Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation Appeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
HPC grants demolition at 223 E. 8th St., rejects proposed new house; village-board appeal likely
Summary
The commission approved a COA to demolish the house at 223 E. 8th St. in Robbins Park but voted down the applicant’s COA to build the proposed replacement; staff said the denial will be forwarded to the village board for further consideration.
At its May 19 meeting the Hinsdale Historic Preservation Commission approved a Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish the single‑family home at 223 E. 8th St. but denied the applicant’s COA for the proposed replacement house.
Why it matters: A COA denial blocks local approval of the proposed design; the next formal step for the applicant is to submit the case to the Village Board for review, which staff said must occur within 60 days of the commission’s decision.
What happened at the hearing: Architect Patrick (Moment Design Architecture) presented a design the owners described as “timeless” and said it was intended to fit into the neighborhood while improving interior light and privacy through a front courtyard and a side‑load garage tucked back from the façade. Commissioners praised the packet and design in general but raised concerns about the proposed fenestration — notably a long, near‑full‑height window feature the commission said reads as a contemporary expression not typical of established historic styles in the district.
Votes and next steps: The commission voted by roll call to approve demolition of the existing house. On the construction COA, the motion to approve failed (recorded roll-call votes: Commissioners Weinberger, Elder and Olson voted no; Chairman Harlow voted yes). Staff told the commission a denial is forwarded to the Village Board for review and possible final action; the village board could approve or deny the COA or impose conditions. The applicant may appear before the Village Board; staff indicated the next board meeting date and said they will help schedule the appeal.
Context: Commissioners and applicant discussed changes made after the design‑review meeting (parapet treatment, minor dormer adjustments, and material selections including mineral‑painted brick, darker base‑course brick, slate roof, cedar‑shake texture and copper accents). The commission encouraged further refinement of fenestration and the design team acknowledged prior iterations and neighborhood engagement.
