The Glencoe Historic Preservation Commission proposed updating existing regulations in an effort to ease the number of teardowns in the village.
“If you value something, whether it is an heirloom or a house, you take steps to save it,” HPC Chairman Peter Van Vechten told village trustees at the Jan. 20 Committee of the Whole meeting.
Continuing a discussion with trustees from last September, Van Vechten detailed a series of HPC recommendations with the goal of enhancing the village’s existing two-pronged historic preservation ordinance that has been active since 1990 and was amended in 2013.
Specifically, the village currently offers an honorary landmark status for properties that comes with fewer restrictions and legal protections than certified status, where the HPC can deny demolition permit requests through a Certificate of Appropriateness process.
“The rate of demolition of significant and landmark demolition appears to be increasing,” Van Vechten said.
There are 11 certified landmarks in the village. Assistant to the Village Manager Jordan Rogalski said after the meeting that no certified landmarks have been demolished since the establishment of the ordinance.
In an attempt to ease demolitions, the HPC submitted 20 suggestions, including eight recommendations for changing the existing ordinance. Those include lengthening the existing demolition permit issuance delay from 180 days to 270 for both certified and honorary landmarks, creating a procedure for third party review of demolition permit applications to find feasible alternatives and increased zoning bonuses for landmark properties.
The other 12 ideas centered on village policy and process, including increasing the demolition fee for landmark properties and the consideration of a new demolition fee for all teardowns to finance community infrastructure projects.
After Van Vechten’s presentation, some trustees expressed apprehension.
“I’m concerned that some of these create an extra hassle factor and extra monetary costs but ultimately are not going to stop someone from selling their house to a developer who wants to bulldoze their property,” said Trustee Gary Ruben.
Trustee Jonathan Vree said, “While these (proposals) make things more difficult, they probably don’t stop anything.”
Board members floated ideas about offering financial incentives to preserve homes, but Trustee Gail Lissner cautioned that developers like the certainty associated with demolition costs.
Van Vechten acknowledged there is not a lot of economic benefit for property owners to have landmark status, but said it was worth pursuing.
“There is a prestige and there is a recognition within the village that this house is special. So, there is some soft value to it,” he said.
Still, Village President Howard Roin said he thought some changes were worth looking into, in an attempt to stem the tide of teardowns.
“Whatever we do it is not likely going to ruin the town and I don’t think any of the proposals we’ve made are going to be ruinous, financially, for anybody,” Roin said. “The hope is they will cause some people, developers and owners to think a different way.”
The committee instructed the HPC to conduct further research and report back to trustees at a future meeting.
Daniel I. Dorfman is a freelancer.
More Top Picks Best Gaming Keyboards