelick, Frank ,Michaelski, `Falter hihm, Jim
Lock (Church/Ridge); Drew Heindel (1230' Maple); Sue Regan (720
Michigan); Hat Davis
REVIEW AND TECHNICAL. ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE
NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR RIDGE HISTORIC DISTRICT (Corner Church an,-' Ridge)
Chairman Horton welcomed Mr. Cyrus and his associates. Following introductions by .Mr. Cyrus,
Mr. Michael Gelick summarized the proposed townh,use project via elevation drawings and a
model. Mr. Gelick stated that the project is compatible with its surroundings and the historic
district for a variety of reasons, including compatible height wish surrounding structures,
providing a smooth transition of scale between the Ridge Avenue apart --tent buildings and large
single-family residences on Asbury and its respect of the existing Ri-ke avenue setback. Mr.
Gelick stated the project involves demolishing the coachhouse at the far wes: end of the site.
Hew also stated that the project exceeded the area's FAR rec,,irernents and asked for
Commission supp,,r: of a zoning variation for the project.
Review and Technical Assistance Committee inember David Gal!,,%vay :hen delivered titre
Committee report, stating c.,ncurrence that the project is indeed co--'natible with its environs
and is a sensitive addition to the Ridge National Register historic Jistirct. In particular he
expressed the C:,mmission's pleasure that the projec: does not involve demolition of the
residential structures in the half block immediately north of International
Headqu,3rters, all of which are contributing structures in :he Evan_• - ?id;e `'a:i,na! Hist.,ric
District. `dr. Galloway stated the C mmittee's concern, however. "" :",e ,�undance of firs:
floor garage doors which are visible and also with screening of the pa-:_ :a!I
R LTA member Yas echoed %1r. ;1311oway's conclusion of the projec_:'_ to its envir:,ns
and added the Committee's feeling that the increased size of the w'-_ is rn,re in keening with
the large single-family character ,,f the historic district ;lean the sr -=:ter un;:s allowable within
the FAR. He added the following rec.,cnmendati„ns: that paving ma:e-:al, ,the,- than black top
be explored for the entry ports, that the vsual impact of the garage, be so!-ened afixing
horizontal battens to the garage doors, that the front entrances bcr _sec aw far as possible,
that the garage doors be pulled forward as far as possible, and that e~ has;_ -he design .js a
corner piece w;,uld make f ,r a st%,nger overall design.
a
Evnst;,n Preservation Commissi.,n
Minutes - February 7, 1989
Pacle Two
General discussion then ensued. In response to Ms. Buchbinder-Green's query, Mr. GeIick
responded that if copper is used it will acquire a natural patina. Ms. Buchbinder-Green then gave
a short history of the site and explained that the coachhouse is actually a twentieth century
structure built in an earlier style and thus iS not a significant structure.
Staff stated that because the coachhouse is not an Evanston Landmark and because the
Commission is not empowered to review new construction in historic districts, the only issue
before the C"mmissivn is whether to support the proposed z;,ning variation, the issues
surrounding which she summarized. A motion to support a variation allowing an increase in the
FAR for the project was unanimously approved. Commissioners congratulated ,Mr. Cyrus and
associates on a jab well done, stressing the fragile nature of historic district boundaries and the
fact that this pr�,ject will both reinforce the residential character of the historic district and
function as a strong boundary.
720 MICHIGAN
Susan Re -an, architect, presented plans for a proposed rear addition to 720 Michigan Avenue.
Ann McGuire, Chair, delivered the report of the Review and Technical assistance Committee:
that the massing and materials of the addition are compatible with zhe existing house, but that
the architect suggest to her client the use of woad windows with true divided lights instead of the
proposed snap -in muntins. Ms. Buchbinder-Green further recommended tht the architect suggest
to the owners that they scrap plans to reuse the modern casement windows proposed for the north
elevation, this window being different frorn all other windows in the house. A motion to approve
the permit as submitted and t,, write a letter to the ijwner urging ;hem t,; reconsider using
snap -in rnutt.,ns and the specified casement, was unanimously approved.
1236 MAPLE
kir. Drew Heindel, architect, presented plans for the proposed installation cot t:c,: skylights to add
needed light and ventilati:,n to a third floor rem,,deling at 1236 klap)e. Ann McGuire, Chair
presented the rep,.,rt to the Review and Technical .assistance Committees: t'Iat she and ,Mr.
Galloway had me: with 11r. Heindel on site and explored alternative methods uf introducing light;
that none of the alternatives were appropriate for the Italianate st,;' that the skylights
are barely visible: that additional light and ventilation is required. and thus the Cojrrmittee's
recommendation to approve the permit as submitted. Discussion A m;,ti;,n to accept the
recarnmendarion of the Review and Technical Assistance Committer was unanimously aptroved.
OLD BUSINESS
1700 SHEERVAN (FOR .MER MARSHALL FIELD STORE) - SIGN
Mrs. Horton updated the C;,mmission on signage of the "House St re". a new business whose
entrance will be the original Sherman Avenue entrance t;o the forme- Marshal, Field Store. The
Sign Appeals Board has approved a green canvas sign for the tran.i,,'71 are, ,ver the entrance
doors and banners for the flagpoles. Commissioners expressed their de:iVht that the Sit-- .appeals
Board did not allow signage on the decorative metal ,original overhanging canoe}Y.
Evanston Preservation Commission
%linutes February 7, 1959
Page Three
PRESERVATION CONFERENCE REPORT
Ms. Sommers Yant reported that representatives from the Evanston Steering Committee,
Printing Committee, and Historical Society met on Janaury 4th and prepared content
recommendations for the Citicorp exhibit. On January 25th this Committee met with Citicorp
representatives who adopted the recommendations with the exception of a minor change to the
proposed exhibit name. The recommendations are included in this munth's EPC packet.
Mrs. ,McWilliams reported that she and Public Relations Committee Chair Sue I=ous met with
Drew Davis and other staff members of the Evanston Review to put together a publicity plan for
the conference. The Review plans to run a series of articles on the conference and then bind
these together in a booklet to give t;, conference participants. The Review will publicize the
conference to all North Shore communities.
REPORT TO ZONING C0MMISSION
Mrs. McWilliams reported that the Zoning Commission accepted the majority of the
Preservations Commission's rep.,rt submitted to them last month. Items the Zoning Carnmission
did not accept include the recommendations for a lakefront protection ordinance and the
inclusion of single-family residences under appearance review. Discussion of appearance review
and binding review ensued. Mrs. Horton expressed her belief that historic district's under minding
review should be large. Mrs. Horton also announced that Airs. Earle is interested in pursuing
National Register n;,rnination for the proposed Northwest Evanston Historic District. Mr. Yas
expressed his string belief that single-family residences should fall under appearance review.
STAFF REPORT
M5. Sommers Yant reported that
R &TA had approved a new entrance directly west of the residential entrance on
Church Street per the Centrum/EPC master entrance plan agreement for the IM0
Sherman building (former Marihall Field Store)..
The first Wilson Estate final Certificate uf Occupancy (C.O.) had been granted. The
final C.O. for Unit 417 was granted following the owners' return of the agreement
negotiated by the 1100 Forest PUD Review Committee regarding replacement of a
rear d,,.,r per the Secretary of the Interior Standards.
PRESERVATION AWARDS
Chairman Horton appointed %Irs. ',icWilliams and :Mr. Galloway to serve as EPC representatives
to the Preservari.,n award Committee. The Council ceremony will be May 22.
The meeting teas adjour d at 10:00 p.m.
STAFF: a..l....
/
DATE:
25Y 17119
MEMEER5 PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF:
PRESIDING:
ASSOCIATES PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular ,IMeeting
Tuesday, March 21, 1989
Room 2403 - 8:00 PJ�A.
CIVIC CENTER
David Galloway, Solomon Hirsh, Phyllis Horton, Mary
McWilliams, Douglas Mohnke, Carol Cualkinbush
Anne McGuire, Dan Tarlock, Stephen Yas
Gwen Sommers Yant
Phyllis Horton, Chair
Barbara Buchbinder-Green
Ann Wise
The meeting commenced at S:05 p.m.
MINUTES
The minutes of December 20, 1988 were unanimously approved with the following corrections:
under "Others Present" change "Francis" to "Frances"; page two. under "Nominating Committee
Report", add "Bing Coney announced his resignation due to his--oving to Chicago": page 3,
paragraph two change "Earl" to Earle".
The minutes of January 5, 1989 were unanimously approved wi:.. *`e following corrections:
under"Others present". change "Francis" to "Frances"; correct ;gelling of "tic Guire" in
paragraph 1 of page 1.
The minutes of January 9. 19S9 were unanimously approved as subrni;ted.
The minutes of February 7, 1989 were unanimously approved .pit` tie following corrections:
under "Vemhcrs Absont" add Varilee Roherg. Jaynes 1 eaman: "Cthers Preser:" change
"Kirin" to "Kihm": page 1, paragraph 3, clarify sentence 3 to resc "...floor garage ccors which
are visible...": page 1. paragraph 4, clarify sentance 7 to read "...: a- '"e garage doors be pulled
forward..."; page 2. paragraph 2, correct spelling of "Italianate": 2. paragraph 5, clarifv
sentence l to read "...of the 'House Store', a new...", page 3. under "Preservation A�.Lards" add
"The awards presentation ceremony at City Council will be Jure page two, under 111236
Maple" change ".inn" to "Anne".
Mr. Hirsh then noted, for the Commission roster, a change in �.is 'tusiness phone number to
939-9 126.
Evanston Preservation Commission �I mutes
March 21, 1989
Page 2
Chairman Horton then announced, with regret, the resignation of Vice -Chairman James
Yeaman, and commented that Mr. Yeaman will be much missed. She asked Mrs. McWilliams and
kir. Hirsh to serve on the Nominating Committee to bring a recommendation for a new
vice-chairman to the next Preservation Commission meeting.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
REV1E1[' AND TECHNICAL, ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE
For the benefit of new members the Chair explained the Preservation Commission's permit
review procedures and the purpose of the Review and Technical Assistance Committee.
Staff reported that a representative of the Coop Board of the Rookwood Apartments (718-734
Noyes, an Evanston Landmark and listed in the National Register of Historic Places) had
requested R&TA's advice on repair/replacement of the building's historic steel windows. A site
meeting was held on February 23, 1989, at which time R&TA members %IcGuire, Freidman, and
Staff, a representative from the Board, and a Cyrus .Management Company representative
discussed how to assess the significance of the windows in defining the buildings historic
character, in prioritizing repair and replacement alternatives, and sources of appropriate
materials. This information will be brought to the Board's next meeting.
Staff then reported on a February 28 site meeting requested by the owner of 1008 Wesley.
During the meeting P&TA member Ellen Galland and Staff advised the owner on the
consequences of installing aluminum siding and appropriate methods of introducing light and air
into a front porch dormer.
ORDINANCE CO.%',1'ITTEF-
For the benefit of new members, the Chair summarized the Commission's plan/time frame for
revising the existing preservation ordinance. Revision of the ordinance has been divided into
three parts and a committee assigned to each part. Due to the resignation of the member
assigned to part one, Staff will assume this duty and present a draft of part one at the next
Commission meeting.
Mr. Galloway then summarized preliminary work undertaken by himse!f. Vr. Yas and Staff on
part two, concerning the review of Certificates of Appropriateness. %Tr. Galloway stated that
the Committee reviewed the preservation ordinances of several other communities. He then
summarized the proposed process for the review of demolition and alteration permits. The most
important proposed changes are provisions a)to foster Commission involvement as soon as
possible in order to facilitate effective, positive intervention, b)c. a--?irg the t!r^e ;unit For
review of alteration permits from 35 to 60 days, and c)changi,-c t J. !imit fcr of
demolition permits to a maximum of one year. Mr. Galloway then that Committee
member .'%Iarilee Roberg will translate the foregoing into draft form.
Discussion then ensued on time limits for review, and the relative strategic merits in .vriting
the ordinance to provide for binding review over demolition alone -;r over alterations to a
premier set of landmarks called the Evanston Register. Discussiorensues regarding past
designations and the types of buildings that would
Evanston Preservation Commission Minutes
-larch 21, 1989
Page 3
receive Evanston Register designation. Mr. Hirsh commented that it is important to give
considerable thought to the buildings that would be designated to the Evanston Register and that
nonsignificant buildings should not come under binding review. Ms. Buchbinder-Green reminded
Commissioners of the legal and practical difficulty of devising appropriate criteria to
distinguish Evanston Register from Evanston Landmark structures. Specifically she reminded
them of preservation attorney Richard Roddewig's comments at the " Historic Preservation
Ordinance Forum" sponsored in 1986 by the Evanston Preservation Commission. Chairman
Horton then read excerpts from a July 10, 1986 letter from M.r. Roddewig on this subject.
Further discussion of the Evanston Register ensued. The Evaluation Committee and Staff will
meet to begin developing Evanston Register criteria for part one. Staff was also requested to
include both \1r. Roddewig's July 10, 1986 letter and the "Preservation Ordinance Forum"
transcript in the next Commission packet, for the benefit of new members and further
discussion. Chairman Horton concluded by explaining that the ordinance revision will proceed
by discussion of each of the three parts and then a concept vote by the full Commission.
PRESERVATION AWARDS CO,\ %1ITTEE
1'rs. Mc%Villiams explained that the Preservation Award Committee has met, that the
Preservation League of Evanston members on the Committee are !'arsha Baum and Margo
Ladwig, that a publicity schedule has been worked out, that the jury day has been scheduled for
May 27 and that the Council presentation is scheduled for June 12. Jurors are currently being
contacted and the final list of jurors will be presented at the next Commission meeting. At the
suggestion of Its. Buchbinder-Green the addresses of past award winners will be included in next
month's packet.
NEW BUSINESS
DISTRICT 65 HEADCUARTERS (Dryden Estate, 1314 Ridge) - UPDATE
Chairman Horton briefly summarized the history of the Preservation Commission's involvement
in preserving the Dryden mansion, which is individually listed in the National Register of
Historic Places, located in the Ridge National Register Historic District. and is designated as an
Evanston Landmark. She summarized both the results of the 1975 feasibility studv for the
property in which the Preservation Commission was involved, anc -event articles in the
Evanston Review which seem to indicate District 65 is again interestec in selling the property.
The Chairman suggested that the Commission send the 197S study to t! e present District 65
Board with a cover letter and ask that representatives of the Commission meet with the Board
to discuss both the study and offer Preservation Commission assistance.
Discussion ensued. Commissioners concured with the Chair's establish nositive
contact with the District as soon as possible, however concern '.vas concerning the
validity of the 1973 study, given the dramatic rise in property values �r� t~,e existence now of
the planned unit development ordinance. Ms. Buchbinder-Green recommended .hat the
Commission also work with the Dewey Community Conference. In response to a cuestion
regarding the applicability of the "Wilson Estate" (l lOO Forest) feasibi;it�: study (undertaken by
the Preservation Commission and Preservation League inn 1986) to :he District 65 property,
Staff
lip- 10, i n n , _,r�ww' n 11 n n ..
Evanston Preservation Commission Minues
:March 21, 1989
Page 4
stated that most of the "Wilson Estate" study principles, preservation priorities, and design
guidelines are applicable. The purpose of the" Wilson Estate Feasibility Study" was to identify
economically feasible solutions to the problem of preserving the original estate structures,
saving the maximum amount of open space, and, if development was necessary. to foster new
construction which was as compatible as possible with both the existing estate structures and
the surrounding historic district. It was resolved that Chairman Horton will contact School
District 65 Board members to ascertain the District's intent regarding the property, in
preparation for the next Commission meeting.
ELECTION OF NEW ASSOCIATES
The chair suggested that the Commission suspend its normal Associate Members nomination
procedures, and elect three long time Preservation Commission members, Barbara
Buchbinder-Green, Anne O. Earle, and Carolyn Ripley as Preservation Commission Associates.
Discussion ensued. A motion to elect Barbara Buchbinder-Green, Anne O. Earle, and Carolyn
Ripley as Preservation Commission associates was unanimously approved.
The Chair then suggested that the Preservation League of Evanston liaison to the Commission
be elected as an .associate member. Discussion ensued as to whether League Board members
could serve as EPC members or associates, and regarding potential new ,associate members. It
was resolved that the League liaison should continue to function as simply a liaison and that
Staff will contact proposed new .associate members.
COMMITTEE CHAIRMANSHIPS
The Chair stated that she is in the midst of talking to various members of the Commission
regarding chairing the Preservation Commission standing committees. To date, Mary
McWilliams will chair the Evaluation Committee, and Anne McGuire will continue to serve as
Chairman of the Review and Technical Assistance Committee.
OLD BUSINESS
ZONING COMMISSION REPORT
EPC Zoning Commission representative Vary McWilliams summarizzed The joint meeting of the
Zoning ComrnissioniCouncil/ZBA/EPC/et al. meld Varch 20, at which t;--e approximately half of
the Zoning Commission's "Zoning Policies Report" was reviewed. The remainder of the report
will be reviewed on April 17. Preservation policies will be reviewed at that meeting. Mrs.
Vc%Villiams also called to the Commission's attention a typographical error in the report on
page 40, paragraph I. the last sentence of which should be changed :c "...demolition of historic
structures is not permitted under present City codes." -
PRESERVATION CONFERENCE REPORT
Local Conference Chairman Yant reported that the Events, Logistics, Printing, Fundraising, and
Tours Committees had met during this month, that a fundraising packet of materials has been
developed. that fundraising has commenced in earnest, and that planning of the various
conference bus and walking tours has also begun in earnest.
,. E=vanston Preservation Commission Minutes
March 21, 1989
Page 5
STAFF REPORT
Staff reported that
in conjunction with her duties as a past board member of the Illinois Association of
Historic Preservation Commissions, she is preparing a statewide model "New Historic
Preservation Commissioner's Handbook" for that organization, which she hopes will be
available within the next year to Evanston Preservation Commission ,Members
she will serve on a panel sponsored by the Winnetka Historical Museum and discuss
Evanston's preservation experience in the context of exploring the possibility of
preparing a preservation ordinance for Winnetka
the second annual "Preservation Primer Workshop", a training seminar for members of
Illinois historic preservation commissions will be held on April 22 in Springfield. Any
Commissioners desiring to attend should contact Staff.
The following permits received Staff approval since the last EPC meeting:
802 Madison - kitchen remodeling (not visible from street)
809 Church Street - (Evanston Galleria) - interior tenant improvement
(no change to exterior)
1700 Sherman (Evanston Galleria) - interior tenant improvements
not visible from street
In closing, the Chair proposed changing the April
originally scheduled April 18th date to April 26.
unanimously approved.
The meeting as adjourned at 10:00 P.X1.
STAFF:4..,
25 Y20/23
Preservation Commission meeting from the
A motion to approve the Chair's request was
t ,
IFT
`� �' _`- f. ; _ } 1.:; :S.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
ME,ME%ERS ABSENT:
STAFF:
PRESIDING:
ASSOCIATES PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Wednesday, April 26, 1989
Room 2401 - 8:00 P.M.
CIVIC CENTER
David Galloway, Phyllis Horton, Anne McGuire, Mary
McWilliams, Douglas Mohnke, Carol Cualkinbush, �Iarilee
Roberg, Dan Tarlock, Stephen Yas
Solomon Hirsh
Gwen Sommers Yant
Phyllis Horton, Chair
Ellen Galland, Anne Earle
N
Mr. Janda (2341 Pioneer Road); MrAIrs. Bailey, Mlr./Mrs.
Zeleinski (2831 Sheridan Place); Ald. John Pudy.
The meeting commenced at 8:05 p.m.
MINUTES
The minutes of ,March 21, 1989 were unanimously approved as submitted.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
REVIEW AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CO.1 VITTEE
Project architect William Bailey summarized plans for a proposed new garage or. the west
facade of 2831 Sheridan Place The new garage is designed with limes -one matching t�e existing
structure and %vith garage doors sympathetic to the main first floor -.kindow in ma-e�ials and
divisions. He also summarized the proposed construction of an =-siish consery _. Iry -style
greenhouse on the east facade. It is not visible from the street.
Review and Technical Assistance Committee Chairman Anne VcGuire rep,::.ed the
Committee's finding that the materials and design proposed is sensiti%e to the existirz _tructure
and that the Committee recommends acceptance. As no permit has been applies for. the
Committee further recommends staff approvai if permit drawinLs are identical .o those
presented this evening. A motion to accept and approve rerornmenc..ion was
unanimously approved.
Project architect Ellen Galland then summarized plans for a one -sty-. adr'.ition to ne south
facade of 2341 Pioneer Road. The owner. Mr. Janda, explained tha, ,hr- Addition is -•eeded to
accommodate an invalid parent. Vs. Galland's ensuing presentation included a) an _�\ lanation
of the design concept as one secondary to the existing structure, and h) a descripr:on of the
materials which match those of the existing house.
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - April 26, I989
Page Two
Discussion ensued regarding the fenestration pattern of the addition, the design and materials of
a possible new fence, roof configuration at the junction of the new addition and the existing
structure, configuration of the proposed deck, and the design of the deck rail.
Recommendations included a) altering the roof pitch of the addition to accommodate a
clerestory and thereby provide the opportunity for the addition's fenestration to more closely
match the proportions of the existing windows, and b) rendering the proposed deck more
sympathetic to the Prairie -style -derived existing house by reconfiguring the deck and the design
of the deck rail. A motion to accept the plans as presented with the understanding that the
above recommendations will be taken into consideration, was unanimously approved.
NOMINATING COMMITTEE
Nominating Committee member Vary ,McWilliams reported the Committee's recommendation
that David Galloway be elected Vice -Chair to replace resigning member James Yeaman. A
motion to approve the Committee's recommendation was approved with one abstention.
PRESERVATION AWARDS COMMITTEE
Preservation awards Committee member McWilliams reported that the Awards Jury will be
comprised of Roy Forrey (Commission on Chicago Historical and Architectural Landmarks),
Melvyn Skvarla (Carow Architects/Planners), Phyllis Horton (Preservation Commission), Andrew
Heindel (Preservation League), and Peter Wyler (General Contractor). Staff added that, per the
Committee's plan, publicity has gone out w t�^ N+avor and Aldermen, City staff. the Evanston
Review, the membership of the Preservation League of Evanston, the Preservation Commission
mailing list. and various businesses. t.'rs. McWilliams dosed by reporting that the jury
deliberation will be held at Committee member 1+arsh Baum's home.
OLD BUSINESS
PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMl_NT CPDINANCI'
q
The Commission reviewed the packet memo containing EP(_. recommendations for revision of
the PUD ordinance. Discussion then ensued as to the appro)riateness of setting specific limits
for the number of units into which an existing stricture colj!C be subdivided. The
Commissioners offered various suggestions as to ways the cumber of units could better relate to
the character of the surrounding neighborhood. 1+rs. McV illiams corer--ented that flexibility in
grouping the permitted number of dwelling units for a pr.rcel is desirable so that open space can
be preserved. \Is. McGuire concurred, adding that such flexibility erables development to be
better tailored to its surroundings.
Followir- ? lenpthv discussion of various methods by which to -ermine a specific, vet
contextur_illy sensitive limit of dwelling units, no suggested ao:r.Dach :-,as found to be
satisfactory. The Chair reminded the Commission that the ide^tification of a specific
mechanism, is the responsibility of the zoning ordinance cons ---?,ant: the Commission's
responsibility is to articulate a policy recommendation. A motion to delete the prospective
limit on the number of dwelling units into which existing buildings --ay be subdivided and to
substitute a performance standard relating the maximum size/nur-ter of units in existing
buildings to the surrounding neighborhood, was unanimously approved.
Evanston Preservation Commission
klinutes - April 26, 1989
Page Three
Aid. Rudy cautioned that the existing ordinance language grew out of concern that large homes
would be subdivided into multiple, very small dwelling units which would erode the quality and
character of their single family neighborhoods. Staff responded that because PUD is not
by -right development, the City can choose not to approve a development with excessive
subdivision. Mr. Yas further responded that by its nature, planned unit development evolves
though a negotiation process whose goal is to realize site compatibility through zoning
flexibility. Inappropriate subdivision would be identified through the pud review process and
hopefully worked out through negotiations as the project was reviewed by City staff, boards,
commissions, the public, and elected officials. Should negotiation fail to produce a compatible
development, however, such an undesirable pud could be denied by City Council.
Ald. Rudy responded that some citizens may distrust such a negotiation process and would feel
more secure with a specific number limit. He suggested a zoned approach where depending on
their characier, different areas of the City would be assigned to different limits. Mr. Galloway
responded that he was uncomfortable with specific limits because they may, in practice, force a
significant structure to be unsypathetically altered. The Commission concurred in letting the
motion stand as approved.
Chairman Horton then suggested that on page three, the "action" recommended for goal number
5 be amended to read, "Institute present EPC advisory Committee -- that reports to the City
Manager -- into section 6-12-7 of the present ordinance." In this way there will be no confusion
that anyone other than the City Manager has final authority to approve or deny minor changes.
1200-14 CHURCH STREET PROJECT - - UPDATE
Mr. Galloway reported that at the April I8 ZMA meeting, the 1200-14 Church Street townhouse
project received a positive recommendation for the granting of a variation from the underlying
FAR requirements. The Dewey Community Conference and neighbors also testified favorably.
PRESERVATION CONFERENCE -- UPDATE
Ms. Sommers Yant reported that since the last EPC meeting the following activities have
transpired. the preliminary route and text of the North Shore bus tour was completed; a
preliminary list of sites was developed for the restoration/rehabili tat ion;adaptive reuse bus
tour; and preliminary routes for walking tours of the two bounded historic districts were
completed: the Printing and Publicity Committees have been working together on text for the
conference program book; and press releases have been mailed to North Shore community
groups, chambers of commerce, historical societies, colleges, and miscellaneous organizations.
The Fundraising Committee has raised approximately $2,500. Commissioners were asked to help
in the fundraising effort in any way they could. Funds are being raised through the selling of ads
in the conference program book and through donations.
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - April 26, I989
Page Four
DISTRICT 65 HEADQUARTERS (DRYDEN ESTATE, 1314 RIDGE) -- UPDATE
Chairman Horton reported that she had called two District 65 Board members who explained
that the present headquarters is in need of large scale maintenance and that the building must
be rewired to accommodate a new computer system the District intends to install. Before
making these major investments, however, the District has decided to assess if the building can
continue to function as its headquarters and is exploring options for other headquarters
locations. The Board is aware of the Preservation Commission's previous feasibility study for
the building. Airs. Horton and A's. Sommers Yant will meet with the District 65 Superintendent
and Business Manager later in the month. Staff added that one developer interested in the
property had met with members of the Review and Technical Assistance Committee who had
been involved in the Cove School project, herself, and a representative from Camiros, Ltd. (the
Cove School Feasibility Study consultant).
"ZONING CO1s 1'ISSION REPORT
EPC Zoning Commission representative McWilliams reported that the series of joint meetingst
involving the City Council/=oning Commission/ EPC/other appropriate boards and commissions
to conduct a preliminary review of zoning policies, was concluded on April 17. In the area of
historic preservation, there was a consensus that a revised historic preservation ordinance would
be separate from the zoning ordinance and that preservation should be a standard for the
granting of variations or special uses under the zoning ordinance.
NEW BUSINESS
REVIEW OF PROPOSED REVISION'S TO THE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE -- PART I
Chairman Horton provided introductory remarks as to the genesis of Part I and offered the
following observations: that the development of separate criteria for the designation of
Evanston Landmarks and Evanston Register Landmarks would be difficult, and that the
Commission must eventually decide whether the new ordinance should cover stronger review
over both demolitions and alterations. The Chair stated that she had asked Dan Tarlock and
Doug Vlohnke to review this draft prior to tonight's meeting and asked them to share their
comments with the Commission.
11r. .%Iohnke stated his concern about the problem of developing t,.vo distinct sets of criteria.
Discussion ensued regarding the method of developing such criteria. "rs. X,C%Crilliams suggested
that the Evaluation Committee develop the criteria. The Chair responded that the Committee
need's to work in conjunction with new members. %'rs. Xtc%Villiams concurred. noting that most
of the Evaluation Committee is now Associate members. \ors. ,Mc\� illiarns then summarized the
historical reasons why the Commission is faced .with develc.-irl" t%ko =_eaarate criteria.
The two criteria are a compromise 'et%veen two points of view �xhich have existtc, on the
Commission for many years. Some members felt that all buildings in a revised ordinance should
come under stronger review provisions, while other members felt that the original landmark
designation criteria were too broad and that "lesser" landmarks should remain under advisory
review. The Chair further commented that both groups agreed that Preservation Commission
input and assistance should be given to the broadest range of landmark owners in order to
I sensitive restoration, rehabilitation, maintenance, and adaptive reuse. The Chair also
stated her concern that should the revised, stronger ordinance include all landmarks, the
Commission would be faced with an overly_ burdensome workload and treat it would be politically
difficult to achieve.
Evanston preservation Commission
Minutes - April 26, 1989
Page five
Mrs. McWilliams responded that the Evaluation Committee, which has been responsible over the
years for identifying potential landmarks and evaluating whether such buildings are historically
or architecturally significant enough to meet Evanston Landmark criteria, has been generally of
the belief that if a building meets the Evanston Landmark criteria, it is a landmark and thus
worthy of the same protection as any other landmark under a stronger ordinance. Staff added
that in terms of history, the new members are coming at the end of a three year process during
which the Commission researched the provisions of other Illinois ordinances and discussed
various community -specific issues involved in creating an appropriate, updated, ordinance for
Evanston. The original goal of strengthening the ordinance however, was articulated as far back
as the 1981 Preservation Plan
developed by the Preservation Commission.
11r. Yas stated his belief that, while strong protection over a few landmarks would surely
preserve those landmarks, this approach may, in the long run, ultimately fail to protect the
larger historic character of Evanston. The approximately 800 current Evanston Landmarks
represent the best of Evanston's historic context and without strong protection, these buildings
could be lost or inappropriately altered. He also questioned whether bringing all existing,.
landmarks under the stronger protection of the new ordinance would increase the Commission
workload appreciably more than it is at present.
,Mr. Vohnke queried what effect stronger landmark protection would have had on the recent
history of preservation effort in Evanston, had stronger protection been previously instituted.
Mrs. Earle responded with several examples: the demolition of the Hereford apartments at the
southeast corner of Church and Chicago, and the Byer Museum (1700 Hinman), to name just two
examples. Staff qualified discussion by stating that stronger landmark protection (or "binding"
review, which is a misnomer) does not mean that a landmarks commission can necessarily
prevent a building from being demolished or inappropriately altered. In cases where economic
hardship is a factor, a permit to demolish or adversely alter a building can be issued.
The Chair stated it is advisable to discuss these and other issues with the aldermen and Mayor,
and that in her discussions to date with Aldermen, it has been stressed that the Commission
should prove there is a need for stronger landmark protection. Mrs. V61 illiams concurred, and
commented that while the Commission has been very successful in encouraging appropriate
alterations and new construction on landmarks, it has been wholly unsuccessful in preventing
demolition with advisory review alone. The Chair suggested that the Commission proceed to
review an ordinance draft which includes both stronger protection for demolitions and
alterations. In this way, members can discuss the broadest range of options and come to
appropriate conclusions. Following the completion of a draft approved by the Commission, the
text needs to be reviewed by preservation law consultant Richard Rocde,- ig, discussed with the
Aldermen, Mayor, and City staff, brought to the public for commert. presented to the Cit}
Council Planning and Development Committee and finally voted on IM :'•e fl-'il City
Discussion then turned to the question of owner consent in landmark designation. In response to
questions, staff stated that in general the owner's opinion as to whether he/she .vishes a building
to be designated is sought, this opinion and the Landmark Commission's recommendation as to
the architectural/historical significance of the building is sent on to City Council, and the City
Council makes the final determination whether the building is designated. Public input is also
solicited through the designation process.
r
tvanston Preservation Commission
• Minutes - April 26, 1989
Page Six
Discussion then focused on historic districts. In response to questions, staff stated that
Evanston has three National Register Historic districts but no local landmarks districts. She
further responded that the Commission will have to eventually determine whether districts will
be afforded Evanston Landmark or Evanston Register protection. Mr. Tarlock commented that
all buildings in the historic district should come under review. Mrs. ,\IcWilliams strongly
concurred. Discussion regarding the method of identifying district boundaries ensued.
Discussion of the limits of control over structures in a historic district followed. Aid. Rudy
cautioned that these limits need to be made clear to the public to avoid unnecessary panic. In
response to Ald. Rudy's query how the new ordinance would respond to change and development,
Commissioners responded that very few landmarks remained downtown, thus the new ordinance
would have a negligible impact on downtown; that the review standards for alterations to
landmarks (Secretary of the Interior's Standard's for Rehabilitation) are specifically designed to
accommodate modern needs in historic buildings; and that the Commission's long track record of
approving and facilitating hundreds of changes in the course of its fourteen -year history attest
to the Commission's historic commitment to both intelligently serving the needs of the public
and remaining true to the purpose/review standards contained in its ordinance.
The Chair suggested that in order to maintain the momentum begun here tonight, and to realize
the goal of completing the Commission's draft by the end of the summer or early fa11, that after
the statewide preservation conference (June 22 - 25, 1989). the Commission meet twice a month
for two months. The Chair further suggested that members bring the following materials to the
next EPC meeting: the draft of Part I, the current Preservation Commission Ordinance, the
"Preservation Forum" (1986) transcript, and Richard Roddewig's 19S6 letter. Staff will also
send additional background information to facilitate discussion at the next EPC meeting. Ms.
McGuire recommended that this information include a complete outline of all sections of the
new preservation ordinance.
DECLARATION OF EVANSTON HISTORIC PRESERVATION MONTH
Staff recommended that due to the large number of preservation activities planned for the
month of June, that June I to 30, 1989 be declared Evanston Historic Preservation month by the
Mayor. A motion to accept this recommendation and to request such from Mayor Barr was
unanimously approved.
STAFF REPORT
The following permits received staff approval since the last EPC meeting:
1510 Greenwood - reroof (no change in material)
1832 Asbury - reroof (no changes in material
1325 Judson - reroof (no change in material)
802 %Iadison - bathroom remodeling (not visible from street)
The Chair requested that the June Commission meeting be held on Thursday, June 15. 1989. A
motion to accept this recommendation was unanimously approved.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 P.!'.
STAFF:
DATE:
25Y25/30
MEMBERS PRESENT
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF:
PRE51DIsNG OFFICIAL:
OTHERS PRESENT:
MINUTES
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, May 16, 1989
Room 2403 8:00 P.M.
CIVIC CENTER
David Galloway, Solomon Hirsh, Phyllis Horton, Anne ,McGuire,
kiary ,McWilliams, Doug k1ohrtke, Carol Qualkinbush, ,Marilee
Roberg, Dan Tarlock, Steven Yas
None
Gwen Sommers Yant
Phyllis Horton, Chair
Hal Davis
The minutes of April 26, 1989 were approved as submitted.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chairman Horton urged Commissioners to attend the June 2 opening of the Citicorp
Savings -sponsored exhibit, "Evanston and Citicorp Invest in Historic Preservation". The exhibit
will run through July I and is being held in conjunction with the 1989 Statewide Preservation
Conference held this year in Evanston. Mrs. McWilliams added that former EPC Commissioner
Ann Earle is the exhibit curator and former Preservation League of Evanston member, Jim
McGuire, is the exhibit designer.
The Chair reminded Commissioners that the Illinois Preservation Conference will be held
Thursday, June 22 through Sunday, June 25 and suggested that each Commissioner invite his/her
alderman to the Conference sessions or events.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
PRESERVATION A%JrARDS COMMITTEE
Staff announced that the Preservation Awards Jury will meet on Sat ,rra�, *.'a27 at Gross Point
lighthouse. Preservation Commission Awards Committee member illiams remind,?c
Commissioners that the awards presentation will be made at Cit; :our:c:: on June 12. The
customary pre -awards reception will be held from 3:30 p.m. to 9:r); p.m. ,-, the second floor
cafeteria of the Civic Center. She asked that each Commissioner bring one cozen cookies. Ms.
Oualkinbush requested that Commissioners be sent a list of the owners of tre %winning structures
in advance of the reception.
OLD BUSINESS
PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE PUD ORDINANCE.
For the benefit of new Commission members, staff delivered a slide presentation summarizing
the Preservation Commission's involvement with the City's Plannec '-'nit Development
Ordinance.
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - )Blau to 1989
Page Two
Discussion ensued. Nis. McGuire stated that because discussion of improvement to the PUD
ordinance may be with the Dryden Mansion (District 65 Headquarters, 1314 Ridge Ave.) in mind,
she wished Commissioners to know that she is involved in discussions with a party interested in
future purchase and potential development of the District 65 Headquarters. She stated her
concern' that a conflict of interest situation may exist if she participates in PUD ordinance
improvement discussion. She stated she will therefore participate in discussion of the
Commission's previous PUD involvement at 1100 Forest Avenue but will refrain from discussion
and voting on new revisions. Chairman Horton stated that because Ms. McGuire had not been
hired by the interested party and, more importantly, that the District #65 School Board had not
yet decided to sell the property, a conflict of interest situation did not exist and that Ms. McGuire
could participate in discussion of and voting on the present issue.
Mr. Hirsh observed that in the case of the 1 100 Forest PUD, the developer chose to develop under
the PUD ordinance rather than according to the underlying zoning requirements. This choice
furthered preservation of the landmark estate complex because of the developer's necessarily
complying with the Secretary of the Interior Standard's for Rehabilitation. He therefore
suggested that all development/subdivision of any large lot be subject to planned unit
development. Discussion then ensued regarding "recent" subdivision of large estates, including
Lohr Park (corner, Ridge and Greenwood), and Ashcraft Park (corner, Crain and Asbury).
Returning to problems involved in the 1100 Forest PUD, Its. McGuire highlighted the need to
preserve estates' setting, including open space and landscaping, and to encourage new buildings in
scale with existing buildings. She also expressed her concern about section 6-12-3-3 (E) of the
ordinance which limits the number of units in existing and new buildings. Such specific limits
could have the negative effect of limiting the amount of open space that can be preserved. She
felt that while replacing the specific requirements of subsection (F) with performance standards
which relate the number/size of units to the project context, furthered the purpose of the PUD
ordinance, it would be difficult to collect the hard data needed to establish this context. Mr.
Tariock questioned whether the concept of open space preservation is valid because the amount of
open space involved in any potential Evanston landmark PUD is so small. Fie cited the fact that
PUDS are most often used in cases involving large tracts of land s,,ch as large new suburban
subdivisions. Mrs. McWilliams responded that the concept is indeed valid because in the case of
densely developed Evanston, the open space remaining on large estates is very precious to the
neighborhood. Ms. McGuire affirmed that such was the neighborhoo-- ;n^tir^.ent when the Cove
School property was placed on the market.
The Chair asked for a specific notion before further discussion prcceecs. Vr. Galloway stated
that it was his understanding the issue before us is both the number ;f units into -hick existing
buildings may be subdivided and the size of any newly constructed urits. VS. VcGuire affirmed
that this was correct. hiscussion then focused on section 6-12-5-3 (E' -.`:roue`,. � arnd specifically,
on how to facilitate Pt_'P5 are respectful to tot'l existing ianc-_r;s t'Je aarcel and also
compatible 'xith surrounding -neighborhood structures. Vrs. Horton , at t'-e specific
numerical limits in section (F) may be too limiting to adequately cam. ^ut t^.e orcinanLe's intent
and purpose. Mrs. .Vc\t illiams agreed, stating that a PI_'D ordinance h ic^ is too inilexible will
not be attractive to developers. Mr. Yas stated that another way �7,DMote compatibility for
preservation projects is to increase awareness and understanding of ti.P orainance's standards (the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation) by elaborating on heir application to the
Evanston built context. Mr. Tariock suggested that resign/compatibiiit� standards similar to the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation be included f r PUL) projects outside of
historic projects. Mr. Yas and Mrs. Horton strongly concurred.
Evanston Preservation Commission
klinutes - May 16 1989
Page Three
Mrs. McWilliams added that the Zoning Commission is also interested in facilitating new
construction which is compatible with its surroundings. A motion to recommend that
design/compatibility guidelines similar to the Secretary of the Interior's Stand ,rds be included
in the PUD ordinance for projects outside of historic districts was unanimously approved. A
motion to recommend that the _oning Commission consultant review section 6-12-8-3 (E) and
assess whether the specific limits outlined in (E) 1-4 controvert the purposes of the PUD
ordinance and if so to suggest alternative language, was unanimously approved.
Discussion then turned to the subject of minimum lot size in a PUD. %irs. McWilliams pointed
out that in the case of I100 Forest PUD the new houses were built on lots which were of the
minimum lot size under the zoning ordinance but were much smaller than surrounding lots and
therefore gave a very crowded appearance to the development. She suggested that the EPC
recommend that a mechanism be developed in the PUD ordinance to ercourage the size of lots
subdivided from a large parcel be compatible with the size of surrounding lots. Commissioners
concurred. ills. McGuire cautioned however, that this provision may lessen development options
and discourage developers from electing the PUD option.
,Mr. Mohnke suggested that discussion should not conclude until %I,-. Hirsh's suggestion that
PUDS be mandatory for subdivision of large lots is discussed. fir. Hirsh moved that planned unit
development should be mandatory for subdivision of lots greater than 16,000 square feet
throughout the City. Discussion ensued. Mr. llohnke suggested that the above motion be
limited to residential projects. M5. McGuire questioned whether the above recommendations
are appropriate if development is not involved in subdivision of a lot renter than 16,000 feet.
Mr. Hirsh elected to limit his motion to subdivision where development is included. lengthy
discussion ensued. The Chair recommended that Mr. Hirsh and \Is. Rocerg discuss this point and
come to the next Commission meeting with a -notion. Discussion was :".en held to the next EPC
meeting.
DISTRICT 65 HEADQUARTERS (1314 RIDGE): UPDATE
Chairman Horton stated that she and Ms. Yant met with District 65 S-..,-!rintencent Pollack and
Business Manager Leon Eiche on %Iay Ilth. The meeting focused 'preservation concerns
regarding potential sale/development of the District 65 Headauarters - a District 65's means of
assessing whether the property will be placee on the market in the near future. ','essrs. Pollack
and Eiche shared a memo containing a cursory assessment of the a%oc;s Cistrict buildings.
Staff and firs. Horton then outlined the various ways the Presr".ation Commission and
Preservation League could be helpful to the District in preserving :`e .Ieadcuarters building.
The Superintendent and District Manager alsc explained the School fcr sale
of land/property. In response to questions, :he%, explained that vhil�-- Di :'.'. gas `_ _.r c 10
take; the highest bidder in any land sale, t~e terms of such sale c_ _._ :�e •-C:_clishec the
District. It LL'a5 asked whether subdivision without development could _- _ corcion of sa;c, and
if an established minimum price was met at this auction whether :7-N -choc: District's legal
obligation would be met. If a minimum price was not reached unct:.- these :erms perhaps a
second auction could take place which would be open to developers. Yr. Eiche Rill look into the
legality of such a two auction system.
The District plans to conduct a more technical assessment of their school administrative
headquarters in the near future and is in the process of putting :vzether a qualifications
questionnaire to send to architectural firms. firs. Horton and sta." vcluntP�rrad to consult
Preservation Commission and Preservation League architects redo--17,endations of
appropriate architectural firms which are also expert in historic preser�._::�n.
Evanston Preservation Commission
lrlinutes - May 16 1989
Page Four
In response to Commissioners' questions, Mrs. Horton explained that the District 65 Board of
Directors would make the recommendation to sell the District Headquarters but the actual sale
would be conducted by the District Trustees.
REVIEW OF PROPOSED REVISIONS TO PRESERVATION ORDINANCE: PART ONE
The Chair recommended that the Commission discuss general concepts before reviewing the
specific language of part one. She also suggested that Commissioners reviewed their 1981
Evanston Preservation Plan which recommends strengthening the present ordinance.
The Chair opened discussion by outlining the Commission's review options under the new
ordinance: a) all landmarks coming in under advisory review b) bring all landmarks in under
advisory review and empower the Commission to recommend to City Council the designation of
Evanston Register landmarks, alteration/demolition of which would come under "binding
review", c) provide for binding review over demolition of all presently designated landmarks and
d) provide that all alteration/demolition of present Evanston landmarks would come under
"binding review".
Discussion ensued as to preferable alternatives. Mr. Yas stated his belie.- that at a minimum, all
present Evanston Landmarks and National Register historic districts should be brought under
binding review. ,Mrs. Horton shared her ideas that all structures in landmark districts come
under binding review as well as Evanston Register buildings. Evanston Register
buildings/districts would represent the most important buildings in the City. %15. Qualkinbush
stated that if all landmarks were immediately put under binding revie--r that the Commission
may experience strong opposition. Mrs. Horton responded that on the contrary, in the recent
past there has been pressure from the public and interest from alderrr:en in instituting stronger
landmark and design review in the City. She also mentioned that a majority of the former
Commission felt that binding review should extend over all landmarks and historic districts. She
also mentioned recent discussions with City staff as to the advisability of instituting finding
review over demolition only as a way to accomplish the most basic arc ir-,00rtant preservation
goal of preventing the elimination of landmarks and also to minimize publi_ resistance.
Mr. Tarlock stated his belief that binding review should extend ov=-r .;! land -narks and historic_
districts for both alteration and demolition because as buildings are iraooropriately altered they
lose the very character for •x-hich they are significant. Mr. \Iohnk(• his belief. :fiat all
Evanston Landmarks should come under binding althoupr af--ministration cf such
provision may burden the Commission and staff. Mr. Galloway state: -that he would like to
consider binding review over all demolitions and binding review over -,;aerations to all Evanston
Register buildings and historic districts. Mr. Gallowa% also suggest : :---at advisory Dr cinding
review should encompass all facades not onl,. what is -isible from t'- Dorton
commented that Vr. Gallo%vay's proposal is identical to the
Preservation Commission, a compromise reached after rnanv years of
Ms. Roberg stated she agreed with fir. Galloway citing her feeling ma- :--e level of sigr.:ficance
of some landmarks deserved advisory rather than binding review. 1's. '.'!'.1 illiams on t-e other
hand, stated her strong support for binding review over all landmarks as a T,eans of preserving
not just individual significant structures but Evanston's historic bu:i: _ontext. She -eit that
public resistance would be minimized as the Commission explained wl a: "'_-inding reyieu" really
does and does not mean.
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - May 16, 1989
Page Five
Ms. McGuire stated she had been a member the Review and Technical Assistance Committee for
quite a few years and had a number of observations as a result of her experiences. She stated
that the Committee and Commission has been very successful in realizing appropriate
alterations and additions because of the positive educational opportunity landmark review
affords. For this reason she is not in favor of binding review over all landmarks and all
structures in historic districts. She stated that many hours were spent by R&TA member under
advisory review, that with binding review the investment of time on the part of Commissioners,
R&TA members and staff would be tremendous, and that the Commissionlstaff would simply not
be able to adequately discharge their duties. She feels the most reasonable alternative is
binding review over the most important buildings. She also questioned ho,� many structures are
in the historic districts and whether binding review over a great nurnter of structures would
prove impossible to administer. Mr. Yas responded that many communities have city-wide
design guidelines, such as Park Ridge, Illinois and that these guidelines are adequately
administered. He added that stronger design in landmark review is a counirv-wide trend.
Mr. Hirsh stated his belief that binding review should be limited: broad application would spark
too much public objection. He disagreed that all landmarks were significant enough to merit
binding review and stated his concern that what is good taste today could be bad taste
tomorrow. He stated that the community looks good as it is without binding review and that
only a small number of structures merit it. In sum, he stated his support for binding review over
all contributing structures in historic districts and a small number .f highly significant
individual Evanston Register structures outside of historic districts.
Mr. Davis questioned what would happen if a strong ordinance is not ap ro•:ed. In response, Mrs.
Horton shared comments based on her experience with the Commission frc-n the earliest days of
its inception. She stated that while most of the first Commission -. -rters wanted binding
review from the very start. it has taken twelve years of hard work and servjce to the community
to prove that advisory review does work and to create an atmosphere n hics`t, at present, is
receptive and even wants binding review. She added that the answer to Davis's question will
come as a result of discussions with aldermen and the public before !n, final draft is written.
She suggested that the Commission should have a pretty good idea ,f ;rat they feel is the
appropriate level of protection before going to discuss ordinance revis:.- %vith aldermen or the
public. She stated her belief that an ordinance can always be adder —..a: the Commission
should strive to achieve what is possible now and that we should prod_•_, -k-:,t a unified goal of
pursuing Evanston Register status for some individual landmarks anc -,:1 -listoric districts and
advisory review over all other landmarks. She added that aldermen : ,, e advised her that the
Commission most come to the public xiih clear information as t- -geed for additional
protection and its practical ir:^pact on the aublic.
Discussion ensued. Ms. Mc1t illiams cuestioned why Evanston A ,.- s-_ 71anv recognized
signifir ant buildings, should resist the national trend of strong landr- _r• orotection': She also
asked why Evanston is so different from other communities %vit' esser structures who
established binding reviev.- when their ordinance was originally enactec. s_ch as ,-aurora. Strong
landmark protection in Aurora, was, in fact, petitioned by a grass roc:,—ovement of property
owners. She questioned whether the perception of widespread resistarr�- to strong landmark
protection is truly valid in Evanston today.
Evanston Preservation Commission
�iminutes » May 14 1989
Page Six
The Chair suggested that the Commission continue their exploration of the
impact/appropriateness of var ous levels of landmark review over the next several months
including talking to aldermen nd the public. She suggested that discussion focus, however on
binding review for Evanston Register and historic districts, and advisory review over other
landmarks, as it seems to be the new majority view of the Commission. She suggested a final
vote be only taken after all parts of the ordinance have been examined. Mr. Galloway
questioned whether all the present landmarks should be reevaluated. Mr. Hirsh suggested
reevaluating only those landmarks designated under certain landmark criteria, notably criteria
A-7. Discussion as to the practicality of the above suggestions ensued. A motion to accept the
Chair's suggestion that the Commission focus its investigation on a system entailing binding
review over selected Evanston Register landmarks and Evanston Register historic districts and
advisory review over all remaining landmarks was unanimously approved.
STUFF REPORT
PERMITS
The following permits received staff approval since the last EPC meeting:
1208 Florence - reroof (asphalt), no change in materials
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
STAFF:
DATE:
25Y35iuC
EVANSTON PRESERVATION AWARDS PRESENTATION
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
JUNE 12, 1989
1. INTRODUCTION: Phyllis T. Horton, Chair
Evanston Preservation Commission
II. PRESENTATION: Joan W. Barr, \Mayor
City of Evanston
Winners please come forward as your project is announced.
In the category of RESTORATION:
1. 1742 Asbury
Designed in 1889 by an early Chicago architect, and located in the Ridge National
Register Historic District, the exterior of 1742 Asbury was restored by owners Kristin
and David McNutt. The project included extensive masonry and fence repair, porch
repairs, major roof and copper gutter replacement, the repair and replacement of
storm windows, including curved storms, removal of overgrown shrubbery, extensive
landscaping, coach house repair and painting with a polychrome color scheme.
Accepting this award are Dr. and Mrs. McNutt.
2. 1411 :Maple
Exterior restoration of this 1873 Italianate-style Evanston Landmark residence
involved stripping all paint, replacing approximately 1 /3 of the clapboards, major
repairs to the front veranda rail, restoration of deteriorated ornament, new exterior
windows, replacement of the interior gutter system with an exterior system, painting
with a polychrome color scheme, and extensive landscaping.
Accepting this award are the owners, Reverend Robert B. Clarke and the Reverend Dr.
Susan Hecker.
3. 903 Monroe
Originally constructed in 1884 by Alson Sherman, an early `t.ayor of Chicago and
important trustee of Northwestern University, for whom Evanston's Sherman Avenue
was named, 903 Monroe had suffered many years of neglect and abuse by the time the
present owners acquired it through foreclosure auction in 19€4.. Exterior restoration
included stripping all paint, removing five layers of roof shingles and installing a new
roof, repair and replacement of wood elements as necessary, extensive porch repairs,
cleaning out mounds of yard debris (including an abandoned car) and landscaping.
Accepting this award are owners Phillip and Annette Stover.
M 1
-2-
4. 1 139 Forest
Designed in 1892 by the significant Evanston architect Stephen Jennings, and located in
the Lakeshore National Register Historic District, the beauty of 1139 Forest was
masked by asbestos siding at the time of its purchase by the current owners. The 48%
asbestos shingles were carefully removed according to EPA standards, only to reveal
extensive damage from a previous fire as well as deterioration due to long-term
interior gutter disrepair and subsequent squirrel infestation. Exterior restoration
Included extensive rernilling of clapboards, storm windows and ornament; major porch
and roof repairs; stabilization of the 1920's garage; and painting with a polychrome
color scheme.
Accepting this award are owners Ruth Wenger and Jonathan Markowitz.
In the category of REHABILITATION
1. 1620 Asbury
Originally built in 1893, this vernacular residence was moved from its original site at
1110 Grove Street in 1921 to accommodate construction of an apartment building.
Exterior rehabilitation, begun in 1986, included removing asphalt siding, five layers of
roof shingles, a wrought iron porch, a collapsed chimney, and an intrusive three car
garage. A new cedar shingle roof was installed, approximately 1 /3 of the clapboards
were replaced, the chimney was rebuilt, and an architecturally sensitive wood front
porch and attached garage were designed. The exterior was painted with an
historically appropriate paint scheme, and the property was extensively landscaped.
Accepting this award are owners George and Liz Gaines.
2. 711 EIgin Road
Although originally designed in 1871 to house the Evanston College for Ladies,
construction was delayed due to the Great Chicago Fire and by the time construction
of 711 Elgin Road was completed in 1874, the College had been absorbed by
Northwestern University. A large west addition was completed by the University in
1892. At the time exterior rehabilitation was begun in 1987, the building evidenced
serious deterioration, particularly on the top story. The rehabilitation project included
removal of exterior fire escapes and several layers of roo:in_, the strengthening of
structural roof members weakened by past attic fires, restoration of major wood roof
elements, and the rebuilding of several chimneys. The building was cleaned and,
finally, painted with an historically appropriate color scheme.
Accepting this award on behalf of Northwestern University is Associate Provost
Jeremy Wilson.
3. 1 501 Lake
This circa I S70 Luxemberger Cottage was rehabilitated through the combined efforts
of owner Edna Rose, the City of Evanston Department of Housing Rehabilitation, and
the Evanston Preservation Commission's Conservation Grant Program. Rehab of this
rare Evanston Landmark included removal of artificial siding, extensive repair and
replacement of clapboards, major porch repairs, repair of existing windows, a new roof,
and complete exterior repainting.
;'Accepting this award in behalf of Ctrs. Rose in Director of Housi-g Rehab and Property
Vaintenance, Catherine Powers.
-3-
4. Merrick Rose Garden and Centennial Fountain
Originally designed in 1947, the Merrick Rose Garden was rehabilitated over the period
1937-88 by the City of Evanston Department of Parks. Postmature, overgrown
evergreens were replaced, approximately 2,000 new rose bushes were planted, the
retaining wall of the central sunken lawn was rebuilt, the gravel walks were renewed
and new brick edging and additional benches were added. An underground sprinkler
system was installed and the garden was rendered handicapped accessible, all to the
delight of original landscape architect Ralph Melin.
Also restored during this period was Centennial Fountain. Moved to the Merrick Rose
Garden in 1946, Centennial Fountain was originally purchased through public
subscription in 1876 in honor of the nation's Centennial and installed in Fountain
Square. The $30,000 necessary to restore the fountain was raised last year through a
9-month public subscription drive coordinated by a coalition of 15 community groups
headed by the Preservation League of Evanston. Prior to restoration the fountain had
been vandalized, its top bird broken and its lower birds stolen. It also evidenced
considerable erosion and structural instability. The restoration, guided by a technical
study commissioned by the Parks Department, involved dismantling the fountain,
complete stripping of all paint, thorough cleaning, repainting, recasting from historic
photos as necessary, and a moisture protection treatment. The Fountain and Garden
were rededicated on Ouly 4, 1988.
In the Category of ADAPTIVE REUSE
1. 1461 Elmwood
This former Texaco gas station was adaptively reused into three retail stores. The
exterior was cleaned, the tile roof repaired, and new window and entrance bays
designed. The interior was gutted, the car repair pits were filled, and a completely
new interior was built. Site improvements Included unearthing and disposing of four
underground gas tanks and the installation of completely new utility lines, landscaping,
awnings, and signage.
Accepting this award are owners Gail and Larry Davis.
2. 1700 Sherman Avenue
Originally designed in 1929 forMarshall Field and Company by the prominent Chicago
architectural firm of Graham, Anderson, Probst, and White, 1700 Sherman was
adaptively reused into the commercial and residential -rental "Evanston Galleria" over
the past two years by owners Centrum Properties. Exterior rehabilitation included
masonry and decorative metal repair, and window replacement. The deve.'oper, in
cooperation with the Evanston Preservation Commission, also adopted a ma=ter plan
for first floor storefronts which preserved key design elements, conserved tl"e quality
and continuity of the original design, and met modern market demand for direct tenant
access.
Accepting this'award on behalf of Centrum Properties is Terri Smucker
-4-
In the Category of MAINTENANCE:
1. Evanston Parkways
Dutch elm disease was introduced in the United States In the 1930's and Into Evanston
in 1955. This vascular tree disease has the capability of killing an entire elm tree
population within 12 to 15 years if not controlled. Of the 22,000 elms existing in
Evanston in 1955, 8,000 still grace Evanston parkways thanks to the City of Evanston
Forestry Department's ongoing identification, control and removal program. Loss of
elms in the past five years has, in fact, ranged between 2.3% and 2.510 annually. With
vigilant monitoring it is hoped that our elm legacy, which contributes significantly to
the character and property values within our community, will continue to be enjoyed
for generations to come.
Accepting this award is Director of Parks, Recreation, and Forestry, Don Wirth.
And finally, the highest preservation award, the MARGERY B. PERKINS AWARD
The 1989 Margery B. Perkins Award recipient is Mrs. Patricia Barnes, for the
restoration of 1745 Hinman Avenue.
Designed in 1893 by the Boston architect William Chase, this exuberant Tudor Revival
style residence was saved, after years of neglect, over the period 1987-1989. Exterior
restoration, guided by the original plans, included extensive repair of the circular
tower, the leaded windows, the stucco and detached garage. In addition, decorative
balconies were remilled, the many charming plaster details were restored, the property
was extensively landscaped, and a compatible rear yard fence - designed by the owner -
was constructed.
Accepting this Award is owner Patricia Barnes.
1 now turn to Preservation League of Evanston President Richard Lehner to close the Program.
Ill. Conclusion: Richard Lehner, President
Preservation League of Evanston
lOY87/90
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Thursday, June 15, 19Q9
Room 2401 8:00 P.1\1:
CIVIC CENTER
,,MEMBERS PRESENT Hai Davis, David Galloway, Phyllis Horton, Anne McGuire, Doug
Mohnke, Carol Oualkinbush, Dan Tarlock
i'EMBERS ABSENT: Solomon Hirsh, Mary McWilliams, Marilee Roberg
STAFF: Gwen Sommers Yant
PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Phyllis Horton, Chair
OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. & %irs. Heimbaugh, (2450 Pioneer Road), Ethan Cosgriff, Tom
Keiff (1525 Ridge Avenue)
Chair opened the meeting by welcoming new commissioner Hal Davis,
COMMITTEE REPORTS
REVIEW AND TECHNICAL .ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE
The Commission considered the proposed construction of a major addition wrapping around the
• south, west and north facades of 2450 Pioneer Road. The Chair opened discussion by
summarizing the landmark criteria under which this house was designatec. A-'s, one of the highest
designation criteria. She also emphasized that the effect of the proposed addition must be
considered not only on the structure itself but its context as well. Context is of the utmost
importance because this structure and its flanking neighbors were designed as a unit. She then
turned tl',c meeting to R.'.-TA Chair Ann
Ms. `.'ct,uire introduced fir. and \Irs. Heimbaugh. its. McGuire anc `.'r. ",7.n-.e met xith %1r.
and %Irs. Heimbaugh at the site prior to tonight's meeting regarcing tl�e project. She stated that
the addition is substantial in terms of both bulk as well as its impact --n the visual character of
the structure. It is the consensus of P'cTS that the proposer. addit:c, :s n,_t Y:eeping .:ith the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards. Thfe ^ronosed deskm also Variations.
She then presont,,c the architect's t«o or000sed alternati,.es for the ._ .:i;: ,,-.. P &T.A f, ,.nc: the
addition propose^ in scl;eme 81 overiy prominent and derivec fror st} le conc;pts in
advance of those upon which the original cesign was conceived. The sec rc: alternatiN e, while
more neutral, was also found incompatible with the existing house anc ::s site. The Chair quoted
Secretary of the Interior's Standard 1/S to underscore that while conteTporar}- additions are not
discouraged, they must be situated and designed in a way whit~. rf,soects the existing
architectural fabric. %ts. McGuire concurred. emphasizing that the Stardares do not prohibit
contemporary interpretations, but that the proposal under consideration is less than satis:actory
in respecting, for example, the basic bulk and scale of the existing lanc�--ar,.
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes June 15, 1989
Page Two
110r. Yas further underscored the importance of preserving the relationship between this house and
its neighbors, quoting from a 1901 article by the original architect regarding the three structure
ensemble. Because of the tight site, the, proposed addition encroachs on the neighboring houses.
In terms of the addition's impact on the existing structure, the prominent south addition destroys
the symmetry of the original building, while the addition's vertical emphasis is not compatible
with the horizontal orientation of the original building. He suggested instead, a rear addition
with north and south wings set well behind the plane of the front facade. He also suggested that
the amount and size of glass used in the addition be more compatible with the fenestration of the
existing house. He added that the planter urns of these proposed addition are not appropriate to
this type of Prairie home. Frank Lloyd Wright used such urns on long, low, houses; this house,
however, is a symmetrical, tall, block.
Ms. Qualkinbush and 11r. Galloway concurred with the comments of Ms. McGuire and Mr. Yas,
adding that they appreciated the owner's time in developing two alternatives. While they
congratulated him on Choosing the Prairie style as a point of design departure for the addition,
and commented that the second scheme is an improvement on the first. for the above reasons
they could not recommend approval at this time.
The Chair then asked for the homeowners' comments. Mr. Heimbaugh stated he had lived in the
house for twelve years, was aware of the significance of the ensemble and agreed with the
comments from the historic preservation standpoint, however the new addition must meet
contemporary lifestyle needs. He expressed his reservation on being to design an addition
• %'. that is respectful given the site constraints, including enormous oak trees which make a rear yard
addition very difficult. also, because of these trees the most desirable location from the
standpoint of light is the location of the proposed southeast prow. Mrs. Heimbaugh added she did
not want her neighbors to suffer. She stated however, that because of the siting of the ensemble
this house has very little privacy and that the addition must address future value and privacy
needs.
The Chair thanked both owners for their comments. Discussion ensued regarding; design
alternatives for addition configuration and roof type. Ifs. Oualkinbush added that oaks are very
sensitive to any disturbance. Mr. Heinbaugh replied he had consulted the City of Evanston
arborist regarding construction. In conclusion, the chair stated that no p rrr.it has et been
applied for and so t.`Ee Commission needn't take any action. She explai-.eti the Coe- mission's final
review procedures, including the ability to hold a construction permit ? ` days -vnile negotiating
toward d mutually acceptable solution. Ms. McGuire added that she and the Review and
Technical :Assistance Committee would be pleased to meet with the Heirnbaughs if they so
desired.
The Cormission next revie,.vec propose- alterations to 1628 Ridge avenue. --t Chair
summarizeo the criteria under which the building was designated. .. i "TA C„a;r `.ticGluire
summarized the scope of the proiect: to bring the structure up to cote, to renter the floor
habitably by adding skylights on the north roof slope, and to change th- south COr-ner .% .ndows to
casement windows. R&Ta felt that because the proposed window alterations are barely visible
and located on a secondary facade, they did not adversely impact the architecture character of
the structure. These changes were also approvable by the State Histcri.c Preservation Office in
Springfield as part of the owners's application for the eight year property tax assessment freeze.
R&TA recommended approval.
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - June 15, 1989
Page Three
Mr. Galloway stated he is involved in the project and will abstain from voting. In response to
questions from Commis--:oners, Mr. Galloway responded that the skylights would be even less
visible after the Church/Ridge townhouse project has been constructed immediately north of this
structure some time next year. In response to other questions Mr. Galloway responded that the
owner desires to clean the exterior brick next year as well as to reconstruct the front porch. A
motion to designate staff approval of the permit if it is identical to that received tonight and
accepted by the State Historic Preservation Office, was approved with one abstention.
In response to questions, the owner, Mr. Gosgriff explained the interior needs which prompted the
proposed changes and also stated his intention to restore the interior. Ms. McGuire thanked him
for his care and sensitivity, particularly in light of the endangered state of this home and its
neighbor a couple of years ago.
PRESERVATION AWARDS C.OMVITTEE
The Chair commented that the Preservation Awards jury met on May 27, that she had been a
juror and that she enjoyed the experience immensely. The Preservation Awards Reception and
presentation at Council were particularly successful this year.
OLD BUSINESS
STATEWIDE PRESERVATION CONFERENCE UPDATE
The Chair commented she .vas disappointed in the response of aldermen to Commissioners,
invitations to attend the Statewide Preservation Conference.
DISTRICT 65 HEADQUARTERS (1314 Ridge, Dryden Mansion) UPDATE
Staff reported that per the last Commission meeting, she consulted with EPC and PLE architects
and compiled a list of preservation -sensitive architects the District may wish to contact
regarding a technical assessment of the District 65 headquarters and other school buildings. The
list has been sent to District 65 Business Manager Leon Eiche.
REVIE%[ OF PROPOSED PEVISION TO PRESERVATION ORDINANCE: P ,RT I
Picking up from the last EPC meeting, in response to Ann McGuire's q#-estion, the Chair reported
that there are approximatel'. 554 buildings in the Lakeshore Historic District and 324 buildings in
the RieFe Historic District. At the Chair's request, Staff then Ce!:-.r.,,u a slide presentation
sur-m,ir:::nv the c_',x'istinL `at:onal Register Historic Districts, lncluclr.; t`eir locate-ai, c�-Iar3cter.
and history. The Chair then -re,v attention to one of the packet Pres�.-r•.ation Law Briefs v-hk7h
cornmentee that if local landmark districts and National Register '",storic districts are not
contiguous. architects and citizens sometimes become confused and fr,;strated because they are
unsure of what regulation and tax benefits apply to each. She there.`ore recommendec that, in
future, local historic districts in Evanston be coterminous with National Register historic district
boundaries. She continued with a brief history of the listing of the various National Register
historic districts. Discussion of the philosophy behind designating historic districts ensued.
r
4:0 .
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes -- June 16, 1989
Page Four
Discussion then turned to criteria for designating local historic districts. The Commission
resolved that staff would send six historic preservation ordinances thought to be very good from
the .Chicago area or elsewhere in the country to six different Commissioners, that each
Commissioner would prepare a summary of part 1 of their ordinance, and that the Commission
would begin discussion of district and other types of designation at the next EPC meeting. %,Ir.
Tarlock requested he be sent the Highland Park ordinance. The Chair also asked Staff to send
Commissioners the statements of significance from Evanston's two bounded National Register
historic districts.
STAFF REPORT
The following permits received staff approval since the Iast Commission meeting.
1225 Ridge - kitchen remodelling (not visible from street)
701 Forest - reroof (no change in materials)
Staff reported that she and Mr. Galloway attended a conference on the preservation tax
incentives in Lockport on May 19. Materials from the conference are available to Commissioners
and the public.
=� ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Chair suggested that the Commission hold a special meeting on Jule 25 in order to mor- as
quickly as possible toward completion of the revised ordinance. A motion to accept the
Chairman's recommendation was unanimously approved
The Chair also announced that Commissioner Hirsh is having knee surgery June 22. The
Commission wished Mr. Hirsh well.
Finally, the Chair reminded Commissioners of the Statewide Historic Preservation Conference to
be held in Evanston Thursday, June 22 through Sunday June 25. She urgec all to attend.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
STAFF:
I
DATE: [ %ir • cy
GSY':mc
25Y41-144
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular ,fleeting
Tuesday, - July 18, 1989
8:00 P.M. Room 2403
MEMBERS PRESENT: Hal Davis, David Galloway, Anne McGuire, Vary McWilliams, Carol
Qualkinbush, Marilee Roberg, ❑an Tarlock, Stephen Yas
MEMBER ABSENT: Solomon Hirsh, Phyllis Horton, Doug Mohnke
STAFF: Gwen Sommers Yant
PRESIDING: David Galloway, Vice Chairman
ASSOCIATES PRESENT: Hans Friedman
Mr. Galloway opened by explaining the purpose of the meeting is to chart Commissioners'
findings of the provisions contained in other cities' historic preservation ordinances. Tonight's
• meeting will focus on the equivalent of Part I of the proposed Evanston revised ordinance.
The meeting then turned to review of the following ordinances: Chicago (Carol Qualkinbush),
Rockford (Hal Davis), Highland Part: (Dan Tarlock), Pasedena. Cal (Stephen Yas) and Aurora
(Doug Mohnke c'is read by Vary McWilliams). The content of the meeting is contained in the
attached chart.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
STAFF: �• , . ti _ "�
DATE:
,attachment
25Y I
I
HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE
COMPARISON:
PART 1
SIZE Or Cofivilfy
tltlitltfllTy ~n
Hision or HEmans
(pop,} (sq. NO AND Or oRUlil1}ICE AHD
i LOCAL i LOCAL
LAUD-
sin or CHARACTER Of
Q
1011110SIIlofl
HISTORIC
HARKS OISIRICT`
LOCAL LAIJWRKS A
HISTORIC IIIS1oRIC
Icago, It 1956
1960
��— — 1987
i, Antonio, Ix 1939 7f%.000
1987
r►lard, It 1970 13B.b011
-ihland Park, It 19113
sadena. CA 135'(W
vora, IL 1979 Rn,n0o
)nslnn, It
risll[Ig)
gotta+, It
,upnsed)
t
DISTRICTS DISiR M S
e micimic develupoent, 9 professional or
Protection of historic volunteer exper-
7/09 page I
Mills or AOyiSoRy
CHANGES OR
REVIEU170 BINDING
resources, public edu-
tepee In hlstor fi3,
3-boo
14f buildings
residentlal,
mixed use
exterior,
Interior:
binding
cation, city planning,
]
is preservation +
tourism.
mxn
Ccissloner of 71rrg.
sa`e
civic pride, ecnn,
arc tect, historian,
developmt, protect river,
arch'1 historian,
exterior:
300 identlfy/preserv; historic
archeologist, landsc
all, lrsclud-
resources$ harmonious/crd.
arch, planner, realtnr, 1200,
10
residential,
Ing appurten-
advisory,
erly city develosoent.
banter, lawyer, constxn-
LuAllsercial
antes, sigoage,
binding
conteitural aesthetic design
er advncate, pros. advnc
landscaping,
identliy SlgnitfCant buird-
] arcnrcecc, ieu,iR'7iz17
slgnage
Ings, protect visual char-
reallor or broler, city I1
4
exterior:
exterior
45 acter of historic districts,
council a+emb, hist, suc.
3 blocks
In,l'nks: mSeed
visible from
binding
advise, deslgnatlDn of land-
member, 2 members at
marks and hist. districts.
large.
residences
districts: firmly
street, puh-
street,
resld.
May, pub -
preserve architectural/cal-
Y iive x+cowers at iarye,
11C buildings
tural heritage., stabilise
board member of hist.
property values, encourage
society, architect, art/
exterior:
binding
rehab/restoration, economic
architectural historian,
all
deveiopaxnnt
lawyer.
protection of historic
7 members at large Inter -
resources, public educa-
estid In ccrr,unity's
IruSxts: mostly
catering,
tion, enhance vlsusl/aes-
historical
SCOUT resid, svr
interior:
thetic character, pronote
Public blcrgs
tnurism, ecnnamic dev.
districts: mostly
sane
residential
re sources, —
11 professional or volun-
sound urban
resources, sound urban
planning, civil orlde,
teer experience In
Indmks: mostly
exterior:
stabilize properly values,
historic preservation. B
2 1Z5 structs.
commercial
districts: res-
binding
g
tourism, economic devel-
00 structs.
Identlal
interior:
opm'nt.
lanilrwits,
Il
1915 14.000 0.5 800
Mft
19112
ecunuvulc developuent, lil'o- I progessionals in relal-
]4,(N70 R.5 tectlnn of historic resour- Pd fields, volunteers
ces, public education, im- With special interest
prove /stabilise property or experience in relat-
valoes. ell disciplines,
structural
rnrx41: Fl1u%0y
residential,
c■lerior.
0 RA stv,x• rrv,rnerr-
visible advisory
lal, Inttltut•
frixn
t P l is lnu5
street
In
7/£9 II.P. ORD. PFr 1 page 2
IF BlilDI)IG DOES BIHDIRG REVIEW EXTEIID OYEZ ALL
enacted in NOTES
Trig ord7 individual structures in
landrr4rks hist. districts
no yes yes
no
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes yes yes urban conservation
district
n
A
MEMBERS PRESENT:
S+EIIBERS ABSENT:
STAFF:
PRESIDING OFFICIAL:
OTHERS PRESENT:
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
,MINUTES
Special Meeting
Tuesday, July 25, 1989
Room 2404 - 8:00 P.1%4.
CIVIC CENTER
David Galloway, Solomon Hirsh, Ann %icGuire, Phyllis
Horton, Mary McWilliams, Douglas %lohnke Marliee Roberg
Hal Davis, Carol Oualkinbush, Dan Tariock, Steven Yas
Gwen Sommers Yant
Phyllis Horton, Chair
Richard Dooley (207 Lake Street)
The meeting commence at 8:05 p.m.
CORRESPONDENCE
The July 13, 1989 memo from the Preservation Commission to t1.e Zoning F;oard of
Appeals regarding a special use for 1835 Grant Street was reviewed without comment.
The Evanston Zoning Commission minutes of June 19, 1989 were reviewed without
comment, as was a notice from Robert B. Ahlberg to the Zoning Coy- nis3ion regarding
scheduling the July 24 Zoning Commission meeting.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
REVIE`,t AND TE`H�,:IC-AL ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE
Review and Technical Assistance Committee Chair Ann .McGuire su,r; rr;arized a project
involving the proposed addition of a dormer on the east side of 207 Lake Street. R,4:A
member Flans Friedman and Staff conducted a site meeting recardir= ~is issue on 3�.!\
I°. k.15. VcGuire notes that t":e owner. \1r. Dooley, is applying `.or a, _ .. ':ear?raoe
ta.1 asst s5mer.t f reezz-. 1'as c.,rresr)onded '.k it"i the Illinois Histo.*:r_
regarding this matter, ann has received their approval. R IT.A recaT.r- accep:once =-
the proposal. given its appropriateness under the Secretary of the ]nt_-.,-', StanddrCs. :
response to a a.uiry from Ms. MicGuire, fir. Dooley confirmed tnat -~-aterial of —e
proposed new dormer would match the existing dormer. He further ex:�:a.ned the inter;ar
needs which prompted the addition of the dormer. Ms. McGuire states :`at t"e owner has
not yet applied for permit for the project. but suggested that the C=-nission errpow'er
Staff to approve the permit if it is identical to the proposal seen torizn:t. A motion to
accept R"k-TA's recom,m-andation vas unanimously approved.
-F,vanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - July 25, 1989
Page Two
his. McGuire stated that R&TA met with the owner of 1008 Wesley prior to the EPC
meeting and requested further documentation of the owner's proposal. A permit
application has not yet been made. The owner will return to the Commission at a later
date.
Staff reported that the owners of 1315 Forest Avenue have elected to repair their slate
roof instead of replacing it with asphalt shingles. R&TA member Steve Knutson and Staff
met with the owner on July 1 S.
Staff also reported that 2931 Sheridan Place will not be considered tonight at the request
of the architect and owner.
R&TA met with the owners of 1419 Grove Street tonight prior to the regular Commission
meeting. The owners desire further refinements of the project design and thus will be
considered by the Commission at a later date.
OLD BUSINESS
STATEWIDE PRESERVATION CONFERENCE REPORT
Staff presented slides documenting the sessions and events of 1989 Illinois Historic
Preservation Conference held in Evanston June 22 through June 25. Mrs. \Ic%;'illiams
stated the conference was proclaimed the most successful in the nine }ears history of the
conclave. She congratulated Ms. Sommers Yant on a job well done as conference chairman.
BUTLER BUILDING (1024 EMERSON, RESEARCH PARK) - UPDATE
The Chair stated that the Evanston Landmark Butler Building has been accuired by the
Citv of Evanston. The building is historically significant for its assc&_iation .with tale
Evanston Black community. The City intends to demolish the building, although no
application for a demolition permit has yet been made. Demolition of the building is a
politically sensitive issue. At the request of the Chair. Staff then sun-:.-_rized tte efforts
undertaken by the Preservation Commission since 1937 to save the u,i!ding, including
meetings :with the developer {the Charles Shaw Company) and the subsec_,...t cevt-:opment
of a proposed compromise plan which preserves the building while simuitar.eously meeting
the Research Park Master Plan guidelines for material, height, _,rare feet. and
configuration. 11r. Yas will he rendering an elevation to accompan,. - :�roocsed plan.
The Shaw Company desires tc cerrolish t!'e huilding and erect a plaeci•
1Iaster flan agreement calls for all land within the Research Park to
under condemnation by \ove-rber of this year.
Discussion ensued as to the building's adaptability to research purpose,. :.r:etr.er it
necessary for the City to demolish the building if the land is not presr:rtly needed f.r
construction, the timetable for construction of the next building, and t .Iw Importance of
the building to the Black community. The Chair stated it is the Comr- ssicn's --barge to
continue working with the City and the Shaw Company to enco.:ra�--e appropriate
preservation of the Landmark.
-Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - July 25, 1989
Page Three
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mrs. Horton announced that due to personal circumstances she must resign as Chairman.
She thus requested that the Nominating Committe reconvene and bring to the next EPC
meeting a recommendation for Chairman. The Nominating Committee will consist of the
most senior Commission members, kirs. McWilliams, Mr. Hirsh, and Mrs. Horton.
STAFF REPORT
Staff reported that
In honor of its listing in the National Register of Historic Places the Shakespeare Garden
was rededicated on Thursday, June 29.
The following permits received Staff approval since the last EPC meeting.
1301 Judson - reroof (no change in materials)
621 Ingleside - reroof (no change in materials)
1326 Davis - reroof (no change in materials)
2S19 Lincoln - fence replacement (replacement inkind)
2325 Hartrey - reroof (no change in material)
200 Burnham PI - reroof (no change in materials)
1724 Asbury - construction of rear porch (not visible from street)
2035 Harrison - addition of t%vo casement to west facades (not visible from street)
GIs. McGuire announced that the association for Preservation Technology %vould be holding its
annual convention in Chicago, September 4 thr.,ugh 9. She encourag*-d Commissioners to
attend. Registration/conference brochures are available through her. Shr- rphasixed that the
conference is an excellent source of technical preservation information.
OLD BUSINESS (Continued)
REV1E1t OF PPOPOSED ADDITIONS TO EVANSTON PRESERVATIO\ 0I-'DJ%A\CB: PART I
Staff added the following information to the Preservation Ordinance matrix develop at the last
EPC meeting:
Community - Evansion
POpulation - 73.706
Square miles - 3.5
Purpose of ordinance - economic development, protection of historic resources,
public education, improve/stabilize property values (proposed ;-rdinance).
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - July 25, 1989
Page Four
Number of members - 11, professionals and volunteers in related fields.
(proposed)
Numbers of local landmarks - approximately 800 (existing ordinance)
Number of historic districts - none (existing)
Size of local historic districts - NA (existing)
Character of landmarks - primarily residential, some commercial and
institutional. (existing)
Type of Review - Exterior visible from the street (existing)
Advisory or Binding Review - advisory (existing)
Ms. Roberg added the follo%ving information regarding the City of Pasadena, California
ordinance.
Population - 135,000
Number of local historic districts - 10 and several pending.
She commented that her conversation with staff members revealed that the
Commission's staff of three was greatly overburcer.ed administering the
requirements of the ordiance with so many landmarks. Ms. McGuire commented
that this has been her long-time fear and that this point should be repeated at the
next Preservation Commission meeting when more memIc?rs are present.
Character of Landmarks and Historic District - i..c:,:idual landmarks are
commercial and residential: Historic districts are prirnar::v residential.
.-alterations reviewed - all exterior, some interior.
Advisor,; or Binding binding/advisory. She e�.psained the role of the
Preservation Commission, Director of the Department of Building ana Zoning,
and the Cite Council in reaching final decision. D:_r'JSSiOn of the process
ensued.
The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m.
STAFF: /
I
DATE: 0
T
25Y4-7
;EMBERS PRESENT:
WEB&'BER ABSENT:
STAFF:
PRESIDING:
OTHERS PRESENT:
CORRESPONDENCE
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, - August l., 1989
8:00 P.M. Room 2403
CIVIC CENTER
David Galloway, Solomon Hirsh, Phyllis Norton, Anne McGuire,
Marilee Roberg, Dan Tarlock, Carol Cualkinbush
Doug %'ohnke,Vary 116111liams, Stephen Yas
Gwen Sommers Yant
Phyllis Dorton, Chair
David Galloway, Chair
Jerry Bogatz (1008 %Yesley); Tony Halford (1817 Church St.); Mrs.
'Wiener, Richard Lehner (2300 Lincolnwood); Mr. & Mrs. Roberts
(1419 Grove)
The July 20, 1989 correspondence from Leon Eich, Business %tanager. School District 65 to Gwen
Sommers Yant, Preservation Coordinator regarding District 65 building's assessment was
reviewed without comment.
The 2uly 25, 1989 memo from Robert B. Ahlberg, Zoning Planner, regarding the Zoning
Commission meeting schedule was reviewed without comment.
The Zoning Commission minutes from July 24, 1989 were reviewed. The Chair stated the
Commission should monitor the proliferation of group homes, as they could affect the appearance
of historic districts.
MINUTES
The Commission reviewed the minutes of May 16, 1989, June 15, 1989.:uly I8, 1989, arc July 25,
1989. Ms. Qualkinbush was assigned the reading of the May 16, June If, and July I5 minutes.
She submitted typographical and stylistic corrections. She also queriec whether the Chair wished
to clarify her meaning in the minutes of Vav 16, 1989, page 4, pararraor. 4. The Chair will
review the paragraph. The Chair then stated she had reviewed the rrinutes of July 25. 1989 and
found them acceptable. Ms. Roberg noted two corrections to the attendance record: she was
absent on June 1 meeting but was only tardy at the July 25 meeting.
I
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - August 1,, 1989
Page Two
COMMITTEE REPORTS
REVIEW AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CCIMMtITTEE
his. M1cGuire summarized the permit for the proposed addition of skylights to each side of the
entrance porch of the Evanston Landmark residence located at 1008 Wesley. R&TA found the
skylights regrettably acceptable, given the fact they will not be visible in a front -on view of the
house and given the need of the owner to add habitable space to the dwelling. A motion to
accept the recommendation of the Review and Technical Assistance Committee was unanimously
approved.
Vs. McGuire summarized the need for a new roof for the City of Evanstcn owned building at 1817
Church Street. The Community Development Block Grant Program (CD) Committee has
requested Commission input as to the choice of roof materials visible from the street. The
existing visible roofing material is slate. The project will be funded with Community
Development Block Grant funds. Bids are in the process of being prepared. The project architect
has recommended the following roofing options: A) repair the visible slate portion using shingles
from the rear of the building and replacing rear shingles removed with asphalt shingles, and B)
replace all the slate with an asphalt product that resembles slate. Li=cussion ensued. R&TA
recommended the Commission preapprove alternative A but if alternative B is cl;osen by the CC
Committee, that the matter be brought back to the Commission for review. A motion to accept
the recommendation of the Review and Technical ,assistance Cor-mittee was unanimously
approved. Air. Hirsh recommended that any extra slates removed should be kept for future
repair.
,\'s. McGuire then summarized the proposed construction of a rear addition for 2300
Lincolnwood. Project architect Richard Lehner presented a mode! and plans of proposed
construction. R&TA found the addition in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards and congratulated both architect and owner on a job well Core. In response to a query
from Vs. VcGuire, Vr. Lehner stated that a permit application has nrt yet been submitted. He
added that a zoning variation will be required for construction and elaborated on the nature of
the variation. He reauested Commission support for the variation. A motion to empower staff to
approve the building permit at a later date, if the final permit plans are identical to those
presented tonight, was unanimously approved. A motion to s!:pport the �-cuested zoning %ariation
was unanimously approved.
V..r. Gallo%vay then summarized the need of the owners of the Evanston Landmark residence at
1419 Grove for a second story addition. He and Vs. Yant met at the sire %vith the owners on 2uly
Zr_ At the meeting they: explained that the proposes addition chances the `.aracter
for which the landmark was desinnated and that a seconC floor ac-_:-:on r-a� ;eopa-..ize the
!andmar designation of the building. The owners explained that no a"` rdable alternative home
exists in Evanston and that they intend to construct the second floor addition regardless of its
effect on the structure's landmark designation. The owners also stated their wish to add to the
structure in a manner as sensitive as possible to its vernacular character. Mr. Galloway and staff
offered various suggestions for the new construction.
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - August 15, 1989
Page Three
The owners then presented their proposal, which incorporates the recommendations of
Galloway/Yant. Discussion ensued. Mt. Galloway thanked the owners for their effort to make
the new construction compatible wit i the existing structure. He stated the Review and
Technical Assistance Committee's recommendation that the owners investigate increasing the
pitch of the proposed new construction to resemble more closely that of the original structure.
He assured the owners that the Commission understands their economic plight and does not wish
to inconvenience them unreasonably. He stated, however, that because the new construction so
greatly impacts the original mass and scale of the landmark, the Review and Technical
Assistance Committee cannot recommend approval of the work. He recommended, however, that
because R&TA has explored all reasonable alternatives with the owners, the Commission send the
permit on with the designation of disapproved. A motion to accept Mr. Galloway's
recommendation was unanimously approved.
NOMINATING CC:%'1'ITTEE REPORT
Mr. Hirsh reported that the Nominating Committee recommends David Galloway for Chairman
and Marilee Roberg for Vice -Chairman of the Preservation Commission. A motion to accept the
recommendation of the Nominating Committee was approved by seven ayes and two abstentions.
OLD BUSINESS
The outgoing Chairman Phyllis Horton then turned the meeting over to new Chairman David
Galloway.
REVIEW OF PROPOSED REVISIONS TO PUD ORDINANCE
At the request of the Chair, staff delivered a brief overview of the Preservation Commission's
involvement in drafting and administering the City's Planned Unit Development Ordinance as it
relates to historic properties. Discussion ensued. Commissioners expressed concern that the
"action" corresponding to goal number 10 was unworkable. Ms. \!cGuire stated that a PUD should
be a attractive, elective option rather than a mandatory process. Further discussion ensued. A
motion to amend this "action " language to read, "provide in section 6-1 2-8-2 PUD be mandatory
for the development of parcels greater than 16,000 scuare feet" was approved with 8 ayes and
one nay.
IAHPC CONIMISSIONER HANDL'CCK
Staff summarized the goal/purpose of the Illinois Association for Historic Preservation
Commissions (IAHPC) Commissioner Handbook Project. The 1,AHPC has asked for ir-7ut from
local commission members for materials to include in the handbook:. 1'_. Poterg reccr~mended
that reprints of articles on pertinent subjects be included. Mr. Gallc%,.av recommendec that a
summary of recent major preservation law rulings be included. X'r. Tarlock suggestec that the
new APA guide to the taking issue be included. Mr. Tarlock also suggested including a brief guide
to architectural styles in Illinois. Mis. Roberg suggested that a central source, per`;aps the
IAHPC, be a clearing house for articles or publications mentioned in the handbook which are not
included in their entirety in the handbook.
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes -August 1 15, 1989
Page Four
NEW BUSINESS
The Commission re .Mewed the packet memo outlining the EPC proposed NVork Plan for fiscal year
1989 through 1990 and 1990 through 1991. Airs. Horton strongly recommended that a fourth
newsletter be added in order to apprise the public of issues pertaining to the revised preservation
ordinance. The Commission concurred with Mrs. Horton's recommendation. MIrs. Horton also
suggested that the Commission put Project 65 on hold and concentrate on the ordinance. The
Commission discussed the possibility of hosting a lecture series focusing on the revised
preservation ordinance, perhaps in conjunction with the Preservation League of Evanston.
Discussion then turned to the fiscal year 1990-91 budget objective. A motion to approve the
following objective was unanimously approved:
To foster public awareness of the economic and aesthetic benefits of preservation
and foster public participation and protection of landmarks in historic districts by
holding a community meeting to solicit input on strengthening the preservation
ordinance by February 1991.
STAFF REPORT
Staff requested that new Commissioners submit their resumes for inclusion in this year's
Certified Local Government Report to the State of Illinois.
The following permits received staff approval since the last EPC meeting:
If 07 Pull Terrace - interior remodeling (not visible from the street)
1207 Maple - reroof (no change in material)
I 1 10 Seward - reroof (no change in material)
1008 Wesley - interior attic remodeling (not visible from street)
506 Lee Street - concrete repairs (no change in material)
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
STAFF:
DATE:
GSA line
25Y46/449
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, - September 19, 1989
8:00 P.M. Room 2403
Civic Center
MEMBERS PRESENT: Hal Davis, David Galloway, Doug Mohnke, Mary McWilliams, Carol
Qualkinbush,Marilee Roberg, Stephen Yas
MEMBERS ABSENT: Solomon Hirsh, Phyllis Horton, AnnMcGuire, Dan Tarlock
STAFF: Gwen Sommers Yant ,
PRESIDING: David Galloway, Chair
ASSOCIATES PRESENT: Anne Earle
OTHERS PRESENT: Richard Lehner, (PLE)
CORRESPONDENCE:
The Commission reviewed the packet memo regarding Federal funding for the National Trust for
Historic Preservation and State Historic Preservation Offices. A motion to send a letter to
Congressman Yates, urging him to support the level of funding recommended by the Senate for
the National Trust for Historic Preservation and State Historic Preservation Offices, was
unanimously approved.
MINUTES
The minutes of August I % 1989 were unanimously approved with the addition to page 2,
paragraph 2, of a final sentence reading, " A motion to support the requested zoning variation
was unanimously approved". Various typographical errors were also identified.
OLD BUSINESS
REVIEW OF PROPOSED PLAN TO PRESERVE BUTLER BUILDING (!' 2!j E-VERSON STREET,
RESEARCH PAPK).
The Chair stated that Preservation Commission and Preservation League architects had met on
August 29, 1989 to discuss the creation of an elevation for the site plan previously prepared by
the PLE and EPC. The site plan both preserves the Butler Building and meets Research Park
Master Plan requirements for the site. Mr. Yas was charged with incorporating discussion items
into an elevation drawing.
Evanstpn Preservation Commission
&+mutes -September 19, 1980
Page Two
Mr. Yas then presented the drawing. He proposed: demolishing the stable portion at the rear of
the original Butler Building, restoring the arched opening located in the western half of the
facade, filling the arched opening on the east and west side of the facades with glass to reflect
the entrance treatment of the new research park building directly to the cast of the Butler
Building, retaining the existing central opening and filling it with recessed, muntined glass,
cleaning the building to uncover the subtly rich brick detailing, enlivening the common brick
sidewalls with illusionistic murals which carry the architectural vocabulary of the facade around
to the sides, and adding additional fenestration to the east side of the building. He suggested
capitalizing on the Butler Building's shallow setback by creating pocket parks in the transition
zones between the Butler building and the deeper setback established under the Research Park
design guidelines, placing the second floor double -hung windows with insulated windows which
replicate existing sash dimensions, and constructing a four story addition (oriented north/south)
which incorporates the Butler Building architectural vocabulary and is attached to the existing
building via a glass connecting element.
Discussion ensued. The following suggestions were offered: reduce the rendering of the addition
to a simple outline of the addition's general form to allow the developer maximum design
latitude, delete note calling for tinted glass in the Butler Building, highlight the Butler Building's
brick detail, and develop both a frontal elevation and a perspective which show the relationship
of the existing new research park building with the "compromise" Eutler building. It"was resolved
that Mr. Yas will incorporate the above recommendations into a final sketch, which will be
considered by the Commission at its October meeting. The Commission sincerely thanked ,Mr.
Yas for all his time and effort.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
REVIEW AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE
The Chair reviewed proposed plans for storefront improvements at 1817 Church Street. The
building is owned by the City of Evanston and leased to the Evanston Community Development
Corporation. Proposed work includes masonry cleaning and repair, repairing or replacing doors
and windows, installing canopy signage, and exterior lighting.
Discussion ensued. The following recommendations were offered: instailine a front door which
fills the original opening (i.e., up to the existing transom), new front door should match final
color chosen for windows and trim, delete use of "Panel 15" to ewer '_carded -up first floor
doorways, fill the latter doorways with a fixed, panel door; delete canopies. delete 10 inch letters
for signage, provide signage by a black wrought iron hanging sign projectirg from the keystone
above the front door. restore two or four first floor light fixtures of black wrought
iron with vandal -proof frosted globes). A motion to pass these re---merd::tion on to project
coordinators in the Planning Department and at ECDC was unanimm.s: arwr;.ed.
`:EWSLE~TTEP CC'VVITTEE
Newsletter Committee members Vc1C illiams, Ouackinbush, and D-avis summarized proposed
articles and timeline for the next Preservation Commission news>etter. The newsletter is
scheduled to be distributed in November. In response to Mr. Davis's recuest for ideas for future
newsletters, Commissioners suggested reprinting OLD HOUSE .;OU NALS articles, listing
preservation -related resources in Evanston: and a "getting reaccuai-tec" series summarizing
Commission services, accomplishment and future directions. The Ccittee r-cuested that any
submitted to newsletter Chairman. Lary mcWillia—.
additional ideas be
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes -September 19, 1989
Page Three
NEW BUSINESS
PROPOSED LECTURE SERIES FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION MONTH, 1990.
Per last month's suggestion, the Commission discussed the benefits of co -hosting a lecture
series with the Preservation League and the City of Evanston Department of Recreation (Levy
Center). The lectures series would be held, preferably, during Historic Preservation month 1990
and would focus on subjects pertinent to the revised preservation ordinance.
BOOK REVIEW
Vicechair Roberg introduced the ideas of Commission members sporadically presenting reviews
of books which they feel might provide helpful background information for other Commission
members. ,Ms. Roberg will review the publication Whv Buildings Stand UD at the October EPC
meeting.
STAFF REPORT
FAMILY COUNSELING SERVICES BUILDING , 1 1 14 CHURCH STREET.
Staff reported that per the August EPC meeting, the Family Counseling Services Agency desires
to apply for Evanston Landmark status. Mrs. Earle then presented historical amd architectural
background regarding the building. Discussion ensued. A motion to defer consideration until
next month when new Commissioners are better acquainted with designation procedures was
unanimously approved.
PERMITS
The following permits received staff approval since the last EPC meeting:
1560 Oak Street - reroof-(no change in material)
1201 Hull Terrace - reroof (no change in material)
1010 Michigan - interior remodeling (not visible from street)
1916 Asbury - reroof (no change in materials)
1723 Asbury - reroof (no change in material)
The meeting wad adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
STAFF: V1*U--rf-1 ' I., el
DATE: le- 3 a
� J
25 Y51-53
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
DRAFT NOT APPRCVED
Special Meeting
Tuesday, - September 26, 1989
7:30 P.M. Room 2403
CIVIC CENTER
,VUIVERS PRESENT: Hal Davis, David Galloway. Phyllis Morton. %'ary M0 illiarns. Doug
11ohnke. Stephen Yas
A'E,1►RER APSENT: Solomon Hirsh. Ann `,tcGuire, Carol Cuali:inbUsh. Marilee Roberg,
Clan Tarlocl:
STAFF: Gwen Sommers Yant
PRESIDING. David Galloway. Chairman
OTHERS PRESENT: Richard Lehner. Drew Heindel. Susan Fous tPLE)
Chairman Callov av opened the mecting by stating that a ctetnolition p�rr•nit application has been
received by Preservation staff for the butler Btrildinp, located at ' 12a Emerson Street in
Research Park:. fey ordinance, the Preservation Commission can hold tr" demolition permit for
ud to ninety days While it seeks alternatives to demolition. The purpo%,- -f this special meeting is
to update Corr�rnissioners on the mitigating solution proposed by t' .• )int EPC/Preservation
League of Evanston (PLC) .Architects Committee.
\tr, Callo�.a`. statec.' that the Cutler Fuilding uas r'c'signatee' for itk r�rical ac,50c_iation with
het}r`. 1�r;t'.''-. ;�-' r";; r'`'ii `�!a�:. _t <tr;Cssrr' tri of the Fitt• i :'th aric i 2�--01 Century. %1r.
Catlokvi- v 0—n titre-od' the meeiinc over to P Try r•te•rnber Stc-%en s t ••,,)!ain the architectural
component of the solution to prese-%<` the f'`+itie'r 11slilding. `,4r. Yas ,',- :. {c`[ that the CPC/PLF
effort to present- the Futl-r Funding and intt-gratt• it into the Pesearr• .."'-rK had 5evun over two
years ago. At th-it time. f rom[)romt�e site plan. %thic-h Incorooritc'c P—eser%atlon r'oneerns
and Resear,-h faster Man nei'r:s. '.l'ac ?mr' pr,~sented o: Park
developer (il-,:irinc lJ Ct-av- CCt''._ n\. TIT �F.`t.Il,t'r rt e it _ ,
_ '{vt C the :t'• -stead
nffc`rfc t7 lnrnr :,..tC p,�t f t' . �Il�ti"r ' .l rt(E'S' 'r t0 1;'. - t� tie
{or•nt((' r'C":r [} c' " - t inn SIT,
"r. Yas reyiev.ec' the faster flan recuireioents for the Nitlor Ptjildir,; - He c •center. slides
of actual site rom itions. and exr)lainve hwv the f'utler 1xmh� .ing cot;reuse(` to
meet faster Plan c-onfiguratlon. sgt,are foot. use, and r,aterirtl regi :fits. Fc'cause of the
similarit, in de*,ailing in(' he igl,t of the Putler rlullr'inc arc, the no.. - se'rc` r ar]. b;:Ilding
('irectiv to tl,t, east �)f thc' I't:t!er sit(-, the preserver Putle•r P - red 1, sere as a
�r'i line' lt3'� r�;';roi)crl of the I .'rein strc,.-t.;c,jjw.
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes -September 26, 1989
Page Two
Recommendations included; continuing, windows along the Butler Building's east facade, turning
the Butler Building's shallow setback from liability into asset by creating pocket parks on either
side of the building. locating the dock on the east side of the Butler Builaing and screening it in a
matter similar to the new building immediately to the east, demolition of the stable portion of
the Rutler to facilitate the building configuration specified in the Research Part: Master Plan for
the site, installing new windows throughout which replicate existing sash and muntin dimensions,
restoring the arched entrance on the west end of the north facade, glazing both the first floor
arches, recessing the first floor central entrance and connecting via a glass element a new wing
set perpendicular to the existing Ezutler Euilding.
Discussion ensued. Commissioners commented on the building's assets, including: a) its
adaptability for office or research use given its open floor plan and original structure design to
accornmodatc heavy loads. bits apparently good structural condition. its similarity in materials,
height and detailing -with the nex Pesearch Park: Buildine directly to the east. c) its continuing
the trend of intcf:rating historic built fabric into the Pesearch Park. (the renovation of the
existing warehnuse structure in I'.e-earch Park: settinp_ this trend" . c) cost io realize the
compromise plan proposed by the FPUPLE: would likely be eauivalent to or less ih,�in rnnstruction
of an entirely nee: building of the same size and configuration, and 0 its affordinv itri opportunity
to sir t.rltaneously further economic development and reasonably preserve buildinv. ',ipmficani to
the development of Evanston. Vr. Heinde! further added that it is irroQ-tant to artif:id.ite the
tipper and lover limits of this preservation effort, i.e., hoer much of the building nee-ds to be
preserved anc' how should it be preserver{.
Mr. Gallowav thf,n asked for comments from the audience. Richard Lehner. President.
Preservation LeaysJe of Evanston, stated on behalf of the Board of Dire,:v)rs that the
Preservation League of Evanston is strongly in favor of preserving the cutler Puilditip. that it
represented an imocrtant piece of Evanston history and that it is a handscrrme building that could
be an asset to the park. He Questioned kvhy demolition trust take place no-.,, and stated that the
building should not be c'estroyec' without sound economic and physical reasons % by it cannot be
integrated into the Park.
Al the request of the Chairman. Staff then summarized the roles cf ,rie Cit% of Evanston,
TOPCOPP. Rese_�rct� Park. Inc.. and the Charles Shaw Company o one �••thtr.
hi�."t:ssi �r rt cri to deticlop, Je a timeline of Commission action o`.r` -ts nir}ety day rcyie�ti
p•�rioc'. �'rs. Po -,or moved that per discussion. E=Pk7 and E'E_F rf : - =entatJyes detielop a
presentation illustrating the r orrpromise solution for preserving t}." :"_tler Duilclno. that
informal meetings to held with representatives from Pesearch Parma. Inc.. Ll:arr, a r•.c other
TOPCOPP rf:prese.-iatiyes. tha; t the next FPC rntevtine feec'hacJ .rese -^et•.^cs be
presented and th,t on the l];isJ. SllC}l feechark a rpnnn1l?1;(-)!, ri• �-v The
motion was unanimously approved. rs. Porten alto Z1.1r7 e5tr•d t~,.f eith
,.O(th'.;f°s1f'rn ! n!'.-'cite i'rr.<Jr„-; rr,old Ye C��er. ,tle• l't'c � 'llrtt'e': _ _. .. � ".. flr'�:t
Presertaticrr, m14Ctl'.7 hr re5ch,_•c'ulec frc r 0 r- 10 h Cr i r'r to
al!OV+ 'Uff7(7 Jeri. t '.! to carry cui the artMtics stippested nv the abc... -_t:on. motion to
accept the Chairrrar's recornmenrE!tion v.-is unanimously approved.
The rrlet-7 %eas at
STAFF:
,�_�
2�)5, ss
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
DRAFT NOT APPROVED
Regular Meeting
Monday, October 30. 1989
8:00 P.M. Poom 2401
CIVIC CENTER
1'rMRER5 PPESEN'T: Hat Davis. David Galloway. Solomon Hirsh. Phyllis Horton. Anne
McGuire. '-'ary %IcV illiams. Doug �Iohn=e. Carol CtlalkinbUsh,
'.tarilee PoberF. Dan Tarlocl: and Stephen Y s
![ENIPEP APSE,NT: None
STAFF: G%ven Sommers pant
PRESIDING: David Gallo%vay. Chairman
ASSOCIATES PPESE,NT: Ann Earle
OTHERS PPF5ENT: Tim Clarr:e. Helen Squires. Richard Lehner
The Chairman opened the meeting by welcoming guests.
CORRESPONDENCE
Correspondence regarding federal funding for historic preservatic- -as reviewed without
comment.
The minutes of the September 27. 1989 Zoning Commission '.'eeting -- a memo regarcing the
_onin£ Cornwission meeting schedule were reviewed withoait comment.
Corresporwo:Ir ir,,' Pence F;r.,;i-ane. Fkoard. Fam!lti Cotrnselinp ectiesting _ ansion
l �n['rl,tr'I Cr°DES."'!T:, r ! j:• .C.Fl `t i''t. .. '� retlf'we(e . The t ! __-ecUesteC t the
1-`•'c?ill�ktli�i! �:!` r''tj.',' r"ett ark -ret)are a reccr-menration E`,ar`ston La--:r^ark
eligibrlit� of I 1 ? , i t', reh. Street for the nekt EPC rneetinp.
MINUTES
The rnimite.•s of unanimol:sk agpro�ee u!th --- f �Nowing Corrections:
page i. ho,10irne of third parat:raoll. correct spelling of "F''EP5C1 \" "` -t: ane page final
sentorwo...-hani e "to"
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - October 30. 1089
• Page two
OLD BUSINESS
DEMOLITION OF BUTLER BUILDING, 1024 EMERSON' STREET - UPDATE
The Chair stated that for the benefit of Commissioners not present at the last EPC meeting, Mr.
Yas. ",'r. Lehner. and he will now present, in slide and graphic form, flow the Butler Building can
be integrated into the Research Park. Mr. Lehner, President, Preservation League of Evanston,
then summarized the significance of the Flenry butler Building. ,Mfrs. ItcV, illiams followed with a
summary of Preservation Commission and Preservation League involvement in this project since
1987. .Mir. Yas shoved slides illustrating how the Butler Building complements the new Research
Park Building at 1890 .':laple. located immediately vast of the Butler Building. He followed with
elevation, perspective. and site plan drawings shov.'ing hov, the building could be adaptively
reused in a v.-ay which• met all ',.:aster Plan guidelines except setback. This !Zck of _ctback, could
bo turned into an asset, howeyer, by creating pocket parks on either si: e of the building.
Creating pocket parl-;s are a goal of the Mister Plan. He conc_lucud b% : ;n)Ir rizing cost
estinw.,ies for six rievelopmCrlt scenarios. each of '.which found the nrnnose� EPC:/PLE
"compromise" Butler Folding plan to he less than or equal to the cost of leveloping a new
building for the site. He further stated that the Butler Building sappears to bt° ':.el! suited to the
s?rl)e type of incubator space being developed in the renovt3ted 19G" %varr'hc)tjs" b ;ilr_'irlg, located
laity -corner to the %Vest of the Butler BuildinF. Although the dcvelope-r f'!13 ti:rs ,warehouse
lht.l'Iding »ill satisfy the market need for such loft incubator space. '.'r. `r'.,s ar Ued that the
Butler Pudding's 16.000 square of a(.'ditional loft incubator space) ��ulcf prut�u i. t)e comfortably
be accommodate(' in the overaf! Research Purl~, given its projected' 1.14 mif?ir scuarc feet of
research space. He further added that even in the short life of tht• Parr:, near -:et crnditions have
changed from those originally projected by the developer and that the opportunity to use the
Butler f',uilding as proposed may very well arise. Given this opportunity, anci t7e f act that file
site is not immediately needed for construction. lie questioned why the 131111er Building 5110ulld be
demolished at this time.
Discussion ensued. ''r. Lehner stated that the Developer has raised the objection that the flutter
Puilding is not inc!uded in the Vaster Plan for the Research Park. He rf'rnincec the Conimision
that as soon as the revised .Mlaster Plan was unveiled. a Research Par,: des. -on charette was
sponsored by Design Evanston in 1987. One of the conclusions of the c.:rt-ttt '.;as thait the lzutlt'r
#wilding s?lokjld be preserved. Shaw C-OMPOW. rep(`esr11tatr1.r1, wart r.r "er.t ::t the [',esign
Evanston charette. iii response to a question Its. Squires stater_' 0- t trt' urr,_:r.a! Rese::rch Park
Vaster Plan did not incluc'e reha'�ilitation of thr ISG`' ;';irehokls_. t`., t ;r,_ '.karehouse was
included in the 1 9S7 revision of the M':aster Plan. and that in accornp-c • tr.p ion '.was made in
the contrac.tural agreement xith TOPCORP to,'nable the %vairchotlsC
fr.. resrjrins,_ to , erl srinr frorr '. -. Vr-&.,ire as tc) wh:thall ; ' . R_ . t. c_.a rant
C
C'Iftere 7r-.r-`:Itvc:,s ..1P prof ahI lit' e;1 p k)' vc for tlio 7_ _..:�. '.5.
1lrCulre f,_]rrher c, -,erIe cC wIIC rliCr flit' reha Spa(7e of tt_' put!_r �,,. -'..: .._,.lr ror as
rnuch as th• space in the nc-w a(lic itlon, Vr. )'as responded that the Sha';.. _ _ o "` t~int. b€It
that the rehabLec' po-tion of the Putter Euilding consritutes only' I to 21, ^,et renta~:e area
of the Posearch Par' It is probabl% ,�ithin the marpin profit t'rr nr', at -st, a
sm:0 sacrifice. The Putter reha'.,,her space s`)ejule+ rent for the sar-it, or rate,
than the .arehctk se space. lie fi:rthl r State(' that the r YnCrlf'.t'
-10r'rti01) ,`ok-f1d �)C f "�1c'rlt'd �tlt' C`1lnt11711o115 fI(Ior F�lai"s, t'S, `[illlr:'E ";F'rl'" tr t}7e :..�lllon
qF )eec I'e' loi,,- ,Tories :ri t ,:js'r)1. �. Lis rPSr)jnf f i' ti: :t t! ;:tl: lrt `
four
f 1('nr
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - October 30, 1089
Page three
The Chair then summarized events which have transpired since the last EPC meeting. EPC/PLE
representatives met with representatives of TOPCOR.P, the Research Park Inc. Hoard and with
representatives of the Charles H. Shaw Company. TOPCORP/RPI representatives were
impressed with the technical depth of the solution. Shaw Company representatives cited the
building's shallov setback, its not being included in the present Vaster Plan, and market
feasibility as objections to the proposal.
The Shaw Company reiterated its 1987 proposal to incorporate portions of the Butler building;
into a monument to be located near the building site. Discussion then turned to the course of
action the Commission should pursue henceforth. The Chair recommended that tite
Commission/PLE deliver its presentation at the November 6 meetiri: of the Planning and
Development Committee and also at a special Preservation Coin mi<s:on meeting. tentatively
scheduled for November 14. Discussion ensued. Mrs. Horton ace that more than one
presentation is needed to enable as many people was possible, es2e_:j;lly aldermen, to be
informed of the merits of thu adaptive reuse for the FLItler Building. C-, ~-rrnissioners felt these
two tirnes appropriate. riven the fast approaching; City Council eonsid_r_:i:n. of the contract to
dernolish the Futler Buildirv. The demolition contract pall be consic rec -t the `:ovember 20th
; &MI /City Council meeting:. Discussion then ensued on cor, r ;. opinion re):arding
preservation/adaptive reuse of the Butler Building. ;1 motion to pur>t.-` a;l feasible sand prudent
alt_,rnatives to demolition of the Butler Puilding; was unanimous aporoviid. The Commission
resolved to request scheduling; the EPC/PLF presentation on the \ntier,i�er 6th Planning and
Development Committee agenda. to hold a special Commission meetirF cm November 14 and to
send an invitation to all alderrn,�n for both events.
hiscussion of puhlicity for the two meetings ensues!. It -vas resolver ,`?at a special issue of
Evanston Preservation \'ew s. focusing on the Futler !wilding, %vould he produced. Mr. Lehner
rectuested that the special issue he also sent to Preservation League Of ivanston members. A
motion to present the EPC/PLE proposal at the November 6 P&D meet:r,, hold a special EPC
meeting; on the 14th, invite aldermen and the public to both of the al ova, ar,r' to request ,a special
presentation at City Council on November 26th, %vas unanimously appro.,°.c
Discussion ensuecr as to the specific requests the EPC/PLE woulr✓ :~ to t~ity Council. A
motion to ask the City Council to withdraw the demolition permit. no, t; ,,jpro%e the demolition
centr:t-t, and �,nrrn'1ra� t�-c C-it'. Ccw-cil to .vorL, :':th the �e':° �� -`,e %-ear re-.-aininF
before the huilding crust he demolished by contract, to incorporate t F.3'r ;PLE proposal into
the i, esearch P rf. Master Plan. was unanimorisl� appro�cd.
On behalf of the Preservation League of Evanston, f:ichard Lehner. P- s.dent. stated that the
Leagues is still strongly comrrittccl to t ,.e preservation of the Butler I;t:. r as proposes. that it
,,visher to cn:tii, to tit, ir, the preservation effort. zanc t"at is �--illing; to orovide
CJl ttn r?: t: *' loilr, the Chair deferrer` consideration of ."F oaFenca itz�"-s to a
later I Pe' n c t;nx
The rneptin$� .aa5 .:c'jUurrer' at 10:30 P.'.'.
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Thursday, - November 16, 1989
8:00 P.,St, Room 2404
CIVIC CENTEP
MEMBERS PRESENT: Hal Davis. David Galloway. Solomon Hirsh, Phyllis Horton, Mary
:,161'illiams, Douglas ,Mohnke, Carol Qualkinbush. Marilee Roberg,
Stephen Yas
MEIMPEPS APSENT: Anne VcGuire. Dan Tarlor_k
STAFF: Gwen Sommers Yant
PPESIDING OFFICIAL: David Galloway. Chair
ASSOCIATES PPESENT: Anne Earle
OTHERS PRESENT: fair Torbenson, Ann Duma. Carol Lems-Etiuorkin, 1lichael Inlay,
Jean E_sch. Nancy Baker. Niartha Tuzson and others.
The Chair ooene(' the meeting by lveleoming guests. Fie then summarize-c' the purpose of the
meeting: to give an opportunity for public review and comment on the- reuse of the
Putler Building. located at 1024 Emerson Street in the Pesearch Park. 1'r °:tr::ec' that ii> ulciition
to the puhiic. aldermen, the Charles Shaw Company and the Pesearch P.,rE Inc. Foarc had been
invited to the meeting. He stated that the Preservation Commission ',r,s 'voted to rec;uest the
City Council to a) rescinc' the demolition permit for the Butler Euikiir�,. h) to not wprove the
demolition contract, and c' To v:ori< with the developer to amend the P scr;rrtl Par'-,, muster plan
and development contract to allow the Ftiiiler fluildtng to be adaptiLe!', rr ,«d in thc• Pirk. He
then proceedec' to sumr-ar:._e t) the Preservation airr Preservation League's
involvement j,-ith the, huilr;nk over the fast two years. 1;) Shall C•.)L>robiections to the
E:P('!PLF C0rnDr,)r1!iSe p131"' nr�serv(' t1't' ar,' ') the ShZ L r' .., _ r{fnr ere['t a
monument to Henr\ Ilutler ,isin�* elements of the ('c'r':�rishc'd f'uticr He the^ thanked
Carol Lens-!"'%'orimm for t`le 1drpe format-)hotos n` 1 21j Emerso, `' r" she pro\I('ed for
tonight's me: t i nn.
Pichard Lehner. Pr;'sirent. Preservation Leaerte of Evanston. 11,e- star-:r his ion's
CO"ItTlItMe7t to �eoirl$, the i1iroueh. their strOr_ Simoort for r,,• D,,,Dmire n!; ", and Alt'
cuesiiorerC Ll."\ t`w Piiiilr'r Ic'Inp has t,? 'mot' torn r'O'.`�'1 nf7L'.. Hc` -.. _ .. <�)r'*r!'.: ink' t`c
5iV111t1i'an t );' 1`t';1'-\ 1"li'." t!lr• tl;!tler !1111 j(41 r)p.
Brest r\;}jiOn i Ot"n lSslOn a7c,t"rt Stelen ) 3s then r-\IeLI't�(1 5!Ic4e4 5t';tfrl!' S,It' ?nClTluns
and the' 1=PC.'PLF i OMpro—ise plan. He concludes .ith a summa-. �-,st estir'=i:'s v hich
indwiite tslut 2e!Dtl%C reel Se Can he f 3rrie(l out for less tf',an, or e'ci,a :`,e cost o;-t!iIdin; a
fvLk hud(linv on t1,t' site'. ',' . '1'iallov.av than sure—iri7-c' a letter frcr P3rlt, ;'lc. Eloard
t�harrr»aI1 ��• I1f13"' l)'.anfelct. Mating 0,..o Four-"s Inter':I n to honor ;rr.•.' ` ;r
C t7mnanv to -le !r all land ne Pa-k In a ti"licl%' f35111•'rl. Vr. Cal Iov ;1 :f'-'' `':5 5U rr'' .it tshe
c,lnt,'nt of `"t, lottor. 4'-It.t,.. .'-fit wily t',ree of t;)f` ;!, %'01 ha\e
It', t,,e PLF. cor :r-,'• Itir' �)Ia 1't' fCef_•r J . P F. POar;
-.�•uS,•ISe'C� Of fni:r[, .�t,t..., .; 15
E% anston Preservation Commission
�,+inutes - November 16, 1989
Page Two
The Chair then solicited comments from the public. Ann Deiner stated her support for the
preservation of the Butter Building and asked for clarification on the function of the central court
yard behind the Butler [wilding. iklartha DuJon questioned whether construction of an addition to
the Butler Building would cost more than completely building anew; Mr. Yas responded "no". Carol
Lems-Dworkin cuestioned why the demolition must proceed so soon and what kind of space the
Puller Building could be used for. In response to the former question, Mr. Galloway responded that
the City wishes to minimize its liability and in response to the second question he responded that
the building could be reused for laboratory and other types of office uses. Vs. Lems-Dworkin
concluded by stating that demolishing the Butler Building and erecting a plaque is an insult. Frank
Lacoono queried how the Park is funded; Mr. Galloway referred hire to the City Vanager's office.
P•.'r. Galloway then thanked the audience for their comments and attention.
The Chair caller` for Commission comment. Nlrs. Horton stated that not enaugh credence had been
given to the Compromise Plan from the City Council and that a stronger preservation ordinance
needs to be enacted. Vrs.:VcV'illiams concurred.
!'r. Galloway stated that the Commission would now proceed with the remainder of its agenda.
At1NUTES
The minutes of September 26, 1989 were unanimously approved with the following corrections: that
page one, paragraph two, sentence two. be corrected to read "...a prominent black businessman...";
that the spelling of Anne VcGuire's name be corrected under "Vembers Present": David Galloway,
Chair. be listed as the "Presiding Official": that page one, paragraph one be corrected to read
"...by stating that demolition...": and that page two, paragraph two. sentence one. be corrected to
read. "Commissioners commented...".
The minutes of October 30. 1989 were Unanimously approved with the follov.ing corrections. that
the spelling of :Anne VcGuire's name be corrected under "'embers Presi,nt": and that David
Gallowav, Chairman, be listed as the "Presiding Official".
CORRESPONDENCE
All correspondence was reviewed without comment.
NEW BUSINESS
APPOI�\'T`•'F°'T OF `:0VlN-AT1,:C CONIVITTEE
The Chair appointed Phvllis Norton. Vary '.'c\[ illiams and Solomon Hirsh to bring a
recommendation to the December FPC meeting regarding a proposed chain -,an and vice-chairman
for I c110.
AMNOLA'CEVENTS
The (hair :.nno-jnc!�c' that the ,administration and Public \Corks Comm,t.,�-,. anc City � ould
he considering the e'er--olition contract to the F'utler Puilding on Vo\e—ber 4;th. F-t urger! III
Commission me --hers to call their alcrermen regarding the issue and attend thf- meeting.
The ri,t-ctine..'•:;s artoiirner' at S-4r, P.','.
r-TAF'F: Utti't%_ ., >i3rL1-e t7U/t7
If
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Special 11.4eeting
Monday, December 4. 1989
7:15 P.M. Room 3900
CIVIC CENTEP
1+E1tE�ERS PR ESE`'.T: Hal Davis, navid Gallowav, Mary McWilliams, Douglas !.'ohnke,
Carol Oualkinbush. Stephen Yas
N'rVREf S ASSENT: Solomon Hirsh, PhvIlis Horton. Anne "cCuire, 1'arilee Roberg, flan
Ta rlock
STAFF: Gwen Sommers Want
PRl SI> ING OFFICIAL- Davic' Gallo+,:ay. Chair
ASSOCIATES: Anne Earle
OTHERS PPESE,'T: Pichard Lehner
PEPMIT REVIEkl - 935 ,VAPLE AVE,,'-,'U=
Staff reviewee plans for the complete removal of one first floor -.:indow fV indo,.%• A) and the
shortening of another fly, indow R! on the north facade of 935 '.'agile. The latter opening is
proposed to be filled by a casement v.'inc+ow.
PisrilScion rrlcl;nr'. "'. �'nhr't"'.' rerrrr",r�+C'tl''r,r t`,z� tL,E, rtaDh(,.2rd t:i,, - t�,r. r•-,�rf-.n of :t:indow A
be knit into the existing fabric. ''r. Yas recon!rnenced that a be in[tallcc! in
the npening for V im4ov.' F. ti'rs. "c%' tlllamS f',rtller recomnlendec '- i If LO : Jit hL3fi£ w i+jdov,
could not be installed. that a central horizonta; muntin be instal!e, .n the procosed casement
windov, to approximate tie appearance of a douhle hung winc'ov.. statec that the
alterations proDosec' were for a secoi-idar,, facade and that the u!te- bons cic -,nt 5ic'11ficantly
affect ;rrportant 'esltn elements. :A -otlon to ar:t!ro%-c° the Dlans .:_ :,rnro5e, ,-r +-or---unicate
the abo%,, to the Dro ct architect '.,a5 unan!'noij5
�5N f,1
t
MEMBL•RS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF:
PRESIDING OFFICIAL:
ASSOCIATES PRESENT:
EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Tuesday,. December 19. 1989
8:00 P.M. Room 2404
CIVIC CENTER
David Galloway, Anne McGuire, Mary McWilliams, Douglas Mohnke,
Carol Qualkinbush, Marilee Roberg, ❑an Tarlock, Stephen Yas
Hal Davis, Solomon Hirsh, Phyllis Horton
Gwen Sommers Yant
David Galloway, Chair
Anne Earle
OTHERS PRESENT: Ethan Spooner, (1144 &lichigan); Sam Mencoff, Scott Hargadon
(1304 Forest); David Rubin (Skokie Historical Society); Richard
Lehner (Preservation League of Evanston); Renee Finucane (1114
Church Street)
The Chair opened the meeting by welcoming all guests present.
CORRESPONDENCE
All correspondence was reviewed without comment.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
REVIEW AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE
Mr. Michael Kelly. architect, presented plans to construct a handicapped ramp for Saint Nicholas
Church, 806 Ridge Avenue. The proposed ramp will be an extension of the existing entrance at
the east portal of the south facade. The ramp is to be constructed of concrete with a steel
railing to match the existing railing.
Discussion ensued. %Is. McGuire recommended that Mr. Kelly check: to make sure that the ramp's
handrail and slope meet the Illinois Accessibility Code. Mr. Yas suggested that the handrail
terminate in a scroll pattern to match the existing rail terminus. Review• and Technical
Assistance Committee member Steven Yas reported the Committee's recommendation that the
design as presented be approved, with the exception that the architect consider altering the
handrail terminus pattern and that he check with the Illinois Accessibility Code as Ms. McGuire
suggested. The Committee found the design unobtrusive in that much of the ramp will be
screened with a berm and landscaping. Mr. Yas added that the design respects existing
architectural features such as the stone stringcourse. A motion to accept the recommendation of
the Review and Technical Assistance Committee was unanimously approved. Mr. Calloway
thanked ,Mr. Kelly but cautioned that if substantial changes needed to be mace to the design to
meet code he would need to come back to the Commission for final approval.
Evanston Preservation Commission
(Minutes - December 18. 1989
Page Two
Ethan Spooner, architect, then reviewed a proposal for the addition of a kitchen. breezeway, and
garage to 1144 Michigan Avenue. Mr. Galloway explained that the project required three zoning
variations. Final design review by the Preservation Commission will be conducted at a later
date. The Commission tonight is being asked to support the three zoning variations. The zoning
variations sought are for side yard, height of garage, and rear yard. Review and Technical
Assistance Committee member Yas reported that the Committee reviewed the design. that it
supports the design in concept. that it recommends supporting the three zoning variations to
realize the concept, and that it recommends that the final design scheme be brought to the
Commission at a later date. A motion to accept the recommendation of the Review and
Technical Assistance was unanimously approved. The Chair directed staff to convey the
Commission's support, in writing. to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Scott Hargadon, attorney, then summarized special use and zoning variations necessary to
construct a 40" high front yard wrought iron fence at 1304 Forest. Mr. Hargadon requested the
Commission's support for these special use and zoning variations on behalf of his client, Mr. Sam
,`.'encoff. Mr. Hargadon summarized his client's hardship as pedestrians cutting across the front
yard and the danger to his small children. He explained his client intends to find a salvaged
Victorian fence or erect a new wrought iron fence. He added that the legal alternative to such a
front yard fence is bushes of any height, but qualified that his client would prefer the fence to
rushes. He stated that historical photographs show that front yard fences associated with houses
of this period were not uncommon. Former Commissioner Anne Earle queried whether a
photograph of 1304 Forest had been located that showed a front yard fence. Mr. ,+tencoff replied
that no such photo had been found.
Discussion ensued. The Chair requested that ,Mrs. A1ckVilliams explain the Preservation
Commission's long-standing policy against front yard fences. Mrs. NtcWilliams explained that the
policy stems from the Commission's effort to preserve the historic open character of
streetscapes, including front yards, in Evanston. She added that most fences existing in the
nineteenth century were unlike the proposed fence, being generally low, link fences installed for
the purpose of keeping cows out. She explained that the Commission works very hard to protect
Evanston's historic open character and simultaneously to help landmark owners meet their needs,
citing various approaches to enclosing side and rear yards. She added that given the `•tencoffs'
unusually large side and rear yards. a mutually agreeable solution is quite likely. Mr. Mencoff
voiced his reservation that a side yard fence located at the legal 27' setback limit could be
successfully integrated with the architecture of his home's large front porch.
Ms. McGuire stated that the (review and Technical Assistance Committee discussed the
possibility of reaching a compromise by erecting the front yard wrought iron fence and replacing
several sections of the existing stockade side yard fence with wrcueht iron fencing to afford
greater visibility of the house. Another alternative is to reassess , o,ar.er's landscape plan to
provide a secure play area in the side or rear yard and install a le a-'. •er. lo%v fence in the front
yard to discourage pedestrians from taking a shortcut across the frc)r: .y~d. Vr. Vencoff replied
that several houses on Forest Avenue already have front yard fences.
Mr. Yas stated his appreciation of Mr. Mencoff's concern for his children's safety, having two
children of his own. He suggested. however. the owner would have teen •.rise to have identified
this need at the time of the design and implementation of the landscape plan, a plan which calls
for the paying of much rear and side yard area. He then suggester the following alternatives:
recessing the eastern portion of the sideyard fence behind the front porch and removing any
section of the stockade fence along the south property line that projects te:ond the intersection
of the east and south fences: still c`iscouraginp, pedestrians from cut::7e ::c'rss the front yard by
planting thornv bushes.
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - December 18. 1989
Page Three
;1r. Yas emphasized the unusually large size of the side and rear yards of 1304 Forest and that
many creative design solutions exist to meet Mr. MencofI's needs both to protect his children and
discourage pedestrian nuisances, without the erection of a front yard fence.
Mrs. Earle underscored the large area available in the side and rear yards, ouestioned the ability
of a 40" high wrought iron fence to keep out determined intruders. and finally urged the
Commission not to support the requested use/variations. stating it would set an unfortunate
precedent for which very little need existed.
`1s. Roberg Queried whether %Ir. Mencoff would be amenable to entering into an agreement to
take down the wrought iron fence when his children were older. Air. �Iencoff replied, "yes". Ms.
Oualkinbush further ouestioned owner need, observing that very small children are usually
supervised during play. She recommended against the front yard landscaping approach to contain
children. Depending on the plant materials chosen, it can be ineffectual or even dangerous. She
also underscored the large size of the side and rear yards and suggested that a concentrated play
area. perhaps a play structure. could be helpful in satisfying the children's play and safety
requirements. and for keeping them in an area where they can best be observed from the house.
A motion not to support the 40" high front yard fence for 1304 Forest. but to work with the
owner to help meet his needs was unanimously approved. Mr. Galloway stressed that the
Commission understood Mr. Mencoff's concerns and hoped very much to work with him in the
near future.
0MlNATI�'G COMMITTEE
1Irs. \'cWilliams reported that the Nominating Committee recommends David Galloway for Chair
andMarilee Roberg for Vice -Chair for the 1990 calendar year. A motion to accept the
recommendation of the Nominating Committee was unanimously approved.
The Chair then introduced visitor David Rubin who is a member of a Skokie group seeking to form
a Preservation Commission in that community, he is here tonight to observe the workings of the
Evanston Preservation Commission.
MINUTES
The minutes of November 16. 1939 were unanimously approved with the following corrections: on
page two, paragraph one, correct spelling of "laboratory": correct spelling of "Stephen" Yas in
�tembers Present: use term "Chair" instead of "Chairman" consistently throughout minutes.
The minutes of December 4, 1989 were unanimously approved with the following corrections:
correct the spelling of "Phyllis" Horton in Members Present: correct srel'inv of "affect" on page
one. paragraph two.
OLD BUSINESS
BUTLER FzUILMN'G (1024 EMERSON) - UPDATE
Chairman Calloway summarized events regarding the Butler Builcinsz since the last EPC
meeting: demolition was held over at the November 20 A&P1? meeting: following lengthy citizen
comment at A&PV, and at City Council on December 4. and following lenet`tti Council discussion.
the demolition %vas approved by a rote of 1 I ayes to 6 nays: an atterr:�t to reconsider demolition
was made at tht December IS Cite Council meeting involving ie _:t z(-n comment and
Council discussion but was finally defeated. Mr. Gallokka� states ... Ied all ::ldrrmen
after the final vote to discuss their feeling about the demolition pr�)coss and their
ultimate vote. In general, fie felt that aldermen saw the Preservation. in%olvement
as professional and thorough.
Evanston Preservation Commission
i"jnutes - December 18. 1989
Page Four
Discussion ensued. Commissioners voiced their concern regarding Council perceptions that
historical landmarks are less valuable than architectural landmarks. Others voiced the strong
need to keep in close contact with the aldermen. Richard Lehner. President. Preservation
League of Evanston ("PLE"), thanked the Commission for their efforts. Mr. Galloway thanked
Atr. Lehner. in turn, for the PLE's involvement in the issue. Mr. Galloway also thanked each
Commissioner for his/her contributions during the Butler crisis. M.S. McGuire suggested that the
Preservation Commission urge the City and/or developer to photo document the Butler Building
landmark: thoroughly before it is demolished.
1114 CHLIPCH STPEET: CONSIDERATIO`' FOR EVANSTON LA,NDVAPK DESIGNATION
The Chair introduced Penee Finucane. Board Vember. Family Counseling Services. and stated
that Family Counseling Services is the owner of 1114 Church Street. The Board supports
landmark: designation for the building. 1'r. Gallowav then asked Evaluation Committee Chairman
:Mary `.+cWilliams to summarize the Committee's findings.
Mrs. Vc\Villiams summarized, for new members, the Evaluation Committee Evanston landmark
review process. Evaluation Committee member Earle then summarized the landmark research
process. Mrs. McWilliams reported the Evaluation Committee recommendation that the building_
be nominated under criterion on A-7.
Discussion ensued. Vs. %1cGuire queried why this building had not been identified as a potential
Evanston landmark before. kirs. Earle explained that the area in which the building is located
was surveyed early in the Commission history, a time in which the Commission was not well
schooled in vernacular architecture. A motion to recommend I 1 It, Church Street as a landmark
under criterion on A-7 to City Council was unanimously approved.
1trs. McWilliams also reported that 1007 Judson ,-Avenue had been nominated by its owners for
Evanston landmark designation. The Evaluation Committee also revie-.:ed this application, found
it lacking in information, and has requested further information from the owners, The
Evaluation Committee will complete its review of 1007 Hudson and bring a recommendation to
the full Preservation Commission when it receives the requested information from the owners.
NEW BUSINF-55
EPC/PLE HCUSENVALK
Richard Lehner. President. PLE. queried whether the Preservation Commission is interested in
cosponsoring an exterior housewalk with the PLE sometime in Vay. 'Discussion ensued. A motion
to form a joint EPC/PLE subcommittee to stuc'v sponsoring the and to report at the
next EPC: meeting, was unanimously approvers. The Chairman still r�:int t%vo Commissioners to
this subcommittee. Vr. Lehner stated that PLF subcommittee mer-!i--s xill be Julie Thomas and
Tim LeVaughn.
CONSIDERATION' OF AMENDING RULES AND PROCEDUPES TC 11CREASE NUMBEP OF
ASSOCIATE `IEVBEPS
11r. Gallowav explained that because of the Commission's increas,,^sly complex and diverse
workload more Associates are needed to help work on projects. especially the Review and
Technical AssistanCO Committee projects. N'r. Galloway further rF-�:rnmended that associates
he autorraticalty &onpeo if they do not participate in Commissior �-- 'Pets during they course of
one vrar.
Evanston Preservation Commission
1,1inutes - December 18. 1989
Page Five
Discussion ensued. Commissioners suggested that the number of Associates be increased to
twenty: EPC the Rules and Procedures presently limit the number of Associates to eleven. A
motion to direct staff to write up a resolution incorporating the above suggestions for review at
the next Preservation Commission meeting was unanimously approved.
STAFF REPORT
Staff reported:
on this year's National Trust for Historic Preservation Conference citing, in particular.
speakers' emphasis that good rules and procedures are essential to establish and to
follow, especially for Commissions with strong preservation ordinances,
that she and Vr. Yas were panelists at this year's American Planning Association
Midwest Regional Conference in Chicago,
that she has recently been a speaker on preservation matters in the communities of
Wilmette. Hinsdale, and Glencoe.
that she acquired three new publications for the Preservation Commission at the
,National Trust Conference.
that the Zoning Committee has changed from a minutes format to a transcript format.
(Given the high cost of mailing these transcripts, only Commissioners who request
being sent the transcripts of Zoning Commission meetings shall receive them) and
the Rhode Island State Historic Preservation Coordinator recently called on staff
seeking ideas from Evanston's preservation experience to apply to Rhode Island.
During the visit he made the Commission a gift of the Phole Island Historic Survey
publication, a useful model for a future Evanston Preservation Commission publication
of the same type.
The following have recently received staff approval:
1 1 17 Asbury - Skylights (not visible from street)
2127 Maple - Peroof (no change in materials)
815 Erummel - Peroof (no change in materials)
1 102 Elmwood - Interior remodeling (not visible from the street)
913 N+onroe - Kitchen remodeling (not visible from the street'
935 Maple - Peroof (no change in materials)
1 100 PidFe - Peroof (no change in materials)
1236 Forest - Pear porch (not visible from the street)
724 Clinton - Peroof (no change in materials)
607 Lake - V ash tub in basement (no preservation impact)
2603 Colfax - Enclose rear porch (not visible from the street)
1 302 Hinman _ Peroof (no change in materials)
1 133 Hinman - Peroof (no change in materials)
1817 Church - Reroof (no change in materials)
1603 Ridge - Electrical upgrade (no preservation impact)
Staff also reporter' that the consultants for School District 65 met ire#orr, a11-. -.kith �'r. C,allowav
arid staff. A summary of the consu'tants' feasibility study will be serf to the R,strict 65 Poard in
December and the cornplete study will be made public in January or F t•truar-, . The preservation
issues contained in the report (a) include whether to retain or se!! the ! 314 Ridge mansion
(administrative headquarters). (b) rebuilding of the clock at Nichols School. and (c) huilding a
r(-)nnc-rtin7 nassaee with IN, kindergarten at ( akion School.
- f .•,.:: fir- .: "-s. �- .._� ,__t+`r.....•;,� _ _ r _ :� t y. _:., - -
Evanston Preservation Commission
Minutes - December 18. 1989
Page Six
OTHER
Mr. Galloway thanked outgoing Commission members for their faithful service and presented
them with appreciation plaques.
The Chair recommended that outgoing Commissioners Itary McWilliams and Phyllis Horton be
nominated as Associate members of the Preservation Commission. A motion to approve Mary
McWilliams and Phvllis Norton as Associate members of the Evanston Preservation Commission
was unanimously and enthusiastically approved.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 P.M.
STAFF: 1 '
l
DATE:
GSY/mec
25Y63/68