[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6334778,"mediaKeyId","2294511-9da022356ec606120c233b3d7a5a3265","parentId",2294511,"title","Evanston Preservation Commission adopts 2025 work plan, adds volunteer corps and landmarking goal","audioSeconds",1022,"startMs",3332000,"endMs",4354000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2294511-9da022356ec606120c233b3d7a5a3265&start=3332&end=4354","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2294511-9da022356ec606120c233b3d7a5a3265/thumbnail_3332000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6334778/Evanston/Cook-County/Illinois/Evanston-Preservation-Commission-adopts-2025-work-plan-adds-volunteer-corps-and-landmarking-goal","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6334778-89b63fd2a9441d838c9c0158fcf1c42c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771167425&Signature=G3vmptceoZXv5LSA47g1L4Hqo0jRyti~46kJJ6eHtWFWH0lV1iVfKygHzczPasfapxYCewrMCz5SLKOsYF2291rtxvFk~pN3RU1U4p7SQ9PbGfZMvUmVFOne-uf4srwmVYWVhfp1ZBOGm2WFuTwXzLfj2ElAFxPQtUjx9~vB7qbXtFw5yg0nqL8ioOr1BqeFILhhE3hO1Pcqb~hp1Go1vi2gihMNmQOcgR7KZy8MQebe2aamIZCK~ScDwrz6I~5t9g2VBfWcTXaSagb~HCt3WEjQBqOV86yNqNKxGuXuOWX55rHtkqvA-wWmyjk~tbkZF~dIuayO3mvrl9CgIW~nJQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Evanston, IL","date","2025-02-12T17:43:36Z","article","The Evanston Preservation Commission unanimously approved its 2025 annual work plan on Tuesday, endorsing survey, outreach and policy initiatives and adding two member‑proposed priorities: development of a volunteer corps and an active goal to pursue additional landmark designations.

Why it matters: The work plan sets the commission’s priorities for the year and directs staff and commissioners to pursue documentation, education and advocacy initiatives that can identify and protect historic resources across the city.

What the plan includes

- Survey and documentation: The approved plan carries forward initiatives to conduct reconnaissance‑level surveys of downtown, neighborhood business districts and other target areas and to add eligible resources to the commission’s study list for follow‑up.

- Outreach and capacity building: Initiative 2.1 (a preservation consortium / advisory subcommittee) and initiative 4.4 (prepare preservation training materials and brief newly elected officials) remain priorities. Commissioners said these programs will support public education and city‑council orientation on preservation priorities.

- Policy advocacy: The plan retains an item to advocate for a citywide deconstruction ordinance (initiative 3.6) and to pursue other policies that advance reuse and materials recovery.

Additions approved at the meeting

Two items were added by motion and included in the unanimous approval: development and implementation of a volunteer corps to assist reconnaissance surveys and outreach, and a formal goal to encourage and pursue additional formal landmark designations during 2025 (the motion framed this as a goal rather than a fixed numeric target, to be developed further by commissioners and staff).

Clarifying how surveys work

Commission staff and commissioners clarified that the plan’s citywide survey work is intended as reconnaissance‑level fieldwork (a “windshield/feet on the ground” inventory of visible exteriors) rather than time‑intensive, interior‑access intensive intensive‑level survey. Staff noted that the reconnaissance surveys previously conducted informed the commission’s study list of eligible properties and that the new work would expand documentation and outreach to owners on the study list.

Vote and next steps

Commissioner (motion maker not specified in the record) moved to approve the 2025 work plan with the listed initiatives (including initiatives 1.4, 1.7, 1.11, 2.1, 3.6 and 4.4) and the two additions (volunteer corps and landmarking goal). The motion passed unanimously. Staff said they will begin drafting outreach materials and a volunteer‑corps survey, and will circulate drafts to commissioners for follow‑up at the March meeting.

Ending

The commission closed the item with unanimous approval and scheduled further work on survey planning, outreach materials and the volunteer‑corps program for the March meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Preservation Commission Meeting 2-11-2025","oneSentenceSummary","The commission approved a 2025 annual work plan that continues citywide reconnaissance surveys, outreach and advocacy initiatives and added items to develop a volunteer corps and to promote additional landmark listings.","taxTitle","Evanston, Cook County, Illinois","taxId",2640,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6334782,"Preservation commission approves rear‑addition changes at 1140 Hinman Avenue, 8‑1 with two abstentions",2003,1313000,3316000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2294511-9da022356ec606120c233b3d7a5a3265&start=1313&end=3316","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2294511-9da022356ec606120c233b3d7a5a3265/thumbnail_1313000.jpg","/articles/6334782/Evanston/Cook-County/Illinois/Preservation-commission-approves-rearaddition-changes-at-1140-Hinman-Avenue-81-with-two-abstentions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6334782-9bd6a695e1bbc239cd694b66d1be67ff/orig.mp4?Expires=1771167425&Signature=M2dRBo~5ZubvYM7QdChXgxfxRKjijEC138~hBp0T8PKEIwKPWVxO8qA7IHJY7lFu7nmgD4zFIW17s9QvokESgTRBOdhlprElFS6fGlilmy956GW4Nr5xvQvXIcKKoWR1MJDT9WM9xYN~waAyrCqHrLCf9HkCvIHD8Ytj8y-gt7wjQj1YRksqOJZ93C8~jVJiLS4CtGlRgeN7NgipzEeSZV7gfAJx-atu1uThcnT9yOMDDCgGbawRaa~aN9TKbI2yEqBbdfsZ6bHKoRaD1AUEIQ2-d~2Xe0HElT4Jlstz6KfSO5gy2qPRntVyGiO5B9RXZ8FRYIxfnoAkfMN52sXRag__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Evanston Preservation Commission on Tuesday approved a certificate of appropriateness for exterior alterations at 1140 Hinman Avenue, a contributing property in the Lakeshore Historic District.

Applicant Stuart Cohen of Cohen and Hacker Architects presented plans to remove a non‑original second‑floor sleeping porch and several later additions at the rear of the Charles Ayers–designed brick house, reconstruct a new covered rear entry and raised deck, alter rear fenestration with new French doors and double‑hung windows, and apply stucco and new trim details to simplify and unify the rear elevation.

Why it matters: The house is a contributing structure in the Lakeshore Historic District; commission members weighed the loss of the sleeping porch against the proposal’s effort to simplify the building’s rear, restore compositional balance and continue prominent dentil trim and column‑capital details on the porch posts.

Key details and discussion

- Stuart Cohen, representing the applicant, said the rear of the house is a “hodgepodge” of several nonhistoric additions and that the sleeping porch “sits precariously” on a roof overhang. He described the design intent as cleaning up the rear elevation and replicating the front porch’s dentil molding and column capital detail in wood trim, while using painted stucco for portions of the rear where matching historic brick proved impractical.

- Commissioners asked about materials and structural condition. The applicant said the single‑story rear addition would receive stucco skirting down to a water table detail on a full foundation, and that the existing sleeping porch is glazed and “structurally sound” though functionally unused.

- Several commissioners expressed mixed feelings about removing the sleeping porch because it is an older feature, but most said it appeared to be a later, awkward addition that did not contribute positively to the house’s character. Commissioners noted the proposal retains and extends several original details (dentil molding and the porch capital motif) and that the work would be visible only from limited vantage points (an alley and partial street views).

Vote and action

The commission approved the application under the cited standards — alteration standards 1–10 and construction standards 1–8, 10–13 and 15 — by a vote announced as 8 yes, 1 no and 2 abstentions. The motion (as read in the meeting) approved demolition of the covered rear entry porch, raised open deck, first‑floor bay and second‑floor sleeping porch at the rear volume; construction of a new covered entry porch and raised deck; reconstruction of the existing roof where it extended over the second‑story sleeping porch proposed to be removed; and alteration of the pattern of fenestration at the rear volume including new French doors and new double‑hung windows in existing and new openings, as presented.

Public comment

Regina Wooten, who lives at 1028 Hinman Avenue, supported the proposal and thanked the applicant for a “thoughtful renovation” in the face of nearby larger developments.

Clarifying details

- Case number read into the record: 25PRES0010, 1140 Hinman Avenue (Lakeshore Historic District). The staff read the applicable standards aloud before testimony.
- Motion text (as presented in the meeting) and the commission’s stated applicable standards were recorded on the record; final tally announced as “8 yes, 1 no, and 2 abstentions.”

Ending

The commission approved the application and closed deliberations on that item; staff recorded the vote and the application will proceed according to normal permitting steps.","The Preservation Commission approved a certificate of appropriateness to remove a second‑floor sleeping porch, reconfigure rear fenestration and build a new covered rear porch and deck at a contributing Lakeshore Historic District house; vote was 8 yes, 1 no, 2 abstentions.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6334786,"Preservation commission, public warn Envision Evanston 2045 zoning draft could threaten historic neighborhoods",7303,261000,7564000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2294511-9da022356ec606120c233b3d7a5a3265&start=261&end=7564","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2294511-9da022356ec606120c233b3d7a5a3265/thumbnail_261000.jpg","/articles/6334786/Evanston/Cook-County/Illinois/Preservation-commission-public-warn-Envision-Evanston-2045-zoning-draft-could-threaten-historic-neighborhoods","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6334786-523dd81adaf3b729b2550caee8f44670/orig.mp4?Expires=1771167425&Signature=cY16ZqJA~m2B6U5LZgOnvVU2do6HV6T96znnYA0ROBhW3noYkzYclmquZfSzVJ4h0GksSnPZ5GDGrynHydf8URMlBJ8xEVj0I6p7TACeZYqz0b~KjddqUKnBSPdK0wpioTPQJcVg3EUZxmaTMKIJaxebEMTLvKW6l-v2VEUm~JSjgcoFfiOCRf9SltcS32oobgQbKUpOIababhuD1vHQXOmA~Xx2deLmGQVKJQdWJoBqsbbmZ2CPNtXoIkCd0IVsjAjrSwmTBR9ECsmHB8KvGHb0P8nSnWUjVQNwkgrjRSYhF1f84Mkshpt5mDJdchsC7w8~JDjHM7kTgQD-csVoCw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Public commenters and members of the Evanston Preservation Commission warned the commission and city staff on Tuesday that proposed zoning changes tied to the draft Envision Evanston 2045 comprehensive plan could accelerate demolition and undermine the character of multiple neighborhoods.

The warning came during public comment and a lengthy preservation-commission review of draft zoning maps that would increase allowed building height and bulk across several downtown and neighborhood commercial corridors. Steve Test, a resident of 1135 Hinman Avenue, told the commission the draft plan “is weighed so heavily towards developers” and urged the commission to push for a stronger preservation chapter to give the body more tools to protect Evanston’s existing fabric.

Why it matters: The commission’s review focused less on individual applications than on the broader policy and zoning changes in the draft plan — specifically proposals that would raise maximum heights and floor‑area ratios on blocks now characterized by low‑scale storefronts, historic landmarks and small multifamily buildings. Commissioners said increasing development potential without neighborhood‑sensitive safeguards could make demolition and large infill projects more likely and increase pressure on long‑time residents.

What was said and discussed

- Tina Paden, who said she lives at 1122 Emerson Street, described a local history of displacement tied to earlier large projects and urged the commission to “stop Envision 2045 and stop the comprehensive plan” unless safeguards are added. She recounted past land‑use changes tied to Northwestern University and the Research Park that she said removed Black households from her block and contrasted past public actions with current proposals.

- Cecile McHugh, who identified herself as the owner of buildings in historic districts at 1926 Orrington, said she was concerned how the proposed upzoning would affect buildings in historic districts that are zoned R4A and R2. She asked whether the preservation ordinance would “overlay any changes to the zoning” for properties not zoned R1.

- Mary Rosinski, a real‑estate agent, urged the commission to press for a stronger preservation chapter, saying prospective buyers choose Evanston neighborhoods in part for scale and architectural character.

- City staff (identified in the meeting as “Kate,” city planning staff) told commissioners that draft materials include a preliminary zoning diagnostic prepared by ZoneCo; she walked the commission through examples where current D2 downtown zoning (maximum heights cited at about 42 feet and FAR of 1.75 in existing code) were shown in the draft as much larger envelopes (examples shown in the meeting cited drafts with proposed maximum heights up to 135 feet and FARs up to 7 in some blocks). Staff noted the zoning diagnostic and draft are under active revision and that a revised comprehensive‑plan draft was expected to be released to commissions and the public in late February.

Commission reaction and next steps

Commissioner John Jacobs (Preservation Commissioner) summarized the commission’s concerns in a prepared statement: the proposed increases in height, bulk and unit capacity would incentivize teardown and replacement with buildings “not sensitive to their context,” potentially changing the character of districts and threatening both historic buildings and affordable housing stock. Jacobs said he opposed the draft zoning changes in their current form and urged the city to pursue targeted plan‑development tools (planned developments) and other approaches rather than wide‑ranging upzoning.

The commission agreed — without a formal recorded vote on a motion — to consolidate the discussion into formal comments to the Land Use Commission and city staff. Chair Klein asked staff to collect written comments and for commissioners to send suggested language; staff said they would attempt to compile a draft letter and redistribute it for review. Commissioners also discussed asking the Land Use Commission for additional review time when the revised draft is released.

Context and specifics cited in the meeting

- Participants called out multiple places on the draft map: portions of Sherman/Clark and the block around the Marshall Field building and the Varsity Theater (downtown), the Asbury Hall and Sherman Gardens areas, the Women’s Christian Temperance Union / Frances Willard block, Central Street’s form‑based overlay, and a cluster near Florence/Greenleaf frequently used by artists and small businesses.

- Commissioners and residents described specific draft proposals shown in meeting slides: D2 downtown parcels with current 42‑foot/1.75‑FAR parameters shown in the draft as zones with up to 135 feet in height and FARs up to 7; Central Street overlay rules (current: max 3 stories/35 feet, transitional height planes and fenestration/articulation requirements) contrasted with a proposed M2 designation that the draft illustrated at 65 feet and FAR 5.

- A public commenter referenced the former Research Park area and the recent sale of a development parcel (cited in testimony as $148,000,000) as examples of how land‑value shifts can change neighborhood access and affordability.

What the commission will do next

Commission staff said a revised comprehensive‑plan draft would be released to commissions and the public on or about Feb. 21; Land Use Commission discussion was expected shortly afterward. The Preservation Commission planned to review the revised draft, consolidate comments into a single letter, and present them to the Land Use Commission. Commissioners also flagged a joint ward informational meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 18 at 6 p.m. in the Civic Center Parasol Room as an opportunity for public comment and outreach.

Ending

Commissioners and members of the public framed the discussion as pro‑active: several said they supported the city’s stated goals of increasing housing affordability and diversity but asked for neighborhood‑specific analysis and tools that protect architectural character and existing affordable housing rather than blanket increases to height and FAR that, they said, would likely accelerate tear‑downs.","Public commenters and Preservation Commission members said the draft comprehensive-plan zoning changes would increase tear-down pressure and destabilize low-scale commercial corridors and residential historic districts; the commission agreed to prepare consolidated comments for Land Use Commission review.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Evanston Preservation Commission adopts 2025 work plan, adds volunteer corps and landmarking goal

Preservation commission approves rear‑addition changes at 1140 Hinman Avenue, 8‑1 with two abstentions

Preservation commission, public warn Envision Evanston 2045 zoning draft could threaten historic neighborhoods