HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM
ACTION REQUESTED:
title
Consider the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) request in order to construct a dormer, window opening, and rear facing deck for the property located at 132 S. Wright Street -COA 18-4592
body
DEPARTMENT: Transportation, Engineering and Development
SUBMITTED BY: Gabrielle Mattingly
BOARD/COMMISSION REVIEW:
Submitted for Historic Preservation Commission review.
BACKGROUND:
The applicants, David and Kim Weeks, have submitted a request for the property located on the northeast corner of Wright Street and Chicago Avenue. The COA request has been submitted in order to construct a new window opening, a rear facing deck that can be seen from Chicago Avenue, and a dormer. The subject property is approximately 15,800 sq. ft. and is currently zoned R2 (Single-Family and Low Density Multiple-Family Residence District). The home is a 2 story, Dutch Colonial Revival with the replacement of the front entry porch. Staff does not have record of any COA applications submitted for this property.
The City of Naperville Municipal Code Section 6-11-8:2 requires a COA subject to Historic Preservation Commission approval for any work performed on the primary façade of the principal building where projection of the work is visible from a public street. The primary façade is defined as the portion of the façade that abuts or is nearest to a front yard or a corner side yard. Note: A COA is not required for modifications to the rear and interior side façades if not visible from the street. Therefore, only the portion of the changes that can be seen from Wright Street or Chicago Avenue, are under the purview of the Historic Preservation Commission.
DISCUSSION:
The applicant has proposed changes to the existing home that can be seen from Chicago Avenue. The changes consist of the following: a new window opening on the south façade, and a rear facing open landing deck with stairs on the east façade, and a dormer on the east façade. A site plan can be found in the attachments depicting the location of the proposed changes. Note: Upon review, staff inquired why the proposed window on the south façade was shorter than the other windows along this façade. The applicant indicated that the short wall, facing Chicago Avenue, is pushed back from the main façade. The size of the window was chosen to be consistent with the windows on the east and north façade. Staff agrees with this rationalization.
The purpose of the proposed window and rear deck are to remodel the existing mud room and kitchen within the interior of the home. A new master bathroom will be added to the second story of the home necessitating an additional window added to the east façade to allow for light and ventilation. The changes will be constructed of materials that are consistent with the existing home in both size and style which include:
• Window: wood, aluminum clad double hung window
• Deck: cedar railings, posts, pickets, and deck with lattice skirt
• Dormer: 6” cedar lap siding, 6” cedar corner boards, asphalt shingles
Section 6-11-8:5 of the City’s Code (Certificate of Appropriateness Required) establishes the factors for consideration of a COA application. Based on the factors and analysis below, staff recommends approval of the COA to allow for the construction of a dormer, window, and rear facing deck to 132 S. Wright. The petitioner is in general agreement with these findings.
Factors for Consideration of a Certificate of Appropriateness Application:
5.1. Compatibility With District Character: The Commission and Zoning Administrator shall consider the compatibility of the proposed improvement with the character of the historic district in terms of scale, style, exterior features, building placement and site access, as related to the primary façade(s), in rendering a decision to grant or deny a certificate of appropriateness.
Analysis: Staff found the proposed changes maintain compatibility with the historic district given the minimal impact on the overall architectural character and the placement near the rear of the home.
5.2. Compatibility With Architectural Style: The Commission and Zoning Administrator shall consider the compatibility of the proposed improvement with the historic architectural style of the building or structure to be modified by the certificate of appropriateness request.
Analysis: The proposed dormer, window, and deck will match the existing building which maintains compatibility with the architectural style.
5.3. Economic Reasonableness: The Commission and the Zoning Administrator shall consider the economic reasonableness of any recommended changes determined to be necessary to bring the application into conformity with the character of the historic district.
Analysis: The proposed changes are economically reasonable because they allow the petitioner to make changes on the interior of the home without impacting the front façade.
5.4. Energy Conservation Effect: In making its determinations, the Commission and Zoning Administrator shall consider the effect that any recommended changes may have on energy conservation.
Analysis: The proposed changes will not result in any adverse impact on energy conservation at the Subject Property.
5.5. Application Of Regulations: The Commission and Zoning Administrator shall not impose specific regulations, limitations, or restrictions as to the height and bulk of buildings, or the area of yards or setbacks, or other open spaces, density of population, land use, or location of buildings designed for conditional uses except as applicable for compliance with the underlying zoning district.
5.5.1. The Commission however, may consider the height and bulk of buildings and area of yards or setbacks within the context of existing neighborhoods in making its determinations. The Commission shall be permitted to deny a certificate of appropriateness on the basis of height and bulk of buildings and the area of yards or setbacks only upon finding that the approval of such a request would be detrimental to the existing or historical character of its surrounding neighborhood. The Commission may adopt procedural rules concerning the type of information that it considers necessary to make such a finding.
5.5.2. The Commission's consideration of height and bulk of buildings and area of yards or setbacks shall not exempt the applicant from compliance with the provisions of this Title 6 (Zoning Regulations).
Analysis: The changes to the subject property are in compliance with the underlying zoning district requirements in terms of setback and height.
5.6. The City's Historic Building Design and Resource Manual may be used as a resource in consideration of the above.
Analysis: The Historic Building Design and Resource Manual provides guidance for new construction in Section E (p 59-68). These guidelines identify what is encouraged, acceptable and discouraged. Within these guidelines, it states the following: the placement of a deck should be located on the rear façade, adding a dormer is an encouraged alternative to building second story additions, scale, materials, style and design should all be considered when making any changes to a historic home. Upon review of the proposal changes, staff finds the applicant has chosen changes that minimally impact the historic home and are consistent with the scale, materials, style and design.
Key Takeaways
• The petitioner is requesting approval of COA 18-4592 in order to construct a dormer, new window opening and rear facing deck for the property located at 132 S. Wright.
• The City of Naperville Municipal Code requires review by the Historic Preservation Commission for changes that can be seen from the street. Staff is in support of the request given its minimal impact on the architectural style of the home.