Historic preservation commission discusses revised design for 223 East Eighth Street, leaves prior denial intact

The Hinsdale Historic Preservation Commission on June 4 reviewed post-hearing changes to plans for 223 East Eighth Street in the Robins Park Historic District but did not reopen or overturn the denial issued at the May 19 public hearing.

Bethany, village planning staff, told commissioners that “the denial from the last meeting … will still stand,” but that the commission’s discussion would be summarized for the village board’s June 10 packet and could help trustees as they consider the application.

The commission’s discussion focused on specific design changes the applicant’s design team submitted after the May 19 hearing. Patrick, a member of the applicant’s design team, said the team had reillustrated changes requested by commissioners and shown before-and-after images to Bethany. The single largest change is the removal of a continuous panel between the garage’s upper and lower windows and replacing that panel with a vertical brick treatment to break up large glazed openings. The design team also illustrated shutters, double-hung windows in some locations, and other fenestration changes that they said the homeowner supports.

Commissioners responded positively to the revisions. Several members said the visual comparisons in the packet made it easier to evaluate the changes and that the brick infill and smaller, more traditional window proportions improved the design’s fit with the district. Commissioners requested that staff note an error in one of the renderings: the rightmost garage-adjacent window shown in a rendering is not proportionate to the architectural elevation and should be corrected in materials presented to the board.

The owners, John and Jess Springer, were not present; staff said they were on a planned vacation and that owners will be required to attend the village board meeting. Commissioners emphasized that the packet submitted to the board should include a summary of this meeting’s discussion and that staff will work with the village attorney to clarify procedures for post-hearing changes going forward.

Bethany said staff plans to propose text-amendment clarifications to the historic-preservation code in the coming months to address gaps that have surfaced when applicants modify plans after an HPC public hearing. Staff noted that, under current code, a substantial post-approval design change would require returning to an HPC public hearing.

No formal action was taken on case HPC 11-2025 at the June 4 meeting; the previous denial from May 19 remains on the record. Commissioners expressed appreciation that the design team and homeowners revisited the plans and asked staff to present the commission’s favorable comments to the board of trustees for its June 10 consideration.

If the board of trustees needs additional or corrected drawings for its packet, staff said the design team could supply updated materials before the board meeting or distribute revisions at the trustees’ meeting.

Background: Case HPC 11-2025 is an application for a certificate of appropriateness to demolish a single-family home and construct a new single-family home in the Robins Park Historic District. The HPC treated the June 4 item as a discussion (post-hearing) rather than a new public hearing and therefore held no vote.