Title
title
Concur with the Historic Preservation Commission and Adopt an Ordinance Authorizing the Revised Historic Preservation Guidelines for Roofing - Solar Panels
end
Introduction
overview
The Historic Preservation Commission recommends that the Village Board adopt an Ordinance Authorizing amendments to Requirements for Roofing - Solar Panels of the Historic Preservation Guidelines (p-123 and p-124).
end
body
Recommended Action
Adopt the Ordinance
Prior Board Action
There is no prior Board action associated with this specific item.
Background
Based on the Historic Preservation Ordinance, the Commission may recommend, and the Village Board may adopt, criteria and guidelines to be used when deciding on a Certificate of Appropriateness or Certificate of Advisory Review (7-9-12A). The Architectural Review Guidelines were adopted in 1993 and, along with the current Ordinance, went into effect on January 1, 1994.
In 2005, the Village Board directed the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) to revise the Guidelines. The HPC began the Guideline update in 2009 with the goal of creating a more user-friendly document with photographs, graphic illustrations, and educational information. Several issues were also identified for further study. This included: the garage policy, second floor bungalow additions, window repair and replacement, commercial buildings, and new construction. Since 2009 the Guidelines and the Historic Preservation Ordinance have been updated regularly to assist staff, Commissioners, and applicants in understanding and implementing procedures for Certificates of Appropriateness (COA) applications, hearings and Advisory Reviews.
Summary of Major Revisions to the Guidelines
This section consists of changes made to the Requirements for Roofing - Solar Panels of the Historic Preservation Guidelines. The following summarized why the change was made or, if applicable, the predicated effect of the change.
The HPC is concerned about the visual impacts of solar panels when installed on the street-facing fa?ade of historic buildings. Based on existing Guidelines, a COA is required for solar panels if they are proposed on slate, tile and shake roofs; whereas an Advisory Review is required regardless of the location of the proposed solar panels. An advisory review has been proven to be not effective in implementing the Solar Panel Guidelines. Therefore, the Historic Preservation Commission recommends requiring a Certificate of Appropriateness for solar panels when proposed on the street-facing fa?ade of historic buildings. For consistency in the review process, all roof types regardless of material type shall be treated the same. Additionally, as a part of the text amendment, "Requirements to install solar panels on the street-facing fa?ade of historic buildings in historic districts" have been added in the Guidelines to give homeowners, property owners alternative options to install solar panels on the street-facing fa?ade of historic buildings. The proposed amendments to Solar Panels Guidelines will help to preserve the character of historic buildings and reduce impact of solar panels while enabling homeowners to leverage the economic and environmental benefits of solar panels.
The following requirements (with photos) have been added to the Requirements for Roofing - Solar Panels (p-123 and p-124) to help reduce the visual impact of solar panels when installed on the street-facing fa?ade of historic buildings.
1. Use solar panels and mounting systems that are compatible in color to established roof materials. Incorporate a monochromatic equipment design (panels are black on black, color matched black attachments and rails, etc.) that blend in well with the roof projections.
2. Use a sleek trim (or skirt) around the perimeter of the solar panel array to hide components that are visible beneath the solar panels.
3. Mechanical equipment associated with the photovoltaic system shall be treated to be as unobtrusive as possible. Incorporate interior conduits instead of exterior conduits and use flush-mounted solar panels that are installed directly on a roof, with a low profile and a clean aesthetic.
4. An alternative to conventional solar arrays is a Solar Shingle system, also called photovoltaic shingles. Solar shingles are solar cells designed to look like conventional asphalt shingles. Various thin film solar cell technologies are used to match conventional shingles both in size and flexibility.
If solar panels are proposed on the street-facing fa?ade of historic buildings, and the proposal incorporates one of the above-mentioned requirements/alternatives, staff can administratively approve the project.
Village staff did an exercise to evaluate and approximately quantify the impacts of the revised Guidelines on contributing resources in the Historic Districts, and especially south-facing corner lots that have two street-facing fa?ades, as they would require a COA to install solar panels on their street-facing facades. These numbers are approximate. There is a total of 3,973 contributing resources, and 356 south-facing corner lots which is 9% of the total number of contributing resources (excluding parks, hospitals, and non-contributing resources). The south-facing corner lots will be impacted the most by the revised Guidelines as they have two-street facing facades, and the south facade is the most feasible and efficient location to install solar panels. Village staff and the Historic Preservation Commission are of the opinion that considering the 9% ratio, the impact would be minimal. Additionally, there are a number of buildings on corner lots that have flat roofs and will not require a COA to install solar panels, which will further reduce the 9% ratio.
These changes will assist staff, Commissioners, and applicants in understanding and implementing Historic Preservation Guidelines for solar panels in historic districts. The Commission believes this change will be more equitable for all applicants as well as reflects the decisions made by a majority membership of the Commission. This change will mirror the Commission's Rules of Procedure and other Commissions' protocols.
Timing Considerations
There is no specific timing considerations associated with this item.
Budget Impact
There is no budget impact associated with this item.
Staffing Impact
There is no staffing impact associated with this item. The item aligns with the department's core service delivery.
DEI Impact
There is no DEI impact associated with this item.
Community Input
The Historic Preservation Commission has held discussions on the Historic Preservation Guidelines for solar panels and potential updates at public Historic Preservation Commission meetings beginning on January 9, 2025. It was determined that updates would be handled by Village staff, based on feedback from staff and Commissioners shared at public meetings. On May 22, 2025, the revised Historic Preservation Guidelines for solar panels was provided to the Historic Preservation Commission. At their meeting on June 26, 2025, the HPC recommended that the Historic Preservation Guidelines for solar panels be adopted by the Village Board by an 8-0 vote.
Staff Recommendation
Staff Recommends approval of this Ordinance.
Advantages:
* Preserve the character of historic buildings.
* Reduce visual impact of solar panels while enabling homeowners to leverage the economic and environmental benefits of solar panels.
* Allow for more administrative approvals.
Disadvantages:
* Additional restrictions placed on installing solar panels on the street-facing fa?ade of historic buildings.
Alternatives
Alternative 1:
Deny the revised Historic Preservation Ordinance.
Advantages:
* Allows property owners to continue to install solar panels on street-facing fa?ades of historic buildings without requiring a Certificate of Appropriateness.
Disadvantages:
* It would fail to preserve the character of historic buildings and provide long-term protection of historic resources within the historic districts.
Alternative 2:
Remand back to the Historic Preservation Commission.
Advantages:
* Further review and information from staff, community and the Historic Preservation Commission.
Disadvantages:
* Would delay installation of solar panels on street-facing facades of historic buildings.
Anticipated Future Actions
There are no anticipated future actions in relation to this item.
Prepared By: Mike Bruce, Village Planner/Planning & Urban Design Manager
Reviewed By: Craig Failor, Development Services Director
Approved By: Kevin J. Jackson, Village Manager
Attachment(s):
1. Ordinance
2. HPC Memorandum
3. Roofing Guidelines