Loading...
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 2014/01/22 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission Proceedings of the January 22, 2014 Meeting A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission was held on Wednesday, January 22, 2014, at 6:30 p.m., at the City of Lake Forest City Hall, 220 E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois. Historic Preservation Commissioners present: Acting Chairman William Ransom and Commissioners John Travers, Robert Alfe, Susan Athenson, Mary Ellen Swenson and Jim Preschlack Commissioners absent: Chairman Pairitz City staff present: Megan Neuman, Planner and Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development 1. Introduction of Commissioners and staff, overview of meeting procedures. Acting Chairman Ransom 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 October 23, 2013 and November 20, 2013 meetings of the Historic Preservation Commission. The minutes of the October 23, 2013 meeting were approved as submitted. The minutes of the November 20, 2013 were approved with a correction as requested by Acting Chairman Ransom. 3. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a landscape plan for the renovated patio at Market House Restaurant, 655 Forest Avenue. Owner: MSQ Partners, LLC Mark and Carla Westcott Representative: Mark Westcott, Market House Restaurant, MH Fish House Acting Chairman Ransom asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts, hearing none; he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Westcott provided a brief background of the work completed at the site since he took ownership. He noted that the outdoor dining area was voted “outstanding” in the Chicago area and provided a photo of the outdoor area in its current configuration as seen from Market Square. He stated that in response to previous comments from the Commission, he worked with Craig Bergmann, a landscape architect, and Mark Knauer, an architect, to refine the plan for modifications and upgrading of the patio to achieve a plan that functions well, is Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 2 compatible with the surrounding area and fits within the parameters of Market Square. Craig Bergmann, 1065 Waukegan Road, said that he was brought into the project at the suggestion of the Commission. He stated that as a landscape architect, he views the outdoor space in the context of the neighborhood and is not just focused on the right plant in the right place. He reviewed photos of the existing patio noting the two mature Elm trees. He confirmed that the easternmost tree is a potential hazard and will be removed as part of this project. He stated that the tree will be replaced in part by planting a new tree on the east side of Bank Lane, across from the patio. He added that an ornamental tree will be planted near the corner of the patio. He stated that the second large Elm tree on the patio will remain. He reviewed the plan noting the planting bed will remain along with the ground cover and existing Hawthorne tree to preserve the view from Market Square much as it is today. He stated that under the new plan, the patio will be screened by additional ornamental trees which will take the place of the Elm tree that will be removed. He presented an illustration of the anticipated view once the new plantings are in place. He noted that by planting a sizable tree at the northeast corner, the patio will appear similar to the existing patio. He acknowledged that the primary goals of the project are to provide additional seating on the patio and leveling the patio for safety. He stated that “green screening” is planned on the existing iron fence along the perimeter of the patio. He acknowledged that the Commission suggested putting a hedge between the public sidewalk and the patio. He noted however that the size of the area needed to successfully grow a hedge and protect it from snow plowing would reduce the size of the patio by about 16 seats. He explained that instead, the concept of green screening is proposed which will be achieved by starting with a panel of English Ivy that will be attached to the fence. He stated that the panel will be supplemented with additional plantings as needed. He stated that this approach will give an immediate effect of screening and should provide for more screening than exists today. He explained that the ivy will grow up the fence and fall down to cover the timber wall as well. He stated that finding the right balance between offering some views into the patio from the public space and giving diner’s privacy will be important. He reviewed the planting bed planned for the northeast corner of the patio explaining that the granite detail that exists today will be removed to allow the plantings to extend toward the public sidewalk. Ms. Neuman reviewed that this petition was before the Commission at the last meeting and at that time, the Commission approved the overall patio expansion, the hardscape material and the exterior lighting. She stated that the approval was conditioned on further review of a detailed landscape plan by the Commission to allow the Commission to gain an understanding of the overall character intended for the area after the renovation is completed. She stated that the landscape plan is presented to the Commission for review and approval. She noted that a goal of the landscape plan is to soften views of the patio from Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 3 the public sidewalk commenting that the proposed plan appears to achieve the goal. She stated that the City’s Certified Arborist confirmed that the eastern Elm is a potential hazard and recommends that as partial replacement for the Elm, one tree be planted on the east side of Bank Lane to re-establish a high tree canopy in the area. She added that the Arborist also recommends that a smaller tree be planted in the bed proposed for the northeastern corner of the patio as a focal point from Market Square. She stated that the Arborist recommends a condition requiring that the construction documents provide details on the steps that will be taken to protect the trees and vegetation that are intended to remain on the site during construction activity. She noted that findings in support of the petition are detailed in the staff report. In response to questions from Acting Chairman Ransom, Ms. Neuman confirmed that the petitioners will be responsible for maintenance of the landscape materials and replacement if necessary. In response to questions from Acting Chairman Ransom, Mr. Westcott reviewed the location of the lamp posts proposed along the outside of the patio. He stated that the lights are located to avoid interfering with the trees that will be preserved on the site. He stated that the various consultants are comfortable that the lighting levels will be appropriate. In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson, Ms. Neuman confirmed that the Commission previously approved the lighting plan. In response to questions from Acting Chairman Ransom , Mr. Bergmann explained that the proposed Dogwood tree will fill the space much as the Hawthorn does now. In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Bergmann reviewed the proposed locations for the additional ornamental trees along the north and east edges of the patio. He confirmed that the middle Hawthorn will be removed to provide more space for the patio. In response to questions from the Commission, Ms. Neuman confirmed that inch for inch plantings will be required on and near the patio to replace the tree inches lost due to removals on the site. In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Bergman reviewed the proposed planting beds explaining that the corner bed is angular to maximize the amount of functional space on the patio. He pointed out that the entire patio is angular with no curved spaces. He reviewed the intended ground cover. He stated that when the remaining Elm dies, it will be replaced with a new tree of the same character. He stated that he would advocate replacing the tree, when necessary in the future, with a Heritage Elm consistent with trees in Market Square. He stated that the proposed project is not likely to speed the decline of Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 4 the tree noting that it is already surrounded by the patio. In response to questions from Commissioner Travers, Mr. Bergmann confirmed that his office prepared the image that shows the patio after completion of the project. He explained that a real photo of the site, showing the existing trees, was enhanced with a nursery image of the proposed Dogwoods. He acknowledged that none of the images show the proposed lamp posts or the existing lights. He explained that he was focused on illustrating the landscaping. He confirmed that the railroad ties will remain and will be used to level the patio. In response to questions from Acting Chairman Ransom, Mr. Bergmann stated that the railroad ties should be covered with ivy in about a year. In response to questions from Commissioner Travers, Mr. Westcott said that he would defer to the City to determine whether railroad ties are appropriate for use near the patio from a health perspective. Acting Chairman Ransom invited public comment, hearing none; he invited final comments from the Commission. In response to questions from Commissioner Preschlack, Ms. Neuman confirmed that City staff will work with the petitioner on the exact location of the new lights. Commissioner Athenson thanked the petitioner for adding Mr. Bergmann to the team noting that as a result, the end product is improved. She commented that the leveling of the patio may have the added benefit of separating the diners from the pedestrians to a greater extent than currently exists. She commented that with the sensitive landscaping proposed, the patio will likely appear to be more a part of Market Square. Commissioner Preschlack agreed with the comments of Commissioner Athenson and thanked the petitioner for the time and effort put into the project to maintain the character, charm and intimacy of the patio space. He acknowledged that the proposed improvements will likely support the continued success of the business. He commented that Mr. Bergmann has added to many petitions the Commission has seen. He asked that the petitioner focus on the details of the project as the final plans are prepared. He stated support for moving the petition forward and directing staff to review the specific locations of the lamp posts. Commissioner Swenson complimented the softening of the fence with landscaping noting that the fence will not appear as a barrier. Acting Chairman Ransom commented that the project has improved since it was last reviewed by the Commission demonstrating that the process works. He stated that Mr. Bergmann always adds value to projects. He stated appreciation for the hard work the petitioner has put into the property to make it a destination Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 5 and a focal point of Market Square. Commissioner Athenson made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness based on the findings detailed in the staff report and incorporating the testimony and the Commission’s deliberations as additional findings. She noted that the approval is subject to the following conditions. 1. 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. 2. The final exterior lighting plan shall be reflected on the landscape plan to facilitate review of the location of the lamp posts in the context of the landscaping as directed by the Commission. Plans shall be submitted for review and verification by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, for consistency with the materials presented to the Commission and the Commission’s discussion prior to submitting a complete application and plans for a building permit. 3. A landscape plan shall be submitted and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist prior to the issuance of a building permit. The City’s Arborist shall evaluate the plan to confirm that: a. Any modifications to the plan are consistent with the plans presented to the Commission and consistent with the Commission’s direction and the conditions of approval. b. Existing trees and vegetation as identified in the presentation to the Commission are retained and protected during construction to the extent possible given the approved plan. c. The Dogwood proposed in the corner planting bed is adequately sized at the time of planting to provide a focal point at the corner from Market Square. d. The size at the time of planting of the new tree located on the east side of Bank Lane is maximized to the extent possible based on good forestry practices, the availability of healthy trees and subject to the review and approval of the City Forester. 4. A pre and post tree maintenance plan prepared by a Certified Arborist shall be submitted along with the landscape plan outlining the steps that will be taken to protect the mature trees within the existing planting bed including the large Elm tree and one understory tree. The maintenance plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City’s Arborist. The plan shall be fully implemented to the satisfaction of the City’s Arborist and regular inspections shall be conducted by the Arborist to verify completion of specified measures at appropriate points before the issuance of permits, during construction and after completion of the project. 5. A detailed plan showing the areas and amount of fill proposed around the existing planting beds shall be submitted and will be subject to review by the City Arborist and Engineering staff to confirm that, to the extent possible, given the approved plan, impacts on the mature trees are avoided and to confirm proper drainage. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 6 6. In the future, when removal of the remaining Elm tree is required, a replacement shall be planted in the same location. The species of the tree shall be selected to re- establish a tree canopy over time. The replacement tree shall be subject to review and approval by the City Arborist. Commissioner Preschlack seconded the motion and the Commission voted 5 to1 to approve the petition with Commissioner Travers voting nay. 4. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving a front porch alteration and various other alterations at 373 E. Westminster. Owners and Representatives: Douglas and Mary Donovan Acting Chairman Ransom asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts, hearing none; he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Donovan introduced the petition. He stated that he has been a Lake Forest resident for 17 years and lived in this house for 10 years. He explained that the purpose of the project is to refresh the house, increase its curb appeal and improve the interior flow. He stated that no radical changes are proposed noting that similar materials or higher quality materials are proposed. He noted that a key part of the project is relocating the front door to be centered on the front of the house. He reviewed a vicinity map and described the surrounding area. He reviewed a survey of the existing conditions on the property and stated that no material changes to the footprint of the house are proposed. He stated that the project fully conforms to the zoning setbacks. He reviewed the components of the project: centering the front door, a small extension of the kitchen and modifications to the garage. He pointed out that the hardscape is already in place for the front door. He reviewed the proposed elevations noting that the changes make the chimney and front door more prominent. He noted that the front door will be centered on the windows and on the house itself. He pointed out that the shutters will be replaced and shutters will be added to the side elevations. He noted that the garage will be upgraded with a new garage door which will have windows with lites and coach lights. Mr. Neuman reviewed the petition noting that the homeowners have considered various options for upgrading the front façade. She noted that the option includes a simple change to the front door, modifications to the rear of the house and the addition of an enclosure between the house and the garage. She stated that the enclosure will be a heated space. She reviewed the rear addition noting that a bay window is proposed on the rear elevation. She noted the importance of the details of the project adding that the plan submitted for permit should reflect the detail of the architectural elements. She noted that a letter was received and was provided to the Commission. She stated that findings in support of the project are provided in the staff report along with recommended conditions of approval. In response to questions from Commissioner Preschlack, Ms. Neuman explained that normally a landscape plan is required only for larger scale projects. She stated that if Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 7 desired by the Commission, additional landscaping could be required as a condition of approval. In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Donovan confirmed that they considered retaining the broken pediment but after 10 years, they have decided that they do not like the broken pediment. He explained the intent to replace it with something that is architecturally appropriate and personally appealing. He added that the existing pediment is falling apart. He explained that various options for the front façade were considered and in the end, a smaller project, rather than a larger addition on the front, was determined to best meet the goals and budget of the project. He reviewed the columns acknowledging that they are flush against the wall and part of the structure. He confirmed that the stoop has a foundation and provided a drawing of the proposed entrance overhang to provide protection from the weather. In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson, Mr. Donovan confirmed that louvered shutters are proposed stating that they are appropriate based on his research. Acting Chairman Ransom invited public comment, hearing none, he summarized that further detailing of the pediment and columns was suggested. He acknowledged the recommendation of the Preservation Commission that a subcommittee be appointed to review detailed plans. He stated that he is comfortable moving the petition forward with conditions of approval. Commissioner Athenson agreed that further work on the details of the project will be important to the success of the project. In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson, Mr. Donovan stated that bricks will be selected to match the existing brick to the extent possible and then all of the bricks will be white washed. Commissioner Preschlack complimented the project noting that this is the type of project that should be encouraged by the Commission. He noted that the house was constructed in 1961 and does not have a distinctive architectural style. He pointed out that the homeowners have thought hard about the project and the result will be an improvement over the existing character. He stated support for approving the project with direction to resolve the details with staff. Hearing no further comments, Acting Chairman Ransom invited a motion. Commissioner Travers made a motion to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for modifications to the front door and porch, a rear addition, a connection between the house and garage, and replacement of the garage door based on the findings in the staff report and incorporating the testimony and deliberations of the Commission as additional findings subject to the following conditions. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 8 1. The 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. 2. Any modifications to the plan shall be generally consistent with the plans approved by the Commission and reflect any direction or conditions of approval. Final plans shall be submitted for review and verification by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, prior to submitting a complete application and pl ans for a building permit. a) A detailed drawing of the front entry reflecting traditional detailing shall be included in the plans. 3. A sample of the proposed brick shall be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit for verification by staff that the size, color, and texture match the existing condition. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Preschlack and was approved by the Commission in a 6 to 0 vote. 5. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving façade alterations at 435 E. Deerpath. Owners: Jack and Patty Hsu Representative: Brian Maite, architect Acting Chairman Ransom asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts, hearing none; he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Maite introduced the petition noting that the house was built in 1929 and provided an overview of the proposed alterations. He reviewed a vicinity map and the surrounding area. He provided photographs of the existing house. He noted that the proposed alterations are in an area away from the streetscape and screened by a hedgerow from the neighboring property. He reviewed the survey noting the location of the area where the work is proposed He reviewed the proposed elevations pointing out changes to the windows to make the house more livable. He described some interior floor plan changes that relate to the changes on the exterior. He stated that the new windows will match the existing detail and window pattern. He stated that the existing house is cedar but noted that hardi-plank siding is proposed for longevity and durability. He stated that the material will be color fast and will not be distinguishable from the street if the detailing is done properly. Ms. Neuman noted that this project was originally submitted as an interior alteration however it was determined that changes would also occur on the exterior and as a result, the project is presented to the Commission for review. She reviewed the proposed changes to the windows and commented that consistency in the size of window openings is important. She acknowledged that the alterations are screened from views from the streets. She stated that staff recommends the use of natural materials consistent with the standards in the Code. She noted that a letter was received and was provided to the Commission. She noted that findings in support of Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 9 the project are provided in the staff report along with recommended conditions of approval. In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson, Mr. Maite confirmed that with the redesign of the kitchen, the door is lost. He reviewed the floor plan noting the access to the rear yard through a new entry. He reviewed the planned landscaping under the triple window. He stated that the existing exterior stairway to the basement does not change. In response to questions from Commissioner Preschlack, Mr. Maite described the proposed siding product noting that it will not decay or rot and will be made to replicate cedar. He confirmed that it will overlap like siding and can be prefinished in any color. In response to questions from Commissioner Alfe, Mr. Maite confirmed that the siding will be replaced only in the area of the work. In response to questions from Acting Chairman Ransom, Mr. Maite confirmed that hardi- plank is stained at the factory and can be painted over. He stated that it is more resilient than cedar. In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Maite explained that both the existing cedar and the new material will be painted to avoid distinction due to the aging of the cedar. He reviewed the proposed changes to the windows and the proposed porch addition noting that the changes are designed to replicate the hierarchy of the existing massing. He explained that smaller windows work well given the proportions of the house. He reviewed each elevation. He described the interior conditions that necessitate the resizing of the windows. In response to questions from Commissioner Alfe, Mr. Maite confirmed that materials from the house will be salvaged and reused on the rear elevation. Mr. Maite responded to comments in the staff report by confirming that the detailing will match the existing conditions. Acting Chairman Ransom invited public comments, hearing none; he invited final comments from the Commission. Commissioner Athenson stated concern about the awkward appearance of the windows. She suggested that the existing symmetry should be replicated. Acting Chairman Ransom noted that the house has distinct masonry and a center mass and acknowledged that the openings on one side of the center mass are smaller than on the other side. He acknowledged the interest in achieving some type of consistency. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 10 Commissioner Preschlack recognized that the interior floor plan is driving the exterior elements. He recognized the efforts made to achieve consistency on the exterior. He stated that in general, the proposed changes are in keeping with the neighborhood. He acknowledged the reasons the homeowner is proposing hardi-board siding and noted the language in the Code supporting the use of natural materials. Acting Chairman Ransom stated support for requiring the use of natural materials for the siding and the trim through a condition of approval. Commissioner Athenson agreed noting that the house was constructed in 1929 and the work now proposed should honor the history with the use of materials that will age over time. In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson regarding access from the interior to the back yard, Acting Chairman Ransom noted that the interior layout is not under the purview of the Commission. Commissioner Travers suggested that French doors, as opposed to sliding doors, would be more consistent with the style of the house. Acting Chairman Ransom agreed but questioned whether that suggestion needed to be included as a condition of approval. Commissioner Swenson complimented the overall house. Hearing no further comments, Acting Chairman Ransom invited a motion. Commissioner Travers made a motion to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the various alterations proposed on the east and south elevations based on the findings in the staff report and incorporating the testimony and the Commission’s deliberations as additional findings subject to the conditions of approval as detailed below. 1. Any modifications to the plan shall be generally consistent with the plans presented to the Commission and consistent with any direction or conditions of approval established by the Commission. Final plans shall be submitted for review and verification by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, prior to submitting a complete application and plans for a building permit. a. Wood clapboard siding, trim, fascia, soffits and rake boards shall be used. b. The use of French doors on the rear elevation to better reflect the time period of the house shall be considered. 2. A mockup of the proposed brick shall be completed and evaluated by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit to verify that the size, color, texture and jointing technique match the existing conditions. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Preschlack and was approved by the Commission in a 5 to 1 vote with Commissioner Athenson voting nay. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 11 6. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving additions at 770 E. Westminster. A building scale variance is also requested. Owners: Michael and Elizabeth Luttig Representative: Rick Swanson, architect Acting Chairman Ransom asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts. Commissioner Preschlack recused himself from hearing the petition due to his personal acquaintance with the petitioners. He left the Council Chambers. Acting Chairman Ransom invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Swanson introduced the petition. He reviewed the surrounding neighborhood noting that the house is located at the curve along Westminster. He stated that the property is about an acre and a quarter in size. He noted that a goal of the project is to enhance the house and make it more historically connected to the Cape Code style. He noted that the owners bought the house about 8 years ago and desire to enhance the streetscape, soften the dominate garage feature, improve upon an earlier rear addition and extend and modify the library. He stated that a building scale variance of about 7 percent is requested. He reviewed the various elevations and the details of the proposed changes. He pointed out detailing that is consistent with work done in the early 1960’s noting that these elements will be modified for consistency with the Cape Cod style. He noted the French doors and balcony above the garage which were used by a previous owner as part of a business stating that these elements will be removed. He reviewed the library addition and the rear addition. He noted the locations of the neighboring homes and pointed out existing vegetation which screens views from off the property. He reviewed the proposed site plan noting changes proposed to the driveway and the vegetation that will be impacted. He stated that the brick will match the existing brick on the house. He acknowledged that the transom windows proposed in the library may benefit from being lowered. He presented a rendering of the proposed end product. He stated that the various elements will be historically accurate. Ms. Neuman explained that this project is a request for design approval and a building scale variance. She noted that from off of the site, the house does not appear oversized for the property. She noted that much of the massing occurs in the rear of the home. She stated that as proposed, the project includes a small addition to the front of the house and a larger addition to the rear. She noted that the front addition will help to balance the massing on the front elevation. She stated that currently, the mass of the garage at the front of the house draws attention to that element. She stated that as proposed, the elements of the house have a pedestrian scale. She noted that the letters received on this project were provided to the Commission. She stated that findings in support of the project are included in the staff report along with conditions of approval. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 12 In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson, Mr. Swanson confirmed that the eave detail on the additions will match the detailing on the existing house. He described the new windows and agreed that further work can be done to soften the new elements and assure they do not appear heavy. Commissioner Swenson commended the project. In response to questions from Commissioner Alfe, Mr. Swanson reviewed the perspective and the elevation and clarified that the elevation more accurately reflects the details of the work proposed. He discussed the details of lowering the transom windows on the library and commented on the pitch of the roof. In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Swanson commented on the request for a building scale variance. He noted that if the rear element was a screen porch, instead of a sunroom, it would not be counted as square footage. He noted that the rear elevation is not visible from the street or from neighboring properties. He stated that due to the unique design and siting of the house, it does not appear to be over scaled for the property. He noted that the ridge height of the house is not increased with the project and as a result, the overall appearance of mass does not increase. He stated that efforts were made to minimize the overage. He explained that the library is important space to the homeowners and currently, the space is tight. He described the scale and detailing of the proposed bay window. He noted that this window is consistent with the Cape Cod style. In response to questions form Commissioner Travers, Mr. Swanson acknowledged that to avoid or minimize the overage, the sun porch could be removed from the project. He stated however that the homeowners feel strongly that the sunroom needs to be included to make the project worthwhile. He noted that the sunroom is located in the least impactful area. In response to questions from Commissioner Travers, Ms. Neuman reviewed the criteria for building scale variances and clarified that the criteria do not require a demonstration of hardship. In the response to questions from Commissioner Swenson, Mr. Swanson confirmed that no changes are proposed to the limestone. Acting Chairman Ransom invited public testimony, hearing none; he stated support for removing the existing shed element on the library and agreed that the proposed transom windows would be improved by reducing the element to a single course. He stated that in his opinion, the proposed change improves the balance of the front elevation. Commissioner Athenson commented that the bay appears a little out of character with the Cape Code style. She agreed that the transom element should be lowered or removed. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 13 Commissioner Swenson suggested that the window not be enlarged. Commissioner Travers commented on the building scale variance noting that the Commission should fully review variance requests with intensity. He noted that the Commission is a recommending body to the City Council on variance requests. He noted that with these types of projects, the variance is the first issue he considers and evaluates based on the standards in the Code and based on whether the variance would further the purpose of the preservation Chapter. He noted that in this project, there is no evidence of a dire need for a variance. He suggested that great results could be achieved in this case without a building scale variance. He expressed concern that approving a variance because the additional square footage is well designed or screened by landscaping may result in “bulk creep” over time. He expressed concern about granting a variance for this project. Commissioner Ransom stated appreciation for Commissioner Travers’ comments. He commented that on occasion, variances are warranted due to lot size, siting of the house, or other factors. He stated that the Commission is charged with considering requests for variances and determining whether the standards are met. He noted that in this case, the request is for a 7 percent overage. He stated support for the variance as requested. Commissioner Athenson agreed that the language in the Code gives the Commission some leeway to consider overages however; she noted that she is always hesitant to approve overages. She stated that there must be a convincing reasons and she noted that in this case, the majority of the additional square footage is in the rear of the house and not seen from the streetscape. She added that the additions are far enough from neighboring property owners to not impede privacy. She stated that by reducing the size of the bay, the appearance of mass will be reduced. Commissioner Swenson commented that in her opinion, the bay balances the weight of the garage. Mr. Swanson agreed that bay should be modified to have only one window course. Hearing no further comments, Acting Chairman Ransom invited a motion. Commissioner Alfe made a motion to recommend approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness granting a building scale variance not to exceed 7% and approving the design of the additions and alterations based on the findings presented in the staff report and incorporating the testimony and the Commission’s deliberations as additional findings. He noted that the motion includes the following recommended conditions of approval. 1. The 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. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 22, 2014 - Page 14 2. Any modifications to the plan shall be generally consistent with the plans approved by the Commission and consistent with the Commission’s direction and conditions of approval. Final plans shall be submitted for review and verification by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, prior to submitting a complete application and plans for a building permit. a. The transom window shall be reduced to a single course of windows. 3. A landscape plan shall be submitted and shall be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist prior to the issuance of a building permit. The City’s Arborist shall evaluate the plan to confirm that: a. The plantings shown provide year round screening of the new additions and driveway from the neighboring properties. b. Existing trees and vegetation are retained and protected to the extent possible given the approved plan. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Swenson and was approved by the Commission in a 4 to 1 vote with Commissioner Travers voting nay. OTHER ITEMS 7. Opportunity for the public to address the Historic Preservation Commission on non- agenda items. There were no additional public comments. 8. Additional information from staff. The meeting was adjourned at 9:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Catherine J. Czerniak Director of Community Development