Loading...
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