Preservation Commission agrees to allow demolition of structure linked to famed architect Daniel Burnham

Two structures on an Evanston property where famed architect Daniel H. Burnham once lived will likely be torn down to make room for a couple’s new home after a proposal was approved 6-2 in a vote by the city’s Preservation Commission on Tuesday.

The two structures include a one-story single-family home that was built long after Burnham died in 1948, and which the commission members agreed had little architectural significance; and a “tea house” adjoined at the east end of the house, believed to have been designed by Burnham and built in 1909. The commission members who voted in favor of the request ultimately felt that the “tea house” was altered so much over the years that it lost its historical significance.

The request to demolish the structures on the property at 111 Burnham Place in the city’s Lakeshore Historic District was brought by architect Dan Wheeler on behalf of homeowners Diane and Paulo Fellin, who intend to build a new home on the pottery.

Architect Dan Wheeler speaks at the Evanston Preservation Commission meeting on Tuesday evening Credit: Bob Seidenberg

While the committee did not quibble about permitting the single-family home to be demolish, there were voices who spoke out against allowing the “tea house” to be razed as they did at a previous meeting held December 9.

In a report submitted to the Commission for their December 9 meeting, Kris Hartzell of the Evanston History Center said the structure known as the “tea house” is “highly significant” because it is the only known structure designed by Burnham for himself.

The structure also represents Burnham’s work at the World’s Columbian Exposition of 1893 of a Japanese tea house on the Exposition grounds, Hartzell reported in her research.

But members of the citizen commission, dedicated preservationists in their own right, reluctantly found too little of the original “tea house’s” features were intact to support denying demolition under their ordinance and voted 6-2 in support of the application.

However, many commission members did voice reservations.

“If you look at the framing of door and windows, if you look at the roof overhang, I think it’s [the original structure] a very simplified classic,” pointed out commission member Stuart Cohen, who is also an architect.

He conceded though that the remodeling of the building since it was built removed the historical significance of it.

“Basically the changing of its architectural style, destroyed the integrity in a very complete way,” Cohen said.

Commission member Sarah M.Dreller, echoed Cohen, saying, “I don’t know, if it is appropriate for us to force them to keep a building that has been so altered over time that it does not express what it was supposed to have been doing.”

Commission members Amanda Ziehm and Carl Klein, who cast the dissenting votes, argued strongest for preserving the “tea house” in some form.

“I think this is culturally significant, not because it’s Burnham’s finest building,” said Ziehm. “ I know this wasn’t built until later in life…I feel like this was maybe a culmination of kind where his architectural style was going. So I think it’s an important reminder of history and attachment to history.”

Klein said he felt the issue represented one of the most difficult votes in front of the group.

“I do want that connection with Burnham somehow saved, whether it’s on site or potentially somewhere else.”

Preservation Planner Cade W. Sterling noted that the commission included three conditions in its approval. The conditions included the following:

That a report be developed for the existing shelter house structure that includes historical photographs, high-resolution photographs of existing interior and exterior conditions, and as-built drawings, and that this report be made available at a publicly accessible repository (Public Library, Evanston History Center, Art Institute etc).
That reasonable efforts be taken to salvage portions of the structure containing visual interest or high quality material and that institutions of interest be afforded a reasonable opportunity to receive salvaged material.
That reasonable efforts be taken before and during excavation of the site as it relates to the potential discovery of archaeological resources including all human-made artifacts and other domestic debris.