HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 1st 2016 MinutesAPPROVED
Preservation Ordinance Review Subcommittee Page 1 of 4
MEETING MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE
REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE EVANSTON PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Thursday, December 1, 2016
8:00 A.M.
Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Room 2404
Members Present: Robert Bady, Tim Schmitt, Karl Vogel and Diane Williams
Members Absent: Sally Riessen Hunt and Ken Itle.
Staff Present: Carlos D. Ruiz Preservation Coordinator
Others Present: Julie Hacker and Stuart Cohen
Presiding Member: Diane Williams, Chair
1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM
With a quorum present Chair Williams called the meeting to order at 8:20 a.m.
2. APPROVAL MINUTES November 3, 2016
Commissioner Bady made a motion to approve the November 3, 2016 minutes,
seconded by Commissioner Schmitt. The motion passed unanimously.
3. OLD BUSINESS
A. Historic Preservation Ordinance Review
1. Recap of Section 2‐8‐9. ‐ STANDARDS FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS
FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS (A) Standards for review of
alteration.
4. NEW BUSINESS
A. Historic Preservation Ordinance Review
1. Review of Section 2‐8‐9. ‐ STANDARDS FOR REVIEW OF
APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS
APPROVED
Preservation Ordinance Review Subcommittee Page 2 of 4
(B), (C), (D) and Section 2‐8‐10. ‐ CERTIFICATE OF ECONOMIC
HARDSHIP.
Subcommittee members discussed Section 2-8-9 (B) and made the following text
amendments (new text) and deletions (deleted text):
2‐8‐9. ‐ STANDARDS FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES
OF APPROPRIATENESS.
(B) Standards for review of construction. In considering an application for a certificate
of appropriateness for new construction and additions to existing buildings,
the Commission shall consider only the following general standards, specific
design guidelines, if any, accompanying the ordinance designating the landmark
or district, and the standards included in Subsection (E) of this Section:
1. Height. Height shall be visually compatible with properties, structures, sites, public
ways, objects and places to which it is visibly visually related. public ways?
(check language)
2. Proportion of front facades. The relationship of the width to the height of the
facades front elevation shall be visually compatible with properties, structures,
sites, public ways, objects and places to which it is visually related.
4. Rhythm of solids to voids in front facades. The relationship of solids to voids in the
front facades of a structure shall be visually compatible with properties, structures,
sites, public ways, objects and places to which it is visually related.
8. Roof shapes and roof mounted equipment. The roof shape of a structure
including any roof mounted equipment shall be visually compatible with the
structures to which it is visually related.
9. Walls of continuity. Facades and property and site structures, such as masonry
walls, fences and landscape masses, shall, when it is a characteristic of the area,
form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street, to ensure visual compatibility with
the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects and places to which such
elements are visually related. [IHPA?]
11. Directional expression of facades front elevation. A structure shall be visually
compatible with the properties, structures, sites, public ways, objects and places to
which it is visually related in its directional character, whether this be vertical
character, horizontal character or nondirectional character.
12, Original qualities. For additions to existing structures, the distinguishing original
qualities or character of a property, structure, site or object and its environment
should be preserved shall not be destroyed. The alteration of any historic or
material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible.
14. Contemporary Innovative design. Contemporary Innovative design for additions
to existing properties shall not be discouraged when such additions do not destroy
significant historic, cultural or architectural material, and such design is compatible
APPROVED
Preservation Ordinance Review Subcommittee Page 3 of 4
with the size, scale, color, material and character of the property, neighborhood or
environment. Innovative new construction shall comply with the standards in
this section 1- xx
5. PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment.
6. DISCUSSION
The following discussion points were made during the review of Section 2-8-9 (B) by
paragraph (#)
(1) Change ‘visibly’ to ‘visually.’
(2) Commissioner. Hacker clarified that ‘additions’ will be included into standards of
‘construction.’
(3) Discussion about ‘public ways’ in relation to windows and doors. It was decided to
leave the text as is.
Diane Williams: for clarity the standards for review apply to additions and to the
construction of free standing structures
Make definition of construction more specific including additions.
Anything that is a structure would be under construction.
(4) Add text public way?
(5) Leave underlined text
(6) No change
(7) Leave underlined text
(8) Discussion on adding language that includes solar panels, environmental energy
efficiency, and new technologies. Include structures or equipment added to a roof. The
added text is generic and inclusive.
(9) The term “Walls of continuity” needs to be clarified. Chair Williams will consult with
the IHPA. The language should supplement and be in context with Zoning.
Commissioner Schmitt said the term “Walls of Continuity” relates to setbacks of
buildings.
APPROVED
Preservation Ordinance Review Subcommittee Page 4 of 4
(10) No change.
(11) The standard refers to the vertical or horizontal emphasis of facades.
(12) The text should be for additions.
(13) No change.
(14) Anything done today is ‘contemporary.’ Why the term is needed and what is its
purpose. Is it needed at all? The term ‘innovative’ covers many things. The term
‘Contemporary’ has been substituted with the term ‘Innovative.’
7. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Schmitt made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 am, seconded by
Commissioner Bady. Motion passed unanimously.
The next Subcommittee meeting is January 5, 2017.
Respectfully Submitted,
Carlos D. Ruiz
Preservation Coordinator, Community Development Department