Loading...
2010-11-03 - Appearance Review Team - Minutes Board orCommission: ❑Appearance Review Team Document Type: 0 A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 11/03/2010 Type of Meeting: ❑ Regular Meeting ART (Appearance Review Team) Meeting NOVEMBER 3, 2010 1250 BARCLAY BOULEVARD, ROI-NORTH AMERICA GROUND SIGN PRESENT Ghida Neukirch, Deputy Village Manager Carol Berman, Deputy Building Commissioner/Administration Brian Sheehan, Deputy Building Commissioner/Operations Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Joe Wallace, Plan Examiner Louis Windecker, ZBA Commissioner Tina Kamptner, ROI-North America David Danzig, ROI-North America PROPOSAL Request is being made by ROI-North America, Inc., 1250 Barclay Boulevard, for variance of Sign Code, Section 14.20.050, pertaining to Industrial Districts; and Section 14.20.070, pertaining to Ground Signs, for the purpose of replacing the existing ground sign. The new sign would be within two hundred fifty (250) feet of the existing Arbor Creek Business Centre ground sign and within two hundred fifty (250) feet of the existing 1278-1300 Barclay Boulevard ground sign, both being located on the same side of the street. Ms. Kamptner explained that there are new tenants and they would a ground sign that shows all the tenants in the building. Ms. Berman asked if IPA still exists. Mr. Danzig explained that IPA changed its' name from IPA to ROI-North America, the company still exists just under a different name. He also explained that the existing ground sign is fifteen (15) years old and they would like to replace with a more modern sign. Ms. Neukirch asked if the tenant panels could combine to create a larger tenant panel. Ms. Kamptner responded that the tenant panels would remain separate. If they had a vacancy, that panel would remain blank until they have a new tenant. Mr. Sheehan asked if the tenant panels would contain multiple colors. Ms. Kamptner stated that they would. She distributed a rendering depicting the proposed tenant panels for the ART to review. Mr. Sheehan inquired about the ground sign proposed for 1275 Barclay Boulevard. Ms. Kamptner explained that they are still working on the approval from the property owner. There was never a ground at that location. She spoke with the property owner last week who advised that they would write an approval letter. That proposed ground sign would be similar in style to the proposed ground sign. No variation is required for the proposed ground sign at 1275 Barclay Boulevard. Ms. Neukirch inquired if the proposed blue color would match anything on the building. Mr. Danzig stated that they do not have any blue on the building. The trim on the building is bronze. They chose blue for uniformity with other existing ground signs in the area. Ms. Berman asked if the tenants are tied to the colors on the tenant panels. Mr. Danzig replied that when they were creating the design for the sign they thought that the tenants would be allowed to use their logos on the panels. If the Village would like only one (1) color, he would not have a problem with that. Mr. Sheehan noted that in his opinion, the use of one (1) color would create a clean, uniform look for the sign. Mr. Danzig inquired about having the logos on the panels blue and the letter in black. Both Mr. Sheehan and Ms. Neukirch did not foresee any issues and requested a revised sign drawing that show both the letters and logos in one (1) color and another drawing showing the letters in black and the logos in blue. Mr. Sheehan believes that the proposed sign looks more aesthetically pleasing that the existing sign. He inquired about landscaping around the base of the sign. Ms. Kamptner explained that they currently have bushes around the ground sign and they intent to place the same bushes around the proposed ground sign at 1275 Barclay Boulevard. Mr. Sheehan suggested submitting a landscaping plan showing the current landscaping for the Zoning Board meeting in case questions should come up as to what type of landscaping currently exists. RECOMMENDATION The ART will withhold any recommendation pending the submittal of the requested information concerning the color of the tenant panels and a landscaping plan. The request for the variance from the sign code will be heard at the November 16, 2010 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. Additional information was submitted by ROI-North America concerning the tenant panels. Up review it is the recommendation of the ART that the first preference would be black lettering with blue logos and the second preference would be the all black for lettering and logos. Board orCommission: ❑Appearance Review Team Document Type: 0 A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 11/03/2010 Type of Meeting: ❑ Regular Meeting ART (Appearance Review Team) Meeting NOVEMBER 3, 2010 1500 ABBOTT COURT, TWIN RINKS ICE PAVILION GROUND SIGN - CHANGEABLE COPY GROUND SIGN PRESENT Ghida Neukirch, Deputy Village Manager Carol Berman, Deputy Building Commissioner/Administration Brian Sheehan, Deputy Building Commissioner/Operations Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Joe Wallace, Plan Examiner Louis Windecker, ZBA Commissioner Denice Bronis, White Way Sign Company Tom Wood, White Way Sign Company PROPOSAL Request is being made by White Way Sign & Maintenance Company, 451 Kinston Court, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 on behalf of Twin Rinks Ice Pavilion, 1500 Abbott Court, for variance of Sign Code, Section 14.40.025, pertaining to Changeable Copy Signs, for the purpose of replacing the existing manual changeable copy portion of the ground sign with a LED digital display. Mr. Wood explained that he coaches the Stevenson hockey team at Twin Rinks. The owner of Twin Rinks approached him and asked for his assistance is requesting an LED digital display sign. The owner would like to use the digital display to capitalize on the recent popularity of the Chicago Blackhawk's to attract new clients. The current manual changeable copy sign is hard to change and is small. They are trying to get information out to the public regarding the programs that are available. They have found that people have a tendency to respond better to graphic logos than to text and with a text-only LED sign, white lettering is not available. The existing manual changeable copy sign did have a variance previously granted. Ms. Neukirch asked if they intend to display videos on the proposed signs. Mr. Wood responded that they do not intent to display videos, only graphic logos with three (3) to five (5) second intervals between screen changes. Ms. Neukirch inquired if the messages would be limited to activities conducted on the property. Mr. Wood stated that the message would consist of program announcements for hockey, figure skating, etc. The programs tend to cater to beginners. They have a competitor located in Rolling Meadows, West Meadows Ice Area, that has an LED display sign. It is hard to compete. They would also agree to display civic announcements for the Village and emergency information such as Amber Alerts. Ms. Berman stated that technology has really changed over the years. Mr. Wood agrees and added that LED signs last much longer. Mr. Sheehan asked about the intensity of the sign, both during the day and at night. Mr. Wood stated that the sign is capable of 7,500 nits, but that the proposed sign would not reach that level and at night the photo cell would cause the sign to be dimmed. Mr. Sheehan is concerned about the affect the sign would have on the adjacent residential neighbors along Weiland Road. Mr. Sheehan inquired about the intended hours of operation of the sign. Mr. Wood stated that they would have the same hours as the current sign which is until midnight on weekdays and beginning as early as 6:00 a.m. Mr. Sheehan explained that previously digital signs have been limited to text and to one (1) color, Amber. He advised that the owner will need to provide to the Zoning Board of Appeals proof of his specific hardship and unique circumstances that would warranty an approval of the proposed sign. Mr. Wood explained that the sign would be the brightest when viewing straight ahead and gets dimmer at an angle or the further the distance from the sign. Mr. Wood distributed an aerial rendering containing reference locations and a corresponding "Intensity at Night" reference sheet. He explained the nit levels at the different angles. During the day, the sign would not be seen by the neighboring residential properties and at night the sign would not be seen any more than street lights or vehicle headlights. Mr. Sheehan stated that he has seen these types of signs at night and they can be very bright. He would not want a sign like this in his backyard. He is concerned with the proximity of a digital display sign this close to a residential neighborhood. Most of the digital signs that have been proposed recently were surrounded by Industrial or Business Districts. Com. Windecker asked if the owner would be present at the Zoning Board meeting to answer questions. Mr. Wood stated that the owner would be present. He also advised that the sign can be dimmed at night to a level that the Village would find acceptable. Ms. Bronis added that the current reader board is not very visible and the owner would like to take advantage of the new technology that is available. Ms. Bronis stated that they had installed a changeable copy LED sign for the Village of Mount Prospect near the corner of Northwest Highway and Main Street (Route 83) that is similar in size and style. She also stated that to achieve a white letter color, more than one (1) color is needed. Mr. Wood stated that if you were to look at a sign with red lettering on a black background and a sign with white lettering on a black background, you would be able to see the white lettering much better and from a further distance. Mr. Sheehan advised them to be prepared to answer questions at the Zoning Board concerning the intended use of the sign. He also advised that the requested screen change time is quite short. The three seconds that is noted in the letter to the Village of Buffalo Grove is much faster than anything that has been approved so far. Ms. Bronis stated that they want to work with the Village. Mr. Wood advised that they have done the math and the average person can read five (5)to seven (7) words in three (3) seconds traveling at forty (40) miles per hour. Mr. Sheehan asked about the number of lines that the proposed sign can support. Mr. Wood responded that the owner would like four(4) lines of copy with each line containing nine (9) inches of copy. Mr. Sheehan asked about the graphics. Mr. Wood advised that the graphics displayed on the sign would depend on the number of pixels. The proposed sign is capable of displaying everything, including videos, but the sign can be set for copy only. The owner is looking to get the message out to the community regarding the programs offered and the hockey games. Mr. Pfeil asked if the sign in Mount Prospect displays graphics. Mr. Wood stated that sign is text only since the Sign Code in Mount Prospect does not allow graphics. Ms. Bronis stated that they can information regarding a sign that they installed that includes graphics so the ART members can go and view it in person. Ms. Neukirch asked if the owner would still pursue the sign if it did not contain graphics. Mr. Wood responded that he was not sure and would have to ask the owner. Mr. Wood quoted the Virginia Tech Study concerning digital display signs. He will forward the Virginia Tech Study to the ART. Ms. Bronis added that she would also forward the information concerning another digital display sign that they have installed. Mr. Sheehan asked for them to provide the intensity of the Mount Prospect sign during both day and night. It would also be helpful to provide a location of another sign that has the same light intensity as the proposed intensity of this sign. RECOMMENDATION The ART will withhold any recommendation pending the submittal of the requested information concerning the review of the intensity levels of similar signs and the case studies. Once the requested information has been received, further review will be conducted and a recommendation will be provided.. Board orCommission: ❑Appearance Review Team Document Type: 0 A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 11/03/2010 Type of Meeting: ❑ Regular Meeting ART (Appearance Review Team) Meeting November 3, 2010 Lilly Residence—976 Cambridge Drive Three-Season Room PRESENT Ghida Neukirch, Deputy Village Manager Carol Berman, Deputy Building Commissioner/Administration Brian Sheehan, Deputy Building Commissioner/Operations Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Joe Wallace, Plan Examiner Louis Windecker, ZBA Commissioner PROPOSAL Request is being made by Mr. and Mrs. Lilly, 976 Cambridge Drive, to replace the existing three-season room with a new three-season room on the rear of the home. Proposed elevations were submitted. Photographs of the existing home showing the existing three-season room was also submitted. The existing three-season room currently has screens. The proposed three-season room will have glass windows. No variations are required. There were no issues with the proposed. Materials to match the existing construction. RECOMMENDATION ART recommends approval subject to the following: 1. Materials to match the existing construction in like kind and quality.