Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/01/2013M Heritage Commission City of Elgin Elgin Heritage Commission October 1, 2013 A. The meeting of the Elgin Heritage Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers by Chairman Bill Briska. 1. Members Present: William Briska, Elizabeth Femal, James Halik (departed meeting at 8:15), Rebecca Hunter,Tom Krebsbach,Judith Rivera, Scott Savel, Judy Van Dusen, and John Wiedmeyer 2. Members Absent: None. 3. Others Present: None 4. City Staff Present: Amy Munro, Historic Preservation and Grants Planner B. Approval of Minutes: A motion was made by Commissioner Halik to approve the August 2, 2013 minutes as amended. Motion seconded by Commissioner Wiedmeyer. The motion passed 9-0. C. Recognize Persons Present: D. Plaque Applications: Commissioners discussed the plaque nominations and all nominations were scored on the criteria of architectural significance, historical significance and current maintenance. Plaques must meet a minimum of 6 points in each category to be eligible for a plaque award. 1. 372 N. Congdon (Tabled 8-6-13) Motion made by Commissioner Savel to untable the item. Motion seconded by Commissioner Halik.The motion passed 9-0. The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 7.7 Architectural Significance: 7.7; Current Maintenance: 7.4 A motion was made by Commissioner Savel to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1930, D.T. Glover. Motion seconded by Commissioner Halik. The motion passed 9-0. 2. 111 N. Porter(Tabled 8-6-13) Motion made by Commissioner Hunter to untable the item. Motion seconded by Commissioner Wiedmeyer.The motion passed 9-0. The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 7.8 Architectural Significance: 6.1; Current Maintenance: 6.7 Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category • Elgin Heritage Commission:Minutes Page 2 October 1,2013 it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Savel to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1914, C. & E. Bishop. Motion seconded by Commissioner Wiedmeyer. The motion passed 9-0. 3. 239 S. Aldine The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 5.0; Architectural Significance: 5.4; Current Maintenance: 6.3. Since the application for the G. & H. Parkin House built in 1940,failed to meet the minimum of 6 points in each category it was deemed ineligible for a plaque award. 4. 30 N. Alfred The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 7.7; Architectural Significance: 6.9; Current Maintenance: 7.4. Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Krebsbach to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1926, W. & I. Waterman. Motion seconded by Commissioner Savel. The motion passed 9-0. 5. 820 Bellevue The item was tabled until owner consent for the nomination could be verified. A motion was made by Commissioner Halik to table the nomination for the F. &V. Knaak House, built in 1936. Motion seconded by Commissioner Hunter. The motion passed 9-0. 6. 830 Bellevue The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 7.3; Architectural Significance: 6.6; Current Maintenance: 6.9. Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Femal to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1924, W. & E. Behren. Motion seconded by Commissioner Krebsbach. The motion passed 9-0. 7. 851 Bellevue The item was tabled until owner consent could be verified. A motion was made by Commissioner Savel to table the nomination for the E. &S. Bremer House built in 1940. Motion seconded by Commissioner Hunter. The motion passed 9-0. 8. 859 Bellevue The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 7.0; Architectural Significance: 6.0; Current Maintenance: 5.6. Since the application for the .Andresen House built in 1927 failed to meet the minimum of 6 points in each category it was deemed ineligible for a plaque award. Elgin Heritage Commission:Minutes Page 3 October 1,2013 9. 428 Billings The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 6.1; Architectural Significance: 5.2; Current Maintenance: 6.8. Since the application for the A. &G. Sorensen House built in 1909 failed to meet the minimum of 6 points in each category it was deemed ineligible for a plaque award. 10. 543 E. Chicago The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 7.8; Architectural Significance: 6.1; Current Maintenance: 5.2. Since the application for the As. McGlincey House built in 1879 failed to meet the minimum of 6 points in each category it was deemed ineligible for a plaque award. 11. 634 Columbia The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 6.3; Architectural Significance: 5.7; Current Maintenance: 7.2. Since the application W. & G. Nohl House built in 1927 failed to meet the minimum of 6 points in each category it was deemed ineligible for a plaque award. 12. 368 Congdon The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 8.0; Architectural Significance: 7.2; Current Maintenance: 7.9. Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Savel to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1929, R. & L. Covey. Motion seconded by Commissioner Femal. The motion passed 9-0. 13. 370 Congdon The item was tabled until owner consent for the nomination could be verified. A motion was made by Commissioner Halik to table the nomination for the A& F. Kimball House built in 1929. Motion seconded by Commissioner Van Dusen. The motion passed 9-0. 14. 490 Division The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 7.4; Architectural Significance: 7.0; Current Maintenance: 7.0. Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Femal to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1892,J. &S. Fluck. Motion seconded by Commissioner Krebsbach. The motion passed 8-1-0, with one abstention (Commissioner Save!). 15. 150 N. Gifford The Commission discussed the nomination, and it was determined that the item should be tabled until the building's exterior historic rehabilitation was completed. A motion was made by Commissioner Hunter to table the nomination. Motion • Elgin Heritage Commission:Minutes Page 4 October 1,2013 seconded by Commissioner Halik. The motion passed 9-0. 16. 21 Hamilton The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 5.4;Architectural Significance: 6.0; Current Maintenance: 6.7. Since the application for the C&A Head House built in 1924 failed to meet the minimum of 6 points in each category, it was deemed ineligible for a plaque award. 17. 162 N. Liberty St. The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 6.9; Architectural Significance: 6.8; Current Maintenance: 7.3. Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Savel to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1926, R. & L. Marckhoff. Motion seconded by Commissioner Wiedmeyer. The motion passed 9-0. 18. 927 Logan The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 5.2; Architectural Significance: 6.0; Current Maintenance: 7.7. Since the application failed for the W. & M. Groneman House (date of construction unknown) to meet the minimum of 6 points in each category it was deemed ineligible for a plaque award. 19. 375 Prairie The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 8.3; Architectural Significance: 6.7; Current Maintenance: 8.6. Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Femal to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1905, E. & L. Foote. Motion seconded by Commissioner Rivera. The motion passed 9-0. 20. 440 S. State St. The item was tabled until owner consent for the nomination could be verified. A motion was made by Commissioner Femal to table the nomination for the R. & M. Fields House built in 1922. Motion seconded by Commissioner Rivera. The motion passed 9-0. 21. 630 N. Spring The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 7.8; Architectural Significance: 6.7; Current Maintenance: 7.2. Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Hunter to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1926, R. &A. Bridge. Motion seconded by Commissioner Savel. The • • Elgin Heritage Commission:Minutes Page 5 October 1,2013 motion passed 9-0. 22. 466 Standish The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 5.8; Architectural Significance: 5.9; Current Maintenance: 5.8. Since the application for the C. &A. House built in 1911 failed to meet the minimum of 6 points in each category, it was deemed ineligible for a plaque award. 23. 215 Villa The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 5.1; Architectural Significance: 5.4; Current Maintenance: 6.4. Since the application for the C. &A. House built in 1911 failed to meet the minimum of 6 points in each category, it was deemed ineligible for a plaque award. 24. 219 Villa The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 8.2; Architectural Significance: 7.0; Current Maintenance: 8.0. Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Femal to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1902, M. & F. Aldridge. Motion seconded by Commissioner Halik. The motion passed 9-0. 25. 225 Villa The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 7.1; Architectural Significance: 6.6; Current Maintenance: 6.7. Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Femal to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1902, M. & F. Aldridge. Motion seconded by Commissioner Van Dusen. The motion passed 9-0. 26. 315 Wheelock The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 4.9; Architectural Significance: 6.0; Current Maintenance: 6.7. Since the application failed for the L. & M. Leuenberger House built 1923 to meet the minimum of 6 points in each category it was deemed ineligible for a plaque award. 27. 18 N. Worth The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 6.2; Architectural Significance: 6.4; Current Maintenance: 6.4. Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Rivera to award a plaque with the following • • Elgin Heritage Commission:Minutes Page 6 October 1,2013 inscription: 1922,J. & M. Douglas. Motion seconded by Commissioner Savel. The motion passed 9-0. 28. 916 Douglas The plaque nomination received the following average scores: Historic Significance: 7.7; Architectural Significance: 7.8; Current Maintenance: 6.5. Since the application received more than the minimum of 6 points in each category it was eligible to be awarded a plaque. A motion was made by Commissioner Hunter to award a plaque with the following inscription: 1922,J. & M. Douglas. Motion seconded by Commissioner Van Dusen. The motion passed 9-0. E. Old Business 1. Cell Phone Tour Website Status Update Ms. Munro advised the Commission that the webpage update is still underway. 2. NHS and the Elgin Bungalow Initiative Update Chairman Brisk a reported that the architectural firm of Allen & Pepa was selected to work on the Bungalow Initiative project. 3. DRSC Appointment Resolutions: Ms. Munro said that the proposed resolution is still under review. 4. Reports from Neighborhood Groups on Heritage Related Activities Chairman Briska reported on the successful Cemetery Walk. F. New Business 1. Heritage Commission Budget Increase Request for Historic Interpretive Signage Installation Chairman Briska discussed the need for funding for interpretive signage installation throughout the City's historic districts. Discussion took place regarding potential signage installation sites. A motion was made by Commissioner Femal to support Chairman Briska's request to the City for additional funding to be added to the Commission's budget to finance the signage installation. Motion seconded by Commissioner Wiedmeyer. The motion passed 8-0. G. Staff Announcements, Other Business: None. H. Adjournment A motion made by Commissioner Savel to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Krebsbach and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. - Elgin Heritage Commission:Minutes Page 7 October 1,2013 Respectfully submitted, Amy Munro Historic Preservation and Grants Planner Approved:January 7, 2014