Historic Preservation Commission

Meeting Agenda CITY OF GENEVA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING LOCATION & HPC INFORMATION TUESDAY, AUGUST 18, 2015 MEETING Location: 1. Call to Order Geneva City Hall 2. Roll Call Council Chambers 109 James Street 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes July 21, 2015 Geneva, IL 60134 4. Concept Review Time: A. 21 North Fourth Street CASE 2015-072 7:00 p.m. Applicant: Patrick Griffin, GriffinWilliams LLP Tim Nelson, Architect Concept review of: Proposed Façade Modifications Commissioners: Scott Roy, Chairman 5. HPC Review of Building Permit Applications Jennifer Ablanalp A. 13 North Third Street CASE 2015-073 Al Hiller Applicant: Jim Bolenger, CFA5 Architects George Salomon Brian Goewey, Owner Paul Zellmer Application for: Façade Modifications Carolyn Zinke 6. Secretary’s Report (Staff Update) Window Policy Discussion Staff Liaison: Promotional Brochure Michael A. Lambert Preservation Planner 7. New Business 630/938.4541 A. From the Commission preservation@geneva.il.us B. From the Public 8. Adjournment Next HPC meeting: September 15, 2015 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 1800 South Street – Training Room Geneva, Illinois 60134 July 21, 2015, 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order Chairman Roy called to order the July 21, 2015 meeting of the Geneva Historic Preservation Commission at 7:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call Present HPC: Chairman Roy; Commissioners Salomon, Hiller, Zellmer, Zinke Absent: Commissioner Abplanalp Staff Present: Historic Preservation Planner Lambert Others Present: Todd Crabbe, 204 Park, St. Charles; Lynnly Buchannan, 38W430 Killey Lane, Geneva; Jerry and Alex Novy, 1058 St. Andrews Ct. Geneva; Glorianne and Collin Campbell, 18 S. Sixth St., Geneva; Recording Secretary Celeste Weilandt Chairman Roy reviewed the protocol for the meeting. 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes – May 19, 2015 Motion by Commissioner Zellmer, seconded by Commissioner Salomon to approve the May 19, 2015 minutes, as presented. Motion carried by voice vote of 5-0. 4. HPC Permit Review of Proposed Development Projects A. 229 W. State Street (Case No. 2015-054) Applicant: Scott Price, Owner; Todd Crabbe, Craftsman Services; Application for Replacement Window. Historic Preservation Planner Michael Lambert reviewed the case which was for replacement windows. He reported the window on the west side was damaged last fall and was replaced with a two-part window which did not meet HPC standards and it was brought to the city’s attention. Historic photographs of the building’s windows were depicted. Mr. Lambert explained that the petitioner was proposing to replace the windows with an aluminum store front system and one that was more consistent with the historic character of the original windows. A sample window frame was distributed. Due to the original product not matching the small portions of the historic window frame the petitioner found a sample window that would match the details. Lambert recalled for the commissioners that other commercial businesses had new aluminum store front windows installed, which were permitted, as long as they met the proportions of the old window and the glass had to be close to the front of the building. Mr. Todd Crabbe with Craftsman Services, explained that the proposal includes replacement windows for the west and south sides. The windows will be a bronze tone aluminum frame with thermal pane and Low E glass. Questions followed as to what was under the window awning to which Mr. Crabbe did not know.  Historic Preservation Commission July 21, 2015 Motion by Commissioner Zinke, seconded by Commissioner Hiller to approve the application for 229 W. State Street, as presented. Roll call: Aye: Hiller, Salomon, Zellmer, Zinke, Roy Nay: None MOTION PASSED. VOTE: 5-0 B. 123 W. State Street (Case No. 2015-065) Applicant: Benjamin Ward, Owner; Mike Howell, Carpentry with Integrity; Application New Rear Yard Pergola. Mr. Lambert noted the west elevation of the Yates Building was not exposed for many of the years it stood; however, the elevation became exposed in 1999. Historic photographs as well as more recent photos followed. Lambert reviewed the site plan. The proposed (unstained) cedar pergola will be located on the west side and will be designed to match some of the details the HPC approved prior on the building. Brussell block pavers will be used to tie in the 1900s cobble stone appearance. Recent views of the open space followed. Mr. Mike Howell from Carpentry with Integrity was present to answer questions. Commissioners had positive comments regarding the proposal. Mr. Howell pointed out the exact location of the pergola and spoke about what lighting currently existed in the back area of the building. However, he stated there would not be lighting on the pergola itself. Per Commissioner Zinke’s question about whether a fence would be installed near the public sidewalk on State Street, Mr. Howell stated there would be no fence and explained it was more of an accessibility issue to the first floor, which was the reason for the long walk. Lambert pointed out for the commissioners that the Illinois Historic Preservation Commission is requiring the stairway on the west side to be painted. Motion by Commissioner Salomon, seconded by Commissioner Zellmer to accept the proposal for 123 W. State Street, as presented. Roll call: Aye: Hiller, Salomon, Zellmer, Zinke, Roy Nay: None MOTION PASSED. VOTE: 5-0 C. 321 Hamilton Street (Case No. 2015-066) Applicant: First Congregational Church; Lynnly Buchanan, representative; Alexander Novy, Project Coordinator; Application for New Yard Pergola. (Commissioner Zellmer recused himself) Mr. Lambert located the site on the overhead and explained where the proposed pergola would be located, i.e., around the corner off of Fourth Street. The site is an open area/gathering place for the church. Currently, there is a low retaining wall on the site. A site plan followed. The project is an Eagle Scout project. Boy Scout Alexander Novy summarized that the red cedar (untreated) pergola will straddle the existing (retaining) walls and beyond the existing pavers. He described where the posts and beams would be located and said that he will be the planner, supervisor, fundraiser and worker on the project, along with his troop. He described the steps that he planned to take to complete the project which he estimated to be done by mid-August. Per a question, the church plans to use the new area for weddings and outdoor church services during the summer. Motion by Commissioner Salomon, seconded by Commissioner Zinke, to approve the proposal for 321 Hamilton Street, as presented. Roll call: Aye: Hiller, Salomon, Zinke, Roy Nay: None MOTION PASSED. VOTE: 4-0 (Zellmer returns) 2  Historic Preservation Commission July 21, 2015 5. Old Business – None. 6. Secretary’s Report A. Election of Vice Chairman – Due to Commissioner Andersson’s resignation, the commissioners needed to elect a new vice chairman. Zinke nominated Commissioner Hiller due to his vast experience, his ownership of a historic home; and his willingness to research unanswered. Questions. Hearing no further nominations, a voice vote was taken and Hiller was unanimously approved to be the commission’s vice chairman. B. Draft Historic Preservation Ordinance Update – Lambert provided an update on the ordinance, noting the next meeting on it will be August 10, 2015. He will be seeking information on some of the items before the ordinance gets redrafted, which he estimates to be sometime in September. C. CAMP Commissioner Training Workshop – Lambert recalled for the commissioners that staff applied and received an Illinois Association Historic Preservation Commission grant, which grant has to be completed in two years. The Commissions Assistance and Mentoring Program (CAMP) is a nationally led preservation and training seminar which is open to all historic preservation commissions within an hour and half radius of Geneva, which is holding the event. The seminar is mandatory for this commission. The seminar costs $70.00 for the day and is scheduled for November 14, 2015, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, in City Hall. Preservation commissions that have expressed interest are from Downers Grove, Oswego, Plainfield, and West Chicago. D. Sixth Street School Demolition / Historic District Survey Update – Per Lambert, the demolition is on schedule for the end of this month. Collin and Glorianne Campbell have been at the site looking for the time capsules. They were in attendance and invited the commissioners to assist them in the digging tomorrow morning. Lambert shared that if the commissioners were following the ordinance through the process, there were many comments made about the tax credits and the tax freeze for historic buildings not being that valuable because the credit was a fairly small amount. However, after meeting with an IHPA representative today and reviewing four potential tax freeze projects, a tax credit project, and two completed tax assessment freezes, Lambert emphasized how active the city was in promoting such benefits and agreed that it was, in fact, a very good benefit to the homeowners and meaningful program to the city’s residents. As to the historic survey, Lambert reported that Erica Risharo (phonetic spelling), the consultant for the project, was almost completed with the survey. She found that two sections were missing out of the 1979 and 1980 historic district nomination -- the early settlement architecture and the industrial history. Lambert hopes to have a copy of the her report for the commissioners in late August, then with a recommendation to the IHPC for any boundary modifications to the survey. Because sections were being added and a number of buildings were being redefined of their classifications, an amendment to the National Registry nomination designation would have to occur. Lambert expects the report will be heard by the Illinois Historic Preservation Council sometime in the spring. However, he expects the commissioners to have a report this September. Details followed as to what that would entail. Lastly, Lambert said he will have a monthly activity report to the commissioners next month. 3  Historic Preservation Commission July 21, 2015 7. New Business A. From the Commission – Commissioner Zinke raised discussion about some of the negative comments the commission was receiving, especially at the council meetings. She recommended that the commission review its window policy and align it with the National Park Services and with the state policies because she felt the city’s policy was too restrictive. Lambert explained the process that would be required to revise the city’s window policy; however, he felt it was a “welcomed” project. In reading through the various window policies, Lambert stated the city’s major change to its policy is that while the HPC would ask for the restoration of existing historic wood windows, there would be the option where historic windows have been replaced, removed or beyond repair, the HPC could allow them to be replaced on any facade at any level with a suitable window -- wood, clad, or a material that met the National Park Service’s policy. He believed if it was the commission’s consensus to align the city’s window policy with the National Park Service’s window policy, that would be enough direction for him. However, Chairman Roy suggested the commissioners do a side-by-side comparison and discuss it next month; Lambert would place the window policy on next month’s agenda. Lambert asked that commissioners determine what specific elements they wanted to be addressed and he would bring those issues to City Administrator McKittrick and Planning Director DeGroot. Secondly, Zinke mentioned referred to a pamphlet that was written some ago which discussed the benefits of living in a historic district but she was not been able to locate any copy of it. Zinke said she heard comments to the contrary and that it was a financial burden living in a historic district. She stated the commission could research and provide its own list of benefits of living/owning a home in a historic district and suggested forming a subcommittee. She asked for input from the commissioners. A couple of commissioners could not recall the details of what was actually covered in the pamphlet. Due to the time constraints involved, Lambert offered to review any work done by the commissioners or use the city’s intern. Zinke offered to contact former historic planner, Doug Karre, to see if he knew anything about the pamphlet. Continuing, Zinke explained that once the information was gathered for the new pamphlet, she said it could be disseminated to all of the homeowners in the historic district, possibly through the city’s utility bills, published in local media, or placed on the city’s web site. However, Chairman Roy shared that the purpose of the pamphlet had to be determined first as well as the commission getting direction from city council on what type of education they would be looking for. Lambert suggested the commissioners put together a few educational pamphlets they would like to produce, have the council review them and then ask them if one of the pamphlets meets the council’s goal toward education. As a reminder, Lambert stated he had no printing budget for the pamphlets which had to be taken into consideration. He offered to follow up on how to get some of the information distributed. Commissioner Zinke then offered to draft a second pamphlet explaining the steps of how a homeowner would landmark their home locally, also discussing the benefits of it. She asked if another commissioner would be willing to assist her. Lambert thought it was a good idea but suggested waiting on this suggestion until staff was given direction as to what the process would be since it was still being discussed at the council level. Commissioners thought it was a good idea. Lambert suggested that an outline be drafted by the commissioners for discussion with the council. Roy asked to place this matter on next month’s agenda. Zinke would work on an outline. B. From the Public – Ms. Glorianne Campbell, 18 S. Sixth Street, agreed that there were negative comments being said about the commission and she strongly encouraged the commissioners to follow through with their educational pamphlets and be proactive. 4  Historic Preservation Commission July 21, 2015 Mr. Collin Campbell, 18 S. Sixth Street, also concurred and stressed the “educational” component was necessary. He could not imagine the council not being in favor of any effort this commission put forward to educate. 8. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:12 p.m. on motion by Commissioner Salomon, seconded by Commissioner Zellmer. Motion carried unanimously by voice vote of 5-0. 5 Community Development Department Report CITY OF GENEVA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 4A 21 North Fourth Street August 28, 2015 Window Modifications Applicant: BACKGROUND Patrick Griffin for The structure at 21 North Fourth Street was constructed, according to the GriffinWilliams LLP / 1999 Architectural Survey, in the early 1980s as a retail store for Giesche GWF Real Estate Holdings LLC, Shoes. Owners The 1999 Architectural Survey classifies this property as “non- contributing” within the Historic District. Tim Nelson, The storefront was remodeled with the addition of some decorative piers Tim Nelson Architects and Prairie School-inspired light fixtures at some point after the original construction date. REQUEST Request: The current owners desire to remove the storefront piers and lighting. Concept Review: Additionally, the proposed design includes the addition of three windows Facade Modifications facing Fourth Street as well as the addition of decorative shingle siding within the existing gable above the main entry off Fourth Street. HPC Case Number: 2015-029 Staff Liaison: Michael Lambert Preservation Planner 630/938.4541 mlambert@geneva.il.us Community Development Department Report CITY OF GENEVA, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 5A 13 North Third Street August 18, 2015 Storefront Façade Modifications Applicant: BACKGROUND Brian Goewey, The wood-framed structure at 13 North Third Street was relocated in Owner 1901 for a hotel that never was constructed at the northeast corner of State and Third streets. That site was later purchased and, in 1906, the Jim Bolenger, John Wheeler Construction Company built the State Bank of Geneva. The CFA5 Architects property was enlarged, several times, after 1940. The most significant alteration after 1940 was the addition of a one-story, brick storefront in the former front yard of the original structure. The 1999 Architectural Survey rated the building as “non-contributing” Request: due to age of the storefront and remodeling of the original frame Permit Review: residence. Storefront Façade Historic images provide a sense of the evolution of the property during Modifications the past 110 years. The house can be dated because, when moved in 1901, a schoolbook was found embedded into the limestone foundation with a flyleaf inscribed HPC Case Number: with its owner’s name and the date of 1848! Only the second floor of the 2015-073 early, 3 bay, gable front house remains; the lower level has been removed, over time, aided by the insertion of several steel beams. Staff Liaison: A bit of history about the present structure: Michael Lambert Once sitting at the northeast corner of Third and State streets, Preservation Planner the house had been a dentist’s home and office before 630/938.4541 becoming a restaurant (John Rayment’s German Kitchen). mlambert@geneva.il.us In 1901, Rayment established a separate saloon at the rear of the property in a converted carriage barn. Also in 1901, the house was moved from its orientation, facing State Street, to the rear of the lot, facing Third Street. The house was moved for a proposed new hotel that never materialized. The relocated house continued as a restaurant under the same name at its new location until 1906. The State Street frontage was sold in 1906 for the State Bank of Geneva building, completed in 1907 (229 W. State Street).  August 18, 2015 Agenda Item 5A Page 2 of 3 Storefront Façade Modifications Between 1906 and 1908, the Third Street restaurant operated as A. G. Johnson’s Restaurant (see 1906 photo), an American Chop House, but was re-opened as The New German Kitchen by Johnson in 1908. After World War 1, the restaurant was re-named the English Kitchen, likely as a direct result of disassociation with all things of German origin during the post-war era. The English Kitchen was noted as “the most picturesque dining room in all of Geneva” (preceding the opening of Kate Raftery’s The Little Traveler [1925] and Anne Forsythe’s Mill Race Inn [1933]). Between 1930 and 1945, the one-story brick addition along Third Street may have been erected. The restaurant operated as the Geneva Cafe after several additions were made to the rear of the building. This may have been when the first floor of the frame residence began to be removed. The Geneva Café was, reportedly, a popular stop for travelers of the nearly adjacent Lincoln Highway. About 1945, the building became Hanson’s News Agency that was adjacent to a newspaper distribution and folding room (for delivery boys), established in the rear portions of the building. “Skip” Hanson also sold sporting goods from the storefront. By 1954 (when the National Tea grocery building was under construction), the building housed Allen Elmgren’s Ice Cream and Soda Fountain, a popular “teen hang-out” throughout much of the 1950s. By the early 1960s, the building had changed hands and was the home of Miller’s Sporting Goods and Grill. About 1962, the building was converted by Ronald G. Samuel (b. 1931 and d. 2013) to Ron’s Pet & Saddle which further opened the first floor retail space, operating at this location for 23 years. At that time, Linda’s Little Critters, another pet store, opened at this location. The Great Harvest Bread Company remodeled the interior and opened in 1994 and closed in 2014. According to the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA): a typical development pattern in urban neighborhoods is the lonely, single, commercial corner building (contemporary to or slightly later than the surrounding houses) that served as the immediate neighborhood’s grocery store, with the owner living above. This example in Geneva is a twist to that phenomenon, in that it is the lonely residential building now surrounded by commercial development that was converted to mixed use with commercial below and residential above. The 13 North Third Street building is unusual in that, most of the time, buildings like this are in residential neighborhoods: a house turned into a commercial building to serve the surrounding residents. The Third Street building is a house turned into a commercial building because everything else is now commercial. The more common course of action would have been to demolish the house and build a new commercial building of one or two stories. Either way, the 13 North Third Street building is certainly historic. In an existing Historic District, whose period of significance (POS) predates the construction of the storefront, perhaps the whole building would be seen as non-contributing (as was the determination in 1999 when the local architectural survey was completed). But, we don’t have to wonder about that for this building. A new district (or any written after 1990) or a new individual list would surely include the whole building at 13 North third Street as contributing. As a contributing property to the Historic district, the building would be a candidate for the rehabilitation tax credit.  August 18, 2015 Agenda Item 5A Page 3 of 3 Storefront Façade Modifications REQUEST The current owner is seeking approval of the façade, as submitted, or approval for some variation of the submitted façade. The architect may present alternate façade design options at the August 18, 2015 HPC meeting. August 18, 2015 13 North Third Street, Agenda Item 5A HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE & PROJECT COMPLIANCE SUMMARY – STAFF ANALYSIS 1. 1999 COG Architectural Non-contributing due to age at time of survey Survey Designation (NC, C, PS, S): 2. Associated Architectural Greek Revival, Commercial / Office Building Style(s) or Type: 3. Significant Architectural Brick Façade with limestone coping trim, and original fenestration patterns built Features : in front of a relocated, Greek Revival, Gable-front Residence. 4. Date of Construction: Residence: ca. 1848-1850, relocated 1906 Commercial Storefront: ca. 1940-1945 5. Date(s) of Significant 1906 Addition(s) and/or ca. 1940-1945 Alteration(s): 6. Period of Significance (POS): ca. 1848 - 1965 7. Historic Names Associated German Kitchen, English Kitchen, Geneva Café, Elmgren’s Ice Cream Stand, with Property: Hanson’s News Agency, Miller’s Sport Shop & Grill, Ron’s Pet & Saddle, Linda’s Little Critters, Great Harvest Bread Co. 8. Historic Images: Yes (see attached) 9. Historic Map Representation: Birdseye View of Geneva: 1869 Sanborn Fire Insurance Co.: 1885, 1891, 1897, 1903, 1912, 1923, 1930, 1945 10. Why is it Important? Rare local example of this type of commercial conversion and expansion. (Context / Significance) 11. Proposed Architectural The overall massing is not proposed to change. Proposed window and door repair Features Consistent with respects the original and evolved architectural character of the building. No Architectural Style and POS: modifications proposed for the façade of the 19th century residence. (Exterior Rehab / Additions) 12. Proposed Architectural The façade treatment does not retain the exposure of the brick façade and, Features Inconsistent with therefore, may or may not be considered to be historically-sensitive. Architectural Style and POS: (Exterior Rehab / Additions) 13. Significant Landscape N/A Elements: 14. Application of COG The proposal conforms to the general provisions of the City of Geneva Design HPC Design Guidelines: Guidelines except that the proposed façade treatment may or may not be considered to be historically-sensitive.. 15. Compliance with COG The proposal conforms to the general provisions of the City of Geneva Window HPC Window Policy: Policy and the National Park Service compliance standards. 16. Compliance with COG The façade treatment does not retain the exposure of the brick façade and, HPC Siding Policy: therefore, may or may not be considered to be historically-sensitive. 17. Summary IHPA Comments: IHPA states that the brick façade must be substantially visible in order to secure (Projects utilizing or approval for Rehabilitation/Investment Tax Credits, if the owner chose to apply potentially utilizing Rehab for the 25% rehabilitation credit as a condition of the proposed work. Tax Credit or Tax Assessment Freeze) German Kitchen, 1906 German Kitchen, 1906 Elmgren’s Ice Cream Stand, 1954 Miller’s Sports Shop, ca. 1962 13 North Third Street - Existing Conditions August 2015 13 North Third Street – Proposed Modifications August 2015 13 North Third Street – Proposed Light Fixture August 2015 GIA MIA Storefront Alteration: 1. Keep existing door frame. Paint all trim Black. Door in disrepair and needs to be replaced with solid hickory door with glass to match existing door. Door transom to remain. 2. Existing brick to remain. Fill all holes in mortar. New hickory panel (sealed with UV varnish all sides prior to installation). to be mounted on top of existing brick. Panel to be secured to building with expansion fasteners that attach through the grout (not brick) and can be removed to restore building to original look. Sign is a flat non-illuminated panel that mounts on top of the hickory panel. 3. Lighting - Gooseneck fixture to illuminate the entrance, and storefront. Mounted to the surface of the existing building (attached to the grout not brick). 4. Flat GIA MIA letters form the company sign. Will work with local signage codes for exact size. Flat - non illuminated letters mounted to the hickory panels. 5. Windows and trim - All glass shall be either reused or if in disrepair, replaced with like material. Trim to have paint stripped, resealed, and painted black. 6. Storefront Hickory Panels - Multiple panels to be fabricated in Hickory (sealed with UV varnish all sides prior to installation). Panels to be secured to building with expansion fasteners that attach through the grout (not brick) and can be removed to restore building to original look. GIA MIA 13 N. 3rd St. Geneva, IL  August 18, 2015 13 North Third Street, Agenda Item 5A 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 continues to function as a commercial / retail building. be placed in a new use that requires minimal The property has been utilized as a restaurant/saloon since 1901. The change to the defining characteristics of the 19th century wood-framed house was moved from the corner of State building and its site and environment. and Third in 1906. The one-story brick addition was constructed between 1940 and 1945 and has served as a newsstand, sporting goods store, grill and ice cream fountain, two pet stores, and—most recently—the Great Harvest Bread Co. store. 2. The historic character of a property shall be The massing, brick façade, windows and doors will be retained along retained and preserved. The removal of historic Third Street. However, the proposed hickory-wood façade will materials or alteration of features and spaces that obscure the historic character of the building although details call for characterize a property shall be avoided. the façade to be installed without damage to the brick façade. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical The proposed work does not respect the historic architecture of the record of its time, place, and use. Changes that building. The building type (a converted residence with a one-story create a false sense of historical development, masonry retail storefront constructed at the public right-of-way) is a such as adding conjectural features or architectural common commercial building type of the first 2/3 of the twentieth elements from other buildings, shall not be century. Few examples were constructed or exist in the Geneva undertaken. community. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes The masonry storefront has attained historic significance in its own that have acquired historic significance in their right. own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction The distinctive features include the one-story brick façade with the techniques or examples of craftsmanship that original wood-framed building behind; original windows and door characterize a property shall be preserved. openings at the storefront; and the angled entry wall directed towards State Street.. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired The brick exterior is proposed to be completely covered and not rather than replaced. Where the severity of cleaned or repaired. Windows and door frames will be repaired and deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive painted. A new door leaf, similar in character to the existing door, will feature, the new feature shall match the old in be installed within the existing door frame; the transom will remain. design, color, texture, and other visual qualities Gooseneck/bracket-mounted lighting is appropriate for the building and, where possible, materials. Replacement of and is encouraged throughout the commercial district per Design missing features shall be substantiated by Guidelines. documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as The wood façade is proposed to be installed utilizing stainless steel sandblasting, that cause damage to historic anchors into the existing mortar joints, preventing damage to the materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of individual brick faces. 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 The attachment of the proposed lighting is not clearly identified. The construction shall not destroy historic materials proposed wood façade is differentiated by material and texture from that characterize the property. The new work shall the historic façade, but—as proposed—will obscure the historic be differentiated from the old and shall be character of the façade completely. 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 The proposed work is to be mounted in a manner that will not damage construction shall be undertaken in such a manner or destroy historic building materials. 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.  AGENDA ITEM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Commission-initiated text amendments to the Geneva Historic Preservation Commission Window Policy – Regarding regulatory changes to the City of Agenda Item: Geneva, Design Guidelines for Historic Properties, adopted as Resolution 2010- 26 on April 19, 2010. Presenter & Title: Michael Lambert, Preservation Planner Date: May 26, 2015 Please Check Appropriate Box: Committee of the Whole Meeting Special Committee of the Whole Meeting City Council Meeting Special City Council Meeting Public Hearing X Historic Preservation Commission Meeting YES Estimated Cost: N/A Budgeted? NO If NO, please explain how the item will be funded: Executive Summary: Since 2013, the Geneva Historic Preservation Commission has discussed, from time-to-time, modifying the existing Geneva HPC Window Policy to be consistent with the window policies for historic properties of the National Park Service (NPS) and the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA). Primarily, the effective change is to allow replacement windows of alternate materials when wood windows are beyond reasonable repair. The NPS and IHPA policies require that certain design elements be required as part of an approved window replacement policy. The NPS and IHPA policies continue to encourage the retention and rehabilitation of existing wood windows; however, their policies recognize that new wood windows may not have the longevity of historic wood windows and that some (not all) alternate material windows can closely match the details of historic windows. Additionally, where historic windows do not exist, the NPS and IHPA policies allow for alternate material windows rather than windows that are of the same material that would have been originally installed in a property. Attachments: (please list) Staff Memorandum Window Policy statements: City of Geneva, IHPA and NPS Comparison Chart of City of Geneva, IHPA and NPS window policies with summary changes Recommendation / Suggested Action: (briefly explain) Staff recommends revision of the Geneva HPC Window Policy to be consistent with state and national standards to be forwarded to the Geneva City Council for ratification by amendment of the existing resolution.  Summary of Standard Window Rehabilitation Policies - Primary Elevations (Viewable from a Public Right-of-Way – Street-facing Elevations and Some Side Elevations) EXISTING ILLINOIS CONDITION OF EXISTING WINDOWS NATIONAL PARK SERVICE (NPS) CHANGE / NO CITY OF GENEVA HISTORIC PRESERVATION AGENCY (IHPA ) (WOOD OR METAL) WINDOW POLICY CHANGE HPC WINDOW POLICY WINDOW POLICY Existing wood or metal windows, original to the building or at least 50 years old and in good material condition and/or Historic windows must be repaired and maintained. Historic windows must be repaired and maintained. Historic windows must be repaired and maintained. No Change suitable for rehabilitation in the review authority’s opinion. Historic windows may be replaced, but new window units Historic windows may be replaced, but new window units Historic windows may be replaced but new window units must match the original size, operation/configuration, and must match the original size, operation/configuration, and must match the original material, size, details of the historic windows based on physical and details of the historic windows based on physical and operation/configuration, and details of the historic Existing wood or metal windows, photographic evidence. Historic wood windows may be photographic evidence. Historic wood windows may be windows based on physical and photographic evidence. If Change original to the building or at least 50 replaced with solid wood or aluminum clad wood windows. replaced with solid wood or aluminum clad wood windows. the historic windows had (or likely had) muntins, then new (allow alternate materials years old but in poor material condition If the historic windows had (or likely had) muntins, then new If the historic windows had (or likely had) muntins, then windows must have true, divided-lites or simulated, and require muntin and/or not suitable for rehabilitation in windows must have true, divided-lites or simulated, divided- new windows must have true, divided-lites or simulated, divided-lites with exterior and interior applied muntins with spacer bars) the review authority’s opinion. lites with exterior and interior applied muntins with spacer divided-lites with exterior and interior applied muntins with spacer bars. Glazing should match the historic character bars. Glazing should match the historic character of the spacer bars. Glazing should match the historic character of of the glass (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective glass (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or the glass (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or or heavily-tinted windows shall not be permitted. heavily-tinted windows shall not be permitted. heavily-tinted windows shall not be permitted. Existing windows may be retained or existing windows may Existing windows may be retained or existing windows be replaced. However, any new window units must match may be replaced. However, any new window units must the original size, operation/configuration, and details of the match the original size, operation/configuration, and details historic windows based on physical and photographic of the historic windows based on physical and Existing windows may be retained or, if modified, may be evidence. Windows, which—historically—were made of photographic evidence. Windows, which—historically— replaced but new window units must match the original wood, may be replaced with solid wood or metal-clad wood were made of wood, may be replaced with solid wood or material, size, operation/configuration, and details based windows. Windows, which—historically—were made of metal-clad wood windows. Windows, which—historically— Existing wood or metal windows, on physical and photographic evidence of the historic metal may be replaced with solid metal or metal-clad wood were made of metal may be replaced with solid metal or are not original to the building and are Change window. If the original windows had (or likely had) windows. Composite windows (fiberglas, vinyl, etc.) may be metal-clad wood windows. Composite windows (fiberglas, less than 50 years old but historic (allow alternate materials muntins, then new windows must have true, divided-lites used as replacement windows only if the details and vinyl, etc.) may be used as replacement windows only if evidence (physical or photographic) and require muntin or simulated, divided-lites with exterior and interior applied dimensions can match those of the historic window. If the the details and dimensions can match those of the historic identifies the original window material as spacer bars) muntins with spacer bars. historic windows had (or likely had) muntins, then new window. If the historic windows had (or likely had) muntins, wood or metal. Glazing should match the historic character of the glass windows must have true, divided-lites or simulated, divided- then new windows must have true, divided-lites or (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or heavily- lites with exterior and interior applied muntins with spacer simulated, divided-lites with exterior and interior applied tinted windows shall not be permitted. bars; muntins must be of dimensions appropriate to the muntins with spacer bars; muntins must be of dimensions architectural style and period of the building. Glazing should appropriate to the architectural style and period of the match the historic character of the glass (clear, patterned, building. Glazing should match the historic character of the opaque, etc.) but reflective or heavily-tinted windows shall glass (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or not be permitted. heavily-tinted windows shall not be permitted. Existing windows may be retained or, if modified, may be Existing windows may be retained or, if modified, may be Existing windows may be retained or, if modified, may be replaced, but new window units must match the presumed replaced, but new window units must match the presumed replaced, but new window units must match the presumed original material, size, operation/configuration, and details Existing wood or metal windows, original size, operation/configuration, and details based on original size, operation/configuration, and details based on based on local buildings of similar age and architectural are not original to the building and are local buildings of similar age and architectural character. If local buildings of similar age and architectural character. If character. If the original windows had (or likely had) less than 50 years old and no historic the original windows had (or likely had) muntins, then new the original windows had (or likely had) muntins, then new muntins, then new windows must have true, divided-lites No Change evidence (physical or photographic) windows must have true, divided-lites or simulated, divided- windows must have true, divided-lites or simulated, or simulated, divided-lites with exterior and interior applied exists to identify the original window lites with exterior and interior applied muntins with spacer divided-lites with exterior and interior applied muntins with muntins with spacer bars. Glazing should match the material as wood or metal. bars. Glazing should match the historic character of the spacer bars. Glazing should match the historic character of historic character of the glass (clear, patterned, opaque, glass (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or the glass (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or etc.) but reflective or heavily-tinted windows shall not be heavily-tinted windows shall not be permitted. heavily-tinted windows shall not be permitted. permitted.  Summary of Standard Window Rehabilitation Policies - Secondary Elevations (Not Visible from a Public Right-of-Way – Some Side Elevations and Rear Elevations) EXISTING ILLINOIS CONDITION OF EXISTING WINDOWS NATIONAL PARK SERVICE (NPS) CHANGE / NO CITY OF GENEVA HISTORIC PRESERVATION AGENCY (IHPA ) (WOOD OR METAL) WINDOW POLICY CHANGE HPC WINDOW POLICY WINDOW POLICY Consider change for side- facing windows towards the rear of an interior side yard elevation (match Historic windows, clearly visible from the street right-of- Existing wood or metal windows, original Historic windows, clearly visible from the street right-of- IHPA and NPS way(s), must be repaired and maintained; some side and to the building or at least 50 years old Historic windows, if visible from the street right-of-way, way(s), must be repaired and maintained; some side and standards); may consider all rear windows may be replaced but side-facing windows and in good material condition and/or must be repaired and maintained; rear windows are not all rear windows may be replaced but side-facing windows requiring restoration and which are replaced must retain size, suitable for rehabilitation in the review regulated. which are replaced must retain size, retention of historic operation/configuration, and details of the historic authority’s opinion. operation/configuration, and details of the historic windows. windows that are not windows. visible from the street but are located within the earliest portions of a building. Historic windows clearly visible from the street right-of- Historic windows clearly visible from the street right-of- Historic windows can be retained or may be replaced but way(s), may be replaced, but new window units must way(s), may be replaced, but new window units must new window units, if visible from the street right-of-way, match the original material, size, operation/configuration, match the original material, size, operation/configuration, must match the original material, size, and details of the historic windows based on physical and and details of the historic windows based on physical and operation/configuration, and details of the historic windows Consider change for side- Existing wood or metal windows, photographic evidence. Historic wood windows, not clearly photographic evidence. Historic wood windows, not based on physical and photographic evidence. If the facing windows towards original to the building or at least 50 visible from the street right-of-way(s), may be replaced with clearly visible from the street right-of-way(s), may be historic windows had (or likely had) muntins, then new the rear of an interior side years old but in poor material condition windows of any material. If the historic windows had (or replaced with windows of any material. If the historic windows must have true, divided-lites or simulated, yard elevation; define and/or not suitable for rehabilitation in likely had) muntins, then new windows must have muntins windows had (or likely had) muntins, then new windows divided-lites with exterior and interior applied muntins with limits of “visible from the review authority’s opinion. to match configuration of primary façade or as based on must have muntins to match configuration of primary spacer bars. Glazing should match the historic character of street” historic documentation; no spacer bars required. Glazing façade or as based on historic documentation. Glazing the glass (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or should match the historic character of the glass (clear, should match the historic character of the glass (clear, heavily-tinted windows shall not be permitted. Rear patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or heavily-tinted patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or heavily-tinted windows are not regulated. windows shall not be permitted. windows shall not be permitted. Non-historic windows may be retained or, if modified, may Existing windows may be retained or replaced. However, Existing windows may be retained or replaced. However, be replaced but new window units, if visible from the street any new window units must match the original size and any new window units must match the original size and right-of-way, must match the original material, size, operation/configuration of the presumed or documented operation/configuration of the presumed or documented Existing wood or metal windows, operation/configuration, and details based on physical and historic windows. Historic wood windows, not clearly visible historic windows. Historic wood windows, not clearly are not original to the building and are photographic evidence of the historic window. If the original from the street right-of-way(s), may be replaced with visible from the street right-of-way(s), may be replaced Change less than 50 years old but historic windows had (or likely had) muntins, then new windows windows of any material. If the historic windows had (or with windows of any material. If the historic windows had (allow alternate materials evidence (physical or photographic) must have true, divided-lites or simulated, divided-lites with likely had) muntins, then new windows must have muntins (or likely had) muntins, then new windows must have and require muntin spacer identifies the original window material as exterior and interior applied muntins with spacer bars. to match configuration of the primary façade or as based muntins to match configuration of the primary façade or as bars) wood or metal. Glazing should match the historic character of the glass on historic documentation; no spacer bars required. based on historic documentation; no spacer bars required. (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or heavily- Glazing should match the historic character of the glass Glazing should match the historic character of the glass tinted windows shall not be permitted. Rear windows are (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or heavily- (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or heavily- not regulated. tinted windows shall not be permitted. tinted windows shall not be permitted. Existing windows may be retained or, if modified, may be Existing windows may be retained or, if modified, may be Non-historic windows may be retained or, if modified, may replaced, but new window units at a historic opening must replaced, but new window units at a historic opening must be replaced, but new window units, if visible from the street match the presumed original size, operation/configuration, match the presumed original size, operation/configuration, right-of-way, must match the presumed original material, and details based on local buildings of similar age and and details based on local buildings of similar age and Existing wood or metal windows, size, operation/configuration, and details based on local architectural character. New windows should match or architectural character. New windows should match or are not original to the building and are buildings of similar age and architectural character. If the complement the size, operation/configuration, and details complement the size, operation/configuration, and details Change less than 50 years old and no historic original windows had (or likely had) muntins, then new of other replacement windows. If the original windows had of other replacement windows. If the original windows had (allow alternate materials evidence (physical or photographic) windows must have true, divided-lites or simulated, (or likely had) muntins, then new windows must have (or likely had) muntins, then new windows must have and require muntin spacer exists to identify the original window divided-lites with exterior and interior applied muntins with muntins to match configuration of the primary façade or as muntins to match configuration of the primary façade or as bars) material as wood or metal. spacer bars. Glazing should match the historic character of based on historic documentation; no spacer bars required. based on historic documentation; no spacer bars required. the glass (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or Glazing should match the historic character of the glass Glazing should match the historic character of the glass heavily-tinted windows shall not be permitted. Rear (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or heavily- (clear, patterned, opaque, etc.) but reflective or heavily- windows are not regulated. tinted windows shall not be permitted. tinted windows shall not be permitted. NOTE: IHPA and NPS encourages the installation of interior or exterior storm windows/panels for energy efficiency, a more sustainable and “green” energy conservation method and may provide conformance with International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) standards; use of storm windows/panels not specifically stated in COG policy. City of Geneva Geneva Historic Preservation Commission 22 S. First Street Geneva, IL 60134 630/232.0818 GENEVA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION - WINDOW POLICY Policy Guide for Window Repair or Window Replacement Requests Replacement windows are not a recommended treatment for historic buildings. To the greatest extent possible, the maintenance and preservation of original historic exterior materials should be encouraged in all cases. The replacement of windows frequently compromises the asesthetic integrity of a building through the removal of original architectural details and the alteration of the building’s historic character and visual identification with a particular period or style of the past. This window policy was developed by the Geneva Historic Preservation Commission in 2000 as a tool to aid property owners in selecting appropriate treatment for their project. 1. Contributing (or higher rated) buildings, Residential and Commercial. Thoroughly assess the condition of the window sash and frame. Repair first, assuming windows are original or historic. If the assessment determines that repair is not feasible, replacements should be of materials, detailing and styling that are consistent with that of the original or existing historic windows. 2. Non-contributing buildings. Thoroughly assess the condition of the window sash and frame. Repair first. If the assessment determines that repair is not feasible, the style and proportions of replacements should be consistent with building style, however more flexibility should be allowed in the window material. 3. Existing additions to contributing (or higher rated) buildings prominent and easily viewed from the street. Thoroughly assess the condition of the window sash and frame. Repair first, assuming windows are original or historic. If the assessment determines that repair is not feasible, replacement should be of materials, detailing and styling that are consistent with that of the original or existing historic windows. 4. Existing additions to contributing (or higher rated) buildings not prominent or easily viewed from the street. Thoroughly assess the condition of the window sash and frame. Repair first. If the assessment determines that repair is not feasible, the style and proportions of replacements should be consistent with building style, however more flexibility should be allowed in the window material. Original historic portion will always be addressed by #1. 5. New additions to contributing (or higher rated) buildings. Windows should match material, detailing and styling of existing windows, if on prominent facade, but allowing for flexibility of materials if addition is not prominent or readily visible from the street. Original, historic portion will always be addressed by #1. 6. New additions to non-contributing buildings. Windows should match material, detailing and styling of existing windows, if on prominent facade, but allowing for flexibility of materials if addition is not prominent or readily visible from the street. 7. New residential or commercial construction. Flexibility should be allowed in material, however styling, detailing, spacing and proportions should be appropriate to the suggested architecture or styling of the new structure. Interior snap-in or false, between-pane grids, are not appropriate. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation The Geneva Historic Preservation Commission uses the Standards when reviewing specific rehabilitation projects in the Historic District. The following standards should be considered when dealing with historic windows. Standard #2 The original distinguishing qualities or character of a building, structure or site and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible. Standard #4 Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. Standard #5 Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. Standard #6 Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced, whenever possible. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture and other visual qualities. Window Policy, Page 1 of 3 City of Geneva Geneva Historic Preservation Commission 22 S. First Street Geneva, IL 60134 630/232.0818 Window Significance Not all windows are equally significant. Factors determining significance include: • Age of window • Design of window • Physical integrity • Street facing façade • Architectural and historical significance Windows should be considered significant if they: 1. Are original or historic. 2. Reflect the original design intent for the building. 3. Reflect period or regional styles or building practices. 4. Reflect changes to the building resulting from major periods or events. 5. Are examples of exceptional craftsmanship or design. Window Facts • Windows convey building character. • They are made of irreplaceable materials. • Windows need periodic maintenance. • Renovation of windows is realistic and affordable. Storm Windows The use of exterior storm windows should be investigated whenever feasible because they are: 1. Thermally efficient 2. Cost-effective 3. Reversible 4. Allow the retention of original windows Interior storm windows are available and do work best in some situations. Storm windows, in combination with historic windows, can provide better energy performance than most modern windows, which utilize insulating glass. Wood storm windows are preferred as wood has a better insulating value than metal. However, aluminum clad storm windows may be allowed provided they do not cover the trim. Storm windows can also provide significant protection from the weather to your historic windows. If old or historic storm windows exist, consider continuing to use them. Storm windows can also be placed on the inside of a window. Weatherstripping is the single most cost-effective way to improve the energy performance of your windows. Energy conservation is no excuse for the wholesale destruction of historic windows which can be made thermally efficient by historically and aesthetically acceptable means. What is the Condition of Your Window? When evaluating the physical condition of windows, look at the following: 1. Window location 2. Condition of paint 3. Condition of frame and sill 4. Condition of sash (rails, stiles and muntins) 5. Glazing problems 6. Hardware 7. Overal condition (excellent, good, fair, poor, etc.) Moisture is the primary contributing factor in wooden window decay. Failure of the paint should not be mistakenly interpreted as a sign that the wood is in poor condition and hence, irreparable. Wood is frequently in sound condition beneath unsightly paint. Window Repair Routine Maintenance needed to upgrade a window to “like new” condition normally includes the following: 1. Some degree of interior and exterior paint removal. 2. Removal and repair of sash (including reglazing and replacement of sash cords and chains, where necessary). 3. Repairs to the frame. 4. Weatherstripping or jamb liners and reinstallation of sash. 5. Repainting. Window Policy, Page 2 of 3 City of Geneva Geneva Historic Preservation Commission 22 S. First Street Geneva, IL 60134 630/232.0818 Window Replacement Replacement windows should match historic windows in: • Style and operation • Dimensions • Materials • True-divided lite • Clad wood windows are okay on secondary or tertiary facades • Avoid bronze anodized aluminum Look at the following when replacing windows: 1. Pattern and size of the openings 2. Proportions of the frame and sash 3. Configuration of window panes 4. Muntin profiles 5. Type of wood 6. Paint color 7. Characteristics of the glass 8. Other details (arched hoods, decorative elements, etc.) Resources • “Fixing Double-Hung Windows.” Old House Journal (no. 12, 1979): 135. • Look, David W. “Preservation Brief #10: Paint Removal from Historic Woodwork.” Washington, D.C.: Technical Preservation Services, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 1982. • Phillips, Morgan and Selwyn, Judith. Epoxies for Wood Repairs in Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.: Technical Preservation Services, U.S. Dept. of the Interior (Government Printing Office, Stock No. 024-016-00095-1), 1978. • “Sealing Leaky Windows.” Old House Journal (no. 1, 1973): 5. • Smith, Baird M. “Preservation Brief #3: Conserving Energy in Historic Buildings.” Washington, D.C.: Technical Preservation Services, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 1978. • Myers, John H. “Preservation Brief #9: The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows.” Washington, D.C.: Technical Preservation Services, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 1981. • Park, Sharon C. “Preservation Brief #13: The Repair and Thermal Upgrading of Historic Steel Windows.” Washington, D.C.: Technical Preservation Services, U.S. Dept. of the Interior. • See the following web page to view the Preservation Briefs: http://www2.cr.nps.gov/tps/briefs/presbhom.htm • Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, 1983. • NPS Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings: http://www.gsa.gov/web/p/hptp.nsf/Guidelines+for+Rehabilitating+Historic+Buildings?OpenView • Carmody, John, Heschong, Lisa and Selkowitz, Stephen. Residential Windows: A Guide to New Technologies and Energy Performance. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1996. • Caring for Your Historic House. Heritage Preservation and National Park Service. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1998. • McAlester, Virginia and McAlester, Lee. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997. • The Window Handbook: Successful Strategies for Rehabilitating Windows in Historic Buildings (16 different NPS Tech Notes on Windows). • The Window Workbook for Historic Buildings (Companion to the Handbook, contains technical papers and listings for windows and restoration products). • See the following web page to view the Preservation Tech Notes: http://www.gsa.gov/web/p/hptp.nsf/NPS+Preservation+Tech+Notes?OpenView • New York Landmarks Conservancy, “Repairing Old and Historic Windows: A Manual for Architects and Homeowners.” Washington, D.C.: The Preservation Press, 1992. • Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credits: http://www2.cr.nps.gov/tps/fax/tax_t.htm Window Policy, Page 3 of 3 Illinois Historic Preservation Agency’s Position On Wood Windows Summary Prepared for Geneva HPC October 15, 2013 Vinyl windows are not approvable because they don’t have the right dimensions and details to be considered appropriate replacement windows. Fiberglass or composite windows are not approvable because no project has yet wanted to use them and no manufacturer has demonstrated the ability to replicate the proportions of historic window components out of these materials. Wood Windows 1. On primary elevations: a. Do historic windows exist in place? i. If repairable in IHPA’s opinion, then they must be retained. ii. If not repairable in IHPA’s opinion, then must be replaced with solid wood or aluminum clad wood that match the historic windows. If the historic windows have muntins, then the new windows must have either true divided lights or simulated divided lights with interior, exterior, and sandwich muntins/spacer bars. b. Non-historic windows? i. Can be retained if desired. ii. If replaced, the new windows must be solid wood or aluminum clad wood windows that match the details of the historic windows to the best of the Agency’s knowledge. If the historic windows had or likely had muntins, then the new windows must have either true divided lights or simulated divided lights with interior, exterior, and sandwich muntins/spacer bars. 2. On non-primary elevations (i.e., rears and some sides): a. Historic windows can be retained or replaced with any material windows but the configuration (i.e., double hung, casement, hopper) and muntins should match. b. Non-historic windows can be retained or replaced with any material windows but the configuration (i.e., double hung, casement, hopper) and muntins should match. IHPA encourages the installation of interior or exterior storm windows for energy efficiency. In fact, retaining historic windows and adding storms is the more sustainable (“green”) course of action than replacement. Proposed Historic District Promotional Brochure Draft Content – For Discussion Only NOTE: A series of promotional/educational brochures was requested by Commissioners at the July 21, 2015 HPC Meeting to be made available in print and online. Commissioners Zinke, Hiller, and Roy provided research of similar brochures from other communities with historic districts and provided a preliminary draft to Staff for review. Staff reviewed the submitted draft text and made additional recommendations and changes. The draft text is presented for Commissioner review, discussion, and comment at the August 18, 2015 HPC Meeting. Outline: Benefits of and Reasons for living in, working in, and owning in Geneva’s Historic District Where is Geneva’s Historic District? Include map with street names and borders What is Geneva’s Historic District? Summary definition of criteria for designation What are the benefits of a Historic District to its residents, property owners, and Geneva citizens? • Residential neighborhoods are protected: character, building scale, variety of architecture, walkability, stabilized property values, sense of place, shared values with like-minded residents. • We have a continued vital downtown composed of successful local business, retention of locally owned shops, restaurants, offices, support services, hotels that are united by heritage marketing / branding and an identifiable destination identity. • Local economy affected positively: increased demand for local labor and local supplies; attracts and retains small businesses, rehab projects in a neighborhood often leads to additional projects within that neighborhood, quaint destination shopping brings outside dollars into the community. • Positive community impacts: existing buildings are renovated and reused rather than lying dormant, there are attractive places to stroll, sit, dine, and relax, mature landscaping and trees and public gardens. • Tourism increases: people interested in preservation, locally-designated historic districts and other nationally-recognized historic features will make a point to  visit; those visitors, typically, stay longer and spend more time and money which continually supports the local economy with business and job creation/sustainability. • Helps the environment: reusing and/or repurposing existing resources and historic properties in established neighborhoods conserves energy and keeps building materials out of landfills. History is “green” and environmentally sound by re-purposing structures that contain “embodied energy” in its longstanding materials and previous construction labor. • Creates pride of community for all Geneva residents and property owners by recognizing and preserving part of Geneva’s proud and longstanding heritage. Certain properties and their owners are distinguished recipients of local Preservation Awards. • Increases property values: studies from Illinois and other states demonstrate that historic district designation stabilizes and increases property values better and faster than non-protected historic neighborhoods because, typically, designated neighborhoods are more consistently maintained. • Projects for renovation or additions in Geneva’s historic district are reviewed for appropriateness based on the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (“SOI Standards”) and the Geneva Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Projects are reviewed as part of both the separate zoning and building permit application processes. Projects designated as historic are eligible for professional advice and consultation by city staff as well as Geneva’s Historic Preservation Commission. • Designated properties may qualify for limited grant funding when meeting the criteria of specific grant funding sources. • Designated properties may qualify for tax benefits: Illinois Property Tax Assessment Freeze program which, based on certain program requirements, prevents real estate tax assessment for owner- occupied residential properties from increasing for 8 years, followed by 4 years of graduated increases that return the property tax to full assessment. Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credits are available for multi-family and commercial properties that are income producing and undergo a certified rehabilitation project that meets specific rehabilitation standards.