Loading...
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