Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Council upholds Historic Preservation Commission decision denying siding replacement at 418 South Fifth Street
Loading...
Summary
After extended testimony from the homeowner, contractor and the Historic Preservation Commission chair, the council declined to reverse the HPC's denial of a request to replace historic exterior wood siding at 418 South Fifth Street.
The Geneva City Council on Feb. (date not specified) declined to reverse a Jan. 22 Historic Preservation Commission decision that denied replacement of historic exterior wood siding and trim at 418 South Fifth Street.
The council considered an appeal of the HPC denial after contractor T.J. Bollinger, representing homeowner Julie Hughes, and Hughes herself asked the council to overturn the commission's decision. Bollinger told the council he had judged roughly "about 60% of the current boards" to be "unsalvageable," saying that replacing only the worst boards would produce an inconsistent appearance and that the total cost to do partial repair would be comparable to full replacement in an engineered product.
Paul Zomer, chair of the Historic Preservation Commission, described the commission's review as governed by the Secretary of the Interior standards (SOI standards) and the city code. Zomer told the council that the evidence before the HPC showed repair and like-for-like replacement would be less expensive than replacing the siding with an alternate material such as LP SmartSide; the commission therefore followed the SOI hierarchy that prioritizes repair and replacement in kind before considering an alternate material.
Bollinger and Hughes argued the HPC did not have the full cost picture and that the near-term economics and the prospect of continuing lead-paint scraping and repainting made the alternate-material option financially preferable for the homeowner. Bollinger said the full replacement in cedar would be "north of 6 figures," and that LP SmartSide presented a lower-cost alternative. Hughes described repeated scraping and painting since 2009 and said she did not want to continue paying several thousand dollars for short-term repairs.
The council heard questions from alderpersons about what evidence was in the HPC record, how the SOI standards were applied, and whether the trim and quarter-round molding could be matched by an alternate material. City staff and the HPC chair emphasized that the tribunal is bound to review the HPC decision on the record before the commission; new evidence not presented to the HPC is procedurally outside the scope of the council's appeal review.
A motion to reverse the HPC decision was made and seconded; the motion failed. The clerk recorded the final tally as six no votes, one "I vote" and one abstention; the council therefore did not reverse the preservation commission's determination and the commission's denial stands.
The council and staff advised the homeowner that she may reapply to the HPC with additional or clarified documentation — for example, an application proposing repair-and-replace on the primary (street-facing) facade and selective replacement with alternate materials on secondary facades, or more detailed cost comparisons — and Director DeGroot said a revised application could be submitted as soon as the applicant had new information to add to the HPC record.
