Loading...
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 2017/09/27 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission Proceedings of the September 27, 2017 Meeting A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission was held on Wednesday, September 27, 2017, at 6:30 p.m., at the City of Lake Forest City Hall, 220 E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois. Historic Preservation Commissioners present: Chairman Grieve and Commissioners Wells Wheeler, Elizabeth Sperry, Jan Gibson, Robert Alfe and Carol Gayle. Commissioners absent: Bill Redfield City staff present: Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development 1. Introduction of Commissioners and staff, overview of meeting procedures. Chairman Grieve reviewed the meeting procedures followed by the Commission and asked the members of the Commission and staff to introduce themselves. 2. Consideration of the minutes of the August 23, 2017 meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. The minutes of the August 23, 2017 meeting were approved as submitted. 3. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for signage for a new business, Freedom Home Care, to be located at 289 E. Deerpath. Property Owner: Deerpath Western LLC (Doug Hanrahan) Tenant/Business: Freedom Home Care Representative: Skip Spanjer, North Shore Sign Company Mr. Spanjer introduced the petition noting that a wall sign is proposed for a new business, Freedom Home Care, over the window, on the store front façade. He noted that two options are presented to the Commission, one with a graphic and the other without the graphic and only lettering. He stated that the sign will be wood with an aluminum pan and one-half inch cut-out letters which will be applied to the metal background. He stated that because the building is historic, the sign will be mounted into the mortar, not into the face of the brick. He stated that the business owners prefer the blue background for the sign noting that blue is the color used in the advertising materials. He noted that a sign with a green background, although not preferred, is offered as an option. He stated that a sign with a black background and gold lettering is a third option. He noted that this option was not included in the materials submitted to the Commission but is now being offered. Ms. Czerniak stated that although the sign is consistent with the Code requirements from an overall size perspective, it is not compatible with the historic building on which it is proposed to be located. She added that the proposed sign is not compatible with Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 27, 2017 - Page 2 the distinctive copper awning on the building or with the signage on the adjacent tenant space. She suggested that consideration of window signage or a projecting sign would be worthwhile. She noted that the building is prominently located near the intersection of Deerpath and Western Avenue, in the historic district. She noted that the City has consistently viewed business signs as a means of identifying businesses, but not as a primary means of advertising. She asked for Commission input on the proposed sign and direction on options that should be considered. She stated that staff recommends that the Commission continue the petition to allow the petitioner to consider the comments offered and explore other signage options. In response to questions from Commissioner Gayle, Mr. Spanjer stated that the letters are a composite material which is more durable than acrylic. In response to questions form Commissioner Wheeler, Mr. Spanjer noted that there are similar wall signs on business across the street and down the block. He stated that the proposed wall sign will be highly visible unlike a window which will be visible only from directly in front of the storefront and not from points to either side. He stated that the intent is to attract the attention of drivers and pedestrians. He stated that the graphic is important to identify the business, represent the company, and identify the type of care the business delivers. He stated that a projecting sign will be visible to pedestrians, but not to people in vehicles on the street. He stated that the business owner is trying to attract people in cars and alert them to the business. He added that a projecting sign is much smaller, with smaller letters. In response to questions from Commissioner Alfe, Mr. Spanjer explained that the business owner is willing to consider a sign with or without a border, but prefers the border. He confirmed that the size of the letters differ in the various options presented in order to fill the available space on the sign. He stated that the finish proposed for the sign and the letters is durable and does not fade. He clarified that the backboard back board of the sign is aluminum and the frame is wood. He stated that the letters will sit on top of the aluminum pan. He stated that the sign will be hung on a bar that will be fastened into the mortar line. In response to questions from Commissioner Sperry, Mr. Spanjer explained that the bar will bend out at the top and the sign base will lock on to the bar. He confirmed that the bar will be fully hidden by the sign and only the white wood return on the edge of the sign will be visible. In response to questions from Commissioner Gibson, Mr. Spanjer stated that a window sign will be impacted by reflections and will not be visible. He stated that the proposed sign will stand out and will be easier to read and will be visible from the east and the west along the street. In response to a question from Chairman Grieve, the owner of Freedom Home Care stated that the initial concept was to install a new awning above the existing copper awning that would span the two adjacent store fronts. He stated that the intent was Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 27, 2017 - Page 3 to have the names of both businesses on the valance of the awning. He stated that the owner of the adjacent business did not support that approach and staff advised that the existing copper awning should not be obscured by another awning. As a result, the wall sign is proposed. He explained that the business helps people to take care of the elderly at home. He stated that they want children of elderly parents and caretakers to see the business name and understand the incredible care that is offered. He stated that the intent is to expose everyone that passes by to the business. He stated that people looking into the space will see a “living room” environment. Chairman Grieve noted that the proposed business does not appear to be an impulse-type business noting that people are likely to do research to find the business rather than just stopping in because they notice the sign. Hearing no further questions from the Commission, he invited public testimony. Mr. Opsitnik, President of the Historic Preservation Foundation, stated that the Foundation provided the Commission with a letter based on the information available prior to the meeting. He acknowledged that a different option is now presented to the Commission but noted that the Foundation did not have a chance to comment on the new information. He stated that the Foundation recognizes that the location of the business is a gateway to the Central Business District. He stated that given the prominence of the location, the sign warrants further consideration including exploring further the size, location, type and color of the sign. He stated that achieving some compatibility with the sign for the adjacent business should be considered. He stated support for a mock-up of the sign before Commission action. Hearing no further public testimony, Chairman Grieve invited final comments from the Commission. Commissioner Gibson noted that given the prominence and historic importance of the Blackler building, and the iconic bay window and copper awning, careful consideration of the signage is important. She noted that based on her observation, the window signage in the adjacent retail space is very visible. She expressed concern about locating the signage above the awning, near the windows of the residential apartments. She noted that the distinctive awning makes this building and options for signage different from the buildings on the other side of the street. She noted that many times vehicles are stopped in front of the building as they approach the intersection offering plenty of time to see signage for the new business. She suggested that consideration of signage near the top of the window may be appropriate. She added that letters should be wood or another natural material. Commissioner Sperry noted that the location is enviable because everyone stops in front of the building and moves slowly past it as they approach the intersection and the railroad tracks. She suggested that the ability to view the sign from 100 feet away is not essential. She stated that the proposed signage, above the copper awning, creates an imbalance with the overall storefront. She suggested consideration of locating signage in the transom area, immediately under the awning. She added that Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 27, 2017 - Page 4 window signage could also be considered. She stated that as proposed, the sign appears too abrupt, bold and out of character with the building. In response to questions from Commissioner Alfe, Mr. Spanjer confirmed that as proposed, the sign will be visible above and will not be blocked by the existing awning. He stated that he made the letters as large as possible within the allowable space. He noted that the proposed sign is centered under the apartment windows. He stated that moving to a black and gold sign, instead of the blue and white sign as originally proposed, will allow the sign to blend in better with the building. He stated that the intent is to get the business name out so people will see it and follow up with a call to the business. He stated that more people will see a sign on the wall than on the window. Commissioner Alfe pointed out that other wall signs in the area have a symmetrical look and are balanced with the architectural elements of the buildings. Commissioner Wheeler noted that the existing copper awning is a significant feature on the building and on the streetscape. He stated that the presence of a sign above the awning will appear jarring. He noted that the signs across the street are aligned and balanced with each other. He stated support for the new business and occupancy of the space and encouraged the petitioner to consider a window sign. Commissioner Gayle noted that it is clear that the Commission is uneasy with the sign as proposed because of its relationship to the building and the existing architectural features. She stated that she shares concerns expressed by other Commissioners about the asymmetry presented by this sign. She stated that the preferred blue sign appears inconsistent and jarring on the historic building. She noted that the sign as proposed does not relate well to the tenant space below. She noted that the storefront is on the north side of the street and will not receive a significant amount of sunlight. She recognized the interest in advertising the business but noted that she questions the notion that the sign will serve as a primary advertising tool. Chairman Grieve noted that the building on which the new sign is proposed is iconic and not like the buildings across the street and as a result, the Commission is appropriately putting extra time and effort into reviewing the proposed sign. He stated that it is important to consider the signage in the context of the unique building. He noted that because of the awning, the two store fronts appear as one property and looking to a more symmetrical solution could be helpful. He noted that in addition to the pairing of the two storefronts, there are residential units above the storefronts which further distinguishes this building from others. He stated that as proposed, the signage appears to be associated with the apartments above the storefront and feels out of place. He pointed out that the awning is containing the commercial spaces below. He applauded the petitioner’s creativity and the interest in working with the neighboring business. He noted that done correctly, signage could likely work within the context of the existing awning. He stated that based on the Commission’s comments, continuation of the petition is appropriate to allow the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 27, 2017 - Page 5 petitioner to revisit opportunities for signage that are more compatible with the building. Hearing no further comments, he invited a motion. Commissioner Wheeler made a motion to continue the petition with direction to explore options for signage in the area below the awning. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gibson and was approved by a vote of 6 to 0. OTHER ITEMS 4. Opportunity for the public to address the Historic Preservation Commission on non- agenda items. No testimony on non-agenda items was presented to the Commission. 5. Additional information from staff. There was no additional information presented by staff. The meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Catherine J. Czerniak Director of Community Development