Historic Preservation Commission

Agenda Village of Glen Ellyn Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Thursday, November 20, 2025 7:00 PM Glen Ellyn Civic Center, Galligan Board Room Visitors are most welcome to attend all public meetings and can find copies of the Agenda online at www.glenellyn.org prior to the meeting. Any individual with a disability requiring reasonable accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should contact the Village of Glen Ellyn ADA Coordinator, 630-469-5000, at least five (5) business days in advance of the next scheduled meeting. A. Call to Order B. Approval of Minutes 1) Approval of the September 18, 2025, Regular Meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes C. Public Comment D. Old Business 1) Presentation of Village Landmark Plaque for 779 Riford Road E. New Business 1) Matching Grant Full Application Final Draft Review 2) Historic Preservation Incentives Text Amendment Review F. Chairman's Report G. Trustee's Report H. Staff Report I. GEHS Director's Report J. Adjourn Civility Pledge - In the interest of civility, I pledge to promote civility by listening, being respectful of others, acknowledging that we are striving to support and improve our community, and understanding that we each may have different ideas for achieving that objective. Page 1 of 56  Glen Ellyn Historic Meeting 11/20/2025 7:00 PM Preservation Commission Department: Community Development 535 Duane Street Department Head: Jennifer Henaghan Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Category: Minutes Prepared By: Jordan Frahm AGENDA ITEM (ID # 2025- DOC ID: 2025-982 982) Approval of the September 18, 2025, Regular Meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes Statement of the Issue: Review and Approve the minutes from the September 18, 2025, Historic Preservation Commission Regular Meeting minutes. Analysis: Items discussed at the September 18, 2025, HPC meeting included the discussion of the historic preservation matching grant pilot program and other preservation incentives, landmark alteration request and a landmark designation public hearing. Budget Impact: Contribution to Strategic Plan Action Requested: Review the September 18, 2025, meeting minutes for accuracy and clarity and approve with changes as required. Attachments: 1. September 2025 HPC Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 56 Village of Glen Ellyn Minutes Village of Glen Ellyn Historic Preservation Regular Meeting September 18, 2025 7:00PM Glen Ellyn Civic Center Historic Preservation Date: September 18, 2025 Board or Commission: Meeting: Regular Called to 7:00 p.m. Order: Quorum: Yes Adjourned: 9:00p.m. MEMBER ATTENDANCE: Penn French Chairman Present Nathan Darga Commissioner Present Donna Leak Commissioner Absent Barb Lemme Commissioner Present Robert Margetts Commissioner Present Jeremy Schletz Commissioner Present Zak Wilson Commissioner Present Also Present: Jordan Frahm Associate Planner Tim Loftus GE Historical Society Kelley Kalinich Village Trustee Adriana Ohl Zamora Recording Secretary Jennifer Heneghan Director Community Development Public Present: Matthew Jones Mike & Chris Wilson Glen Ellyn resident – 779 Riford Rd. Glen Ellyn resident – 574 N. Main St. A. CALL TO ORDER The September 18, 2025 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Chairman French at 7:00 PM at the Glen Ellyn Civic Center. B. PUBLIC COMMENT – None Page 3 of 56  C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM AUGUST 21, 2025 HPC MEETING MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF HPC MEETING OF 8/21/2025 as amended RESULT: Motion Unanimously Carried MOVER: Commissioner Darga SECONDER: Commissioner Margetts AYES: 6 D. OLD BUSINESS 1. HPC- Update on Preservation Residential Matching Grant Pilot Program. Jordan hoping to get off the ground this year and pursue suite of incentives in parallel with Pilot Program. There will be third party reviewers, trying to work out how we will pursue that, will we waive fees, HLR will still have to get paid, so still working through it. 2. Expedited Review, we are well in process of new permitting software, review times going down. Our standard for review is strong, to shorten lead times, may not happen, receiving mixed feedback currently. Our standard is currently 10, shortening to five days, there is conversations over efficacy 3. Zoning allowances- proactive allowances for historic homes if that encourages saving historic homes. That was tabled as we were updating zoning code, however we will explore other ways to take historical properties and ease zoning restrictions, have zoning reform for historical properties. The 37 properties that we have plats of surveys on, the 25% lot coverage does not necessarily impact a large portion of historic homes. Homes capped at 20% lot coverage are 4 of 37 surveyed, 78 percent could construct an addition 500 square feet. When the numbers were ran, the numbers are not as impactful. Impact would be trying to reform side yard setbacks, that would be impactful. Historic homes on 50foot wide lots, that is something that if we were to use administrative variance, it would not get homeowners to a place where it would affect historic homes. Something we could do to take to commission before zoning code update, is to address non conformity or side-yard setbacks. Approach zoning in a way that would be impactful. Page 4 of 56 Chairperson French- Trying to find a way to move whole program forward before zoning review happens. The 37 single family homes, designated as landmarks, of those 37 only 4 are at or above 20% lot ratios, meaning current footprint of existing home as it is right now for 33 of the 37 is 20% or below? Jennifer Heneghan- Correct Chairperson French- I am trying to understand the significance, it’s good that we have that starting point. If we took ideally all of the homes that are significant and potentially significant. Wouldn’t it be cool if we had the exact dimensions of the lots because those are going to be the folks that would potentially want to break down the downs. To really know what is Trustee Kelley Kalinich- I thought there were 3 categories? Jordan Frahm- to change alteration it would affect not just for the 40 landmark homes but for 132 GEHS homes. Chairperson French- main point of this is that you found a way from a practical point that we could launch a program that if someone wanted to do an addition, they could? Is there a way to launch this? Tonight we have one being presented. Jordan Frahm- which we could, our analysis shows that they could build an addition of 400-500 square foot of livable area but we want proactive allowances to go up to 25% but that would be introducing new chapters and sections. This would allow us to add clause Chairperson French- the conclusion summarizes what you are saying? Jordan Frahm- yes, that is more or less our update Jennifer Heneghan- the only thing I would add is that specific with question of lot coverage, we know that is a pretty hot topic in building community- that will be considered as a whole with the updates next year as there is a very good chance the board will adopt a 25% lot coverage for the entire community. Start collecting the data, the majority of the homes that we have collected data on can already additional square footage. Chairperson French- that is a positive. I think we have to think through, as to how we would describe that would look like. Page 5 of 56  Commissioner Margetts- In your 3rd bullet point there, if Village adopts 25%, does that go away? Jennifer Heneghan- if Village changes from 20% to 25%, then yes Commissioner Margetts- as it stands right now- it’s a positive to have 500 square feet over the 250. That is the direction we want to go. Do we have a concern about the 250 vs 500? Jordan Frahm- They should be able to max out, the administrative 22% was introduced in response to reducing to 20%, if we return to 25% Chairperson French- the 500 times 2, gives someone an extra thousand square feet. Jordan Frahm- the larger the addition, the less it will keep character of historic home, sure you should be able to max and weigh with historic preservation Jennifer Heneghan- landmark property will have to come to HPC Chairperson French- if we are launching program and someone is interested in opting in to the program, you opt in then make application, do they all need to come in from of HPC, or was this meant to be fact track or if they meet all the guidelines then they don’t need to come to this group Jordan Frahm- as presented, I would say no. They would have to come before you or see an application to qualify that property. That would be applied to non-conformity section. Chairperson French- landmark, program launched and not a landmark property, but yet they had the home built in 1893, would they come before us or would it need to come to us. Jordan Frahm- we have talked about a staff vetted process, any home that staff has any question about, those can be pulled like a consent agenda Chairperson French- any reactions or thoughts? Commissioner Darga- I think we are just taking about one aspect here but obviously someone putting an addition could be asking for the program, might be multiple things. Chairperson French- there is an incentive to actually do it, permit fee program and incentive program Commissioner Darga- for any one, they have to get on the list, so we would see them coming on the list Page 6 of 56 Jordan Frahm- you are keeping the list Chairperson French- that is opted in, then people are eligible to make application, as long as the applicants fit the program and do addition, do we have to see each of the applicants that do an addition, do they come to us. Jordan Frahm- they would not come before you if they are proposing an addition if they are significant or potentially significant. Expediting review is what we are trying to do. Lot coverage bonus’s is patio, accessory structures when talking about lot coverage in Hinsdale which is 25%, they don’t have any actual building roof structure bonus’s Trustee Kelley Kalinich- what about pool houses? Jordan Frahm- not 100% sure, that would be hardscape in required rear yard, I am making assumptions but in reviewing their actual code its 25% across the board. Chairperson French- do you think as staff they didn’t want to give 25% because then they can build a large house Trustee Kelley Kalinich- hardscape is above and beyond, it is two historical categories. Thank you for clarifying that. I think you are exactly right about setbacks, when addition added then it could go back into the set back Jennifer Heneghan- based on your suggestion, I took a quick look went back 5 and a half years, going back there were 63 zoning variations, approved 21 for lot coverage, of those 21 none were on landmark properties. Matthew Jones- Cottage and Main, just came before us for impervious surface based on secondary, I think that is the only historical home we have seen. Might mention that when we are looking at zoning codes, we are also looking at materials, that is not in our prevue. We are only looking at zoning and not materials, might want to address at zoning and not what is being used to build. Chairperson French- how do you think we should, we rely on you guys as the professionals, if you can launch this program in its entirety, do you feel hands are being forced or this is practical. We don’t want to do anything that is not realistic for you guys Page 7 of 56  Jordan Frahm- this is something in keeping with overall goals of village. This is a way to do more seem less, we are talking about text amendments, and pilot program, we are still pursuing every item in the suite, but I think that once we get the zoning program finalized, then we will be more sure Jennifer Heneghan- program is not a one and done, this is something we can keep looking at, if HPC wants to look at bulk regulations, we will do that. It’s a program Kelley Kalinich- we agreed, that we want to pilot and then evaluate, what are permit fees not collected, what is that financial impact, not set in stone. Starting point. Commissioner Margetts made a motion to adopt the Residential Preservation Matching Grant Pilot Program resolution as presented for HPC, seconded by Commissioner Lemme E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Landmark Designation Public Hearing - 779 Riford Road Chairman French- meeting tonight was called out in notice, public daily herald Sept 2nd. At this point, we are opening of a public hearing, we will swear in petitioner and then we will have motion to close and we as a body will deliberate. Sworn in Mike Wilson, stated “I have owned this house for 15- 20 years, my biggest concern is not what I am doing is more potential harm coming to it” Jordan Frahm- a home that is landmarked, everything still needs to be reviewed by HPC Mike Wilson, Homeowner- I am more prone to trying to save this home. Jordan Fraham- can you share the significance of the home Mike Wilson, Homeowner- the home was built in 1920, one day, I was riding the school bus and saw the house, I thought it was a cool house, I realized this is a very historic area and something that we need to try to take care of. It came up and I was not looking for this house. I think it’s worth saving, the area itself benefits saving it. I did not buy this house as an investment Jordan Fraham- in preliminary you discussed restoration project Page 8 of 56  Mike Wilson, Homeowner- yes someone in street complained about front porch and side porch, we have taken them out and replaced them. We just finished that. Also on the house it had wood shingles, I plan to take off siding and if I can use wood shingles I will if I can. Old houses are fun to take care of. Jordan Fraham- there are gorgeous features in this home Mike Wilson, Homeowner- I would be really happy to get it in some sort of protective status Commissioner Schletz- I saw work being done, when will you know if shingles are salvageable Mike Wilson, Homeowner- well they are under there, I am highly hopeful that they are salvageable. Sworn in Homeowners tenant-stated “I live in that house, I kind of want to add to it, in the basement, in that window it used to be heated by coal. I lived here almost 10-14 years. When we first rented the house, we looked at the house, had the good old feeling of the house” Mike Wilson, Homeowner- next stage is taking off the siding, this year if we make it with The weather. That will be a big step in the right direction. Commissioner Margetts- is that getting ready Halloween? Tenant- Yes, I change it for Halloween, with all construction that is going on, I can’t get everything up Mike Wilson, Homeowner- Correction to agenda packet- it says September 18, 2013 Chairperson French-Thank you for saving the house, wonderful Commissioner Scheltz- was it marked as a contributing in 2007? Commissioner Lemme made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Darga, all in favor. Motion passed, public hearing closed. Page 9 of 56  Chairperson French- I wanted to read that designating 779 Riford Rd, would preserve, strengthen, encourage sensitive care, referring to criteria to meet designation, 7 or 8 of the criteria are met and this meets them. It fits with comprehensive plan, it’s harmonious with surrounding area. Overwhelming evidence to be approved Commissioner Darga made motion to approve the historic designation of 779 Riford Rd., Seconded by Commissioner Schletz. Motion passed unanimously. 6 (yes) 0 (no) votes 2. Landmark Alteration Request - 574 N. Main St. Jordan Frahm- this is the Joseph McChesney house, contributes to historic main St. significant architecture, project is constructing rear yard addition with wrapping porch using existing bay window. 100 foot lot, location of addition shown to commissioners. Front elevation of home was shown, provided by architect. Straight front of home also shown. Elevations of addition shown, asking to consider petitions request for the landmark alteration. There could be involuntary meeting or voluntary meeting, architect is here and he can add clarifications. Steven Poteracki Architect- homeowners love home, but they need space, there are lots of deterioration from the balcony in the front, they want to with the addition take same detailing and wrap around to the back, with shakes, scallops and this is existing side porch, keep as is, but it would be a one-story addition to keep elevation low and grounded. You would not see 2 story wall project here. Feel strongly about repairing the home, Chairman French- owners have been there about 3 years. I don’t know if they were in Glen Ellyn before, I don’t know them personally, great example, of people move in from the city. They have been there a few years and thought about what they want to do. Steve has been to some of our events. Commissioner Lemme- so you will stay with same foundation? Steven Poteracki, Architect- Split lime stone foundation, intent to replicate that, use same material that is in chimney, they want in the back Commissioner Lemme- so the drawing on left, the 2 story windows, that is Page 10 of 56  the addition? Steven Poteracki, Architect-That is existing, Commissioner Lemme- we would only see it if approaching from south? Steve Poteracki, Architect- Yes, there also trees that minimalize public view Commissioner Lemme- brothers best friend lived in that home, it was a boarding house, I appreciate your attention to maintain detail. You mention there is damage to front porch, not, changing appearance? Steve Poteracki, Architect- Correct, just maintaining existing structure. Commissioner Darga- Jordan, looking at site plan and survey, they have a lot of room to expand, I noticed the garage, that has to be non-conforming correct Jordan Fraham- if they were to rebuild garage, they would have to set back 3 feet Commissioner Darga- they have plenty of room if they wanted to rebuild the garage Jordan Frahm - accessory structure, it has to be 10 foot from main home Commissioner Wilson-Does the addition have to follow secretary of interior standards? Jordan Frahm- no Chairperson French- for the action required, is the applicant asking us to make motion for approval or preliminary approval? Are we ready to make a motion. Commissioner Darga- even if it does not have to follow the secretary of interiors, you kind of do Page 11 of 56  Commissioner Wilson- under standard 9, it says the new work for additions shall be differentiated from. The old and new shall be compatible. Reversibility, the additions related to the new construction, the integrity of historic property shall be preserved. Chairperson French- if new addition based on lot or however the owners or architects want to do it where it looks like two homes not lined up, in this case you can hardly even see it from that point of view Commissioner Margetts- looking at elevations, am I to interpret that the back windows will be more prairie style? Steven Poteracki Architect- no all windows will be the same Commissioner Wilson- I was not trying to gloss over that, but I guess if we go down every item with the secretary of interiors guidelines, does it have to meet everyone? Jordan Frahm- you are weighing those things against each other, you would have to determine if this does meet standard number 9 Chairperson French- was that a concern enough to not meet preliminary approval? Commissioner Wilson- yes I think so Chairperson French- what would you have them do? Chairperson Wilson- have it look different enough so that you can see the new build versus the old build Chairman French- Steve you have more experience than all of us, can you educate us in that point? Steve Poteracki, Architect - we went through iterations of copying bay so it really blends in, we could have easily shot gunned back, but we are trying to keep with this corner and line, it’s not like we are taking second floor here. Is it proportioned the same, no, but we are keeping in historical style. Can it be dismantled and brought back to what it was? Yes Commissioner Margetts- we talked about this a few years ago about adding an Page 12 of 56  addition but it can’t be mimicked or the same, I am not worried about it looking the same, I feel that it should be documented in paperwork somewhere, so we can say this part is original, this is not. Chairperson French- I don’t know that is just in the history? It’s been well documented Jeff, Historical Society Director- from my knowledge on historic houses, a big part of it is making sure that you are using something that a future person can come and see the difference. The floor board sizes and what not. I highly doubt you are using the same lumber you used in the 1920’s Steve Poteracki, Architect-very easy in this house, the floor plan changing is the addition, not touching existing interior. Conscious of keeping interior intact. Margetts- is it possible today to do a forgery today? Jeff, Historical Society Director- yes, it’s not easy but it can be done, you have to get some type of nails, wood, insulation, you would never able to put up and say it looked this way. Commissioner Margetts made a motion to approve for preliminary approval; Commissioner Dargo seconded the motion. Motion Passed with all in favor. 3. TRUSTEES REPORT – Trustee Kalinich began by thanking Jeff and Historical society. I received a communication this week from recorder’s office in Dupage County, they are in the process of applying for a grant to national archives, trying to get a grant to restore and preserve all books dating back to 1839. They have asked that I write a letter on behalf of historical society. Application to be submitted in November Trustee Kalinich then went on to communicate the following points: 1. In process of interviewing Trustee Candidates, 7 outstanding applicants, decision will be made October 6th, recommendation made during board meeting 2. Process of developing budget for 2026, suggest that we talk about amount to be included in budget for incentives next year Chairman French- clarification on last point, the 50k approved for Page 13 of 56  2025, lets say we get program launched in Nov. by the time people are aware, it does not seem like the 50k would be use in 2025, how will the dollars flow. Will we use or lose? Trustee Kalinich- Let me get clarification, depends upon if a contract is encumbered 4. CHAIRMAN REPORT – Nothing to report only that Jeff is taking another position, going to Arlington Heights Historical Society. 5. GEHS DIRECTOR’S REPORT – Going to Parks and Rec, taking over History Museum, very similar situation. We do have some awesome things, we had wonderful donations which give us permanent temp walls. We finally got a donor wall, will continue to highlight people who donate. We will continue to work on the steps with the Tavern. Commissioner Lemme- my question is since Stacy tavern is a historical, none of that has come before us, is there a reason why we have not been included? Jeff- Village is fantastic, they have put a lot of money into the tavern, that all needed to be done, it was pricy things, the steps needed to be replaced. We need to make them ADA compliant, that let them know when there are issues where they wanted to add things that did not fit with the historic character. There are conversations with public works and community developments. We said no metal rails. It is mainly replacement work, not anything new, no major changes. Commissioner Lemme- did grant proposal get submitted? Jordan Frahm- grant program not live, nothing actually submitted A. STAFF REPORT – Jordon Frahm mentioned RFP zoning code requirements discussion will take place next week. B. ADJOURNMENT & NEXT MEETING DATE – Commissioner Darga motioned to adjourn the meeting and Commissioner Margetts seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next HPC meeting is October 16,2025. Submitted by Adriana Ohl, Page 14 of 56 Recording Secretary Reviewed by Jordan Frahm, Staff Liaison Page 15 of 56  Glen Ellyn Historic Meeting 11/20/2025 7:00 PM Preservation Commission Department: Community Development 535 Duane Street Department Head: Jennifer Henaghan Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Category: Award Prepared By: Jordan Frahm AGENDA ITEM (ID # 2025- DOC ID: 2025-983 983) Presentation of Village Landmark Plaque for 779 Riford Road Statement of the Issue: Award to be presented to Mike Wilson, owner of 779 Riford Road in Glen Ellyn. Analysis: This English cottage-style house earned recognition as an excellent example of a representative architectural style of Glen Ellyn's early suburbanization in the 1920s. Budget Impact: Contribution to Strategic Plan Action Requested: Presentation of the Landmark plaque approved by the Village Board on October 14, 2025. Attachments: 1. Ord 7225 Page 16 of 56 Page 17 of 56 Page 18 of 56 Page 19 of 56 Page 20 of 56 Page 21 of 56 Page 22 of 56 Page 23 of 56 Page 24 of 56 Page 25 of 56 Page 26 of 56 Page 27 of 56 Page 28 of 56 Page 29 of 56 Page 30 of 56 Page 31 of 56 Page 32 of 56 Page 33 of 56 Page 34 of 56  Glen Ellyn Historic Meeting 11/20/2025 7:00 PM Preservation Commission Department: Community Development 535 Duane Street Department Head: Jennifer Henaghan Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Category: Discussion Item Prepared By: Jordan Frahm AGENDA ITEM (ID DOC ID: 2025-984 # 2025-984) Matching Grant Full Application Final Draft Review Statement of the Issue: The Residential Preservation Matching Grant pilot program is planned to be reviewed and approved by the Village Board on December 8th. Analysis: The Residential Preservation Matching Grant pilot program policy document and application were drafted by Village Staff. The Village Board has reviewed the HPC's proposed incentives at both a March and October workshop this year, and with their feedback, Village Staff created the attached final draft for approval that will be considered at the December 8th regular meeting of the Village Board. The most recent changes to the application packet can be viewed in the language highlighted in red. Village Staff will provide a pre-application for the two homeowners that have previously submitted materials for proposed projects. Budget Impact: Contribution to Strategic Plan Action Requested: Review the final draft of the Matching Grant Application for the Historic Preservation Incentives pilot program and provide any final feedback to staff before it is submitted for approval to the Village Board. Attachments: 1. Residential Matching Grant Application Packet November update Page 35 of 56  VILLAGE OF GLEN ELLYN Village of Glen Ellyn Residential Preservation Matching Grant Program Application Packet Village Manager’s Office 535 Duane Street — Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 — Telephone 630.547.5345 — Fax 630.547.8849 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1 Page 36 of 56  VILLAGE OF GLEN ELLYN Village of Glen Ellyn Residential Preservation Matching Grant (As of MMM/DD, YYYY) Purpose The Village of Glen Ellyn and the Historic Preservation Commission recognize the importance of preserving historic residences. 150 years of American homebuilding provide Glen Ellyn with neighborhood charm, architectural heritage and local pride. Preservation programs not only protect historical and architectural assets, but also promote sustainability, community vitality, and a diverse housing stock. The Village of Glen Ellyn Residential Preservation Matching Grant Program was created to encourage the restoration of architecturally or historically significant properties built at least 50 years prior to the date of application. The Village Board reserves the sole right to amend, modify, add, or delete any part or subpart of this Grant program. Assistance Available Qualified projects are eligible to receive a Residential Preservation Matching Grant in an amount not to exceed $10,000, as determined by the Historic Preservation Commission. Approval of funding will be made by the Village Board on the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Commission. Grant awards will be administered as a reimbursement grant after the preservation project is completed and all requested documentation is received and reviewed by Village Staff, the HPC and Village Board to verify the approved scope of work has been met. Property Eligibility Requirements • Homes at least 50 years old may be considered for a grant award. • Homes that are Village Landmark properties, Glen Ellyn Historical Society plaque properties, homes included in the National Register of Historic Places, and homes considered architecturally significant or potentially significant may be qualified by Village Staff for eligibility for grant award, with subsequent Historic Preservation Commission approval. Approved properties will be included on the Historic Preservation Commission Incentive Program Qualified Property List. o Village Landmarks, Glen Ellyn Historical Society plaque homes, NRHP homes and Significant and Potentially Significant rated homes are specifically mentioned, as these homes typically emulate the architectural, historical, and cultural significance required to be eligible for a grant award. o Significant and Potentially Significant homes are determined by Architectural Resource Surveys commissioned by the Village. 2 Page 37 of 56  o After an application for grant consideration is received, Village Staff will review permit history, conduct site visits and/or utilize other historical resources to investigate whether a property has undergone significant alteration or is in a condition of extreme disrepair that would potentially disqualify the home for consideration as a Village Landmark or National Historic Register property. o Homes that are qualified by Village Staff receive final determination of eligibility at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. Present members that would like to discuss the eligibility of any Landmark, GEHS Plaque or architecturally rated property, at length and separately from other applications, may motion to address an individual application. Otherwise, staff qualified applicants will collectively receive final approval by a majority vote of the HPC. • All other homes that are at least 50 years old may be considered for eligibility by the Historic Preservation Commission by application and reviewed at a regularly scheduled public meeting. Applicants and supporters would be encouraged to attend these eligibility discussions, and the Historic Preservation Commission will vote on approval to qualify eligibility. o Such properties will encompass one or more of the following criteria: ▪ The structure exhibits master craftsmanship. ▪ The structure displays distinct features that exhibit a historically important architectural style from a representative period. ▪ The property possesses local or regional cultural significance, or is associated with historically significant individuals. ▪ The property significantly contributes to the Village as a source of civic pride. o Such properties may be determined to be eligible for the grant program by a majority vote of the HPC members after review, testimony, and discussion when an applicant petitions the Village for inclusion in the Historic Preservation Commission Incentive Program Qualified Property List • Applicants must receive a determination of eligibility to submit a grant award application. • Grant award project applications will be reviewed by the HPC, in the order that they are received, at Regular Meetings of the Historic Preservation Commission. 3 Page 38 of 56 Waived Permit Fees • All properties included on the Historic Preservation Commission Incentive Program Qualified Property List are exempt for internal permit fees charged by the Village of Glen Ellyn o Third Party permitting fees, like that of an environmental or engineering review by a consultant, will be charged to the permit applicant. o Fees charged by the Village will be waived for Landmark Properties, Glen Ellyn Historical Society homes, NRHP properties, significant and potentially significant homes on historic resource surveys and any other residence included on the HPC Incentive Program Qualified Property List. Grant Award and Project Eligibility The Residential Preservation Matching Grant Award is designed as a reimbursement grant for 50- percent of eligible project costs. Properties included on the Historic Preservation Commission Incentive Program Qualified Property List may submit an application seeking a grant award for up to $10,000 (total project costs must meet or exceed $20,000). Grants will be awarded on a rolling basis with an open application window until funds are exhausted. Annual approved funds for the Residential Preservation Grant Award total $50,000. Applicants must provide construction plans that demonstrate U.S. Department of the Interior preservation standards and provide multiple quotes for construction costs or be exempt under stipulations allowing for sole-source bid. Such stipulations may include a documented effort to seek multiple bids with a failure to respond within a reasonable timeframe, or a project where the level of expertise being sought is specialized so that the number or qualifications of potential project bids is limited. Projects that qualify for a Residential Preservation Grant Award must include exterior improvements that enhance the home’s appearance and contribute to improving the streetscape. Due to the program’s intent to promote high preservation standards, proposed projects should aim to preserve or restore significant architectural features of the home, utilize heritage materials, and use principles of sympathetic design per the standards of the U.S. Department of the Interior. Grant funds must be awarded prior to the start of any eligible project to be considered for reimbursement. Ineligible projects include routine or deferred maintenance (such as painting not part of a restoration), landscaping, fences and other accessory structures, driveways and other paved areas. Work must be completed within 12 months of receiving Village Board approval for the award – with extensions considered as needed. 4 Page 39 of 56 Examples of Eligible Improvements • Rehabilitation of roof or siding using heritage materials like cedar or stone. • Restoration of non-extant details like corbels on a craftsman bungalow. • Preservation of a home’s historic feature, like a prominent front porch on an American Four Square • Protection of original architecture, like a turret on a Queen Anne Victorian. Ineligible Improvements • Regular or deferred maintenance (such as painting not as part of a restoration) • Landscaping • Fences • Accessory structures that have not been designated as Landmark structures or National Register properties • Driveways or other paved areas The Residential Preservation Award is a reimbursement grant, and the project must be completed in order to receive grant award funds. Awards are only valid if the preservation project is completed within a year of the date of the Award approval. Written requests for time extensions may be considered by the Community Development Director. Project Evaluation Project evaluation and approval is handled by the Village of Glen Ellyn Historic Preservation Commission at regular meetings and requires approval by the Village Board. Only projects that adhere to preservation standards of the United States Department of the Interior as deemed appropriate by the Historic Preservation Commission are eligible for a grant award. Projects shall preserve or restore significant architectural features of the home, utilize heritage materials, and/or use principles of sympathetic design. Application Requirements Required Submittals with Application: • Photos depicting existing conditions of the home that will receive improvements; • A schematic drawing with detailing the proposed improvements; • Scope of Work with detailed costs for each proposed improvement (excluding ineligible portions of improvements) from multiple contractors. All contractors must be registered with the Village’s Community Development Department prior to a building permit being issued; 5 Page 40 of 56  • A narrative as outlined below: ➢ Description of proposed preservation work including information about the proposed building materials and methodology for proposed changes. ➢ Details on how improvements sought will positively impact the historical preservation of the Village. ➢ Credentials and experience of contractors ➢ Any unusual or expected difficulties or hardships in making the proposed improvements. Pay Back Provision If a home that has received Residential Preservation Grant funding is demolished, or project related improvements are undone or altered within 3 years, the applicant shall wholly reimburse the Village the total value of the grant award. The applicant agrees to this provision when she/he signs the Award Request Certification and the Application Certification. 6 Page 41 of 56  VILLAGE OF GLEN ELLYN Historic Preservation Residential Matching Grant Award REQUIRED SUBMITTALS WITH APPLICATION: • Photos depicting existing conditions of the home that will receive improvements; • A schematic drawing with detailing the proposed improvements; • Scope of Work with detailed costs for each proposed improvement (excluding ineligible portions of improvements) from multiple contractors. All contractors must be registered with the Village’s Community Development Department prior to a building permit being issued; • A narrative as outlined below: ➢ Description of proposed preservation work including information about the proposed building materials and methodology for proposed changes. ➢ Details on how improvements sought will positively impact the historical preservation of the Village. ➢ Credentials and experience of contractors ➢ Any unusual or expected difficulties or hardships in making the proposed improvements. HOMEOWNER INFORMATION: Homeowner Name: _________________________________________________________ Home Address: ________________________________________________________________ Home Phone: __________________________ Email: _________________________________ If tenant, what is the expiration date of your current lease? _______________________________ If buyer under contract or tenant, who is the property owner? ____________________________ Property Owner Name: __________________________________________________________ Property Owner Address: ________________________________________________________ Property Owner Phone: ___________________ Property Owner Fax: ____________________ Property Owner E-mail: _________________________________________________________ 7 Page 42 of 56 OVERVIEW OF HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE OF THE HOME _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ OVERVIEW OF HOW PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS MEET PRESERVATION STANDARDS _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 8 Page 43 of 56 RELEVANT EXPERIENCE OR EXPERTISE OF CONTRACTORS _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXPECTED HARDSHIPS OR DIFFICULTIES _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ ITEMIZED ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION COST _________________________________________________________ ____________ _________________________________________________________ ____________ _________________________________________________________ ____________ _________________________________________________________ ____________ _________________________________________________________ ____________ _________________________________________________________ ____________ _________________________________________________________ ____________ 9 Page 44 of 56 _________________________________________________________ ____________ TOTAL PROJECT COST: ____________ AMOUNT OF AWARD REQUESTED: ____________ 10 Page 45 of 56 APPLICATION CERTIFICATION I, the undersigned, certify that I have read the program description and requirements for the Village of Glen Ellyn Residential Preservation Matching Grant Award. I certify that all information provided herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the improvements described in this application must receive all required permit approvals from the Village of Glen Ellyn prior to the commencement of construction. Furthermore, I, the undersigned, my successors and assigns, hereby agree to save and hold harmless the Village of Glen Ellyn and any of its employees, officers and directors from all cost, injury and damage to any person or property whatsoever, any of which is caused by an activity, condition or event arising out of the performance, preparation for performance or nonperformance of any project improvement included in my award application. The above cost, injury, damage or other injury or damage incurred by or to any of the above shall include, in the event of an action, court costs, expenses of litigation and reasonable attorneys’ fees. I understand that if my home is demolished, or project related improvements are undone or altered within 3 years I will be required to repay the Village in an amount as described on page [x} of the award packet. _______________________________________ ____________________________________ Applicant Name (PRINT) Applicant Signature Date: __________________________________ CONSENT FROM PROPERTY OWNER (Required if different from Applicant) _______________________________________ ____________________________________ Property Owner Name (PRINT) Property Owner Signature Date: __________________________________ ************************************Office Use Only *************************************** Application is: ______Approved ______Denied _______________________________________ ____________________________________ Village President Date ______________________________________ ___________________________________ Economic Development Coordinator Date 11 Page 46 of 56  VILLAGE OF GLEN ELLYN Residential Preservation Matching Grant Award Request Certification SUBMITTAL FOR AWARD Please submit the following information to the Community Development Director via the Historic Preservation Commission Staff Liaison once approved work is complete for award payment: • This signed Award Request Certification • Copies of invoices stamped “PAID” from all contractors, and companies associated with eligible work completed for the project • Proof of payment (limited to copies of canceled checks and/or credit card receipts) • Photos of all completed construction • A signed and notarized Applicant’s Affidavit for Award form provided by the Village of Glen Ellyn • Contractor’s Affidavit for Award (attached) CERTIFICATION I, the undersigned, warrant that all representations of the application submitted under the program are true and accurate and that there has been no material change which would in itself or cumulatively with other events impact adherence to preservation standards approved by the Historic Preservation Commission and the Village Board. All agreements, warranties and representations made to the Village of Glen Ellyn are true at the time they were made and shall remain true at the time of submittal for Award under the program. I understand that if my home is demolished, or project related improvements are undone or altered within 3 years I will be required to repay the Village in an amount as described on page [x} of the award packet. The Village of Glen Ellyn may in its sole option cancel its assistance commitment either in whole or in part for failure to comply with the requirements of this award program or applicable Village Codes and Regulations. _______________________________________ ____________________________________ Applicant Name (PRINT) Applicant Signature Date: __________________________________ 12 Page 47 of 56  APPLICANT’S AFFIDAVIT FOR AWARD STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS COUNTY OF DUPAGE ) TO: The Village of Glen Ellyn The undersigned, ___________________________________ (Name), being duly sworn, deposes and says that he or she is the Owner/Tenant (strike one) of the property located at __________________________________________________ (the “Premises”) and has applied for a Residential Preservation Matching Grant from the Village of Glen Ellyn, in the amount of $ ______________, for approved eligible projects (the “Work.”). The attached proof of payment is true, correct, and genuine, and delivered unconditionally and the work set forth in said proof of payment has been completed and/or the materials set forth in the attached proof of payment has been used in connection with the Work in the Premises. Upon payment of $_____________ from the Village of Glen Ellyn, there shall be nothing due or to become due from the Village of Glen Ellyn in connection with the disbursement of the approved award amount from the Village of Glen Ellyn based on the documentation submitted to the Village of Glen Ellyn for the Work set forth in said proof of payment. ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Date Signature SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _____day of __________________, 20___. ____________________________ Notary Public 13 Page 48 of 56  CONTRACTOR’S AFFIDAVIT FOR WORK COMPLETED STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS COUNTY OF DUPAGE ) TO: The Village of Glen Ellyn The undersigned, ___________________________________ (Name), being duly sworn, deposes and says that he or she is the Owner/Employee (strike one) of __________________________________________________ Construction Company (the “Contractor”) and has completed work for ____________________________ , (the “Applicant) recipient of the Village of Glen Ellyn Residential Preservation Matching Grant Program. The attached proof of payment is true, correct, and genuine, and delivered unconditionally and the work set forth in said proof of payment has been completed and/or the materials set forth in the attached proof of payment by the Contractor for the Applicant. ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Date Signature SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _____day of __________________, 20___. ____________________________ Notary Public 14 Page 49 of 56  Glen Ellyn Historic Meeting 11/20/2025 7:00 PM Preservation Commission Department: Community Development 535 Duane Street Department Head: Jennifer Henaghan Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Category: Discussion Item Prepared By: Jordan Frahm AGENDA ITEM (ID DOC ID: 2025-985 # 2025-985) Historic Preservation Incentives Text Amendment Review Statement of the Issue: If the expanded role of the HPC in creating a greater suite of incentives is to be installed beyond the parameters of the Matching Grant pilot program, a series of text amendments must be passed through the Village Plan Commission by recommendation and subsequently approved by the Village Board. The attached text amendments are drafted by Village Staff to demonstrate progress on these steps and to request feedback. Analysis: Title 2, Chapter 13 of Village Code would be amended to include the scope of the Historic Preservation Incentive Program, including adding eligibility and qualification rules and procedures, and detailing waiver and grant program details. Section 4-1-4 of Village Building Code would be amended to eliminate internal permit fees. Third-party permit fees would still be required. This proposal also includes an amendment to the zoning code that would allow for lawfully constructed existing setbacks to be permitted for additions and alterations throughout the Village. The aim of this amendment would be to reduce the number of applications for setback variation, an issue that disproportionately impacts homes eligible for Historic Preservation incentives due to age (built before 1976) when lesser setbacks were required. The amendments to Title 2 and Title 4 of the Village Code will be presented to the Village Board for their consideration on December 8. Following the incorporation of any feedback from the HPC, the amendment to the Zoning Code will proceed through the public hearing process with a hearing before the Plan Commission prior to consideration by the Village Board. Budget Impact: Contribution to Strategic Plan Action Requested: Review the drafted text amendments and provide feedback to staff. Attachments: 1. HPC Incentives Draft Text Amendment Page 50 of 56 Page 51 of 56  DRAFT Historical Preservation Incentive Program Text Amendment Amend Title 2 Chapter 13 Section 12 – Historic Preservation Incentive Program Add Title 2 Chapter 13 Section 13 – Severability VC 2-13-12 Residential Preservation Incentive Program A. Purpose: To recognize the importance of preserving historic residential architecture, the Village of Glen Ellyn, in coordination with the Historic Preservation Commission and Village staff provide a set of financial incentives for applicable and qualified homes. B. Applicability: 1. Eligibility a. A home is required to be a minimum of 50 years old to be considered for incentives. b. Homes that are Village Landmark properties, Glen Ellyn historical Society Plaque properties, homes included in the National Register of historic Places, and homes considered architecturally significant or potentially significant may be qualified by Village Staff for inclusion in the incentive program with subsequent Historic Preservation Commission approval. c. All other homes that are at least 50 years old may be considered for eligibility by the Historic Preservation Commission by application and reviewed at a regularly scheduled public meeting. 2. Qualification a. Village Landmarks, Glen Ellyn Historical Society plaque homes, NRHP homes and Significant and Potentially Significant rated homes typically emulate the architectural, historical, and cultural significance required to qualify for incentives. b. Significant and Potentially Significant homes are determined by Architectural Resource Surveys commissioned by the Village. c. Homes not meeting eligibility criteria due to Landmark status, existing cultural or historical honors per the Glen Ellyn Historical Society or U.S. Department of the Interior, or architectural significance per Village commissioned resource surveys, must demonstrate that a property seeking qualification demonstrates one or more of the following: i. The structure exhibits master craftsmanship. Page 52 of 56  ii. The structure displays distinct features that exhibit a historically important architectural style from a representative period. iii. The property possesses local or regional cultural significance or is associated with historically significant individuals. iv. The property significantly contributes to the Village as a source of civic pride. 3. Historic Preservation Incentive Qualified Property List a. Eligible homes must submit an application to opt into consideration for the Historic Preservation Incentive Qualified Property List b. After an application for grant consideration is received, Village Staff will review permit history, conduct site visits and/or utilize other historical resources to investigate whether a property has undergone significant alteration or is in a condition of extreme disrepair that would potentially disqualify the home for consideration as a Village Landmark or National Historic Register property. c. Homes that are qualified by Village Staff receive final determination of eligibility at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. Present members that would like to discuss the eligibility of any Landmark, GEHS Plaque or architecturally rated property, at length and separately from other applications, may motion to address an individual application. Otherwise, staff qualified applicants will collectively receive final approval by a majority vote of the HPC. d. Homes that do not fit the criteria for Staff qualification may be qualified by a majority vote of the HPC upon application and review at a regularly scheduled meeting if the property meets qualification material outlined in Village Code Section 2-13-12(B)2(c). e. The Historic Preservation Incentive Qualified Property List will be maintained on file at the Community Development Department by Village Staff. C. Waived Permit Fees: All properties included on the Historic Preservation Commission Incentive Program Qualified Property List are exempt for internal permit fees charged by the Village of Glen Ellyn 1. Fees charged by the Village will be waived for Landmark Properties, Glen Ellyn Historical Society homes, NRHP properties, significant and potentially Page 53 of 56  significant homes on historic resource surveys and any other residence included on the HPC Incentive Program Qualified Property List. 2. Third Party permitting fees, like that of an environmental or engineering review by a consultant, will be charged to the permit applicant. D. Residential Preservation Matching Grant: Homes on the Historic Preservation Incentives Qualified Property List are eligible for grant funding. Approved projects are eligible for up to $10,000 as a 1:1 matching grant. 1. Grant applications are reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission and evaluated on the proposed project’s adherence to the U.S. Department of the Interior’s preservation standards. a. Projects must include exterior improvements that enhance the home’s appearance and contribute to improving the streetscape. b. Projects should aim to preserve or restore significant architectural features of the home, utilize heritage materials, and use principles of sympathetic design. c. Ineligible projects include routine or deferred maintenance, landscaping, fencing, accessory structures, driveways and other paved areas. 2. Application Evaluation: Homeowners will prepare an application for submittal to Village Staff and present the proposal to the Historic Preservation Commission at a regularly scheduled meeting. a. Applications will include photos depicting existing conditions of the home that would receive improvements. b. Applications will include schematic drawings or elevations detailing proposed improvements. c. Applications will include a Scope of Work with detailed costs for each proposed improvements (excluding ineligible portions of improvements) i. Applicants will be required to provide bids from multiple contractors. ii. If applicants are unable to produce multiple bids, or a proposed project requires a level of expertise so that personnel options are unreasonably limited, sole-source bids will be considered. d. Applications will include a detailed narrative describing the proposal including but not limited to: Page 54 of 56  i. Proposed preservation work including information about the proposed building materials and methodology for proposed changes. ii. Details on how improvements sought will positively impact the historical preservation of the Village. iii. Credentials and experience of contractors. iv. Any unusual or expected difficulties or hardships in making the proposed improvements. e. The Historic Preservation Commission will vote on proposed projects for recommendation to the Village Board for final award approval. 3. Approval of funding will be made by the Village Board upon the review and recommendation of the Historic Preservation Commission. a. Grant awards will be provided as a reimbursement grant only. i. Grant award must be determined before project activities have started. ii. Work must be completed within 12 months of receiving Village Board approval, with extensions considered upon written request. iii. All project activities must be completed and submitted to Village Staff to initiate reimbursement. b. Pay back provision: If a home that has received Residential Preservation Grant funding is demolished, or project related improvements are undone or altered within three (3) years of project completion, the applicant shall wholly reimburse the Village the total value of the grant award. Ament Title 4 Chapter 1 Section 4 – Fee and Deposit Schedule Add 4-1-4(G) Homes included on the Historic Preservation Commission Incentive Program Qualified Property List will not be assessed permit fees generated by the Village. All third party permit fees will be assessed normally. Amend Title 10 Chapter 8 Section 6 – Nonconforming buildings and structures Retitle 10-8-6(B)3 Nonconforming Single Family Dwelling to 10-8-6(B)3(a) Page 55 of 56 Add 10-8-6(B)3(b). A single-family dwelling which is nonconforming due to setback that was lawfully permitted at the time of the construction, may construct additions or make alterations of the principal structure that do not worsen the condition of the nonconforming setback. Page 56 of 56