Loading...
1981-02-26 - Appearance Commission - Minutes• APPEARANCE COMMISSION • VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE, IL. YHURS.t FEB. 26,_ 1981 • • I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. by Chairman Don Hardt at the Village Hall on Thursday, Feb. 26, 1981. II. ROLL CALL • Commissioners Present: D. Knaak, L. Kirby, P. Carr, D. Hardt, L. Paolillo (7:55 P.M.) Commissioner L. Gibbs was absent. QUORUM PRESENT. Bldg. Dept. Rep. — James D. Griffin. Village Attorney — Wm. Raysa (PublicHearing) Prospective Commissioner Present: Carmelo M. Cea, an Architect. 1146 Dayton, 634-•0026. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Feb. 12, 1981 minutes were deferred because the Commissioners present at the meeting are absent. Ch. Hardt reported that he had attended the ZBA meeting last Thurs. Feb. 19, 1981. There was a discussion of the Amortization Schedule of the Palo Alto Sign Code and the feasibility of including such a section in the B. G. Sign Code when it is re— vised. It was decided that at .this time, with the economic situation as it is, it would not be advantageous or to the best interest to the Village to pursue it. The possibility of being stricter on Legal N"on—Conforming signs brought in for changes was discussed and it was agreed that if these signs could be brought into Conformance, that would be advantageous to the Village. It was agreed that minor changes should be made immediately. The AC Members were asked to go through the Sign Code before the next meeting and make notes of any errors or minor corrections. so that problems with intent be clarified. Ch. Hardt also noted that the necessity of proven hardship for Sign Code Variations was discussed with the ZBA and hardship is required. They are at some disadvan— tage in that the ZBA does not have any input from the AC before the variation hearing. Thought will be given to the process and modifications made to correct this problem. IV. BUSINESS A. First Midwest Development Corp. — Chatham Manor Homes Diane Walker and Michael Schwartz 1. Face Change on Temporary Sign Before the presentation, Ch. Hardt mentioned that in accordance with the motion made 2/12/81 when the sign approved was erected, at that time the other 4 signs on the property were to be taken down. He noted that. the new sign was up but there are still several signs along the street. Why? Ms. Walker said that their sign company had been instructed to remove the four signs in question and that it was her understanding that this would be done — probably the next day. 2/27/81. ' Mr. Griffin said that some of the signs are not on the Chatham Property. Ms. Walker than presented the new sign which will have a Logo and a different phone number. The Logo is being finalized and a copy will be given to Mr. Griffin. This sign will be up from approximately 3/19/81 to 7/17/81 when a new face will be presented. Ch. Hardt opened the meeting for discussion of the sign. The price being quoted on the sign was objectionable. They are not allowed on any other signs. The color red and the words Sales Office Open were discussed. It was felt that the proportion was not as usual. The name of the project should be the central theme, with other information kept to a minimum. Advertising signs are allowed, one per project and it was noted that all signage must be approved. With regard to the stipulation that "no other ground sign be erect for the advertising, sale, lease or development of this parcel" -- Ms. Walker said she mentioned 'entry way walls or corridor' at the last meeting and asked that the tape be checked. She said it would be an interior sign and she will present it to the AC. After further discussion, Ms. Walker agreed to remove the price and change the color of "Sales Office Open" to Brown. The colors of the project ad— vertising will be Blue and Browns with Black copy. Com. Knaak made the following motion: I make a motion to table the Chatham sign until the Logo is decided upon. Also strongly urging that consideration be given to the discussion here tonight regarding the price and the 'Sales Office Open" copy. Com. Kirby seconded the motion. Discussion: Com. Carr said sh did not think the sign was offensive as it is. Com. Paolillo said he objected to the price and would be satisfied if the copy "Sales Office Open" was changed to Brown. Ms. Walker said she would very much like to have the sign approved tonight, so that the sign company could begin working as soon as possible. Ch. Hardt called for a vote. Roll Call Vote: Paolillo — Aye Kirby — Aye Knaak . — No Kirby — No Carr. — No Motion to Table did not carry. Ch. Hardt asked for a motion with certain stipulations. He informed Ms. Walker that should the motion be denied, an appeal could be made to the Village Board. Com. Carr made the following motion: I move we accept the sign for Chatham Manor Homes, subject to review of the Logo, with the following stipulations: 1) Sales Office Open be BROWN. 2) Removal of "From $59,000" 3) Any future changes will not be made by means of a 'tack—on' 4) The sign will be erected about March 19, 1981 and be removed or changed with approved copy by July 25, 1981 Com. Knaak seconded the motion. , Com. Kirby cautioned that approval would open the Village to other developers to erect signs with such top lines as "Models Open" — Phone Nos. etc. APPEARANCE COMMISSION Feb. 26, 1981 — Page Two • • Roll Call Vote was taken: Aye - Paolillo Knaak Carr• Nay - Kirby Hardt Motion passed 3 to 2. Ch. Hardt noted the reason for his vote was the size of sign and the•relation of the size of the words "Sales Office Open" to the total size of the copy. Ch. Hardt said the sign was approved with the Logo yet to be approved and that as a temporary sign it will be unlit. Colors also to be submitted. 2. Architectural Review of Units A/B and C/D. The following comments were made with regard to structure and materials: a) Muttons on windows are not removable, stipulated that muttons would be used on all windows. b) Columns - where the wood columns meet the concrete, metal post anchor base would be used. c) Shutters - 1" x 6" - Opera Pine, manufactured on site, treated with an oil based stain once before installation and two coats • after. Both sides painted. Want Tudor appearance with wood. d) Contoured wood vents:-Pre-finished, enameled Brown. Eliminates all need for pots on the roof. All roofs will be Brown asphalt shingles. e) Back banister - Treated pine, sealed with oil base stain. f) Spaces between garages - Three element reliefs -staccato board. g) Gutters and Downspouts - Stipulation that sufficient downspouts ' will be used. Will keep as much water off the asphalt as possible. h) Patio doors - Aluminum frame. Wood trim. i) Window frames - Wood trim will be used. j) Light fixtures - At rear doors. k) A-B Elevation has optional balcony doors. 1) Kickboard at upper level doors - backed with a Bandboard kickboard. m) B-Vents - encased with aluminum. Interior flues-for optional fire- n) Decorative gable vent - non-functional, vinyl material. Places. o) No exposed flues. All stipulations for approval will apply to all three elevations where applicable. Color Packages: • • There will be two (2) color packages for each elevation. All roofs will be Charcoal Brown. #l - A- Siding will be a Buff Tone (Fort Collins Cream) with Dark Brown doors and Brick #1 - B - Similar siding color - Grey/Beige. Brick with Oxford Brown doors. Webster brick company. Purchasers will not have a choice of colors. .A street scene will be selected by First Midwest Dev. Corp. APPEARANCE COMMISSION Feb. 26, 1981 - Page Three Six color packages were presented, but only 4 will be used on the manor • homes. On the multi-family buildings will.have additional color packages because there are more of them. Only three brick selections will be used. Elevation # 2 - Colonial A. Vinyl siding, Fort Collins and Prairie with Light Brown Trim. Color of front door will be a field decision after unit is built. B. Off White with Prairie Sandlewood Brick. Choice open for front door. All mortar will be grey or beige. Elevation # 3 Stone Entry - Light color. Will choose the best color and will only be used on three (3) buildings at most. - All specifications of Brick and Colors will be given to James D. Griffin when the decisions have been made. Should the brick selected become unavailable, a similar kind can be substituted. Lighting Fixtures Pictures of some fixtures was presented, but the exact selection has not been made. These will be presented at a later time. • Com. Kirby made the following motion: • I move we accept the elevations as presented by Chatham Manor Homes this -evening, with the following stipulations: • 1 - Windows throughout on:._ all elevations will be muttoned; 2 - Gutters and Downspouts will be placed on all elevations, both levels (1st and 2nd floors) • where applicable on the roof, with the approval of the Bldg. Dept. 3 — Escutcheons (Metal anchor bases) will be used at any place where wood meets stoops. 4 — All stipulations noted in the discus- sion are part of this motion. Com. Knaak seconded the motion. Note: The exterior lighting is not included in the motion, but will be brought backJfor approval at a later date. Roll Call Vote: Aye - Paolillo, Knaak, Kirby, Carr, Hardt Nay - None Motion Carried 5 to 0. • APPEARANCE COMMISSION Feb. 26, 1981 - Page Four B. Lexington Development Co. — Right of Way Landscaping Richard Piggott, Developer Representative Mr. Biggot presented plans for the location of street trees at the Buffalo Grove Commerce Center, located on Lake/Cook Road. He said this step is toward com— pletion of the S.I.A. Trees will be put in according to Village Practice. That is: trees will be spaced approximately 50 ft. apart and 4 different species of trees will be used. Choice of species will be based on the avail— ability of the trees at the time of installation. According to the agreement with the Village Engineering Staff, parkway trees will be put in simultaneously with the development of each individual lot. At the point when they ask to be put into the maintenance period...any lots, not developed at that time, will be planted with the parkway trees. _ As each lot is developed, individual landscape plans will be submitted for approval. Lots are subject to individual development so each drawing will show placement of the parkway trees. Ch. Hardt noted that he had two questions: 1 — When the streets are dedicated to the Village and trees are put in, who is responsible for the trees if they are damaged during future development? Mr.Piggott said that whoever develops the lots will take on that responsibility. Ch. Hardt was concerned about lots developed several year hence when the trees have grown considerably, from 2i caliper to 5" caliper, for instance — can Mr. X be required to replace any trees removed with one of equal size. Mr. Raysa said it would be difficult to require this, but developers usually assume responsibility for trees from one year from the date of acceptance by the Village they install the trees and provide the Village with a cash deposit or letter of credit to be used to sur— face the road at a later date. 2 — When will the streets be dedicated to the Village? According to the agreement, this year all the improvements will be made, such as sewers, underground work, gutters and curbs minus the sidewalks and streets for Unit # 1. They must wait through one winter before they can come in for acceptance. They will come in next spring or summer, finish all corrective work and ask for • acceptance by the Village. They will put in the trees whether or not the lots are developed. Er. Raysa suggested a stipulation be made by developer to bind any subsequent owner to be responsible for replacement of like quality trees if any are damaged during construction,etc. Mr. Piggott agreed that this•would be acceptable to him. Regarding placement of the trees, the Village requirements will be followed, but if for some reason, a tree location must be changed, the developer agrees to put the same number of trees will be used. This was acceptable to Mr. Piggott.. The species selection was discussed and it was suggested that the Appearance Commission select four species tonight; and that when lots are developed, plans must be brought in for approval with the further stipulation that the developer must come in before the streets are dedicated, with plans .showing what trees will be placed where. APPERANCE COMMISSION Feb. 26,1981 — Page Five • The developer agreed with this plan and the Commissioners felt that four trees could be selected at this time, but the right will be reserved to change at a later date if prices or availablity affects the choices. Com, Knaak asked about the need for screening for residents on the West • lot line. Mr.Piggott said that the planned development'will be some 5 ft. to 7 ft. lower than the residents. The Ordinance requires that a 30 foot space be maintained for drainage and a total of 507 to the buildings. a six-foot stockade fence is required with additional Austrian Pine trees as needed. It was noted that possible screening will be needed for any roof-top units• which will be seen by the residents. Also appropriate screening will be needed along the East side also, if:.if that portion is developed. Com. Knaak made the following motion: I move we approve the street tree plans for Lexington Development Corp. Phase No. 1 - to plant Norway Maple, Honeylocust, Green Ash and one other variety to be selected from Littleleaf Linden, Hackberry, Red Maple, and American Linden. Trees to be planted in clusters of three or more; percentages to be as equal as possible throughout Phase# 1 area. That if in the construction process, a tree has to be removed for construction reasons, that it be replaced with a tree of similar species ,a. before; and similar size. Phase No. 2 will be reviewed at a later time. The current owner binds himself and all sub- sequent owners to these conditions. Trees are to be 2" Staked or 2i" Unstaked as per Ordinance, or larger. Com. Paolillo seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote was taken: Aye - Carr, Kirby, • Paolillo, Knaak Nay - Hardt Motion carried 4 to 1. C. PUBLIC HEARING - Monotony Code Amendment Chairman Hardt read the Public Hearing Notice and explained the purpose of the hearing was to review the proposed ordinance which would add the usual Monotony specifications to the Appearance Plan of Buffalo Grove. The text of the proposed amendment was read oy Chairman Hardt. Two gentlemen from Hoffman Homes were present and Jack Schem (?) asked what the definition of Dis-similar Elevations was. Ch. Hardt explained that the term refers to changes in architectural treatment: raised ranch, split level, ranch, Colonial = Models; Di s-similar Elevations refers to changes in the exterior appearance of a model: partial brick, full brick or no brick; tudor style, etc. These are considered as different elevations. The Appearance Commission determines which models are to be considered dis-similar. .APPEARANCE COMMISSION ,no, „_ ... Changes in roof elevations, significant changes in elevations qualify an elevation dis-similar. The interior of the house can be the same. Colors and materials are not a determination of an elevation. There must be a difference in structure and roof line, etc. fiscussiori of the section refering to "white houses'in a row" resulted in the general opinion that trims 'usually vary the appearance of a house enough. Mr. Bob Russo - Hoffman Homes asked that Sec. #1 be clarified. Ch. Hardt answered that the Code Amendment is based upon precedents that have been set in the past. The AC would stipulate that a builder would agree to follow the Monotony Code. Usually this was sufficient, but occasionally problems resulted and therefore the Monotony Code is being added to the Ordinance. The minimum number of models needed to meet the Code is• three. Mr. Russo commended Buffalo Grove on having an Appearance Commission and said that the Village is better because of it. He added, considering the economy today, that the Comtission be aware of the added cost and extra time involved in numerous meetings with the Village Planners, etc. Mr. Raysa reviewed the history of Esthetic Zoning and noted the need to include Public Health, Safety and Welfare in the wording of the amendment. He also asked that terms be clarified, because intent is often used in court when problems arise. He recommended a new draft be submitted. The following terms were defined: Sec. I - The Appearance Plan is currently Exhibit A, 73-54. Developers are instructed that they must comply with all Village Ordinances - the Appearance Plan is part of this stipulation, but it does not need to be codified and made a part of the Statutes. Adjacent Buildings - Lots with common frontage. On corner lots, frontage of elevation and frontage of building across the street,is consid- ered. Base Color - Us»A»y the siding color. If the front elevation is brick then it would be the color of the brick. Not specifically the color of trim, shutters, doors, gutters, windows, etc. Elevation - a treatment of a model, particular architectural format - Style: ranch, two-story or raised 'ranch, etc. .. Elevation then is a different treatment of the same style: Tudor, different siding, different brick, different roof, etc. The front elevation with a porch for instance; but not a change of height. B - See #9 - Siting. refers to the horizontal plane. A - Sec #9 - Identical Front - intent requires two models, with the same front elevation can only be built on every third lot with two dis-similar models in between. Wording needs clarification. (Elevations are variations of the same model.) Sub-Sec. B - Standards must be established. Problem with the language. Needs clarification. APPEARANCE COMMISSION Feb. 26, 1981 - Page Seve • • Different Front Elevations — There must be an architectural change• on • front of the building, like the roof line — . not color or materials Mr. Cea suggested: Elevation changes are denoted by the • architectural element of the building • • and not color or materials. B — every second lot? — Different elevations can be built on every second Strike r "as determined by the Appearance Commission."• lot. Mr. Raysa will revise the wording of the amendment and return it to the Appearance Commission. A second Public Hearing will not be necessary. V. ANNOUNCEMENTS Various Village signs were brought to the attention of Mr. Griffin and he will look into each situation. VI. ADJOURNMENT Com. Knaak made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 11:00 P.M. Com. Paolillo seconded the motion. Meeting adjourned by unanimous approval. Respectfully submitted, v `�L2aL� • Shirley Ba , Secretary \./ Appearance cmmission • • • sb APPEARANCE COMMISSION Feb. 26, 1981 — Page Eight.