1978-11-09 - Appearance Control Commission - Minutes •
(g
` APPEARANCE COMMISSION 0 (C
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE, ILL.
Thurs. . NOVEMBER 9. 1978
1 . CALL TO ORDER
The regular Appearance Commission meeting was called to order
at 7:39 PM, Nov. 9, 1978 at the Village Hall, by Chairmen Don
Hardt .
2 . ROLL CALL
Those present were : Commissioners Knaak, Berins , Gibbs and
Kirby; Chairman Hardt ; Dominic Saviano .
Absent i Commissioner Paolillo
QUORUM PRESENT Also present was a prospective Commissioner:
Mr. Michael R. Holland
810 Shady Grove, B.G .
541-6341 (Home) - 688-?540 (Business)
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Oct. 12, 1978 & Oct . 26, 1978 minutes were reviewed and several
corrections noted. (See attached. )
minutes
Motion to accept the Oct . 12, 1978/as corrected was made by
Commissioner Knaak and seconded by Commissioner Gibbs .
All agreed unanimously.
Motion to accept the Oct . 26, 1978 minutes as corrected was
made by Commissioner Gibbs and seconded by Commissioner Knaak.
Aye- Com. Knaak, Berins , Gibbs and Hardt . Com. Kirby - abstained .
4 . OLD BUSINESS
a) PRUDENTIAL - Landscaping: Representatives T. P. Conrardy,
Mark Mc Kenzie from Bob' s Green Thumb Land-
scaping Co. , Inc .
The presentation was made by Mr. Mc Kenzie, who described.
the addition of trees and shrubs along the South end of they
property. Pin Oaks to be used in the parking lot area.
Agreement to use 2i inch caliper trees , about 10-12 ft high.
Ch. Hardt read the Forester's recommendation which was given
verbally because of lack of time . Mr. Page , the Village Con-
sultant, recommended the English Oak instead of Pin Oak; and
also recommended the area (Section A) have asphalt moved back
2 more feet . This would not effect the parking area. The
purpose being to allow more water for the trees .
Mr. Conrardy agreed to moving the pumipers 4 ft . from the
the concrete wall in a straight line . They prefer Pin Oaks .
Com. Kirby asked for an intrepretation of the Latin species .
Mr. Me Kenzie gave the English names and discussed the various
plantings that have been proposed with the Commissioners .
•
Commissioner Kirby made the following motion:
I move the revised landscaping plan of Strathmore
Shopping Plaza for Sections A. & D be accented as
presented with these stipulations :
I - On the South section of Building A,
designated as Section A, the parking
bumpers be a minimum of 4 feet from the
retaining wall along the entire area.
• 2 - The slope in the swale be such that the
bark that is being used as ground cover
under the shrubs, will not wash away.
Commissioner Knaak seconded the motion.
Chairman Hardt opened Discussion of the motion. •
Brad Olsen, representative for the Homeowners asked about
the height of the fence on the Landscaping Plans . It
shows a 6 ft . fence but at the last meeting a 7 ft . fence
was stipulated for the South side of the property. He also
. asked when the plantings are scheduled.
Mr. Mo Kenzie answered that they hope to start this fall .
It will depend on getting the approval of the Village
Board and then it takes 2 weeks to order the plantings .
Mr. Olsen asked about the West corner on the South side .
He said 8 ft . Junipers had been proposed to hide the curb
lights, and keep people from cutting across the yards.
M . Conrardy answered by assuring the Homeowners that the
cars will not be in this area and that eventually a meridian
will be placed on Arlington Heights Road so that turning will
be controlled.
Mr. Olsen asked about the size and area of screening that the
proposed trees would cover. He was informed that Pin Oaks
are a thick foilage tree that keeps its leaves a long time.
The height of the fence was discussed by the Commissioners
as to itesthetic quality. Ch. Hardt prefers 6 ft . for
the reaso that the trees behin 74 will not be as attractive.
Mr. Conrardy explained the situation of already having a
6 ft. fence which can be installed now before hard weather
comes , as against the possiblilty of having to wait for a
7 ft. fence which is an odd size.
Mr. Olsen commented that a 6' fence provides less screening
of roof top units . He said the trees are not so much for
screening as for breaking up the appearance of the fence .
Ch. Hardt summarized the discussion and asked the Commis-
sioners to decide so that the meeting can continue .
•
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
Nov. 9, 1978 - Page Two.
Commissioner Knaak made the following amendment :
I move we stipulate that the fence on the Snuth
side by 7 feet high as approved on Oct . 12, 1978,
Section A on the plans .
Commissioners Gibbs seconded the motion,
Roll "Call Vote was taken as follows: Aye; Knaak, Berins
and Gibbs
Nays Kirby and Hardt
Amendment passed 3 to 2.
Roll Call Vote was taken on the original motion.
Motion Passed unanimously.
Ch. Hardt commented that an appeal can be made at the time
of the Village Board hearing.
Com. Knaak asked about the 'ForLas6' sign on 'the vacant
portion of the property, North quarter. Approval is required..
. Mr. Conrardy agreed to take it down.
b) BUFFALO GROVE GLASS SERVICE - Sign
Mr. Saviano informed the Board that the Buffalo Grove
Home Center cancelled. He presented the revised sign
for Buffalo Grove Glass Service. The minutes stated
they could present the new sign at a Workshop without
being here .
Mr. Saviano said it could be approved but that the man
is not registered with Buffalo Grove and must be bonded
before he can work here . This will be taken care of by
the Building Department .
Mh. Hardt stated the conditions that should be noted in
. the motion. Com. Gibbs made the following motion:
I move we accept the repsubmitted, revised sign
for Buffalo Grove Glass Service, Ltd. as submitted
with the following stipulations:
1 — To be painted on the inside
8 - The el ctrical connections not be visible .
3 The Ca be in good condition.
4 - Have an electrical disconnect (on the back
or the sign) or be painted out if visible.
5 Use only white tubes.
Commissioner Berins seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote wQs taken and the Motion Passed. 4 Ayes .
Com. Kirby abstained.
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
Nov. 9, 1978 - Page Three
5. NEW BUSINESS
a) EARLY LEARNING CENTER t SCREENING of ROOF TOP UNITS
Mr. Arvid Olson and Mr. John J. Caulfield (Lawyer)
Mr. Olson reviewed the architectural screen that vas
presented and stated that he understood that there was
a problem with the screening because it was secured to
the roof top units and would make it difficult for
the Fire Dept . to have access . He suggested an altera-
tion which would leave the center of each section open.
The . construction would be two
1 ! "fences" T attached to the units,
I '9 ‘° I covered with shake shingles to
S , f I match the roof . Wood frames .
Commissioner Gibbs commented that they looked like match
boxes on top the roof . "Because the units are already up,
its the only solution possible without going into the roof."
The amount of space required to meet the needs of the
fire regulations was discussed and it was decided that
if the units were wrapped at the inside around the
corners with a minimum of 6 feet open. This was agreed .
The other visible roof hatch shall be paintedrout to
match the Dark Brown trim.
Commissioner Kirby made the motion as follows :
I move that the roof top equipment screening
presented by the Early Learning Center be approved
with these stipulations :
1 - A 6 ft. access way be designated on
each of the interior fence lines, leaving
a center opening of 5 ft. between units .
2 - The roof hatch be painted out to match the
Dark Brown trim.
Commissioner Gibbs seconded the motion.
Roll call vote was taken and the Motion Passed. 3 aye - 2 no.
Aye - Berins, Kirby and Gibbs
No - Knaak and Hardt
LANDSCAPING
Chairman Hardt said that changes would have to be made
in the original plans because of the swale and changes in
the elevations that the Appearance Commission was unaware
of when they were presented .
Mr. Arvid Olson described the swale . It is 1-2 RR ties
high at:ithe Southeast Corner and is 4-5 RR ties high where
it meets Prudential's wall - It deepens from East to West .
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
Nov. 9, 1978 - Page Four
1 ,
' Mr. Olson said he would stipulate plantings the same
as Prudential and would have had the changes made before
coming if he had known this was necessary.
Com. Kirby pointed out that the same tall hedge if used
would outgrow the Pin Oak trees.
A straw poll indicated that the Commission would need to
see plans .
The discussion continued and suggestions were made by the
Commissioners. They asked that the pin oaks be continued
along the East side, special treatment be given to the
SE Corner and along the South to eliminate the low shrubs
and use shade trees.
Mr. Olson was agreeable to making the changes but since
he very much desire to get everything settled as soon as
possible and present the new plans at the Village Board
meeting the suggestion was made by Brad Olsen to ad-
journ this portion of the meeting until 7 P.M. Nov. 20th,
review the plans and make a recommendation.
This was found to be agreeable .
A straw vote was then taken to determine whether ELC
should use the same trees (pin oaks) or durable shade
trees which grow faster. Vote was as follows :
D. Knaak -Different species
L, Berins - alternate species
B. Gibbs -- same species all along
L. Kirby -- prefers flexibility
D. Hardt -- also flexibile -
Ch. Hardt ruled that the AC preference would be the
faster growing, durable shade trees especially at the
corner and about 20 feet back onl7the East line . (No Maples)
• Mr. Brad Olson asked that copies of the landscaping plan
be given to him for review before the meeting.
Commissioner Gibbs mde the following motion:
I move the approval of ELC Landscaping be
deferred and that this portion of the AC
of this night , Nov. 9, 1978 be reconvened
at 7 P.M. on Monday , November 20, 1978 in
the Conference Room of the Village Hall to
review the revised Landscaping Plans
Commissioner Kirby seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote was taken and Motion Passed unanimously.
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
Nov. 9, 1978 - Page Five
b) RANCH MART I. Sign Package
Copies were distributed to the Commissioners this night
and Ch. Hardt stated that an exception would be made to
review it without previous opportunity to read it .
Ch. Hardt also said that it would be required to agree
-that if any changes vary from the sign package then the
approval. of the AC would be necessary.
Mr. Ed Larson - American Sign and Indicator Co. - said
that was stated in the sign package, and that the Bldg.
Dept . would see to it that the proper guidelines are
followed.
Ch. Hardt insisted that the intent may be correct but
the way the wording reads it is all inclusive when it
says "certain. tenants are exempted"-any tenants would
able to erect non-conforming signs.
Com. Kirby made the following statements
•
"All exempted signage that remains as of 'this specific
• date' is exempted from the requirements set forth in
this document and any changes to that signage hairs to
! Comply with this document and a variation to this
document would require it going all the way through
Village channels ." This is to be Paragrath 4, P. 1 .
Other questions were discussed concerning the amount
of signage a store can have if, for instance they
occupy two store fronts. Mr. Larson explained that
they still would only be allowed one sign.
Colors were stipulated : white, ivory, yellow, orange
and yellow/orange . Lettering types were shown and
agreed upon: Helvetica, Universe or Microgramma, used
in Upper or lower case sizes .
Commissioner Gibbs made the following motion:
I move we accept the Sign Package for the
Ranch dart Shopping Center, Gregg Builders ;
as presented with the changes noted below:
ADMINISTRATION
Para. 1 - 2nd sentence - must changed to SHALL
Para. 4 - Strike the verbage used and insert :-
"A11/exempted signage that remains
of ' .i s .,- eA-+f�-w-_date• is ex-
empted/from�t.ti the requirements set
I �'� forte in this document and any
X ` changes to that signage have to
0 a \ comply with this document : and a
ate'
� ( 0 variation to this document would
p require .1g. going all the way through
� \ the Village channels."
a1 L. APPEARANCE COMMISSION •
•
Y 14A Nov. 9, 1978 - Page Six
SIGN CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA
5. COPY COLORS - Sentence 3 - should change to SHALL
Sentence 5 - strike "Will be consid-
ered - shonid read
"Would be white, yellow,
orange and yellow/orange
where
GRAPHIC COPY:
1. Sentence 2 - should changed to SHALL
2. Last paragraph - 1st line - period ( . ) after center.
2nd line - strike "other" - All
signage is governed
Commissioner Kirby seconded the motion.- •
Roll Call Vote was taken and the Motion Passed unanimously.
Ch. Hardt told Mr. Larson that he could appeal these changes.
. PYLON SIGN
Chairman Hardt stated that according tb the new sign code
the AC does not have the right to review this sign but at
the direction of the Village Board have been asked to give
comments on its appearance - not its location. We are to
decide how the sign would blend with - Ranch Mart Center and
how it would look at the Dundee Road entrance in place of the
low level sign; and anything that may make it more reasonable .
According to the Sign Ordinance variances can be granted due
to hardship or in such cases that a particular aestetic im-
provement is made to the center or if some of the other signs
are removed. A review of the Sign Ordinance is to be made
by a Sub-Committee to clarify its verbage concerning distances,
Cori. Gibbs said the height is under 20 ft . but does it pro-
ject over the egress% "no" Also if the other sign is mover'
would it be legal . "It would be non-conforming because of the
spacing. There are already too many signs on that corner."
The planter box that is there now would remain.
Com. Kirby asked if they would lower the sign?
Mr. Larson .said "No, according to the traffic speed code -
at 45 MPH a sign should be 30-35 ft. high.
Com. Gibbs asked why one side extends 1' 3" and the other 1 '9"
Mr. Larson said that was a basic design concept and he also
informed the AC that the sign is 119.6 sq . ft .-which meets codes
Com. Berins questioned the difference in size of Ranch Mat
part and the Jewel - Irving Federal part and also the 24': ex-
panse is too wide.
Does
Com. Knaak - Prefers present sign. /hot especially dislike.
the new one.
Com. Kirby - Said she understood the need for advertising
and the competition that is in this area. But she said the
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
Nov. 9, 1978 - Page Seven
- i
majority of the people who will be doing business at I
these establishments live in the Village . They should
understand that the AC is here to make the Village look
good and upgrade the signage . We can allow mare signs
and bigger signs, soon everyone would want larger and
larger signs.
Mr. Larson said that such a sentence is subjective and
signage depends on each person's ability to read . All
business establishments have a right to have a signs.
Mr. Saviano stated that this is correct and even . though
one frontage is smaller than the required 500 ft . he
should be allowed a sign.
Ch. Hardt decided it was time to review the sign dis-
regard everything else except the aesthetics of the.
copy, how it blends in with the center and how it
appears. Also whether it should be put up.
Com. Berins said these were 2 opposing views and she
did not understand how the AC can approve the sign but
not approve it being put up.
Com. Gibbs made the recommendation that the Pylon sign
is an attractive sign and that it relates well to the
Ranch Mart Center. Com. Kirby and Ch. Hardt agreed .
Com. Knaak opposes the sign because of the 3 different
styles of lettering on one sign. Com. Berins agreed .
the
Com. Kirby said it should also be noted that/plantersis
existing but shrubs have not been submitted.
Ch. Hardt asked for the Commission's decision as to
whether the sign should be put up or not and the reasons
for not approving it ; and whether the low level sign
should be moved to Dundee Road.
Com. Gibbs said he would not recommend the sign because
it is in violation of the Sign Package
ground level
Ch. Hardt said , "Because of the numerous/signs in close
proximity to the proposed Ranch Mart Pylon Sign it is
the feeling of the AC that the sign should not be erected
as proposed . There currently is a "For Sale" sign -
150 ft .to the East : a double faced billboard sign for
Oak Creek Condos apnroximately 233 ft . to the East end
Mobil Oil Pylon about 400 ft. to the East . Also there
is Striker Lanes/ Mr. Adams Sign 150 ft to the West :
Era Real Estate sign 245 ft to the West . In addition,
we are noting that Gregg Builders property on Dundee Rd .
has 4 ground level signs . Prior to any additional ,con-
sideration should be given to removal of at least 2
of the ground level signs to the East - which are temp-
orary signs . (Oak Creek Condos and the Restaurant signs . )"
More discussion followed concerning the application of
;the Sign Ordinance . It was Com . Gibbs opinion that the
AC should wait until the proposed interpretation is
given by the authorities of the APPEARANCE COMMISSION
Nov. 9. 1978 - Page Eight
Mr. Larson asked that it be noted that the Appearance Com-
missioners have already voted to approve the aesthetics of
the sign. And that he is going to pursue other avenues to
gain permission to erect it .
Ch. Hardt repeated the Appearance Commission's decision that
it should not be erected. It was a unanimous decision.
Further discussion concerning the legality of the sign was
continued and Ch. Hardt referred to the fact that the sign
was reviewed only because Mr. Larson asked to have it look-
ed at from an aesthetic point of view. This was done and.
it will be the decision of the Village Board to decide if
it conforms to the Sign Ordinance .
,k. WORKSHOP
a) Steeple View -- A.T. Henderson Co.
With reference to the Memo from Wm. Balling to Tom Fennell,
dated Nov. 8, 1978 (attached) , Mr. Henderson met with
Chairman Don Hardt and Mr. Fennell on Thurs . Nov. 9, 1978
to discuss the points in question. As a result of that
meeting, Mr. Hardt presented the agreements that were made .
He explained that at the time of the Village Board review of
the recommendations of the Appearance Commission the original
Plan Commission Concepts were compared and several conditions
have not been met .
Proper consideration has been given to correct the conflicts
and Mr. Henderson agreed wholeheartedly to make adjustments
as outlined by Chairman Hardt .
Commissioner Berins made a motion to amend the motion made
Oct. 26, 1978 as follows:
I move we approve the Landscaping as submitted deleting
• the courtyard area in which the birms that were pre.s4nted
may interfere with eventual placement of the Tot Lots as
initially proposed to the Board . This area will be re-
submitted at a later date; showing revised Landscaping and.
Tot Lots placement . It should be further noted that addi-
tional consideration has been given to the retention area
on Weiland and County Line Road and it is the AC's concur-
rence that the tree placement shall remain as originally
accepted. If a.,conflict occurs with the placement of trees
proposed in the Landscape Plan with respect to the retention
• area due to varying engineering properties it is the recom-
' mendation of the AC that the placement of the trees can be
varied however, the number is to remain as proposed .
It should be further noted to the Board that the tree place-
• ment with respect to the Fire Lane aircess roads has been
considered and the trees have been eliminated in lieu of
low-lying shrubh.that will not encumber entrance by fire dept .
• • vehicles ; any and all emergency vehicles.
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
NOV. 9, 1978 - Page Nine
•
It should be further noted that the Typical Landscape Treat_'
ment around the building and foundations has been considered
• and is being approved as part of the total Landscape Package .
• And in addition the medians as proposed by Exhibit B were not
indicated on Exhibited G nor on exhibits presented to this Com-
mission. It is our understanding that the Village Staff is
against such medians and therefore Landscaping will not be
reviewed by this Commission' at this time .
•
•
Motion was seconded by Commissioner Gibbs.
Roll Call -Vote was taken and the Motion Passed - 4 to 1 . (No-Knaak)
Com. Knaak stated his reason for voting against the amendment .
He said it was because of the medians shown on the Concept Plans
and he would have preferred to have them included at this time.
Commissioner Kirby made the following motion:
I move we amend the approval of the Architectural Plan
made on Oct . 26, 1978 (Steeple View) to include a full
uniform mansard around all sides of each building to allow
for homogeneous compatibility between the multi-family area
and any future commendial area.
•
Commissioner Gibbs seconded the motion.
•
Roll Call Vote was taken and the MotionPassed unanimously.
b) VOLUNTEER. for Sign Ordinance Review Committee ' was requested
and it was decided that Com. Knaak would be the representative
along with Mr. Hardt , Mr. Heinrich, Mr. Larson , Mr. Fennell
and:others_ to- make -any necessary changes . Since a date has not
been set Commissioner Berins will attend if Com.Knaak cannot:;go
Chairman Hardt reported that after the discussion Monday night
at the Village Board . regarding the legality of the Appearance
Commission and in response to Mr. Larson's statement that a
Village with respect to the power that is granted to it by
State Charter is only allowed to establish ordinances that are
based on health, safety and welfare; and not to such subjective
things as aesthetics . It has been researched and it is true
that challenges can be made based on aesthetics . The outcome
of such a challenge is questionable and the Board recognizes
that possiblilty, therefore any annexation agreements or dc!vel-
opment agreements they make include a stipulation. that iht
developer will regard and agree to all ordinances in the Village
of Buffalo Grove ; and they apecifisally point out the Ordinance
Number of the Appearance Commission. So any conflict that was
won on the ordinance standpoint they would lose from the con-
tractural basis. There fore under Contract Law the Commission
has to right to operate the way it has been that nall Phases .
This stipulation applies to all developmentb 7/ have come in
:after AC. was established. The Village Board has the final say.
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
Nov. 9, 1978 - Page Ten
•
a) Commissioner Knaak voiced his desire to see results as the
outcome of the work of the Appearance Commission. His time
is valuable and he sees the function of the Commission as
two-fold : 1st-what is done at the meetings and 2nd-the
enforcement of the stipulations made. Many businesses have
not complied with the agreements they made . Com. Knaak pre-
sented photographs citing many of the violations.
Mr. Saviano agreed and suggested that a letter be written to
Mr. Balling recommending that when people who are in vio-
lation come in for renewal of their business license, and an
inspection determines they have not complied with their ap-
ppoved specifications, that Mr. Saviano has the right to deny
their license until they have corrected the situation.
• Several violations were noted:
1 - Car Wash at #83 and Arlington Hts , Road
2 - Weekend Realty Signs
3 - Dunell - closed stores signs have been turned .
4 - Gerri's Deli - changed hands, new sign should
have come in for approval
5 - Village of Buffalo Grove has sign over wall of
Golf Course, & three signs on the building, 1.�ad-
vertising food. Not fair to allow one to do it .
The problem was discussed further and Chairman Hardt agreed
a letter would be the proper procedure and he would write one.
d) Chairman Hardt described the Morotny Code and presented a
drawing. It states :
a) Houses must be at least 3 apart if identical.
b) If a different elevation it can be 2nd awAy•.
a) Same house cannot be directly across the street.
Can be 1 house away - across the street .
d) Cul da sac - Same criteria, not across court .
Circles and fingers treated the same way.
Colors- No two houses adjacent to each other can have the
same color scheme . All agreed with this idea .
?1 ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 12 Midnight by unanimous agreement .
Respectfully submitted ,
Shirley Bat , Secretary
APPEARANCE COMMISSION
Nov. 9, 1978 - Page Eleven.
eb
• c
P/26
To: Tom Fennell
Date: November 8, 1978
Subj: Steeple View - Appearance Commission Approval
Please arrange to have the landscape and architectual
plans re-evaluated by the Appearance Commission 11/9/78 for
conformance to Exhibit B, Concept Plan, Exhibit C architectual
and landscape concept, and Exhibit G preliminary engineering. I
have noticed the following conflicts:
A-. 1. Landscaping and perimeter detention plan (tree
location). •
Landscaping and emergency fire lane access (tree
�Qlocation). (1 emergency access point deleted)
Building and foundation treatment.
Architectual compatibility with concept plan -
particularly as it relates to future commercial
development.
erie4-- / 5. Entrance landscape medians.
6. Conflict between berms and tot lots.
Please re-evaluate for other conflicts. I have spoken to
Don Hardt on this and he has reserved time at the end of the November
9 meeting for re-analysis.
The Village Clerk exhibits I mentioned may be picked up
from Norma.
Sincerely,
ff
Wi lia R. Bal ing
Village Manage
WRB/nk
cc: Dominic Saviano
Son Hardt