In 2015, residents of Hulbert-designed homes south of Madison, north of I-290 and west of Oak Park Avenue, decided they’d rather not form a new village historic district, thank you very much. And in the spring of 2016, a home on the highly visible corner of Chicago and Linden avenues in the Frank Lloyd Wright Prairie School of Architecture Historic District was deconstructed beyond recognition, prompting a concerned villager to write Wednesday Journal to find out why the village allowed a home in a historic district to be “ruined.”
At the root of these two occurrences is some public confusion over just what it means to own a home in a historic district in Oak Park and what role such a designation plays when a homeowner in that district wants to renovate his or her home. According to village officials and the Historic Preservation Committee, there are numerous misconceptions about village guidelines, so the standards are worth revisiting.
Back to basics
First of all, many wonder if a village full of homes predating World War II (and even World War I) is equally full of “historically significant” homes. While many village homes are designated as historic, with some even listed on the National Register of Historic Places, there are only three historic districts in the village, and the majority of village homes are not included within historic district boundaries.
The three districts are the Ridgeland/Oak Park District, the Frank Lloyd Wright Prairie School of Architecture Historic District, and the Gunderson Historic District. The homes within these historic districts make up roughly one third of village housing stock, and the boundaries of the districts can be seen on the village website: http://www.oak-park.us/village-services/planning/historic-preservation/historic-district-boundaries.
On its website, the village defines historic districts as, “an area with geographically definable boundaries, possessing a significant concentration of properties united aesthetically by plan or physical development, or by past events, that has been designated as an Oak Park Historic District pursuant to village ordinance.”
Within the historic districts, the village distinguishes between properties that are deemed contributing to the historic nature of the district and those that are not:
“In a historic district, most buildings contribute to the significance of the area without individually having the credentials of a landmark. These buildings are referred to as ‘contributing resources.’ They help to maintain the historic integrity of the neighborhood. Buildings that do not contribute to the significance of the historic district are usually less than 50 years old or have been significantly altered in the recent past. These buildings are referred to as ‘non-contributing resources.'”
Renovating within a historic district
The village’s urban planner, Doug Kaarre, notes that the permit application for homes in the historic district is the first level of oversight the village exerts over planned construction projects.
“When an owner submits a permit application,” Kaarre said, “the address will trigger [Historic Preservation Commission] review. Any addition within a historic district is tagged in our system. It’s an automatic review. We look at the scope of the work and whether the building is considered contributing or non-contributing to the district.”
Rosanne McGrath, an Oak Park architect and former chair of the preservation commission, says determination is key.
“When the districts were created,” she noted, “all the properties within the district were surveyed. Each district has a time period of significance. Any structure built outside of that period will be ‘non-contributing.’ In our three historic districts, the vast majority of buildings are considered ‘contributing.'”
Both McGrath and Kaarre note that the Chicago and Linden house, a ranch house with a build date around 1947, was a non-contributing home to the Frank Lloyd Wright Prairie School of Architecture Historic District.
Kaarre points out, “Even though this is a major scope of work, the home is a non-contributing resource. Because of the visibility of the project, I reached out to the architect to see if they’d be willing to get some feedback from the commission, but my understanding is they declined that.”
McGrath points out that homeowners of non-contributing properties, can do what they want to their properties, but the Historic Preservation Commission will offer an opinion that is purely advisory, and many people come in and listen to the commission’s suggestions.
For homes that are considered contributing, a certificate of appropriateness is required for demolition, including partial demolition. Kaarre said that an addition to a home is classified as a partial demolition.
This can be an area rife with misconceptions. Yes, a certificate of appropriateness is required for most large-scale renovation projects planned for contributing structures, but no, this doesn’t necessarily add to the burden of a homeowner seeking to work on his or her home. Both Kaarre and McGrath stress that the vast majority of projects do not require Historic Preservation Commission review.
Notes Kaarre, “Typically, an addition of any sort would require approval, but if it’s not visible from the street, a certificate of appropriateness for a project can be approved administratively. Most are. Fewer than 10 percent of projects go before the commission.”
McGrath points out the misconception that it is difficult to rehabilitate historic district homes is just not true. She said there are three requirements that must be met in order to trigger a certificate of appropriateness review by the commission:
1) Is the property a contributing structure?
2) Is the proposed work visible from the street?
3) Does the proposed work call for demolition of the historic fabric of the property?
In essence she said the only significant changes prohibited are additions to the front of the home, which local zoning laws prohibit in most instances, and also demolition.
Kaarre specifies that Oak Park’s guidelines most likely would not allow for the demolition of a contributing resource in its entirety. Unlike the River Forest case of the recently razed Mars Mansion, he said, “It’s not likely that something like that would get demolished here. The purpose of the historic district is to preserve contributing resources. Unless there are mitigating circumstances, it is very difficult to get a permit to completely demolish a contributing property.”
McGrath emphasizes that for most homeowners looking to renovate their historic district homes, all that is required is a little planning.
“If you know your project is large in scope and might require a certificate of appropriateness review,” she said, “it’s smart to do that when you’re in the design phase. It’s worthwhile to go in before you want the building permit just to make the process easier. The take-away is that you can enlarge, update and improve your home in a historic district, and it’s done hundreds of times a year in Oak Park.”