Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Highland Park council narrows route for noncontiguous historic districts, approves owner-consent requirement
Summary
The City Council adopted an ordinance requiring owner consent for inclusion in noncontiguous local historic districts, reversing an earlier practice that allowed involuntary inclusion in such districts and prompting extended public comment and debate about preservation tools and individual property rights.
The Highland Park City Council on Sept. 8 approved an ordinance amending the city code to require owner consent before a property can be included in a noncontiguous local historic district. The ordinance change passed after public comment and extended council debate over historic-preservation policy and a pending nomination that city staff and some residents said prompted the timing of the proposal.
The new rule aligns noncontiguous-district nominations with the city's 2018 policy that requires owner consent for local landmark designations, city staff said. Director Fontaine said the change would "prohibit the inclusion of a property from consideration in the proposed noncontiguous local historic district without owner consent" and would not change owner-consent requirements for contiguous historic districts.
The measure drew lengthy public comment from local preservation advocates who argued that noncontiguous districts serve a different practical purpose than landmarking single properties and that requiring near-universal owner buy-in would effectively prevent any such districts. "The noncontiguous historic district is a really interesting idea," historic-preservation applicant Jean Sogen told the council, urging the council to allow the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) to weigh in first. Several owners and preservation advocates, including owners of nationally significant properties, described past demolitions and urged stronger tools to protect architecturally important homes.
By contrast, attorneys representing the owner and the contract purchaser of a property that is the subject of a pending demolition application urged the Council to adopt the amendment now. One attorney said the pending noncontiguous nomination had been filed specifically to impede the demolition process for 175 Prospect and that the ordinance would remove uncertainty and align city policy with the council's 2018 landmarking change.
Council members debated procedure and timing: several said they wanted the HPC to review the proposed code change before final action, while others said the council must resolve an internal inconsistency in the code without delay. Councilmember Bloomberg moved to refer the matter to HPC; that motion failed. The ordinance ultimately passed by council vote (see actions). Corporation counsel told the council the city's standard practice would be not to grandfather recent applications under the new rule.
Why it matters: noncontiguous historic districts are a tool used in other communities to group historically or architecturally related resources that are not geographically contiguous. Supporters say the option can protect multiple dispersed properties that share a theme (for example, a common architect or architectural style). Opponents of the ordinance change said requiring owner consent for noncontiguous districts will make the tool effectively unusable and reduce the city's ability to preserve its architectural heritage.
The ordinance changes Highland Park Code chapter 24 to require owner consent for noncontiguous district nominations, aligning that procedure with the owner-consent requirement for local landmark designations. The council asked staff whether the ordinance should be applied to a specific noncontiguous nomination recently filed; staff replied the ordinance as drafted would apply and the pending nomination would not be grandfathered.
The council's action resolves a long-running tension between two policy aims: preserving historically significant buildings and respecting property owners' rights. Several council members and many public speakers urged the city to pursue additional incentives and programs to encourage voluntary preservation as well as continued public education about options for owners.
The council closed the item after the vote; opponents and proponents were told the change takes effect in the city code and staff will provide next steps for implementation.
Ending: The decision means future noncontiguous historic district nominations will require owner consent; commissioners and advocates said they plan to discuss how the change affects nominations and outreach at upcoming HPC meetings.
