Historic Preservation Commission

Meeting Agenda CITY OF GENEVA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING LOCATION & HPC INFORMATION TUESDAY, December 17, 2013 MEETING Location: 1. Call to Order Geneva City Hall 2. Roll Call Council Chambers 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes 109 James Street November 19, 2013 Geneva, IL 60134 4. HPC Review of Building Permit Applications Time: A. 124 South Second Street CASE 2012-042 7:00 p.m. Applicant: Nancy Luyten, Owner Application for: Freestanding Signs Commissioners: B. 116 South Street CASE 2012-106 Applicant: Daryl Bean / D. R. Horton Homes Scott Roy, Chairman Christopher Russo / ALA Architects Nanette Andersson Application for: New Residence Al Hiller 5. Secretary’s Report (Staff Update) Zachary Ploppert Geri Schock-Soderberg 6. New Business Kurt Wehrmeister A. From the Commission Carolyn Zinke B. From the Public 7. Adjournment Staff Liaison: Michael A. Lambert Next meeting January 21, 2014 Preservation Planner 630/938.4541 preservation@geneva.il.us The Historic Preservation Commission meeting is audio-recorded and summary minutes are taken by a recording secretary. The City of Geneva complies with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Individuals with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting who require accommodations in order to allow them to observe and or participate in this meeting are required to contact the Planning Division at 630/232.0818 at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting to allow the City of Geneva to make reasonable accommodations for those persons.  HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES 109 James Street - Council Chambers Geneva, Illinois 60134 November 19, 2013, 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order Chairman Roy called the November 19, 2013 meeting of the Geneva Historic Preservation Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll call followed: 2. Roll Call Present HPC: Chairman Roy, Commissioners Andersson, Hiller, Ploppert, Schock- Soderberg, Zinke Staff Present: Preservation Planner Michael Lambert; Community Development Dir. Dick Untch; City Administrator Mary McKittrick Others Present: Mr. Darryl Bean, D.R. Horton, 800 S. Milwaukee, Libertyville, IL; Mr. Maurice McNally, Avondale Custom Homes, P.O. Box 3700, St. Charles, IL; Mr. Clyde Jones, 521 Franklin St., Geneva; Ms. Liz Safanda, 1013 Dunstan Rd., Geneva; Mr. Jim Bishop, 228 S. Fifth St., Geneva; Mr. Dave McFadden, 328 S. Sixth St., Geneva; Mr. Adam Gibbons, 33W777 Hill Road, Geneva; and Mr. Dave Myszka, architect for Avondale Custom Homes; Recording Secretary Celeste Weilandt 3. Approval of the October 15, 2013 Minutes The October 15, 2013 minutes were approved on motion by Commissioner Ploppert, seconded by Commissioner Schock-Soderberg. Motion carried by voice vote of 6-0. 4. HPC Review of Building Permit Applications A. 200 S. Third Street (Case 2013-103); Exterior Sign; Applicant: Dave McFadden/Past Basket - Preservation Planner Lambert noted this request went before the Plan Commission on November 14, 2013, which was in support of the sign request. Currently, two existing signs were approved by the City Council through a variance. The third sign would be located by the new deck area that was proposed. Mr. McFadden stated the need for the third sign was due to the new deck area and for a new tenant, reminding the commissioners of that discussion before the Commission last month. Commissioner Hiller moved to approve the application, as presented, Seconded by Commissioner Ploppert. Roll call: Aye: Andersson, Hiller, Ploppert, Schock-Soderberg, Zinke, Roy Nay: None MOTION PASSED. VOTE: 6-0 B. 526 S. Fourth Street (Case No. 2013-104); Demolition of an Existing Residence; Applicant: City of Geneva - Mr. Lambert reviewed the proposal and explained that the home and property were recently purchased by the City of Geneva with the intent to clear the  Historic Preservation Commission November 19, 2013 site for additional parking. A number of city staff did take a tour of the residence. The home is listed as Dutch Colonial in the 1999 survey and is listed as a contributing structure to the historic district; however, it needed repair and maintenance. Photos of elevations and existing conditions followed. Per Lambert, a single-car garage (erected on the site around 1945 and not identified as contributing to the property) sits on the site but may be slightly off the property, as identified in tax maps and other survey information. The garage has also been utilized for some fire department practice at the site recently. Lambert reported the home was built at some time between May 1923 and June 1930. Discussing the neighborhood context and viewing an aerial photo of the neighborhood, Mr. Lambert explained that the site is not “visually-connected” to the historic neighborhood because the historic housing at the nearby intersection creates a discernible “hard edge” condition and because the subject house is surrounded by a large parking lot to the east and a large vacant lot to the south. Photos of the interior followed with Lambert explaining that while the exterior of the home looked Dutch Colonial, the interior was finished in an Arts and Crafts style. Existing conditions of the basement followed. A summary of facts followed by Lambert, noting that a city parking lot sits adjacent to the site and the subject site was purchased by the City in order to add commuter parking per the Downtown / Station Master Plan. Per Mr. Lambert, the City has proposed publishing two requests for proposals: either relocation of the home or demolition. A redevelopment summary followed noting the estimated cost to rehab the house on-site is approximately $428,000. The estimated land value was approximately $150,000 and for an estimated 2100 sq. foot house in Geneva, he estimated the total value of the property would be $579,000.00. Regarding the garage, Commissioner Hiller believed it may be older, given the drop lap siding and some other elements. He wondered if it may have been moved from another location. Lambert felt it may have been relocated and believed it was older due to the milling that was done on it. Getting a second opinion about the garage history was also suggested. Some commissioners believed it would have been better if the fire department held its exercises after the demolition permit had been discussed and granted. Planner Lambert elaborated that the request for proposals (RFP) would be for a period of 30 days to allow someone to bid on the house and relocate it to another lot; the RFP would not necessarily require that the home be removed from the lot within 30 days. Asked if there was a deadline to get house relocated or when construction would begin on the site, Dir. Untch explained there was no specific schedule set but he envisioned that actual construction would begin some time in the spring, but that there could be some negotiation. Other staff/commissioner comments followed that the house was structurally sound, the poured concrete foundation was very good, it did need some rehab work, and that someone would get a nice home. Also mentioned was the fact that the request had to be looked at from the perspective of the highest and best use. Staff felt that the home’s location, its proximity to the surroundings, and the city’s need for parking in the immediate area, was appropriate to view as either a home to be relocated or demolished if relocation could not be obtained. Those commissioners who toured the residence provided positive comments about the interior, the sound structure of the home, and the fact that there was a market for smaller, charming, homes. Chairman Roy opened up the meeting to public comment. 2  Historic Preservation Commission November 19, 2013 Ms. Liz Safanda, 1013 Dunstan Road, stated this home was her “second home” from ages 8 to 12 years old. Her best friend, who lived there, recently sold the home to the City of Geneva. She clarified that the first floor powder room near the kitchen was present in the early 1950s. She agreed the home was not in good condition. As to the site being “just outside the delineation of the historic district”, she objected to that statement made in the PowerPoint presentation and argued the house was in the historic district. City Administrator Mary McKittrick stated the intent of the City was to put out simultaneously two Request for Proposals (RFP) -- one to advertise proposals for demolition and the other to advertise proposals to relocate the primary structure, starting with a bid of $1.00 and out for 30 days. Should the City receive proposals for both options in response to the RFP, relocation would take precedent. Commissioner Hiller moved to approve the demolition of the property at 526 S. Fourth Street with the condition that the property be posted for relocation and if the sale does not place within 30 days, the City be shall be allowed to demolish the structure. Seconded by Commissioner Schock-Soderberg. Roll call: Aye: Andersson, Hiller, Ploppert, Shock-Soderberg, Zinke, Roy Nay: None MOTION PASSED. VOTE: 6-0. 5. Concept Review A. 212 S. Fifth Street (Case No. 2012-105); Relocation of Carriage Barn, Screened Porch Demolition; Minor Exterior/Site Paving Improvements; Applicant: Avondale Custom Homes - Mr. Lambert reported this site was the former Merritt King property. Historic photos were reviewed, with Lambert noting the carriage barn in one of the photos as being relocated twice to- date. This request would be for a third relocation. Various photos were reviewed, with Lambert pointing out in one photo of the house having a gap between two sections where a bathroom was installed. There is a proposal to complete that closure. For informational purposes, he explained that the brick piers off of the driveway were reported to be constructed in the early 1980s and the brick driveway about 1973, with bricks salvaged from the City of Elgin. Elements of work to be considered under the concept review included the repair of an existing raised patio; the replacement of existing concrete sidewalks with brick paver edging to be replaced with bluestone; the repair of the tongue and groove wood porch deck; and wooden steps to be replaced in kind. Mr. Maurice McNally with Avondale Custom Homes introduced himself and architect Mr. Dave Myszka. Mr. Myszka reviewed photos of the current home and stated that he planned to keep the original home but repair/restore it to better conditions. He planned to subdivide the lot into four additional lots. The cement walkway leading up to the home, the north side cement patio, and the patio to the west would be replaced with bluestone material. The existing garage/barn (with shed on back) would be reoriented to have the garage doors and new driveway exit onto Fifth Street. The existing entry door to the garage would be relocated to the northwest side of the shed. A full foundation, with concrete floor, would be added to the garage First and second floor plans for the existing home and the proposed concept plans were presented, with Mr. Myszka indicating that the exterior of the home would be painted but be left alone with just the reorientation of the garage to a better location. Some interior work would be done. As for the gap between the two sections of the home, Mr. Myszka explained that space would be closed off to allow better matching of the architecture of the house and siding. It would also create a nicer closet for the master bedroom. Once the garage was relocated, Mr. Myszka 3  Historic Preservation Commission November 19, 2013 stated the existing screen porch would be removed. The patio would be restored. Mr. McNally explained that the bricks from the existing driveway would be used somewhere on the site, i.e., as a border for the driveway or somewhere with decorative possibilities. Regarding the gapped space between the two sections of the home, Mr. Myszka confirmed that the gap was on a 45-degree angle and he did not know why it was created that way. A resident, who lived just south of the property, mentioned that the two windows on the left were for an apartment because the former owner, Merritt King, rented the rooms there. He believes the space was added there in order to provide access to the second floor apartment. Per Andersson’s questions, Mr. Myszka stated that some new windows would be added to the existing laundry room area to go along, architecturally, with the house. The kitchen window would be restored to what it was. Commissioner Hiller preferred that the applicants move the barn to the southwest corner; he did not prefer using asphalt for the driveways but liked that the driveway would be broken up -- giving it a more architectural look. While he did not prefer the use of bluestone because it was not period appropriate, Hiller preferred using the left-over street bricks for the front walkway or entranceway. Andersson liked the bluestone material. As a last comment to offer, Hiller suggested that if the applicants were not going to use of the extra elements from the barn/garage (cupola, light) that they should give those items to the Geneva History Center to research to see if they were historic elements from other Geneva buildings. Setbacks were also noted. Per Mr. Myszka, the front steps would be rebuilt with a solid material. Discussing the lots, Dir. Untch confirmed that the corner lot qualified under one of the state’s Plat Act exemptions, meaning that it provided space for another lot that meets the minimum lot area and width requirements of the R-4 District without needing City Council or Plan Commission action. Details followed. He pointed out that the three remaining lots were lots from the original town of Geneva and were buildable. Demolition dust was briefly mentioned. Mr. Jim Bishop 228 S. Fifth Street, stepped forward and stated he lives immediately south of the King House. He spoke about the distance between the King House and his house, which sat five feet from the King’s property line. He confirmed with staff that the rear setback for the principal structure and the accessory structure was five feet. Therefore, he objected to the new location of the garage being relocated to the southwest corner due to the location of his patio, which was about three feet from an existing fence, and would be an imposing story-and-a-half structure next to his patio. Regarding the north side of the house, Mr. Bishop believed the new home planned for the lot would be very close to the existing home. He suggested leaving the garage where it was, turn it around to face south, and bring the driveway around, as it would preserve the house as it looks currently. However, he did support the renovations being proposed to the home and stated the bluestone was appropriate. B. 110 South Street (Case No. 2012-106); New Residence; Applicant: Daryl Bean/ D.R. Horton Homes; Christopher Russ/ALA Architects- Mr. Lambert reported there is no address for the subject vacant lot but it does sit at the corner of Route 31 and South Street. The petitioner was here to present a concept plan. Mr. Daryl Bean, with D.R. Horton and Emerald Homes, stated he purchased the lot and had worked with Planner DeGroot and was seeking input tonight. Proposed was a single-family, Craftsman-style home with a three-car garage. Elevations of the proposed home were reviewed, noting materials would include lap siding, stone, shakes and gables with details. The front porch would be bead boarded to allow for some exterior living space. Mr. Bean stated there was a 4  Historic Preservation Commission November 19, 2013 change to the rear elevation: the fireplace would be brought to the rear exterior wall. He proceeded to point out the surrounding structures and review the site plan. Commissioner comments followed that some of the elements could reflect the current time period; some different roofing could be provided; and reducing the massing would be beneficial due to the adjacent house. Other comments included that too many materials/textures were being used and focusing on just the Craftsman-style or another style would be a positive. However, others liked the variety of materials. Per Mr. Bean, the siding would be a Hardi-plank wood (LP Smart Trim) product. Another suggestion included using a higher quality sound insulation due to the trains passing by. Chairman Roy opened up the meeting to public comments: Mr. Mike Bruno, 522 Fulton Street, asked about the depth of the porch (9 feet). Mr. Lambert also added to the conversation that the lot coverage may have to be looked into if the porch was expanded. It was suggested by Andersson to enlarge the front porch since the train would be in the rear. However, even with the train and nearby parking garage, Mr. Bean stated there was a nice tree line located in the back of the home which provided some privacy. 6. Secretary’s Report (Staff Update) Commissioner Training - IAHPC Roundtable - Planner Lambert reported the state preservation agency notified the City that there has been no record of commissioners or staff receiving commissioner training certification this year. The last date for this year’s training is scheduled for December 7, 2013 in Springfield. Details followed regarding the benefits of such training workshops. Zinke offered to be the representative for next year’s training. Commissioner Schock-Soderberg offered to go. However, Lambert stated that if she could not attend, he would attend as a last resort. Ms. Liz Safanda, 1030 Dunstan Road, mentioned the fact that Preservation Partners held previous workshops where commissioners from all three towns were invited. Asked if that could be considered appropriate training, Mr. Lambert thought it could be as long as it was approved by the IHPA. She would follow up with Mr. Lambert. Staff updates included: - 327 Franklin: Petitioners were going to remove a fireplace (1950’s addition to the home) that was falling off the side of the house -- upon investigation with the fire department, significant upgrades will have to be done to create an active fireplace. The owner is now requesting not to replace the fireplace and fill in the gap with siding to match the home, soffit and fascia details. Asked if the commissioners would like to see Mr. Lambert handle this case administratively, all commissioners, except Andersson, were fine with an administrative review. - Patten House: A conflict exists of what has been drawn (regarding the front porch) and what was being constructed. Lambert said he was asked by the contractor to construct a cedar deck since the walking surface was not covered. He had concerns about constructing a tongue and groove deck floor. While it was not initially approved by the Commission, Lambert said the petitioner was anxious to move forward, due to the weather. As a compromise, he approved the decking with a 3/16th-inch gap but required an edging board to be installed that would have the traditional bull-nose and traditional details at the front side of the porches. He felt it was a better 5  Historic Preservation Commission November 19, 2013 long-term solution. The deck will be stained as close as the painted color with everything else painted as proposed in the plans presented. Mr. Adams Gibbons, a resident, inquired about the reuse of the pillars on the original small portico, wherein commissioners did not recall them being reused. Mr. Lambert spoke about how the pillars changed over the years but the petitioner would not be reusing them at the exterior; however, Lambert was unsure whether or not the petitioner would be reusing them as part of the interior decor. The petitioner, however, has saved and used historical elements of the home in the renovation. Mr. Lambert provided an update on Mr. Flynn’s garage on Fifth Street and referenced his monthly activity report. 7. New Business A. From the Commission - Commissioner Zinke distributed a copy of her notes to Chairman Roy regarding the concerns of residents and friends regarding the preservation of the Mill Race Inn property or a part of it. She recommended that staff begin the process of landmarking the Julius Alexander Blacksmith Shop and the enveloping additions which make up the original Ann Forsyth 1933 Mill Race Inn. Zinke discussed her recent investigations of this property done at the Geneva History Center. Commissioner concerns were raised whether the original blacksmith shop could be found within the structure and whether it would be intact. Hiller and Zinke offered to research the building (under staff supervision) while other commissioners believed starting the research process was important first before landmarking anything on the site. Per questions, Dir. Untch stated there was a contract purchaser interested in the property and the commission could initiate a friendly landmark status process but any active effort should include the purchaser in the conversations for his/her input. While he reminded the commissioners that there was the federal tax credit advantage, the highest and best use criteria had to be considered for the site. Andersson suggested, as a first step, for staff to share its concerns with the parties and that commissioners do their own research of the site. Planner Lambert, however, suggested that, logically, it made sense to first gain access into the interior to see what actually exists before commissioners get too far ahead in their research process. Additionally, Dir. Untch cautioned that what may exist may be in the flood plain, which also had to be addressed, especially in regard to regulatory requirements of other agencies. Dialog followed that the logical person to get into the structure would be Planner Lambert, whose background includes early settlement structures. Dir. Untch stated he and Lambert would contact the owner/purchaser-contractor to get inside the building. Lambert suggested commissioners might create map overlays to determine where in the present building he should be concentrating his investigation. Ms. Liz Safanda, 1013 Dunstan, asked what happens if the owner objects to the request, wherein Zinke responded that it is her hope that the Commission would continue the discussion, educating the potential purchaser of the value of the building, if something of historic significance were found to exist. However, some commissioners agreed to take one step at a time and not lose a potential interested buyer. 6  Historic Preservation Commission November 19, 2013 Resident, Mr. Adam Gibbons, proceeded to discuss his copy of a 1890s photograph of the Bennett Mill where he identified the blacksmith shop in the background. He suggested reviewing the Sandborn maps to better identify the location of the shop. Per Andersson’s question about a new commissioner, Chairman Roy said he reviewed some applications but he has heard nothing as to an appointment of a new commissioner. B. From the Public - None. 8. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. on motion by Commissioner Ploppert, seconded by Commissioner Andersson. Motion carried unanimously by voice vote. 7 Community Development Department Report CITY OF GENEVA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 4A 124 South Second Street December 17, 2013 Exterior Rehabilitation Applicant: BACKGROUND Nancy Luyten The residence at 124 South Second Street is listed as a “Significant” structure in the 1999 Architectural Survey. Consequently, the preservation of the Patten House is of high priority within the community. The residence is currently being renovated for use as a restaurant. Request: Renovation plans have been reviewed and approved by the HPC. Permit Review: Freestanding Signs On September 16, 2013, the City Council approved a zoning variance request to allow the erection of two freestanding signs; one each in the east and south yards. HPC Case Number: REQUEST 2013-042 Based on the requirements of the Geneva Historic Preservation Ordinance and subject to the HPC / Administrative Review matrix, freestanding signs must be reviewed by the HPC prior to installation. Staff Liaison: Michael Lambert The Applicant has submitted drawings of the freestanding signs, which Preservation Planner will be identical to one another, for Permit Review. The signs will be 630/938.4541 placed with the sign panel perpendicular to the street. The Applicant mlambert@geneva.il.us provides, as an alternative design, an option for reducing the sign post massing by utilizing a 4” X 4” in lieu of the 6” X 6” main post. STAFF ANALYSIS The proposed design for the freestanding yard signs will complement the renovation efforts in-progress and completed to date. The proposed signs will not be affixed to the historic structure or landscape and do not significantly impact the visibility of the historic landmark from the public right-of-ways. Because the sign panels are substantial in size, the 6” X 6” sign posts do not seem out of character for the site or in comparison to the non-historic details of the front porch that have been approved by the HPC and constructed by the Applicant. Therefore, the sign request, as submitted, appears to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the Design Guidelines for Historic Properties and the City of Geneva Sign Ordinance. Community Development Department Report CITY OF GENEVA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 4B 110 South Street December 17, 2013 Permit Review: New Residence Applicant: BACKGROUND Daryl Bean, D. R. Horton The property at 110 South Street is a vacant lot on which a new Christopher Russo, ALA residence is proposed. A Concept Review for this proposal was heard by Architects the HPC on November 19, 2013. The City of Geneva’s adopted Design Guidelines for Historic Properties identify several criteria for new construction within the Historic District. Specifically, two over-arching goals are identified: Design new buildings which are compatible in existing neighborhoods; and Encourage infill development which is compatible with existing Request: neighborhood character. Permit Review To those ends, several recommendations are outlined (summary New Residence provided), including: Locate the footprint and foundation of the new structure similar to the existing structures surrounding the new structure; HPC Case Number: Design the mass and height of the new house to be compatible with 2013-106 the mass and height of neighborhood houses; Reduce the mass of the new house by designing the second story to be one-half or less of the first story; Design new homes to reflect current architectural trends and Staff Liaison: materials; Michael Lambert Utilize visual clues of floor heights, roof shapes and massing found Preservation Planner in neighborhood homes; 630/938.4541 Select an architectural style that enhances the neighborhood preservation@geneva.il.us architecture; Design the new house to complement any natural features of the site; Reduce mass of house with rooflines sloping towards neighboring houses or with the use of cross gables; Orient the front entry similar to entries of neighborhood houses; Incorporate a front porch that is similar in height and massing of neighborhood porches; Locate the garage or accessory structure(s) similarly to surrounding properties and at the rear of property; Minimize the massing of any accessory structure;  Agenda Item 4B Page 2 of 4 Concept Review Several questions are posed by the Design Guidelines to assist in the design of a compatible infill home: What are the qualities of the attractive buildings in the neighborhood? Is a consistent theme or pattern evident in the architectural character of the neighborhood? Where are primary and accessory structures typically located on neighborhood lots? What are the roof heights of the adjacent structures? How big are the homes in the neighborhood? What architectural cues are prevalent in the neighborhood? How does the proposed design enhance the neighborhood? What natural features can or should be preserved? Lastly, the Design Guidelines identify several common mistakes incorporated into the design of infill residences: Replicating historic buildings or styles literally. Locating a new building ahead or behind the average street block setback. Designing homes which are out of scale with neighboring properties. Utilizing a pattern book or standard home plan that does not reflect the neighborhood context. Attaching garages at the front or side which increases the overall building mass. NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT The property at 110 South Street is located in a unique, fringe area of the Geneva Historic District. Its location can be viewed either as “a gateway location” at the southern boundary of the District or as a location within the Historic District that has been significantly transformed by infill development in recent years. The subject property abuts a public parking garage to the south; a redeveloped block of infill construction surrounding the significant historic property known as East View to the north; an eclectic neighborhood of small residences to the east; and a small, existing residence and new townhome development to the west. The neighborhood does not have a clearly-definable architectural context at this point in time. A diverse palette of building materials is present within eyesight from the subject property: stone, clapboard, brick and modern variants of those historic materials. Building massing and roof forms vary dramatically. The most visually predominant architectural forms in the neighborhood are located immediately north of the subject property. Those infill residences are not historic forms but are contemporary infill forms that may or may not be an appropriate clue for continued design inspiration. The site possesses few natural features which may or may not be reasonable to incorporate into the design of the residence. The property slopes from the west property line down towards First Street on the east property line. A hedge of mature—but non-specimen—trees lines the perimeter of the property. The City of Geneva Department of Public Works has raised concerns about the appropriateness of the driveway location at the bottom of the rise near First Street. Commentary included concerns of the driveway proximity to the intersection during peak travel times when traffic stacks up westward on South Street as well as visibility of the driveway at the bottom of the hill for eastbound traffic that is approaching an intersection with multiple traffic issues (poor sightlines, curving roadway and traffic speed).  Agenda Item 4B Page 3 of 4 Concept Review DESIGN REVIEW CONSIDERATIONS Conceptually, the proposed residence appears to satisfy the Zoning Compatibility requirements for infill housing in the City of Geneva. However, The HPC concept review on November 19, 2013 resulted in an overall favorable reception of the proposed infill residence. However, several issues were discussed including: Site Plan: HPC did not object to the First Street-facing garage Concerns about potential noise from railroad; HPC encouraged measures to reduce noise in the residence Overall Massing: Concerns about the use of gables which will make the house appear much taller than neighboring structures; the majority of Commissioners were in favor of reduce the appearance of height Commissioners liked the revised massing of the Left Elevation at the garage roof and the modified bedroom windows Architectural Expression: The Commissioners were split on the overall exterior design with some Commissioners feeling this has architecture is seen too often in new houses and something more unique and interpretive of “our era” with nods to the past would be more acceptable for Geneva The Commissioners were indecisive in the appeal of the Stick Style / Bungalow gable details…some liked the gable treatment; others were less enthusiastic Some thought the variety of materials was excessive and overly complicated; others liked the texture but conceded that the color palette will strongly influence the successful use of multiple materials The use of siding materials in a linear fashion made the house appear “too monolithic” for most of the Commissioners, who suggested a little more expressive use of materials and window size/arrangement; the opinion was expressed that the materials could be used to “break down” the overall monolithic appearance of the residence None seemed too enthused or dismayed by the extension of stone on the east / left elevation as a design element All agreed the South Street porch should be a more generous living space and not just ceremonial; overwhelming opinion of the commissioners was that the porch may be a more desirable outdoor space than the rear yard; the porch should be between 8’-0” and 9’-0” in depth from the front wall of the house. The Commissioners liked the details of the bracketed first floor windows and the tapered columns on masonry pedestals / plinths The HPC concurred that the fireplace move to the exterior (south) wall was preferable; no objections were raised about the enclosure materials Overall, the Commissioners expressed a desire for more creativity in the details and were less concerned about the overall size or placement of the house on the lot Based on the HPC Discussion, Staff offered the following additional direction to the Applicant: Stone veneer is more appropriately placed in vertical massing rather than horizontal banding to be more complementary of historic uses of masonry (the masonry wainscot/dado is largely a mid-twentieth  Agenda Item 4B Page 4 of 4 Concept Review century innovation); the amount of stone may not be as important as the well-chosen placement of it and use of it in a more historic manner Similarly, the wrapping of materials around corners is an easy way to avoid the “pasted on” facade that is common in many subdivision homes. The HPC seemed to want the design to reflect the traditional consistency of detailing on visible elevations as is found throughout the Geneva Historic District Fewer gables or simpler gable details may result in a less “overbearing” appearance of the house in the neighborhood Windows do not have to be uniformly sized; a mix of window sizes may help to make the front façade appear to be less regimented Smooth-faced (not wood-grained) clapboard sidings and coursed shingle siding (as opposed to random, jagged-edged shingles) have been preferred because they are more historic in appearance and, therefore, a better blend within historic neighborhoods. The site slopes fairly significantly from west to east but the elevations are drawn with a flat ground plane. If the buildable site will be graded to a flat pad, then the elevations are representational but the site plan likely needs to include a retaining wall or a significant embankment at the east side. If the site slope is to be maintained, please indicate how the site grading and east end of the front façade will accommodate the site grade REQUEST The design of the infill residence at 110 South Street has been modified to reflect the input of the HPC and, therefore, is presented for approval for construction by the HPC. STAFF ANALYSIS In response to the HPC and Staff feedback, the Applicant’s construction drawings have been modified to: reflect the actual grade plane, sloping from west to east (results in a lower garage floor; a deep eave is placed over the garage doors with the projected roof supported by decorative brackets; stone veneer is used in vertical massing, “wrapping“ the architecture from the front façade to the side elevation; stone does not wrap around the less- visible northwest corner) simplify the overall architectural details of the front (South Street) façade and incorporate more creative architectural detailing (Stick details of gable framework have been eliminated in favor of a projected gable face supported by small brackets; projected gables are decorated with vertical board; lower gable faces are coursed shingle; the oversized boxed soffits at gables have been replaced with a smaller boxed soffit which gracefully curves into the fascia; a porch beam is present beneath the porch eave) use exterior materials more consistently with historic use of materials (stone veneer is used in vertical massing rather than horizontal banding across the majority of the First Floor; upper floors are frame with a combination of clapboard and shingle siding which “breaks down” the overall massing of the front facade) As presented for Permit Review, the construction drawings for 110 South Street appear to be consistent with the objectives of Geneva’s Design Guidelines for Historic Properties; appear to comply with the Tear Down / Infill (TD/I) bulk regulations; and appear to address the issues raised by the HPC and Staff during Concept Review. I HPC REVIEW APPLICATION-FORM lIi.iiiIIII .. ~-,... __ B__u_il_d_in~g~P_e_rm__ it_A_p~p~lic_a_t_io_n __ R_e_v_ie_w ------------------- Application for HPC Review PROPERTY INFORMATION PropertyAdd~s: R1.~l t- SbJtt Gf~ uo s"Jk St. L\ ( Do you have questions Name and Address of Property Own er: .[) ok Ji-6 m \I\. about ~OO $, M;I~av..\Lee AI/e.· Historic Preservation Cornmission PROJECT DESCRIPTIONL. z:: I.... ~ 00 l{g ; b~r+y~ ;l{~ I (DoGC.f'1b.,lr. d~lIli. ~ Dropo,,~d 'Nork . .!..tiaa1\ ac.tdltlor.alll.1gec.!'f r,!,OI)GG"'O') review? Contact c..v,(['<t.IAt--ly ~ .Vo..W A,(t- I 00\-, 1-0 bv..~1J.. 0.- Staff at: ~ i& k>('15' h.e& ('~) 4 t 5" h ~~ hoJ4'{ e. 630:926.454 i or ~~\--h ~ ~t.~ ctN' ~A.r~~~. Jfte h...',u-L kkaulfuss@q~~·a. il.us i~ q.bo~ :S~,\D f>t\~LR.e-t.~.1 Y'- SI z.e , :;: h~V:LtJ.I'O""")4.. ))(~h,\~~t.ht>-~l tJrN,J/t-11$.'( ~ ph.J~ j)~r Cev"'t~" SUBMIT PLANS & DRAWINGS TO ILLUSTRATE PROPOSED CHANGES For HPC Staff use only: APPLICANT INFORMATION CASEtt r.PC MTG: RECEI·· ...ED: HletorlO PrnarV3llon Co",ml9$lo" 22 S.l'lretstreilt G,n,~·a. IL ;0134 G~O"~3e.4S.£1 fax S~O(23Z.14S4 City of Cenev», Design Gaidclincs. 2010 13  City ofGeneva Building Department Permit Number 109 J ames Street Geneva, lllinois 60134 Date Received _ APPLICANT LIVl.Q I'p,j t£) I+rW-€...-S'---t-----=-= Address of Applicant ~OC ~:~Q!AV E~'e. JlA.f.. bk:k z-~o Primary Phone Number Z:l.-tf 1--3Z( ~Lf)Cell Phone Number'2tCf- Z'3'f-f'S'~ax '8171-t~-(pr Project Address \ 1 \) 0011 :kb-----'Do£..!~~, __:_---_:_--- PIN Number \ 'Z - \ 0 - '2-0'6- DOt[ E-maiIAddress~&h£p..f!f@.~{..l10(.fo"- Lo!N\ I ProjectDescription .lh~\~'5i\...~I~~~~,\y 'J.S+Ory 3-u...r7o.s:P'i~ \t'n- Curp';I"udilln lnrf) r-uuu iun Subdivision Name l...IotNumber Phase Iluildin(( Width -~lid' l.ength f.rJ),1 ) 1'~lIeight gq ~J :'o/~It~ries S=S:' 2------ Bedrooms ~ Bathrooms 4, S" Total Square Footage (gross) Z<Jig I l'tilil\" Inful'Il1l1Hnn I';U:I TIUC SER\'Il'I, l'IIAR,ICTEllISTICS Electric Service Size (amps) 200 Electric Service Secondary Voltage _ Phase~or ·~eone 3 Phase \VA n:1( SERVin; ('IIARI( TEIUSTIL'S Number or fixture Units Estimated Length of Water Service Line" L.-/O ' water Meter Size as calculated using the Stale or fllinois PlLlJnhing.CodC Current Edittou. Circle One: ~ -- % inch, I inc,\ I Y2 inch) 2 inch, 3 inch. 4 inch 6 Properly Owners C> 6L H-~[ h...O-,-"'-=~ -'--- --_-;:-'- -tr- _ Owners Address <60D i ,M ' City L .b.iU{'r' )t'\/~ State -'~=.JJ,-,--_ OwneJ'SI'honeNumbCJ'S2:ZLf-'t.;3Lf~7~Lfl Cell Phone 1-'2'" t'54 5~1 Fax------~----- Contractor Name --b •. Llll...""""C'-7-'C..>\tf ,,1:-_----'tJ"""'-lf...Jet"""-'\A....!<.-"r -:- Address -m S.M ~IIAl(), (A~.( A&y L,'h"trt(\J\I\!.g" State ::Lr. Zip &DOl-f~ Phon_c ~ ceU£Zlj~-S~'13 Fax E-mail address M~. A @.tRi ~~. LG W'- Roofing License Number I 0 c..r '0 Ito 513 Plumbing License Number () 5'S: () 930:3 s: Project Cost: $ (Pea I ~ Retail Value of New Project: $ ,{)D. 000 I flL-REBY ('f;'RTlFY TlUT THE ,'[WI'OSCO WONK IS AU1JIORlLUJ BF rut: UII'SL'N (S) or RLCOIW. AND TIIAT IIIAVE BEl:;N ..WTl/O/{{ZEf.I BY tns em'iVU? (8) TO !II'IKi; THIS .'LI'PUC"ITIO!'V ·1/\0 SClIElJl'l.£ ,HL :VECE,\'S>lR)' INSl'eCT/OiliSAS AN I (,'}:';,'/'OF INt' OH'/\,EU(Sj "IS/) TIIAT "VI:. II ILL CO!\FONM JOIL/. Till:' ,1/'f>UC"BLF. CODES. L 1W'i'. ut.ct '-.-100NS OR ONfll/\AS( 'ES OF rttt: cirv OF (j/o'VL/ 'i. si« n: OF ILLINOIS A,l\'lJ "Lf)f.R.-1L (;OJ LR,\':IlEl\'7: Signature: FOI' orrin' Use Only: lltnifl!!---\\ anl:-- Ifist. Ih"l: -- '\rea:-- '\\ arer meter IIIH.'ha'-g(·------ ----Fire ""il,niull 1Ft'4:: ---- Lkl'l.-icC" n nect l-ee: ~"&li l-ee: Sdwnll,c,~:------ T I' es R - I Pad, Fee: _ l,'hntl-.\ "t.'l"'-.' rO'I -"i. FI-I':S ell "RCEI): ~==,-c~.c==,~'.=_===c,=',=c~~=='e=,c=';======================================================================~ Huildin:.! Permit t-ee: J . -  ZONING COMPATIBILITY & WORKSHEET *** This worksheet shallbe completed by the architect whom submitted signed and sealed plansfor review.- This document assists building permit applicants in determining whether a proposed new house or addition complies with the City of Geneva Zoning Ordinance. In order to complete this worksheet, you will need a copy of the zoning ordinance. Cop- ies of the Zoning Ordinance are available on our website at www.geneva.il.usorattheBuildingDivisioncounter.This work- sheet is required to be completed and submitted with the building permit application for any of the following types of projects on property located within Residential Area One: I. New single-family houses. 2. Additions to existing single-family houses where the gross square footage of the completed house will be increased by 400 square feet or more. This includes garages, porches and accessory structures. ISECTION I: APPLICANT INFORMA TION Name of architect completingthis worksheet: Name of the firm this architect works for: ~LA ~Z.C c..c ITCG-rS i rL.AN~-.s,. ,~. Architect's phone number: (e,r> 788- '1..00 Architect's emailaddress: Name of property owner: Property Owner's phone number: Property Owner's emailaddress: ISECTION 2: PROPERTY INFORMATION Project Location and Zoning Project Address: 1.o.o- s_o_~ Sr,_.___i•••..•1 Zoning of Property: I (l.-l (~It".,)1 Lot Area and Dimensions Lot area is calculated by multiplying the What are the property dimensions? width of the lot by the depth of the lot as shown on an accurate plat of survey. Lot area is used to determine house size. The What is the area of the property in square feet? larger the lot, the larger a house can be. Lot area and dimensions also determine allow- able building height and lot coverage. tD Does the property cor' form to the minimum lot size and lot frontage of the zoning district in which it is located (circle one): N If yes, continue to SECTION 3 below. If no, list the zoning standards that the property does not meet in the space provided and then continue to SECTION 3. CITY OF GENEVA, BUILDING DIVISION 109 JAMES STREEIT. GENEVA. IL 60114 P: 630/262.0280 F:630/262.0286 ISE.CT/ON 3: BULK STANDARDS Yards & Setbacks A typical single-family lot has a front yard, which is the open area in front of the house, a side yard on either side of the house and a rear yard behind the house. Setbacks are minimum distances a house must be set back from the front, street (for cor- ner lots), side and rear property lines. In order to determine required setbacks, the yards of a lot must be determined. Each zoning lot must contain a front. rear and side yard. The fourth yard can be either a side yard if it is an interior lot or a street yard if it is a corner lot. On odd-shaped lots. all yards that are not street or rear yards are considered side yards. A street setback is required for the front yard. A rear setback is required for the rear yard. A side setback is required for the side yard and either a side or street setback is required for the fourth yard. There is an additional setback regulation for street setbacks. In order to determine the required street setback. measure the existing street setbacks of the houses to either side of your property and average them together. This is the required street setback for your property unless the distance is less than the required district minimum setback or greater than the listed maximum required street setback in the Zoning Ordinance. What are the addresses of the houses on either side of your lot? 1 and 1,--11..._-_3_, _ What are the street setbacks (in feet) of the houses on either side of your lot? Fill in the required setbacks in the space provided. Be sure to include the average setback from above in the required street setback section. The setbacks are available in the single-family zoning district sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Once the required setbacks are determined. fill in the proposed setbacks in the space provided. The proposed setbacks must be greater than or equal to the required setbacks. Ifthis is not the case, you will need to modify your project. REQUIRED SETBACKS PROPOSED SETBACKS Street: Street: Rear: Rear: Side: '.0' Side: e.sr' Side/~(circle one): '&0.0* Side/~ (circle one): Please refer to Section 11-3-3 of the Zoning Ordinance and the district requirements of the specific zoning district in which your property is located for standards governing set- backs and yard permissibility for accessory buildings or structures. CITY OF GENEVA, BUILDING DIVISION 2 109 JAMES STREET, GENEVA, IL 60134 P: 630/262.0280 F:630/262.0286 ISECTION 3: BULK STANDARDS-CONTINUED Lot Coverage Lot coverage is the measurement of all impervious surfaces on the property. This includes all hard surface areas such as pat- ios, decks, driveways, and sidewalks, plus the house and any accessory structures such as gazebos, sheds, etc. Allowable lot coverage is calculated by multiplying the lot area by either 040 if your lot is less than 20,000 square feet in area, or by .30 if your lot is 20,000 square feet or larger in area. The resulting amount is the maximum amount of lot coverage you are permit- ted to have on your lot. In the space provided below, provide both the allowed and the proposed lot coverage for your pro- ject. Does your existing or proposed house contain a detached garage or a side/rear-loaded attached garage? If it does, your house may qualify for a 5% bonus to lot coverage. In the space provided below, fill in both the allowed lot coverage and the pro- posed lot coverage and indicate if your project qualifies for a 5% lot coverage bonus. Allowed: I ~=«»~?' .1. Proposed: 1__ 4....;..1.,I_C(.:..-'...;7:...;; •...;.D ....J Does your project qualify for a 5% lot coverage bonus? (circle one)? y db Building Height To calculate allowable building height, you may need assistance from a surveyor or a civil engineer because you will need to determine the average ground elevation above mean sea level at the corners of the zoning lot at the street right-of-way line. For an interior lot, use the two front comers. For a corner lot, use the three corners of the lot that are adjacent to the street. Insert the elevations of the two (or three) corners in the spaces provided: Elevation of 3rd corner Elevation of Ist corner Elevation of 2nd corner (only used on corner lots) '> I_I ....•'_O_S __ -..11 12 (""7.' Insert the average of the two (or three on a corner lot) elevations from boxes I, 2 and 3 above in the box to the right: Insert the finished first floor elevation of the house in the box to the right: From the Zoning Ordinance, determine what the maximum allowable height for your zoning lot is based on the width of your zoning lot. Insert the width of your lot and the maximum allowable building height below: Width of your lot: Maximum allowable building height: 17 "#-0" If your project exceeds the minimum side setbacks, it may qualify for a bonus to maximum allowable height. Please refer to the Zoning Ordinance to determine if your project qualifies for a maximum allowable height bonus. Does your project qualify for this bonus (circle one)? y CITY OF GENEVA~ BUILDING DIVISION 3 109 JAMES STREET, GENEVA, IL 60134 P: 630/262.0280 F:630/262.0286 ISECTION 3: BULK STANDARDS-CONTINUED Building Height-Continued Add the number you inserted in box 7 on the previous page to the number you inserted in box 4 on the previous page and insert the resulting number in the box to the right. This number is the maximum allowable building height above mean sea level for your zoning lot. In order to determine the elevation above mean sea level of your house you must meas- ure the height of the house using the front elevation starting from the finished floor ele- vation. Insert the height of the house measured from the finished first floor elevation in the box to the right. Add the number in box 9 above to the finished first floor elevation above mean sea level from box 5 on the previous page and insert the result in the box to the right. This num- ber must be less than or equal to the number in box 8 at the top of this page. Maximum Floor Area Floor area is the measurement of the interior space of the house for the purpose of regulating the exterior mass of the house. Find the lot size range that your property falls between and determine the allowable floor area for your property by reviewing the "Maximum Floor Area Table" (11-5-6) in the Zoning Ordinance. Maximum Allowable Floor Area-Proposed project and existing buildings. if any. Insert the maximum allowable floor area from the Table in the Zoning Ordinance. IMAF-1 '-I, "$ , 8 - Additionally, your project may receive a bonus to floor area if it includes a detached ga- rage or a side-loaded attached garage if your project qualifies for a garage bonus, insert the bonus in the box. If it does not qualify for a bonus, insert a zero in the box. I MAF-2 1 Add boxes MAF-I and MAF-2 together and insert the amount in the box to the right. This is your maximum allowable floor area. I MAF-3 Yi,,8 Calculating proposed floor area A. First Floor Area I. Calculate the first floor area of the house, as measured from the exterior walls at the finished first floor elevation. All porches, garages, and other parts of the house that are covered by a roof should be included in this calculation. Insert this amount to the right. 4 CITY OF GENEVA, 109 JAMES STREET, BUILDING GENEVA, DIVISION IL 60134 P: 630/262.0280 F:630/262.0286 ISECTION 3: BULK STANDARDS-CONTINUED Maximum Floor Area-Continued 2. If the house contains one or more garages of any kind including detached garages, subtract the following amount from the total calculated in number I above based on the lot size of the property: For lots less than 10,000 square feet in area, subtract 484 square feet. For lots 10,000 square feet or greater in area, subtract 726 square feet. Insert the amount to be sub- tracted to the right. 3. Insert the result of the subtraction of the amount in box A2 from the amount in box A I on the previous page and insert that amount in the box to the right. I A3 -z.;& l/ 7. " 4. If the house contains a one-story, open front porch with no floor area above it that provides direct access to the front door of the dwelling, sub- tract the actual square footage of the porch from the total calculated in box A3 above, but not to exceed 300 square feet. Insert the amount to be sub- tracted to the right. If your lot does not contain a front porch that qualifies for this exception, insert a "0" on the line to the right. 5. Insert the result of the subtraction of the number in box A4 from the num- ber in box A3 and insert that amount in the box to the right. This is the amount of first floor area that will be included in the total floor area calcu- lation. B Basement Floor Area If the project contains a basement or a portion of a basement that extends above the ground adjacent to the foundation wall to a height of five (5) feet or greater as measured from the top of the finished first floor to the lowest finished grade of the ground adjacent to the building, then that portion of the basement will need to be included in the maximum floor area calculation. There is one exception to this requirement as follows: For houses that contain exposed foundation walls greater than five (5) feet in height on lots or parcels of land, where the elevation of a zoning lot line is at least 6 feet higher than the elevation of the opposite and approximately parallel zoning lot line, up to 200 square feet of basement floor area shall be subtracted from the calculated total floor area. Calculate the basement floor area in the following manner: I. Insert the total square footage of the basement to the right. IBI I, • z..s 2. Insert the linear footage of the perimeter of the exposed foundation wall (5 feet or greater) to the right: I B2 Q 3. Multiply the amounts in boxes BI and B2 together and insert the resulting amount to the right I B3 0 4. Insert the linear footage of the perimeter of the entire basement to the right: I B4 Iff. I'S CITY 109 OF GENEVA'I JAMES STREET, BUILDING GENEVA, DIVISION IL 60134 5 P: 630/262.0280 F:630/262.0286 I SECTION 3: BULK STANDARDS-CONTINUED Maximum Floor Area-Continued S. Divide the amount in box B3 by the amount in box B4 and insert the result- 65 ing amount to the right 1 0 6. If you have a naturally-sloping lot that qualifies for the basement floor area exception, insert the amount to the right, not to exceed 200 square feet. If your lot has no basement floor area that qualifies for this exception, insert a I B6 0 "0" on the line. 7. Subtract the amount in box B6 from the amount in box BS and insert the amount to the right. This is the amount of basement floor area that will be I B7 0 included in the total floor area calculation. C Second Floor Area The floor area of second floors of houses is calculated using a "calculation line" method as follows: Measure the horizontal area of the building from the exte- rior walls or roof at a point twenty (20) feet above the first floor of the build- ing and insert the amount to the right. This is the amount of second floor area that will be included in the total floor area calculation. If this amount equals zero, insert a "0" in the box. (DO NOT MEASURE THE ACTUAL SECOND FLOOR AREA) D Third Floor Area The floor area of third floors or attics of houses is calculated using the same "calculation line" method as follows: Measure the horizontal area of the o building measured from the exterior walls or roof at a point twenty-eight (28) feet above the first floor of the bUildingand insert that amount to the right. This is the amount of third floor/attic area that will be included in the total floor area calculation. If this amount equals zero, insert a "0" in the box. (DO NOT MEASURE THE ACTUAL THIRD FLOORIA TTIC AREA) 6 CITY 107 OF JAME;S GENEVA, STRE;E;T, BUILDING GE;NE;VA, DIVISION IL 6013~ P: 630/262.0280 F:630/262.0286 I SECTION 3: BULK STANDARDS-CONTINUED Maximum Floor Area-Continued E. Accessory Buildings or Structures Floor Area Each accessory building or structure on a zoning lot that is larger than 200 square feet in size that is covered by a roof needs to be included in the maximum floor area calculation as follows: I. Calculate the floor area of the first floor of all accessory buildings or struc- tures measured from the exterior walls at the finished first floor elevation and insert the amount in the box to the right. If your lot does not contain o any accessory buildings or structures that meet these criteria, insert a "0" in the box. 2. Calculate the floor area of all accessory buildings or structures measured from the exterior walls or roofs at a point eighteen (18) feet above the first floor of the accessory building or structure. If this amount equals zero, insert a "0" in the box. 3. Add the amounts in boxes EI and E2 together and insert the amount to the right. This is the amount of accessory building or structure area that will be included in the total floor area calculation. o F. Total Floor Area The total floor area of the project is determined by adding the totals in boxes "AS", "B7", "C", "D", and "E3". Add these amounts together and insert the amount to the right. This is the total floor area of your project. This amount Ie "1,I$"S. , must be equal to or less than the maximum floor area amount in box MAF·3 on page 4. I CITY OF GENEVA, BUILDING DIVISION 7 109 JAMES STREET, GENEVA, IL 60134 P: 630/262.0280 F:630/262.0286 Reference Example A Proposed Color Palette – 110 South Street, Geneva Reference Example B