Loading...
BRB_2021_11_03_MINUTESThe City of Lake Forest Building Review Board Proceedings of November 3, 2021 Meeting A meeting of the Lake Forest Building Review Board was held on Wednesday, November 3, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. This meeting was conducted remotely in compliance with Governor’s Executive Order 2020-07, issued on March 16, 2020 that suspended certain Open Meetings Act provisions relating to in-person attendance by members of a public body due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Building Review Board members present: Chairman Jim Diamond and Board members, Joanne Bluhm, Sally Downey, Timothy G. Franzen, John Looby, Scott Renken and Richard Walther Building Review Board members absent: None Staff present: Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development Jennifer Baehr, Planner 1. Introduction of Board members and staff, overview of meeting procedures – Chairman Diamond Chairman Diamond 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 from the August 19, 2021 and October 6, 2021 meetings of the Building Review Board. The minutes of the August 19, 2021 and October 6, 2021 meetings were approved as submitted. 3. Consideration of a request for limited changes to previously approved plans for the new home at 1525 Sage Court in the Oak Knoll Woodlands Subdivision. The proposed changes include changes to the window type, the design of the front door and the style of the exterior light fixtures. Property Owners: Thomas and Samantha Bakas Developer and Project Representative: Mike DeMar, Fidelity Wes of Oak Knoll LLC and Rick Swanson, architect Chairman Diamond asked the Board members for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Swanson stated that no architectural changes from the plans originally approved by the Board are proposed. He stated however that the petitioners request approval of vinyl clad wood windows rather than aluminum clad wood windows as presented in the original plans. He stated that the windows now proposed will have the same profile as the Building Review Board Minutes – 11/3/2021 Page 2 of 12 aluminum windows previously approved but will be clad with vinyl rather than aluminum on the exterior. He noted that the design guidelines prepared for the subdivision by the original developer allow the use of vinyl clad wood windows. He noted that because the plans as presented to the Board for this house specified aluminum clad windows, this request for a change from the prior approvals is presented to the Board. He stated that at this time, a specific window manufacturer has not yet been selected. He stated that the intent is to select a window that has the same aesthetic and quality of the previously approved aluminum clad window. Ms. Baehr confirmed that the petition is presented to the Board because changes are proposed to the plans that were previously approved by the Board. She stated that staff has emphasized to the developer that careful thought should be given to plans and specifications presented to the Board because staff has only limited ability to approve modifications to the plans after the public review process and Board approval. She noted that the plans presented by the developer and approved by the Board in April specified black casement, aluminum clad wood windows. She stated that the plans submitted for permit, after Board approval, specified aluminum clad wood windows as approved by the Board and the building permit was issued based on the plans and specifications submitted. She stated that after the building permit was issued, the developer notified staff that the recent purchasers of the property plan to install vinyl clad wood windows, instead of the approved aluminum clad windows due to a supply issue. She noted that because vinyl clad wood windows are not consistent with the Board approvals, the proposed change is presented to the Board for consideration. She stated that the developer provided samples of vinyl clad and aluminum clad wood window products adding that staff identified some visual differences between the two as detailed in the staff report. She noted that the developer is also proposing minor changes to the design of the front door and the style of the exterior light fixtures. She noted that these types of minor changes would normally be reviewed at the staff level without returning the petition to the Board for review however, because of the window changes in combination with the other minor changes proposed, all the changes are presented at this time for Board review and action. She stated that the staff report recommends approval of the changes as proposed to the front door and light fixtures and approval of the vinyl clad wood window product subject to conditions related to the exterior finish, window profile and treatment of the miter joints to assure a high quality appearance. Board member Walther commented that in reviewing the samples of the windows, he observed visual differences between the two as outlined in the staff report including differences in the profile and in the reveal between the frame and the sash. He stated that in reviewing past petitions, aluminum clad wood windows were approved consistently. He acknowledged that the City’s Design Guidelines state that as an alternative to natural wood windows, aluminum or vinyl clad wood windows may be considered he noted however that the Board has consistently approved aluminum clad wood windows to assure consistency with quality construction and materials uses throughout the City. He recalled that the developer for the Oak Knoll Woodlands subdivision previously presented plans for a speculative home in the development and the Board denied the request to install vinyl clad wood windows. He stated concern about approving vinyl clad wood windows noting that the trend Building Review Board Minutes – 11/3/2021 Page 3 of 12 may be followed by others in the new development creating inconsistency with prior Board approvals of new homes. He asked for clarification on the light fixtures and noted that with respect to the proposed modifications to the front door, in his opinion, the front door as originally approved presents a stronger design than the full glass steel door now proposed. Board member Renken stated that in his opinion, the proposed change to the front door is minimal noting that it adds a slight contemporary touch to the home that is trendy with today’s buyers. He noted that architectural design is not static. He stated that either of the light fixtures appear to be appropriate. He noted his short time on the Board but noted that Mr. Swanson stated that the design guidelines established by the developer allow either aluminum or vinyl clad wood windows. He stated that the intent appears to be to use one of the top quality vinyl windows available. He stated that he reviewed the samples of the aluminum and vinyl clad wood windows provided by the petition and read the staff report which detailed the differences between the two window types. He stated that in his opinion, the differences in the windows are very slight. He stated that from ten feet away, the differences will not be discernable. He stated that he reviewed the samples of the windows at dusk and was not able to determine whether the vinyl clad wood window has a sheen. He noted that the staff report includes a recommendation that if vinyl clad wood windows are approved by the Board, a low-sheen or matte finish should be required. He stated that he is not aware that a matte finish is offered on vinyl clad wood windows. He acknowledged that they putty at the miter joints was a bit rougher on the vinyl clad windows. He stated that quality vinyl clad and aluminum clad wood windows are available and stated that he would be willing to approve a vinyl clad wood window subject to more information on past approvals of vinyl clad wood windows in the City. Board member Bluhm agreed with Board member Walther stating that she does not recall the Board approving vinyl clad wood windows in the past. She stated support for aluminum clad wood windows. She stated that if the change is really being requested due to a supply chain issue that will hold up construction, she is willing to support the request subject to the conditions as recommended in the staff report including a matte exterior finish, detailed profile and clean miter joints. She stated support for the front door as originally approved, with the solid panel at the bottom, but stated that she will support the change with assurance that a high quality product is used. She stated that her understanding of the proposed changes to the exterior lighting is that the fixture with the metal scrollwork is proposed above the front door and the other fixtures around the garage and on the rear of the home. She noted that the fixtures are not consistent with each other but acknowledged that they are not on the same side of the house and will not be visible together. Board member Looby stated support for the minor changes proposed to the exterior light fixtures. He also stated support for the front door as now proposed noting that overall, the change does not impact the overall appearance of the home. He commented that in his opinion, aluminum clad wood window are much better looking and are more durable than vinyl clad wood windows. He agreed that the Building Review Board Minutes – 11/3/2021 Page 4 of 12 application of the adhesive in the joints of the vinyl clad windows is concerning. He stated that the difference in the profile of the windows is difficult to determine from the samples provided but noted that the windows should have a detailed profile. He stated that he is not sure if it is possible for the joints of the vinyl clad windows to be cleaner. He stated a preference for the aluminum clad wood windows. Board member Downey stated support for the changes proposed to the light fixtures and front door noting however that the original front door presents a stronger design. She explained that when she reviews material samples, she does not look at the identifying labels. She noted that instead, she looks at the visual appearance and assesses whether the sample appears to be of high quality. She stated that the aluminum clad wood window has the appearance of a much higher quality product. She stated that the miter joints on the vinyl clad wood window are very unattractive due to the construction technique and the color. She acknowledged that some people may not notice the adhesive at the joints from ten feet away, but she will. She stated a preference for the aluminum clad wood window. She acknowledged that if there is really a supply chain issue that is specific to aluminum clad wood windows, this will be a concerning issue for all new homes. She stated that since ground has not yet been broken for the new home, the supply chain issue may well be resolved by the time the windows are needed. She stated that if the Board chooses to approve the vinyl clad wood window, it is reasonable to expect that the other homes in this new subdivision may follow suit. Board member Franzen stated support for the proposed changes to the light fixtures and front door. He stated that if, as stated by Mr. Swanson, vinyl clad wood windows are approved for this development, he will support the change from aluminum to vinyl clad wood windows. Chairman Diamond stated support for the previously approved aluminum clad wood windows. He stated that the proposed changes to the front door and light fixtures are acceptable. He explained that the Building Review Board is tasked with upholding the City’s Design Guidelines and not necessarily those put in place by a private developer which did not go through a City approval process. He invited a response to Board comments and questions from Mr. Swanson. Mr. Swanson agreed that the treatment of the joints at the corners of the vinyl window sample provided to the City are not attractive. He noted that the intent is to use a high quality vinyl window manufactured by Andersen Windows, one of the best window companies in the country. He stated that he has used the Andersen vinyl clad wood window on a number of buildings, including the Libertyville train station, and has never had any issues with the product. He stated that there are probably seven different Andersen vinyl windows and acknowledged that a cheaper version of the vinyl window was likely provided to the City than the one intended for use. He stated confidence that the more expensive vinyl window does not have the issue at the joints as observed by staff and the Board members. He added that the Andersen 400 Series window has a different profile than the sample provided to the Board, a profile that is similar to the profile of the previously approved Pella aluminum clad Building Review Board Minutes – 11/3/2021 Page 5 of 12 wood window. He acknowledged that there is a certain perception of vinyl windows, but the Andersen product is a wood window simply clad in vinyl. In response to questions from Board member Walther, Ms. Baehr confirmed that the proposed light fixture above the front door has decorative scrollwork on either side of the fixture and seeded glass. She confirmed that a different light fixture is proposed between the garage doors. In response to questions from the Board, Ms. Czerniak explained that the City’s Design Guidelines encourage the use of natural materials. She acknowledged that the Board has approved the use of quality fiberglass windows in the past and offered that option as one that could be explored. She acknowledged that the windows proposed for use are wood clad vinyl windows, not completely vinyl windows. She explained that with respect to the design guidelines written by the original developer of the subdivision, those guidelines were never brought to the Board for review and approval and therefore, they do override the City’s Design Guidelines. She stated that the City has not obligation or authority to enforce private covenants. She stated however that the developer’s design guidelines can certainly be considered by the Board. She stated that this development is a new subdivision, unlike infill development in an established neighborhood. She stated that the first homes built in the subdivision will likely establish the quality and character of the overall development. She stated that if the Board chooses to approve the vinyl clad wood windows, staff recommends the conditions detailed in the staff report adding that a requirement that the petition at least explore fiberglass windows before proceeding may be worthwhile. Board member Walther recalled that the very first house to be presented to the Board for this subdivision was for a speculative house. He stated that at that time, the Board had a lengthy discussion about the use of vinyl clad wood windows and decided that aluminum clad wood windows should be used in the subdivision. He stated that it is important that the Board is consistent in reviewing petitions. Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Diamond invited public testimony. Hearing none, he invited final comments from the petitioner. Mr. DeMar stated that Icon Building Group owned the subdivision before he purchased it and presented the initial plans for a home on Lot 10 with vinyl clad wood windows. He stated that a representative from Andersen Windows told him that vinyl clad wood windows have been approved in Conway Farms by the Homeowners’ Association, specifically the Andersen 400 Series window. He stated that beyond the 400 series, windows are custom built. In response to a question from Board member Franzen, Ms. Czerniak stated that the City’s Design Guidelines encourage the use of natural materials, wood windows. She commented that the Board has made accommodations in the past to allow metal clad wood windows recognizing that some homeowners desire them for maintenance reasons. She reiterated that staff is seeing movement toward fiberglass Building Review Board Minutes – 11/3/2021 Page 6 of 12 windows in some cases which appear to be a step above vinyl clad windows in quality, character and appearance. She clarified that the City’s Design Guidelines do not prohibit vinyl clad wood windows. Board member Franzen stated that it appears that there was a mistake made by the petitioner with the sample that was provided. He stated that if a condition of approval requiring the use of the Andersen 400 Series product is included in the Board’s approval, he is supportive of the request assuming staff will review the correct sample of the window that is proposed for use. Board member Looby agreed with Board member Franzen’s comments. He stated that it puts the Board in a difficult position if the wrong product is provided by the petitioner for the Board’s review as a sample of the intended quality and character. He stated that if the intended vinyl clad wood windows have a refined appearance and a character and quality similar to the previously approved aluminum clad wood window, he can support the change. He noted that it is confusing to hear that the sample provided is not the windows that are proposed. Board member Downey questioned why the design guidelines developed by the original developer of the subdivision are referenced if they were never presented to the Board or approved by the Board. She questioned whether the design guidelines prepared by the developer were reviewed with the neighboring residents. She stated that the Board should apply the City’s adopted Design Guidelines. She stated that fact that the wrong window sample was provided by the petitioner for the Board’s review is an issue. She stated that the sample window provided by the petitioner is concerning and appears inexpensive. She stated that the onus is on the petitioner to show the Board the right window sample adding that if the correct window sample was provided and determined to be of high quality, there may be no issue. She expressed concern about the Board making decisions based on a supply issue as represented by the petitioner noting that supply issues may be a factor that the Board will need to consider in the future if the issue can be documented. She stated that she can support vinyl clad wood windows if there if fact is a supply chain issue, the windows are of high quality and if synthetic materials on the overall house are limited. Board member Bluhm stated that in her opinion, the Board should have the opportunity to review the correct sample of the window. She explained that every effort should have been made by the builder and the representative from Anderson Windows to provide a sample that accurately reflects what is proposed. She stated that she would be willing to support the petitioner’s request if an acceptable sample window is provided. Hearing no further comments from the Board, Chairman Diamond invited a motion. Board member Looby made a motion to recommend approval of limited changes to the previously approved plans for the new residence subject to the following conditions of approval. Building Review Board Minutes – 11/3/2021 Page 7 of 12 1. The exact model of the proposed vinyl clad wood window shall be provided to the City and will be subject to review and approval by City staff in consultation with the Chairman. At a minimum, the sample shall demonstrate the following: o The vinyl shall have a matte finish. o The window shall have a detailed profile to avoid a flat and low quality appearance. o The miter joints shall be clean, without adhesive protruding from the joint. 2. The conditions of the previous approvals remain in force and this Meeting Action Notice shall be considered an addendum to the previous Meeting Action Notice. The motion was seconded by Board member Downey and approved by a vote of 7 to 0. 4. Consideration of a request for approval of a new residence and attached garage on a vacant lot. Approval of a conceptual landscape plan, and overall site plan is also requested. The property is addressed as 410 Oak Knoll Drive and is in the Oak Knoll Woodlands Subdivision. Property Owner: Fidelity Wes of Oak Knoll LLC, (Mike DeMar, 100%). Contract Purchasers: Andy and Maggie Timson Project Representative: Rick Swanson, architect Chairman Diamond asked the Board members for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner. Mr. Swanson introduced the petition on behalf of the developer. He presented an overall site plan for the subdivision noting the location of the lot at the end of the cul de sac, adjacent to the Conway Farms golf course. He noted that there are no significant trees on the site and the existing trees are dead or in poor condition. He stated that the driveway is configured to feature the architecture of the house and the landscaping and pointed out the walkway from the driveway to the front door. He acknowledged that from the cul de sac, the garage will be visible and pointed out that care was taken to appropriately design and detail every elevation. He presented images of the proposed hardscape. He stated that the home is designed in the English cottage style adding that this particular design is inspired by homes in the coastal villages of North Wales with white painted brick, stone and stucco. He stated that the roof forms are generally a combination of steep, hip and gabled roofs. He noted that cedar window and door headers are proposed to express the casual nature of the quaint traditional style. He explained that the exterior materials will be a masonry veneer of common clay brick painted with Benjamin Moore’s “White Heron”, the window sills will be cut limestone, the stucco on the back of the home will have a troweled finish and will be white to match the brick color. He stated that the home will have white, Andersen casement windows. He noted that rough hewn cedar headers are proposed above the windows adding that the headers will be stained a soft, natural color. He stated that the fascia and soffit will be a smooth cedar painted classic white. He added that white aluminum gutters and downspouts Building Review Board Minutes – 11/3/2021 Page 8 of 12 are proposed. He stated that the entrance door will be Federal blue, the roof will be cedar shingle, and the overhead garage doors will be insulated steel with a light stain. He noted that paver bricks are proposed for the front walkway and stoop. He stated that the house complies with all the building scale and height requirements. He presented images of historic precedents of the English cottage architectural style. He noted that most of the historic precedents are either white painted stone or white stucco or brick. He stated that the light fixture above the front door and the decorative vent on the roof will be copper washed with acid to achieve a green patina tone. He noted that window boxes are proposed on some of the windows. He presented the elevations of the home. He added that the casement windows will have simulated divided lites. He stated that French doors are proposed on the rear of the home. He stated that main roof form has a clipped gable end to create the appearance of a half-story, common with the Cottage style. He explained that the garage elevation has one larger 16 foot wide door and a single 9 foot wide door. Ms. Baehr reviewed that the proposed home is on a lot on the west side of the cul de sac, at the end of Oak Knoll Drive. She stated that the property is just over a half acre and is one of the smaller lots in the subdivision. She stated that unlike many of the other properties in the subdivision, there are very few trees on the site and the buildable area of the lot is fairly open. She added that there are some dead trees and trees that are in poor condition along the perimeter of the property that are proposed for removal. She stated that as proposed, this home will have brick exterior walls painted white consistent with the chosen architectural style. She noted that in recent meetings, the Board expressed concern about monotony of the color palettes in the subdivision given the number of white and white-ish houses presented to date and encouraged the developer to explore a variety in color palettes for future homes. She pointed out that colors read somewhat differently on various materials explaining that white painted brick can have a different appearance, texture and shadowing than white stucco or white clapboard. She suggested that in the case of this petition, consideration could be given to a darker color for the trim and rake boards as an accent and distinguishing element. She stated that the staff report offers findings in support of the petition and recommended conditions of approval. Board member Looby complimented the design of the home and thanked staff and the petitioner for providing renderings of the homes in the subdivision that have been approved to date. He stated support for the painted brick noting that a white tone in this case will give the home a cottage appearance. He stated that the home is well placed on the lot. He observed that this lot backs up to the Conway Farms golf course so the homeowners will have a beautiful and private view of the course. Board member Franzen stated that the home is very attractive and stated support for the color scheme as presented and desired by the petitioners. He noted that as Board member Looby pointed out, the property is adjacent to the golf course and he questioned why, given the adjacent open space, year round plantings are needed to screen the driveway and garage. He noted that golfers are used to seeing homes in Conway Farms from the course. He stated support for eliminating the conditions pertaining to the color scheme and screening of the garage. Building Review Board Minutes – 11/3/2021 Page 9 of 12 Board member Downey agreed that the home is very attractive. She noted that the Board has discussed the potential for monotony in the subdivision given the numerous white color schemes in contrast to the variety and earth tones used in neighboring subdivision. She noted however in this case, the developer is proposing to change the color of the adjacent, recently approved home to light gray, instead of white, which will provide some contrast between the two neighboring homes. She noted that historically the Cottage style features elements like the window frames in a earth tone color and, as proposed, the headers above the windows and the window boxes are proposed to be a natural color. She stated support for the petition as presented. Board member Renken pointed out that the footprint of the home appears to be a square but from a perspective view, the “square” is broken up by the design details including lowering the fascias and adding dormers that project out from the roof and the varying heights. He stated that in his opinion, the design is very successful. He complimented the orientation of the home on an angle noting that the long sweeping roof at the entrance will be visible and the garage hidden. He agreed that the color palette as proposed is historically correct for the chosen architectural style. He suggested that a slight contrast could be considered for the trim color. He stated that the stained wood elements and cedar roof will soften the white brick. He stated support for the petition as presented. Board member Bluhm complimented the home and stated support for the color scheme. She commented that the Benjamin Moore White Heron color reads a bit more gray than a classic white, which is proposed for the trim, which may create some contrast between the brick and trim color. Board member Walther noted that in the past, he has commented on the potential for monotony of color palettes in the subdivision. He stated that he took some time to understand the color palettes that are being presented in the Oak Knoll Woodlands subdivision in the context of the existing homes on Oak Knoll Drive, from the entrance to the subdivision, south to Conway Road and on Abington Cambs Drive. He reviewed that on Abington Cambs Drive, there are a total of 10 homes, two are white stucco, one is a stone house in a granite color, five are brick homes and one home is gray. He added that on Oak Knoll Drive, there are two white homes, one yellow house, six brick houses of various colors from light brown to dark red. He summarized that on Abington Cambs Drive, two out of ten homes are white, or 20 percent. He stated that on Oak Knoll Drive, two homes out of ten homes are white, 20 percent. He pointed out that currently, in the Oak Knoll Woodlands subdivision, not counting the Tudor home at 1525 Sage Court as a white House, there are five white houses out of 16 possible homes, 31 percent. He noted that percentage takes into account the proposed change in the stucco color from white to gray for the home at 395 Oak Knoll Drive. He stated that based on the current approvals, with several lots remaining for development, 31 percent of the homes in the Oak Knoll Woodlands subdivision will be white, a significantly greater percentage that found in the surrounding neighborhoods. He asked that the Board members take this information into consideration going forward. Building Review Board Minutes – 11/3/2021 Page 10 of 12 Chairman Diamond invited final comments from the petitioner. Mr. Swanson thanked the Board for the comments. He explained that when the Board previously raised concerns about the number of white homes in the subdivision, the design of the house now presented was already in progress. He stated that as they meet with new clients and prospective buyers of lots in the subdivision, they are stressing that natural, earth tone color palettes should be considered. He stated he is taking the concerns expressed about monotony in the subdivision seriously. He stated that he believes the house currently proposed will be a nice addition to the subdivision. Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Diamond invited public testimony. Hearing none, he invited final comments from the Board. Board member Looby encouraged the petitioners to consider planting White Pines instead of arborvitae noting that arborvitae will be eaten very quickly by deer. He added that White Pine do very well in this area and provide a taller and more natural look. He added that if they want a more substantial buffer for their home from the golf course, they might consider approaching Conway Farms Golf Course about plantings some trees on the course. Board member Bluhm stated that this development has been in the works for several years and is now developing into a beautiful neighborhood. She noted that she has seen many brick and cedar homes that have recently been painted white with black windows consistent with the current trend away from earth tones. She noted that the homes approved to date in the new subdivision are in varying architectural styles and should visually appear distinct from each other despite the white color palette. She stated that the home now before the Board will fit well with the other homes in the subdivision. She stated support for the petition. Board member Walther stated support for the petition. He stated that in his opinion, the potential for monotony continues to be an important issue. He noted that Mr. Swanson and the developer appear to be well aware of the issue. He stated that it appears that the development has reached its limit for white houses but acknowledged that the style of the home currently before the Board lends itself to white as the appropriate color. Board member Franzen clarified that the lot in question is a significant distance from the golf course adding that even in winter, the house will be difficult to see. He stated that he does not see a need for substantial planting to screen the house from the course. Board member Looby pointed out that there is a service road on the golf course property in the area of the home and noted that golf carts travel along the path. He stated that the homeowners may benefit from plantings in that area for privacy. Building Review Board Minutes – 11/3/2021 Page 11 of 12 Hearing no further comments from the Board, Chairman Diamond invited a motion. Board member Franzen made a motion to recommend approval of the new residence, conceptual landscape plan, and the overall site plan subject to the following conditions of approval. 1. Aluminum clad wood windows are required. 2. All modifications to the plans including refinements made in response to Board comments or as the result of 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 to the building permit application for comparison purposes. Staff is directed to review any changes to the plans 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 landscape shall include, but not be limited to, 22 replacement tree inches to account for trees removed on the site. In addition, the minimum landscape standards for new residences as detailed in the Code, including ground cover, mid level and canopy trees and evergreens across the site. Some screening along the garage and driveway should be considered for the privacy of the homeowner. 4. If determined to be necessary by the City’s Certified Arborist, any declining or damaged parkway trees shall be removed and replaced by the developer prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for this property. 5. The final grading and drainage plan shall demonstrate the project is consistent with the applicable Code requirements and will be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. Grading or filling on the site should be kept to the absolute minimum necessary to meet good engineering practices, properly direct drainage and mitigate off site impacts. 6. Tree Protection Plan – Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a plan to protect trees identified for preservation and to protect trees on neighboring properties during construction, must be submitted and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist. 7. Details of exterior lighting shall be submitted with the plans submitted for permit. Cut sheets for all light fixtures shall be provided and all fixtures, except those illuminated by natural gas at low light levels, shall direct light down and the source of the light shall be fully shielded from view. All exterior lights shall be set on automatic timers to go off no later than 11 p.m. except for security motion detector lights. 8. 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. Building Review Board Minutes – 11/3/2021 Page 12 of 12 9. If the petitioner desires the issuance of a building permit prior to the completion and approval of critical infrastructure in the development, an Acknowledgment prepared by the City will need to be signed, notarized and filed with the City. The motion was seconded by Board member Downey and approved by a vote of 7 to 0. In response to a question from Board member Walther about the exterior color of the lift station in the cul de sac on Oak Knoll Drive, Board member Renken noted that he observed some stone on the site which appeared to be for the exterior of the building. OTHER ITEMS 5. Opportunity for the public to address the Building Review Board on non-agenda items. There was no additional public testimony presented to the Board. 6. Additional information from staff. In response to a question from Board member Downey, Ms. Czerniak stated that consideration is being given to returning to in person meetings. She stated however that until further notice, remote meetings are anticipated. The Board voted unanimously to approve the 2022 meeting schedule. The meeting was adjourned at 7:43 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Baehr Planner