Loading...
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 2012/05/23 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission Proceedings of the May 23, 2012 Meeting A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission was held on Wednesday, May 23, 2012, at 6:30 p.m., at the City of Lake Forest City Hall, 220 E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois. Historic Preservation Commissioners present: Commissioners Bill Ransom, Fred Moyer, Mary Ellen Swenson and Guy Berg. Commissioners absent: Chairman Kurt Pairitz and Commissioners Jim Preschlack and Susan Rafferty Athenson City staff present: Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development 1. Introduction of Commissioners and staff, overview of meeting procedures – Chairman Pairitz Acting Chairman Ransom introduced the asked the members of the Commission and staff to introduce themselves. He provided an overview of the meeting procedures. 2. Approval of the minutes of the April 25, 2012 and May 3, 2012 meetings. Approval of the minutes was postponed. CONSENT AGENDA 3. Continued consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving an addition to an existing structure and the associated landscape plan. Approval of a building scale variance is also requested. The property is located at 1296 N. Green Bay Road. Owners: Jess and Katie Belcher Representative: Austin DePree, architect Board member Berg made a motion to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the addition and associated landscaping subject to the conditions of approval below and to recommend approval of the building scale variance to the City Council. He noted that the approval is based on the findings in the staff report. Conditions of approval. 1. Approval of the building scale variance by the City Council consistent with the Code. 2. If required by City staff, chain link tree preservation fencing shall be installed prior to the issuance of the building permit. 3. A construction materials' staging plan and construction vehicles parking plan shall be provided by the petitioner and reviewed and approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 2 4. A full size, detailed landscape plan for the property shall be submitted subject to review and approval by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. In the event that the landscaping cannot be planted prior to the approval of the final inspection of the fence due to the time of year, a financial guarantee shall be posted in the amount of 110% of the cost of the plant materials and labor to ensure planting at the first available season. The landscape plan shall address the following issues: a. The plan shall maintain key vistas from the house to the surrounding open space consistent with the original intent of the development of the lot. b. The landscape plan shall identify all vegetation, both mature trees and undergrowth areas that will be removed or maintained. c. Sizes and species of the proposed plant material shall be identified on the landscape plan to ensure the plan complies with the Tree Preservation and Landscape Ordinance. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Moyer and it was unanimously approved by the members present. COMMERICAL PETITION 4. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving signage for a new retail business, Pasquesi Home & Garden on the Square, located at 695 N. Western Avenue. Owner: The City of Lake Forest Representative/Business Owner: Mike and Lisa Pasquesi, Pasquesi Home & Garden 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. Pasquesi introduced the petition noting that a monument sign and a wall sign are proposed for the new business in the warming house on the west side of the railroad tracks. He noted that the signs will be aluminum with vinyl applied letters. He reviewed the monument sign proposed for the west side of the building, facing Western Avenue, and the wall sign proposed on the east side of the building, facing the railroad tracks. He reviewed images of the proposed signage and noted that the colors and detailing relate to the main business which is located in Lake Bluff. He reviewed the dimensions of the proposed signs as presented in the Commissioner’s packets. Ms. Czerniak welcomed Pasquesi’s to Market Square noting that it is a bright spot of color in the Central Business District. She stated that the signs as proposed are in conformance with the Code and noted that the petitioner worked with staff over the past couple months to review and consider several options for signage at this location. She stated that as a result of those discussions, the signs presented to the Commission are smaller than those originally proposed. She commented on the size of the wall sign on the east wall noting that it may appear large to passengers exiting the train immediately in front of the sign, however she noted that the sign is intended to be viewed from across the tracks and from that perspective, the size appears appropriate. In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson, Lisa Pasquesi clarified that the rendering Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 3 in the packet provides a view from further away than the images presented to the Commission during the presentation. In response to questions from Acting Chairman Ransom, Mr. Pasquesi explained that the wall sign will be attached with concealed fasteners. He reviewed the alternatives for signage that were considered and stated that larger signs were too overpowering for the site. He welcomed input on the size of the signs. In response to questions from Acting Chairman Ransom, Ms. Czerniak noted that the sign proposed for Western Avenue, although described as a “monument sign” is a post and panel sign, not a stone or masonry sign. She also reviewed various signage types that were considered. She noted the business owners intent to keep the signage subtle allow the displays to attract people to the business. In response to questions from Commissioner Moyer, Mr. Pasquesi confirmed that the vinyl lettering will be durable and stated that a sample of the material could be provided to the Commission. In response to questions from Acting Chairman Ransom, Ms. Czerniak confirmed that ongoing maintenance of the signs will be the business owners’ responsibility. She confirmed that if signage is in disrepair, the City’s Code Enforcement Officer would contact the business owner and request repair or replacement. Commissioner Swenson noted that the business is a good addition to Market Square and the business district. Acting Chairman Ransom invited public comment. Hearing none, he invited final comments from the petitioner and staff. Hearing none, he invited final comments from the Commission. Acting Chairman Ransom agreed that Pasquesi’s is a great addition to Market Square and provides great splash of color to the area. Commissioner Berg observed that the signs almost become a garden element and stated that the size as proposed is appropriate for the site. He stated that the use of vinyl will give the appearance of painted letters. Commissioner Berg made a motion to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the signage subject to the advisory comments of the Commission regarding durability of materials and quality of the lettering both of which would be left to staff for review. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Moyer and it was unanimously approved by the Commission. CONTINUED PETITIONS 5. Consideration of expansion of the scope of previously approved additions and alterations to a residence at 142 S. Stonegate Road. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 4 Owners: Bud and Leslie Stevens Representative: Christopher Rosati, architect Acting Chairman Ransom asked the Commissioner to identify any conflicts of interest or ex parte contacts regarding this petition. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner. The Board reviewed a model presented by the petitioner. Mr. Rosati introduced the petition and reviewed the change in the scope of the project since the last meeting and since the initial approval of the project last November. He described the east-facing dormer noting that it was revised to be more like the existing dormers on the main house. He described the north dormer noting that it is now similar to the proposed west facing dormers with gable roof forms. He summarized noting that all of the dormers are now similar to provide a unified design. He noted that the eave of the garage addition was lowered to 6” below the existing garage eave. He stated that the previously approved Master Bedroom addition was reviewed by the owner based on comments from the Commission and as a result, a modification is proposed changing the wood columns to masonry columns for durability. He commented on the approach unique to the house and stated the desire to provide a unified view by having similar roof shape for all of the dormers. He noted efforts to keep the garage addition subservient to the main mass of the house and reviewed elevations pointing out the areas where modification is proposed. He discussed the side views of the dormers and explained that due to floor heights, relationship to the eave and the roof pitch of the existing garage, the garage dormers cannot exact match those on the house. He stated that the sidewalls will be shingled in slate to mitigate the difference in height and the detailing will match existing conditions. He stated that the detailing of the masonry porch piers will be similar to detailing at the front door. He reviewed the floor plans noting that there are no changes to the footprint since the previous approval. Ms. Czerniak explained that after receiving initial approval of the project, the petitioners re-evaluated the scope of the project and the detailing. She noted that this is an unusual property with unique limitations due to the location of the house in proximity to the ravine. She pointed out that no change in the footprint of the house is proposed as part of the modifications. She stated that staff has reviewed several alternatives for the dormers with the petitioner and stated that the current proposal is the alternative that appears most consistent with the direction provided by the Commission at the last meeting. She stated staff support for the solution presented given the extent of review and thought given to all alternatives. In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson, Mr. Rosati explained that in previous discussions, the Commission suggested that consideration be given to changing the wood columns to masonry columns. He stated that after consideration, and some reluctance, the petitioners now agree that the masonry columns are appropriate and will require less maintenance and be more durable. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 5 In response to a question from Commissioner Berg, Mr. Rosati confirmed that the limestone detail on the columns is intended to be similar to the front door. He confirmed that the rope detailing of the stone casing at the front door will be replicated. He stated that the face of the dormers over the garage doors will be wood noting that no change to the width is proposed. He pointed out that there are currently dormers in that location. In response to a question from Commissioner Moyer, Mr. Rosati stated that the roof and sidewalls of the proposed dormers will be slate. Acting Chairman Ransom invited public comment. Carolynn Tacks, 123 Stonegate Road, stated that she is the only neighbor with views to the house noting that her house is located to the east. She stated support for the project. Acting Chairman Ransom recognized that the previous suggestions of the Commission were incorporated into the modifications as now proposed. Commissioner Berg stated support for the proposed modifications noting that the wall face of the western dormers appears thin and suggested that consideration be given to improving that area. He made a motion to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the modifications as presented subject to the following conditions of approval. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the following conditions shall be satisfied. 1. Modifications to the proposed dormers at the garage, consistent with the direction of the Commission, shall be subject to final approval by a subcommittee of the Commission. 2. Given the location of the existing structure within the steep slope setback area, plans prepared and stamped by a licensed Engineer shall be submitted to the City. The City Engineer shall confirm that the plans provide all necessary details of the proposed construction and specifically the piers proposed to support the bedroom addition. The plans shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer. 3. All requirements as determined by the City Engineer and City Arborist to protect the ravine, trees and vegetation on and near the property and, to prevent stormwater runoff into the ravine, into sensitive natural areas or on to neighboring properties shall be met to the satisfaction of the City. Requirements may include, but shall not be limited to, silt fencing, chain link fencing or construction fencing. All protection measures shall remain in place until written approval authorizing removal is issued by the City. 4. A detailed landscape plan, depicted on the approved grading plan, shall be submitted for review by the City’s Certified Arborist. The Arborist shall confirm that the plan achieves the following goals before approving the plan: a. The plan shall identify all existing plantings, those that will remain, and those intended for removal. b. The plan shall identify all new landscaping proposed. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 6 c. Any trees over 8” removed shall be replaced on the site at a ratio of no less than 1” for 1” replacement consistent with the City’s Tree Preservation and Landscape Ordinance and subject to the approval of the City’s Certified Arborist. d. Any plantings determined to be necessary to enhance, restore or protect the ravine shall be reflected on the plan. 5. A plan for the staging and storage of construction materials and equipment reflecting the proposed access to the site and any on-site parking of construction vehicles shall be submitted and subject to approval by staff. Other conditions. 6. City staff is directed to conduct periodic, pro-active inspections of this site to assess and confirm that the work on the site is proceeding consistent with the approved plans. 7. In the event that landscaping cannot be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy due to the time of year, only a conditional Certificate of Occupancy shall be issues and a financial guarantee in the amount of 110% of the full cost of materials and labor shall be posted with the City. All plantings shall be completed during the first available planting season as determined by the City’s Certified Arborist. Commissioner Swenson seconded the motion and it was unanimously approved by the members of the Commission present. 6. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a fence, entrance gate and landscaping located at 925 N. Lake Road. Owner: Mark Kowlzan Representative: Jeff Heaney, architect and Michael Gould, contractor Acting Chairman Ransom asked the Commissioner to identify any conflicts of interest or ex parte contacts regarding this petition. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Michael Gould, architect, noted that since the last Commission discussion, the plan has been modified in response to the comments heard. He noted that the previously proposed fence “fin” fence is replaced with a traditional metal fence with brick piers. He stated that his client is willing to remove the brick piers along the front property line as recommended in the staff report, but requested approval to keep the piers at the gate area to frame and identify the entrance. He stated that in the future, extensive remodeling of the house is anticipated. He stated that the Commission commented on the significance of the existing fence and piers at the garages at the previous meeting and as a result, he stated that removal of those elements is no longer proposed as part of this project. He noted the intent to rebuild the existing pillars and fence at the garage. He stated that this will be an amazing improvement to the neighborhood noting that the lot is prestigious lot and that the intent is to maintain that prestige. Ms. Czerniak stated that this petition is back before the Commission with revisions as a follow up to the previous Commission discussion. She confirmed that in this plan, the existing pillars Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 7 are proposed to be rebuilt. She stated that the type of fence now proposed is more consistent with the character of the historic district. She commented on the recommendation to remove some of the brick pillars along the street noting the intent to preserve views into the property given the double fence-line proposed and the entrance gate. She commented on the proposed lighting noting that Lake Road is a dark street and that care will need to be taken to assure that the fixtures shield the source of the light and to assure that the intensity of the lights is not disruptive to the streetscape or neighboring homes. She noted that a condition is recommended requiring review to address the lighting issue. In response to questions from Commissioner Moyer, Mr. Gould reviewed the piers proposed to remain. He stated that the new piers will be detailed to match the existing piers to provide a proper relationship between the new gate and fence and the home. He stated that the proposed fence has 5-1/4” spacing between the spindles noting that the spindles will be square, ¾” by ¾”. He confirmed that the top of the fence is intended to match the existing fence. Commissioner Berg stated that the project has improved since last presented however he noted that the plans are difficult to understand. In response to a question from Commissioner Berg, Mr. Gould reiterated that the piers alone the street will be removed is requested by the Commission. In response to a question from Commissioner Berg, Ms. Czerniak noted that staff too had difficulty reading the plan. She commented that the staff recommendation to consider removal of the piers was an effort to soften the impact of the proposed change on the streetscape noting that currently, this property reads as an open area along the street. In response to a question from Commissioner Berg, Mr. Gould stated that the existing piers are 2’ x 2’ and confirmed that the proposed piers adjacent to the gate will match the existing piers. He noted that the remaining piers proposed near the gate, will be narrower. He stated that there will be extensive landscaping. Commissioner Berg commented on the appropriateness of a fence both between the existing garages and on the street as discussed by the Commission at the last meeting. He discussed the indentation proposed at the front entrance noting an interest in seeing that it is lined up with the structures beyond it located on the property. He stated that the current approach to the design is interesting noting the challenge of how to meld the two fences into a cohesive plan. He discussed the composition of the existing fence and piers noting that the central piers are taller than the flanking piers and fence. In response to a question from Commissioner Berg, the petitioner confirmed that the existing central piers are taller than the existing flanking pillars. He stated that all of the piers on the new fence are proposed at 7 feet to support the gate and for consistency throughout. He stated that the fence is 6’8” tall. He noted that the fence is setback 7’6” from the front property line. He stated that 2-1/2” x 2-1/2” metal columns will be used in place of the brick piers which will be removed from the plan along the front fence. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 8 In response to a question from Commissioner Swenson, Mr. Gould commented on rebuilding the existing fence and piers. He stated that his client has a young child and the intent of this project is to provide a secure play yard for his daughter. He noted that there have been security issues in the past and the owner would like to have a tall fence at the front property line. He stated that this is a prestigious home noting that it will become a mansion after it is remodeled in the future. He stated that there is enough land between the front gate and the fence at the garage to support the proposal. Commissioner Swenson stated that there appears to be a lot of metal and fencing proposed in a small area. She noted that the amount of fencing overwhelms the house. Mr. Gould responded that the fence will relate better to the home after the future remodeling project noting that the plans for that project have not been developed. He stated that the proposed lighting at the gate will not be seen given the setback from the street. Mr. Mark Kowlzan, property owner, commented on the discussion regarding preserving the original fencing that occurred at the last meeting. He noted that the original proposal was to demolish the existing fence and piers. He stated that the suggestion for keeping the existing piers and fence came from the previous Commission meeting. He stated that the existing pillars cannot be restored due to their condition, but must be rebuilt. He stated that he is struggling with whether or not the pillars should be rebuilt and with what should be done with the fencing. Acting Chairman Ransom noted that the petitioner addressed the comments that the existing fence has architectural merit as part of the existing composition by proposing to keep the fence and build a new fence. Commissioner Swenson questioned the possibility of keeping the existing piers and planting a privet hedge between the columns. In response to a question from Commissioner Swenson, Mr. Kowlzan stated that a comprehensive landscape plan is planned and will include new ground cover and new boxwood plantings at the garages. He stated that the privet fence is an interesting concept. Mr. Gould confirmed that keeping the piers without fencing the fencing was discussed. Acting Chairman Ransom invited public comment. Hearing none, he commented that when first seeing the petition, he wondered about the appropriateness of having two fences. He noted that he looked around the City to find instances where two fences are installed and as a result, he became more comfortable with the proposal to locate a new fence near the street. He agreed that some amount of landscaping is appropriate but noted the importance of balancing plantings with views into the property. He agreed that removal of the brick piers along the front fence makes sense. Mr. Kowlzan asked for a firm response from the Commission on whether or not the fencing between the existing piers should remain. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 9 Commissioner Berg noted that the concern about removing the existing pillars relates to the fact that the composition was integral to the architecture of the house. He stated that putting fencing between the existing pillars is not as important to the composition as preserving the columns. He noted that the concern is about setting up a forecourt of columns at Lake Road. He stated that the current plan is improved since the last concept was presented to the Commission. He stated however that the three dimensional reality of having six piers of the same height with the design of the gate may be problematic. He stated that security will not be forsaken by lowering the fence and pillars. He commented on the relationship of the existing piers noting that stepping down the height of the piers at the street may be worth examining. Mr. Gould confirmed that as proposed, the pillars are all the same height. He stated that the side columns are narrower to highlight the pillars at the gate. Commissioner Berg noted that maintaining the same height might not be the ideal solution. Commissioner Swenson added that it is nice to create a hierarchy in the design. Mr. Kowlzan commented on varying the height of the pillars and asked for more direction on this matter. Commissioner Moyer commented on the charm of the property noting that he is uncomfortable with the proposed solution. He stated that the double layering of fencing is troublesome noting that the solution does not seem to be removal of the existing fencing. He commented on the architectural relationship of the existing composition. He stated that the driveway to Lake Road is currently in the foreground to the entrance point at the garages. He stated that the new fencing will erase the existing arrangement. He stated that he is uncomfortable with losing what is there because it is well done. He stated that the landscape plan is beautiful noting that it does not provide much open area which seems to conflict with the interest in a play yard for children. Mr. Kowlzan noted the importance of fencing in the yard so the children will be safe. Commissioner Moyer stated that the proposed fence will detract from the character of the property as it exists today. He stated that the proposed entrance does not have the importance of the existing entrance noting the redundancy in the design. In response to questions from Acting Chairman Ransom, Commissioner Moyer explained that the proposed fence is much improved from the previous plan presented to the Commission. He stated that the current proposal will be less of a visual barrier but noted that he is still struggling with the concept of a fence along the property line. He stated that lowering the fence enough to not create a visual barrier will not address the homeowner’s concern about security. He suggested that finding a secure area for the children to play, not in the front yard, could be an alternative solution, however he has heard from the owner that there is no other place for the children to play given the Lake to the east. He noted that he is intrigued by Commissioner Berg’s suggestion to align the piers and create a modular approach to the design noting that he is reluctant to discuss details for a project that he does not support in principal. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 10 Mr. Kowlzan noted that security is a big issue for his family. He stated that the intent may have been to align the piers noting that the site plan has been manipulated several times to get to this point and may not be accurate. He stated that visually, the intent is to align the piers with the architecture although the measurements may not be exact. He pointed out that the driveway used to be on the north side of the property but as it is currently configured, the driveway is not perfectly centered on the property. Commissioner Moyer noted that the new piers would need to move approximately 4 feet north and 4 feet south in order to align with the existing configuration of the garages. He stated that the elevation from the street would be different than currently drawn. He suggested that a new drawing be completed which could allow for evaluation to determine if that is an appropriate direction. He reiterated his concern with the concept of a fence in this location. Mr. Gould noted that if the fence is shifted, the spacing between the piers would be equal. Commissioner Moyer stated that the spacing needs to be carefully reviewed in relation to the configuration of the existing structures. He suggested the petitioner study the site and the various relationships to see what makes sense. He acknowledged that the different spacing to the north and south create a challenge in the design. He stated that the setback for the gate may need to get bigger and may or may not relate to the street. Commissioner Berg stated that this project still needs a significant design development. He stated that he understands the owner wants a fence noting that the Commission is offering suggestions but ultimately, the architect and petitioner will need to consider several possibilities including schemes that align the piers with the existing piers or with the garage wall. He stated that design development is difficult in an open meeting forum. He questioned if uniformity of height of the piers is appropriate. In response to a question from Acting Chairman Ransom, Ms. Czerniak noted that so long as a quorum of the Commission is present, a majority of the members present is sufficient to approve, or disapprove a motion. Commissioner Swenson stated that the double layer of fence does not serve the house. She acknowledged that putting a fence at the street results in the loss of architectural integrity of the site but stated that in her opinion, if a fence is installed at the property line, the existing fence should be removed. Acting Chairman Ransom summarized the varying opinions expressed by Commission members and noted the comments regarding the need for further study. He asked the Commission members how they wish to proceed. Commissioner Moyer stated that he would like to see a solution that achieves what the owner wants to achieve and represents a good solution for the property. Commissioner Berg stated that more time is needed to develop this petition. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 11 Acting Chairman Ransom noted that the petitioner has been before the Commission twice and tried to incorporate suggestions received from the Commission. He stated appreciation for the efforts that have brought the petition to this point. He stated that the Commission should provide clear direction to the petitioner. He questioned whether there is support for approving the project at this point with conditions, or if the project should be continued and brought back for further Commission review. Commissioner Swenson stated that she would be willing to support the project with conditions that the existing fence be removed and the front fence be lowered 6 inches. Commissioner Berg noted that elements of the proposed fence, pillars and gate need to align with existing elements on the site. He suggested that the fence at the street could be brought down to align with the swoop of the gate. He stated that there needs to be systematic research and a logic to developing the solution noting that it cannot be directed without seeing it drawn. Commissioner Moyer noted that the project is certainly better than before. He stated that the curvature on the gate and how it meets the fence is an improvement. He acknowledged that it helps define the entrance. He stated that lowering the fence and aligning it with the lower part of the curve may be worth examining. Mr. Kowlzan noted that the high point of the gate is 7 feet. He stated a willingness to drop the fence down to relate to the lower portion of the gate. Commissioner Berg stated that the drawings indicate the connection at the lowest point of the swoop is 5’10” noting that it may have to be lowered to that point. He stated that it is challenging to design the petition in the public forum with so many unknowns. In response to a question from Acting Chairman Ransom, Ms. Czerniak acknowledged that staff understands that a longer term renovation of the residence is planned by the owner. She noted that the issue of the existing fence and piers may be appropriate to consider in the context of what sounds like it will be a fairly large project renovating the house. She noted that there have been several comments about lowering the fence and aligning it differently. She stated that if the Commission approves the petition, it will be important to provide clear direction on to the petitioner and staff on what is being approved. Commissioner Moyer stated support for lowering the fence to the point of the lowest point of the gate. He stated that in conjunction with lowering the vertical dimension, the horizontal band should also be lowered in a manner that is proportionate to the taller fence. Mr. Gould stated that the columns are proposed at 7 feet and the proposed fence is lower than the columns. Commissioner Moyer stated that the height of the gate does not necessarily have to be a specific height, but stated that the lower fence should relate to the design of the gate. Acting Chairman Ransom stated that the Commission has indicated that some adjustment to the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 12 height of the gate and fence is necessary. Commissioner Moyer stated that the level of security provided is the same with a 5’10” or a 6’2” fence. He stated that the more important design choice is to find the alignment that makes sense noting that proposing a fence height that aligns with the lowest point of the gate could be logical. Mr. Kowlzan offered some possible adjustment to the gate design to allow a higher fence. Acting Chairman Ransom questioned if the Commission would require the fence to align with the lowest point of the gate. Commissioner Berg stated support for the direction of the petition. He stated that there needs to be logic in the design so that the gate does not appear as an afterthought. He stated that this house is at a prominent location. He stated that the drawings need to be refined and drawn up in final form. He stated that larger drawings would be helpful. Mr. Gould stated that the height of the fence needs to be appropriate and lowering the height of the fence compromises the project and does not meet the needs of the owner. Acting Chairman Ransom noted that the current discussion is focusing on the height of the fence but noted that there are other concerns and issues that need to be addressed. He suggested that the petition be continued to allow the petitioner to consider the comments and bring forward a revised design. Commissioner Berg made a motion to continue the petition noting that the revised submittal should include a final rendering, larger drawings, and more detail. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Moyer and it was approved by all members in attendance. OTHER ITEMS 7. Opportunity for the public to address the Historic Preservation Commission on non- agenda items. Linda Shields, 985 Melody Road, thanked Commissioner Berg for his dedication and service noting that his expertise and input has made many positive changes in the community. She stated that many structures are better as a result of his input. She expressed her hope that he would remain involved in the community. Acting Chairman Ransom recognized the value of Commissioner Berg’s contributions and insight over his years on the Commission and agreed that the City of Lake Forest is much better off thanks to his service. 8. Additional information from staff. No additional information was presented by the staff. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 23, 2012 - Page 13 The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Catherine J. Czerniak Director of Community Development