Loading...
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 2015/04/29 Minutes The City of Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission Proceedings of the April 29, 2015 Meeting A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission was held on Wednesday, April 29, 2014, at 6:30 p.m., at the City of Lake Forest City Hall, 220 E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois. Historic Preservation Commissioners present: Chairman Pairitz and Commissioners Wells Wheeler, John Travers, Robert Alfe, Susan Athenson, Mary Ellen Swenson and Jim Preschlack Commissioners absent: None City staff present: Kate McManus, Assistant Planner and Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development 1. Introduction of Commissioners and staff, overview of meeting procedures. Chairman Pairitz reviewed the meeting procedures followed by the Commission and asked the members of the Commission and staff to introduce themselves. 2. Approval of the minutes of the March 25, 2015 of the Historic Preservation Commission. The minutes of the March 25, 2015 meeting were approved with a correction as requested by Commissioner Travers. 3. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for revisions to previously approved plans for a rear addition and building scale variance at 338 E. Westminster. Owners: Andrew and Regina Lind Representative: Andrew Lind, architect Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts, hearing none; he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Lind introduced himself as owner and architect of the home. He explained that his petition was previously before the Commission in February and since that meeting revisions were made to the approved plans per suggestions made by the Commission. He reviewed the changes noting that they include narrowing the windows and raising the ceiling height to 9 feet. He stated that he also centered the addition on the rear elevation of the house and added French doors to east elevation. He explained that the current plan narrows and lengthens the addition which results in a square footage overage of 18 additional square feet beyond the previous approval. Ms. McManus stated that the petition was approved by the Commission in Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 29, 2015 - Page 2 February and is back before the Commission for an increased building scale variance of 18 square feet. She explained that staff does not have the latitude to approve a variance which differs from what has been officially approved. Commissioner Travers posed the question if staff may be able to approve minor changes for building scale variances without Commission review. In response to Commissioner Travers’ question, Ms. Czerniak stated that the ordinance for a building scale variance approved by the City Council must specify the amount of the overage. She stated that staff will explore langu age that could be presented to the Commission in situations where the design is not fully resolved to provide staff with some latitude to resolve the exact square footage before an ordinance is prepared. She noted that in general, staff has very little latitude with respect to variances and the appropriate Board or Commission is charged with recommending a specific overage. Chairman Pairitz agreed that in some cases, it may be appropriate for the Commission to give staff some latitude to work within as the design is finalized. In response to a question from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Lind stated that he intends to use true divided lite windows, but acknowledged that due to cost and maintenance, he may use simulated divided lite windows. In response to Commissioner Swenson, Mr. Lind stated that the window size changed from 4 feet wide to 3.5 feet wide, which is the exact size of the windows on the front of the house. Hearing no further questions from the Commission, Chairman Pairitz invited public comment, hearing none; he invited Commission comments and deliberation. Commissioner Athenson thanked petitioner for taking the Commission’s suggestions into consideration. She stated that she is not concerned with the increased building scale overage as it will make the space more livable. She noted that the changes are an improvement to the home. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Pairitz invited a motion Commissioner Travers made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving revisions to previously approved plans including: (1) a building scale variance of up to 248 square feet, (2) the inclusion of French doors on the east elevation, and (3) changes to window size and ceiling height, as previously recommended by the Commission based on the findings detailed in the staff report and incorporating the testimony and the Commission’s deliberations as additional findings. He noted that the approval is subject to the following conditions. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 29, 2015 - Page 3 1. Plans submitted for permit must reflect the project as presented to the Commission. If, during the final design development process, modifications are proposed, plans clearly detailing the areas of change must be submitted and will be subject to review by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, to verify that the plans are consistent with the intent of the Commission and the approvals granted. 2. Tree Protection Plan – Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a Tree Protection Plan, to protect trees during construction, must be submitted and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist. Commissioner Wheeler seconded the motion and the Commission voted 7 to 0 to approve the petition. 4. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving an addition and driveway modification at 540 N. Green Bay Road. Owners: Ingrid and Brian Biela Representatives: Mike Malloy, project manager Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts, hearing none; he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Malloy introduced the project by showing a site plan of the proposed addition. He stated that the addition is sited very similarly to what was proposed in 2008 and is 40 feet from the north property line. He stated that the landscaping plan presented in 2008 will be used for the current project. He explained that there will be thinning of non-native brush and screening along the north property line. He explained that a slight driveway modification is needed to make navigating it easier. He showed existing floorplans and explained that the purpose of the addition is to make the home more livable for the family. He stated that an additional bedroom, laundry room, powder room, storage space, a mudroom and an attached garage are proposed. He explained that the existing garages are attached to the house but require the owners to walk outside to get from the garage to the home. Showing images of the existing entry, he explained that visitors have difficulty finding the front door as it is tucked away and not clearly defined. He also stated that the addition will provide a connection between the ground floor and the second floor noting that there is currently no living space on ground level. He showed perspective drawings of the proposed addition and stated that the entry is located near garage and pointed out that the addition will have similar a roof shape, massing, and materials as the existing house. He pointed out that the covered entry has suspension cables. He showed perspective drawings from each direction and stated that the existing window spacing will be retained and that the existing staircase may be removed. Ms. McManus stated that the current proposal is very similar to what was Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 29, 2015 - Page 4 approved by the Commission in 2008. She stated that since that project was never started, the previous approvals have expired. She noted that there are conservancy areas on the north and east edges of the property protecting existing vegetation and noted that the City Arborist will verify that these areas are retained. She stated that the proposed addition appears to be compatible with the existing house and that it is minimally visible from Green Bay Road. She noted that the original architect of the house had the opportunity to review the current proposal and he indicated to staff that overall he found it acceptable and emphasized the importance of ensuring that the materials and design elements of the addition are consistent with the existing house. In response to a question from Commissioner Travers, Mr. Malloy stated that it would be difficult to mitigate for the increase in impermeable surface area because the existing driveway is asphalt and the budget does not support repaving the entire drive. In response to a question from Commissioner Preschlack, Ms. McManus clarified that the original architect was able to briefly review the plans for the addition and indicated to staff that he found them to be satisfactory. In response to Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Malloy stated that the landscape plan was previously approved in 2008 and some of the plantings were completed. He explained that the intention is to complete the rest of the plantings and add more landscape screening. Hearing no questions from the Commission, Chairman Pairitz invited public comment, hearing none; he noted that this is an unusual house, largely veiled from the street. He acknowledged that the original architect reviewed the plans and found them to be generally consistent with his vision. He commented that there is a new element added to the entry to emphasize its location. In response to questions from Commissioner Alfe, Mr. Malloy stated that there are original teak awning windows and new metal windows. He explained that the intention is to use a different element to highlight the entry and that the metal will be painted gray to match the existing siding. Chairman Pairitz recognized a member of the public. Jim Crawford, resident at 550 N. Green Bay Road stated that his property borders the site to the north. He stated that he is generally comfortable with the proposed addition. He asked for clarification on the material of the clerestory windows and the proposed screening to the north noting concern about potential light impacts. In response to concerns from Mr. Crawford, Mr. Malloy explained that there was some previous concern about light spillover, so wood panels are proposed in Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 29, 2015 - Page 5 place of glass in the clerestory windows. Commissioner Wheeler and Commissioner Preschlack stated that from the plans presented, they understood the clerestory windows to be glass. They noted the importance of keeping the banding consistent. Commissioner Wheeler stated that spandrel glass is an option to retain reflectivity. In response to questions from the Commission, Mr. Malloy stated that they will consider using glass for the clerestory windows; but noted that the glass is custom and may be cost prohibitive. In response to a question from Commissioner Travers, Mr. Malloy clarified that the owner is willing to consider using glass in the clerestory windows. Chairman Pairitz noted that the windows are a defining feature of home and the materials used should be consistent. He also recognized that the addition is not on the public side of the house, but stated that a similar material to glass should be used. Commissioner Wheeler agreed that the clerestory windows are a significant feature of house. In response to a question from Chairman Pairitz, Ms. Czerniak stated that the City has received comments from the public about the house in the past, but not specifically about light spillover. In response to a question from Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Malloy confirmed that the entry feature is integral to the window unit. Chairman Pairitz noted that the proposed window at the entry is not out of context with existing house and is not exposed to street or neighbors. Commissioner Travers stated that the owners seem to be open to using glass for the clerestory windows. He noted that in the past, there has been no public concern about light spillover. He added that the closest neighbors prefer the use of glass. He suggested adding a condition of approval to address the material of the clerestory windows. In response to a question from Mr. Crawford, Mr. Malloy stated that the landscaping includes thinning of brush and cleaning up the landscaping to make room for evergreens. He noted that new landscaping will be planted on the subject property, not on the neighboring lot. In response to a question from Chairman Pairitz, Ms. Czerniak stated that the City would not require plantings on the neighboring property. She added that could Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 29, 2015 - Page 6 be agreed to between the neighbors if desired. She suggested that the City work with the homeowner and neighbor to ensure proper placement of landscaping to provide for effective screening. Chairman Pairitz suggested adding a condition directing that the City arborist review the landscape plan to assure appropriate screening between properties. Brian Biela, petitioner, stated that he generally likes the clerestory windows except for bright light early in the morning. He acknowledged that some neighbors have expressed concerns about light spillover. In response to a question from Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Biela stated that he was not familiar with the window material alternatives, but said that he is open to considering the options. Chairman Pairitz stated that it is important that the windows in the addition appear consistent with the existing house from the exterior. Commissioner Wheeler offered that interior shaded could also be considered. He noted that the reflective qualities of the addition’s clerestory windows should be consistent with the existing windows. Commissioner Alfe noted that the window setbacks should also be consistent with the windows in the original house. Chairman Pairitz stated that spandrel glass could be a good option. Commissioner Wheeler complimented the house and stated that the design is an asset to the community. Commissioner Preschlack stated that he feels comfortable with the proposed addition knowing the original architect was able to review the plans and found them to be acceptable. He stated that the addition appears to be consistent with the existing home. Commissioner Travers suggested an additional condition of approval: Clerestory/transom panels on the addition may be clear or opaque and shall be consistent in appearance with the original house. He also proposed a revision to a condition recommended in the staff report: the landscaping plan shall be consistent with the intention of screening the area near the northern property line. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Pairitz invited a motion. Commissioner Travers made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving an addition and driveway modification based on the findings detailed in the staff report and incorporating the testimony and the Commission’s deliberations as additional findings. Commissioner Travers noted that the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 29, 2015 - Page 7 approval is subject to the following conditions. 1. Plans submitted for permit must reflect the project as presented to the Commission with the following modification. a. A reflective material shall be used for the clerestory/transom panels in the addition. The panels may be clear or opaque but shall be generally consistent in appearance with the clerestory windows in the original house. b. If any additional modifications are proposed, plans detailing the areas of change must be submitted and will be subject to review by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, to verify that the plans are consistent with the intent of the Commission and the approvals granted. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a final landscape plan shall be submitted and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist. The landscape plan shall provide for screening of the area near the north property line to provide a buffer for the residence to the north. The landscape plan shall provide for protection and preservation of the conservancy areas. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a final engineering plan shall be submitted demonstrating that existing grades on the site are maintained to the extent possible with only changes necessary to accommodate proper drainage and good engineering practices. 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a materials staging and construction vehicle parking plan must be submitted to the City for review and will be subject to City approval in an effort to minimize and manage impacts on the neighborhood during construction and to minimize impacts on trees intended for preservation. 5. This project must abide by all of the terms, conditions, restrictions, and provisions of The City of Lake Forest City Code, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, rules, and regulations. 6. All material on the exterior of the home shall be consistent with the existing material and represent like kind construction. Commissioner Swenson seconded the motion and the Commission voted 7 to 0 approve the petition. OTHER ITEMS 5. Opportunity for the public to address the Historic Preservation Commission on non- agenda items. There were no additional public comments. 6. Additional information from staff. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 29, 2015 - Page 8 Ms. Czerniak acknowledged Chairman Pairitz and noted that this was his last meeting. She thanked him for his time on the Commission and invited him to return to a future meeting for formal recognition. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kate McManus Assistant Planner