The City of Lake Forest Building Review Board met Oct. 3.
Here is the minutes provided by the board:
A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Building Review Board was held on Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 6:30 p.m., at the Municipal Services Building, 800 Field Drive, Lake Forest, Illinois.
Building Review Board members present: Chairman Ted Notz and Board members, Jim Diamond, Richard Walther, Chris Bires and Ross Friedman
Building Review Board members absent: Fred Moyer and Bob Reda
Staff present: Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development and Jennifer Baehr, Assistant Planner
1. Introduction of Board members and staff, overview of meeting procedures– Chairman Notz
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 and staff to introduce themselves.
2. Consideration of the minutes of the September 5, 2018 meeting of the Building Review Board.
The minutes of the September 5, 2018 meeting were approved with one correction as requested by Board member Friedman.
3. Consideration of a request for approval of a new residence and attached garage on vacant property. Approval of a conceptual landscape plan is also requested. The property is located at 710 Green Briar Lane.
Owners: Richard & Lena Hall
Representative: Richard Hall
Chairman Notz introduced the project. He asked the Board members for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Mr. Hall introduced the petition and explained that considerable work has been done to develop a plan that addresses drainage and grading concerns on the site. He stated that brick is proposed as the primary façade material, asphalt shingles for the roof, and aluminum clad windows. He explained that stucco chimneys are proposed for unique family health reasons, to avoid the use of porous brick. He acknowledged that the west elevation features a large of unbroken wall explaining that windows are not desired in the garage and master bedroom. He noted that the garage has windows on the front elevation and an unbroken wall in the bedroom is desired for ease of furniture placement.
Ms. Czerniak stated that this property and neighboring properties are encumbered by an overland stormwater flow route through the rear yards which presents challenges and certain limitations in siting a home on the properties. She explained that previously, the property in this request was part of the property to the west and a single house was located on the combined parcels. She stated that a developer purchased the property, demolished the house and subdivided the property into two buildable lots. She stated that the neighborhood is made of small lots and noted that in recent years, some transition has occurred in the area including demolitions, construction of replacement houses and additions to existing homes. She acknowledged that the development activity has added to the appearance of building massing along the streetscape. She stated that the property proposed for development is a long narrow lot with the proposed residence sited toward the front of the lot to accommodate the overland flow route in the rear yard. She pointed out that a depression will be created immediately behind the house to retain water during heavy storms as it moves from west to east across the backyards. She stated that portions of the rear yard will be encumbered with a recorded drainage easement limiting any future construction or obstruction of the water flow through the area. She acknowledged that drainage is not within the purview of the Building Review Board but noted that it is of great concern to neighboring property owners. She explained that the petitioner, at the request of the City Engineer, initially prepared a grading plan that pushed the drainage easement to the rear of the property. She noted that approach requires tree removal and re- grading on the neighboring property to the east to accommodate the shift in the flow of water to the rear of the yards, away from the homes. She stated that although the plan makes sense from a long term perspective, the neighboring property owner is not in a position to make changes on her property at this time. She stated that the City engineer reviewed the preliminary drainage plan and the final grading and drainage plan will be subject to his approval. She stated that the petitioner refined some design aspects of the house in response to staff comments. She noted however that the west elevation is long and unbroken and suggested that a trellis or landscaping could be used to mitigate the expanse of wall. She stated that a more detailed landscape plan is needed as the project moves forward. She noted that the City’s Design Guidelines require masonry chimneys, rather than the use of stucco for that element. She asked for Board direction on the aspects of the project noted by staff. She stated that findings in support of the project are included in the staff report along with recommended conditions of approval.
In response to questions from Board member Diamond, Mr. Hall stated that landscaping on the property is limited in some areas due to the need for swales and a depressional area to handle water moving across the property. He confirmed that coach lights are proposed on the garage and at the front and rear doors. He confirmed that true cement stucco will be used.
In response to Board member Friedman, Mr. Hall stated that the architect is Eric McAlpine. He stated that steel is proposed for portions of the roof and reviewed that wood will be used for the soffits, copper for the flashing, and aluminum for the gutters and downspouts. He stated that the railings are wrought iron.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Ms. Czerniak confirmed that the siting of the house, hardscape and landscaping is directed by the need to grade the property to accommodate stormwater flows that occur in the area. She confirmed that although overland flow routes cannot be obstructed by plantings, a landscape plan should be developed for other portions of the property.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Hall stated that the driveway is asphalt and the turnaround area is approximately 24 feet. He stated that the driveway is about three feet from the property line.
Board member Friedman stated that it will be important to landscape the area between the driveway and the property line.
In response to questions from Board member Bires, Mr. Hall confirmed that the trim will be wood and the garage door, insulated steel.
In response to questions from Board member Walther, Mr. Hall stated that the downspouts will be connected to the storm sewer. He stated that brick soldier courses will be used on the gable ends and frieze boards will be used elsewhere to detail the top of the brick walls. He stated that no fencing is proposed.
Board member Walther suggested that the west elevation could be softened with the addition of openings or a raised brick detail shown on other elevations of the house.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Hall confirmed that stucco is proposed for the chimney and dormers. He reviewed the areas where a raised brick detail is proposed.
Chairman Notz agreed that the raised brick detail or an alternate brick pattern would be an acceptable solution to address the unbroken expanse of wall on the west elevation without adding windows. Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Notz invited public comments.
Ann Russell, 720 Green Briar Lane, stated that she has no objection to the design of the proposed residence but is concerned about drainage impacts on her home. She stated that the proposed drainage plan directs water to the City’s storm sewer but noted that at times, the sewer surcharges.
In response to question from the Board, Ms. Czerniak acknowledged that during very heavy storm events, storm sewers in the area have surcharged. She stated that as properties in the area developed decades ago, low areas and overland stormwater flow routes were filled. She stated that as redevelopment has occurred, the City has worked with property owners to re-establish flow routes, swales and depressional areas in an effort to manage water during heavy storms. She reiterated that the City Engineer is requiring that a drainage easement be recorded on this property to assure that going forward, the depressional areas are not filled or planted in a way that reduces the capacity to retain stormwater. She added that the City recently finished smoke testing in various areas of the City to identify cross connections that may still exist between the sanitary and storm sewer. She stated that that after the results are available, repairs will need to be made to both public and private sewer lines in an effort to reduce flows in storm sewers so that there is more capacity to handle heavy storm events. She stated that the storm sewers are not designed to handle a 100 year rain event. She stated that although the City Council will likely continue to allocate funds to improve storm sewers, homeowners may benefit from taking action on private properties to accommodate heavy storms such as creating rain gardens, areas that will retain water away from homes during the heaviest storms.
In response to questions from Board member Diamond, Ms. Czerniak stated that she is not aware of any pending storm sewer improvements planned for this area.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Ms. Russell stated that the vegetation at the rear of her property consists of oaks and buckthorn and is healthy. She added that at this time, she does not desire to remove trees and regrade her property and incur the resulting costs to do so.
Chairman Notz invited further public comment.
Joe Manning, 690 Greenview Place, confirmed that in past storms Green Briar Lane and the property proposed for development held a significant amount of water. He stated that there is concern in the neighborhood about the scale of the new development that is occurring and the drainage capacity of the area.
In response to questions from Mr. Manning, Mr. Hall stated that full brick is proposed for the exterior of the residence. He explained that the original floor plan located the garage on the east side of the property however, due to the need to accommodate a depressional area for stormwater, the garage was required to be flipped to the west side of the property.
Fiona McCarthy, 700 Green Briar Lane, stated that Mr. Hall built her house on the adjacent property to the west. She stated that since the redevelopment and regrading of her property, she has had no drainage issues. She noted that she too was required to regrade her property to include swales and depressional areas. She stated that she has a finished basement with a full bathroom and has not had any water issues because the regrading keeps the water away from the house. She stated that Bleck Engineering prepared the grading plan for her property as well as the plan for the petition now before the Board.
Hearing no further public comments, Chairman Notz asked the Board for final comments.
Board member Walther observed that the proposed regrading and compensatory storage will improve drainage in the area and reduce flows to the east.
Board member Bires stated agreed that a raised brick detail on the west elevation will be sufficient to break up the long, unbroken wall.
Board member Friedman commended the architectural integrity of the proposed residence. He encouraged consideration of widening the windows noting that refinement could benefit the overall design.
Board member Diamond stated agreement with the comments of the other Board members with respect to adding detailing to the west elevation.
Hearing no further comments, Chairman Notz invited a motion.
Board member Friedman made a motion to recommend approval of the new residence, attached garage, conceptual landscape plan and overall site plan based on the findings in the staff report and incorporating the Board’s discussion. He noted that the recommendation is subject to the following conditions of approval.
1. The west elevation shall be revised to add detailing to break up the long, unbroken wall.
2. Any further modifications made to the plans as a result of final design development or in response to comments offered during the Board’s review shall be clearly called out as part of the submittal for building permit. A copy of the plans as submitted to the Board for review shall accompany the plans submitted for permit and areas of change shall be highlighted in some manner. 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 applicable Code requirements and will be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer with specific attention paid to mitigating impacts on the neighboring property to the east. Grading or filling on the site should be kept to the absolute minimum necessary to meet good engineering practices and to properly direct drainage.
4. A landscape plan shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit. The plan shall reflect appropriate open spaces as required to accommodate drainage and detention on the site. To the extent possible, the 59 replacement inches shall be planted on site using species and sizes as approved by the City Engineer. If the replacement inches cannot be accommodated on the site, payment in lieu of on-site plantings shall be required to support streetscape plantings in the surrounding neighborhood.
• In particular, the landscape plan shall reflect plantings along the east property line to screen the driveway and visibility of the garage doors, to the extent possible, from the neighboring home and the streetscape. The final landscape plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City Arborist.
5. Tree Protection Plan – Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a plan to protect trees identified for preservation and to protect trees and vegetation on neighboring properties during construction must be submitted and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist.
6. All exterior lighting shall be directed downward, not out. All sources of light shall be fully screened by fixtures or obscured glass and shall not be visible from off of the site. Cut sheets of all exterior light fixtures shall be submitted along with construction plans submitted for permit.
7. A plan for construction parking and material 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. Construction parking should be accommodated on site due to the narrowness of the road and proximity of the intersection. If necessary, contractors may need to park at remote locations be shuttle to the work site.
The motion was seconded by Board member Diamond and approved by a vote of 5 to 0.
4. Consideration of a request for approval of a new residence, attached garage, conceptual landscape plan and overall site plan at 20 N. Western Avenue, the site of a previous demolition.
Owners: Richard & Regina Lindstrom
Representative: Scott Renken, Renken Architects & Builders
Chairman Notz introduced the project. He asked the Board members for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Mr. Renken introduced the project. He stated that the property is just west of the intersection of Western Avenue and Ryan Place and a fence obscures the property from the street. He noted that the property is approximately 70 feet wide and 300 feet long. He stated that the previous house on the property was recently demolished by a different owner noting that the existing curb cut and driveway alignment will remain to avoid impacting vegetation. He reviewed the proposed residence noting the attached three-car, side load garage at the front of the house. He stated that the garage doors will not be visible from the street due to the siting of the house, the vegetation and fence. He noted that the house is located behind the garage with an enclosed link between the two. He stated that configuration of the house is driven by the long, narrow lot. He pointed out the location of mechanical equipment, on the south elevation, adjacent to the link between the garage and house. He stated that the air conditioner units will be screened by a solid five foot fence and landscaping. He stated that the house is design in the Shingle Style, with Craftsman influences. He explained that the design of the residence includes a simple front to back gable, a cross gable form, and two minor masses that extend from the main mass on the rear. He stated that the building materials include stone along the base, synthetic lap siding on the lower portions of the exterior wall, and cedar shingle on the upper level. He stated that the property owners would like to use an engineered wood product for the trim, soffit and fascia material. He stated that architectural asphalt shingles are proposed for the roof with metal roofs planned for minor elements. He stated that fiberglass windows are proposed.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Renken confirmed that the lower portion of the walls are horizontal lap siding and the upper portions of the exterior walls and the gable ends are cedar shingles.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Renken stated that the siding exposure and the shingles are both proposed at six inches.
In response to questions from Board member Walther, Mr. Renken stated that the stone base of the house will be capped with a limestone band. He confirmed that corner boards are now planned instead of flared corners as reflected on the original plans presented to the Board.
Chairman Notz invited staff comments.
Ms. Baehr reviewed the recommendations in the staff report and requested Board input on the proposed use of synthetic materials instead of natural materials. She added that consideration should be given to further detailing of the side elevations to break up the long expanse of wall. She noted that the house on the property to the south faces north, toward the side of the proposed house so it will be important to assure that adequate screening is provided along the south property line for the benefit of both properties.
In response to questions from Board member Walther, Mr. Lindstrom stated that the existing fence on the west property line, along Western Avenue, will likely be replaced with a similar solid wood fence.
In response to questions from Board member Walther, Mr. Renken stated that the stone along the base of the house will be four inches thick.
In response to questions from Board member Bires, Mr. Renken stated that the column will be either wood, engineered wood or fiberglass. He stated that the surface of the porch is bluestone. He confirmed that all of the exterior light fixtures will match. He stated that after discussions with neighbors to the south, it was agreed that the south property line will be landscaped but that no fence will be installed.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Renken stated that the soffits will be wood or a synthetic product if approved by the Board. He stated that the flashing material will be a prefinished aluminum, the garage doors insulated metal, and the front door either mahogany or oak.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Lindstrom stated that synthetic siding is proposed for ease of maintenance.
Board member Friedman acknowledged that the proposed residence will have little visibility from the street because of the vegetation and fence along Western Avenue.
In response to a comment in the staff report, Mr. Renken stated the north elevation is intentionally void of windows due to the proximity of the neighbor to the north.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Ms. Czerniak confirmed that the previous house on the property was before the Board a few years ago for approval of an addition and renovations. She stated that after work got underway, it was determined that the house could not be salvaged and it was demolished for health and safety reasons. She confirmed that the current petition is from different owners.
In response to questions from Board member Diamond, Mr. Renken stated that the chimney will match the stone used on the base of the house. He stated that the decorative bracket will be wood or a synthetic material.
Chairman Notz observed that although the house is sited forward of the neighboring homes, there is limited visibility from the street.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Renken reviewed the south elevation of the garage noting the proposed double window.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Lindstrom stated a preference for two double windows or a triple window on the south elevation of the garage to break up the wall.
In response to Board member Walther, Mr. Lindstrom agreed that landscaping could be added to soften the long unbroken wall on the north elevation.
Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Notz invited public comments. Hearing none, he invited final comments from the Board.
Board member Diamond stated that the project appears to satisfy the applicable criteria.
Board member Friedman stated that the proposed residence is well proportioned and complimented the massing and materials. He noted the importance of executing a landscape plan that is at the same level of quality and detail as the house to achieve the intended end product.
Board member Bires expressed his support for the petition and stated support for a triple window on the south elevation of the garage as desired by the property owner.
Board member Walther agreed with other Board members and stated that he also supports the modification to the window on the south elevation of the garage.
Chairman Notz stated that the specific resolution to the windows on the south elevation of the garage should be left to the property owners but agreed with the concept of further breaking up the wall and appearance of mass of the garage. He encouraged the petitioners to work with staff on the final resolution of that element. He invited a motion.
Board member Friedman made a motion to recommend approval of the new residence, attached garage, conceptual landscape plan and overall site plan based on the findings in the staff report and incorporating the Board’s discussion. He noted that the recommendation is subject to the following conditions of approval.
1. The plans shall be modified to address the following:
a. Modify the south elevation of the garage to break up the appearance of unbroken mass.
b. Wood shall be used for the window and door trim, fascia,
soffits and brackets as specified on the Description of Exterior Materials form submitted by the petitioners.
2. All modifications made to the plans that were presented to the Board in response to Board direction including the modifications and clarifications specified above, 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 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. Details of exterior lighting shall be provided on the plans submitted for permit. All fixtures shall direct light downward and the source of the light shall be fully shielded from view by the fixture or by sight obscuring glass. Cut sheets of all fixtures shall be included in the submission for permit.
4. The final landscape plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City Arborist and shall specifically provide for screening along the north and south property lines. The plan must reflect a total of 56 replacement inches or, a payment in lieu of on-site planting will be required if determined by the City Arborist that full replacement plantings cannot be accommodated on the site.
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 parking of construction vehicles is permitted on Western Avenue
The motion was seconded by Board member Diamond and was approved by a 5 to 0 vote.
5. Consideration of a request for approval of a new residence, attached garage, conceptual landscape plan and overall site plan on vacant property located at 1500 Sage Court.
Owner: Rialto Capital, Kevin Borkenhagen, Director
Representative: Rachel Wallis, Icon Building Group
6. Consideration of a request for approval of a new residence, attached garage, conceptual landscape plan and overall site plan on vacant property located at 590 Broadsmoore Drive.
Owners: Arthur & Kathleen Daniels
Representative: Edward Twohey, BBA Architects
Chairman Notz introduced the project. He asked the Board members for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Mr. Twohey introduced the project. He stated that the property is a lot in-depth and is tucked behind the homes along Broadsmoore Drive. He reviewed the proposed site plan and floor plans. He noted that the site will be regraded just enough to direct drainage away from the home. He stated that landscaping is proposed to enhance the existing plantings along the rear of the property, soften the building foundation and screen the hardscape areas. He stated that the design of the residence is a contemporary interpretation of an English Style home. He reviewed some changes that were made since the Board packets were prepared and clarified that the primary façade material is stucco with limestone detailing, the steeply-pitched roof is slate and the low-pitched roofs are proposed as metal. He stated that the dormers are clad with zinc panels and the gutters and downspouts are zinc-coated copper. He stated that natural stone is proposed for the base of the house. He stated that hardscaped is proposed as limestone and bluestone. He pointed out the large window well on the north elevation to provide natural light into the basement.
Ms. Baehr requested Board input on the proposed complex roof forms, dormers and various connecting elements on the roof. She stated that some simplification of the roof forms and massing may be appropriate.
Board member Walther agreed that the roof forms are complicated. He noted that the dormers vary in size based on the dimensions provided on the elevations and are not consistent around the house.
In response to questions from Board member Walther, Mr. Twohey explained that the elevation drawings reflect a flat impression of the dormers and causes them to appear different than the actual dimensions. He clarified that the dormers are in different plans and will not appear as shown on the elevations.
In response to a question from Board member Bires, Mr. Twohey confirmed that the zinc panels on the dormers are similar in color to the roof material.
In response to questions from Board member Walther, Mr. Twohey explained that the knee wall along the perimeter of the parking court will be approximately 24 inches high and 16 inches wide. He provided samples of proposed exterior materials.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Twohey confirmed that the horizontal stone banding will be aligned on all elevations.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Twohey stated that the horizontal stone band between the stacked veneer stone is intended to be 2 or 2 1⁄2 inches, different from the sample provided.
In response to questions from Board member Bires, Mr. Daniels confirmed that the same stone will be used for the base of the house and the chimneys. He stated that most of the existing vegetation on the property is buckthorn and brush. He stated that dense landscaping is planned along the west and north property lines after the buckthorn is removed. He stated that a garage door material has not yet been selected but noted that the visual intent is a stained wood door.
Board member Bires agreed the prior comments that the roof appears complicated and appears to incorporate various forms and elements.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Twohey stated that the front door will be steel.
In response to questions from Board member Friedman, Mr. Daniels confirmed that the paved service area on the south side of the house can only be accessed through the garage. He stated that the front stoop is bluestone. He stated that a decision has not yet been made on the driveway edging material. He stated that A&J Landscape will do the site work and landscaping. He stated the intent to have cleaner, austere landscaping close to the residence to compliment the architecture, and more natural landscape away from the home. He stated that the light fixtures are a Bevolo product.
In response to questions from Board member Diamond, Mr. Twohey stated that the windows are wood with metal cladding and narrow stiles and rails. He stated that the scupper material is zinc-coated copper. He explained that the reason for the multiple roof forms is to create a presence on a large site that is setback from the street.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Twohey reviewed the location of the window well, in front of the bay window in the kitchen. He stated that the connecting dormers between the gable roof forms is an adaptation of a contemporary butterfly roof element. He explained that the dormers are configured to avoid exceeding the allowable square footage. He stated that alternatives were explored however, the owners prefer the butterfly roof form. He stated that the columns for the rear and screen porches are wood.
In response to questions from Chairman Notz, Mr. Daniels explained that the paved area on the south side of the garage is a basketball court and provides access to storage for the pool and lawn equipment. He clarified that it is not intended for service vehicles.
Board member Friedman recognized that the property has almost no visibility from the street. He noted however, landscaping will be important since the landscaping will be seen from the street. He stated that the residence should be an appropriate design but stressed that the landscaping is key for this project.
In response to questions from Board member Walther, Mr. Daniels stated that no driveway gate is proposed but noted that one pier or post at the end of the driveway is planned to identify the driveway entrance.
Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Notz invited public comment. Hearing none, he stated concern with the design and massing of the connecting dormers noting that he is not convinced that the design is appropriate or well thought out. He acknowledged however that to Board member Friedman’s point, the residence will be very difficult to see from the street. Hearing no further questions, he invited a motion from the Board.
Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Notz invited a motion.
Board member Friedman made a motion to recommend approval of the new residence, attached garage, conceptual landscape plan and overall site plan based on the findings presented in the staff report and incorporating the Board’s discussion. He stated that the recommendation is subject to the following conditions of approval.
1. Further study and evaluation of the connecting dormer elements shall be undertaken in an effort to achieve simpler massing and a less complex roof form.
2. Any modifications made to the plans as a result of final design development or in response to comments offered during the Board’s review shall be clearly called out as part of the submittal for building permit. A copy of the plans as submitted to the Board for review shall accompany the plans submitted for permit and areas of change shall be highlighted in some manner. 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. Details of exterior lighting, if any is proposed, shall be submitted with the plans submitted for permit. All fixtures shall direct light downward and the source of the light shall be fully shielded from view by the fixture or by sight obscuring glass. Cut sheets of all fixtures shall be submitted with the construction plans.
4. The final landscape plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City Arborist. The arborist shall review the plan to assure 1) adequate replacement of plantings in any area where buckthorn or other existing vegetation is removed and 2) significant plantings between the house and the street.
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. Construction vehicles shall be accommodated on the site.
The motion was seconded by Board member Diamond and was approved by a 5 to 0 vote.
OTHER ITEMS
7. Opportunity for the public to address the Building Review Board on non-agenda items.
There was no additional public testimony presented to the Board.
8. Additional information from staff.
No additional information was presented from staff. The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 p.m.
https://www.cityoflakeforest.com/assets/1/27/Building_Review_Board_Minutes_10.3.18.pdf
Alerts Sign-up