Loading...
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 2011/08/10 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission Proceedings of the August 10, 2011 Special Meeting A special meeting of the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission was held on Wednesday, August 10, 2011, at 6:30 p.m., at the City of Lake Forest City Hall, 220 E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois. Historic Preservation Commissioners present: Chairman Kurt Pairitz, Commissioners Bill Ransom, Fred Moyer and Guy Berg. Commissioners absent: Commissioners Susan Rafferty Athenson, Jim Preschlack and Mary Ellen Swenson. 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 July 27, 2011 meeting minutes. The minutes of the July 27 , 2011 meeting were approved with one correction as requested by Commissioner Ransom. CONTINUED PETITIONS 3. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving a partial demolition and the construction of an addition at 950 Maplewood Road. Owners: Stewart and Marianne Swift Representatives: Brian Goehle, Steven Rugo, architects Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts. Mr. Rugo introduced the petition and Mr. Goehle reviewed the dimensions of the changes made to the roof since the last meeting. He discussed various alternative designs that were considered based on the previous comments from the Commission. He noted that retaining the single roof ridge line was determined to be the most appropriate solution. He noted that the side door was recessed to help subordinate this entrance to the main door. Ms. O’Neill noted for the record that Commissioner Moyer was not present at the meeting when this petition was previously considered but since that meeting, he has reviewed the minutes of the meeting and is prepared to participate in consideration of this petition. She noted that since the June meeting, the petitioner reviewed alternatives to the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 2 plan presented as requested by the Commission. She noted that this project is an example of balancing preservation with the need to create a functional garage. She acknowledged that with the alternative now presented, there is more demolition of the existing structure than was previously proposed but noted that overall, this alternative presents a more cohesive design as an end product. She noted the fir trees located close to the area of the proposed work and stated that an effort to protect and preserve the trees is part of the conditions of approval as recommended by staff. She noted that at the previous meeting where this petition was considered, several neighbors spoke in support of the project. She stated that no new correspondence was received prior to this meeting. She stated staff support for the revised plans as presented. At the request of Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Rugo provided further explanation of the changes made to the plan since the last meeting. He noted that the one-story skirt roof previously proposed was eliminated and that the one and a half story massing is preserved. He commented that the dormers will remain in the same location and that consideration was given to stepping the roof form down over the east garage bay. He reviewed the detailing on the secondary entrance door noting that it will remain very consistent with the current design. Chairman Pairitz invited public testimony, hearing none, he asked for any final questions or comments from the Commission. Hearing none, he commended the project and the further study that was conducted in response to the Commission’s comments at the previous meeting. He stated that in his opinion, stepping down the ridge over the garage bay could be a benefit to the project; he stated however that it should not a requirement for approval. Commissioner Berg stated support for the project and made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness to approve the partial demolition and the addition as revised and presented 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. Comprehensive digital photographic documentation of the existing house and site, including the landscaping along the west property line, shall be submitted and be subject to a determination by staff that the photos adequately document the site. 2. A tree preservation plan shall be prepared by a Certified Arborist to outline the steps that will be taken to protect and care for the mature trees in proximity to the addition. The plan shall be submitted and subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist. 3. The final driveway location shall be shown on an approved grading plan and subject to approval by the City’s Certified Arborist to ensure changes are kept to the minimal necessary to access the expanded garage and to verify that significant existing trees and vegetation will be protected to the extent possible. 4. A detailed landscape plan of the area surrounding the proposed additions 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: Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 3 a. The plan shall identify all existing plantings: those that will remain and those intended for removal. The existing trees along the west property line shall be preserved. b. The plan shall identify foundation plantings around the new addition. c. A note shall be placed on the landscape plan stating that approval of the plan is for plantings only, any lighting, garden structures, pool, fences or other accessory structures will require separate approval and permits. 5. A plan for the staging and storage of construction materials and equipment reflecting the proposed access to the site and parking of construction vehicles shall be submitted and subject to approval by staff. All construction activity must remain on the property. 6. Protective fencing, as determined to be necessary by the City’s Certified Arborist and the City Engineer, shall be erected to protect vegetation and prevent stormwater runoff on to neighboring properties during construction activity. The fencing shall remain in place and properly installed until removal is authorized by the City. Other conditions 7. 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. 8. In the event that landscaping cannot be completed prior to the scheduling of a final inspection due to the time of year, 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. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ransom and was unanimously approved by the Commission. NEW PETITIONS 4. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the landscape plan at 693 Spruce Avenue. Owners: Chris and Marguerite Burke Representative: Bruce Everly, landscaper Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for any conflicts of interests or Ex Parte contacts, hearing none; he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Everly introduced the petition. He stated that construction of the new house for the petitioners is well under way and as a result, some re-thinking of the landscape plan has occurred. He noted that in response to the new house, a shift in the location of the curb cut is proposed. He noted that the driveway is proposed to shift to the west slightly, to center the curb cut and the entrance drive on the house. He noted that the existing curb cut and driveway location expose the garage doors to the street instead of the entrance to the house. He reviewed the landscaping proposed for the front yard noting that one tree will be removed. Ms. O’Neill noted that this plan is before the Commission consistent with the conditions Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 4 of approval for the new home constructed on the lot. She noted that plantings are proposed in the parkway and noted that as required by the Code, those plantings have been reviewed for consistency with the requirements for planting in the public right-of- way. She noted that the City’s Certified Arborist review the proposed right-of-way plantings as well as the proposed overall landscape plan. She confirmed that the motor court exists today but the curb cut is shifted from the east side of the property to the center. She noted that the proposed change is not a significant or negative change to the street scape. She noted that no landscape lighting is proposed as part of this plan. She noted that if lighting is proposed at a later date, further review and approval would be required. She stated staff support for the project as presented. In response to a question from Commissioner Ransom, Mr. Everly confirmed that the surface of the motor court will likely be changed from pea gravel to asphalt. In response to questions from Commissioner Ransom, Ms. O’Neill stated that to date, no comments have been received from the public regarding this petition. In response to questions from Commissioner Berg, Mr. Everly described the hedge proposed along the front property line. He confirmed that the hedge will grow to a height of about 17’ to help screen the house from the streetscape and soften the hardscape in front of the house. He confirmed that the hedge could be maintained at a lower height of 14’ – 15’. He noted that at the east side of the house, the garage doors are intended to be screened from the street with a hedge adding that the hedge in this area will balance the hedge on the western part of the property. He stated that the large driveway opening will provide a view of the house. In response to questions from Commissioner Moyer, Mr. Everly discussed the edging of the hedge that will occur three to four times a year to maintain the desired clean look on the streetscape. Chairman Pairitz invited public input, hearing none, he agreed with the comments of Commissioner Berg that additional views of the house might benefit the streetscape, but he stated an understanding of the desire for the hedge for privacy for the owners. Commissioner Ransom made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the landscape plan 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. If determined to be necessary by City staff, chain link tree preservation fencing shall be installed prior to installation of the new driveway to protect the parkway tree adjacent to the new driveway entrance. 2. Any landscape lighting or any additional landscape features such as pillars, gates or fences along the street shall require additional consideration by the Commission. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Berg and was unanimously approved by the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 5 Commission. 5. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving an addition with a Building Scale Variance at 990 N. Sheridan Road. Owners: Marty and Caroline Masterson Representatives: Austin Depree, architect Laura Sargent Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts. Hearing none, he invited a presentation by the petitioner. Ms. Sargent introduced the petition and provided a brief history of the property. She noted that the existing sun porch, which was added in the 1980’s, is not meet the character or quality of the rest of the house. She provided photos illustrating this point. She provided a site plan showing the area to be removed, and the replacement breakfast bay addition. She noted that the replacement addition will have a smaller footprint than the existing space. She noted other changes proposed including the replacement of windows and doors. She reviewed the proposed floor plans and elevations and compared them to the existing elements of the house. She noted the improvements in proportion and scale as a result of the proposed removal and construction of the replacement addition. She reviewed a rendering of the proposed rear elevation. She stated that the plan reduces the current building scale overage and creates an addition that is complimentary to the rest of the existing house. Ms. O’Neill stated that the residence is in the historic district, but is not a contributing structure. She confirmed that the proposed removal and replacement improves the character and consistency of the house. She confirmed that the house is currently over the allowable square footage but noted that with this project, the amount of the overage will be reduced. She stated staff support for the project. In response to questions from Chairman Pairitz, Ms. Sargent discussed the head of the window and the head of the door noting limitations in those areas. She agreed that the detail of those features could be given further consideration. Commissioner Berg discussed the relationship of the door to the windows noting the inconsistencies in style on the existing elevation. He suggested re-working the details of the architecture in these areas. In response to questions from Commissioner Berg, Ms. Sargent agreed to further study as suggested. Chairman Pairitz invited public comment, hearing none; he invited final comments from the Commission. Commissioner Berg made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving an addition based on the findings in the staff report and subject to the following conditions of approval. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 6 The following conditions shall be met prior to the issuance of a building permit. 1. Documentation of further study of the height and design of the arch over the entrance door shall be submitted to staff along with the proposed final design of this element. Staff is authorized to approval a final design if it is determined that it is consistent with the discussion of the Commission. 2. Digital photographic documentation of the existing home and site shall be provided to the City. 3. Protective fencing shall be installed on the site as directed by the City’s Certified Arborist and subject to City approval. 4. A construction materials and staging plan and construction vehicles parking plan shall be submitted subject to City approval to assure that the plans minimize any impact on the neighboring property owners and on the street. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Moyer and unanimously approved by the Commission. 6. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving an addition to the existing residence and new fences, gates and patios as part of the overall landscape plan at 333 E. Woodland Road. Owner: Paul Daniel Representatives: Paul Psenka, architect Daniel Dalziel, landscape architect Mr. Psenka introduced the petition. He presented information on the proposed addition at the southeast end of the house. He showed an overall plan of the property noting the location of the proposed addition adjacent to an existing porch on the rear of the house. He showed a floor plan of the proposed addition noting that the addition will be a powder room. He pointed out the proposed fire place addition located in the same general area, on the east side of the house, in the family room. He stated that this is the main area for the family to gather noting the desire to have a bathroom closer to the main living spaces. He noted that the addition is quite small. He stated that the addition will blend into the architecture of the house noting that the porch currently in this location appears to be an addition. He noted that the existing porch is awkward in that it does not extend to the east wall of the house. He stated that the addition will follow the existing pitch of the porch roof and fill in the easternmost portion of the wall, beyond the extent of the porch. He noted the window that will be removed to allow for the addition. He provided images of the proposed chimney. He showed a roof plan noting that the roof of the addition will read as a single plane. He stated that the proposed addition is a logical solution to accommodate the desired space. Mr. Dalziel presented the landscape plan. He provided a history of the landscaping on the property noting that over the years, prior to the recent purchase of the property by his clients, the landscaping on the site was compromised by lack of maintenance and growth of invasive species. He noted that the tree removals that occurred were approved by the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 7 City and that the replacement landscape plan is presented to the Commission for approval. He noted that in response to the staff report, the new curb cut and circular drive was removed and he presented a revised plan to the Commission. He provided a rendering to the Commission for consideration. He noted that the rendering uses fall colors to represent the variety of plant material proposed. He stated that a fence with stone columns is proposed along the streetscape along with entrance gates at the driveway. Ms. Czerniak acknowledged that since the Daniels purchased the property, a significant amount of work has occurred on the site to update the home and yard. She explained that with respect to the tree removals that occurred, if the full extent of landscape and hardscape work proposed for the site was understood, the City would not have issued tree removal permits in advance of the Commission reviewing both the removal and replacement plan. She acknowledged an error on the part of staff in not pursuing information on the comprehensive plan for the site prior to issuing tree removal permits. She stated however that the project seems to have evolved over time. She stated that despite the sequencing error, the tree removal permits were issued only after careful review of each tree by the City’s Certified Arborist and removal was deemed to be appropriate due to deteriorating conditions. She stated that staff is just now seeing the revised plan presented to the Commission by the petitioner’s landscaper noting that the staff review was done on the plan in the Commission’s packet. She stated that no review has been done on the plan now before the Commission but noted that based on the description by Mr. Dalziel, it appears to address some of the comments in the staff report. She stated support for the removal of the second curb cut noting that with this plan, a potential threat to additional trees in the front yard is removed. She observed that this property is located at a point of transition along the Woodland Road streetscape with smaller properties located to the west, and larger properties located to the east with wooded streetscapes. She noted the importance of the streetscape and compatibility with the overall character of the neighborhood. She stated that staff was contacted by several surrounding property owners with questions about the proposed plan. She recommended that since a revised plan was just submitted, the Commission may want to offer general comments on the plan and continue consideration of this matter to allow for review of the landscape plan by staff and modifications of the plan by the petitioner based on the Commission’s comments. Mr. Dalziel commented on the revised plan noting that the changes from the plan in the Commission’s packet are minimal. He noted that in response to questions from neighboring property owners to the south about drainage, existing yard drains in the rear yard will remain. He stated that drainage will not be altered. He asked that the Commission grant approval of the revised plan. In response to a question from Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Dalziel stated that there are no changes proposed to the western driveway. He confirmed that a fence, piers and new plantings are proposed at the front of the property. In response to the question from Commissioner Ransom, Mr. Dalziel confirmed that the basketball court shown on the original plan, within the setback area, will be removed. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 8 Chairman Pairitz noted that the proposed addition to the house does not appear to be controversial and suggested that part of the project could be moved forward. He noted that the landscape and hardscape improvements are numerous and complicated and stated that further time is needed for review. In response to questions from Commissioner Berg regarding the fence and gate, Mr. Dalziel discussed how the fence and gate relate to the house and overall streetscape. Commissioner Berg observed that there are several estate homes which are setback from the street that have pillars and a gate along the streetscape. Mr. Daniel, property owner, pointed out that there is a fence all around the neighboring property to the east. He stated his desire to have a fenced lot for the protection of his children and dogs. He stated that the fence will be an enhancement to the streetscape and part of the overall enhancement of the property. In response to a question from Chairman Pairitz, Mr. Daniel stated that he is unsure whether the fence along the south property line is in his ownership but stated that he is happy to work with the neighbors to address the condition of the fence. In response to a question from Commissioner Ransom, Ms. Czerniak stated that the elements of the plan that impact the streetscape are the most important aspects of the plan from the City’s perspective. She noted that elements in the rear yard will need to conform to Code requirements, but will be less visible from off of the site. She noted the importance of clearly understanding the fence that is proposed and allowing time for the City’s Certified Arborist to understand the changes to the plan. Mr. Daniel noted that there are currently gaps in the landscaping. He stated his intention to install plant material during this planting season, before the winter. Chairman Pairitz invited public comment. Ms. Rommy Lopat, 410 E. Woodland Road, stated support for the staff recommendation to reestablish a wooded character along the road. She stated that parkway trees should be planted as part of this plan to replace trees removed. She stated that detailed plans should be presented to the public showing the proposed fence, gate, flag pole, and lighting. She commented on the fence across the street noting that it is covered with plant material and hidden from the street. She asked that consideration be given to reducing the number of Blue Spruce and adding more “greener” vegetation. She stated that there is a need for a comprehensive look at the City’s Tree Ordinance to avoid situations such as this in the future. She noted that the tree removal application does not ask for the total number of trees proposed for removal as part of the project, and should. She disagreed with allowing removal of Ash trees unless it has been determined that the Ash Borer is present. She suggested that the Tree Ordinance should require that all Ash trees be treated as a matter of good forestry practices. She noted that treating trees is cost effective. She stated that treatments for diseases should be sought before removal is Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 9 allowed. She commented on the staff report noting that the trees that were removed were significant. She asked that the Commission find more ways to help staff and homeowners preserve trees. Chairman Pairitz noted that in his opinion, the current state of this petition is not a result of a failure of the Ordinance. He stated that this petition should have been brought to the Commission before the removals occurred since they were part of a larger project but noted that at this point, the Commission must review the petition that is presented. He asked for input from the Commission on whether there is interest in moving some aspects of the petition forward. Commissioner Ransom questioned whether reviewing the petition on a piecemeal basis is appropriate. Commissioner Berg stated that he is in favor of the proposed addition to the house and the addition of the chimney. He stated that the changes appear to be an improvement over the existing conditions and consistent with the standards. He stated that he is not clear about the design of the fence noting that the fence appears different in the various renderings presented. He noted the importance of a consist use of materials throughout the property. He stated that he is not comfortable moving the landscape plan forward without further information and review. Commissioner Moyer stated that he is supportive of the proposed addition. He expressed concern about the proposed fence and gate. He stated that the rendering is confusing. He stated that there needs to be elegance to the design of the fence, gate and pillars that matches the house. He stated that the Commission must review this petition carefully consistent with previous reviews. Mr. Dalziel offered that the gate could be removed from the petition allowing approval of the fence and landscaping. Mr. Daniel noted that there is an existing gate on the west side of the property. He stated that the gate was manual, but is now electrified. He stated a desire to construct a fence that matches the existing wrought iron fence around the back yard. He offered an alternative fencing scheme that only enclosed the backyard. Ms. Czerniak confirmed that if a fence is proposed to enclose only the backyard, approval by the Commission may not be required. She stated that a fence in the area indicated, enclosing the backyard, would have minimal impact on the streetscape. Mr. Daniel confirmed that the existing gate is locked to secure the backyard. Chairman Pairitz asked for any final comments from the Commission, hearing none, he invited a motion. Commissioner Ransom made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the addition and the chimney subject to the following conditions of approval. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 10 He noted that his motion includes continuation of the Commission’s consideration of the landscape, hardscape and fencing plan to allow further review and to allow the petitioner time to respond to the Commission’s comments. The following conditions shall be met prior to the issuance of a building permit. 1. All construction vehicle parking and staging of materials shall occur on the site. 2. Tree and vegetation protective fencing and silt fencing shall be installed consistent with direction from the City’s Certified Arborist and the City Engineer. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Berg and it was unanimously approved by the Commission. COMMERCIAL PETITION 7. A request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving new signage, awnings and doors for Megan Winters at 675 Forest Avenue. Owner: Broadacre Management Tenant: Megan Winters Representative: Annette Carroll Chairman Pairitz asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Ms. Winters introduced the petition noting that she and her business partner are opening a high quality interior design firm at 675 Forest Avenue. She noted that her firm is in the image business and that the interior and exterior space will be of high quality, consistent with the work of the firm. She requested Commission approval of new awnings, signage and planters on the front of the building and on the south elevation. She described the proposed replacement awning noting that she took a great deal of time to select a space in which to open her business and that she made this selection in part due to its association with Howard Van Doren Shaw. She noted that the new awning will retain the general form of the existing awning but will be a different color to update the look of the space and to distinguish her space. She explained that the awning will be affixed to the building in a manner that is more “high style”. She stated that hardware will fasten into the mortar, not into the brick. She pointed out that the existing awning is old and in poor condition. She provided a sample of the proposed awning material and hardware. She noted the aged bronze color of the hardware and the finial and sphere that provide detail. She provided a photo of the full front elevation. She discussed signage proposing that the name of the business be in 4” letters on the valance of the awning. She proposed lettering on the windows “workroom” and “home”, both in French. She stated that there will be no signage on window on the south elevation. She described plans to update the door. She noted that the original Men’s Club doors did not have windows. She stated that historically, the doors would not have a single pane of glass as currently exists. She stated her intent to replace the door with a high quality wood door with lites. She described the zinc planters proposed on the ground, in front of the windows. She explained that the intent of all of the changes is to communicate to her clientele that the firm has elegance similar to Market Square itself. She stated that she and her partner are very excited to open their business in Lake Forest. She stated her intent to bring energy and good design to the Central Business District. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 11 Ms. O’Neill noted that the Historic Preservation Commission reviews changes to signage and awnings in Market Square in cases where the proposed changes are not directly aligned with the approved design guidelines. She provided some history on the use of the building. She stated that the changes proposed are a creative way to update the building while still being respectful of the historic character of the building and Market Square. She stated general support for the various elements of the project however she noted that other entrance doors in Market Square have a single pane, not lites with the exception of Southgate restaurant. Chairman Pairitz noted that the entrance door is a transient part of the building and pointed out the door with lites on the south side of the building. In response to questions from Chairman Pairitz, Ms. Winters confirmed that part of the proposal is to paint the window trim white. Chairman Pairitz noted some concern about the awnings but acknowledged that the Commission has approved awnings of some varying colors in the Central Business District in the past. He noted that the planters are also transient elements. In response to questions from Commissioner Berg, Ms. Winters stated that the windows in the door will be simulated divided lites, double glazed, with two panes of glass and muntins on each side. She confirmed that 2’10” doors will be used. Commissioner Berg noted concern that the door, as constructed, might not appear as anticipated. Ms. Winters confirmed that she is sure that the door will look appropriate noting that she has already had a door made and is pleased with it. Chairman Pairitz invited public comments. Gail Hodges, resident and a member of the Preservation Foundation, noted that she is aware of previous renovation efforts of Market Square. She stated that in the earlier renovation, careful attention was paid to determining appropriate colors and patterns for the paint and the awnings. She noted that considerable research went into the previous renovation and noted John Vinci’s involvement. She pointed out that the shops in market Square are not differentiated by color. She stated that the proposal presented is a good one, but questioned whether a change in color is appropriate for Market Square. She noted that over time, incremental changes do ultimately, over time, change the character of a place. Annette Carroll, partner in the Megan Winters design firm noted that the plans have been reviewed by the State Historic Preservation Agency. She requested approval of the awnings but agreed that the decision on the door and planters could be left up to the City. Chairman Pairitz stated that in his opinion, the awning appears to “fight” with the building. He stated that not all of the awnings necessarily need to be the same color; however he noted that the proposed color does not appear right. He observed that the awnings in Market Square overall are in terrible shape. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 12 Commissioner Berg commented on the planters noting that they are well designed. He observed that the planters are in a rhythm with the buttresses but observed that the planters in front of the windows appear to be overdone. Commissioner Moyer stated support for the divided lite door and admired the energy displayed by the petitioner. He stated that the existing awnings appear to better mimic that energy. He stated concern about the proposed color for the new awnings and stated that the existing awnings work very well with the building. He noted the consistency in every aspect of the façade. He stated that he understands from a marketing perspective, the interest in creating a different appearance, but stated that overall; the change would be a downgrade of the building. He stated that the existing awnings have a spark. Chairman Pairitz explained that there is a rhythm created by the awnings and agreed that the rhythm is lost with the proposed awnings. Commissioner Moyer commented that retaining the existing awnings, with striping would be an improvement over the proposed design. Commissioner Berg noted that the striping on the awnings amplify the other elements of the building. He noted that the business owner’s interest in being distinctive is a challenge at this site. He pointed out that unlike the storefronts in Market Square where Shaw used variety and distinctive elements, this building has consistent elements and reads as a single mass. He stated that the Commission is excited about the new business and he acknowledged that the awnings and door are temporary and could be replaced in the future but noted that this building is very distinctive. Commissioner Ransom noted that after listening to his fellow Commissioners he has a better understanding of the building and the various design elements. He stated support for removal and replacement of the three existing planters under the windows. He stated that initially he sensed that the awnings were light, but perhaps appropriate, but stated that he now has a better understanding of the value of similarity on this particular building. Ms. Winters expressed her disappointment in the Commission’s comments. She stated that the planters are well made and will be an improvement to the building. She stated that she cannot live with the existing awning and needs to differentiate her space from the rest of the building. She noted that she has spent a great deal of money on the interior of the space. She stated that she has tried to be respectful of the City’s regulations and asked the Commission to consider her need to differentiate her business. In response to questions from Chairman Pairitz, Ms. Winters explained that the planters will be spaced to provide a gap between them. Commissioner Berg noted that the elements as proposed go against the building but he also acknowledged that the elements proposed are removable and will not constructed as part of the building. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 13 Commissioner Moyer pointed out that the façade is in the public domain and very photogenic in its present state. Chairman Pairitz explored whether something other than the green as proposed would address the concerns raised. He noted for instance that black awnings might re-enforce the building elements. Commissioner Moyer commented that he has not yet seen an awning solution that in his opinion is better than what currently exists. He stated that visual consistency is important and that the existing solution provides consistency. In response to questions from the Commission, Ms. Czerniak commented that the integrity of Market Square has long been identified by the City Council and various Boards and Commissions as being of critical importance to the community. She stated that as a result, the Commission’s thoughtful consideration of this petition is appropriate. She offered the options of appointing a subcommittee or requiring removal of the awning at the time the business vacates the space for Commission consideration. Chairman Pairitz commented that he does not support approving a solution with a requirement for future removal. He stated that given the importance of this petition, it may be appropriate to give this request further consideration at a meeting where more Commissioners are present. He stated that there may be a range of solutions that could provide the distinction the business owner is looking for while at the same time assuring that the composition works for the entire building. He stated that he is not sure at this point what the best solution is, but stated confidence that there is one that will work. Ms. Winter stated that a determination on the planters and paint cannot be made until an awning is approved. Ms. Carroll noted that this business is bringing something new into the community that needs to be distinguished. She stated that what is proposed is a sophisticated approach. She stated that the awnings must be in before the store opens. Chairman Pairitz reiterated that there may be an acceptable solution that is not a green and white strip awning. Commissioner Berg suggested that the petitioners give consideration on how to make the desired image more compatible with the building as a whole to avoid an unbalanced appearance. He stated that the solution must give respect and regard to the façade. He stated support for appointment of a subcommittee of the Commission to work with the petitioners and staff to explore solutions before the matter is returned to the full Commission. He made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness to approve the painting of the trim, the new door with lites, and the planters based on the findings in the staff report and subject to the following condition of approval. He stated that included in his motion is a continuance of Commission consideration on all aspects of the awnings and referral of this element to a subcommittee of the Commission for review of possible solutions. He stated that a final solution for the awnings and signage should be returned to the full Commission for consideration. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 10, 2011 - Page 14 The following conditions shall be met prior to the issuance of a building permit. 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the petitioner shall provide digital photographic documentation of the complete existing façade and detailed images of the area of request to the City. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ransom and was unanimously approved by the Commission. OTHER ITEMS 8. Opportunity for the public to address the Historic Preservation Commission on non- agenda items. There were no additional comments from members of the public. 9. Additional information from staff. Staff stated that the Commissioners will be polled to determine if a quorum is available for a special meeting in September due to the volume of petitions filed for Commission review. The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Catherine J. Czerniak Director of Community Development