Lake County Gazette

City of Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission met Feb. 22

Here are the minutes provided by the commission:

A meeting of the Lake Forest Historic Preservation Commission was held on Wednesday, February 22, 2023, at 6:30 p.m. at the City of Lake Forest City Hall, 220 E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois.

Historic Preservation Commissioners present: Chairman Maureen Grinnell and Commissioners Lloyd Culbertson, Elizabeth Daliere, Jan Gibson, Geoffrey Hanson, Robin Petit, and Leif Soderberg.

Commissioners absent: None

City staff present: Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development 

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

Chairman Grinnell reviewed the meeting procedures followed by the Commission and asked the members of the Commission and staff to introduce themselves.

2. Consideration of the minutes of the January 25, 2023 meeting of the Commission. Consideration of the minutes of the January meeting was postponed.

3. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness approving a replacement residence, landscape plan and overall site plan for the property located at 1302 N. Green Bay Road. 

Property Owners: Ralph and Mary Gesualdo 

Project Representative: John Krasnodebski, architect 

Chairman Grinnell asked the Commission for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, she noted that the Commission previously approved the demolition of the existing residence and stated that work is underway to advance the demolition and cleanup of the site. She invited a presentation from the petitioner.

Mr. Krasnobedski provided an overview of the neighboring properties noting that the subject property is accessed by a private lane. He added that the surrounding area is comprised of traditional style homes which served as inspiration for the English Country style home proposed on the site. He stated that the property is heavily wooded and noted that the existing home on the property is located on the northern portion of the site, not in conformance with current setbacks. He stated that the replacement residence is sited at the center of the property, in conformance with the 50 foot setbacks from all property lines. He stated that the required setback provides a significant buffer between the proposed residence and surrounding properties. He stated that the replacement residence faces south and fronts on a motor court. He noted that the house reflects English roof forms, architectural detailing and exterior materials. He noted that the home is primarily a one-and-a-half story design and is comprised of a larger central mass that steps down at the perimeter. He stated that the replacement residence is intended to nestle into the landscape as a gracious, subtle home. He stated that vertically oriented casement windows, bay windows, stone chimneys, and dormers with timber arches are proposed. He explained that the exterior walls of the home will be Lannon stone from Wisconsin, the windows will be bronze in color, and the roof will be gray/blue natural slate tile. He added that the driveway will be gravel with a stone border and garden wall around it. He noted that the replacement residence meets the City’s zoning and building scale requirements.

Ms. Czerniak reiterated that the Commission previously approved the demolition of the existing residence. She stated that a permit for the demolition is pending the completion of disconnects of various utilities and any required abatement of materials in or on the residence. She stated that the proposed replacement residence presents a strong design. She stated that as the project takes shape, there will be a better understanding of the impact on trees beyond the footprint of the house which will help to determine the areas where new plantings should be focused. She added that many of the trees on the site are not significant species and not in good condition. She stated that maintaining the overall wooded character of the site should be a focus of the final landscape plan.

Commissioner Petit asked for more clarification on what the petitioner envisions for the hardscape and landscape on the site. She asked about the design rationale for the two-story window on the front elevation. She asked for clarification on the areas where stone and shingles are proposed. She asked for more information on the porch and the proposed locations for shutters. She questioned whether the herringbone pattern is repeated on more than one area of the house.

In response to questions from Commissioner Petit, Mr. Krasnodebski described the locations of a proposed landscape wall, planting beds, a bluestone terrace, and boxwood hedges. He stated that a crushed gravel driveway is proposed. He described the front window element and reviewed various alternatives that were considered for that element. He reviewed the areas where stone and shingles will be used and noted that overall, earth tones are proposed around the house. He stated that the porch will be detailed with wood timbers and brackets. He noted the location of the copper roof noting that it will patina over time. He reviewed the locations where shutters are proposed and noted that the shutters are intended to anchor the windows and break up the appearance of wall mass. He stated that the herringbone pattern is repeated in the interior of the house.

Commissioner Gibson noted that the north arrow on one of the plans is incorrect. She asked if the attic will be finished. She noted concern about drainage in the area. She noted that staff identified the need to enhance the landscape plan. She asked if the windows will be clear glass. She asked for details on the garage doors. She questioned whether bronze windows are appropriate in relation to the wrought iron accents.

In response to questions from Commissioner Gibson, Mr. Krasnodebski acknowledged the error with respect to the north arrow on the plans and stated that it will be corrected. He stated that there are no plans to finish the attic. He stated that grading and drainage plans are being prepared by a licensed engineer and will be subject to review by the City Engineer. He acknowledged that an increased volume of water cannot be directed on to neighboring properties. He stated that the current landscape plan is conceptual and will be enhanced as the site takes shape. He confirmed that the windows will be clear glass. He responded that the garage doors will be dark stained wood with wrought iron hinges. He added that the garage doors are arched at the top, with stone surrounds. He stated that the windows will be dark brown so there will not be much differentiation between the windows and iron work.

Commissioner Hanson asked if there is an opportunity to minimize the appearance of the large window element on the front elevation. He acknowledged the owners’ interest in natural light but commented that the window appears oversized for the home.

In response to Commissioner Hanson, Mr. Krasnodebski agreed to consider some refinements to the window but noted that the overall height will likely remain unchanged.

Commissioner Daliere asked for an explanation of how the square footage of the garage is considered given that it exceeds the garage allowance.

Ms. Czerniak explained that if a garage exceeds the square footage allowance specified in the Code for garages, the excess square footage must be added to the square footage of the house. She stated that in the case of this petition, including the excess garage square footage, the residence remains below the allowable square footage and as a result, no variance is needed.

Commissioner Soderberg asked why the material above the large window on the front elevation is different from the material above the other windows. He agreed that the window on the front elevation appears overly large. He noted concern about the rustic character of the shutters given the architectural style of the home.

In response to questions from Commissioner Soderberg, Mr. Krasnodebski stated that because the window on the front elevation is a prominent feature, an arched limestone header is proposed. He stated that the smaller windows in the areas where stone is used will have straight limestone headers and the windows in the areas where shingles are used will have timber headers. He confirmed that some refinements were made to the large front window since the materials were provided for the Commission’s packet. He explained that the shutters have vertical boards adding that in his opinion, the rustic character of the shutters seems appropriate for the English Country architectural style. He stated that if desired by the Commission, consideration can be given to using paneled shutters.

Chairman Grinnell stated that the shutters on the right elevation of the home appear in keeping with the style of the home. She commended the design of the front of the home noting the different shapes which, in her opinion, all work together except for the single shutters on the garage.

In response to comments from Chairman Grinnell, Mr. Krasnodebski agreed to reconsider the shutters on the garage.

Hearing no further questions from the Commission, Chairman Grinnell invited public comment.

Richard Martino, 1300 N. Green Bay Road, expressed concern about drainage in the area noting that the private road that provides access to the homes in this area from Green Bay Road is at times under water. He suggested that construction access from the north be considered.

In response to a request from Chairman Grinnell, Ms. Czerniak reiterated that prior to the issuance of any permits, a drainage and grading plan will be required and will be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. She stated that the plan will be reviewed in the context of the surrounding properties and the overall grading and stormwater patterns in the area. She stated that staff will alert the City Engineer to the concerns raised by the neighbors.

Chairman Grinnell invited final questions from the Commission.

Commissioner Daliere stated that the final landscape and drainage plans are important and will need to be thorough. She encouraged consideration of more pervious surfaces and a rain garden to help address manage stormwater. She agreed that the window on the front elevation appears overly large in relation to the other elements on the home. She stated that shutters be consistently applied around the home or eliminated.

Commissioner Petit asked whether the arch over the front door is treated in the same manner as the arch over the garage doors.

In response to a question from Commissioner Petit, Mr. Krasnodebski confirmed that both arches are proposed as Lannon stone with a keystone projecting slightly in front of the Lannon stone.

Hearing no further questions from the Commission, Chairman Grinnell invited final comments from the petitioner.

Mr. Krasnodebski stated that the gravel drive will help with drainage and agreed that keeping water on the property, in appropriate locations, will need to be explored.

Chairman Grinnell asked if the drainage on the private road is the City’s responsibility.

In response to Chairman Grinnell’s question, Ms. Czerniak stated that in this situation, responsibility for the road is complicated and an issue that the City has been working with property owners in the area to resolve for some time.

Chairman Grinnell asked the petitioner for comments on the shutters.

In response to Chairman Grinnell’s question, Mr. Krasnodebski commented that he will revisit the use of shutters with his clients.

Chairman Grinnell invited final comments from the Commission.

Commissioner Gibson complimented the design of the home. She agreed that further study and consideration should be given to the shutters and the large front window. She suggested consideration of black windows instead of bronze. She suggested that consideration be given to retaining stormwater on the site for future reuse.

Commissioner Hanson stated that the shutters work well to break up the large wall on the back of the garage. He spoke to Standard 13, Preservation of Natural Resources, and noted that given the amount of tree removal proposed, the site will be a lot more open. He stated that trees will need to be replanted in appropriate locations. He spoke to Standard 3, Proportion of Openings, he encouraged the petitioner to soften the large window on the front elevation to be more in keeping with the classic style of the home. He expressed support for the overall plan and replacement residence.

Commissioner Petit complimented the overall design. She stated concern about the inconsistency of windows on the front elevation and the lack of a focal point. She asked that consideration be given to tying the bay windows together in some way. She stated that the stairwell windows do not relate to the rest of the house.

Commissioner Culbertson complimented the petitioner and architect and stated support for the project as presented.

Chairman Grinnell agreed with Commissioner Hanson that the shutters on the rear elevation work well. She stated concern about the shutters proposed on the front elevation. She stated that despite many different elements on the front elevation that are pleasing, there is no focal point. She agreed that some refinement to the large window should be considered. She asked how soon construction is expected to start noting that the neighbors are anxious to see the project move forward.

Mr. Krasnodebski stated that demolition is expected to get underway in the coming weeks with construction of the new house starting in three to four months.

Hearing no further comments from the Commission, Chairman Grinnell invited a motion.

Commissioner Gibson made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving a replacement residence, conceptual landscape plan, and the overall site plan. She stated that the motion is based on the findings detailed in the staff report and noted that the Commission’s deliberations are incorporated as additional findings. She stated that the motion is subject to the following conditions of approval.

1. Consideration should be given to softening the large window on the front elevation and to the style and use of shutters around the home with an eye toward consistency.

2. Plans submitted for permit must reflect the project as presented to the Commission. Any refinements made in response to direction from the Commission, 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 Commission 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 Commission’s direction and approval prior to the issuance of any permits.

3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a detailed, landscape plan shall be submitted and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist. The plan shall meet the minimum landscape criteria for new construction and provide for the required 48 replacement inches on site to the extent possible using good forestry practices. If all replacement tree inches cannot be accommodated on the site, the number of remaining inches for which a payment in lieu of planting will be required must be noted on the plan. The full payment in lieu of on site plantings is required prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. If during construction, additional trees on the site are compromised in the opinion of the City’s Certified Arborist, additional replacement inches or payment in lieu of on site planting may be required.

4. 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.

5. Details of exterior lighting shall be submitted with the plans submitted for permit. Cut sheets for all light fixtures shall be provided and all fixtures, except those illuminated by natural gas at low light levels, shall direct light down and the source of the light shall be fully shielded from view. All exterior lights shall be set on automatic timers to go off no later than 11 p.m. except for security motion detector lights. All exterior lighting shall respect the dark sky character of the neighborhood.

6. 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. Discussions with neighbors should occur regarding use and maintenance of the private road.

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

4. Consideration of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the removal of the front porch and construction of an expanded replacement porch. A single story addition and related demolition are also proposed at the southwest corner of the residence. The property is addressed as 435 Illinois Road. Property Owner: Allen and Beth Laufenberg 

Project Representative: Diana Melichar, architect 

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

Ms. Melichar presented images of the home. She noted that the first problem with the home is that the porch dominates the front façade and, as a result, the front door is not prominent and rarely used. She added that the front door is not protected from weather. She pointed out that currently, plantings obscure the front of the home. She explained that because the side entry on the north elevation is closest to the driveway, visitors enter the home from the side door. She noted that the side door leads to a stair landing between the basement and stair hall above and does not accommodate visitors. She stated that the second problem with the home is that because of the interior layout, the family spaces have limited natural light and limited views of the expansive property. She added that the family room and kitchen have little connection to the rest of the first floor spaces. She stated that the home has undergone several modifications and additions over the years which seem to have occurred in a haphazard manner. She pointed out that research revealed that there have been a number of different front porches on the home. She stated that the existing front porch appears to date from 1939. She stated that the existing front porch is a monolithic concrete structure and is not in keeping with the Queen Anne style of the home. She stated that a new Queen Anne style wooden wraparound porch is proposed to replace the existing porch. She presented plans of the existing and proposed porches. She noted that the new porch provides protection from the weather and discreetly incorporates a ramp for accessibility. She stated that the proposed porch reflects a design in keeping with the architecture of the home. She explained that the side entry on the north elevation is part of an addition that squared off and encapsulated an original bay on the first floor, as evidenced by the foundation which is shaped like the second floor walls above, that remains in place today. She stated that the proposed plan reestablishes the original first floor bay by removing the squared off addition and the side entry door. She reviewed the proposed interior floor plan noting that the kitchen, dining room and family room are relocated to the south side of the home and a comfortable flow is established between the living spaces. She stated that the addition proposed on the south side of the home incorporates pinwheel bays, a classic Victorian design, that will bookend and anchor the existing flat roofed portions of the home. She stated that the pinwheel bays provide expansive light into and views out of the most used spaces in the house. She noted that by repeating the pinwheel bay forms on the addition, the home appears more cohesive. She stated that the railing on the roof will be removed and the existing roofs pitched slightly for positive drainage to the extent possible. She presented the proposed landscape plan noting the new terraces and plantings which are intended to help organize the outdoor spaces and visually support the additions. She stated that the driveway will be enlarged at the front to reinforce the front entry point for visitors. She noted that the proposed work rectifies insensitive prior additions and knits together the façades in a more cohesive manner.

Ms. Czerniak stated that this home is an example of how homes grow and change over time. She reiterated that much of the proposed work is intended to improve upon prior changes that occurred both inside and on the outside of the house. She requested Commission input on the pinwheel element proposed on the south side of the house acknowledging that Ms. Melichar provided a thorough explanation of why the element, in the proposed configuration, is incorporated into the plan. She stated that findings in support of the petition are detailed in the staff report.

Chairman Grinnell invited questions from the Commission.

Commissioner Petit asked about the material for the new porch and requested information on the proposed color palette. She asked about the pitch on the ramp.

In response to questions from Commissioner Petit, Ms. Melichar confirmed that the porch, including the decking, will be constructed of wood. She stated that the trim on the house will remain white. She stated that the pitch on the ramp will be 1:12 and is ADA compliant.

Commissioner Culbertson asked about the chimney on the south elevation.

In response to Commissioner Culbertson’s question, Ms. Melichar confirmed that the chimney on the south elevation will remain and serves a fireplace in the family room. She confirmed that the chimney is two different colors, with a portion painted white and the remaining portion unpainted. She stated that it is her expectation that the entire chimney will be painted after repairs are completed.

Commissioner Soderberg asked if the ramp will extend into the driveway. He asked about consistency of roof pitches between the existing home and proposed addition.

In response to questions from Commissioner Soderberg, Ms. Melichar confirmed that the ramp will not extend on to the driveway adding that it will be screened by landscaping. She stated that the existing home has many different roof pitches and as a result, there will not be consistency. She explained that the roof form on the family room addition is configured to preserve views from the second floor bedroom. She pointed out that the family room addition will not be highly visible from the street.

Commissioner Daliere noted that currently, three air conditioner condensers and a satellite dish are located on the south side of the house and asked how they will be addressed. She noted the potential for continued damage from woodpeckers.

In response to questions from Commissioner Daliere, Mr. Melichar pointed out the proposed location for the condensers and satellite dish, behind the garage. She stated that wood repair and restoration will be as needed.

Commissioner Gibson spoke to Standard 8 and stated that the family room addition as designed will mitigate some of the flatness of the south elevation.

Chairman Grinnell noted a number of access points into the home and asked which will remain. She asked it a first floor master bedroom was considered.

In response to questions from Chairman Grinnell, Ms. Melichar reviewed the access points and the adjacent terraces served by the various entrances. She stated that there is an elevator in the home to facilitate access to the master bedroom.

Hearing no further questions from the Commission, Chairman Grinnell invited public testimony. Hearing none, she invited final questions and comments from the Commission.

Commissioner Culbertson stated that the proposed wraparound porch appears to be the right solution for the home.

Commissioner Hanson commended the design of the porch to incorporate a ramp. He observed that the family room addition in its present configuration, breaks up the south elevation and stated support for the roof shape as presented.

Hearing no further comments from the Commission, Chairman Grinnell invited a motion.

Commissioner Hanson made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness approving the removal of the front porch and construction of a replacement porch, a single-story addition, related demolition, and alterations. He stated that the motion is based on the findings detailed in the staff report and noted that the Commission’s deliberations are incorporated as additional findings. He stated that the motion is subject to the following conditions of approval.

1. Plans submitted for permit must reflect the project as presented to the Commission. If any modifications are proposed in response to Commission direction or as a result of final design development, plans clearly detailing the areas of change must be included with the 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.

2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a detailed, landscape plan shall be submitted, any trees identified for removal shall be identified and will be subject to review and approval by the City’s Certified Arborist. The plan shall at a minimum provide for foundation plantings around the porch and addition and if required, replacement tree inches.

3. 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.

4. Details of all exterior lighting shall be submitted with the plans submitted for permit. Cut sheets for all light fixtures shall be provided and all fixtures, except those illuminated by natural gas at low light levels, shall direct light down and the source of the light shall be fully shielded from view. All exterior lights shall be set on automatic timers to go off no later than 11 p.m. except for security motion detector lights.

5. 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. No parking of contractor vehicles is permitted on Illinois Road due to the narrowness of the street and volume of traffic at this location.

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

OTHER ITEMS  

5. 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. 

6. Additional information from staff. 

No additional information was presented by staff.

The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m.

https://cms9files.revize.com/cityoflakeforestil/Document_center/Agendas%20and%20Minutes/Historic%20Preservation%20Commission/2023/Minutes/HPC%20Minutes%20-%2002.22.2023%20-%20Approved.pdf