City of Highland Park Historic Preservation Commission met April 14.
Here are the minutes provided by the commission:
CALL TO ORDER
At 6:31 p.m., Chairperson Levy called the meeting to order. He and Staff read meeting procedures. This Commission meeting takes place virtually through audioconference or video call and at City Hall for some Staff. The public is invited to attend virtually via Zoom. Staff was asked to call the roll.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Chairperson Levy; Commissioners Greenbaum, Pines, & Weeder
Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Pierce, Salamasick & Sogin
Councilmember Present: Blumberg
Student Council Absent: Mendelson & Zhang
Staff declared that a quorum was present.
Staff Present: Coleman
Others Present: Sharon Osterby, Water Resources Professional/Lake County Stormwater Management Commission
Cal Bernstein, Attorney/Samuels & Bernstein
Gale Cerabona/Minute Taker
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Pines moved to approve the regular meeting minutes of March 10, 2022. Commissioner Greenbaum seconded the motion.
On a roll call vote
Voting Yea Chairperson Levy; Commissioners Greenbaum, Pines, & Weeder
Voting Nay: None
Chairperson Levy declared that the motion passed unanimously.
SCHEDULED BUSINESS
1. 1313 Division Street – Determination of Historic Significance
Planner Coleman explained the proposal:
• Built c. 1959 with a second-story addition in 2011
• Modern style
• Architect is unknown
• Project location was shown
• Aerial photos and elevations (including a shed) were illustrated
• History (1959 original building permit)
• Architectural features
• Lake County Stormwater Management Commission
o buyout program for flood-damaged properties
o inundation zone – frequent flooding
• Landmark criteria was displayed
Planner Coleman advised Ms. Sharon Osterby from Lake County Stormwater Management Commission is present this evening.
Chairperson Levy asked if anyone in the audience has questions. No one responded.
Some HPC comments are:
• Commissioner Pines would like background. He asked if this house is occupied. Ms. Osterby said there is no one in the home. They acquired it in 2021 at the pre-flood value. The home is located in the flood plain. The lowest point of the house is 1 ft. underneath the elevation of the flood plain. The owners’ children were ill from poor air quality and mold. The state government conducts historic review. She expounded.
• Commissioner Weeder commented she doesn’t believe this structure meets any criteria
Commissioner Weeder moved that this structure doesn’t meet any criteria. Commissioner Pines seconded the motion.
On a roll call vote
Voting Yea Chairperson Levy; Commissioners Greenbaum, Pines, & Weeder
Voting Nay: None
Chairperson Levy declared that the motion passed unanimously.
2. 1298 Linden Avenue – Determination of Historic Significance
Planner Coleman explained the proposal:
• Contributing structure in 2001 South Central Survey
• Built c. 1924 with a 1960 kitchen remodel
• Colonial Revival style
• Architect is unknown
• Project location
• History – no alterations. H.H. Hammond listed as contractor
• Architectural features
• Elevations were shown
• Landmark criteria was highlighted
Planner Coleman advised that the petitioner is represented by Mr. Cal Bernstein who is present tonight.
Mr. Bernstein shared the property is under contract. The intention is to tear down the house and build a beautiful new home. The front façade is a typical temple-like feature with a portico. This house does not have that. There may have been additions (however there is no evidence to support that).
Chairperson Levy asked if there are any questions.
Some HPC comments are:
• Commissioner Weeder said this is not a symmetrical classical base. There is typically brick and stone – not stucco. It is quirky. This house meets 1, 4, and 6 criteria. It is charming.
• Chairperson Levy concurred. It is difficult to lose a home like this; difficult to note criteria.
• Commissioner Pines said he is happy to discuss criteria. He read criteria 1 and doesn’t believe there is any landmark criteria.
• Commissioner Greenbaum agrees with Commissioner Weeder. It meets criteria 1, 4, and 6. She believes it demonstrates character and value.
Councilmember Blumberg reminded that whether the home meets criteria or not, the HPC must advise if a delay should take place and if there is integrity. There is evidence in some images that the house has an inconsistency of window treatments. There’s a change in rhythm; additions or not. He explained the integrity prong and asked the HPC to consider this.
Mr. Bernstein concurred with Councilmember Blumberg. Some aspects are not original and do not have integrity or design. He noted this was researched. It is not a good example. Charm is not architectural style. It is not consistent with the style. Mr. Bernstein referenced the standards and staff report. There are better examples in the area that are worthy of restoration. The client considered restoring it. There are things (trees, etc.) that prohibit rehabilitation. He doesn’t believe the criteria is met.
More HPC comments:
• Commissioner Weeder referenced criteria 6 which left off innovative.
Chairperson Levy offered options – continue to next meeting, continue deliberating, etc. 31
Additional HPC comments:
• Commissioner Greenbaum stated the back seems inconsistent; however she identified shutters, dormers, and symmetry. It is not mismatched or random. She believes this house has a lot to offer this community.
• Commissioner Pines disagrees – the house has marginal charm.
Councilmember Blumberg suggested making a motion with further discussion on criteria 4 or continue this matter.
Commissioner Weeder moved that this house meets criteria 1, 6, and perhaps 4. Commissioner Greenbaum seconded the motion. Commissioner Weeder amended that the house meets criteria 1 and 6. Commissioner Greenbaum accepted the amendment.
On a roll call vote
Voting Yea Commissioners Greenbaum, Pines, & Weeder
Voting Nay: Chairperson Levy
Chairperson Levy declared that the motion passed 3-1. Commissioner Pines believes he voted incorrectly and may have misunderstood the motion. After some discussion, the motion was rescinded. Councilmember Blumberg further explained.
Mr. Bernstein clarified this is a motion that this meets criteria 1 and 6.
Chairperson Levy suggested this matter be continued so more research can be done on criteria 4, the home & its history. Also, more Commissioners should be at the next HPC meeting.
Commissioner Pines moved that this be continued to the May HPC meeting. Commissioner Weeder seconded the motion.
On a roll call vote
Voting Yea Chairperson Levy; Commissioners Greenbaum, Pines, & Weeder
Voting Nay: None
Chairperson Levy declared that the motion passed unanimously. Planner Coleman advised he would Conduct more research.
At 7:31 p.m. Commissioner Greenbaum advised she must depart for the evening. Chairperson Levy explained, as there would no longer be a quorum, the meeting has to end. Councilmember Blumberg asked that a motion take place.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Greenbaum moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:32 p.m. Commissioner Pines seconded the motion.
On a roll call vote
Voting Yea Chairperson Levy; Commissioners Greenbaum, Pines, & Weeder
Voting Nay: None
Chairperson Levy declared that the motion passed unanimously.
http://highlandparkil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=2690&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up