After three new trustees were seated in the spring election, the village’s landmark ordinance has resurfaced as a hot-button in issue in Winnetka.
The chairwoman of the village’s Landmark Preservation Commission, which hears landmark applications and makes recommendations to the Village Council, worries that the 21-year-old ordinance may be marked for repeal.
Earlier this year, the newly constituted council denied a property owner’s request to designate four Tudor-revival commercial buildings as local landmarks. And now, a family is seeking landmark designation for their 117-year-old Foursquare home across from the Village Green, but could face a similar outcome.
The Preservation Commission unanimously approved the McQuet family’s application for their home at 528 Maple St. But the issue was delayed for consideration by the Council as the Commission sought to clear up some confusion among trustees who voiced opposition to the measure last month, said Louise Holland, commission chairwoman.
“There just weren’t enough votes (to approve it),” Holland said. “There were a great deal of other issues concerned with the landmark law which sort of confused the issue.”
Chief among them is a concern that the local landmark designation allows the homeowner to apply for a property tax assessment freeze, which would keep the home’s tax rate constant for eight years — before inching back up to its full amount by year 12 — if the owner spends 25 percent of the home’s fair market value on improvements.
“I’m indifferent to people landmarking things, as long as everybody knows who much it costs taxpayers,” said Trustee Patrick Corrigan.
He said he is working on an analysis on how the freeze program affects other homeowners but needs additional data and declined to discuss numbers.
In essence, since the amount of taxes requested by local governing agencies stays constant, if one property owner’s is decreased, all other properties in town would slightly rise to make up the difference.
Jen McQuet said she and her husband will not apply for the tax assessment freeze program if their home is designated a local landmark.
Trustee Richard Kates questioned the Preservation Commission’s determination that the McQuets’ home is truly historic. He wouldn’t say he supports repealing the local ordinance but suggested the village review whether the Commission’s criteria should be changed.
“The time may be ripe to review those items, because as far as her house is concerned, the key items that one would normally associate with a landmark had a rating of zero by the landmark commission,” Kates said.
The home received highest marks because of its age, for having an “established or familiar feature” and for its structural condition. It received a “zero” mark for several categories, including its association with an historical event, person or cultural activity; its association with an architect or master builder; and for the amount of “major alterations.” The total score still resulted in a “significant” rating.
A home’s internal features are not considered as part of the Commission’s analysis.
The local ordinance has been hotly debated since its creation in 1991. But there was never the type of opposition from the Village Council as there exists today, said Holland, a former village president and trustee. She said her commission is frustrated by being second-guessed by the Council.
“These people are uninformed and they make decisions based on prejudices they may have and not on the facts, and that’s sad for the McQuets,” Holland said. “It’s sad for anyone who comes along with a request for landmarking. Will this council ever agree to it? Who knows.”
More Top Picks Eye Tracking Exercises You Can Try At Home