VILLAGE OF LONG GROVE
MEETING MINUTES OF THE ARCHITECTURAL BOARD
REGULAR MEETING – November 21, 2005
7:00 PM
Call to Order: Chairman John Staub called the meeting of the Architectural Board (AB)
to order at 7:00 p.m. with the following members present:
Members Present: Chairman John Staub, Lori Lyman, Terrance Connolly, Lynn Michaelson-Cohn
Members Absent: Dee McLaughlin
Also Present: Village
Planner James Hogue, Members of the public
Motion to approve the minutes as presented by Commissioner Lyman,
seconded by Commissioner Cohn, and unanimously approved by voice vote.
2. Consideration of a request for an addition to
“The Studio”, 360 Historical Lane for
enclosure of an existing patio and signage within the “B-1” Historic Business
District, submitted by Mr. Tom
Hilligoss.
The Board reviewed the revised drawings which incorporated the changes as recommended by the AB to “The Studio” addition at their meeting of October 17th. The Board found that these items adequately reflected the changes as requested by the AB.
Motion made by Lynn Michaelson-Cohn, seconded by Terrance Connolly to accept the revisions to the proposed addition to “The Studio” as presented by the petitioner. On a voice vote; all aye
Mr. Hilligoss then presented a revised design for proposed signage for the project. He noted signage as proposed would be used to replace existing signage and would be exactly the same in terms of square footage as what is existing. The only change would by the copy on signage.
Commissioner Lyman asked staff if square footages of the proposed signage were indeed identical. Planner Hogue indicated that this latest revision to signage on the property had not been submitted to staff for review. As such he could not answer the question. However, he did indicate that if the sign copy was the only thing to change and square footage was to remain identical, this would be acceptable and should not pose a problem.
The Board reviewed the signage request and noted that the drawings of the signage proposed to be placed on the building lacked dimensions and a square footage calculation. Therefore, the Board could not determine if what was proposed was identical in terms of square footage to what was existing and could not approve this request.
A proposal was also submitted for the
street (hanging) sign on
A motion to approve the street (hanging) sign as proposed by the petitioner was made by Commissioner Lyman, seconded by Commissioner Cohn and approved unanimously on a voice vote
At the October 17 regular AB meeting the Board approved a request for a
monument sign as proposed by the petitioner with the use of cultured or natural
stone over the entire monument (in place of the “dryvitt”) and while not
mandatory, the AB recommended the use of larger lettering if possible subject
to revised drawings being submitted for AB review.
Chairman Staub re-reviewed the request and noted that the revisions as
previously requested had been made.
Motion made by Commissioner Connolly, Seconded by Commissioner Cohn to
accept the revisions as submitted. On a voice vote; all aye.
At the October 17th regular AB meeting the Board approved a
request for signage as presented with regard to the logo and color scheme as
depicted on the company letterhead without the phone number and subject to a
final drawing being submitted for AB review and approval.
Commissioner Lyman noted that the changes as submitted by the
petitioner were exactly as requested by the AB.
Motion made by Commissioner Cohn, Seconded by Commissioner Connolly to
accept the revisions as submitted. On a voice vote; all aye.
At the October 17th meeting the Board found that there was not enough detail provided in the items submitted. Specifically the Board wanted to see more detail with regard to the overall color scheme of the building and improvement, and specifications and/or samples of the new materials to be used in construction (i.e doors, windows, etc).
Planner Hogue noted that petitioner resubmitted a scaled drawing of the building façade which identified materials to be used and the dimensions of the structure.
Chairman Staub discussed the remodeling of the façade with the petitioner. The AB then discussed alternatives for making the building façade more “quaint”.
Mr. Towner stated that the use of the area to be enclosed by the remodeling had not yet been determined. He indicated that a repair bay in the rear of the existing building would continue to be utilized for auto repair.
The Board determined that as the structure was existing significant changes to the structure could not be readily accomplished. The Board did note that “coach lighting” could potentially be used in the façade renovation.
A motion was made by Lori Lyman, seconded by Lynn Michaelson-Cohn to approve the façade renovation as submitted by the petitioner with the condition that if the “coach lighting” option were to be pursued that the fixtures be submitted for review and approval by the AB. Motion approved unanimously on a voice vote.
Commissioner Lyman reviewed the proposal and noted that landscape lighting such as this required AB approval per the Village Code.
Commissioner Connolly asked why mail box lighting was being proposed. Planner Hogue noted that particularly at this time of year it was dark when people arrived home from work. Mailbox lighting would be convenient to residents getting their mail. Commissioner Cohn also added that it may serve to deter vandalism.
Commissioner Lyman liked the concept. Commissioner Connolly noted that all lighting should be directed away from roadways and on-coming traffic.
Motion made by Commissioner Connolly, Seconded by Commissioner Cohn to approve the lighting plan as submitted with the condition that all lighting be focused away from all roadways and on-coming traffic. On a voice vote; all aye.
Other Business;
1. Obituary Thomas Thoresen – Commissioner Cohn indicated she had asked that this item be placed upon the agenda. As Mrs. Thoresen was on the Park District Board she felt the passing of Mr. Thoresen should be acknowledged.
The consensus of the AB was to have staff draft a letter of condolence on behalf of the Board to be sent to the Thoresen Family. The letter is to be reviewed by Commissioner Cohn.
2. Rules of Procedure – Chairman Staub began the discussion by raising a number of issues of concern regarding the Open Meetings Act which had transpired and the possible need for such rules to provide guidance when issues such as these arise.
Planner Hogue noted that this was something that was being done with other Boards and are intended to make the work of the Board more efficient and productive. He also noted these could be utilized when new Commissioners are appointed to provide an overview of how meetings work and establish some “ground rules” for meetings. Before a lot of time and effort was expended, Mr. Hogue wanted to know if the AB felt this was worthwhile.
The Board then discussed the issue further and the idea of application procedures and guidelines was also mentioned. Planner Hogue noted that application procedures for all Board and Commissions were already in the works.
It was the consensus of the Board to direct staff to begin the preparation of draft Rules and Procedures for consideration by the AB.
Adjournment: Commissioner Cohn made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner Lyman. On a voice vote the motion was unanimously approved. Meeting adjourned at 8:38 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted;
James M. Hogue
James M. Hogue
Village Planner