BUILDING REVIEW BOARD 2015/06/03 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest
Building Review Board
Proceedings of June 3rd, 2015 Meeting
A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Building Review Board was held on Wednesday,
June 3rd, 2015, 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:
Mike Bleck, Robert Reda, Fred Moyer, Ross Friedman, Bruce Grieve and Jim
Diamond.
Building Review Board members absent: None
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 King
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 to introduce
themselves.
2. Consideration of the minutes of the May 6th, 2015 meeting of the Building Review
Board.
The minutes of the May 6th, 2015 meeting were approved with a correction as
requested by Board Member Moyer.
3. Consideration of a request for approval of a new residence and attached garage
located at 700 Green Briar Lane. Approval of the overall site plan and landscape
plan is also requested. No variances are requested.
Owners: Fiona McCarthy Ricci and Michael Ricci
Representative: Adam Lyons, architect
Chairman Notz asked the Board for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest.
Board Member Bleck recused himself as his company is involved in this project
and left the Council Chambers.
Chairman Notz invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Mr. Lyons introduced the petition and provided samples of proposed materials to the
Board. He stated that the owner was drawn to the location of the property and its
proximity to the Central Business District. He added that the owner is from the East
Coast and selected the Nantucket cottage style for her new home. He stated that
the lot has unique proportions and initially created some design challenges and he
and the owner explored several design and massing alternatives. He showed
precedent images of the Nantucket and Cape Cod styles. He noted that the front
façade is simple and balanced with a portico with diminutive proportions. He stated
that the massing of the house is a cluster of individual structures almost appearing to
be separate cottages and the site plan includes an outdoor patio and courtyard.
He noted that there is a balance of interior and exterior spaces and the color palette
is monochromatic. He explained that initially Hardie Board shingle siding was
proposed; however with staff’s recommendation, true cedar shingles and trim are
now proposed. He also noted that other materials include gray brick or stone on the
chimney, gray stone on the breezeway, and reclaimed barn timber on the front
entry, rear patio space, garage, and breezeway doors. He stated that the design is
not standard but designed to meet the owner’s needs and wishes and is consistent
with the selected style.
Fiona McCarthy Ricci, owner of the property, introduced herself and spoke about
the inspiration for the proposed design noting that great thought was put into the
flow of spaces, natural light and the Nantucket influenced design.
Ms. McManus stated that the site was part of a 2 lot re-subdivision approved in 2014
and the demolition of the existing house was approved in order to address existing
drainage issues and to allow reconfiguration of the lots. She noted that staff received
a contact from the neighbor to the east with concerns about drainage and added
that staff recognizes that drainage is a significant concern and the issue will receive
special attention throughout the process in order to ensure that there is proper
drainage on the site. She noted that a 2nd contact was received from a neighbor on
Greenview with concerns about the proposed design as well as drainage and noted
that a copy of the email received from the neighbor was provided to the Board. She
asked that the Board provide input on the general massing and roof lines of the
house and placement and size of the dormers. She acknowledged that the
petitioner took into consideration staff’s recommendations to use natural materials
and noted that the use of true wood shingles and trim is consistent with the City’s
Design Guidelines. She noted that the City Arborist has identified 3 significant oak
trees which warrant preservation; if possible, taking into account the extent of re-
grading required addressing the drainage issues. She stated that staff is
recommending general approval of the plan with recommendations to refine the
massing and form with the Board’s input and discussion
In response to questions from Board Member Moyer, Ms. Czerniak explained that the
existing house had significant drainage issues and noted that the subdivision
conditioned upon re-grading of the site and stormsewer improvements. She added
that the demolition of the existing house is necessary to address the drainage issues.
In response to questions from Board Member Reda, Mr. Lyons stated that he is open
to reducing the scale of the dormers on the garage and explained that the two
dormers on the south roof internally provide head room at the stairway. He added
that he is also open to extending the dormers and adding windows to appear more
consistent with the rest of the house.
In response to concerns from Board Member Reda regarding the rooflines on the
breezeway, Mr. Lyons stated that he will consider reducing or simplifying the roof
lines.
In response to questions from Board Member Friedman, Mr. Lyons stated the overall
depth of the house is 115-120 feet and the gutters and downspouts are white
aluminum. He added that the trim and soffits are wood and the shingles are
individual shingles, not panels. He stated that the garage doors are somewhat
custom made and are steel insulated with a wood skin.
Board Member Grieve requested attention be given to the transitioning from the
front of the home to the back and stated that some simplification of roof forms
would benefit the design.
In response to a question from Board Member Diamond, Mr. Lyons stated that the
proposed materials are consistent with staff recommendations and that staff did not
call out the use of asphalt shingles as a concern. He added that the neighborhood is
a mix of old and new homes with mostly asphalt roofs.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Lyons clarified that there is no 2nd
story space on the front of the house. He added that this design was the least
imposing of the alternatives they considered and noted that the home is setback
from the street which will diminish the scale of the façade. He noted that the interior
layout was selected to distinguish the private areas from the public areas of the
house. He added that there will be truss work inside the home which dictated the
placement of the 2nd floor bedrooms. He stated that the breezeway was not
incorporated into the garage mass because it serves a function that helps define the
courtyard space.
In response to a question from Board Member Friedman, Mr. Lyons confirmed that
the owner has considered that the garage is a great distance from kitchen.
Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Notz invited public comment.
Anne Russell, owner of 720 Green Briar, stated that the design of the house should
consider drainage and commented that based on the grading plan presented, no
accommodations have been made for the required drainage easement and
retention area. She noted that the flow rate of water was not included in the plans.
She complimented the design of the home, but emphasized her concerns with
drainage and how the design of the home has not taken this into account.
At the request of Chairman Notz, Ms. Czerniak responded that as part of the re-
subdivision, strict conditions were placed on the property to assure that drainage is
properly addressed. She confirmed that the City Engineer is aware of the drainage
issues on this site and is aware of the concerns. She added that as plans progress, the
design of the house may need to be modified in order to address drainage issues.
She added that the City is committed to keeping in touch with neighbor during the
development and review of grading and drainage plans for this site.
Chairman Notz invited further public comment.
Jim Hopkinson, 744 Green Briar Lane, stated that modifications to the drainage plans
should be made to address storm water over flows. He showed a map of the
surrounding neighborhood stating that steep slopes on neighboring streets direct
water flow onto the property. He suggested that a storm retention system, check
valve, and increased grading be added as conditions of approval.
Ms. Czerniak stated that Mr. Hopkinson could submit his suggestions in writing for
review by the City Engineer.
Peter Witmer, owner of the vacant lot east of 700 Green Briar Lane, stated that he
sold the lot to the petitioner and applauds the thought put into the design of the
proposed home. He added that the bird’s eye view is not how the home will be seen
and he is not concerned with the massing. He noted that the drainage issues on the
site are significant and modifications should be made to the existing plan to address
these issues. He stated that he is concerned with the proposed wall that runs along
the property line and noted that there is no opportunity for vegetation in this area.
In response to public comment, Mr. Lyons stated that the petitioner is aware of the
drainage concerns. He added that the petitioner’s engineer was consulted. He
stated that the tree to the east of the house cannot be preserved due to the re-
grading needed for the site, but the two oak trees at the front of the site will be
preserved.
Chairman Notz invited final questions and comments from the Board.
In response to questions from Board Member Diamond, Mr. Lyons stated that he will
continue to work with staff on the scale of the dormers and simplifying the roof forms
on the breezeway. He added that the roof pitches are the result of a long process
and he has no plans to change them.
Board Member Grieve stated that addressing drainage issues is a priority and
suggested that the wall along the driveway be reconsidered to avoid water running
down the driveway. He added that there is a tendency to add low landscaping to
Cape Cod houses, but suggested adding larger trees to the site to soften the
façade.
Board Member Friedman stated that drainage is outside the Board’s purview, but the
plans seem to disregard the subdivision requirements which should have been
addressed prior to the home’s design. He stated that the front elevation is discreet
and understated and the views from the streetscape are most important. He added
that he has concerns with the massing and rooflines toward the rear of the house
and the views from neighboring properties should be considered.
Board Member Reda stated that the home is a unique design and a great addition
to the neighborhood. He added that issues with the roof forms and dormers at the
back of the house can be resolved.
Board Member Moyer stated that the design is refreshing and clean, but that there
are complications in the back of house. He suggested the petitioner consider making
the stairway a scissor stair in order to reduce the footprint and keep the stairway
under the gable where there is more space. He added that the entry space is
dramatic and complimented the materials and color palette.
Chairman Notz stated that the roof peak over the garage appears to be flattened
and requested that the petitioner consider raising it to keep consistency among the
roof lines.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Lyons stated that the peak was
flattened in order to stay under the allowable square footage.
In response to questions from the Board, Ms. Czerniak stated that staff would have to
take a closer look at the building scale calculation to confirm if changing the peak
would result in an overage. She noted that the building scale requirements are not
intended as an excuse for a compromised design. She acknowledged that in some
projects, design compromises are made to make the house as large as possible.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Lyons stated that he plans to clean
up the roof lines, including those on the breezeway, to create a better harmony
throughout the structure. He stated a willingness to work with staff to make the
adjustments.
Hearing no further comments from the Board, Chairman Notz invited a motion.
Board Member Reda made a motion to approve the petition based on the findings
in the staff report and subject to the following conditions of approval.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
1. The following modifications shall be made to the plans:
a. Refine and simplify the roof forms particularly on the rear half of the
residence.
b. Modify the dormer masses with respect to form, scale, detailing and
placement to achieve greater consistency.
2. Any modifications made to the plans, including those detailed above, and
changes resulting from final design development shall be clearly called out
on the plan and a copy of the plan originally provided to the Board shall be
attached 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.
3. The final grading and drainage plan shall demonstrate the project is
consistent with the conditions of the subdivision and applicable Code
requirements subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
Modifications to the site plan and design of the residence may be required in
order to address all drainage concerns. Should significant modifications be
required, the revised plans, at the discretion of staff, shall return to the Board
for review.
4. The final landscape plan must be submitted on and be in alignment with the
grading and drainage plans as approved by the City Engineer. The
landscape plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City’s
Certified Arborist. Plans shall include the preservation of the two significant
oak trees located at the front of the property. The Arborist’s review of the
plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
a. Verification that appropriate replacement inches are planted on the site
or, if on site plantings cannot be accommodated, that a payment in lieu
of on site planting be made to the City to support streetscape plantings in
the immediate neighborhood.
b. Verification that a landscape dominant streetscape will be achieved.
c. Verification that plantings do not interfere with designated stormwater
overland flow routes.
5. If determined to be necessary by the City’s Certified Arborist, a pre and post
tree maintenance plan prepared by a Certified Arborist shall be submitted
outlining the steps that will be taken to protect the mature trees on the
property. The maintenance plan shall be subject to review and approval by
the City’s Arborist. The plan shall be fully implemented to the satisfaction of
the City’s Arborist and regular inspections shall be conducted by the Arborist
to verify completion of specified measures at appropriate points before the
issuance of permits, during construction and after completion of the project.
6. A plan for construction parking and materials’ staging shall be submitted for
review and will be subject to approval by the City’s Certified Arborist, City
Engineer and Director of Community Development. Street parking is only
permitted directly in front of this property during construction activity due to
the narrow width of the street.
General
7. Prior to demolition, two copies of 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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 Grieve and approved by a vote of 6-0.
4. Consideration of a request for approval of demolition of the existing residence
and detached garage and approval of a new residence and detached garage
located at 786 Oakwood Avenue. Approval of the overall site plan and
landscape plan is also requested. A front yard variance is requested.
Owners: David and Tiffany Bruskin
Representatives: John Krasnodebski, architect
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
returned to the Council Chambers.
Mr. Krasnodebski introduced the project and provided samples of the proposed
materials to the Board. He presented images of the existing streetscape stating that
the area is mostly residential. He explained that the existing house is located at the
end of Wisconsin Avenue, on Oakwood Avenue. He stated that the existing fence
and driveway will be removed and the new garage will be accessed from the rear
alley. He stated that the new residence is traditional with simple massing, a simple
roof line consisting of a single gable and a cross gable over the entry. He added that
there is a wrap-around porch and the proposed materials consist of stucco, wood
brackets, double hung wood windows, and a brick base and chimney. He stated
that the detached garage has similar detailing to the home. He explained that the
proposed home is 40 feet from the front property line, but that the front porch, as
proposed, will require a 6 foot variance from the front yard setback. He stated that
by removing the existing drive, the impervious surface on the site will be reduced. He
added that a sidewalk from Oakwood Avenue and evergreen landscaping for
screening are proposed. He stated that an existing ash tree will be removed. He
stated that the petitioners had initially looked at ways to renovate the existing home,
but the structure has been severely modified over time noting that the house has
been resided in vinyl and a large addition has been added to the rear. He added
that the foundation is in poor condition. He requested approval of the demolition
and proposed replacement residence.
Ms. McManus explained that the existing house is not architectural or historically
significant and has been significantly modified over time. She noted that the
replacement house appears to be consistent with the City’s design guidelines and
fits in well with the streetscape. She stated that a condition of approval has been
included to prohibit construction parking on Oakwood. She added that a City
parking lot is located across the street from the property and the petitioner can
obtain permits from the City for parking for construction vehicles if needed. She
stated that the City Arborist has requested that an evaluation of the elm tree
proposed for removal be completed and if conditions allow, that efforts be made to
preserve the tree. She noted that staff recommends approval of the petition as
proposed.
In response to a question from Board Member Diamond, Mr. Krasnodebski stated that
the proposed chimney material is a reddish brick.
Board Member Grieves commented that the house is a nice addition to the
neighborhood. He questioned the eyebrow dormer noting that it draws too much
attention and commented that the ornamental feature over garage appears large.
In response to a question from Board Member Friedman, Mr. Krasnodebski stated
that the height of the house is 28.5 feet and is lower than the adjacent duplex and
similar in height to the property to the south. He noted that there is a mix of roof
materials in the area, but asphalt shingles are the predominant material.
Board Member Reda expressed concern that there are significant ornamental
features on the house and not enough detail in the drawings to allow the Board to
fully understand the decorative elements. He complimented the plan to remove the
driveway and utilize the alley for access.
Board Member Moyer noted that the eyebrow dormer has some visual association
with and references the tower in Market Square which is close in proximity to the
house. He stated that his first impression was that the dormer was too large, but now
appreciates the curve and counter curve of the dormer.
Chairman Notz complimented the design and stated that the dormer is attractive.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Krasnodebski clarified that the
dormer window has simulated divided lites with wood muntins and trim and an
asphalt roof that curves and recedes back into roof line. He confirmed that the
asphalt shingles are very pliable and can follow the shape of the dormer. He stated
that the attic window on the house and the window on the garage are different
shapes to avoid redundancy. He stated that the garage is set back on the lot and
the round window differentiates it from the oval window on the house. He explained
that the decorative element under the front gable is a wood grid designed to
accentuate the entry. He noted that the stucco has a fine texture and the
foundation is the same brick as the chimney, with a wood cap. He stated that the
double gable on the façade serves to break up the flat façade and create interest.
He stated that he had not considered bumping out the north portion of the façade
noting that the house is a simple form designed to fit in with neighborhood.
In response to a question from Board Member Friedman, Mr. Krasnodebski stated
that the porch materials consist of a composite material for the columns, brick piers,
fir wood decking, and wood soffits and fascia.
Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Notz invited public comment.
Hearing none, he invited final questions and comments from the Board.
Board Member Grieve stated that he understands the design of the dormer better
based on the additional details provided by Mr. Krasnodebski.
Board Member Bleck and Board Member Moyer complimented the design of the
replacement house.
Board Member Friedman suggested that cedar shingles be used in place of asphalt
shingles.
Hearing no further comments from the Board, Chairman Notz invited a motion.
Board member Friedman made a motion to approve the petition based on the
findings in the staff report and subject to the following conditions of approval.
Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits
1. If any 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 plan and a copy of the plan
originally provided to the Board shall be attached 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.
2. The final grading and drainage plan shall demonstrate that any grading and
filling on the property is kept to the minimum necessary to achieve proper
drainage. Additional information, as determined necessary by the City
Engineer, may be required to verify the project is consistent with Code
requirements and to verify good engineering practices are followed to
minimize the potential for negative impacts on adjacent properties.
3. A final landscape plan shall be drawn on the approved grading and
drainage plan and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s
Certified Arborist. The final landscape plan shall include the following:
a. A tree evaluation report completed to assess the condition of the elm tree
proposed for removal at the western edge of the lot. The tree should be
preserved, if conditions allow.
b. Ornamentals planted in the front yard to diversify the landscaping.
c. Replacement inches for trees removed should be planted at least in part
in the form of larger, deciduous trees. Replacement inches may need to
be in the form of a payment in lieu of onsite plantings to support parkway
plantings in the vicinity, due to the limited lot size.
4. If determined to be necessary by the City’s Certified Arborist, a pre and post
tree maintenance plan prepared by a Certified Arborist shall be submitted
outlining the steps that will be taken to protect the mature trees on the
property. The maintenance plan shall be subject to review and approval by
the City’s Arborist. The plan shall be fully implemented to the satisfaction of
the City’s Arborist and regular inspections shall be conducted by the Arborist
to verify completion of specified measures at appropriate points before the
issuance of permits, during construction and after completion of the project.
5. A plan for construction parking and materials’ staging shall be submitted for
review and will be subject to approval by the City’s Certified Arborist, City
Engineer and Director of Community Development. No construction parking
is permitted on Oakwood Avenue. Offsite parking and shuttling workers to
the site may be necessary due to the traffic on Oakwood Avenue.
General
6. Prior to demolition, two copies of 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.
7. 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,
8. 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.
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 Diamond and approved by a vote of
7-0.
OTHER ITEMS
4. Opportunity for the public to address the Building Review Board on non-agenda
items.
There was no additional public testimony presented to the Board.
5. Additional information from staff.
There was no additional information presented by staff.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:13 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kate McManus
Assistant Planner