Historic Preservation Commission Meeting

August 4, 2021 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING URBANA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DATE: August 4, 2021 APPROVED TIME: 7:00 p.m. PLACE: City Council Chambers, City Building, 400 South Vine Street, Urbana, Illinois MEMBERS ATTENDING David Hays, Alice Novak, Laura O’Donnell, Gina Pagliuso, Trent Shepard MEMBER EXCUSED Renee Pollock STAFF PRESENT Marcus Ricci, Planner II OTHERS PRESENT Ilona Matkovski, Joseph Prior, Nathan Sonnenschein, Angela Urban OTHERS PRESENT Geneva Frank, Timothy Freeman, Haaris Pervaiz, Usman REMOTELY Pervaiz, Emily Ramsey, Lee Weintraub 1. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Novak called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. Roll call was taken, and a quorum was declared present. 2. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA There were none. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the June 10, 2021, rescheduled meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission were presented for approval. Mr. Shepard recommended the following three changes to the minutes: 1. Page 3 – Paragraph 3 – Last Sentence: Change “built” to “designed”; 2. Page 4 – Paragraph 3 under Certificate of Appropriateness – Issued and Not Issued – 5th Line: Change “bric-abrac” to “bric-a-brac”; and 3. Page 6 – 1st Line under Other Discussion: change “could do to alleviate work from City staff” to “could reduce the workload of City staff.” Mr. Hays moved to approve the minutes as amended. Ms. Pagliuso seconded the motion. The minutes were approved as written by unanimous vote. Page 1  August 4, 2021 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Regarding Case No. HP-2021-COA-03  Email from Dennis Roberts dated 08-04-2021  Email from Mary Pat McGuire  Letter from Nathan Sonnenschein 5. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION There was none. 6. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS There were none. 7. OLD BUSINESS There was none. 8. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS HP-2021-COA-03 - A request by Icon Hospitality, LLC, represented by Joseph Prior, for a Certificate of Appropriateness to renovate the exterior of the Urbana-Lincoln Hotel at 210 South Race Street, including the repair and restoration of exterior architectural features. Chair Novak opened the public hearing for the case. Marcus Ricci, Planner II, presented the case to the Historic Preservation Commission. He began by stating the purpose of the proposed request for a Certificate of Appropriateness. He reviewed the history and architecture of the Urbana-Lincoln Hotel. He talked about the proposed changes, separating them into three categories: 1) exempt undertakings, 2) minor works and 3) major works. Ms. Pagliuso asked if the parcels with the parking lots were part of the property for the hotel and owned by the applicant’s company. Mr. Ricci said yes. With regards to the planting/flower beds, he was not sure if they were located in the City right-of-way or if they were part of the hotel’s property. Mr. Ricci continued his presentation by showing photos of the exterior of the hotel. He gave the staff recommendation for approval with the following conditions: 1. That construction be in general conformance with the Application and Exterior Renovations as submitted; 2. That the applicant provide model information for the following, to be reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission prior to installation: new windows for the 1982 north entrance enclosure and for new lighting sconces; 3. That additional Certificates of Appropriateness be obtained prior to undertaking any minor or major works not contained in the current Application and Exterior Renovations; and 4. That any modifications needed to the Exterior Renovations regarding the major works approved in this Certificate of Appropriateness due to conditions Page 2  August 4, 2021 discovered during construction activities may be reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission Chair and the Zoning Administrator or their designee, prior to their commencement, and reflected by administratively amending the Certificate of Appropriateness. Mr. Ricci stated that was the end of his presentation. Chair Novak asked if any members of the Historic Preservation Commission had questions for City staff. There were none. Chair Novak opened the hearing up for public input. She invited the applicant to approach the Commission. Joseph Prior, applicant, approached the Historic Preservation Commission to speak. He talked about Icon Hospitality, LLC. He introduced the other members of his team from Zimmerman Weintraub Associates, LLC, as follows: Lee Weintraub, Principal; Timothy Freeman, Director of Interior Design; and Geneva Frank, Designer II; and Emily Ramsey of MacRostie Historic Advisors. Mr. Weintraub talked about some of the work that his company, Zimmerman Weintraub Associates, LLC, has done for Marriott International, Hilton, Crate & Barrel, Starbucks and Equinox Fitness. Ms. Ramsey stated that her company is a preservation consulting firm that primarily focuses on providing consulting services to developers of historic buildings that are seeking federal, state and local incentives to make sure that the work done is in compliance with the Secretary of Interior standards and receives the necessary approvals. She mentioned other projects that she has previously worked on. Mr. Prior stated that they would also be working with the Advance Consulting Group International (ACGi) which would be providing mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and fire protection engineering services for this project. For branding, they would be working with Point B Communications, which developed the concept for the Hotel Royer. Ms. Pagliuso asked about the glass block windows on the west side of the upper level of the hotel. Mr. Prior believed that these windows would be kept as is. Mr. Weintraub confirmed this. Ms. Pagliuso asked what led the team to select stacked-stone cladding rather than keeping the existing brick cladding. Many of the comments received were in opposition to the stacked-stone material. She, herself, was not a fan of it. Ms. Ramsey stated that they are in the process of submitting an amendment to the National Park Service that will include this change to the original plan submission. The amendment also addresses all of the interior conditions they have to resolve to obtain approval. She mentioned that she spoke with the Illinois State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviewer about the stacked-stone cladding and the change from the originally-proposed shiplap cladding. SHPO reviews the project first and makes recommendations to the National Park Service. The National Park Service takes into account the recommendations and generally approves whatever SHPO recommends. The reviewer did not have an issue with the proposed amendment change and did not think that the National Park Service would either. In fact, the National Park Service prefers that non-historic additions be Page 3  August 4, 2021 compatible but differentiated from the historic portion of the building so that there is not a false sense of history created. Mr. Freeman stated that the reason for going with the stacked-stone material is to differentiate the addition from the original building. They do not feel that the brick on the existing building is compatible because it is a modern brick with a much smoother surface. At some point in the past, stacked-stone flower planters were built near the west main entrance. They simply want to blend the different generations of the hotel into one but still make it obvious that the 1982 addition is a different structure from the 1923 historic masterpiece of Joseph Royer. Ms. Pagliuso talked about the limestone and fieldstone walkway in the northwest corner. She wondered if there might be a tie-in to this walkway with a different stacked stone. Mr. Weintraub stated that he had not seen the walkway. He appreciated the comment. Mr. Shepard asked if the stacked stone would be multi-colored. Mr. Prior said that it would be only one color. Mr. Hays wondered if the lighter paint color on the timber of the 1982 addition was to differentiate between the older and newer sections of the hotel. Mr. Freeman replied that was the motivation behind painting the timbers a lighter color. They view the 1982 addition as a modern Tudor which would imply less of the strongly contrasting tones of the original existing Tudor design. They want to make it obvious between where the old stops and the new starts. Mr. Hays stated that the Lincoln structure and the pergola are in the darker tones. Mr. Freeman stated that it was a way to bridge the original historic building to the 1982 addition. Ms. Pagliuso said that she was not a fan of the trellis work. She would rather see the arched windows. She understood that they probably want to give their guests using the pool some privacy. However, the windows – although not original to the historic portion of the hotel – mirror the windows of the Urbana Free Library across the street. She recommended some plantings by the pergola rather than hiding the windows. She wondered why they chose the trellis. Mr. Freeman stated that there is only about one-and-a-half feet between the patio and the parking lot, so the thought was to create a peek-a-boo moment to introduce some greenery and also to provide a somewhat semi-private place for guests to sunbathe and enjoy an outdoor experience. Ms. Pagliuso stated that there was no mention about any changes to the exterior wall enclosed by the shopping mall. It appears that there has been water leakage from the ceiling where it meets the mall: do they plan to address this and if so, what changes are they planning to make? Mr. Weintraub stated that they had not focused on this wall; they have been focusing on the exterior and development of the interior of the hotel. Mr. Freeman stated that the area entering the shopping mall will be closed and turned into an office. The brick at the original main entrance to the hotel will be cleaned and restored. Haaris Pervaiz, of Icon Hospitality, added that they will ensure that the entrance and the office space will complement the existing exterior of the structure. It was not included in the proposed changes because it is considered interior space. Page 4  August 4, 2021 Ms. Pagliuso asked what would happen to the docking area. Mr. Prior said that they plan to fix it up and use it for deliveries, etc. Mr. Weintraub said that they planned to paint and fix it and treat the façade. Usman Pervaiz, CEO of Icon Hospitality, LLC, spoke to the Historic Preservation Commission. He talked about the company and its staff. They plan to apply for the Hilton Award – a special award for outstanding Hilton franchise projects – when the project is completed. Ilona Matkovski approached the Historic Preservation Commission to speak. She expressed her appreciation that Icon Hospitality, LLC, is trying to preserve the historic character of the hotel. The design of the building reminds her of a roadside hotel. It does not appear to be a good match for the Royer Hotel or for the spirit of a Tudor revival building or for the original design of the Jumer addition. She talked about specific changes that she did not like, which were as follows: • Trellis design for the air conditioners are not compatible with any part of the hotel • Stacked-stone cladding would not be compatible with the Tudor style • Where the old historic building stops and the addition begins should blend rather than being differentiated. The color should be dark. Nathan Sonnenschein approached the Historic Preservation Commission to speak. He stated that he is in favor of the project and that it would be an asset to the City of Urbana. The comments that are made are from people who live in the community, and the changes are part of their lives. Because the separate hotel buildings are still one use and one property, he did not feel that some of the changes would be complementing each other and instead should be unified with the same design. He stated that the hotel is attached to the shopping mall, so in many ways they are one structure and many people feel that the stacked stone should not be used because there are visual differences happening already. The lighter-colored half timbering is not something one would see with historic Tudor Revival architecture style. Joseph Royer was really smart at creating buildings that were coherent and stylistically unified. With no further input from the audience, Chair Novak closed the public input portion of the hearing and opened it for Historic Preservation Commission members discussion and/or motion(s). Mr. Hays commented that the trellis design for the air conditioners is quirky and does somewhat resemble the design in windows used in Tudor Revival architecture. He stated that his initial reaction to the proposed look of the exterior of the buildings was the same as those expressed in the written comments. However, after looking at the illustration for a while, he began to see the 1923 portion with greater integrity than if it would be unified in design with the later 1982 addition. The color of paint that the applicant chooses to use is beyond the purview of the Historic Preservation Commission. Ms. Pagliuso stated that there is a window way up high on the original building that appears to be leaded glass diamonds. Chair Novak stated that she had voted in favor of the construction of the porte-cochere when it was originally proposed; however, she felt it was poorly constructed. She is in favor of anything that would improve the look of it. Page 5  August 4, 2021 Mr. Ricci noted that Condition # 4 would allow the Zoning Administrator and the Chair of the Historic Preservation Commission to approve changes to the proposed major works. Typically major works would come back to the Historic Preservation Commission. Mr. Shepard moved that the Historic Preservation Commission approve Case No. HP-2021- COA-03 to allow the work described with the following conditions: 1. That construction be in general conformance with the Application and Exterior Renovations as submitted; 2. That the applicant provide model information for the following, to be reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission prior to installation: new windows for the 1982 north entrance enclosure and new lighting sconces; 3. That additional Certificates of Appropriateness be obtained prior to undertaking any minor or major works not contained in the current Application and Exterior Renovations; and 4. That any modifications needed to the Exterior Renovations regarding the major works approved in this Certificate of Appropriateness due to conditions discovered during construction activities may be reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission Chair and the Zoning Administrator or their designee, prior to their commencement, and reflected by administratively amending the Certificate of Appropriateness. Mr. Hays seconded the motion. Mr. Shepard asked questions about Condition #2 and #4. Mr. Ricci stated that Condition #4 refers to changes that may arise that the applicant is unaware of at this moment but may encounter during construction. Condition #2 refers to new windows and new lighting sconces that have not yet been selected yet but will be selected at some point in the future. Ms. Pagliuso made a friendly amendment to the motion to modify Condition #2 by adding the following language, “If and when the new lighting fixtures and/or new windows are approved by Illinois SHPO/National Park Service, then the Zoning Administrator and the Chair of the Historic Preservation Commission would have the authority to approve the changes on behalf of the Commission. Mr. Shepard agreed to the friendly amendment. Roll call vote on the motion with the amendment was as follows: Ms. O’Donnell - Yes Ms. Pagliuso - No Mr. Shepard - Yes Mr. Hays - Yes Ms. Novak - Yes The motion passed by a vote of 4 ayes to 1 nay. 9. NEW BUSINESS There was none. Page 6  August 4, 2021 10. MONITORING OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES Royer House – Mr. Shepard stated that the sign posts were still up at the Royer House. He volunteered to talk with the owners about removing it. Chateau Normand – Mr. Shepard stated that he spoke with Pierre Moulin about removing the sign. Mr. Moulin thought that it had been removed. Ms. Novak noted that the posts were still sticking up out of the ground though. Mr. Ricci had spoken with The University Group, which had removed the sign boards in February and assured him they would remove the posts during warmer weather. Mr. Ricci will follow up with the property manager. 11. STAFF REPORT HISTORIC PRESERVATION MONTH ACTIVITIES: PUBLIC INPUT AND ITEMS OF INTEREST Mr. Ricci stated that a demolition permit had been applied for 408 West Main Street. Since the property is on the Demolition Delay List, it is subject to a required 45-day waiting period prior to issuing the demolition permit. HISTORIC PROPERTY ACTIVITIES Certificates of Appropriateness in Progress or Review Mr. Ricci stated that he been trying to stay in contact with the owners listed on the written staff report to keep updated with the work progress. If the Commission has any questions, please ask. Zoning Issues Mr. Ricci talked about the following: • He stated that he has not received a response from some of the owners of the properties listed on the written staff report. • He mentioned that City staff are drafting a Programmatic Agreement with the Illinois SHPO. He explained that when the City performs emergency repair work (funded by CDBG or HOME funds) on a property, a review of historical significance is required and normally performed by SHPO. The City is pursuing the ability to perform this review in-house to reduce the amount of time it takes. 12. STUDY SESSION There was none. 13. ANNOUNCEMENTS There were none. Page 7  August 4, 2021 14. CLOSED SESSION To Consider Security Procedures, Pursuant to 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(8) Mr. Shepard moved to continue this to the next regular meeting. Ms. Pagliuso seconded the motion. The motion was approved by unanimous voice vote. 15. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Shepard moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:48 p.m. The meeting was adjourned. Submitted, Marcus Ricci, AICP Historic Preservation Commission Recording Secretary Page 8