2005-12-07 - Appearance Review Team - Minutes Board or Commission: ❑Appearance Review Team
Document Type: 0 A e
g nda 0 Minutes
Meeting ate: 12/07/2005
Type of Meeting: ❑ Regular Meeting
The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m. in the Buffalo Grove Village Hall.
Mr. Kollman's letter [attached] dated December 2, 2005 provided observations and comments
concerning the exhibits submitted by David Wytmar of Groundwork, Ltd with his letter dated
November 29, 2005 [attached].
Mr. Wytmar, representing Canyon Development Group, presented the following documents:
1. Preliminary Site Plan dated 11/8/05 [11x17-inch color] by Groundwork, Ltd.
2. Preliminary Unit Floor Plans, Villa Units A , B, C & D dated 11/29/05 [1 lxl7-inch
blackline] by Groundwork, Ltd.
3. Color Depictions of Exterior Front Elevations [undated] for Villa Units A-1, A-2, B-1,
B-2, C-1, C-2, D-1 and D-2 by Groundwork, Ltd. [8.5x11-inch, color]
4. Preliminary Exterior Elevations 11 /29/05 [24x36-inch blueline] by Groundwork, Ltd.
5. Building Material Identification List dated 9/19/05 by Groundwork, Ltd.
6. Preliminary Landscape Plans dated 11/28/05 by MSLA [l lxl7-inch color]
7. Preliminary Landscape Plans dated 11/28/05 by MSLA [24x36-inch blackline]
8. Partial Tree Survey/Inventory by Urban Forest Management dated 9/26/05
9. Deck Railing Detail/Partial Elevation [undated]
Mr. Wytmar noted that the Deck Railing Detail indicates that cedar would be used for exposed
elements and the piers would be brick or stone. He said that the developer would customize the
deck for each home within the common area of 20x4l feet at the rear of the unit.
Mr. Wytmar explained that all the homes will have a "lookout" basement since the grade for the
homes will generally decrease by four feet from the front of the home to the back. He noted that
windows for the basement can be added or moved at the buyer's discretion.
Mr. Wytmar reviewed the elevations for each Villa unit. He noted that the siding would be fiber
cement or cedar material.
Commissioner Teplinsky said that he is pleased with the overall improvements to the elevations
since the previous ART review, but he is disappointed with the lack of windows in the various
elevations. He commented that the plans should give buyers the option for having more windows
than what is depicted on the elevations, including the side elevations. He said that the houses
will look better with additional windows on the side elevations.
Mr. Kollman commented that in addition to improving the appearance of the homes, windows
give people the opportunity for cross-ventilation at certain times of the year when the windows
can be left open. He noted that his recommendation is to add windows to the various elevations
as listed in his review memo. He commented that if additional windows aren't depicted on the
elevations, buyers may not understand that they have the ability to add windows at various
locations.
Mr. Wytmar indicated that he could show additional windows as options on the elevations.
Mr. Kollman emphasized that the Units #1 and #11 with side elevations facing Buffalo Grove
Road should not have blank walls - -windows need to be added to these side elevations.
Mr. Wytmar noted that Mr. Kollman has suggested the addition of a roofed entry feature for the
rear door area on the A units. He said that a canopy will be added as an option on the revised
elevation
Mr. Kollman inquired about the material that would be used for the decks.
Mr. Wytmar said that the decks would be constructed of a wood product with cedar finish, and
upgrades for the material would be offered.
Mr. Kollman noted that as the decks age and the color fades it gives a"tired" look to that area of
the house exterior. He suggested that high-quality, durable materials be used for the decks. He
asked if the materials for the decks will be specified in the covenants for the homeowners'
association.
Mr. Wytmar said that the decks would be built of composite materials and the developer will
work with the individual purchasers concerning the specific materials.
Mr. Kollman commented that the casings added to the windows on the A units is an
improvement to the elevations. He asked if the chimney material will match the material used on
the front elevation.
Mr. Wytmar said that a note will be added to the elevations indicating that the chimneys will be
masonry veneer to match the masonry of the front elevation.
Mr. Kollman suggested that if a home does not have a chimney, a window can be added to the
elevation.
Mr. Wytmar agreed that there would be room for additional windows.
Mr. Kollman commented that the roof over the bay windows on the front elevation such as the
A-2 unit is shown as shingle, but metal would be a better material for this feature.
Mr. Wytmar said that he would add a metal roof as an optional upgrade for the roof over the
front bay window.
Mr. Kollman commented that the B-2 roof lines have been improved. He suggested that a gable/
dormer be added to the B-2 unit at the rear door.
Mr. Wytmar agreed to make this change.
Mr. Kollman noted that there are a number of locations on the elevations where the transitions
between different materials are awkward or arbitrary rather than being based on specific design
elements of the elevation.
Mr. Wytmar noted that materials such as brick are generally extended at least 3.5 to 4 feet onto
the adjoining elevation and this seems to be a reasonable width. He said that trim is used in the
transition areas and the brick will be "king" size so it will be thicker than the siding. This
difference in thickness adds a visual feature to the elevation where the brick meets the siding
material.
Mr. Kollman suggested that another option would be too extend the brick all the way across the
side elevation. He also noted that the B-1 front elevation appears "squeezed" because of the
design of the dormers and this could be remedied by centering the dormer for Bedroom 3 over
the garage.
Mr. Wytmar indicated that the location of the support beam for the wall affects the location of
the dormer in this elevation.
Mr. Kollman commented that it would not be a big expense to move the dormer and the
elevation would look better.
Mr. Wytmar indicated that the next part of the presentation would be the landscape plan, which
would be presented by Mr. Snyder. Mr. Wytmar left the meeting at 4:35 p.m.
Mr. Snyder reviewed the landscape plan, including the parkway plantings proposed for the west
side of the cul-de-sac and the fence along Deerfield Parkway. He noted that the six-foot fence
along Deerfield Parkway would have a lattice feature for the top area, and this design element
might also be used on the decks of the homes creating a visual tie for this aspect of the
subdivision. He noted that the fence will have piers at 16 feet on center, not 8 feet as shown on
the landscape plan.
Mr. Kollman said that integrating the subdivision identification sign on the retaining wall at the
street intersection is an attractive design feature. He noted that it is important to make sure that
the parkway plantings are varied in terms of size and species variety.
Mr. Snyder noted that the plant material proposed for the parkway plantings are a combination of
ornamental and shade tree varieties, and the Village Forester will review the plan and make
suggestions for improving the variety if he thinks it is necessary.
Mr. Kollman noted that the ground elevation around the homes decreases by four feet from front
to back, and he inquired if this degree of grade change is necessary.
Mr. Pfeil commented that the engineering plan, particularly for sanitary sewer service, affects the
grading plan for this site.
Commissioner Teplinsky noted his concern with the proposed amount of clearance of the
existing trees on the site. He inquired why the plan proposes clustering along the east side of the
site rather than a more solid line of plantings.
Mr. Snyder indicated that the plan tries to create some open views to the stormwater pond east of
the site, and the trees proposed for preservation are within the cluster areas. He said that the site
generally has low quality trees that are not suitable for preservation.
Commissioner Teplinsky commented that the extensive tree clearance that was done for the
Estates at Hidden Lake subdivision east of the pond should not be repeated on this site. He
suggested that either more trees be saved on this site or extensive re-planting be done to replace
trees that are removed. He inquired if new plantings could be provided on the Village-owned
parcel east of the site. He said that a solid planting screen isn't necessary, but there should be
more plantings along the east side of the site than is provided by the proposed clusters.
Mr. Snyder said that he would discuss the concept of adding plantings on the Village property
with the staff.
Mr. Snyder left the meeting at 5:30 p.m.
Mr. Pfeil asked Commissioner Teplinsky and Mr. Kollman to formulate recommendations for
consideration by the Plan Commission.
Commissioner Teplinsky commented that although the addition of windows to various elevations
has been talked about as an optional change, he thinks additional windows should be required.
Mr. Kollman concurred, particularly for the villa units that have walls facing Buffalo Grove
Road.
The recommendations developed by the ART team are:
1. The elevations as proposed would result in extensive blank walls on the side elevations,
which would be particularly unattractive on Units 1 and 11 facing Buffalo Grove Road.
Windows must be added to the elevations of the units as follows:
A: Left side -Breakfast room; Bedroom 2; Bedroom 3; Master Bedroom
Right side—Den; Great room and Master bedroom [if no chimney]
B: Left side—Master bedroom; Bedroom 2; Bedroom 3
Right side—Den; Great room [if no chimney]; Bedroom 4
C: Left side—Breakfast room; Master bedroom; Bathroom; Bedroom 3
Right side—Den; Great room [if no chimney]; Bedroom 2
D: Left side—Master bedroom; Bedroom 3
Right side—Den; Great room [if no chimney]
2. A roof feature [gable] should be added on the rear elevation of Unit B-2, similar to the
gable provided for Unit B-1.
3. Roof treatment or roofed porch should be shown as an option for the rear doors on A
units.
4. Material transitions should be improved for the B-2 unit [left side elevation]; C & D units
[left side— continue to gable break]
5. Metal roof should be offered as an optional upgrade instead of shingles for front bay
windows for A-2, B-2 and D-2 units.
6. Chimney material should be masonry to match front elevation.
7. Deck and railing materials should be specified and should be high-quality and durable.
8. Landscape plan—
A. Additional plantings on Village-owned property east of the site should be provided to
mitigate the aesthetic impact of the extensive removal of trees that will occur on the
development site. The additional plantings will augment the screening provided by the two
proposed "clusters" of plantings that will be preserved on the east side of the site.
B. The proposed incorporation of the subdivision identification sign on the retaining wall is
a positive design feature that should be included on the final landscaping plan, subject to
applicable Village Sign Code standards.
C. Care should be taken to provide variety for tree plantings, particularly in terms of size
and species. An attractive blend of ornamental and larger shade trees should be
provided.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:40 p.m.
Villas at Hidden Lake—AR T_Mike Kollman_12-2-2005.pdf ART minutes—Villas at Hidden Lake—David Wytmar letter-1 1-29-2005.pdf
Villas at Hidden Lake_David Wytmar letter_12-14-2005.pdf Villas at Hidden Lake—comments concerning brick size_12-21-2005.pdf
Dec 02 05 04: 26p Wexler Kollman 847 9130907 p• 2
Wexler/Kollman P.C.,Ltd.
16595 Easton Avenue
Prairie View Illinois 6OW
847.913.U07
December 2, 2005
Mr, Bob Pfeil
Village of Buffalo Grove
Fifty Raupp Blvd.
Buffalo Grove, Illinois 60089-2196
Re: Appearance Review Team Meeting
December 7, 2005
Villas at Hidden Lake
Dear Bob,
I have reviewed the information that you sent me in reference to the above project
and offer the following observations and comments in anticipation of the December
7 ART meeting.
Site Plan Observations
The site is a prominent corner with a long exposure along Buffalo Grove Road to the
west and Deerfield Parkway to the south. Units number 1 and 11 have a strong side
presence and the corresponding side elevations should be considered unique as
compared to other units in this development. Units 1, 2, 10 and 11 have very visible
rear elevations that also need to receive consideration. Units 3-9 will be very
visible from the rear (pond side and walkway).
Landscape Observations
The architecture would read stronger with some trees closer to buildings instead
of all lined up along parkway at same elevations. Are ail shade trees the some
variety? Variation will enhance site and provide seasonal interest as well as
tolerance to disease. Is sign part of retaining wall at berm as indicated on
landscape plans or freestanding as indicated on engineering?
Architecture•Site&Land Planning•Landscnpe Design
www.wexko.com
Dec 02 05 04: 2Gp Wexler Kollman 847 9130907 p• 3
w /
Unit Design Comments
Generally speaking, the applicant has responded to our previous comments and the
units convey a sense of quality with the use of materials and the variation in
rooflines. The front elevations are playful and break up the garage-dominated
facade with dormers and changes in massing. The side and rear elevations are
weaker and lack windows and very massive in a couple of the alternatives presented.
Orientation and unit selection as they respond to site plan comments above are
important and need to be considered.
Villa A-1
The front elevation is playful and well balanced. What material is proposed for the
wide casings around the den windows? Left side and right side elevations would
benefit from additional windows that would seem to work with plans.
A roofed rear entry would be a big improvement and solve some of the rear
elevation comments above. What is the proposed rear entry deck construction and
materials as submitted? Chimneys are not specified but should be masonry to match
front elevation. Casings were added around all windows from last submission and
improve the overall appearance.
Villa A-2
Front elevation seems to work well. The metal roofed bay as previously submitted is
preferred over the new shingled version. Side and rear would benefit from
additional windows that would seem to work with plans. Rear entry porch roof with
column, and masonry chimney with decorative flue pipes should be considered. The
roof line irregularities have been minimized from previous submission.
Villa B-1
Weaker front elevation than the A units. The asymmetrical dormer appears to
squeeze the smaller dormers into the loft area. Should consider centering the
Bedroom 3 dormer over the garage. Side and rear elevations are much improved
over last submission. Specify rear entry deck materials and railing details. Chimney
should be masonry to match front elevation and windows should be considered on
left side at master bedroom.
Dec 02 05 04: 26p Wexler Kollman 847 9130907 p• 4
T ,
Villa B-2
Better front elevation than B-1. Metal roofed bay as previously submitted is
preferred over new shingled version. Roof lines are improved from previous
submission. Asymmetrical garage dormer appears to pinch entry roof and create
maintenance concerns. Material transitions are weak at sides as they occur in the
some plane. Rear entry feature similar to B-1 would help. Chimneys should be
masonry to match front elevation and windows on left side elevation at master
bedroom would be an improvement.
Villa C-1
The front elevation is playful and well balanced. What material is proposed for the
wide casings around the den windows? Left side elevations would benefit from
additional windows that would seem to work with plans. Material transition is weak
at left side and should be continued to gable break. What is the proposed rear
entry deck construction and materials as submitted? Chimneys are not specified
but should be masonry to match front elevation.
Villa C-2
Front elevation seems to work well. What material is proposed for the wide casings
around the den windows? Left side elevations would benefit from additional
windows that would seem to work with plans. Material transition weak at left side
and should be continued to gable break. What is the proposed rear entry deck
construction and materials as submitted? Chimneys are not specified but should be
masonry to match front elevation.
Villa D-1
Weaker front elevation than the C units. Should consider centering the Bedroom 3
dormer over the garage. Side elevations appear massive and would benefit from
additional window openings. Material transition at left side is awkward and should
continue to gable break. Specify rear entry deck materials and railing details.
Chimney should be masonry to match front elevation and windows should be
considered on right side at den and great room.
Villa D-2
Better than D-1, especially side elevations. Metal roofed bay as previously
submitted is preferred over new shingled version. Material transitions are weak at
left side elevations as they occur in the same plane. Specify rear entry deck
materials and railing details. Chimneys should be masonry to match front elevation
and windows on left side elevation at master bedroom would be an improvement.
Dec 02 05 04: 27p Wexler Kollman 847 9130907 p. 5
u /kol�twew�►
I hope this information will be helpful and look forward to our December 7 meeting.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
Sincerely,
Michael S Kollman, AIA
November 29, 2005 KECEIVED
Village of Buffalo Grove NOV 2 9 2005
Department of Planning
50 Raupp Boulevard PLMNING SERVICE°
Buffalo Grove, Illinois 60089
Attn: Mr. Bob Pfeil Re: Canyon Development Group
Village Planner Proposed Single-Family Villas
Buffalo Grove Rd. & Deerfield Pky.
GW#L 110
Dear Mr. Pfeil:
Enclosed are 10 copies of the following items for the referenced project for use at an ART
meeting scheduled for December 7, 2005. Please note that two supplemental plans, each with
two elevations, have been added.We have used the styles from the original A& B exteriors and
the feedback from the first ART meeting as our guide in designing the C & D exteriors.All the
plans have been designed to work in the original unit area footprint of 41'x60'.
1. Preliminary Site Plan—by Groundwork, ltd., revised 11/8/05 (11"x17"color).
2. Preliminary Unit Floor Plans (Units A, B, C & D)—dated 11/29/05(11"x17").
3. Exterior Depictions (8)—by Groundwork, undated 8%x11 (colorized).
4. Preliminary Exterior Elevs (Units A1/2, 131/2, C1/2, D1/2)—dated 11/29/05 (24"x36"b/w).
5. Material Identification List—by Groundwork, ltd., dated 9/19/05.
6. Preliminary Landscape Plans—by MSLA dated 11/28/05 (11x17 color).
7. Preliminary Landscape Plans—by MSLA dated 11/28/05 (24x36 b/w).
8. Partial Tree Survey/Inventory—by Urban Forest Management, dated 9/26/05.
The material outline indicates the type of material to be used. Final selection and colors will be
coordinated directly with the purchasers. The color depictions have been provided as a tool to
understand the balance and massing of the various base materials being incorporated into each
fagade and do not represent specific color programs.The developer has also been advised of the
need to ensure that the Appearance Ordinance will need to be followed with regard to
color/material separation of buildings. For past projects in which we served as the Architects, a
developer was required to submit a listing of the selected material colors at the time of permit
submittal for each specific lot. We presume that this is still the general practice.
It is understood that any proposed project identification sign wall need to be submitted to the ART
for review once its design has been developed. Should you need any other items at this time,
please feel free to contact our office.
Very truly yours,
GROUNDWORK, LTD.
By: ,
avid M. Wytmar AIAy
Cc; Mr. Steve Greenberg—Canyon Development Group
Mr. Larry Freedman—Ash,Anos, Freedman & Logan
Mr. Mike Snyder— MSLA
Mr. Steve Goodman—Jacobs Homes
GROUNDWORK, LTD.
ARGFIITEGTS/PLANNERS/ENGINEERS
351 WEST DUNDEE ROAD,5UITE A (/
BUFFALO GROVE,ILLIN015 60069 J
847.541.4151 FAX 547.541.4066
gworkltd@aol.com 0 www.groundworkltd.com
RECEIW r
DEC 14 2005
December 14, 2005 I.ANNING SERVICE!
Village of Buffalo Grove
50 Raupp Boulevard
Buffalo Grove, IL 60069
Attn: Mr. Robert E. Pfiel, Village Planner
Re: ART Review
Villas at Hidden Lake
Buffalo Grove,Illinois
Canyon Development Group
GW#L110
Dear Mr. Pfiel:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Revised Preliminary Elevations and Preliminary Unit Floor Plans
(dated 12/9/05) for the proposed Villas at Hidden Lake. These drawings reflect the agreed-upon
modifications discussed at the ART meeting of December 7, 2005. In addition to you and I, Plan
Commissioner Howard Teplinsky, consulting architect Michael Kollman, and Landscape Architect Mike
Snyder were in attendance at this meeting. The modifications to the preliminary architectural drawings
are as follows:
All Units:
• The optional fireplace chimneys would be masonry veneer to match the masonry at the front of the
house.
• Some optional window locations have been indicated by dashed lines to illustrate possible additional
window locations. Due to the semi-custom nature of the development,window and door locations
may shift due to site considerations or purchaser preferences.
• Stair and deck railings would be cedar, and purchasers would be offered the option to upgrade the
materials. These options would include synthetic decking materials.
• A canopy at the rear entry would be offered as an option to purchasers. This option has been
indicated on one of the unit elevations (Villa Al).
• Metal roofs would be offered as an upgrade in lieu of shingle roofs at bay windows.
Villa 132:
• A gable has been added over the rear slider.
Villa D2:
• The cast stone veneer has been extended on the second floor at the side of Bedroom#3.
I believe this accurately reflects the modifications agreed to at the meeting. Should this not be the case,
please let me know.
GROUNDWORK, LTD.
ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS/ENGINEERS
351 WE5T DUNDEE ROAD,SUITE A
BUFFALO GROVE, ILLINO15 60089 mainnv
G
�
547.541.4151 FAX 847.541.4066
gworkltd@aol.com•www.grouniworklti.com
Very truly yours,
GROUNDWORK,LTD.
ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS/ENGINEERS
David Wytma 'AIA
cc: Mr. Steve Greenberg-Canyon Development Group
Mr. Charlie Murphy-Canyon Development Group
Mr.Bill Balling-Village of Buffalo Grove
DMW:I
enclosures
2
12/21/05 14:44 FAX 8474130314 GROUNDWORK LTD 1m001
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
INFORMATION PAGE
COMPANY: Vj,,,,, a�t�a►4a Gwgo.JE
ATTN:
FAX NUMBER: 94714 T9 -790G
FROM: David Wytmar, AIA
GROUNDWORK 30B#: L1lo - rw 5M7fr .4r H+Oods.>
INSTRUCTION/MESSAGE: 1906- t„> fts fo,+s& -2 VOWL- ►??�s1��f' ' '�
aisG AA.pa4 o!-' 'Me Size bs:t
EA-lov- Z JJoaup "Aot- too
Tp TM P- GPIA417 20's ?n.ovr afire- t N Twe
NA•>0 Cs t�� Tr tr.ta ..S rZ.6��. -t�� T1ir�
QoJ 9sua 1+►o►cwr r' "140 b" TAIS Is Th.
SAa►�. Srig 1fA•rak. TNAr t.441 SPA 80#1fa Fl 4-
Tke Tw* AaAtfox- MSf#fw+rrA%. D,&4L-oPA&Tf,
-&smrcr A,* G-rarlr Ar-
6l.0od,� LAm& 1 4A S W And 1406&4
`Av hArE FJ�+-TM�R.. t°�.wetr�a,+c
NUMBER OF PAGES:
TRANSMISSION DATE: IL/?.1 16
OPERATOR:
MAILED:
NOT MAILED:
IF YOU DID NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES OF THIS TRANSMISSION,PLEASE CALL THE
RECEPTION DESK AT 847/541-4151 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.THANK YOU.
GROUNDWORK, LTD.
ARCH TECr5/PLANN E R5)fNGfNEER5
35 I WE5T DUNDEE ROAD,SUITE A n
BUFFALO GROVE,IWN015 00055 GR
847.541.41 51 - FAx 847.541.4000
gworkltd@aol.com
12/21/05 14:44 FAX 8474130314 GROUNDWORK LTD 002
Dee 21 05 011. 08p 047-459-7944 p. 3
Nominal Size Actual Size No. per
Size*. Width Height Length Width Height Length sq ft* Coursin
Standard 4" 2 2/3" 8" 3 5/8" 2 1/4" 8" 6.27 6c=16"
Modular 4" 2 2/3" 8" 3 5/8" 2 114" 7 5/8" 6,86 6c=16"
King 33181, 3" 10" 3" _ 2 6/8" 95181, 4,DO 5c=16"
Queen 2 3/4" 3" 10" 3 1/8" 2 3/4" 9 5/8" 4.61 6c=
Engineer 4" 3 115" 8" 3 5/8" 2 13/16" 7 5/8" 5.65 5c=16"
Economy 4" 4" all 3 5/8" 35181, 7 5/8" 4.00 4c=16"
Utility 4" 4" 12" 3 5/8" 3 5/8" 11 1/2" 3.03 4c=16"
Jumbo 4" 3" 8" 3 518" 2 3/4" 8" 5.50 5C=16"
Norman 4" 2 2/3" 12" 3 5/8" 2 1/4" 11 5/8" 4.57 6C=16"
Norwe ian 3 1/2" 3" 12" 1 3 1/2" 1 2 3/4" 1 11 5/8" 1 3,84 1 5c=16"
Number per square foot with 3/8" mortar joints(bed and vertical)
There is no true standard of face brick sizes versus names. The same name brick
may vary in size among different manufacturers, it is best to specify face bricks by
size first and then by name.
Prepared by: Greg Summers, Village of Buffalo Grove, IL, March 13, 2003