Loading...
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 2016/06/22 Minutes The City of Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission Proceedings of the June 22, 2016 Meeting A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission was held on Wednesday, June 22, 2016, at 6:30 p.m., at the City of Lake Forest City Hall, 220 E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois. Historic Preservation Commissioners present: Chairman Grieve and Commissioners Elizabeth Sperry, Bob Alfe, Susan Athenson, Wells Wheeler and Bill Redfield. Commissioners absent: Carol Gayle City staff present: Kate McManus, Assistant Planner and Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development 1. Introduction of Commissioners and staff, overview of meeting procedures. Chairman Grieve reviewed the meeting procedures followed by the Commission and asked the members of the Commission and staff to introduce themselves. 2. Approval of the minutes of the May 25, 2016 and June 2, 2016 meetings of the Historic Preservation Commission. The minutes of the May 25th and June 2nd Historic Preservation Commission meetings were approved as submitted. 3. Continued consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for alterations and additions to the existing residence located at 540 Pine Lane. Owner: Albert Zoller Representative: Karl Strassburger, designer/builder Vicki Lidstrom, project manager Chairman Grieve asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts, hearing none; he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Strassburger introduced himself and explained that he is working on the project with Leggy Bird Designs. He reviewed the site plan and location of the house noting that the back of the house faces the ravine. He noted that there are 3 areas of work proposed including a shed dormer at the front, a fireplace at the rear, and a shed roofed side entry on the north elevation. He reviewed the various types of windows on the house, existing and proposed. He provided a comparison of the existing and proposed front elevations and explained that the dormers on the front elevation were a later addition and will be removed and replaced with a single shed dormer. He stated that the existing ribbon windows on the front elevation will be removed and replaced with French doors. He stated that existing windows will remain on the south elevation with the exception of a new French door. He called out the proposed gable, Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 2 chimney and large glass windows on the rear elevation . He stated that a door, with a shed roof is proposed to access the office on the north elevation. He noted that the windows throughout the house will be of consistent proportions. He provided a section of the front entrance noting that the front door will align with the shed dormer above. He stated that the existing 4 ½ inch fascia eave line will be extended for the new entry and that the pergola roof is almost flat. He reviewed the proposed materials and color palette. He stated that the existing home is white brick and painted wood. He stated that metal standing seam is proposed for the new roofs and a gray granite stone is now proposed in place of Eden stone. He stated that the stone is limited to the chimneys. Ms. McManus stated that the Commission voted to continue the petition at last month’s meeting and the Commission provided direction to simplify the design, adjust the roof forms to be more consistent with the original design intent and to reconsider the use of stone. She stated that the petitioner responded to the Commission’s comments and a revised plan is presented. She stated that the front entry was further simplified and the stone is now proposed only on the chimneys. She added that a mockup of the stone was provided on site. She noted that a shed dormer is proposed in place of the previously proposed gable above the new entry. She stated that staff requested additional information on how the new front entry with tie into the existing eave. She concluded that the changes are responsive to the Commission’s concerns and that staff is recommending approval of the petition. In response to questions from Commissioner Redfield, Mr. Strassburger stated that he intends to remove the brick chimneys and reconstruct them in stone so thermal expansion should not be a concern. In response to questions from Commissioner Wheeler, Mr. Strassburger clarified that both chimneys will be rebuilt and the existing chimney will be lowered to match the new chimney in height. He stated that the existing front door opening will be filled in with Chicago common brick and the front door will be relocated to the center of the facade. He explained that the proposed French doors are essentially located where the existing door is and that the bathroom will be retained. He agreed that a beam may be needed to support the new overhang over the entry, but emphasized that the fascia line is retained. In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Strassburger explained that the dormers proposed for removal were added in 1998 and that the owner desires a centered entry. He stated that the kitchen windows will be removed and a single dormer will be added over the entry. He stated that the proposed French doors on the front façade provide access to secondary rooms and noted that the front façade will be more symmetrical as a result of the changes. He explained that the existing doors are 6’8 and the existing heights are maintained consistently on all new windows and doors. He noted that the proposed dormer helps to define the entrance and provides light into the interior. He stated that he did not study other Boyd Hill designs but added that there are a variety of window types around the home and the owner desires Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 3 larger expanses of glass. In response to questions from Commissioner Alfe, Mr. Strassburger stated that metal is proposed on the roofs of the new elements because the owner desires a change from the existing textures. In response to questions from Commissioner Sperry, Mr. Strassburger clarified that the stone is proposed only on the chimneys and confirmed that the fountain element, previously indicated on the drawing, was removed. He stated that bluestone is proposed for the walkways and stoops and that no changes are proposed to the south elevation of the house. He explained that 2 new doors were added on the rear elevation and will be 6’8 tall. In response to questions from Commissioner Wheeler, Mr. Strassburger confirmed that the existing front courtyard features an offset walkway with raised lawn beds. He stated that it has not been determined if the raised lawn beds will be removed, but acknowledged that the walkway will be relocated and the character of the raised beds will likely change. Commissioner Wheeler suggested that the raised beds be retained because they are an important feature of the site. In response to a question from Commissioner Athenson, Ms. McManus confirmed that the property is identified as a Contributing Structure to the historic district, but noted that numerous modifications have occurred over time including the garage wing addition and the conversion of the original garage to living space. She reiterated that the hipped dormers on the front elevation were also a later addition . She stated that she is unsure whether the house would be identified as a Contributing Structure if the historic survey were completed today. Hearing no further questions from the Commission, Chairman Grieve invited public comment. Art Miller, 169 Wildwood Road and a representative of the Preservation Foundation, stated that the proposed revisions do not preserve the contributing status of the structure. He stated that the front entry should be further refined. He acknowledged the improvements made to the roof pitches since the earlier presentation. In response to public testimony, Mr. Strassburger noted that the removal of the 2 dormers is an improvement to the structure and restores the architectural integrity of the original house. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Grieve invited final comments from the Commission. Commissioner Sperry noted that the revisions made since the last meeting achieve a Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 4 design that is sensitive to the original architecture and noted that the petitioner has addressed the Commission’s comments. She acknowledged that the home was significantly altered in the past and stated that she is leaning toward supporting the petition. Commissioner Alfe stated that the revisions are responsive to the Commission’s earlier comments and expressed support for the petition. Commissioner Athenson stated that the home is designed by a prominent architect and the original design intent should be retained. She requested that the renovation be designed to be more sensitive to the original design and stated that she is not in favor of the petition. She noted that the home’s value lies in the Boyd Hill design and the proposed changes will destroy its historic significance. Commissioner Wheeler stated that the revised plans are an improvement over the previous plan presented to the Commission. He stated however that the raised lawn bed should be retained as an important design element. He acknowledged that houses change over time and that some changes are appropriate to meet the owner’s needs. Commissioner Redfield agreed with Commissioner Wheeler’s comments and stated support for the petition. Chairman Grieve thanked the petitioner for the materials provided and for the onsite mockup of the stone. He noted that the streetscape impact of the house is minimal. He stated however that the spirit of the original design will be changed with the proposed changes. He stated that the removal of the dormers on the front is a great improvement and added that he would be surprised if the home would be deemed a Contributing Structure as is stands today. He noted that the rear elevation will change significantly, but acknowledged that it will have limited visibility from off of the site. He noted that due to the large expanses of glass proposed, there may be off site light impacts which may be a concern. He noted that the revisions to the front entry are an improvement over the previous plan presented to the Commission. He stated that limiting the stone to the chimneys is more appropriate than the more extensive use previously proposed. He stated that the proposed changes may bring the home closer to a Contributing Structure with the removal of the existing dormers. He suggested reducing the height of the shed dormer on the front elevation noting that it appears too dominant. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Grieve invited a motion. Commissioner Wheeler made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness for alterations and additions to the existing residence based on the findings detailed in the staff report and incorporating the testimony and Commission’s deliberations as additional findings. He noted that the approval is subject to the following conditions. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 5 1. Plans submitted for permit must reflect the project as presented to the Commission. If any modifications are proposed in response to Commission direction and/or as a result of design development, plans clearly detailing the areas of change must be submitted at the time of submission for permit, along with the plans originally presented to the Commission, and will be subject to review by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, to verify that the plans are consistent with the intent of the Commission and the approvals granted. a. High quality, natural materials should be used consistently on all elevation and should be clearly indicated on the plans submitted for permit. 2. Prior to removal of the non-original dormers, or any other work on the house, comprehensive photo documentation of the existing residence must be provided to the City in a digital form determined to be satisfactory by the City. The purpose of the documentation is to preserve an historic record of the property in both the City and in the Lake Forest-Lake Bluff Historical Society archives. 3. Details of exterior lighting, if any is proposed, shall be submitted with the plans submitted for permit. All fixtures shall direct light downward and the source of the light shall be fully shielded from view. 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a materials staging and construction vehicle parking plan must be submitted to the City for review and will be subject to City approval in an effort to minimize and manage impacts on the neighborhood during construction and to minimize impacts on trees intended for preservation. The road must remain passable at all times. 5. This project must abide by all of the terms, conditions, restrictions, and provisions of The City of Lake Forest City Code, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, rules, and regulations. Commissioner Alfe seconded the motion and the Commission voted 5 to 1 to approve the petition with Commissioner Athenson voting nay. 4. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the existing single family residence and attached garage and approving a replacement residence, attached garage, site plan and conceptual landscape plan. Owners: Doug and Mary Donovan Representative: Rick Swanson, architect Chairman Grieve asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts, hearing none; he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Swanson reviewed the location of the residence within the historic district and explained that the existing residence was constructed in 1963 and lacks the architectural quality of neighboring homes. He noted that the house has structural issues due to water damage and seepage. He stated that the home has no Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 6 architectural pedigree that would support preservation and explained that a number of diseased trees were previously removed for the site. He provided images of the property and house and stated that the home is typical of spec houses from the 1960s with a front loaded garage and misaligned windows. He reviewed the neighboring homes and explained that the adjacent coach house to the west was recently approved for demolition. He explained that the petitioners are seeking a variance from the front yard setback to locate the new house in conformance with the established front yard setback in the neighborhood. He noted that the driveway access will be improved and noted that the circular drive will align with the front porch. He stated that the grade of the site will remain the same and will allow a stepped porch at the front of the house which is consistent with other houses on the street. He reviewed the proposed exterior materials: a cedar shingle roof, wood siding with a white wash stain, blue shutters, off white trim and an ashlar stone. He added that the stone is consistent with the shingle style. He noted that a small secondary entry is proposed at the garage. He stated that the story and a half appearance is appropriate for the style and noted that the proposed residence complies with building scale requirements. He stated that the height of the residence is consistent with the existing house, but stated that the depth of the house will increase. He reviewed the landscape plan noting that the driveway will be pavers and that additional plantings will soften the driveway. He added that evergreens will be added to provide year round screening of the driveway. Ms. McManus stated that a historic resource evaluation and structural evaluation were submitted in support of the demolition . She noted that the existing house is non- contributing to the historic district and was built as a spec house . She stated that the proposed siting of the replacement structure will require a zoning variance as there is an existing 80 foot setback on the plat of subdivision and the house will encroach in to the setback. She added that the style and materials of the home are appropriate for the neighborhood. She noted that staff recommends that consideration be given to using copper for the gutters and downspouts. In response to questions from Commissioner Sperry, Mr. Swanson stated that he agreed to the material changes recommended by staff for the gutters and downspouts. He clarified that the landscape plan will be refined moving forward. He noted that a zoning variance is needed to bring the new house into alignment with the house to the east. In response to a question from Commissioner Sperry, Ms. McManus explained that the plat of subdivision indicates a special 80 foot front yard setback for this property, in excess of the standard setback for the R1 zoning district. In response to questions from Commissioner Alfe, Mr. Swanson confirmed that the driveway turnaround area will require the removal of some dead or dying trees. He stated that an older tree plan was submitted to staff and may have included some trees that have since been removed. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 7 In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Donovan explained that he has been working for a long time to determine how best to update the existing home due to the extent of structural issues. In response to questions from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Swanson stated that he is open to making adjustments based on the Commission’s input, but stated that it is important that the house be consistent with the selected architectural style. He noted that the Tuscan columns and windows are true to the Shingle Style and that in his opinion, removing the Palladian window will not affect the overall design. He added that he is open to ideas and would like the house to fit well into the neighborhood and streetscape. In response to questions from Commissioner Wheeler, Ms. Czerniak stated that the Code does not dictate a style, only that the design should be consistent with a single style. Commissioner Wheeler stated that there are simpler versions of the Shingle style and added that in his opinion, there are too many elements on the house as proposed. He complimented the floor plan, but suggested that the Pall adian window and detailing be simplified. Commissioner Redfield noted that there are different types of dormers used and agreed that the design appears overly busy. Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Grieve invited public comment. Art Miller, 169 Wildwood Road, stated that the existing residence is quiet and sits next to City owned open space. He noted that the neighboring homes are very historic and significant and suggested that the proposed home should have simpler roof forms and simpler organization. He suggested that the garage doors should be screened from properties to the west and that thinner porch columns should be considered. He also suggested subtle paint colors to further simplify the design. Marian Bradley, 403 E. Westminster, expressed concerns about drainage noting that currently, there is puddling of water in the yards in the area. She noted that there is a large amount of pavement proposed with the turnaround and driveways and requested more information on the potential drainage impacts. Hearing no further public comments, Chairman Grieve invited a response to public testimony from staff. Ms. Czerniak stated that the City Code requires that drainage plans take into account the grade of properties within 50 feet of the property line. She stated that staff will make the City Engineer aware of the neighbor’s concerns. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 8 Chairman Grieve invited a response to public testimony from the petitioner. Mr. Swanson assured the neighbor that the grading and drainage plan for the new house will be reviewed by the City Engineer to assure that there are no off site impacts. Chairman Grieve invited final comments from the Commission. Commissioner Sperry stated that narrowing the pillars may be helpful to further simply the design. In response to questions from Commissioner Sperry, Mr. Swanson noted that the stone will be a fieldstone and he confirmed that the color rendering accurately reflects the color palette. He clarified that there is a color contrast between the shingles and stone which will be a soft buff color with warm tones. He stated that the ashlar pattern proposed for the stone is consistent with the selected architectural style and noted that the shingles will be washed with a stain. He noted that the stone is proposed mainly around the base of the house and he acknowledged that there may be greater color contrast than what is depicted in the rendering. Commissioner Alfe noted that the house, once constructed, will not be as complex as it appears in the elevations however, he requested simplification of the columns. Commissioner Athenson stated that she is comfortable with the demolition request and the proposed siting of the new structure which may provide more separation from the neighbor and may be beneficial for drainage. She stated that the selected style is appropriate and that although the proposed elements are appropriate for the style, they may not be appropriate for the neighborhood. She stated that other similar houses are much simpler and suggested simplifying the front entry roof form and windows. She noted that the repeating mullions on the front windows are very formal and the front entry detail looks heavy. She added that the front porch railing is complicated and that the tall narrow window to the right of the bay window looks contemporary. She suggested that the eyebrow window muntins be simplified and that the stone be used only on the bottom of the house. She noted that screening the garage doors will be important and noted that the other elevations are much simpler than the front elevation. Commissioner Wheeler expressed support for the demolition and agreed that the front elevation is busy and could benefit from some simplification. He suggested removing the flower boxes and making the window casings less prominent. Commissioner Redfield stated that there are too many design elements. He stated that he is generally supportive of the petition subject to further simplification. In response to a question from Chairman Grieve, Mr. Swanson stated that he is open to the suggestions offered by the Commission, but is concerned about staying true to the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 9 selected style. He suggested that refinements, based on the Commission’s comments, could be resolved by working with staff to allow the petition to move forward. In response to a question from Commissioner Redfield, Mr. Swanson agreed that there is more impervious surface than exists on the site today. He stated that he will work closely with the project engineer and City staff to assure that drainage is properly addressed. He added that landscaping on the site will be enhanced. Chairman Grieve noted that there appears to be a consensus in support of the demolition. He stated that landscaping will be important, particularly as it relates to grading and drainage and to assure that the encroachment into the front yard setback is appropriate for the streetscape. He noted that the lot is located adjacent to both non-contributing structures and significant historic properties. He stated that, in his opinion, the selected style is appropriate but noted that there is consensus among the Commissioners that the design is overly busy. He suggested consideration be given to adding a patina to the materials if possible, so that the house does not stick out on the street. Commissioner Sperry stated that in her opinion, the new home will be very successful with some further simplification. Commissioner Athenson stated that she would be more comfortable with the project, with refinements as discussed by the Commission and have it return to the Commission noting that it could be put on a Consent Agenda at the start of the next meeting. Chairman Grieve offered that conditions can be added to the motion to ensure that the design is simplified. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Grieve invited a motion. Commissioner Wheeler made a motion to approve the demolition of the existing residence. The motioned was seconded by Commissioner Alfe and the motion was approved by a vote of 6 to 0. Commissioner Wheeler made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving a new single family residence, site plan and preliminary landscape plan for the property located at 373 E. Westminster based on the findings detailed in the staff report and incorporating the testimony and the Commission’s deliberations as additional findings. He noted that the approval is subject to the following conditions. 1. Plans submitted for permit must reflect the project as presented to the Commission with the modifications detailed below. If any further modifications are proposed, plans detailing the areas of change must be submitted and will be subject to review by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, to verify that the plans are consistent with the intent of the Commission and the approvals granted. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 10 a. High quality, natural materials shall be used on the residence. b. Materials shall be treated to reflect a patina. c. The front façade shall be further simplified as discussed by the Commission. 2. Details of exterior lighting shall be submitted with the pl ans submitted for permit. All fixtures shall direct light downward and the source of the light shall be fully shielded from view. 3. The existing grades on the site must be maintained to the extent possible with only changes necessary to accommodate proper drainage and good engineering practices. The height of the house, in combination with any grade change, must conform to the permitted overall height. 4. Tree Removal Plan, Tree Survey, Tree Protection Plan – Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the City’s Certified Arborist will review these materials and confirm the following: a. Tree removal is limited to that necessary for construction and to trees in poor condition elsewhere on the site. b. Trees worthy of and able to be preserved are properly protected during construction and if appropriate, treated pre and post construction to increase the chances of survival. c. Replacement tree inches are properly calculated and that the required replacement is provided on site or, if replacement plantings cannot be accomplished on the site consistent with good forestry practices as determined by the City Arborist, payment in lieu of onsite plantings may be accepted by the City to support parkway plantings in the general vicinity of the project. Payment for any inches not planted on the site must be received by the City prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 5. Landscape Plan – Prior to a framing inspection, a final landscape plan, drawn on the approved grading plan, must be submitted for review and will be subject to approval by the City’s Certified Arborist. 6. Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the site must be planted consistent with the approved final landscape plan. If, due to the time of year, planting is not possible, a bond in the am ount of 110% of materials and labor must be posted with the City to assure that the plantings are completed within 30 days after the start of the next planting season as determined by the City. 7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a materials staging and construction vehicle parking plan must be submitted to the City for review and will be subject to City approval. All construction vehicles should be parked on the site or in the public parking lots nearby. No on street parking is permitted due to the narrowness of the street and the proximity to the Central Business District. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 11 8. Prior to demolition, comprehensive photo documentation of the residence, the overall property and the streetscape must be provided to the City in a digital form determined to be satisfactory by the City. The purpose of the documentation is to preserve an historic record of the property in both the City and in the Lake Forest-Lake Bluff Historical Society archives. 9. Until a permit is obtained for demolition of the house and until demolition activity is diligently being pursued, the property and yard must be maintained in good condition consistent with the requirements of the Code. 10. Demolition activity must begin within 30 days of installation of construction and site protection fencing and demolition activity must be continuously pursued to completion to minimize disruption to the neighborhood. 11. This project must abide by all of the terms, conditions, restrictions, and provisions of The City of Lake Forest City Code and all other applicable codes, ordinances, rules and regulations. Commissioner Sperry seconded the motion and the Commission voted 6 to 0 to approve the petition. 5. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a partial demolition and rear and side additions to the existing residence located at 70 W. Laurel Avenue. Owners: Dan and Mary Dolan Representative: Peter Witmer, architect Chairman Grieve asked the Commission for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts, hearing none; he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Witmer stated that the project is a renovation of a simple farmhouse style home that has been added onto and modified over the years including the conversion of the garage to living space. He noted that the house is simple and wings are proposed on each side. He reviewed the site plan noting the long driveway and explained that the lot was subdivided from the land to the east. He stated that the proposed modifications provide for a first floor master bedroom, sun room and family room. He noted that the center portion of the house is the highest ridge line and the additions are stepped down creating a balanced façade. He stated that the rear elevation consists of a screened porch and fireplace and the mudroom elevation is an improvement to the existing elevation in that area. He noted that a casual side entrance porch is proposed near the driveway. He added that the south elevation is well screened from Laurel Avenue and stated that the materials will match the existing house. Ms. McManus stated that the petition is a request for approval of a partial demolition and substantial additions to the existing residence. She noted that the home is not Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 12 identified as a Contributing Structure in the historic district and noted that the garage wing, constructed in 1971, and a sunroom, are proposed for demolition. She added that the demolition criteria appear to be met and that the site is minimally visible from the street due to an existing stockade fence. She stated that staff requested information and clarification on the side porch and on the existing and proposed window materials and noted that the proposed house is well under the allowable square footage. In response to questions from staff, Mr. Witmer clarified that the windows are clad and the muntins will match existing. He explained that there are a variety of windows on the existing house. He noted that the porch materials consist of 6 x 6 wrapped posts and a stockade railing. He added that the vents do not match the existing. Commissioner Redfield stated that the proposed design is appropriate for the neighborhood. Commissioner Athenson noted that the Griffiths brothers were the grandsons of the Atteridges. In response to questions from the Commission, Mr. Witmer explained that precast concrete was used for the decking likely for fire proofing and noted that the home is solidly built. In response to a question from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. Witmer stated that the windows are smaller over the kitchen counter and laundry room on the front elevation but stated that adjustments can be considered to achieve greater consistency with the other windows. In response to questions from Commissioner Alfe, Mr. Witmer stated that he eliminated one type of dormer and acknowledged that the other existing dormers are two different sizes. He clarified that the thin members on the rear sunroom are structural members with a vertical wood piece to separate the screens. In response to a question from Chairman Grieve, Mr. Witmer stated that the screen material extends to the gable on the sunroom in order to take advantage of the views to the west and allow light into the family room. He explained that using glass panels may look too contemporary and he clarified that the room will have radiant heat. Hearing no further questions, Chairman Grieve invited public testimony. Art Miller, 169 Wildwood Road and a representative of the Preservation Foundation, stated that the proposed wings change the proportions of the front façade and he suggested making the entry more prominent. He suggested using a segmental arch over the laundry room window and that the sunroom roof height be lowered so as not to compete with the main form of the house. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 13 Commissioner Sperry stated that the additions are sound and simple and acknowledged that the home has some functional challenges. She suggested that the dormer sizes be adjusted, but stated that she is in favor of the petition. Commissioner Alfe expressed support for the petition, but agreed with the Foundation’s concerns regarding the front porch. Commissioner Athenson requested that the front casement windows be changed to double hung windows and added that she is intrigued by the Foundation’s suggestions regarding the front entrance. She expressed concern that the sunroom may not be functional and asked that consideration be given to putting in glass panels and reducing the size of the room. Commissioner Wheeler agreed with the points made about the front entrance. He stated that the entry may appear more pronounced in reality because the additions are setback. He stated that he has no concerns with the partial demolition. Commissioner Redfield agreed that the front windows on the addition should be consistent with the existing windows. Chairman Grieve noted that the additions are complementary and the changes improve the later modifications. He summarized the Commission’s concerns including making the windows more consistent throughout and ensuring that the sunroom is functional. He noted that the wings change the massing of the structure and that repainting the entry may help to make it stand out more. He stated that he is comfortable with the petition. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Grieve invited a motion. Commissioner Wheeler made a motion to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for a partial demolition and additions based on the findings detailed in the staff report and incorporating the testimony and the Commission’s deliberations as additional findings. He noted that the approval is subject to the following conditions. 1. Plans submitted for permit must reflect the project as presented to the Commission with the modifications detailed below. If any further modifications are proposed in response to Commission direction and/or as a result of design development, plans clearly detailing the areas of change must be submitted at the time of submission for permit, along with the plans originally presented to the Commission, and will be subject to review by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, to verify that the plans are consistent with the intent of the Commission and the approvals granted. a. The windows located in the mudroom and kitchen shall be adjusted to be more consistent with the existing windows. b. Consideration shall be given to reducing the scale of the rear screen porch and adjusting the expanse of the screens. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 14 c. Consideration shall be given to further emphasizing the front entry. 2. Prior to removal of the non-original addition, comprehensive photo documentation of the existing residence must be provided to the City in a digital form determined to be satisfactory by the City. The purpose of the documentation is to preserve an historic record of the property in both the City and in the Lake Forest-Lake Bluff Historical Society archives. 3. Tree Protection Plan – Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a plan to protect trees during construction must be submitted and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist. 4. Details of exterior lighting, if any is proposed, shall be submitted with the plans submitted for permit. All fixtures shall direct light downward and the source of the light shall be shielded from view. 5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a materials staging and construction vehicle parking plan must be submitted to the City for review and will be subject to City approval in an effort to minimize and manage impacts on the neighborhood during construction and to minimize impacts on trees intended for preservation. No on street parking is permitted due to the narrowness of the street and proximity to the intersection. 6. This project must abide by all of the terms, conditions, restrictions, and provisions of The City of Lake Forest City Code, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, rules, and regulations. Commissioner Sperry seconded the motion and the Commission voted 6 to 0 to approve the petition. 6. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a garage addition, façade modifications and window replacements at the residence located at 470 College Road. A building scale variance is also requested. Owners: Doug and Stacy Marquis Representative: Ronald McCormack, architect Mr. McCormack introduced himself and the owners and reviewed the existing and proposed site plans. He noted that the existing driveway and garage are difficult to use and noted that the existing garage is not accessible from the interior of the house. He stated that a new 2 car garage is proposed, setback from the face of the existing garage, to provide an adequate back out distance. He stated that additions to front and side of the residence are also proposed including a full width porch and office addition. He explained that, in lieu of a rear addition to provide a functional garage space, a front loaded garage was considered, but rejected. He reviewed the existing footprint of the house and noted the shallow existing garage. He stated that the screen porch, on the rear of the home, will be expanded and described the proposed Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 15 front porch noting that a copper roof is proposed over the front porch. He stated that little change is proposed to the second floor of the house, but noted that a sleeping porch will be converted to a laundry and closet area. He explained that the roof line is defined by hip roofs and that the original home was constructed in 1924 with prairie influences. He stated that it is a very simple structure with an entry porch tacked on. He added that the shingles on the exterior were likely added later. He noted that the east elevation consists of a garage addition at the rear of the house, adjacent to the existing garage. He stated that the garage doors will not be visible from the street and will be set back from the neighboring property. He explained that the grade north of the house, in the back yard, drops in grade making it difficult to push the garage back further on the lot. He stated that the office addition and porch roof connect and that the owners would like to lighten the color of the home as presented in the colored rendering. He stated that copper is proposed on the additions because of the low roof pitch and explained that the continuous porch will provide the opportunity to use the front yard. He added that French doors are proposed on the front façade and a bay window is proposed on the library. He stated that wood windows will be replaced with aluminum clad windows. He stated that in his opinion, the house is a Four Square style and he provided historic examples of the style noting that a front porch is appropriate for that style. He stated that the proposed additions will require a building scale variance. Ms. McManus stated that a 2 car garage is proposed on the rear elevation, a full width porch is proposed on the front and an office and screen porch is proposed on the west elevation. She added that other modifications include painting the exterior, changes to the driveway, a rear deck and landscaping. She stated that the proposed additions require a building scale variance of 554 square feet and stated that the standards for a building scale variance appear to be met. She noted that the full width front porch as proposed does not appear to be fully consistent with the character of the home. She requested Commission input on that aspect of the project. She stated that staff recommends consideration be given to retaining the front windows instead of replacing them with French doors. In response to questions from Commissioner Wheeler, Mr. McCormack confirmed that the oak tree in the front yard is damaged and will be removed. Commissioner Wheeler noted that the French doors do not appear to be necessary and traditional windows may provide more opportunity for furnishings on front porch. Commissioner Athenson stated that the front porch as proposed appears to be related to the Four Square and stated that the porch should be designed in a manner consistent with the home’s existing style. She noted that the addition of the French doors and sidelights are not consistent with the character of the house. In response to comments from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. McCormack stated that the sidelights are existing, but agreed that the design of the glass could be simplified. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 16 He stated that the French doors can be reconsidered. He stated that a porch railing is not necessary and would block views of the front yard. In response to a question from Commissioner Athenson, Ms. Czerniak confirmed that increasing the width of the porch could add to the magnitude of the variance that is needed. In response to a question from Commissioner Athenson, Mr. McCormack explained that there is no other logical place for the office other than in the front corner of the house. In response to questions from Commissioner Alfe, Mr. McCormack stated that there is little space for plantings along the property line near the garage. He confirmed that a retaining wall will be needed. He noted that the space is tight but commented that a fence may be able to be added to provide some screening from the garage doors. He confirmed that the center window on the 2nd floor is at a different line than the others and confirmed that there is a safety railing behind the screen porch which is visible on the elevation. In response to questions from Commissioner Sperry, Mr. McCormack stated that historically, the porch roof may have been tin. He stated that copper will patina and blend in quickly with the rest of the house. Commissioner Sperry stated that some of the proposed elements are inconsistent with the simplicity of the home. She requested that consideration be given to consistent use of shutters or eliminating them altogether. In response to questions from Chairman Grieve, Mr. McCormack stated that the color scheme will change, but the materials will remain the same. He noted that the cedar shingles will be cleaned and stained. He stated that the office addition as proposed has a wood bay that extends foot from the plane of the wall , but remains under the roof line. He confirmed that the curved bay on the side elevation is existing. In response to a question from Chairman Grieve, Ms. Czerniak explained that periodically, the City’s historic survey is updated and at that time, permit records for the properties are reviewed and any alterations that were made are considered. She stated that later modifications, the age and the style of the house are taken into account when determining whether a building should be identified as a Contributing Structure. She reminded the Commission that Susan Benjamin, a historic consultant, explained at a previous meeting that structures over 50 years old are often identified as Contributing to assure that careful consideration is given when changes are proposed, however, changes are still possible. Hearing no further questions from the Commission, Chairman Grieve invited public testimony. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 17 Art Miller, 169 Wildwood Road, stated that the project architect for this petition is known for his porch designs and questioned whether the Contributing status of the structure will be lost with the proposed changes. He noted that the house is quiet and the additions are proposed to the front façade. He acknowledged that there is a large front yard, but stated that the massing of the front façade should be retained. He stated that the house is deep on a narrow lot and the proposed changes appear bulky from the front view. He requested that consideration be given to adding a terrace and an awning to reduce the appearance of mass. Hearing no further public testimony, Chairman Grieve invited final comments from the Commission. Commissioner Wheeler noted that the general appearance of the house will change with the proposed project but acknowledged that homes evolve over time. He stated that he is not supportive of the sidelights as detailed and noted that the shutters were likely added to the house at some point and are in disrepair. He stated that the porch is inviting. He pointed out that the basement windows on the south elevation will be covered by porch. He stated that he is generally in favor of the petition because it is a successful arrangement of spaces and he stated support for the building scale overage. Commissioner Athenson stated that the Contributing status of the house should be retained. She expressed concern that too much detailing is proposed which does not match the character of the house. She noted that a 6 foot wide porch is not very functional and that the continuous porch roof appears awkward. She suggested breaking up the expanse of roof and stepping the office addition back from the porch. She requested that alternate locations for the office be considered and that the French doors be eliminated from the front façade. She stated that the copper roof is unnecessary and that asphalt or cedar shingles should be considered. She stated that the garage location is not ideal and stated that she has some concerns about whether the criteria for a building scale variance are met. She suggested that a different garage door style be used. Commissioner Alfe expressed support for the changes to the front of the house. He noted that the shutters are not appropriately sized. He stated support for the copper roof. In response to a question from Commissioner Alfe, Mr. McCorm ack stated that 8 foot garage doors are needed for larger vehicles. He explained that the different door sizes will not be obvious because of the grade change. Commissioner Sperry stated that the new garage is appropriately located and acknowledged that the petitioner explored other alternatives. She expressed concern about the modifications proposed to the front façade and requested that the shutters be removed, the sidelights be simplified and that the copper roof be reconsidered. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 18 Chairman Grieve stated that the length of the porch is a concern and agreed that the depth of porch as proposed makes the porch not very functional. In response to the Commission’s comments, Mr. McCormack agreed that the side lights as designed are too formal and that the shutters and French doors can be eliminated. He stated that the options for locating the office addition are very limited. He agreed to eliminate the window bay from the office. He added that he agrees that the porch depth should be increased. In response to a question from Alfe, Mr. McCormack agreed to study a design in which the porch roof extends beyond the study. Chairman Grieve stated that the petition is challenging because it changes the character of the home significantly from a cottage or lake house to a traditional farm house. He noted that the proposed color change will impact the character greatly as well. He noted that the historic survey identifies the structure as Colonial Revival, a style in which a front porch is typically absent. He added that the house is located in a very historic area and is a Contributing Structure to the historic district. He stated that the proposed changes, including the French doors and bay window panels are too modern in appearance and not appropriate for a 1920s house. He requested that the addition be softened and the porch roof be broken up. He stated that the building scale variance is appropriate and reasonable, but acknowledged that there are some limitations to historic properties. Commissioner Athenson noted that there are several unresolved issues and a continuance may be appropriate. Mr. McCormack stated that the owners are anxious to move the petition forward and asked for approval of the petition with the ability to changes with staff. In response to a question from Commissioner Sperry, Ms. Czerniak stated that based on the Commission’s discussion, there appear to be a number of areas of concern and that a continuance may be appropriate. She summarized that in general, the Commission appears to be supportive of the garage addition. Hearing no further comments from the Commission, Chairman Grieve invited a motion. Commissioner Athenson made a motion to continue the petition to allow the petitioner to revise the plans in response to the comments and concerns offered by the Commission. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sperry and the Commission voted 5 to 1 to continue the petition with Commissioner Wheeler voting nay. OTHER ITEMS 7. Opportunity for the public to address the Historic Preservation Commission on non- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes June 22, 2016 - Page 19 agenda items. There were no additional public comments. 8. Additional information from staff. The meeting was adjourned at 9:41 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kate McManus Assistant Planner