Lake County Gazette

City of Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission met Aug. 26.

Here is the minutes provided by the commission:

A meeting of the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission was held 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.

Historic Preservation Commissioners present remotely: Chairman Bruce Grieve and Commissioners Carol Gayle, Jan Gibson, Steve Lamontagne, Ron Levitsky, Robin Petit, and Elizabeth Sperry

Commissioners absent: None

City staff present: Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development Jennifer Baehr, Assistant Planner

1. Introduction of Commissioners and staff, overview of meeting procedures.

Chairman Grieve announced that he made a determination that an in-person meeting is not prudent or feasible due to the Covid-19 pandemic. He reviewed the meeting procedures followed by the Commission and asked the members of the Commission and staff to introduce themselves. He noted that members of the public will be able to offer testimony on each petition and on non-agenda items by calling the number provided on the agenda and on the screen.

2. Consideration of the minutes of the July 22, 2020 meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission.

The minutes of the July 22, 2020 were approved as presented.

3. Continued consideration of a request for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for a new residence on a vacant lot located at 450 Washington Road. The Commission will also consider the associated site plan, proposed tree removal and landscape plan.

Property Owner: Lakeshore Historic Properties, LLC

(Arthur & Anne Mertes, 99%, & Kathleen Mertes, 1%)

Representative: Austin DePree & Keith Labutta, Northworks Architects

Chairman Grieve asked the Commission for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner.

Mr. DePree introduced the project design team. He noted that his firm has completed previous projects in the City’s Historic Districts. He explained that the property owners listened to the comments and concerns raised by the Commission at the last meeting and the plan was revised accordingly. He noted that the changes include modifications of the building footprint, massing, architectural detailing and fenestration. He stated that as a result of the changes, the residence more closely aligns with the surrounding historic neighborhood. He acknowledged the concerns raised by the Lake Forest Preservation Foundation regarding the style of the residence. He stated that in his opinion, the character and richness of the community is enhanced by a variety of architectural styles.

Mr. Labutta reviewed the existing site conditions and the architectural styles found in the surrounding neighborhood. He explained that at the previous meeting, the Commission questioned whether the architectural style as presented sufficiently defined and whether various elements of the house were compatible with the surrounding historic neighborhood. He stated that the revised plans present a home designed in the Colonial Revival architectural style, with consistency on all elevations. He stated that the Colonial Revival style is common throughout the neighborhood and is fitting for this particular site. He explained that the elements of the home such as the massing, roof elements, exterior materials and openings are now designed consistent with the Colonial Revival style. He noted that elements such as a front entry portico, shutters, and dormers were incorporated into the design of the home and are common features of the Colonial Revival style. He added that these elements bring a human scale to the appearance of the home. He stated that the revised color palette includes off-white wood siding and gray shutters. He noted that the building footprint was modified to add a projecting mass on the north side of the house to add depth to the front elevation of the home. He explained that the fenestration pattern was studied and revised and now presents a more regular and balanced appearance. He stated that a preliminary grading and drainage plan was submitted to the City. He stated that the proposed landscape plan was revised to address concerns raised at the previous meeting. He explained that landscaping along the north and south property lines is enhanced to the extent possible to buffer the existing homes from the new development. He noted that the plantings previously proposed in the utility easement on the south property line were removed to keep the easement clear.

Ms. Baehr explained that this petition was reviewed by the Commission in June, and the Commission voted to continue the project to allow the petitioner to consider the comments from the Commission and the neighbors and refine the plans in response. She stated that the comments offered at the previous meeting are detailed in the staff report. She noted that the petitioner submitted an updated statement of intent which responds to each of the comments raised by the Commission. She stated that the revised plans reflect substantial changes from the plans originally considered by the Commission. She explained that one of the key revisions made in response to comments offered at the last meeting was that the style of the home was changed to Colonial Revival to be more compatible with the surrounding historic neighborhood. She added that with the change to the Colonial Revival style, the various elements of the home such as the roof forms, the window proportions, and architectural detailing were modified to reflect the Colonial Revival style. She stated that elements such as a front entry portico, pergola and dormers are now incorporated into the design and help to break up the mass of the home. She explained that the exterior materials were modified for consistency with the Colonial Revival style noting that wood clapboard siding and a wood shingle roof are now proposed. She added that the color palette was changed and is now subtle, in keeping with the colors of the surrounding homes. She stated that the landscape plan was revised to include more evergreen plantings along the south property line to provide screening between the new home and the properties to the south. She noted that the neighbor to the south submitted a letter requesting a more substantial landscape buffer in the area of the garage. She stated that staff will continue to work with the petitioner on the landscaping and once the project begins to take shape during construction, the screening along the south property line will be reevaluated to ensure that there is a sufficient landscape buffer while at the same time, preserving an open area along the utility easement. She stated that overall, the revisions respond to the comments at the last meeting and the design of the home appears much more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. She stated that the staff report includes a recommendation for approval and findings in support of the recommendation.

Commissioner Sperry commended the petitioner on the changes made to the plans. She stated that the exterior materials and architectural detailing present an elegant appearance.

In response to questions from Commissioner Sperry, Mr. DePree explained that the proposed color for the wood siding is “Dove White” and the color for the shutters is Benjamin Moore “Platinum Gray”.

In response to questions from Commissioner Sperry, Mr. Labutta clarified that the exterior light fixtures shown on the color rendering were included as a place holder and do not accurately depict the fixtures that will be used.

Commissioner Lamontagne expressed appreciation to the petitioner and property owners for being receptive to the Commission’s comments offered at the previous meeting.

In response to questions from Commissioner Lamontagne, Mr. Labutta stated that the eave overhang will be between 12 and 18 inches. He stated that a 6 inch round gutter is proposed. He noted that the gutters will be white to match the house. He stated that the standing seam metal roofs will be gray, to resemble zinc. He clarified that both chimneys are the same size and identical in appearance.

Commissioner Gayle agreed with Commissioners Lamontagne and Sperry, commending the petitioner on the revisions made to the plans and for the responsiveness to the Commission’s comments. She expressed admiration for the simplicity of the current design.

Historic Preservation Commission Minutes – August 26, 2020 Page 3 of 17

Commissioner Petit commended the petitioner on the thoughtfulness and thoroughness of the current proposal.

Commissioner Levitsky stated that the changes made to the design of the home are impressive.

In response to questions from Commission Levitsky, Mr. Labutta acknowledged that the window shutters on the rear elevation are very close to one another but confirmed that there will be a small exposure of clapboard between the shutters. He explained that the dormers above the garage were added to add to the human scale of the home. He stated that Bleck Engineering is working on the drainage plans.

Commissioner Gibson thanked the property owners for responding to the Commission’s concerns. She stated that the Colonial Revival style is fitting for the site.

In response to questions from Commissioner Gibson, Mr. Labutta stated agreed that further refinements of the scale and size of the dormers is appropriate. He stated that it may be possible to raise the pitch of the roof on the screen porch and on the linking element between the house and garage to allow the use of wood shingles as opposed to the currently proposed metal standing seam roof.

In response to questions from Commissioner Gibson, Mr. DePree stated that metal roofs are common for secondary roof forms of historic architecture. He added that the dormers will be constructed using historic proportions with narrow side walls.

In response to questions from Commissioner Gibson, Ms. Baehr stated that the final color palette will be reviewed by staff to ensure the colors are consistent with the colors presented and approved by the Commission.

In response to questions from Commissioner Gibson, Ms. Czerniak stated that the concerns raised by the neighbor regarding drainage will be conveyed to the City Engineer. She confirmed that the City Engineering looks beyond the property lines when evaluating drainage plans. She added that a copy of the engineering plans can be provided to the neighbor if requested.

Hearing no further questions from the Commission, Chairman Grieve invited public testimony.

Michael Hrusovsky, 648 Waveland Road, reviewed the history of the Alling Subdivision and Brownsville area. He commended the petitioner on the design of the new residence.

Hearing no further public testimony, Chairman Grieve invited final comments from the Commission.

Commissioner Gibson expressed support for the project. She added that the drainage should be carefully reviewed. She stated that the final color palette should be submitted to City staff for review.

Commissioners Petit and Sperry expressed support for the petition.

Commissioner Gayle stated that the dormers do not appear necessary and encouraged the petitioner to consider eliminating them.

Commissioner Levitsky agreed with comments made by Commissioner Gayle about the dormers.

Commissioner Lamontagne stated that in his opinion, the dormers appear to add balance to the overall composition and present a human scale to the appearance of the home.

Chairman Grieve summarized the Commission’s comments. He stated agreement with Commissioner Lamontagne that the dormers appear to add character to the home. He stated that there may be value in revisiting the size of the dormers to ensure they are appropriately scaled. He noted that metal standing seam roofs are found throughout the Historic District and the use of a metal standing seam roof on the residence appears appropriate. Hearing no further comments from the Commission, he invited a motion.

Commissioner Gibson made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness for a new single family residence and attached garage on a vacant lot located at 450 Washington Road subject to the following conditions of approval.

1. Consideration should be given to eliminating the dormers or refining the scale and proportions of the dormers.

2. Plans submitted for permit must reflect the project as presented to the Commission. If any modifications are proposed in response to the Commission’s discussion and direction or, if changes result from further design development, plans clearly detailing the areas of change must be submitted at the time of submission for permit, along with the plans originally presented to the Commission, and will be subject to review by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, to verify that the plans are consistent with the intent of the Commission and the approvals granted.

3. At the time of submittal for a building permit, samples of the proposed exterior paint colors shall be provided for staff review.

4. At the time of submittal for a building permit, detailed drainage and grading plans must be submitted. The plans shall clearly reflect all existing trees and identify those proposed for removal and any additional trees that may be impacted by grading on the site or construction activity. Grading and filling shall be limited to the minimum necessary to meet accepted engineering standards in the interest of minimizing stress on the trees intended to remain and preserving the existing topography.

5. The final landscape plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City Arborist to assure that all vegetation removed or impacted by construction or grading is replaced as required by the Code. In addition, the plan must reflect adequate, year round screening along the south side of the house to the extent possible recognizing the presence of utility easements, to minimize views from on and off the property and to screen the mechanical equipment. At the time the final landscape plan is reviewed, a final calculation of replacement inches required will be completed and proposed species will be reviewed.

6. Plantings shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or, if that is not possible due to the time of year, a cash bond shall be posted in an amount of 110% of the plant materials and labor to assure planting during the next available planting seasons.

7. Tree Protection Plan – Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a plan to protect any trees identified for preservation during construction as well as trees on neighboring properties, must be submitted and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist. In addition, for any trees that, as determined by the City Arborist, may be impacted by construction activity, a plan for protection, including pre and post construction treatments as may be appropriate, must be prepared by an independent Certified Arborist and submitted with the building permit application. The tree protection plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist.

8. Details of exterior lighting, if any is proposed, shall be reflected on the plans submitted for permit. Cut sheets of all light fixtures should be provided and all fixtures shall direct light downward and the source of the light shall be shielded from view from off the property. The right to night, dark sky goals shall be satisfied. All exterior lights, except for motion detection lights, shall be on timers set to turn off no later than 11 p.m.

9. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a plan for construction parking and materials’ staging shall be submitted to the City for review and will be subject to City approval in an effort to minimize impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. Due to the narrow, curving road no parking of construction related vehicles on the street is permitted.

The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gayle and approved by a vote of 7 to 0.

4. Consideration of a request for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for a three car garage and mudroom addition and exterior alterations to an existing single family home at 237 E. Onwentsia Road.

Property Owners: Justin and Shannon Engelland

Representative: John Berta, architect

Chairman Grieve asked the Commission for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petition.

Ms. Engelland introduced the project. She explained that the home was built in 1939 and designed in the Colonial Revival style by architects Edwin Hill Clark and Chester Howe Walcott.

Mr. Engelland explained that the work proposed is intended to restore the home and update the floor plan to make it functional for their family. He added that the work proposed includes repair and replacement of rotting windows and trim, enclosing and insulating the sunroom on the south side of the house, restoring the iron balcony above the front door, and painting the exterior of the home. He added that a three car garage and mudroom addition are also proposed on the north side of the residence. He explained that the new garage will allow for the existing attached garage to be converted into a family room. He added that two bluestone terraces are proposed on the rear side of the house.

Mr. Berta gave an overview of the proposed site plan. He noted that the proposed three garage is set back from the front façade, on the northwest side. He stated that the garage is 38 feet long and 26 feet wide. He explained that the style of the proposed garage matches the existing home. He added that the garage will have a brick exterior and a slate roof. He stated that two shed dormers are proposed on the front of the garage to incorporate elements found on the home. He added that the windows on the garage will match the windows on the first level of the home. He stated that a new chimney is proposed on the north elevation and will match the existing chimney on the south elevation. He explained that French doors will be added to the rear elevation to provide access from the home to the new terraces. He stated that all the windows will be replaced to match the existing windows in size and profile. He described the proposed color palette. He stated that the proposed paint color for the exterior brick is intended to closely match the existing brick color. He added that the new garage will be painted to match the house.

Ms. Baehr stated that the property is located on the south side of Onwentsia Road, and is very narrow at the north end, at the street, widening as the lot extends to the south. She noted that the home is sited on the southern portion of the lot and has very minimal visibility from the street. She stated that the home was built in the late 1930’s and has a formal interior layout. She explained that the proposed alterations will convert the existing attached two car garage into a modern day family room space off of the existing kitchen. She added that with the existing garage being converted to living space, a new three car garage is proposed on the northwest side of the house and a mudroom addition will connect the garage to the existing home. She stated that the proposed garage is a single story structure with a steeply pitched hip roof to match the roof on the home and the exterior materials and architectural detailing of the garage and mudroom addition also match the house. She noted that the location of the garage allows for the driveway in its current configuration to remain, no changes are proposed to the driveway. She stated that the petitioner is also proposing various exterior alterations such as window replacement and painting the exterior. She explained that overall, the proposed alterations are consistent with the design and character of the existing house and help to create a more cohesive appearance on all elevations of the home. She stated that limited tree removal will be required to allow for construction of the garage and replacement inches will be required based on the size, species and condition of the trees removed. She added that staff recommends that to achieve the replacement inches, trees should be planted on the west side of the property to help screen the garage from the neighboring home. She stated that comments provided by the Lake Forest Preservation Foundation expressed some concern about a front loaded garage, however from staff’s perspective, because the garage is setback from the front of the house, it does not appear to compete or overwhelm the front façade. She added that there is also the opportunity to provide plantings on the east side of the property to mitigate any limited views of the garage from Green Bay Road as suggested by the Foundation. She stated that overall, the proposed garage and exterior alterations are in keeping with the style of the existing residence and will help make the home more functional for the property owners.

In response to questions from Commissioner Levitsky, Mr. Berta explained that the extent of repair to some of the elements is not fully known at this stage of the project but noted that the intent is to keep as much of the existing material as possible.

In response questions from Commissioner Levitsky, Mr. Engelland stated that they are currently working with a landscape architect to develop a plan for the existing vegetation on the site. He stated that there will be some selective removals to open up views across the property.

Commissioner Gayle commended the petitioner on the proposed alterations and design of the garage, adding that the new construction appears to blend very well with the existing home.

In response to questions from Commissioner Gayle, Mr. Engelland explained that they intend to install landscaping along the west side of the garage to provide screening for the neighboring property.

Commissioner Sperry expressed support for the project.

In response to questions from Commissioner Gibson, Mr. Berta stated that the garage is set back approximately 30 feet from the front façade of the home.

In response to questions from Commissioner Gibson, Mr. Engelland stated that the manufacturers they are considering for the replacement windows are Windsor and Marvin. He explained that the dormers are proposed on the front of the garage to break up the roof form as viewed from the front facade. He added that they will consider relocating the dormers to the rear to match the location of the dormers on the existing home.

In response to questions from Commissioner Lamontagne, Mr. Berta explained that the new chimney on north side of the house is completely straight, not tapered like the existing chimney on the south elevation because the new chimney must fit between the existing openings on the north wall.

Commissioner Petit stated that a more extensive landscape plan would be beneficial to the project.

In response to questions from Commissioner Petit, Mr. Berta stated that wall mounted light fixtures will be installed between the garage doors. He stated that the existing curved brick wall in front of the screen porch will be removed to allow views to and from the porch.

Hearing no further questions from the Commission, Chairman Grieve invited public testimony. Hearing none, he invited final comments from the Commission.

Commissioner Lamontagne encouraged the petitioner to revisit the shape and detailing of the chimney on the north elevation due to its prominence on the elevation as viewed from the approach to the home.

Commissioner Gibson agreed with Commissioner Lamontagne’s comments about the new chimney. She added that it will be important for the replacement windows to be of high quality to maintain the character and historic integrity of the home.

Commissioner Levitsky expressed support for the petition.

Commissioner Gayle commented that in her opinion, the garage is set back far enough from the east elevation of the residence to appropriately separate the masses and allow the home to remain as the focal point.

Commissioners Petit and Sperry expressed support for the project.

Chairman Grieve summarized the Commission’s comments. He encouraged the petitioner to revisit the chimney on the north elevation and the dormers on the garage. He added that installing landscaping along the foundation of the north elevation will help to soften the appearance of the chimney. Hearing no further comments from the Commission, he invited a motion.

Commissioner Lamontagne made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness for a three car garage, mudroom addition and exterior alterations to the single family home at 237 E. Onwentsia Road based on the findings presented in the staff report and subject to the following conditions of approval.

1. Consider eliminating the dormers on the front of the garage for consistency with the front elevation of the home.

2. Conduct further study of the shape and detailing of the chimney on the north elevation in an effort to provide a focal point when approaching the home and to reflect some elements of the style of the existing chimney.

3. Plans submitted for permit must reflect the project as presented to the Commission. If any modifications are proposed in response to direction provided by the Commission as detailed above, or as a result of design development, plans clearly detailing the areas of change must be submitted at the time of submission for permit, along with the plans originally presented to the Commission, and will be subject to review by staff, in consultation with the Chairman as appropriate, to verify that the plans are consistent with the intent of the Commission and the approvals granted.

4. The submittal for permit must include information prepared by a Certified Arborist detailing the species, size and condition of the trees proposed for removal to allow construction of the garage and mudroom addition. This information will be used to allow a determination of the total number of replacement inches required to be planted on site or compensated by a payment in lieu of on site planting.

5. A final landscape plan shall be submitted and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist. Replacement tree inches as determined to be required shall be reflected on the final landscape plan.

To the extent possible, some vegetation screening should be installed on the west side of the new garage to soften views of the garage mass from the open field to the east.

6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a plan to protect trees and vegetation identified for preservation during construction must be submitted and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist.

7. Details of exterior lighting, including, but not limited to, lights proposed on the garage shall be reflected on the plans submitted for permit. Cut sheets of all light fixtures should be provided and all fixtures shall direct light downward and the source of the light shall be shielded from view from off the property. The dark streetscape character shall be preserved.

8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a materials staging and construction vehicle parking plan must be submitted to the City for review and will be subject to City approval in an effort to minimize and manage impacts on the neighborhood, neighboring properties and existing trees and landscaping during construction. It appears that there is sufficient space on the property for material staging and construction parking so long as tree protection fencing is installed as needed.

The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gibson and approved by a vote of 7 to 0.

5. Consideration of a request for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for a new residence on a vacant lot located at 740 Washington Road. The Commission will also consider the associated site plan, tree removal and landscape plan. Property Owners: Hugh and Diane Zentmyer

Representative: Edward Deegan, architect

Phil Rosborough, landscape architect

Chairman Grieve asked the Commission for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petition.

Ms. Zentmyer stated that she and her husband are very excited to have the opportunity to build on this lot given the property’s significance within the community. She stated that Mr. Deegan and Mr. Rosborough have worked very hard to meet the requirements established by the Plat of Subdivision and have thoroughly studies the site.

Mr. Zentmyer explained that they began looking at the property over a year ago. He stated that due to complications created by the COVID-19 pandemic, the project was delayed. He stated that due to his and his wife’s age it is very important to them to move this project forward as quickly as possible. He explained that Mr. Deegan has designed a beautiful home that will be an asset to the community and the landscape architect has prepared a design that complements the home’s architecture.

Mr. Deegan explained that there are many challenges associated with this particular property due to the significant grade change across the site and existing trees on the property. He added that from east to west, there is 13 feet of grade change across the site and 7 feet of grade change across the proposed building footprint. He stated that the home previously located on this property, prior to subdivision, was generally in the location of the house as now proposed. He explained that the property owners require primarily a single story home.

Mr. Rosborough gave an overview of the site noting particular elements of the original Swift Estate property including an evergreen hedge, a granite bird bath, stone steps and a brick wall that will be preserved. He explained that the significant grade change on the property combined with a natural opening of vegetation along Washington Road drove the initial concept of locating the curb cut and driveway on the north side of the site. He commented that the initial concept was simpler, and the driveway required less of a grade change because Washington Road slopes downward from north to south. He explained that after feedback from City staff about the conditions of the subdivision, the plan was revised to locate the curb cut and driveway near the southeast corner of the lot through the historic Yew hedge. He stated that the driveway as now configured, curves around a significant Oak tree before arriving at a motor court at the front of the house. He explained that the proposed landscaping is intended to bring back the feeling of the original country estate, with a natural, park-like design. He noted that close to the residence, the plantings are more formal and organized. He stated that the east, north and west borders of the property have a substantial amount of evergreen plantings which will be augmented to maintain privacy between this property and neighboring properties. He stated that along the south property line, a new border of evergreens is proposed for screening. He presented photographs of the proposed plantings and garden elements including a stone wall and koi pond.

Mr. Deegan gave an overview of the various site studies that were completed. He reviewed the interior layout of the home noting that the floor plan is organized to provide ample natural light throughout the home and provide for single floor living. He explained that the massing of the home is comprised of projecting and recessed gable forms. He stated that the home is designed in an English Country style. He described the roof plan, noting that the higher pitch roofs are cedar shingle and have a 13:12 pitch and the lower pitch roofs are standing seam copper. He explained that a cupola is proposed to provide natural light into the kitchen. He described each of the proposed elevations. He noted that in particular, the front and rear elevations present depth and articulation as a result of the projecting and recessed forms and bay windows. He explained that the proposed exterior materials include a lime wash brick for the main façade material and wood siding on the bay windows. He described the references used for the English Country style. He presented various views from the proposed residence to the yard.

Ms. Baehr stated that the property is Lot 2 of the recently approved Swift Subdivision. She added that there are a total of four lots in the subdivision and this is the first lot to be developed. She explained that several notes were incorporated as part of the approval of the subdivision. She stated that one of the notes on the plat of subdivision speaks to tree preservation areas one of which is located at the north east corner of Lot 2. She added that the plat also specifies a front yard setback which exceeds that standard setback for the zoning district in order to preserve the streetscape. She explained that the site plan that is currently proposed is a result of discussions between staff about respecting the tree preservation areas as reflected on the plat of subdivision. She stated that the new residence is designed in the style of an English Country house and reflects a one and a half story massing with a combination of gable, hip and shed style roof forms. She added that the home features traditional detailing and high quality, natural materials consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. She explained that the elevations of the home generally reflect a regular fenestration pattern with the exception of the rear elevation which has larger expanses of openings to take advantage of views to the rear yard. She stated that there is a glass ridge above the kitchen, which is essentially a series of skylights at the ridge of the roof and a cupola element intended to allow natural light into the space below. She noted that it will be important to prevent light spillover to the adjacent properties and the streetscape both from these elements and from the large expanse of glass on the rear elevation. She stated that the proposed residence is generally in the location of the home originally on the site, and no existing trees are located within the footprint of the house or within the area of the motor court. She noted that one tree that is adjacent to the driveway will need to be removed and replacement inches for this tree have been accounted for with the proposed landscape plan. She stated that there is a very significant Oak tree that is in the front yard that is proposed to be preserved, a boulder wall is proposed around the tree to create a tree well in an effort to protect the tree given its location near the driveway and planned regrading. She added that the City Arborist reviewed the location of the driveway in relation to the Oak tree and suggested that the driveway be slightly adjusted to swing out further to the south to provide more space between the driveway and the tree in an effort to minimize impacts to the tree. She stated that as construction on the site gets underway the heritage oak tree along with other trees identified for preservation will be reevaluated on an on-going basis and if it is determined that the trees are negatively impacted by construction, additional replacement inches will be required based on the size, species and condition of the trees impacted. She stated that overall, the design of the home appears to fit in with the mix of homes in the surrounding neighborhood and the petitioner has made efforts to site the residence and configure the hardscape to minimize tree removal and to minimize longer term negative impacts on existing trees and vegetation.

Commissioner Sperry expressed support for the proposed material and color palette. She stated that as currently proposed the gable forms are in need of further articulation. She noted that the proposed windows on the gable ends appear very tall and narrow, and almost “church-like.” She suggested widening or lowering the windows. She added that given the large areas of glass, it appears there will be a large amount of ambient light emitted from the home that the neighbors may take issue with. She noted that cupola appears distracting.

In response to questions from Commissioner Sperry, Mr. Deegan explained that many of the architectural precedents they studied feature single windows or triple windows centered on gable forms that are narrow and vertical rather than horizontal. He noted that the home reflects many traditional details such as the jack-arches above the windows and limestone sills. He clarified that the home does not present a single plane along the elevation, but rather the massing is comprised of different volumes and elements that project from the main mass, creating depth and articulation.

Commissioner Lamontagne commended the petitioner on presenting a suitable historical architectural style that works with a single level floor plan and working with the many challenges associated with the site. He stated that the cupola does not appear to be consistent with the architectural style of the home.

In response to questions from Commissioner Lamontagne, Mr. Deegan stated that cupola elements can be found in historic examples of the chosen architectural style, however they were often louvered and did not contain glass. He explained that originally the cupola was much larger, but was scaled down in response to concerns raised by City staff. He stated that as currently proposed the cupola is 4 feet tall and 9 feet long. He stated that half-round copper gutters are proposed.

In response to questions from Commissioner Levitsky, Mr. Deegan explained that because of the large front yard setbacks on Lots 2 and 3, the homes that will be developed on these lots will be minimally visible from the street, as opposed to what will eventually be developed on Lots 1 and 4, which will be much closer to the street and have a stronger presence on the streetscape. He stated that the natural flow of water is from north to south and the proposed plan maintains the drainage pattern on this particular lot and does not spill over to Lot 3.

Commissioner Gibson expressed concern about the proposed windows. She added that many different size windows are proposed. She stated that the amount of light emitted from home will be significant and may draw complaints from the neighbors. She noted that the community has a dark character and it is important that that quality, particularly in this neighborhood, is maintained. She described the importance of this particular property in the context of the Historic District and the surrounding significant buildings.

In response to questions from Commissioner Gibson, Mr. Deegan clarified that skylights are not proposed, but what is visible on the roof plan is a glass ridge cap. He stated that all the windows will be fitted with electronic shades, adding that the property owners do not want to be the cause for complaints and want a home that is understated. He explained that the proposal balances the needs of the property owners and accomplishing a design that is stylistically compatible with the neighborhood. He explained that although there are different size windows, all the windows are proportionate to one another. He explained that the chimney has a brick corbel detail with a limestone cap and a spark arrestor on top which is a simple copper box with mesh.

Commissioner Gibson referenced the standards of the Historic Preservation Commission stating that the home as currently proposed does not meet the rhythm of solids to voids and compatibility standards.

Commissioner Petit reiterated the concerns about the large amounts of tall windows. She commended the architect on the site plan given the challenges of the site.

Commissioner Gayle expressed support of the design of the residence. She stated that she has some concern about the potential for light spillover given the large expanses of glass and the location of the driveway in relation to the significant oak tree in the front yard. She agreed with Commissioner Lamontagne’s comments about the cupola being inconsistent with the style of the house.

In response to questions from Chairman Grieve, Mr. Deegan confirmed that in some areas of the tall, stacked windows they are purely aesthetic and not needed to meet building code requirements.

Hearing no further questions from the Commission, Chairman Grieve invited public comment. Hearing none, he invited comments from the Commission.

Commissioner Lamontagne commended the design of the home adding that the home appears to have a nice presence on the site. He reiterated concerns about light spillover. He explained that some areas of the home could use some further refinement in order to more closely meet the standards of the Historic Preservation Ordinance.

Commissioner Gibson suggested eliminating the cupola element. She expressed concern about the concept of using shades to mitigate the light emitting from the home, adding that a home should not be designed with this concept in mind. She stated that the home does not appear to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. She suggesting conducting further study of the surrounding homes.

Commissioner Gayle commended the petitioner on the low-profile and understated qualities of the home. She stated that the style of the home does not appear to be so incompatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood as described by Commissioner Gibson. She stated that she has some reservations about the cupola and the windows could use some further refinement but overall she is supportive of the design of the home.

Commissioner Petit stated that the site plan and proposed landscaping works very nicely. She expressed concern about the large amount void space on the west elevation.

Commissioner Levitsky agreed with Commissioner Gayle’s comments on the design of the house. He added that consideration should be given to eliminating the cupola.

Commissioner Sperry agreed with comments made by Commissioner Gibson. She stated that the home deviates too severely from the surrounding homes with the proposed color scheme and the abundance of windows. She added that elements such as the cupola and proportions of the windows on the gable ends are inconsistent with the style of the home.

Chairman Grieve stated that the petitioner did a very nice job given the challenging site conditions. He stated that he agrees with other Commissioners that some areas of the home could use some refinement but does not believe these items are as severe as described by other Commissioners. He acknowledges the concerns of his fellow Commissioners about the historical significance of this area. He explained that now that the Swift Estate property has been subdivided there will be four different homes of different styles and it is unrealistic that they will all be reminiscent of the historic home originally on the property.

In response to questions from Commissioner Gayle, Ms. Baehr stated that if the petitioner is ready with revised plans in time for the next scheduled meeting it may be possible to have the petition on the next meeting agenda.

In response to comments made by Commissioner Gayle, Commissioner Sperry clarified that the Commission is not asking the petitioner to completely start over with the design of the home. She added that there are specific areas that have been identified that are in need of refinement.

Ms. Czerniak clarified that the areas identified by the Commission that are in need of further study appear to be enough in number that continuation of the item is appropriate.

Commissioner Lamontagne explained that because other Commissioners are citing the compatibility standard as a reason for continuation which suggests that the design of the home is in need of a complete redesign. He clarified that in his opinion the style of the home is appropriate.

Commissioner Petit agrees that the style of the home is appropriate, but some elements of the design as previously discussed are in need of refinement.

Commissioner Gibson made a motion to continue the consideration of the petition to allow further study and refinement of the design and to allow the petitioner to respond to the comments, questions and discussion of the Commission on the following items.

• Eliminate the cupola. The cupola does not appear consistent with the style of the home or character of the surrounding historic district.

• Conduct further study of the large expanses of glass around the home and consider refinement to minimize the potential for light spillover.

• Eliminate the glass ridges on the roof to reduce the potential for light spillover.

• Enhance the gable forms in an effort to add more depth to their appearance.

• Conduct further study of the proportions of solids to voids to achieve greater consistency on all of the elevations of the home.

• Consider modifications to the proportions of the tall, narrow windows to present a more residential appearance and to achieve more of a human scale.

The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sperry and approved by a vote of 4 to 3 with Commissioners Levitsky, Lamontagne, and Chairman Grieve voting nay.

OTHER ITEMS

8. Opportunity for the public to address the Historic Preservation Commission on non-agenda items.

No testimony on non-agenda items was presented to the Commission.

9. Additional information from staff.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.

https://www.cityoflakeforest.com/assets/1/27/Historic_Preservation_Commission_Minutes_08.26.2020.pdf