Loading...
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 2011/07/27 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission Proceedings of the July 27, 2011 Meeting A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission was held on Wednesday, July 27, 2011, at 6:30 p.m., at the City of Lake Forest City Hal l, 220 E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois. Historic Preservation Commissioners present: Chairman Kurt Pairitz, Commissioners Bill Ransom, Mary Ellen Swenson and Guy Berg. Commissioners absent: Commissioners Susan Rafferty Athenson, Jim Preschlack and Fred Moyer. Staff present: Megan O’Neill, Planner and Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development. 1. Introduction of Commissioners and staff, overview of meeting procedures – Chairman Pairitz Chairman Pairitz introduced the members of the Commission and staff and reviewed the procedures followed by the Commission. 2. Approval of the June 22, 2011 meeting minutes. The minutes of the June 22, 2011 meeting were approved as submitted. CONTINUED PETITIONS 3. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the construction of a detached garage and landscape wall at 815 Barberry Lane. Owners: John and Bridgette Doheny Representative: John Krasnodebski, architect Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts. Hearing none, he invited a presentation by the petitioner’s architect. Mr. Krasnodebski introduced the petition noting that since the last meeting, the petitioners have taken into account the concerns and comments raised by the Commission and the neighbors. He pointed out that the petitioners are now the owners of the property rather than the contract purchasers. He provided photos of the site from various perspectives noting the extensive vegetation on the property. He reviewed the current proposal noting that in the earlier proposal the garage doors faced Barberry Lane. He pointed out that after study of various alternatives, the design selected for the garage no longer presents the garage doors to the street, but instead the garage doors face to the east, toward the residence. He decribed the courtyard that will separate the new garage from the house and the short courtyard wall that will connect the two elements. He reviewed the various alterantives studied since the last meeting and commented on the difficulties and draw backs of each. He reviewed the elevation of the proposed garage and Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 2 courtyard and described the proposed exterior mateirals noting that they match the historic residence. He noted the efforts to design a garage and courtyard of simplicity and elegance taking cues from the historic home. He noted that the garage doors will by carriage type doors, detailed to match the home. He commented that the re-designed proposal takes into account the comments heard at the earlier meeting and requested Commission support of the project. Craig Bergmann, landscape architect, stated that he is preparing a full landscape and hardscape plan for the property. He stated however that his presentation is focused on the area of the new construction. He discussed the driveway spur which will be aligned on the center of the courtyard. He noted that the area of the addition is designed to have the feel of a courtyard as opposed to a driveway. He pointed out that the first floor windows on the west side of the house will look on to the courtyard, toward the garage. He described the vegetation planned for the area including ornamental trees and hedges and pointed out that a low retaining wall will support the planting beds. He stated that one Norway Maple tree will be removed along with some other lesser vegation. He pointed out that no heritage trees will be removed for this project. He described the west property line noting the large Norway Spruce in that area which currently provides a buffer between this property and the neighboring property to the west. He stated that additional Norway Spruce will be planted to add to the existing buffer and to provide longevity to this wooded area. He pointed out the location of the neighbor’s three car garage and driveway noting that the planting in this area will provide additional screening benefiting both properties. He noted the open feel of properties in this area and the sense of shared landscaping between properties. He stated that the intent is to preserve that feel. He stated that the landscape plan will introduce new significant trees into the natural woodland area along Barberry Lane to enhance the area with appropriate plantings. Ms. Czerniak commented that the presentation by the petitioner’s representatives was comprehensive. She recognized the efforts made to consider various options for locating an additional garage on the property as directed by the Commission at the last meeting. She stated that the alternative presented addresses the primary concerns raised noting that the garage doors no longer face Barberry Lane, the garage is separated from the historic residence by a courtyard and additional landscaping is proposed. She noted that the petitioners talked with neighboring property owners and that staff received input from the neighbor to the west that although the preference is still not to add a garage in the area west of the house, the current proposal goes a long way to address the concerns. She noted that the new garage is setback about 87 feet from the street. She stated that staff recommends approval of the project based on the findings in the staff report and subject to the conditions of approval as recommended. Chairman Pairitz asked the Commissioners for any questions, hearing none, he invited public comment. Hearing none, he invited final comments from the Commission. The Commission thanked the petitioner for responding to the concerns raised at the previous meeting and commended the creative solution presented. Commissioner Ransom made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the new garage and courtyard as presented based on the findings in the staff report and subject to the following conditions of approval. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 3 Prior to the issuance of a building permit the following conditions must be met to the satisfaction of the City. 1. Plans shall be reviewed by City staff to confirm that they are consistent with the plans presented to the Commission and consistent with the direction, discussion and any modifications requested by the Commission. 2. The petitioner shall submit digital photos of the pre-construction conditions with a particular focus on the west portion of the property, the area and views that will be impacted by the garden wall and garage. 3. Tree and vegetation protection fencing shall be installed consistent with the direction of the City’s Certified Arborist. A construction materials staging plan and construction vehicle parking plan shall be provided by the petitioner and reviewed and approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. Other 4. A landscape plan for the area of work shall be submitted for review by the City’s Certified Arborist to confirm that at a minimum: a. Inch for inch replacement of the tree that is removed is provided for on the plan in the form of trees or other vegetation subject to the approval of the Certified Arborist. b. Enhancement of the existing planting bed located along Barberry Lane is provided if it is determined by the Certified Arborist to be necessary to screen views of the garage and court yard from the streetscape. c. Foundation plantings are provided around the garage and near the garden wall as determined to be appropriate by the City’s Certified Arborist. The landscape plan must be submitted to the City prior to approval of the framing inspection to allow time for review and planting concurrent with the completion of the project. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Berg and unanimously approved by the Commission. 4. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the construction of an addition at 30 N. Ahwahnee Road. Owners: Ed and Marie Pasquesi Representatives: Scott Streightiff, architect Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for any conflicts or interest or Ex Parte contacts, hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Streightiff presented the petition and provided a massing model to the Commission for review. He reviewed the comments received from the Commission and members of the public when this petition was last before the Commission. He reviewed the petition as originally proposed and as presented at the last meeting. He described the revisions to the plans since the last meeting in response to the comments heard. He reviewed the elevations of the house with the addition as now proposed. He pointed out that the main ridge of the addition was droped to subordinate the addition to the main element of the house. He reviewed a section through the house showing the impacts of the changes on the interior spaces. He reviewed the floor plans Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 4 resulting from the revisions made. He described the proposed exterior materials noting that the existing asphalt shingles on the roof will be replaced with cedar shingles. He stated that the owners are commited to using high quality materials and crafts people. He stated that the owers love the home and want to up grade the porch area to make it more functional and consistent with the rest of the house. Ms. O’Neill summarized the petition noting that this project will replace and expand an existing porch area. She reviewed the comments and direction provided by the Commission at the May meeting. She pointed out that in particular, the Commission directed that the addition not over power or compete with the defining elements of the house, the double gables. She stated that the major modifications to the residence are proposed on the front elevation noting that there are no significant changes to the rear of the residence. She stated staff support for the project as revised subject to the conditions of approval as recommended in the staff report. Commissioner Ransom expressed appreciation for the revisions made. He expressed concerns about whether the arched windows as proposed are consistent with the existing residence. He commented that the windows seem to draw attention to the addition, working against the goal of keeping it subordinate to the main residence. In response to questions from Commission Ransom, Mr. Streightiff confirmed that alternatives to the arched windows in the garden room were considered. He showed photos of an arched hallway inside the home and noted the owners’ interest in carrying that element on to the addition. He noted Stanley Anderson’s use of triple arched windows in other locations. However, he stated a willingness to give further consideration to the window form. Commissioner Swenson commended the changes made to the plan since the last meeting. Commissioner Berg noted that the massing model is very helpful. He commented that the dormers are handled well. He questioned whether the ridge could be lowered a bit more acknowledging that the height of the ridge as established is for the purpose of preserving interior space. He stated general support for the refinements made since the last meeting. Mr. Streightiff commented that consideration was given to lowering the roof further. He noted that further reduction in the height of the ridge is difficult to achieve while at the same time meeting the owner’s goals. In reponse to questions from Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Streightiff acknowledged that attention will need to be given to addressing some tricky details including the transition from the main house to the addition and placement of the gutter. He agreed that getting the details “right” could help to further subordinate the visual appearance of the addition to the main house. Chairman Pairitz invited public coments. Hearing none, he returned the matter to the Commission for final discussion and comment. He reiterated the importance of careful attention to how the details are worked out. He commented that the addition still seems to fight with the main house for prominence. He stated that the refinements needed at this point are nuances, but stated that they are important to the success of the project. He stated that overall, the revised design goes a long way toward preserving the original character of the residence. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 5 Commissioner Berg stated that the overall effect of the revised plan is good and that the plan is well done. He stated that he understands the intent of the arched windows, to align with the interior. He noted the use of “mixed metaphors” by Anderson on other projects. He acknowledged that the arches may be more attractive to the home owners than an alternative window form. He suggested that consideration be given to options for reducing the ridge height noting that the resulting effort could improve the end product. He noted a technique used by Howard Van Doren Shaw on a residence near the Colllege. He noted that a similar technique, might be workable here. Commissioner Ransom stated appreciation for the comments of the other Commissioners and suggested that given the work on the petition to date, the Commission’s comments and suggestions be offered as items that should be studied, but not requirements. He stated his understanding that landscaping will be used to further subordinate the addition to the main house. He commended the petitioner and architect for incorporating the earlier comments of the Commission into the revised design. He made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving a partial demolition and a replacement addition based on the findings in the staff report and subject to the following conditions of approval. The following conditions shall be met prior to the issuance of a building permit. 1. The petitioner shall demonstrate that further consideration has been given to the following apects of the project to the satisfaction of City staff. City staff is authorized to approve refinements to the plan related to these two elements if it is determined by staff that the refinements are consistent with the discussion and direction of the Commission . a. Further reduction of the ridge height. b. Alternatives to the arched windows. 2. Detailed information shall be provided to the City on the proposed windows to ensure new windows match existing true divided lite windows. 3. Digital photographic documentation of the existing home and site shall be provided to the City. 4. A detailed landscape 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. c. The plantings must provide inch for inch replacement for the tree removed in a manner consistent with the Historic Preservation Commission approval and in a manner that retains the existing character of the property. 5. Protective fencing shall be installed on the site to protect existing trees and vegetation as directed by the City’s Certified Arborist. 6. A construction materials and staging plan and construction vehicles parking plan shall be submitted subject to City approval. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 6 The motion was seconded by Commissioner Berg and was unanimously approved by the Commission. NEW PETITIONS 5. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving alterations to elevations on an interior courtyard at 111 West Westminster. Owners: Liam and Francesca Connell Representative: David Poulton, architect Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner’s representative. Mr. Poulton provided a brief history of the property. He explained that the proposed changes will occur in the interior courtyard and are not visible from the street or from the outside of the residence. He explained that the petitioners recently purchased this residence and are preserving the estate in its original condition with the exception of changes planned for the kitchen wing of the house. He noted that the kitchen wing is being renovated to create a family kitchen and associated spaces. He explained that historically, the kitchen was not used by the family living in the house. He described the area of the proposed work and explained that doors will be added to an existing wall to provide access into the interior courtyard. He noted that currently, there is no part of the building that takes advantaqge of the interior courtyard. He noted that the courtyard is viewed from parts of the house and used as a pass through area. He pointed out that the proposed addition of doors will allow the family to take advantage of the interior courtyard space. He explained that the integrity of the walls will be preserved and that French doors will be inserted into the wall on either side of the existing fountain. He reviewed the interior changes proposed to allow the kitchen space to take advantageof views into the courtyard. He provided photos of the courtyard space pointing out the wall where the French doors will be inserted and the fountain that will be preserved. He provided a side by side illustration on the existing wall and the wall as proposed with the doors. He noted the symmetry that will result. He confirmed that the existing doors will be duplicated identifically noting the intricacy of the work. He requested Commission support of the project on behalf of the petitioners. Ms. O’Neill noted the uniqueness of this petition pointing out that none of the proposed changes will be visible from outside of the house, only from inside the home and from the interior courtyard. She stated that the proposed changes will facilitate greater use of the courtyard and enhance the living space. She stated staff support for the petition based on the findings in the staff report and subject to one condition of approval as recommend in the staff report. In response to a question from Commissioner Ransom, Mr. Poulton confirmed that the new doors will replicate the hand carving on the existing French doors. He added that the same species of wood will be used noting that consideration is being given to using reclaimed timbers where appropriate. Commissioner Ransom requested that staff require and review detailed drawings, in combination with photographs if appropriate, to assure appropriate detailing and replication. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 7 Chairman Pairitz invited public comment. Hearing none, he stated agreement that confirming that an appropriate level of detailing is well documented and carried out is important. Commissioner Ransom made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the installation of doors within an existing wall adjoining the interior courtyard based on the findings in the staff report and subject to the following condition of approval. The following condition shall be met prior to the issuance of a building permit.i 1. Dimensioned elevation drawings, including information on the muntin profiles, shall be submitted with the permit application to verify the new doors will match the existing conditions. Commissioner Berg seconded the motion and it was unaniosuly approved by the Commission. 6. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving replacement and modification of the front entrance at 45 S. Sheridan Road. Owners: Jim and Diane Cutler Representative: Miguel Lara, architect Chairman Pairitz asked the Commision for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Lara introduced the petition noting that the Cutler’s home was originally the power house for the McCormick estate. He explained the project noting the owners’ desire to embellish the existing entrance and replace it with an element that is more traditional in design. He stated that a mahogany post and beam structure is proposed on the same foot print as the existing entrance element. He noted the intent to create a conservatory type look. He reviewed the proposed elevations of the new entry way. He noted the uniqueness of the home pointing out that the trim and the medallions are all quite visible. He noted that the existing entry stands out as inconsistent with the rest of the structure. He described the materials and detailing that will be used on the new entry way. He noted that a standing seam roof and casement windows are proposed between the posts. He requested Commission support of the project. Ms. O’Neill noted that the existing entrance to the home is not original but was constructed in the 1970’s. She concurred with Mr. Lara that is it inconsistent with the original building in form, materials and detailing. She stated that what is proposed is an in-kind replacement of the existing entry way. In response to questions from Commissioner Berg, Mr. Lara explained that skylights are proposed to provide light into a long dark hallway and to achieve the owners’ desire for a conservatory type structure. He offered some sample photos of other conservatories from which references for this element were taken. Chairman Pairitz commented that the house is interesting. He noted the large elevation, and small entrance. He acknowledged that this same relationship exists on the house now, but questioned whether it should be retained. He also acknowledged that the house is already at the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 8 maximum allowable square footage limiting the options for modifiying the size of the entrance element. In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson regarding the roof, Ms. O’Neill explained that the ability to extend the roof is also limited due to zoning setbacks. In response to questions from Commissioner Ransom, Mr. Lara confirmed that the petitioners considered various alternatives for the entrance however they wanted to retain the openness of the element with glass. He stated that the entry is used as a foyer before entering a narrow, dark hallway that continues for 20 to 30 feet. Commissioner Ransom acknowledged that there is a problem with the current entrance but commented that the proposed entrance does not appear to present a significant improvement. He noted that with respect to both scale and design, there appears to be room for enhancement. He questioned whether an open porch was considered. Commissioner Berg stated an understanding of the interest in improving upon the existing entrance. He commented that the porch concept is intriguing, but acknowledged that the unusual floor plan might limit the options. He suggested consideration of allowing the front door to recede to give a “porch look”. Commissioner Swenson suggested consideration of removing the sidelights or considering an alternative door. Chairman Pairitz noted that the large front elevation is largely masked by landscaping. He commented that if the entry is meant to have a pedestrian scale, the detailing should be scaled appropriately. He stated that the project could be improved with some further study. He noted the difficulty of the large elevation and the small entry element and commented that adding various details to the entry element makes it appear even smaller. He discussed the roof over hang and suggested that the medallions be scaled appropriately for this element. He stated that in his opinion, the sidelights could remain, or be removed. He stated support for the project noting that fine tuning is needed. He invited public comment. Mr. Cutler, property owner, noted that before bringing this project forward, a great deal of research was completed and many options were explored. He noted that since moving into the house, he has done much to restore its original character. He explained that while traveling, he encountered true conservatories and stated his interest in trying to replicate some of the elements he saw while at the same time, retaining the openness that the current entrance provides. He pointed out that currently, the entrance element has little relationship to the original house. Commissioner Berg thanked Mr. Culter for his interesting comments. He suggested that the proposed replacement entrance should be done elegantly, without the use of large detail. He noted that he is apprehensive of mixed metaphors in this case. He stated that he is reassured to some extent by the property owner’s comments. Chairman Pairitz stated that the overall design can be improved by modifying the scale of the medallions and with other attention to detail. He noted that as presented, the detailing is scaled Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 9 to the main structure, not to the small entry element. He acknowledged the difficulty of tying this smaller element into the larger elevation. Commissioner Ransom stated support for removal of the existing entry structure. Commissioner Berg stated that the project should be taken to the next level with careful attention to detail. He suggested that the Commission’s comments provide direction to the petitioner and staff regarding refinement of the project. He made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the partial demolition of the existing entry way and approving the replacement entry based on the findings in the staff report and subject to the following conditions of approval. The following conditions shall be met prior to the issuance of a building permit. 1. The design of the entry element shall be refined to scale the detailing appropriately to the entry element rather than to the larger residence. The refinement of the design shall be subject to staff review to assure that it is consistent with the Commission’s discussion. If determined by staff to be necessary, the matter may be returned to the Commission for further consideration. 2. Digital photographic documentation of the existing home and architectural details shall be provided to the City. 3. Protective fencing shall be installed on the site subject to City approval. 4. A construction materials and staging plan and a construction vehicles parking plan shall be submitted subject to City approval. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ransom and was unanimously approved by the Commission. 7. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving a partial demolition and addition at 85 E. Westminster. Owner: Anthony and Diane Manno Representative: John Krasnodebski, architect Chairman Paritiz asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Krasnodebski presented the petition. He described the property and provided photos of the existing home and streetscape. He pointed out the area of the existing one-story addition and provided photos of this area. He noted that the date of construction of the previous addition is unknown. He pointed out inconsistencies between the existing addition and the main house. He stated that the replacement addition will be one-story in height consistent with the existing structure. He noted that the wood detailing on the main house will be captured on the addition. He explained that the addition provides kitchen, breakfast and family room spaces. He noted that the family has lived in this home for 15 years and has been comtemplating this change for several years. He stated that no variances are requested. He described the replacement addition pointing out that it is recessed from the front of the home. He noted that keeping the addition as a one story element and stepping it back minimizes the impact on the existing structure and on the site. He reviewed the landscape concepts noting that the existing yews are in decline and will Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 10 be replaced. He reviewed the elevations noting the classical proportions, the detailing and the use of the same types of windows as those on the main house, in particular, the bays on the rear of the home. He described the exterior materials, the limestone base, stucco walls and wood windows, noting that all detailing will match the existing home. He discussed the hardscape noting that a slight shift will be made in the location of the sidewalk. He noted the location of the terrace and the importance of the access point to the terrace given the limited access to the back yard. He reviewed a conceptual landscape plan illustrating the proposed rescreening of the east side of the property. Ms. O’Neill explained that this project proposes demolition of a later addition to the original house. She noted that the existing addition is not a defining element of the property. She noted that findings in support of the proposed partial demolition are presented in the staff report. She pointed out that the full elevation of the home is never viewed at one time from any perspective due to the configuration of the structure and the streetscape vegetation. She noted that the addition will be a separate pavilion, set apart from the main house. She recommended a condition of approval requiring evaluation of the existing trees on the site in the context of the proposed landscape plan. She stated staff support for the petition. In response to a question from Commissioner Berg, Mr. Krasnodebski confirmed the intent to match the windows of the replacement addition to those on the existing house. He commented that all of the windows in the house appear to be original except for those on the addition. In response to a question from Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Krasnodebski stated the intent to “pre- patina” the copper to achieve the desired effect at the outset of the project. Chairman Pairitz invited public testimony, hearing none, he returned the matter to the Commission for final comments and action. Commissioner Berg noted the importance of the detailing in making the project successful. Commissioner Ransom made a motion to grant a Certification of Appropriateness approving the replacement addition based on the findings in the staff report and subject to the following conditions of approval. The following conditions shall be met prior to the issuance of a building permit. 1. Detailed information shall be provided to the City on the proposed windows to ensure new windows match existing true divided lite windows. 2. A detailed landscape plan for the area around the proposed addition 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 in the area surrounding the proposed addition. 3. Protective fencing shall be installed on the site subject to City approval. 4. A construction materials and staging plan and construction vehicles parking plan shall be submitted subject to City approval. Given the size of the property and scope of the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 11 project, all construction material staging and parking must be accommodated on private property. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Swenson and was unanimously approved by the Commission. 8. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the construction of an addition with a building scale variance at 970 E. Deerpath. Owner: Peter and Elizabeth Hamilton Representatives: Terry Tackbary, builder Dwight Delattre, 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. Tackbary introduced the petition and provided a brief history of the site. He stated that although the house is in the historic district, it is not historic. He explained that the property owners want to add space to make the house livable for a family noting that the house currently does not have any closets. He stated the intent to add a mud room and a second story addition. He reviewed the elevations of the existing house and the proposed elevations with the second floor addition. He stated that the addition is designed to add symmetry to the home in a manner consistent with the character and scale of the existing home. He stated that all of the exterior materials will match those on the existing house. He noted that a brick is available which provides a good match with the existing house. He pointed out that the addition will not be visible from the street. He reviewed perspectives of the area of the addition as viewed from neighboring homes and the streetscape illustrating the lack of visibility of the area. He stated that the project requires a variance from the building scale ordiance and stated that the criteria for a variance are met with this petition. Ms. O’Neill confirmed that the house is not considered a significant historic house within the historic district. She discussed the request for a building scale variance noting that the existing house is over the allowable building scale and the addition will add a small amount to the overage. She noted that the addition does not create a house that is out of scale or character with the neighborhood. She stated that staff recommends approval of the building scale variance as requested subject to the recommended conditions of approval. Chairman Pairitz observed that if the entire addition is shifted toward the back of the house, it could have the effect of lowering the appearance of the wall on the front elevation. He noted that on the back of the house, the roof hides most of the wall. In response to questions from Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Tackbury confirmed that the addition could be shifted to the back but noted the importance of keeping the stairs in the present location. He commented that the proposed location provides for a good transition and addresses some existing pockets on the roof. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 12 In response to questions from Commissioner Swenson, Mr. Tackbury explained that efforts were made to line up the quoins or to provide further separation. He noted that those efforts were not successful. Chairman Paritiz observed that the mis-alignment of the quoins will likely not be prominent once constructed. He invited public comment. Hearing none, he offered further comments on the project reiterating that moving the addition back could improve the project. He stated that he is satisfied that criteria for a building scale variance are met. Commissioner Berg commented that if this house was more significant to the historic district, the Commission would consider this request differently. He agreed that setting the addition back further could improve the project, particularly the front elevation, but acknowledged the comments from the petitioner. He concluded stating that moving the addition back would make the element less intrusive. Mr. Tackbury confirmed that consideration was given to locating the addition further back on the house. He reviewed the reasons for the location as proposed. Chairman Pairitz stated that the benefits of the current location versus pushing the addition to the rear of the house could be debated. He stated his opinion that diminishing the mass of the addition could be important to improving the project. He suggested that the petitioner be encouraged to reconsider pushing the addition toward the rear and allowing staff to approve such a change if appropriate. Commissioner Ransom made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness for the addition based on the findings in the staff report and subject to the following conditions of approval. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the following conditions shall be satisfied. 1. Staff shall review detailed plans to confirm that the intent of the project, as described by the petitioner at the meeting, is achieved. If the detailed plans do not align with the description presented to the Commission and the following discussion, this item should be returned to the full Commission for further consideration. 2. The petitioner shall provide digital photographic documentation of the existing home and site to the City. 3. If determined to be necessary by City staff, chain link tree preservation fencing shall be installed prior to the issuance of the building permit. 4. A construction materials staging plan and construction vehicles parking plan shall be provided by the petitioner subject to staff review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Swenson and was unanimously approved by the Commission. OTHER ITEMS 9. Opportunity for the public to address the Historic Preservation Commission on non- agenda items. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes July 27, 2011 - Page 13 Rommy Lopat, 410 Woodland Road, raised two issues for the Commission’s consideration. First, she discussed the south beach access road reconstruction project. She noted that this engineering project has the potential to drastically alter the historic district. She noted concern about the proposed guard rail, curbing and other land altering activity noting that expressing concern that the project will really change the park. She noted that the project is being considered outside of the Forest Park Master Plan. She discussed a second issue, preserving the wooded streetscape of Woodland Road. She noted significant tree removal that recently occurred on a property on Woodland Road impacting the wooded streetscape. She stated that preservation of streetscapes is important and noted that drastic modifications should not be permitted. She asked that as this property comes forward, that the wooded streetscape be restored. At the request of Chairman Pairitz, Ms. Czerniak responded to public testimony noting that the Public Works Committee of the City Council, as well as the City Council, have had numerous discussions about the South Beach Access Road project. She explained that the work planned is an infrastructure stabilization project due to failing conditions on the South Beach Access Road. She stated that elements of the project may be able to be changed is in the future if they are determined to be inconsistent with the Forest Park Master Plan. She stated that the Forest Park Master Plan is expected to be presented in the coming months and will be reviewed at various public meetings. She noted that the project on Woodland Road referenced by Ms. Lopat will be presented to the Commission at an upcoming meeting. She noted that this project came forward to the City incrementally and as a result, approval was granted for removal of some lower quality and declining trees consistent with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. She stated that subsequent to the tree removal, additional work was proposed at the site and as a result the entire project will be presented to the Commission for review. She acknowledged that if the full project was understood at the outset, the tree removals would not have been permitted prior to Commission review of the overall project. 10. Additional information from staff. Ms. Czerniak announced that the Historic Preservation Commission will hold a special meeting on August 10th to accommodate the petitions that have recently been submitted. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Catherine J. Czerniak Director of Community Development