1983-03-24 - Appearance Commission - Minutes APPEARANCE COMMISSION
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE, IL.
THURS. , MAR. 24, 1983
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Don Hardt called the meeting to order at 7:37 P.M. on Thursday,
March 24, 1983 at the Village Hall .
II. ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: B. Gibbs, C. Zusel , K. Krippes and D. Hardt, QUORUM!
Commissioners Absent: C. Cea and Ed Larsen.
Building Dept. Liaison: Dominic Saviano
Village Board Liaison: Charles Gerschefske, Trustee
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
March 10, 1983 - Ch. Hardt asked that two sections of the H & R Block-Hyatt
discussion be deleted. Page Three - Paragraph 3: delete
"that was designed by Mr. Morelli ; Paragraph 6: delete all .
Com. Gibbs made a motion to approve the March 10, 1983 minutes as amended.
Com. Krippes seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Aye - Gibbs
Krippes
Hardt
Nay - None
Abstain - Zusel
March 10, 1983 were approved and will be placed on file.
IV. BUSINESS
A. Maishes Deli - Plaza Verde Wall Sign
Cancelled.
B. Suffield Place - 5 ft. Stockade Fence
Mr. Saviano explained the need for approval of a 5 foot stockade fence
along the south lot line of all lots which shall abut on the Busch Rd.
right-of-way. This is in accordance with the annexation agreement.
Com. Gibbs made the following motion:
I move we accept the proposed 5 ft. stockade fence
at Suffield Place, to be erected with the good side
facing Busch Road along the south lot line of all
lots adjacent to the Busch Road right-of-way.
Com. Krippes seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Aye - Zusel
Gibbs
Krippes
Hardt
Motion Passed 4 to 0. Nay - None
C. Wes-Tech - Buffalo Grove Commerce Center
Representative not present. Discussion was temporarily postponed
until after Item D - Windfield.
D. Windfield - New Model
Mr. Henry Gilbert and Mr. Ken Struck, of KRSS presented the plans for
a fourth model at Windfield. Mr. Gilbert explained the need for a new
model . Of the three models they now have, one is selling very slowly.
They feel they are missing a part of the market because of this; and they
will soon be running into trouble with the Monotony Code. The new model
will appeal to "empty nesters" who want a ranch type house, plus in situa-
tions where a parent must move in with a family, this house offers two
master bedrooms. For larger families, the optional 4th bedroom offers a
full size house.
The model will be built on Lot 5, next to the parking lot area. All
materials used were previously approved, with the exception of the brick.
A similiar brick was presented because the first brickyard went out of
business. They will now use Heirloom Charlston by Beck Brick. Mortar
will be natural grey color. A color chart was presented for the model .
1 . Roof - Antique Brown
2. Brick - Heirloom Charleston
3. Gutters and Downspouts - Brown
4. Soffits - Brown
5. Siding - Doeskin
6. Trim - Mohogony - Garage Doors, also
7. Shutters - Brown
Some Windfield residents were present: George Voss - 1326 Rose Ct. West;
Mr. Howard - 1324 Rose Court West; and Ken White - 1332 Rose Court West.
Mr. Voss said that his house is presently up for sale, but if he cannot
sell it, he will be staying in Buffalo Grove and asked if residents could
have some time to review the plans. He asked for a week, but Ch. Hardt
denied this request. He explained that the Appearance Commisiion was a
recommending body and the Village Board would have authority to address
any problems. Since the next Board meeting is not for about two weeks,
there would be sufficient time for the plans to be reviewed. A set of
plans can be secured from the developer, or they are available to be seen
at the Building Department. The Appearance Commission only looks at the
architectural features, colors and compatibility with existing models.
Size and value are not considered by the AC.
Shutters will be included on all windows, but not muttons. They are shown
on the plans where they are included, mostly on the front windows and on
other selected windows, but not bedrooms.
The Commission discussed the architecture of the Model . It is offered in
two elevations, each with a possible 4th bedroom. Elevation 1 has alumi-
num siding and Elevation 2 has painted vertical wood siding.
A Straw Poll indicated that the Commissioners agreed that for Monotony
Code purposes the DOVER would be considered 1 Model with Two Elevations ,
The 3 bedroom is ,one elevation and the 4 bedroom is one elevation of
the same DOVER Model . Specifically, the 3-bedroom would have to have
two other models in between, but the 4-bedroom model would be considered
different and could be built with only 1 other model in between it and a
3-bedroom. And vice-versa.
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
Mar. 24, 1983 - Page Two
Ch. Hardt asked for comments from the audience.
Mr. Voss acted as spokesman and expressed concern that the colors
being used lack continuity.
Ch. Hardt explained that when the Appearance Commission approves
color packages, and the Village Board subsequently approves them.
The Appearance Commission cannot disapprove the colors now. The
developer is changing only the brick, not any color selections.
It was also noted that the Appearance Commissioners do not approve
or disapprove colors because of personal preference. Colors are
approved that are compatible, within a realm. It was noted that a
homeowner can paint his house any color he chooses, after it is pur-
chased. At times, the AC has restricted certain colors from being next
to one another
m e next question Mr. Voss asked concerned the islands on the cul-de-
sac. He said the landscaping for the island was approved but never
put in. He and some of the other homeowners have cut weeds and they
would maintain the plantings if they are put in.
Ch. Hardt stated that because of the economy, homes have not been
built and it is customary for a new developer to take over any previous
landscaping agreements relative to the areas within the right-of-ways.
The Building Department would be able to look into the annexation agree-
ment to see when the work was scheduled to be done.
Mr. Saviano added that a developer usually landscapes the islands after
the houses in an area are completed. When the court is finished, the
islands will be done. It is the responsibility of the developer to
keep the area as clean as possible.
Mr. Voss expressed the concern about the parking along the street in
front of the models. He said people come out on weekends and do not
use the parking lot. The street is very narrow and there is not room
for parking there. He felt a sign is needed to direct people to the
lot, or a sign that says "No Parking Here To Corner. "
Mr. Struck recalled that when the signage was presented to the AC last
year, a Parking Ahead sign was presented and denied. If it is approved,
they will be glad to put it up.
The Commission agreed to increase signage to eliminate this problem.
Com. Gibbs made the following motion:
I move we approve the Dover Model as
submitted with only two elevations:
1 - 3 bedroom unit
2 - 4 bedroom unit
Brick to be Heirloom Charleston.
Colors to be the same as previously
approved.
Natural mortar to be used on the brick.
Shutters all around the house.
Muttons on the windows as shown.
Com. Zusel seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Aye - Krippes
Gibbs
Zusel
Hardt
Motion Passed 4 to 0. Nay - None
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
March 24, 1983 - Page Three
Ch. Hardt asked about the lighting fixtures. Mr. Gilbert and Mr. Struck
stipulated that the light fixtures will be the same as previously approved.
Com. Zusel had to leave to attend another meeting.
\./ 2 - LANDSCAPING OF MODEL AREA
The Model will be Dover - Elevation #1 - 3 Bedroom with aluminum siding.
Ch. Hardt asked about the existing lighting of the models and commented
that the lights to the South of the buildings seem to be distracting to
people coming down the main entry. He suggested that it be shielded,
or turned toward the house.
Mr. Howard asked if the landscaping proposed for the model is to be the
same as the landscaping being given to the purchasers, relative to the
grading of the land.
Mr. Saviano said that would be up to the Engineering Department. Berms
are graded by that department.
Ch. Hardt asked what kind of buffer exists between the parking lot and
the proposed model , and the existing models.
Mr. Gilbert said there is a split rail fence around the existing models
and will be continued around the new model, directing people around the
parking lot to the Sales Office.
There will be two flood lights shining on the front of the building.
There will be one sign - DOVER in front of the model to match the other
approved signs.
The owner of the house on Lot 18 was present (Mr. Howard) and he was
not opposed to the proposed lighting which is to be left on all night.
A homeowner asked about allowing parking on the cul-de-sac because he
has a three year-old. The Commission felt that the cul-de-sac is far
enough away from the proposed model that people would not be parking
down there. With reference to people coming out on weekends to see
their new houses, there is nothing that can be done about parking until
streets are dedicated.
Mr. Saviano said that police cannot issue citations until streets are
dedicated. People can park on a cul-de-sac as long as they do not
block fire hydrants, driveways, public sidewalks or mailboxes. The
workers have to park and the parking lot is not large enough to hold
all the necessary vehicles.
Mr. Gerschefske commented that the Village Board will be discussing
parking and signage on April llth. They will also be talking about
undeveloped areas & speed limits. Areas must be provided for people
to park and for workers to park, etc.
Com. Krippes made a motion to approve the Landscaping of the proposed
Windfield DOVER model on Lot #5, as submitted.
Com. Gibbs seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Aye - Krippes
Gibbs
Hardt
Motion Passed 3 to 0. Nay - None
Ch. Hardt said the Model and the Model have been approved. Should
a problem with brick arise, a similiar brick may be substituted. If
a very different brick is selected, it should be submitted to the Bldg.
Department.
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
Mar. 24, 1983 - Page Four
Ch. Hardt directed Mr. Gilbert to check into the model lighting.
Ch. Hardt told the residents that they can attend the Village Board
meeting when this proposed model will be approved, and if they have
any concerns with compatibility, that is the time to speak. The recent
ruling in Schaumburg concerning the building of smaller houses in a sub-
division is of interest, but obviously this house is larger than the ones
now being built, so it should not be a problem.
C. Wes-Tech - Buffalo Grove Commerce Center
Mr. John Thieboldt presented plans for an addition to the Wes-Tech
building. He said the reason the addition is necessary is because the
company is expanding rapidly and they wish to add one bay. The building
is nearing completion. The bay will be 36' 12" and will be constructed
of exactly the same building materials.
There is a possiblilty that the owner will approve of a suggestion being
made by Mr. Thieboldt to extend the front elevation treatment of two
windows with the white stone cap continued. This treatment would en-
hance the architectural features of the building. Construction would
be the same.
Com. Gibbs made the following motion:
I move we approve the Architectural change
in the Wes-Tech building, resulting in an
addition of 36 ft. 1-1/2" on the East side
of the building, with the stipulation that
all building materials and colors will be
the same.
The motion includes the provision for the
architecture to be changed to match the
previously approved window/stone cap treat-
ment; OR as presented.
Com. Krippes seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Aye - Krippes
Gibbs
Hardt
Nay - None
Motion Passed 3 to 0.
Landscaping of Wes-Tech Addition.
Mr. Thieboldt presented a new landscape plan and explained that the
landscape budget had been increased and the landscaping has been
enhanced dramatically.
Ch. Hardt asked if the area to the East side will be sodded?
The proposed pavement planned cannot be put in because it is a future
street and the required set back requiement will be 25 feet. Instead of
sod, the area will be hydro-seeded, if this is agreeable.
The owner is purchasing the two lots to the rear, and eventually the
access road will be built. They will sod the front area from the build-
ing line to the front walk.
Ch. Hardt asked that some 4 to 5 evergreens be put in to break up the
blank elevation, along with the hydro-seed on the East side. With
sod in front with some additional planting to continue in front of the
new section, the plan would be acceptable.
Com. Krippes made the following motion:
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
Mar. 24, 1983 - Page Five
Com. Krippes made the following motion:
I move we accept the proposed Landscaping Plan
for Wes-Tech as revised and adjacent to the
proposed East elevation addition with the following
stipulations:
1 . The area from the right-of-way to
building set back line be sodded.
2. The area from the builidng line to
the rear be hydro-seeded.
3. An additional 4 to 5 evergreens,
bushes or trees to break up the
blank elevation.
4. At the owner't option the front
low landscaping treatment will be
continued in the sodded area,
East of the driveway.
Com. Gibbs seconded the motion. Roll Call : Aye - Krippes
Gibbs
Hardt
Nay - None
Motion Passed 3 to 0.
V. ANNOUNCEMENTS
Ch. Hardt mentioned that no action was taken concerning the No Parking
along the entrance to Windfield's models. Should the Village Board
wish to approve the additional sign, it is acceptable to the AC.
Ch. Hardt read a letter from Mr. Frank Hruby concerning posting signs
on property that will have a hearing before the Appearance Commission.
The Commission did not favor this action and a memo was dictated to
Mr. Hruby and the Village Board. The memo was made in the form of a
motion made by Com. Krippes and seconded by Com. Gibbs.
I move that we recommend to the Building Department
and the Village Board that on-site signage should not
be required in matters that appear before the
Appearance Commission.
It is our opinion that we are trying to eliminate
the proliferation of signage and since we are not
required to conduct a Public Hearing, it is not
appropriate in our case.
Roll Call Vote: Aye - Krippes
Gibbs
Hardt
Nay - None
Motion Passed - 3 to 0.
\s/ VI. ADJOURNMENT
Com. Gibbs made a motion to adjourn. Com. Krippes seconded the motion.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 P.M.
Respectfully submitted, Shin tes, Sec. APPEARANCE COMMISSION
�s�� March 24, 1983 - Page Six