Historic Preservation Commission

Meeting Agenda CITY OF GENEVA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING LOCATION & HPC INFORMATION TUESDAY, MARCH 18, 2014 MEETING Location: 1. Call to Order Geneva City Hall 2. Roll Call Council Chambers 109 James Street 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes February 18, 2014 Geneva, IL 60134 4. HPC Review of Building Permit Applications Time: A. 227 S. Third Street CASE 2014-004 7:00 p.m. Applicant: Tad Hemming – Hemming Construction Berry House Shops Application for: Replacement of Door Leaves at street level Commissioners: Scott Roy, Chairman B. 212 S. Fifth Street CASE 2014-006 Nanette Andersson Applicant: Avondale Custom Homes Maurice McNally / Dave Myszka Al Hiller K. Peterson Associates Architects Zachary Ploppert Application for: Demolition of Non-historic Screened Porch Geri Schock-Soderberg Replacement of Historic Cellar Bulkhead with Escape Window Carolyn Zinke 5. Concept Review Staff Liaison: A. SW Corner of Fifth & Campbell Streets – Lot 2 CASE 2014-005 Michael A. Lambert Applicant: Avondale Custom Homes Maurice McNally / Dave Myszka Preservation Planner Concept review of: Proposed Infill Residence 630/938.4541 6. Secretary’s Report (Staff Update) preservation@geneva.il.us 7. New Business A. From the Commission B. From the Public 8. Adjournment Next HPC meeting: April 15, 2014 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 Geneva Public Works Building 1800 South Street - Conference Room Geneva, Illinois 60134 February 18, 2014, 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order Chairman Roy called the February 18, 2014 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 Others Present: Clyde and Sharon Jones, 521 Franklin St.; Resident Jim Bishop; Colin Campbell, 18 S. 6th St.; Adam Gibbons, 33W777 Hill Rd.; Ald. Mike Bruno; Carolyn Jerjee with Preservation Partners; Linda Steele, 527 Campbell St.; Susan Sarkauskas with Daily Herald; Recording Secretary Celeste Weilandt 3. Approval of the December 17, 2013 Minutes The December 17, 2013 minutes were approved on motion by Commissioner Ploppert, seconded by Hiller. Motion carried by voice vote of 6-0. 4. HPC Review of Building Permit Applications - None. 5. Concept Review A. Campbell Street between Fifth and Sixth Street (Case No. 2014-002) Proposed Infill Residence (Avondale Custom Homes, Maurice McNally/Dave Myszka) - Preservation Planner Lambert reviewed the proposal before the commissioners, explaining the proposed in-fill house would be for Lot 4, facing Campbell Street. A review of the home’s materials (stone and cedar shake shingle); site plan; proposed elevations; and floor plans followed. Mr. Lambert did state, however, the proposed volume for the proposal exceeded what the zoning ordinance allowed and the petitioner would have to address how that would be remedied. Mr. Dave Myszka, with Avondale Custom Homes, and on behalf of the petitioner, reviewed the elevations and materials in more detail stating that he did reduce some of the volume overage by reducing some of the roof pitches and would forward that information to Mr. Lambert. The floor plans were not changed. In addition, Mr. Myszka explained how the massing was reduced by having a smaller mass in the front elevation and increasing it to the rear. An 8 ft. front porch would be included. The structure’s height was 32 feet and with the pitch reduced, would be 28 or 29 feet in height. As compared to the Merritt King house, the King house was 36.5 feet from the finished floor to the top. He clarified he was trying to have the proposed homes in proportion to the neighborhood homes.  Historic Preservation Commission February 18, 2014 Overall, Andersson had positive comments about the proposed home but had concerns about the position of the garage being at the front of the house, creating a “snout” house with its design cutting off the house to the rest of the neighborhood. She referenced how the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines specifically address this issue and it offered suggestions on how to design homes for the historic district. Mr. Myszka explained that the design was created on the basis of his client wanting a large backyard area. Other commissioner comments included that the narrow lot presented a challenge and it was not the right design for the historic district. Mr. Myszka offered to look at the design again. Questions followed on whether this home would set the setbacks of the other three homes and how would the corner lot affect the front yards and side setback for the corner lot, wherein Mr. Lambert explained the corner lot would have Campbell Street as the legal front yard. The corner lot would require a 20 ft. setback from Campbell and a 20 ft. setback off of Sixth Street. Per a question about lot coverage calculations, Mr. Lambert confirmed the rear patio was under the maximum lot coverage calculation. Other than the garage issue, many commissioners liked the home’s appearance and materials. Asked what Andersson’s recommendations would be for the proposal, she stated the garage could be placed to the side and reduce the width of the home or add an alley and have all the garages in the rear. With having a front-loaded garage or side load garage, Mr. Lambert also confirmed there were “givebacks” and noted that the longer the driveway, less floor area was available to work with, according to the Geneva Zoning Compatibility Worksheet. Rejecting the proposed residence solely on the “snout-nosed” garage design (a guideline recommendation and not part of the Code requirements) was not the purview of this commission. However, according to Section 10-6-6, Item D of the City of Geneva Zoning Code - Historic Preservation, Mr. Lambert pointed out that if the petitioner chose to pursue this concept, the zoning board would likely support the proposal and forward it to City Council which must uphold the city’s zoning ordinance. Commissioners Hiller and Ploppert reiterated that the lot was difficult and had restrictions, and there had to be some form of give and take. Dialog then followed on what other designs could be expected for the other three lots. Mr. Lambert interjected also reminded the commissioners that the narrowness of the lot was chosen by the developer when he purchased the property, noting there were three lots that were platted and the lots were not a burden placed upon them. Dialog followed regarding other 60 ft. lots in the area that had detached garages or one-car garages, or an alley. Chairman Roy opened up the meeting to public comment: Mr. Colin Campbell, 18 S. 6th Street, asked if the house could be moved 20 feet north, set the garage in rear and use the current driveway as a common driveway for all of the houses to be built on Sixth Street, i.e., dedicating an alley. Mr. Myszka indicated he would look into the suggestion. The honey locust tree was also a concern. Ms. Sharon Jones, 521 Franklin Street, discussed the direction of the sun which was a positive for this home’s backyard; the fact that garages were a part of life in 2014; the historic district offered a variety of homes; and that the proposed house would reflect a time period when it was built and be unique to the historic district. Resident, Ms. Linda Steele, inquired as to when construction would begin (March or April) and the positioning of the homes to the proposed home. Mr. Myszka responded that each home’s design would be coming before this commission and he would like to provide a streetscape drawing as each home comes on board. Ms. Steele felt the area would be very busy. 2  Historic Preservation Commission February 18, 2014 It was pointed out by Andersson that the homes behind Egg Harbor were a good example of homes on narrow lots with the garages placed in rear with an alley. 6. Secretary’s Report (Staff Update) HPC Building Permit Review Matrix Affirmation - Mr. Lambert had no permit activity to report this month. However, he asked for input regarding the matrix so it could be formalized. The matrix has been helpful to him. Commissioners were supportive of the matrix. Mill Race Inn Investigation Staff Report -- HPC Review & Comment - Mr. Lambert thanked Commissioners Zinke and Hiller, the Geneva History Center, and Mr. Colin Campbell for their input into the report. The report concluded that a portion of the Mill Race building dates back to 1846 as a manufacturing building which was Anne Forsythe’s original Mill Race Inn. Mr. Lambert stated he did not speak to the prospective purchaser today and he does not know the status of the purchase currently. The commission appreciated all of the research done on the report and the information was very helpful to a developer. Lambert noted that an outstanding issue is that the extent of floodway/floodplain was still unknown at this point. Asked if the walls were independent of the remainder of the building, Lambert, from what he saw, said it could stand on its own but he did not know how the roof structure held the tops of the walls. Commissioner Hiller expressed concern about the following: the developer’s plans were unknown at this time; there has been community interest in landmarking the building; and the city wants development of the property to move forward. He believed it was appropriate to let the developer do his/her due diligence first. Commissioner Zinke noted that the site was Opportunity Site No. 6 within the Downtown Station Area Master Plan and the city wanted the site to be developed into a banquet facility with restaurant use. She believed the city would probably support the preservation of part of the building and hoped that the city would work with the developer and offer some financial incentives to the developer. Planner Lambert explained that part of the building could be landmarked and not necessarily the entire building. He stated that the issue was for the commissioners to determine what parts of the building were most significant to the community. He felt the significant period was between years 1846 and 1935 and to base any landmarking proposals on that information. Lambert stated he would contact the prospective purchaser, discussing with him what the commission discussed tonight. Tying into the discussion Mr. Colin Campbell raised dialog about the housing study that the city was conducting, one of which issues was affordable housing. He suggested the commission consider the idea that if the area of Bennett Street and Route 38, and east up the hill, was turned into affordable housing units, he envisioned that the red brick building could become a convenience store while the Mill Race property could be developed as shops for that housing. Preservation Month Discussion - Mr. Lambert reminded commissioners that Preservation Month is in May and it is the bi-annual preservation awards year. Commissioners Zinke and Hiller would be reviewing the permits (Soderberg steps away) and were come up with a list of potential candidates. Lambert said he would like Ploppert and Soderberg to be hosts for the day. (Soderberg returns; Ploppert steps away) Commissioners Andersson, Zinke, and Hiller would be part of the preservation awards group (Andersson steps away; Ploppert returns). Asked if the commissioners wanted certain jurors to participate, Zinke suggested to invite Doug Karre, former HPC planner; Lambert suggested Ms. Amy Munro from Elgin (Andersson returns); and Shock- Soderberg suggested the preservation planner from Blue Island. Lambert walked through the activities planned for the month. Commissioners discussed that it would be nice for this 3  Historic Preservation Commission February 18, 2014 commission to coordinate its events with the Geneva History Museum and Preservation Partners. Hiller volunteered to be the point-person for the coordination; Zinke would be a backup. Geneva Broadcast Network Programming - Mr. Lambert advised that City Administrator McKittrick has challenged every department to make a larger presence in the community through the Geneva Broadcast Network and Lambert recommended that the HPC do a series of informative programs on preservation. Lambert referenced his handout explaining how he envisioned the series and presented a short slide presentation, noting the program would consist of two segments with a main topic of approximately 30 minutes and a “field guide” segment about five minutes long. (Schock-Soderberg leaves meeting at 8:30 pm) Commissioner dialog followed that Lambert could possibly get the script going and incorporating one of the presentations into Preservation Month, if possible, but Andersson pointed out that staff resources were very limited. Asked how many programs he needed to complete, Lambert indicated there was no timeframe, but he preferred to see the segment entitled “Keeping Preservation Relevant: The Geneva Story” completed first and to involve the high school students and bring preservation to another generation. Zinke mentioned she had been in contact with Ms. Mary Keyser at Geneva High School, and she would have Ms. Keyser contact Mr. Lambert on this topic. 526 S. Fourth Street Update - Only one bid was made on the property; the bidder’s proposal was to demolish it. City Admin. McKittrick has suggested that the bid be accepted by the City Council. Window Policy Update (re: 402 Franklin St.) - Lambert indicated that the Warners, who are rehabilitating the property at 402 Franklin Street and are pursuing a Tax Assessment Freeze, expressed some confusion regarding the window approvals given by the commission. The Warners consulted with IHPA regarding the tax assessment freeze review and proceeded to follow the requirements of the National Park Service which allowed all clad windows in his building. Lambert referenced his handout and noted what the owner’s perspective was on this matter, what the commission’s direction was, and what the resolution was. Lambert suggested inserting new language into the city’s Window Policy, keeping the intent of historic wood windows where there are wood windows, but identifying additional circumstances where clad windows may be acceptable. (The Park Service allowed clad windows when all historic windows are non-existent.) Commissioners were asked to provide their comments after reading the handout and discuss it in the future. Lambert shared where the confusion came in between the HPC policy and state / federal policy. Historic District Survey Update - Lambert’s request for an intern to assist with survey field work was denied by the city due to the budget. Commissioners Andersson and Ploppert volunteered to assist Lambert in the field. He will have a schedule in the future of the blocks to be photographed. Ordinance Review Update - Lambert asked the commissioners to review the historic preservation ordinance and determine its weaknesses and strong points. From his notes, he has identified that the city has no provision for demolition requirements, no process for de-landmarking, and the process for which staff reviews the projects for review has been modified since the ordinance was last updated. Lambert discussed reasons for considering inclusion and/or updates of these items. 6. New Business A. From the Commission - Zinke asked about the status of the 2008 Historic Preservation Plan, believing not much has happened with regard to its goals and objectives, wherein 4  Historic Preservation Commission February 18, 2014 Mr. Lambert discussed the three goals he was assigned (the survey, the ordinance and visibility) to date and recalled that about one-third of the goals in the 2008 plan were accomplished. However, Andersson reminded the commissioners that at the time the plan was created a full-time historic planner existed. B. From the Public - None. 8. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. on motion by Ploppert, seconded by Andersson. Motion carried unanimously by voice vote. 5 Community Development Department Report CITY OF GENEVA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 4A 227 South Third Street March 18, 2014 Door Replacement Applicant: BACKGROUND Tad Hemming The structure at 227 South Third Street was constructed circa 1854 as a Berry House Shops single family residence. The original Greek Revival building has been significantly expanded and altered after 1945. The structure is treated with synthetic siding and numerous replacement windows. The existing wood doors located at the ground level are not historic openings. The existing doors have been exposed directly to weather and Request: the elements and have deteriorated over time. In particular, the Permit Review: insulated glazing has “fogged” due to broken seals for the glazed Door Replacement window unit. The building is rated “non-contributing” according to the 1999 Survey. HPC Case Number: 2014-004 REQUEST Due to the exposure and minimal visibility of the non-historic doors, the Applicant is requesting to install paired doors that are aluminum clad at Staff Liaison: the exterior (white, in color, to match existing) with wood interiors. Michael Lambert Preservation Planner 630/938.4541 mlambert@geneva.il.us March 18. 2014 Agenda Item 4A Page 2 of 2 Door Replacement 1869 Bird’s Eye View 1912 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map West Elevation – Existing Conditions West Elevation – Existing Doors South Elevation – Existing Conditions South Elevation - Existing Doors March 18, 2014 227 S. Third Street, Agenda Item 4A HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE & PROJECT COMPLIANCE SUMMARY – STAFF ANALYSIS 1. 1999 COG Architectural Non-Contributing (NC) Survey Designation (NC, C, PS, S): 2. Associated Architectural Greek Revival Style(s) or Type: 3. Significant Architectural Gable Returns at eaves Features : 4. Date of Construction: 1854 5. Date(s) of Significant House form unchanged up to 1945 Addition(s) and/or Numerous alterations and additions since circa 1975 Alteration(s): 6. Period of Significance (POS): 1854- circa 1970 7. Historic Names Associated None with Property: 8. Historic Images: None submitted 9. Historic Map Representation: 1869 Bird’s Eye View of Geneva 1912, 1923, 1930, 1945 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map 10. Why is it Important? Early Greek revival residence (Context / Significance) 11. Proposed Architectural Significant loss of architectural integrity with significant alterations and Features Consistent with additions Architectural Style and POS: (Exterior Rehab / Additions) 12. Proposed Architectural Proposed work replaces non-historic doors Features Inconsistent with Architectural Style and POS: (Exterior Rehab / Additions) 13. Significant Landscape n/a Elements: 14. Application of COG Guidelines do not address replacement of non-historic elements in-kind HPC Design Guidelines: 15. Compliance with COG n/a HPC Window Policy: 16. Compliance with COG n/a HPC Siding Policy: 17. Summary IHPA Comments: n/a (Projects utilizing or potentially utilizing Rehab Tax Credit or Tax Assessment Freeze) March 18, 2014 227 South Third Street, Agenda Item 4A FINDING OF FACT – STAFF ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or The property has been converted for use commercial retail and be placed in a new use that requires minimal hospitality uses since 1980 or earlier. The conversion has change to the defining characteristics of the resulted in significant alteration and loss of architectural building and its site and environment. integrity over time. 2. The historic character of a property shall be The proposed work will not further diminish the architectural retained and preserved. The removal of historic integrity of the property. The proposed door leafs will replace materials or alteration of features and spaces that existing door leafs that are not contained within historic characterize a property shall be avoided. openings. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical n/a record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes n/a that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction The architectural integrity of the property has been significantly techniques or examples of craftsmanship that compromised prior to this request. characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired The existing wood doors are non-historic and are proposed to rather than replaced. Where the severity of be replaced with more durable materials (aluminum clad deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive exteriors with wood interiors). feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as n/a sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a n/a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new Historic materials will not be affected by the proposed work. construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new n/a construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. HPC action on the agenda item may be as follows: 1. Adopt Staff’s Finding of Fact as presented. 2. Adopt Staff’s Finding of Fact, with modifications, basing any modifications on the SOI Standards. 3. Create new Finding of Fact, basing it on the SOI Standards. Community Development Department Report CITY OF GENEVA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 4B 212 South Fifth Street March 18, 2014 Permit Review: Exterior Improvements Applicant: BACKGROUND Maurice McNally, Avondale The property at 212 South Fifth Street consists of the historic property, Custom Homes known commonly as the Merritt King House. The property is identified as Dave Myszka, Designer a Significant property in the 1999 Architectural Resources Survey. K. Peterson Associates, Architect The subject property is adjacent to the property at 520 Campbell Street, which was approved for demolition by the HPC on August 20, 2013 under a separate request. The historic home at 212 South Fifth Street will be retained for rehabilitation and renovation. Request: Demolition of non-historic The corner lot to the north of the subject property as well as the three addition lots formerly occupied at 520 Campbell Street are being re-developed with new infill, single-family residences. Alteration of historic cellar bulkhead The house at 212 South Fifth Street is an eclectic, wood-framed residence consisting of the original 1853 residence towards the rear and an imposing 1890 addition to the front of the property. While the original HPC Case Number: house is vernacular in architectural details, the street-facing portion of 2014-006 the residence is Queen Anne Style residence with Stick detailing. As discussed at the November 19, 2013 regular meeting of the HPC, the 212 South Fifth Street site has evolved over time. The existing Carriage Staff Liaison: Barn has been relocated on the property at least two times; each move Michael Lambert has resulted in modifications to the structure, including the addition of a Preservation Planner second floor screened porch linking the carriage barn to the residence. 630/938.4541 REQUEST preservation@geneva.il.us The Applicant is seeking complete minor exterior improvements to the 212 South Fifth Street property as part of an interior remodeling project. Specifically, the Applicant wishes to demolish the non-historic screened porch in order to prepare for the future relocation of the historic carriage barn to an undetermined location on the 212 South Fifth Street property. The Applicant appeared before the HPC on November 19, 2013, seeking input and feedback from the HPC regarding the demolition of the screened porch. The HPC had no objections to the removal of the non- historic screened porch at that time.  Agenda Item 4B Page 2 of 2 Permit Review Also, the Applicant is seeking permission to remove a historic cellar bulkhead and replace it with a code-compliant egress window. The historic cellar bulkhead is located at a re-entrant corner of the residence and has been a route for stormwater to find its way into the otherwise dry cellar. The Applicant’s request for the cellar bulkhead modification is a result of investigative demolition work within the former Merritt King residence in conjunction with the development of architectural plans for the renovation of the interior. The existing walls and steps of the bulkhead consist of rubble limestone. The bulkhead, including the wooden doors, are in fair condition. Prior owners of the house had sealed the bulkhead with plastic and other materials in an effort to prevent the entrance of stormwater into the basement. The bulkhead is located on a rear façade and, once the proposed infill residences are constructed, will not be visible form any public street. The Applicant has stated that the rubble stone treads and risers will be removed as part of the work to install the new egress window. Submitted construction plans do not indicate whether the bulkhead retaining walls will remain in place and be covered with soil or be demolished in their entirety. Also, submitted plans do not indicate how or with what material the basement wall below the proposed egress window will be constructed. At this time, no additional exterior work is being requested for approval by the HPC. Overview of area of Proposed Exterior Work Non-historic Screened Porch requested to be removed Location of Historic Cellar Bulkhead requested to be removed Existing Cellar Door at Re-Entrant Corner – March 18, 2014 Existing Cellar Door Closed and Existing Cellar Door Open and Window Above – March 18, Window Above – March 18, 2014 2014 Rubble Limestone Bulkhead Rubble Limestone Bulkhead from Basement Interior – from Basement Interior – March 18, 2014 March 18, 2014 Community Development Department Report CITY OF GENEVA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 5A Fifth & Campbell Streets – Lot 2 March 18, 2014 Concept Review Applicant: BACKGROUND Avondale Custom Homes The infill residence proposed for the vacant lot at the southwest corner Maurice McNally of Fifth and Campbell Streets is part of a larger redevelopment proposal Dave Myszka, Designer for the properties located at 212 South Fifth Street and 520 Campbell Street. REQUEST Request: The proposed residence is the second of four (4) new residences that will Concept Review be built on the vacant land surrounding the former Merritt King home and property. The entire parcel is bounded by Fifth Street, Campbell Street New Infill Residence and Sixth Street. The proposal is for a one-and-one-half story home with an attached HPC Case Number: street-facing, front-load garage as well as a detached, street-facing, front- 2014-005 load garage. The architecture of the proposed home incorporates traditional forms, massing, materials and details. Staff Liaison: Michael Lambert STAFF ANALYSIS Preservation Planner In order to provide informal feedback to the applicant, the conceptual 630/938.4541 plans are provided for HPC review and comment. preservation@geneva.il.us Preliminary Staff Review identified that the house appears to comply with the bulk regulations identified in the Zoning Ordinance. No calculations have been provided by the Applicant to verify that lot coverage complies with Zoning Regulations for the site. If those calculations meet the provisions of Geneva zoning regulations, then, the proposed residence satisfies the zoning requirements for the property. The proposed architecture is sympathetic to historic elements of 19th century homes but is not a duplicate of other homes within the Geneva Historic District. Exterior materials (brick-veneered foundation, clapboard siding, and asphalt shingle roof) are consistent with materials found throughout the Geneva Historic District. Based on discussions at the February 18, 2014 meeting of the HPC (regarding streetside garages for new construction within the Geneva Historic District), this proposal for garage doors facing Campbell Street  Agenda Item 5A Page 2 of 3 Concept Review may raise concerns about conformance with adopted Design Guidelines (“Guidelines”), especially in combination with the next two (2) lots west, which are narrow and may include proposals for street-facing garages. Under the adopted provisions of the Guidelines, street-facing garages are discouraged but not prohibited. In fact, previous cases that incorporated street-facing garages have been approved on corner lots throughout the Historic District. The adopted Guidelines are policies intended to encourage harmonious development that is sympathetic to the architectural rhythms and character of the existing and long-established neighborhood patterns throughout the Historic District. However, the Guidelines were not adopted as mandatory requirements (e.g. zoning regulations) for the development of properties within the Historic District.