MEETING MINUTES OF THE

LONG GROVE ARCHITECTURAL COMMISSION

 REGULAR MEETING

May 17, 2010

7:00 P.M.

 

Call to Order:  Chairman Michaelson-Cohn called the regular meeting of the Long Grove Architectural Commission (AC) to order at 7:03 p.m. with the following members present.

 

Members Present: Lynn Michaelson-Cohn; Chairman, Terry Connolly, Marietta Calas,, George Tapas and Richard Brockman.

 

   Also Present: Village Planner James Hogue, and members of the public.

 

   Absent:  Valerie Plunkett.

 

Chair Michaelson-Cohn welcomed newly appointed members Tapas & Brockman to the Commission.  

  

1.  Approval of the March 15th Draft Meeting Minutes.

 

Commissioner Connolly noted corrections to the minutes as it related to “lead-free” brass. Other noted various typos in the draft minutes as presented. Commissioner Connolly moved to accept the March 15th draft meeting minutes as corrected, seconded by Commissioner Calas. On a voice vote; all aye.

 

2.      Consideration of a request for window treatments for the CVS Pharmacy Building, Route 83 and Aptakisic  Road within the Sunset Grove Development, Submitted by Sure Light Signs.

 

Planner Hogue explained the request noting that all other aspects of the signage approval on this project had been approved in 2008.  The window treatments are the last remaining item for AC consideration with this request. He referred to the items which had been submitted by the petitioner with regard to the color scheme of the proposed window treatments. As the petitioner was not present, Planner Hogue encouraged the AC to discuss the proposal in order to provide feedback to the petitioner for the next meeting.

 

After discussion the AC offered the following direction to the petitioner;

 

·       Use a mix of historic to present day photos of the downtown suggesting the transition from “old” to “new”.

 

·       Place a different scene in each of the 12 windows.

 

·       Provide examples of window treatments in both B&W and sepia (the red, white & black was not acceptable to the AC).

 

·      Remove the “teardrop” icons and “CVS Pharmacy” name from the window treatments.   

 

The AC directed Planner Hogue to forward these comments on to the petitioner. This item was continued to the June 21st regular meeting.

 

3.      Consideration of a request for signage for “Bella Donna Boutique” at 420 Robert Parker Coffin Road   and within the B-1 Historic District submitted by Danuta Wozniak.

 

The petitioner was present to explain the request. She noted that the signage currently on the property was temporary and would be removed upon approval and installation of the permanent signage.

 

Planner Hogue noted that based upon the items submitted the petitioner is requesting one (1) wall sign measuring 84” x 16.” (9.3 square feet) placed on the front of the structure. Materials out of which the signs will be constructed include Vinyl cut letters mounted on plywood frame attached to the building. The signage would be brown (cocoa) & and white with regard to the color scheme and non-illuminated.    

 

Square footage of the commercial space for which the signage is being requested is approximately 680 square feet. For retail spaces containing 501 to 1000 sq. ft. of floor area 12 square feet of signage may be allowed per the Village Zoning Code. From the Village Code perspective the sign is approvable.   

 

After discussion the AC was in favor of the look of the sign. They questioned the durability of the lettering and encouraged the petitioner to consider sealing the sign to protect the lettering.

 

A motion was made by Commissioner Calas, seconded by Commissioner Tapas, to accept the request for signage as submitted.

 

On a voice vote; all aye.

 

4.      Consideration of a request for signage for “Full Gospel Church of Love” at 1598 Arlington Heights Road and within the “R-2” District submitted by Cosmos Sign & Design.

 

The petitioners’ representative explained the request indicating that an additional sign panel would be added to the previously approved and existing sign. As proposed, replacement of an existing 4” x11” (3.6) square foot sign with a 2’ x 8’ foot double faced sign panel would occur. Illumination would be external from the existing lighting illuminating the present sign. The sign panel would be aluminum and black & white in color. 

 

Upon discussion the AC recommended that the corners of the proposed sign panel be scalloped and that the lettering and color scheme be modified to blue & white.  These recommendations were made to have the proposed sign panel better match the existing sign. It was also noted that under the present code lighting sources for signage must be screened or landscaped to hide the illumination source. Currently no such screening of the illumination source exists. The AC indicated that such screening should be included in this request for signage. Rocks or shrubs were ( or a combination of the two) were suggested as possible alternatives for screening of the light source.

 

A motion was made by Commissioner Connolly, seconded by Commissioner Tapas, to accept the request for signage with the following modifications;

 

 

·     The corners of the sign be scalloped to match the existing sign.

 

·     The lettering and color scheme be modified (to blue & white) to match the existing sign.

 

·     The existing illumination source for the signage be landscaped to comply with the Village Code with a landscape plan being submitted and subject to the review and approval of village staff.  

 

On a voice vote; all aye.

 

5.      Consideration of landscaping, lighting, elevations & signage for the proposed Arbor Grove PUD/ Subdivision in conjunction with the petition for a SUP/PUD  as submitted by Allen Kracower & Associates on behalf of Mr. Michael Burgmeier for property located at 2727 RFD and commonly known at the Geimer Greenhouse. 

 

Village Planner Hogue explained the request noting that the PCZBA and CSCC had reviewed the proposal and, for the most part, were receptive to the concept.  He indicated that portions of the proposal (e.g. preliminary landscaping, elevations, lighting, and signage plans and plat) require Architectural Commission (AC) review. These items along with applicable standards for review were included for consideration by the AC.

Lawrence Dziurdzik, Vice President, Allen L. Kracower & Associates explained his role and the role of his firm with regard to the proposed redevelopment of the Geimer Greenhouse property. He indicated as proposed the property would be divided into seven (7) lots all of which would be single story with the exception of lot six (6) which would likely contain a two story structure. Wetlands on the property have been delineated and will be naturalized and protected. 

 

He then presented the landscape plan noting the CSCC review, proposed plantings and reduced scenic corridor. 

 

He then presented “concept” elevations to the AC noting that as there were not any proposed users or “anchors” at this time he had photos of what structures on the site could potentially look like. He indicated that from their perspective stone building bases with horizontal siding in natural colors seemed appropriate at this location. Awnings, asphalt shingles and exterior wall lighting may also be appropriate. A tower element may also be considered on lots 3 & 4 noting the 35’ height limitation imposed by the “HR” District.

 

The AC noted the structures needed to fit into the Long Grove “feel”. It was noted that the AC had preference for gabled roofs and found the elevations identified in concepts “e” “f” & “g” of the submittal to be representative of the character of the proposed development as envisioned by the AC.

    

Mr. Dziurdzik then explained the signage and lighting plans as submitted. He noted two types of signs, a “Development and Tennant Sign” and a “Development Monument Sign” are proposed. Both would be externally illuminated and very similar in design to the existing Menards signs.  Individual building signage would need to be reviewed on a case by case basis as business for the development had not yet been identified.  Decorative lighting fixtures 18’ in height are proposed for internal pedestrian ways. Parking lot lighting is proposed on poles at 25’ in height.  Both decorative and parking lot lighting fixtures would be identical to those used in the Archer Parking Lot renovation.

Planner Hogue noted that individual review of proposed business signage had become common and is how tenant signage has been approved in Long Grove Commons and will be approved in Sunset Grove. Mr. Hogue indicated that in his opinion this approach to approval of individual business signage was working well.  

The AC asked that the petitioner consider lowering the height of the “tenant monument sign” to create more “horizontal massing” (i.e. lower & wider) of the “tenant monument sign” instead towering vertical signage as proposed.   Also, a different decorative cap similar to the entryway treatment identified in “Commercial Concept Elevation F” as submitted with the preliminary architecture concepts for both tenant & development monument signs.

After discussion the AC made the following recommendations to the PCZBA with regard to this proposal;

·         Landscaping –

1.      Consider adding bike racks to the development as a landscape feature.

2.      Have the landscape plan reviewed by the Village Arborist.

3.      Consider uplighting of buildings as proposed for Downtown Long Grove.

4.      Consider the location of power poles to the site.

 

·         Signage

1.      Lower the height of the “tenant monument sign”.

2.      Create more “horizontal massing” (i.e. lower & wider) of the “tenant monument sign” instead towering vertical signage as proposed.  

3.      Consider a different decorative cap similar to the entryway treatment identified in “Commercial Concept Elevation F” as submitted with the preliminary architecture concepts for both tenant & development monument signs.

·         Lighting

1.       The “ornamental” fixtures as proposed are acceptable.

2.      Consider shortening the poles of the “development light” fixtures (18’ suggested).

3.      Review lighting at entry points to the site for adequacy (reference standards for East Wilmette for intersection lighting).

4.      Create a more “balanced” lighting plan so that if a fixture fails no “darkspots” are created.

 

·         Elevations

1.      Identify screening for trash enclosures

2.      The AC has a preference for the elevations identified in the “preliminary architecture” Sheet 2; “Commercial Concept Elevations E & F” in terms of the architectural style of the development.

3.      Materials shall be of a high quality similar to the Menards & Sunset Grove Developments.

4.      Colors to be consistent with Menards & Sunset Grove developments as well.

5.      Consider “Bannockburn Green” as a model.    

 

 Adjournment: Commissioner Connolly made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner Calas.  On a voice vote; all aye.  Meeting adjourned at 8:12 p.m.

 

Respectfully Submitted,

James M. Hogue

James M. Hogue, Village Planner