BUILDING REVIEW BOARD 2014/08/07 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest
Building Review Board
Proceedings of August 7, 2014 Meeting
A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Building Review Board was held on Thursday,
August 7, 2014, at 6:30 p.m., at the City’s Municipal Services Facility, 800 Field Drive,
Lake Forest, Illinois.
Building Review Board members present: Chairman Charlie King and Board
members: Mike Bleck, Ted Notz, Ross Friedman, Fred Moyer and Bruce Grieve.
Building Review Board members absent: Robert Reda
Staff present: Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development
1. Introduction of Board members and staff, overview of meeting procedures –
Chairman King
Chairman King 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 June 4, 2014 and July 16, 2014 Building Review
Board meetings.
The minutes of the June 4, 2014 meeting were approved as submitted.
The minutes of the July 16, 2014 meeting were approved as submitted.
3. Consideration of a request for approval of an addition and alterations to an existing
residence located at 255 Glenwood Road.
Property Owners: Ross and Cheryl Pettit
Representative: David Block, architect
Chairman King asked the Board for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest.
Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Mr. Block introduced the homeowner and the petition and stated that he read the
staff report. He stated that the house is in need of renovation including upgrades to
the windows and doors. He stated that the homeowners desire some interior
changes and want to take advantage of the large attic for a bedroom. He stated
that the owners have lived in the house for a number of years and explained that the
living spaces are long and narrow. He stated that the changes proposed will make
the house more contemporary and will improve the flow inside the house. He stated
that the addition of dormers is proposed for the additional bedroom planned for the
attic. He stated that skylights are desired to provide natural light into the kitchen. He
noted that the mudroom on the south side of the house blocks the kitchen windows.
He stated that a larger garage is needed and explained the proposal to add on to
the front of the garage to allow space for two cars and storage. He explained that
the overhead door proposed on the side elevation will make storage easier than a
“man” door. He stated that the existing patio is in poor condition and will be
replaced. He stated that near the house, new landscaping will be installed to
replace overgrown bushes. He stated that the trees on the property will be
preserved. He added that the stone walk in front of the house will be replaced since
it is in poor condition.
Ms. Czerniak commented that various alterations are proposed to the house. She
stated that much of the renovation planned is interior. She noted several areas on
which Board input is requested including the size of the dormers and the extension of
the length of the garage. She added that the proposed skylights should be carefully
considered to be sure they are screened by existing trees to avoid light spillover into
the neighborhood. She noted that overall, further details should be provided to
clarify the changes proposed.
Chairman King invited questions from the Board.
In response to questions from Board member Grieve, Mr. Block stated that as
planned, two of the windows in the dormers are fixed and one is operable. He
stated that an operable window is required for egress but noted that alternatively,
two of the windows could be operable and one fixed.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Block confirmed that the
brick will match the existing residence. He noted that the brick used on the previous
addition does not match the house. He stated that the brick on the earlier addition
will be removed and replaced so that the house is clad in a consistent brick. He
stated that the roof will likely be completely re-roofed and agreed that architectural
shingles could be considered to add detail to the house. He stated that the overall
color scheme will remain the same as it is today, white and dark gray. He clarified
that at the front entry, a 4 x 4 column is proposed to be wrapped with trim. He
stated that the front stoop will remain and will be covered with pavers. He
confirmed that a landscape plan was not prepared since the overall footprint of the
house is not changing.
Board member Friedman stated that a landscape plan will be important to help the
Board understand the overall project.
In response to questions from Chairman King, Mr. Block explained that the interior
layout of the house impacts the exterior and as a result, the front entrance must
remain where it is and cannot be made more prominent.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Block stated that options
were considered for modifying the front entrance, but the results were awkward. He
acknowledged that it could be dressed up or screened with landscape.
In response to questions from Board member Notz, Mr. Block explained that the
transition from brick to siding is necessary because of the cost of brick. He stated
that the new siding will be hardi board. He reviewed the garage stating that a
window was considered to bring light into the garage noting that it would also break
up the brick wall. He confirmed that the garage doors will have windows. He stated
that the overhead door on the side will allow easy access into the storage space.
He stated that swinging doors will take up too much room and will be difficult to
maneuver in the snow. He discussed the changes proposed to the kitchen space
confirming that the intent is to create a vaulted ceiling in the kitchen with skylights to
open up the room. He discussed the elevations and agreed that the window
alignment could be improved on some of the elevations.
In response to questions from Board member Bleck, Mr. Block confirmed that the
chimney will be removed and that all of the windows will be replaced with double
hung windows. He stated that steel garage doors are proposed with glass lites. He
stated that the garage doors will match the trim. He stated that most of the brick on
the house will remain with the exception of the brick used on the previous addition.
He noted the intent to match the color and dimensions of the original brick.
In response to questions from Board member Moyer, Mr. Block confirmed the entire
house will be re-roofed with consistent materials.
Board member Moyer reiterated the importance of a landscape plan noting that a
landscape plan may help to mitigate the neighbor’s concerns about the side
elevation if year-round screening is provided.
In response to questions from Chairman King, Mr. Block discussed the dormers noting
that the ridge of the roof is not proposed to increase. He stated that the dormers are
sized to allow sufficient living space. He reviewed the size of the new room and
stated that the dormers come down quickly.
Board member Friedman discussed the pitch of the roof and the space needed for
insulation. He acknowledged that one of the windows needs to meet the egress
requirements.
In response to questions from Chairman King, Mr. Block stated that the footprint of
the patio will remain the same as the existing patio. He reviewed the plans for the
windows on the south elevation, on the first floor, noting that the new windows will be
wider than the existing windows. He stated that cans or pendant lighting will be used
in the skylights to avoid light spillover to the outside.
In response to questions from Board member Notz, Mr. Block reviewed the locations
of the bedrooms in the house noting that the new bedroom will be framed in a
similar manner. He stated that the dormers will be tied to the ridge, to keep the
dormers simple, rather than creating gable elements.
In response to questions from Board member Bleck, Mr. Block reviewed the
dimensions of overhead door planned for the side elevation noting that it will be a 6-
foot door, in the same style as the main garage doors. He stated that the front
elevation was not provided because there are trees shielding that view. He stated
that a new front door is planned and the storm door will be removed, but clarified
that no other changes are proposed on the front elevation.
XXXX
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Block discussed the
intended transition between the brick and the siding. He stated that the trim will be
replaced with hardi-board. He stated that cost is an issue in using brick all around
the house.
Board member Notz stated that the use of brick around the house would provide
consistency.
In response to questions from Board member Notz, he explained that the project will
likely be phased for budget reasons. He suggested that landscaping could be
planned for the east and south sides of the house noting that landscaping will also
add cost to the project.
Chairman King stated that the Board normally considers project as a whole, looking
at all elevations and the entire property to understand the proposed changes and
any potential impacts, positive or negative. He stated that the Board does give
consideration to elements that are already in place and limits of the project. He
noted that the replacement of the patio will add cost to the project and suggested
that there may be other elements that could be a higher priority. Hearing no further
questions from the Board, he invited public comment.
Mr. Lorenz, 265 Glenwood Road, stated appreciation for the Board process. He
stated that he is the neighbor to the east and stated that he is pleased that work is
planned on the house and property. He stated concern about the extension of the
garage and the appearance of the long, east elevation. He also expressed concern
about the overhead door proposed for the storage area commented that double
swinging doors would improve the appearance. He asked that consideration be
given to the impact of the east elevation noting that landscaping will be important
to soften that area.
Hearing no further requests to speak from the public, Chairman King invited a
response from the petitioner.
Mr. Block stated that adding brick to the east elevation will be costly and depending
on how it is done, could be inconsistent with the other elevations. He stated that if
necessary, swinging doors could be used rather than an overhead door.
Chairman King suggested that continuing the petition may be appropriate noting
the number of issues identified by the Board members, the neighbor and staff. He
asked for comments from the Board.
Board member Grieve recapped the issues identified, noting that the dormers should
be refined including aligning the width with the elements on the first floor. He
encouraged consideration of a different window configuration and suggested that
on the west elevation, there could be greater spacing between the three windows.
He noted that a style of window could be selected that would make the massing
look different without changing the interior space. He commented on the elevations
noting that the on the north and south elevations, the eye is drawn more to the roof
than on the west elevation. He suggested that this area be revisited. He
acknowledged that landscaping could help to screen elements of the house but
added that it is not a good approach to build something and then hide it. He
suggested that consideration be given to ways to break up the east elevation noting
that a window would serve that purpose and provide light into the space. He
added that a landscape plan will be important to address the neighbor’s concerns.
Board member Friiedman added front entry mass the detailing could be further
addressed, some level of fdetailing that cllas attention to thi as a front entry. Furter
evaluated and addressed.
Proposed roofing on the shed roof at the entray Ross – introduction of some other
element.
Grieve frmaing space at entry idease.
Ross suggested consideration of a pergola connfigutation. Will lose the shelter from
rain.
Boad member Notz agreed with comments of colleagues. Readdress, on the west
elleation, tom ake sure that the dormer is centered. Discussed windows alighment
and size. Close.
Board member Blcek. Nothing futher
Board member Moyer, agreed with comments. Aother compelling reaons for bringin
ghte brickc across. Gale white, esatlish a new character. Should hve been brick.
Big picture, look at the patio as a tradefoof. Do iti right correctly and leave
something else for alter.
Chairman King good direction. Will be an improvement on the exstign house with
new materials. Add to piut a finner point. Would not approve an oeverhead door at
that locationl i
Board member Bleck______ made a motion to continue
The motion was seconded by Board member Fridemmatn and was approved by the
Board in a 6 to 0 vote.
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 7:41 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Catherine J. Czerniak
Director of Community Development