BUILDING REVIEW BOARD 2017/05/03 Minutes
Page 1 of 13
May 3, 2017
The City of Lake Forest
Building Review Board
Proceedings of May 3, 2017 Meeting
A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Building Review Board was held on
Wednesday, May 3rd, 2017 at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 220
E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois.
Building Review Board members present: Chairman Ted Notz and Board
members: Jim Diamond, Ross Friedman, Robert Reda, Mike Bleck and Fred Moyer
Building Review Board members absent: Peter Dunne
Staff present: Kate McManus, Assistant Planner and Catherine Czerniak, Director
of Community Development
1. Introduction of Board members and staff, overview of meeting procedures –
Chairman Notz
Chairman Notz reviewed the role of the Building Review Board and the meeting
procedures followed by the Board. He asked the members of the Board and staff
to introduce themselves.
2. Consideration of the minutes of the April 5th, 2017 meeting of the Building
Review Board.
The April 5th meeting minutes were approved as submitted.
3. Continued consideration of a request for revisions to a previously approved
plan for 20 N. Western Avenue. (Partial demolition, alterations, additions)
Owners: Zac and Megan Zarling
Representatives: Michael Hrusovsky, designer
Adam Lyons, architect
Chairman Notz asked the Board for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest.
Board member Friedman stated that he had a conversation with the petitioner’s
representative, but stated that the conversation will not affect his ability to review
the petition impartially.
Chairman Notz invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Mr. Hrusovsky introduced the owners and stated that they are requesting
approval of changes to the previous approved plans for modifications to the
Page 2 of 13
May 3, 2017
existing house. He reviewed the history of the property and provided background
on the original owner. He stated that after the prior Board’s approval, and once
construction of the approved addition got underway, unanticipated structural
issues were encountered with the rear portion of the house. He stated that he
initially believed that the rear wing was newer than the original house but noted
that it may actually predate the rest of the house. He stated that there may be a
future addition on the rear of the house, but stated that no new construction at
the rear of the home is proposed at this time. He stated that the owners are
seeking approval of the removal of the existing rear wing. He stated that the
existing house, without the rear addition will be a fully functioning house. He
noted that a kitchen is proposed in what was previously the dining room and
noted that a rear door and small rear porch are proposed on the west elevation
where the rear wing is currently located. He noted that there are no changes
proposed to the previously approved second floor addition. He reviewed the
elevations and noted that no changes are proposed to the previously approved
front elevation. He stated that new windows are proposed on the rear elevation
where the one story wing will be removed. He stated that the exterior materials
will match the existing house and he provided a color rendering of the rear
elevation with the rear wing removed.
Ms. McManus stated that the Board continued consideration of this petition to get
clarification on the scope of the work proposed as part of this project. She stated
that the request now before the Board is for approval of a partial demolition
consisting of the removal of a rear, one story wing and approval of minor
modifications to the rear elevation to enclose the gap that will be left by the
removal of the rear addition. She stated that staff is recommending approval of
the petition as presented.
In response to questions from Board member Diamond, Mr. Hrusovsky stated that
since the last meeting, debris was removed from the yard. He agreed that the
floor plans as presented incorrectly number the bedrooms and stated that there
are 3 bedrooms in the home.
Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Notz invited public
comment. Hearing none, he invited final comments from the Board. Hearing no
further comments from the Board, he invited a motion.
Board member Reda made a motion to recommend approval of the petition based on
the findings detailed in the staff report which document that the plans as presented
and as modified by the recommended conditions of approval, meet the design
standards and requirements of the City Code as detailed in this staff report. Approval is
recommended subject to the following conditions:
Conditions of Approval
Page 3 of 13
May 3, 2017
1. Plans must be submitted consistent with the parameters outlined below and
consistent with other applicable Code requirements. If modifications are
made to the plans presented to the Board, either in response to Board
direction, or as the result of final design development, the modifications shall
be clearly called out on the plans and a copy of the plans that were
provided to the Board shall be attached to the revised plans, with changes
highlighted, for comparison purposes. Staff is directed to review any
changes, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, to determine
whether the modifications are in conformance with the Board’s direction
and approval prior to the issuance of any permits.
a. Plans submitted for permit shall be clearly detailed, drawn and stamped by
a licensed architect.
b. The exterior materials and detailing shall be consistent with the plans as
originally presented to the Board for approval. All siding, trim and windows
shall be wood consistent with the representations made to the Board.
2. A timeline for construction shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance
of approval of the revised plans to document that the project will be
completed, and a Certificate of Occupancy obtained in compliance with the
Code requirements.
3. Work must proceed in full accordance with the approved plans. If
unanticipated conditions are found at the site, work must be stopped and
revised plans and the necessary supporting documentation deemed
necessary by the Director of Community Development must be submitted for
review and will be subject to approval prior to work proceeding.
4. A lighting plan, including specifications on all exterior fixtures proposed, shall
be submitted and must be in full compliance with the City Lighting Guidelines.
Fixtures shall direct light down and all light sources shall be screened from view.
The dark sky, right to night concept shall be followed. Exterior lights shall be
turned off by 11 p.m.
5. No modification to the grade or topography of the property is permitted unless
and until a final grading and drainage plan is approved by the City Engineer.
6. Tree protection fencing as required by the City Arborist must be installed and
remain in a secure and upright position throughout construction and until the
City Arborist authorizes removal of the fence.
7. Prior to allowing work to proceed at the site, an updated materials staging
and construction vehicle parking plan must be submitted to the City for review
Page 4 of 13
May 3, 2017
and will be subject to City approval in an effort to minimize and manage visual
impacts and congestion on the neighborhood during construction and
minimize impacts on trees intended for preservation. Due to the location of
the property near an at grade railroad crossing, and given the narrowness of
the Western Avenue roadway, no on street parking or staging of construction
vehicles or contractor vehicles are permitted.
8. 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.
The motion was seconded by Board member Friedman and passed by a vote of 6
– 0.
4. Continued consideration of a request for approval of an addition to the
Performing Arts Center at Lake Forest Country Day School and related
alterations. The property is located at 145 S. Green Bay Road.
Owner: Lake Forest Country Day School
Representative: Doug Pasma, architect
Chairman Notz asked the Board for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest.
Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Mr. Pasma stated that he was before the Board in December, 2016 and received
approval for modifications to the south wing, the Athletic Center of the Lake
Forest Country Day School , and direction on modifications proposed to the north
wing of the school, the Performing Arts Center (the PAC). He provided a massing
model and pointed out the areas where modifications were made in response to
comments at the last meeting. He stated that the intent of the changes is to
create more harmony between the existing elements of the PAC and the
proposed additions and to improve the appearance of the Green Bay Road
streetscape and the front of the school overall . He stated that the existing
covered walkways that extend between the wings of the school will be enclosed.
He stated that the interior spaces of the PAC will be reworked and a lobby and
seating area will be added. He stated that the lobby has a triangular footprint
and that large windows are proposed on the west façade of the PAC to relate to
the previously approved changes to the gymnasium. He noted that his team
reviewed the minutes from the previous Board meeting and identified the key
points raised by the Board. He stated that the main concerns included the form
and details of the main entrance to the PAC, the existing intense exterior lighting
on the campus and its offsite impacts, the relationship of the proposed windows
on the west elevations of the PAC and the Athletic Center, and the massing and
rooflines of the proposed additions to the PAC. He provided an image of the
existing PAC entrance and roof line and explained that the plans were modified
Page 5 of 13
May 3, 2017
to retain the existing gable and to step back the taller addition from the existing
plane of the building. He provided a comparison of the previous proposal and
the revised proposal. He noted that there was discussion regarding the eave
detail and the elliptical window and noted that the eave detail was enhanced.
He stated that the window element was retained noting that it breaks up the
expanse of wall on the south facing elevation of the PAC. He stated that a metal
material is now proposed for the exterior wall of the addition noting that it is a rain
screen product, with a vertical shingle effect, in a bronze tone. He stated that the
eave detail consists of a crown mold and a drip edge and is identical to the
detail at the existing main entrance. He described the gutters. He stated that the
height of the projecting roof element on the addition was reduced by 2 feet to
minimize visibility from off of the campus. He stated that a limestone cap is
proposed on the roof of the lobby. He noted that simulated divided lites will be
used on the west facing windows and that the trim and dormer details will match
and will be a cream color. He noted that both windows will incorporate a
motorized shading device. He stated that signage previously proposed on each
building was removed to simplify the appearance and to allow the school to
determine whether additional signage is needed after the renovations are
completed. He reviewed the locations of the existing light fixtures noting that
they will be removed and replaced with 14 steel bollards with illuminated tops.
He noted that perforated metal screens will be added to mitigate light impacts, if
necessary. He noted that recessed fixtures will be used as needed on the building
and confirmed that offsite light impacts will be eliminated. He reviewed the
proposed landscape enhancements.
Ms. Czerniak reiterated that in December the Board approved alterations to the
gymnasium and generally endorsed the alterations and additions proposed to
the PAC. She noted however that the Board encouraged further study and
refinement of the architectural details and massing and encouraged an
approach that distinguishes the addition from the existing structure. She stated
that the school campus, although it has historic aspects, has evolved over time.
She noted that the changes proposed to the exterior lighting will be a significant
improvement given the existing high intensity lighting on the site. She asked for
input from the Board on the bollard fixture and whether or not shielding of the
light source should be required consistent with the lighting guidelines. She
suggested that a condition could be added directing staff to review a mock-up
of the fixture on site before full installation. She stated that minimal changes are
proposed to the landscaping on the site and noted that no trees that are in good
condition will be removed. She stated that as needed additional plantings will be
added over time to screen the additions and modifications as needed and to infill
the streetscape buffer. She stated that the staff report includes findings in support
of the petition.
Page 6 of 13
May 3, 2017
Chairman Notz invited the Board members to step down from the dais to view the
model. The Board reconvened.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Pasma confirmed that the
roofline was dropped down 2.5 feet and that the project no longer requires a
height variance.
In response to questions from Board member Diamond, Mr. Pasma stated that he
did not bring a sample of the metal material proposed as siding for the addition,
but said that it will have a matte bronze, historic appearing finish. He clarified that
the fin element of the roof is proposed as an architectural composite metal with a
honed look while the roof on the addition to the PAC is proposed as a different
metal, rain screen product.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Pasma stated that the
size of the metal panels can be customized, but as proposed, the panels are 16
inches by 9 inches and vertically oriented. He noted that there is a 3/8 reveal
between panels.
In response to a question from Board member Diamond, Mr. Pasma stated that
the rain screen product allows for drainage behind the panels. He noted that the
coverings over the walkways will be painted wood, consistent with what exists
today. He stated that the bollards are slender, 4.5 inches square, and he
confirmed that there is an option of a perforated metal sleeve to shield the
source of the light.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Pasma stated that the
flat roof area is a single ply membrane. He confirmed that the columns will be
carpenter built, finished in the field and will most likely will be cedar. He stated
that the columns will be painted a cream color to match the trim on the rest of
the school. He stated that Pella windows will be used to enclose the walkways
noting that the trim will be the same cream color. He noted that many of the
windows in the school were replaced in 2005. He confirmed that the trusses are
exposed in the interior of the PAC addition, but the HVAC system will not be
exposed. He noted that the trusses have very thin members. He explained that
the curve over entrance to the PAC will be sided with brick veneer. He stated
that this element is necessary to accommodate a seating circle on the inside and
to achieve sufficient head room.
In response to questions from Board member Moyer, Mr. Pasma stated that the
lettering over the entrances was removed and confirmed that as now proposed,
there is no signage directing people where to go, consistent with the current
conditions. He acknowledged that some type of directory signage may be
considered in the future.
Page 7 of 13
May 3, 2017
Ms. Czerniak stated that once the improvements are completed, the City and
school can work together on directory signage, if needed.
Board member Moyer stated that setting back the addition and new roof form
from the plane of the existing building is a good solution noting that it allows the
existing roof to be retained. He stated that he is disappointed that the exterior
material of the addition will appear bronze and suggested that consideration be
given to achieving a color more consistent with the gallery addition and fin roof
element. He noted that the rendering depicts more of a gray tone, rather than a
bronze tone, consistent with the new fin element. He stated that the rendering
presents a strong color scheme and stated that the 2 elements should be visually
connected.
In response to Board member Moyer’s comments, Mr. Pasma stated that he sees
the fin addition as progressive and the new roofline on the south facing elevation
as more a part of the existing building. He confirmed that both elements could be
sided with the same material.
Board member Moyer acknowledge that the approach described is valid and is
well thought out. He encouraged the petitioner to explore use of the same
material on both forms.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Pasma confirmed that the
dormers on the PAC have a flatter roof form than previously proposed. He stated
that the detailing on the new south facing gable will not be replicated on the
north side because there is not an existing open gable on that end and because
the north elevation is not part of the scope of the project. He stated that the
existing conditions do not allow the roofline to be stepped back on the north
elevation.
Chairman Notz suggested study and refinement of the north elevation to assure
that the appearance is not inconsistent with the rest of the building. He noted
that there may be some visibility of the north elevation from off of the site.
Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Notz invited public
comment.
Art Miller, 169 Wildwood Road, stated that he is a member of the Lake Forest
Preservation Foundation and stated that the Foundation supports staff’s
recommendation. He noted that the project has been carefully thought out and
the elevations are balanced, despite not being symmetrical. He stated that the
windows proposed on the west elevations are successful on the PAC and
gymnasium. He noted that the proposed brick banding helps to diminish the
Page 8 of 13
May 3, 2017
scale of the building and support for consistent colors on the new elements to
avoid calling too much attention to the additions. He suggested that the elliptical
window be removed.
In response to public testimony, Mr. Pasma stated that the elliptical window was
influenced by the original window on the building and was drawn from historic
precedent. He stated that in his opinion it enhances the gable.
Board member Moyer observed that the elliptical window is shown differently in
the rendering than in the drawings. He noted that in his opinion, the larger
window configuration is better. He noted that eliminating the window could make
the elevation appear to be too contemporary. He noted that that he is
supportive of introducing the elliptical window in the larger configuration.
Mr. Pasma stated that the elliptical window plays to the history of the elevation
and reinforces that the distinctions between the existing building and the
addition.
Board member Reda stated that he is supportive of the revised plan as now
presented. He stated that either color option for the new elements appears to be
acceptable in his view. He suggested that the decision on the specifics of the
bollard light fixture be referred to staff. He stated that he is comfortable with the
north façade of the building as proposed acknowledging that it is beyond the
scope of the project.
Board member Bleck stated that the mitigation proposed for the exterior lighting
will be an improvement to the current conditions on the site.
Board member Friedman complimented the project and stated that it will be a
great asset to the community.
Board member Diamond stated that he is supportive of the petition and
suggested that the petitioner be directed to can work with staff to resolve the
colors and light fixture details.
Chairman Notz stated that he favors retaining the elliptical window and asked
that staff verify that the addition is integrated appropriately with the existing north
elevation.
Hearing no further comments from the Board, Chairman Notz invited a motion.
Board member Reda made a motion to recommend approval of the petition based on
the findings detailed in the staff report which document that the plans as presented
and as modified by the recommended conditions of approval, meet the design
Page 9 of 13
May 3, 2017
standards and requirements of the City Code as detailed in this staff report. Approval is
recommended subject to the foll owing conditions:
1. Building Plans - The plans submitted for permit shall be consistent with the plans
submitted to the Board with modifications, refinement or additional detailing
as directed by the Board and specifically, as noted below. If other changes
are made to the plans as a result of final design development, the changes
must be clearly called out on the plans submitted for permit. The plans as
approved by the Board should accompany the plans submitted for permit to
allow for a full understanding of any changes made. Modifications to the
plans presented to the Board will be subject to review by staff in consultation
with the Chairman as appropriate.
a. Attention should be given to visually integrating the addition into the
existing north elevation to the extent possible.
b. The extended gable addition on the south elevation of the Performing Arts
Center shall be generally consistent in color with the addition.
2. Interior Lighting – Plans submitted for permit shall detail plans for interior shades
for all large expanses of glass to mitigate off site light impacts during evening
events.
a. Interior lights should be located and fixtures selected to minimize off site light
impacts.
b. Interior lights in areas of expansive glass must be turned off after activi ties in
each space are concluded for the evening.
3. Exterior Lighting - Details of any proposed exterior lighting shall be provided on
the plans submitted for permit. All fixtures shall direct light downward and the
source of the light shall be fully shielded from view.
a. Existing exterior lighting on the Athletic Center and on the Performing Arts
Center shall be updated at the time of work on each building wing to bring
the lights into conformance with current requirements. Light must be directed
downward and the source of the light fully shielded to avoid off site impacts
on adjacent streets and residential properties along Green Bay Road and on
Onwentsia Road.
b. An overall plan for exterior lighting reflecting, at a minimum, all exterior lights
on the Athletic Center and on the Performing Arts Center, shall be submitted
and will be subject to City review and approval. The plan shall identify safety
and security lights which, if fully shielded, may remain on at all times, and lights
that will be used only during times of activity on the Campus.
c. The proposed bollard light fixture shall be mocked up on the site for review by
City staff prior to the issuance of a permit authorizing full installation.
4. Construction Parking/Staging - Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a
materials staging and construction vehicle parking plan must be submitted to
Page 10 of 13
May 3, 2017
the City for review and will be subject to City approval. Parking of construction
vehicles or contractors vehicles on public streets is not permitted.
5. Tree Protection Plan – Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a plan
identifying trees in the vicinity of the proposed construction activity,
construction parking or staging of equipment must be submitted along with a
plan for protecting the trees during the construction.
6. Landscaping - Prior to the rough framing inspection for each building wing, a
landscape plan reflecting any proposed additional landscaping shall be
submitted and will be subject to final review and approval by the City Arborist.
The Arborist shall verify the following:
a. Adequate foundation plantings are provided at the new building entrances
and around the additions, as space permits, to meet minimum requirements.
b. Enhancements, if any are proposed or determined to be necessary to
soften views of the proposed additions or mitigate light impacts, are
detailed on the plans.
7. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy a site inspection shall be
conducted by City staff to evaluate whether building additions and light
impacts from interior and exterior lights are adequately mitigated. Additional
landscaping or modification of light placement, fixtures or shades shall be
required if determined to be necessary.
8. Photo documentation of the existing buildings must be submitted to the City in
a digital form for the purpose of documenting the buildings in the City archives.
9. 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.
The motion was seconded by Board member Moyer and passed by a vote of 6
– 0.
5. Review and input on the plan for reconstruction and replication of an historic
stable and a lodge. Relocation and adaptive reuse of the structures was
approved as part of the Westleigh Farm Subdivision at 210 S. Ridge Road.
Property Owner: Reilly Ridge Road, LLC and Reilly Family Farm Limited
Partnership (Robert Reilly, Mary Reilly and Antoinette Hudecek)
Contract Purchaser and Developer: North Shore Builders – Representative,
Nate Wynsma
Page 11 of 13
May 3, 2017
Chairman Notz asked the Board for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest.
Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Board member Bleck recused himself as his company was previously involved in
an earlier project proposed for this site.
Ms. Czerniak noted that this is Board member Bleck’s last meeting and thanked
him for his time on the Board.
Board member Bleck left the Council Chambers.
Mr. Wynsma introduced the project and explained that a 34-lot single family
home subdivision was recently approved for this 40-acre parcel. He stated that it
is his intent, as the developer, to restore the historic house located on the site. He
stated that the historic stable, which is visible from Ridge Road and sits at the
south end of the property, is in serious deterioration. He stated that it was
designed by Howard Van Doren Shaw and is a traditional frame structure. He
stated that the stable will be de-constructed once measured drawings of the
structure are completed, and reconstructed on the site for use as a maintenance
building. He stated that the gardener’s lodge is a very simple structure and will
also be de-constructed and relocated on the site for use as a resident clubhouse.
He reviewed the proposed elevations of each structure noting that the exterior
materials will be salvaged where possible. He reviewed the plans for the lodge
and stated that the roof will be hunter green asphalt shingles. He stated that the
club house will have bathrooms and an open entertaining area. He that the
French doors will be replicated. He stated that outside the lodge, there will be a
pergola with a stone patio overlooking the existing pond. He reviewed the
landscape plan which includes a tiered garden. He stated that both structures will
be located on a new slab and the exteriors will be replicated. He stated that the
doors and cupola on the stable will be restored and reused if possible. He
reiterated that the two structures will be deconstructed noting that because of
their poor condition, the structures cannot be relocated in whole. He stated that
it is the intention to replicate the historic nature of the buildings, while making the
structures viable for ongoing use and to reduce maintenance costs.
Ms. Czerniak stated that this project was referred to the Board by the Plan
Commission for oversight and approval of the intended process for
deconstructing and replicating two existing outbuildings located on a 40-acre
development site. She noted that the concept of replicating the 2 structures was
approved as part of overall subdivision plan. She stated that the replication of the
structures and incorporation of the structures into the new development was
viewed positively by the Plan Commission and City Council. She noted that
although the structures are in serious disrepair and unstable condition, they are
important to the history of the community. She clarified that this is an opportunity
Page 12 of 13
May 3, 2017
for the Board to provide direction and input on how the replication project will be
approached. She noted that measured drawings and photo documentation of
the structures are in progress and noted that an historic resource assessment of
each structure was prepared by Susan Benjamin to guide the replication work.
She noted that asphalt singles are appropriate adding that careful attention to
window details and exterior materials will be important to achieve the intent of
the project. She acknowledged that there will need to be a balance between
true replication and achieving a structure that will be functional and can be
maintained in a reasonably economic manner. She stated that consistent with
the City’s Design Guidelines, natural materials should be used for the exterior of
the buildings. She stated that Board input and direction is requested, but no
formal action from the Board is required on this unique project.
Board members Moyer and Reda expressed support for the project.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Wynsma stated that
the color palette for the stable consists of a white exterior with a green roof. He
stated that the stable is currently light gray and tan. He stated that the windows
will have simulated divided lites, in a dark green color. He noted that the
driveway material in the area near the stable is proposed as chip and seal. He
stated that the historic barn door will be used for pedestrian access. He confirmed
that no lighting is proposed for cupola. He stated that they will investigate
whether electrical wiring exists in the structure today to support a light in the
cupola but noted that lighting will not be added where it did not exist historically.
In response to questions from Board member Diamond, Mr. Wynsma stated that
the replicated stable will have an open truss system. He stated that there is an
apartment in the existing stable which will not be replicated. He confirmed that a
cementitious siding, such as Hardieboard, is proposed for the stable because it is
more durable and requires less maintenance than wood. He noted that given
the size of the structure and the fact that it will need to ultimately be maintained
by the Homeowners’ Association, a lower maintenance product is desired.
Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Notz invited public
comment.
Art Miller, 169 Wildwood Road, stated that he is representing the Lake Forest
Preservation Foundation and stated that the Foundation supports staff’s
recommendation with respect to this project. He explained that the stable was
built in 1905 and that the massing, details and materials of the replication should
be close as possible to the original structure. He noted that the property was
where F. Scott Fitzgerald courted Ginevra King adding that courtship and
Fitzgerald’s time in Lake Forest inspired the novel, the Great Gatsby. He stated
that in many ways, the stable is more unique than the main house. He noted that
Page 13 of 13
May 3, 2017
the cupola served a functional purpose for the structure by providing for air
circulation. He agreed that natural materials should be used for the exterior to
add more character and evoke the era during which it was originally
constructed. He suggested that canoes could be used on lake and historic street
names selected to enhance the unique character of the site.
In response to public testimony and to questions from the Board, Mr. Wynsma
clarified that the dock near the pond shown in the earlier plans is no longer
proposed. He noted that hip roofs are original to Adler’s plans for the lodge.
Hearing no further questions of comments, Chairman Notz asked for a motion.
Board member Reda made a motion stating the Board’s support for the project
and the approach described for deconstructing and replicating the stable and
lodge as part of the Westleigh Farm Subdivision.
The motion was seconded by Board member Friedman and was approved by a
vote of 6 to 0.
OTHER ITEMS
7. Opportunity for the public to address the Building Review Board on non-
agenda items.
There was no additional public testimony presented to the Board.
8. Additional information from staff.
There was no additional information presented by staff.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:07 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kate McManus
Assistant Planner