Loading...
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 2014/03/19 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission Proceedings of the March 19, 2014 Meeting A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission was held on Wednesday, March 19, 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 Bill Ransom, Robert Alfe, Susan Athenson and Jim Preschlack (arrived at 6: 42 p.m.) Commissioners absent: Commissioners Mary Ellen Swenson and John Travers City staff present: Megan Neuman, 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 January 22, 2014 of the Historic Preservation Commission. The approval of the minutes of the January 22, 2014 meeting was postponed. 3. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for façade modifications and reconfiguration of an existing bay window at 255 Maple Court. Owners: Steve and Susan Felker Representative: E. Austin DePree, 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. DePree introduced the petition noting that his clients purchased the Stanley Anderson house a few months ago. He stated that some interior remodeling is underway and that as the work progressed, the owners decided that changing out some of the newer plate glass windows and replacing them with windows more consistent with those on the front façade would be an enhancement to the house. He added that the kitchen remodeling work led to interest in some work on the north façade and alterations to a bay window which was a later addition to the house. He reviewed the overall site plan and described the surrounding area noting another Stanley Anderson house nearby. He provided photos of the existing house reflecting the painted brick and slate roof. He showed photos of the existing bay window where changes are proposed. He reviewed other architectural elements of the house. He noted the small covered porch and the newer storm door noting the inconsistency with the elements of the original Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 19, 2014 - Page 2 house. He showed photos of other Stanley Anderson homes. He reviewed the site plan and focused on areas where work is proposed, the north façade and the bay window. He noted that his clients would like to eliminate the exterior basement stairs for safety, due to water infiltration and to improve the aesthetics. He reviewed the replacement French doors proposed in the kitchen and commented that the interior renovations to the kitchen are intended to provide an eating area in the space. He reviewed the other windows proposed for replacement on the east side of home, in a later addition. He noted an additional window that is proposed for replacement on the southeast corner of the house. He reviewed the existing and proposed elevations. (Commissioner Preschlack arrived.) Mr. Depree continued showing a rendering of a street view of the house with the alterations proposed. He noted that views of the house are limited from the street. He concluded noting that the various improvements proposed will make the house more livable and bring it closer to the original design. Ms. Neuman commented that the project is straight forward with no foot print changes proposed. She noted that the success of the project will be in the details and noted the importance of assuring that the new windows match the details of the existing windows. She stated that findings in support of the project are offered in the staff report. Chairman Pairitz invited questions from the Commission, hearing none, he invited public comment. Art Miller, 169 Wildwood Road, stated that if the house was designed by Stanley Anderson, the original plans may be available from Paul Bergmann and may be worth reviewing. He stated that the project may be eligible for tax benefits and offered resources that could be helpful in exploring that opportunity. In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, DePree stated that it is believed that Stanley Anderson designed the house but he acknowledged that to date, the original plans have not been located. Ms. Neuman stated that staff will check the City files for information to verify the original architect. Chairman Pairitz complimented the plans and stated that this is the type of project the Commission likes to encourage in the community, careful renovation and restoration of significant houses. Hearing no further comments from the Commission, Chairman Pairitz invited a motion Commissioner Ransom made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving façade modifications, replacement of windows and reconfiguration of the bay window. He stated that the motion is based on the findings detailed in the staff report and incorporates the petitioner’s presentation as additional Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 19, 2014 - Page 3 findings. He noted that the approval is subject to the following conditions. 1. Any modifications made as the plans are finalized must be generally consistent with the plans presented to the Commission. Final plans must be submitted for review and verification of consistency by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, prior to submitting a complete application and plans for a building permit. 2. Detailed information on the proposed windows must be provided with the final plans along with evidence that the windows are consistent with the detailing of the existing windows. Staff is directed to confirm that the muntin profile, material and overall design are consistent with the original windows on the house prior to issuance of the permit. Commissioner Preschlack seconded the motion and the Commission voted 5 to 0 to approve the petition. 4. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the demolition of an existing garage and construction of a replacement garage at 1002 Woodbine Place. Owners: Scott and Natalie Rempala Representatives: James Benjamin and Robert Roloson, architects Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts, hearing none; he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Benjamin introduced the petition noting that the owners are proposing to tear down the existing garage and replace it with a more appropriate structure. He reviewed the plat of survey and explained that this property was part of a larger estate property and that the existing house was formerly the coach house for the large estate. He noted that several decades ago, the City approved a subdivision of the larger estate property which resulted in the unusual location of the house in relation to the property lines. He noted that the existing garage and tool shed were a later addition to the house after the subdivision occurred. He reviewed a site plan noting the location of the existing garage and the house within the front yard setback. He reviewed a floor plan of the proposed garage. He reviewed the proposed site plan noting that the replacement garage will be furthe r away from the street than the existing garage. He noted that the garage is designed with the intent of connecting it to the house with an appropriate design element. He reviewed the proposed front elevation noting that the design queues were taken from the original tool shed building rather than from the coach house since the tool shed is a smaller building with a simpler design. He noted that some of the original lattice work from the gardens will be used in the design of the garage connection element and on the garage. He noted that in some areas, ivy will be grown on the lattice. He reviewed the front elevation and noted the prominence of the original coach house and pointed out how the proposed garage will have a consistent character. He reviewed the proposed floor plan, roof plan and sections. He Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 19, 2014 - Page 4 reviewed air photos of the existing site and provided photos of other properties in the neighborhood. He provided photos of the property and the garage. He reviewed the plat of the original estate and explained that several subdivisions of the property occurred over the years. He reviewed early concept studies for siting the new garage and commented on the weaknesses of each alternative. Ms. Neuman noted that the project includes a request for approval of the demolition of the existing garage and construction of a replacement garage. She confirmed that the existing garage is not of the same vintage or quality of construction as the original coach house. She stated that based on staff’s evaluation, the demolition criteria are satisfied. She acknowledged that the replacement garage is taller and larger than the existing garage but noted that it is located further from the street than the existing garage. She commented that this area has a utilitarian character and that it is not uncommon for garage doors to face the street on this block. She stated staff support for the proposed siting and orientation of the replacement garage. She noted that the design has been refined in response to some of the comments in the staff report. She stated staff support for the project noting that findings in support of the project are part of the staff report. Chairman Pairitz commended the petition and invited questions from the Commission. In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Ms. Neuman confirmed that the garage is proposed as a tandem garage to allow for cars to be double stacked. Ms. Rempala confirmed that they intend to park cars two deep in the garage. In response to questions from Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Benjamin confirmed that there has been some refinement of the materials and design since the Commission’s packet was prepared. Chairman Pairitz noted the importance of trying to achieve general consistency with the existing structure. In response to questions from Commissioner Alfe about matching the half timbering to the tool shed, instead of to the house, Mr. Benjamin pointed out that the house does not match itself. He pointed out the differences in the existing windows and detailing. Chairman Pairitz suggested that the successful execution of this project may be more about getting the style right rather than finding an exact match to the existing conditions. In response to questions, Mr. Benjamin explained that the center of the coach Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 19, 2014 - Page 5 house was originally a pass through with separate living units on each side. In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Benjamin explained that the height of the garage is proposed to be in keeping with the coach house. Hearing no further questions from the Commission, Chairman Pairitz invited public comment. Art Miller, 169 Wildwood Road, provided some history on the original estate and on the evolution of this street. He noted that in this case, there is an advantage to having the structures forward on the lot preserving the gardens as private space consistent with the historical context of the site. He complimented the project. Chairman Pairitz commented that the proximity of the structures to the street in this area is interesting. He noted that the proposed garage does not impact the other residences. Commissioner Athenson commented that sometimes it is necessary to grant variances to support the preservation of older homes. She stated that the petitioner and architect did their homework in developing the proposed design. She complimented the presentation. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Pairitz invited a motion Commissioner Ransom made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the demolition of the existing garage and approving the replacement garage and connection element 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. 1. Any modifications made as the plans are finalized must be generally consistent with the plans presented to the Commission. Final plans must be submitted for review and verification of consistency by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, prior to submitting a complete application and plans for a building permit. a. A garden trellis, similar to those proposed on the south elevation, should be applied to the north elevation to soften the view of the structure from the adjacent property. b. Details of the heavy timbering and stucco construction shall be provided on the final plans. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Athenson and was approved by the Commission by a vote of 5 to 0. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 19, 2014 - Page 6 OTHER ITEMS 5. Opportunity for the public to address the Historic Preservation Commission on non- agenda items. There were no additional comments from the public. 6. Additional information from staff. The meeting was adjourned at 7:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Catherine J. Czerniak Director of Community Development