BRB_2022_09_07_MINUTESThe City of Lake Forest
Building Review Board
Proceedings of September 7, 2022 Meeting
A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Building Review Board was held on Wednesday,
September 7, 2022 at 6:30 p.m., at the Municipal Services Building, 800 Field Drive, Lake
Forest, Illinois.
Building Review Board members present: Chairman Jim Diamond and Board members,
Joanne Bluhm, Sally Downey, and Scott Renken
Building Review Board members absent: Timothy G. Franzen, John Looby and Richard
Walther
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 June 1, 2022 Building Review Board meeting.
Consideration of the June 1, 2022 meeting minutes was postponed.
3. Consideration of a request for an additional design option to the previously
approved plans for the Amberley Woods Courtyard Homes development. The
additional design option currently proposed is for the home at 1945 Amberley Court.
Property Owner: McNaughton Development (Paul McNaughton, 100%)
Project Representative: John Barry, project manager
Chairman Diamond asked the Board members for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of
interest. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Ms. Czerniak stated that staff was alerted only a few hours ago that a representative
from McNaughton Development was not available to attend tonight’s meeting. She
acknowledged that standard practice is to have the property owner and the owner’s
representative make a presentation during the public meeting and respond to questions
but recommended that the Board make a one-time exception and proceed with
consideration of the petition despite the absence of the property owner.
With the Board’s consent, Ms. Czerniak provided an overview of the petition. She stated
that as plans are submitted for permit by McNaughton Development for each of the 19
Courtyard Homes, staff continues to carefully review the plans for conformance with the
approvals issued to date by the Board, consistent with standard practice, and in doing
Building Review Board Minutes – 9/7/2022 Page 2 of 5
so, identified several aspects of recently submitted plans that differ from the approved
plans. She stated that overall, most of the changes are minor in scope but together
represent a visual change in appearance from the elevations approved by the Board.
She reviewed that the areas of change include the building footprint, roof forms, and
window proportions and placement. She noted that the staff report details each of the
proposed changes to a particular model type. She added that staff understands that
the changes are being driven by the contract purchaser and as noted by the petitioner,
corrections to the previously approved plans which were drawn incorrectly. She stated
that the staff report presents findings in support of the changes with the exception of the
proposed change in the half-timber detail above the openings on side elevations, at the
bay windows.
In response to questions from Board member Renken, Ms. Baehr confirmed that staff is
not recommending approval of the small vertical half-timber detail directly above the
bay windows.
Board member Renken noted that the approved elevations show a band board directly
above the openings on the bay windows, but the currently proposed plans show the
openings lower on the wall leaving a gap between the top of the windows and the
band board.
Board member Downey stated that it appears that there are more changes to the plans
than the developer identified in the statement of intent. She stated that it is upsetting
that staff is put in the position of scrutinizing the plans for changes when the developer is
obligated to identify any and all changes made to the previously approved plans.
Ms. Czerniak stated that staff has reiterated to the developer numerous times that as a
condition of approval, any and all changes to the approved plans must be clearly
called out on the plans submitted for permit. She stated that staff has encouraged the
developer to consult with staff early if changes are planned to determine how best to
process the approval of the changes. She added that staff has make every effort to get
petitions for changes to the Courtyard Homes on to the Board’s agendas quickly at the
developer’s urging. She stated that only the specific changes identified in the staff
report are presented for consideration. She stated that all other aspects of the home
must comply with the previously approved plans.
Board member Renken stated that he understands that changes are sometimes made
to address desires of buyers and acknowledged that some of the changes may not be
an issue from an aesthetic perspective. He expressed concern that it appears that this
particular developer may not have completely thought through the interior floor plans
prior to presenting the elevations of the homes for Board review. He stated that there
are numerous ways to resolve the half-timber detailing.
In response to questions from Board member Renken, Ms. Baehr stated that the staff
report recommends that the half-timber detailing above the bay windows remain as
originally approved or as close to the original approvals as possible.
Building Review Board Minutes – 9/7/2022 Page 3 of 5
Hearing no further comments from the Board, Chairman Diamond invited a motion.
Board member Bluhm made a motion to recommend approval of an additional design
option for the Brunswick Tudor model type in the Amberley Woods Courtyard Homes
development based on the findings in the staff report and incorporating the Board’s
deliberations as additional findings. He stated that the recommendation is subject to
the following conditions of approval.
1. The stucco half-timber detailing shall remain as originally approved.
All conditions of the conditions of the original approval remain in effect.
The motion was seconded by Board member Downey and approved by a vote of 4 to 0.
4. Continued consideration of a request for approval for exterior lighting for Bank of
America, at 780 Western Avenue.
Property Owner: Swarthout Family LLC and Bank of America
Project Representative: Steve Wilkinson and Daniel Bundschuh, project managers
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. Bundschuh stated that he and Mr. Wilkinson are employed by Bancare, Inc., the
company hired by Bank of America to complete lighting upgrades at various Bank of
America sites. He stated that in July, a preliminary lighting plan was presented to the
Board and a revised plan is now presented based on the comments heard at the earlier
meeting. He stated that the total number of light fixtures proposed on the building was
reduced from 16 to 8 fixtures. He stated that the lamp posts previously proposed in the
planting beds along Western Avenue were eliminated. He added that the existing
landscaping on the north side of the building is maintained with the current plan. He
presented new light fixtures noting that they were selected based on the direction of the
Board to be more in keeping with the style of the building and the surrounding area. He
stated that the light fixtures will be either matte black or bronze. He noted that the Bank
of America does not permit motion sensors on exterior lights due to safety concerns he
added however that the proposed lights will have low, medium and high settings. He
noted that the wall mounted light fixtures are now proposed at a consistent nine foot
height instead of at various heights around the building. He stated that information on
the current lighting levels on the property is included in the Board’s packet. He stated
that the existing recessed lights in the ATM drive-thru lanes will be replaced.
Ms. Baehr stated that the revised plans appear to address most of the Board’s
comments from the previous meeting. She noted that the petitioner provided options
for the fixtures for the wall mounted lights, and she requested input from the Board on
the most appropriate fixture. She stated that lighting plan as now presented indicates
new light fixtures and one additional fixture above all of the ATM drive-thru lanes
however, only one lane is currently active. She stated that the staff report recommends
that the new recessed, and brighter, lighting only be installed in the active ATM drive-
thru lane. She stated that the drive-thru lane appears to be very well-lit with the current
Building Review Board Minutes – 9/7/2022 Page 4 of 5
number of fixtures and recommended elimination of the additional fixture. She stated
that an after hours/overnight lighting reduction plan has not yet been submitted and is
required as a recommended condition of approval.
Board member Downey thanked the petitioner for reducing the number of light fixtures
proposed on the building. She noted that one of the fixture types proposed is very similar
to the existing light fixtures on the building adjacent to the Bank of America with the
exception that the existing fixtures are green. She stated that the petitioner may want to
consider matching the color of the existing light fixtures.
Board member Bluhm agreed with staff’s recommendations and stated support for the
bronze fixture.
In response to questions from Board member Bluhm, Mr. Bundschuh explained that the
two new light fixtures are proposed directly adjacent to the walk-up ATM.
In response to questions from Board member Renken, Mr. Bundschuh stated that all the
lighting on the building will be on from dusk until dawn. He stated that after the light
fixtures are approved by the Board, a lighting reduction plan will be prepared for staff
review.
In response to questions from Chairman Diamond, Mr. Bundschuh clarified that both the
black and bronze fixtures have a matte finish.
Board member Renken stated support for a black or bronze fixture as opposed to a
green light fixture. He stated support for the fixture labeled “option one”.
In response to questions from Board member Renken, Mr. Bundschuh stated that the
light fixtures will be mounted to the exterior walls with a curved arm at the top of the
fixture. He explained that the two fixtures presented are similar in shape and range from
9 to 14 inches round.
Chairman Diamond stated that black light fixtures will blend in with the building. He also
stated support for the fixture labeled “option one”. He read comments from Board
member Looby into the record noting that he is pleased with the petitioner’s response
and supports the staff recommendation.
Hearing no further comments or questions from the Board, Chairman Diamond invited
public testimony. Hearing none, he invited a motion.
Board member Renken made a motion to recommend approval of an exterior lighting
plan for the Bank of America, 780 Western Avenue, based on the findings in the staff
report. He stated that the Board’s deliberations are incorporated as additional findings.
He stated that the recommendation is subject to the following conditions of approval.
1. Lighting shall only be installed above the drive-thru ATM lane(s) in use.
2. The current number of recessed light fixtures under the drive-thru canopy shall be
Building Review Board Minutes – 9/7/2022 Page 5 of 5
maintained and the additional light fixture proposed under the drive-thru canopy
shall be eliminated.
3. After installation, the lighting intensity shall be evaluated by staff to verify
consistency with lighting levels in the area. The intensity of the lighting shall be
reduced if determined to be necessary by staff.
4. An after hours lighting reduction plan shall be provided indicating a reduction in
the number of lights that remain on during the overnight hours and/or indicating
a reduction in the light levels or intensity during overnight hours.
5. Any modifications to the plan, either to response to direction from the Board or
changes made for other reasons, must be submitted for review and a
determination by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, that the
plans are in conformance with the approvals granted and the conditions prior to
submitting a complete application and plans for a building permit.
The motion was seconded by Board member Downey and approved by a vote of 4 to 0.
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.
There was no additional information presented by staff.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:06 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennifer Baehr
Planner