HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM
ACTION REQUESTED:
title
Receive the report and provide feedback regarding the new business items raised at the January 23, 2025 Historic Preservation Commission meeting
body
DEPARTMENT: Transportation, Engineering and Development
SUBMITTED BY: Brad Iwicki, Assistant Planner
BOARD/COMMISSION REVIEW:
Submitted for Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) review.
BACKGROUND:
At the January 23, 2025, Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) meeting, Commissioner Wills raised several items for consideration under new business, including increasing detailed discussions, meetings with developers or homeowners, and expanding the HPC’s overall knowledge and understanding of each case. Following a brief discussion on these items, the HPC requested that staff research the items below:
- Process and requirements to establish a committee
- Updating the 2008 Historic and Architectural Survey by Granacki Historic Consultants.
- Report on the 223 Center Street case
- Scheduling an agenda item for public discussion
- Commissioner and historic preservation or subject relevant training
This report is being provided in response to the items raised under new business on January 23, 2025.
DISCUSSION:
ESTABLISHING A COMMITTEE
Staff discussed the HPC’s request to detail the process and requirements to establish a committee and offers the following:
§ Per the Historic Preservation Commission Bylaws, Article 1 - OFFICERS, Section 3 - Duties, the Chairman shall appoint committees as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the Commission and shall appoint committee chairmen.
At a scheduled HPC meeting and by a formal adoption of a motion, a committee may be formed as directed by the HPC Chairman. Prior to any such motion being made, staff recommends that the HPC provide reasons for the establishment of a committee, the purpose and specific powers of that committee, and the tasks that the committee would be responsible for. The HPC should also discuss why the items/topics could not be discussed during a regular HPC meeting (which is noticed and open to the public). Finally, the HPC should determine the desired end product from this committee and how success is measured as it relates to the goals of the committee and the HPC.
The tasks and responsibilities of the committee shall, at no point, exceed the powers and directions granted and directed by the Historic Preservation Commission and shall not act without prior direction from the HPC and Chairman. It is worth noting that a committee is a public body and subject to the Freedom of Information Act.
Staff Recommendation:
Notwithstanding the above, staff does not recommend establishing a committee for the following reasons:
• OMA limitations/implications - A committee which includes HPC members is considered a public body as defined by OMA. As a result, no more than 2 HPC members could attend a committee meeting unless that meeting was noticed, open to the public, and recorded. If the meeting requires compliance with OMA, that discussion would be best held at a regular HPC meeting.
• Transparency and Public Involvement - Each HPC agenda includes public forum, old business, reports, and new business (in addition to the COA reviews). Staff believes that it would be more appropriate to include special topics on a HPC agenda in order to allow all HPC members, as well as interested members of the public, to hear and participate in the discussion.
Please advise staff if there are specific topics that the HPC would like added to a future agenda for discussion.
SURVEY
The HPC shared interest in the possibility of updating the 2008 Historic and Architectural Survey. If such a resurvey was undertaken, it would be completed by a 3rd party consultant. While the survey may provide useful information, it will only represent a snapshot in time. The initial survey was undertaken by Ramsey Historic Consultants (formerly known as Granacki Historic Consultants) in 2007-2008.
A resurvey would provide several notable updates that occurred between 2008 and 2025, including, new local landmarks, sites and structures of special significance, and alterations to structures and updates on their exterior conditions (note: neither the existing or proposed survey will address interior building conditions).
Funds are included in the 2025 City budget to pay for the updated survey. City staff is currently obtaining three bids for this work, as is required per procurement procedures. Once a bidder is secured, staff will oversee the consultant’s completion of the survey update. Final survey results will be presented to the HPC upon completion.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff intends to move forward with consultant selection for the survey update. Prior to consultant selection for this work, the HPC should confirm the purpose and reasons the survey update is necessary, its projected use, and benefits gained from the proposed update.
TRAINING
Additionally, the HPC shared their interest in commissioner and historic preservation training. The City may cover the registration costs for Commissioners to attend local historic preservation training if it is determined that training is necessary. Staff does try to forward training opportunities to the HPC as they are available.
Staff requested that the HPC share their thoughts on the necessity for training and identify training needs specific to preservation activities in Naperville via two separate surveys to the members of the commission. The survey was sent to 9 active members of the HPC and the Naperville Settlement representative; neither survey was completed by all 9 HPC members. The HPC City Council representative was made aware of the survey.
The first survey requested the members of the HPC to share their thoughts on the potential benefits of Historic Preservation Commission training, their personal availability, and preferred format of the training. The survey received 8 responses. The results are explained below:
Do you think you would benefit from an organized third-party training session from preservation professionals?
• 7 of 8 respondents shared that they would benefit from a training opportunity.
Do you think the Historic Preservation Commission would benefit from an organized third-party training session from preservation professionals?
• Overall, the HPC would benefit from a training opportunity.
Does your schedule allow the flexibility to attend a full day or half day training event during business hours on a weekday?
• Input is divided regarding availability with 4 members sharing that have a full day of availability, 3 with a half day, and 1 with no flexibility in their schedule.
Do you prefer live in-person training at the Naperville Municipal Center or virtual training?
• The majority of the respondents, 6 of 8, shared that they prefer in-person training at the Naperville Municipal Center rather than virtual training.
Staff then asked additional questions to gain a better understanding of the overall training needs of individual members of the Historic Preservation Commission and the Historic Preservation Commission as a wholein order to guide staff towards organizing the proper training that is needed. The survey received 7 responses. The results of the survey are outlined below:
In general, what topics on historic preservation do you feel you need training on?
• The HPC responded with interest in understanding the purpose of historic preservation and the scope or jurisdiction of the HPC, and standards for restoring historic homes including appropriate materials and alternatives.
Why do you feel training is necessary?
• 5 of 7 respondents stated that the HPC should expand their role and duties beyond what is being done today and training is needed before beginning that work. 1 member shared that they are new to the Commission and 1 member stated that they are not currently able to perform HPC duties based on lack of critical knowledge regarding historic preservation.
To date, have you attended in-person or virtual training opportunity that has been forwarded by staff (i.e., sessions offered by Landmarks Illinois, Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, National Historic Preservation Agency, etc.)?
• 4 responded with “No”.
• 3 responded with “Yes”.
If you have not attended a training session forwarded by staff, please choose the best answer explaining why.
• 1 responded with “Topics are not relevant”
• 1 responded with “Schedule will not allow for it”
• 2 responded with “Other”
If you have attended a training session forwarded by staff, rank its value to your role as a member of the Historic Preservation Commission (5 stars = high value).
• 4 responded with 4 out of 5, showing there is value in the training opportunities forwarded by staff
• 1 responded with a 3 out of 5
If CAMP Training is provided, select 6 of the 14 topics that would provide you the MOST value: (1 = most interest, 6= least interest). The topics listed below are in order of most interest to least interest
1. Alternative Materials
2. Community Engagement and Building Public Support
3. Design Review Exercise
4. Envisioning Infill Design Exercise
5. Legal Basics
6. Preservation Planning
If CAMP training is provided, select 6 of the 14 topics that you believe would provide the MOST value to the Historic Preservation Commission (1 = most benefit, 6= least benefit)
1. Why Preserve? An Introduction to Historic Preservation
2. Alternative Materials
3. Meeting Procedures
4. Enforcement and Violations
5. Envisioning Infill Design Exercise
6. Legal Basics
Staff Recommendation:
It appears that there is HPC interest in receiving training on specific topics; however, it does not appear feasible to commit the HPC as a whole to attending training sessions held for significant blocks of time. Accordingly, staff does not recommend pursuing CAMP training at this time (note: CAMP training is also a significant expenditure ranging from $6,000 - $9,000).
Instead, staff recommends that the HPC confirm their top 2-3 training topics. Staff can arrange for training on these items at a series of 2025 HPC meetings (held either at the end of a regular HPC meeting or at an HPC meeting at which no COAs are scheduled, including the off-meeting months). Depending on the topic, training may be provided by either staff or by an expert in that field. Additional training topics/sessions could be added in 2026.
223 CENTER STREET
The HPC requested a report on the 223 Center St. cases with the goal of to pulling lessons learned from the case in order to respond appropriately to future cases. A detailed timeline is provided in the attachments.
The plan for the improvements at 223 Center St. originated in 2022 when a Certificate of Appropriateness application was received for a residential addition. This COA request (COA 22-4462) was approved by the Historic Preservation Commission.
The property assumed new ownership in June 2023. The new owner, MKJH Remodeling, LLC., represented by Moses Khaled, submitted a permit for a residential room addition that was not in conformance with the plans approved with COA 22-4462. A COA for a new scope of work was submitted (COA 23-3770) by the property owner and processed by staff. This COA request was approved by the Historic Preservation Commission.
Following approval, City staff found that work completed on site exceeded the scope of work outlined in the plans approved with COA 23-3770 and was considered illegal demolition per the Historic Preservation Code.
A COA was submitted with revised plans showing the scope of work including the illegal demolition. The application was processed by staff and scheduled to be heard before the HPC. The HPC denied the request and the petitioner made an appeal to City Council. City Council approved the appeal with the condition that cedar siding remains on the primary façade.
Staff finds this situation to be unique and that staff and the Historic Preservation Commission responded appropriately. The City’s Legal Team worked with staff regarding issuance of fines and citations for the illegal demolition. The property owner was ordered by the court to pay a $15,000 fine.
AGENDA ITEM FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION
The discussion at the January 23, 2025, HPC meeting considered opportunities to interact directly with the public in an open discussion format. This aligns with the Historic Preservation Commission, Powers and Duties, as outlined in the Municipal Code.
When considering an agenda item for public discussion, it is important to ensure the discussion is fair and orderly, and topics focus on matters relevant to the HPC. As such. the Commission should provide a report to staff outlining the following:
• What is the purpose of the meeting?
• What is the format of meeting?
• Establish topics of discussion
o What is the HPC looking for from the public?
• How will the HPC capitalize on the information gathered from the public?
Staff Recommendation:
Based on staff experience, an open meeting with no set topic of discussion will result in a very low turnout. Public participation tends to be greatest when there is a specific proposal upon which feedback is being sought, and even in such cases, attendance tends to be low unless there is opposition to the proposal. An open meeting also requires notice to the parties that are being requested to attend.
Absent a scheduled open meeting, each gathering of the Historic Preservation Commission includes a public forum on the agenda which provides members of the public with an opportunity to speak directly to the HPC regarding topics that are not specified on the agenda for that meeting. Following public forum, if there is commission consensus, the HPC can request follow-up on the public topics in the “new business” section of the agenda.