The village of Wilmette Appearance Review Commission met Aug. 29 to approve certificates.
Here are the meeting's minutes, as provided by the commission:
1
V I L L A G E O F W I L M E T T E
1200 Wilmette Avenue
WILMETTE, ILLINOIS 60091-0040
MEETING MINUTES
APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMISSION
MONDAY, AUGUST 29, 2016
7:30 P.M.
SECOND FLOOR TRAINING ROOM
Members Present: Tim Sheridan, Chairman
William Bradford
Dan Collyer
Daniel Elkins
Mason Miller
Craig Phillips
Carrie Woleben-Meade
Members Absent: None
Guests: Timm Martin, 636 Anthony Trail, Northbrook, IL
Edie Rowell, 1625 Sheridan Road
Barb Bischoff, 1223 Washington Avenue
Kevin Kazimer, 18 Executive Court, South Barrington, IL
Sam Gambacorta, 464 Highcrest Lane
Jim Braband, 924 Greenleaf Avenue
Chikako Eickbush, 2611 Laurel Lane
Florence Erie-Krueger, 409 Jackson, Winnetka, IL
Sam Smith, 2155 Old Willow Road, Northfield, IL
Staff Present: Lucas Sivertsen, Business Development Coordinator
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Sheridan called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Approved 09/26/16
2
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES; APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMISSION MEETING
OF AUGUST 1, 2016.
Mr. Bradford moved to approve the August 1, 2016 meeting minutes as amended. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Phillips. Voting yes: Chairman Sheridan, and
Commissioners Bradford, Collyer, Elkins, Miller, Phillips, Woleben-Meade. Voting no:
none. The motion carried.
III. CONTINUANCES
Mr. Bradford moved to continue Case 2016-AR-18, 601 Green Bay Road, Mona Lisa
Stone & Tile to the September 26, 2016 meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Phillips. Voting yes: Chairman Sheridan, and Commissioners Bradford, Collyer, Elkins,
Miller, Phillips, Woleben-Meade. Voting no: none. The motion carried.
IV. CONSENT AGENDA
Ms. Woleben-Meade moved to approve an Appearance Review Certificate for Case 2016-
AR-35, 70 Skokie Boulevard, Love’s Yogurt, Certificate; and Case 2016-AR-36, 1255
Green Bay Road, The Private Bank, Certificate. The motion was seconded by Mr. Elkins.
Voting yes: Chairman Sheridan, and Commissioners Bradford, Collyer, Elkins, Miller,
Phillips, Woleben-Meade. Voting no: none. The motion carried.
V. CASES
2016-AR-11 1314-1318 Wilmette Avenue
Sam Gambacorta Appearance Review Certificate
Mr. Sivertsen called Case 2016-AR-11, 1314-1318 Wilmette Avenue, Sam Gambacorta,
for an Appearance Review Certificate request to address conditions of the prior approval
including presentation of the landscape plan, photometric plan, garage door material,
window design and elimination of the rear gate.
Mr. Kevin Kazimer said he was there to address some of the remaining items from the
previous approval. He said the site plan was adjusted to allow an existing mature tree to
remain. The drive aisle near the rear of the property was shifted slightly away from the
property line to accommodate room for the existing tree. The light poles along the east
property line were removed. The floor plans and elevations were modified to extend the
wall above the front entrance so that is in line with the first floor and not setback as
originally proposed. The window at that bay is now a rectangular window and not an oval
window. The finish of the light fixtures will be black.
Mr. Sam Gambacorta added that the landscape plan was revised to show the trees along the
west property line that belong to the neighbor. Those trees are shown as remaining. He
said the texture and material for the garage doors would be a steel door in Clopay UltraGrain
Cherry paint. The door will have the appearance of a wooden stained door.
Approved 09/26/16
3
Mr. Sheridan asked if they had selected a font for the property address.
Mr. Gambacorta said they will cut the limestone into a times new roman font.
Mr. Miller asked for the color of the windows.
Mr. Gambacorta said the windows would either be painted or extruded windows that have
the color built into the material. The color will be rustic brown.
Mr. Phillips moved to approve an amendment to Case 2016-AR-11, 1314-1318 Wilmette
Avenue, Sam Gambacorta, for an Appearance Review Certificate based upon the plans
submitted with the stipulation that the letters on the monument sign be in times new roman
font, that the photometric point to point include the entire property and not just the property
lines, and that the light fixture size is 16 inches. The motion was seconded my Mr. Miller.
Voting yes: Chairman Sheridan, and Commissioners Bradford, Collyer, Elkins, Miller,
Phillips, Woleben-Meade. Voting no: none. The motion carried.
2015-AR-45 930 Greenleaf Avenue
Women’s Club of Wilmette Appearance Review Certificate
Mr. Sivertsen called Case 2015-AR-45, 930 Greenleaf Avenue, Women’s Club of
Wilmette, requesting an Appearance Review Certificate to address conditions of the
previous approval.
Mr. Timm Martin presented the materials for the project as submitted in the petitioner’s
packet. He said the original proposal included a handicapped ramp on the south side of the
building. Due to budget constraints the club has withdrawn the ramp for now and so he is
showing Juliet balconies at the south facing doors until the ramp can be constructed. The
club has hired a fundraiser to help pay for the ramp, but they don’t have the funds yet.
Ms. Woleben-Meade asked if they were being asked to vote on a proposal without an
accessible ramp.
Mr. Martin said that they are asking to remove the ramp from the approval until the club
has enough money. He said the lighting proposal is not yet complete because they have not
been able to get photometric data on the fixtures. They are proposing down lighting along
the north and east sides of the building so as not to cause light to bleed across the property
line. He said trying to find a good replacement steel window is difficult. Quaker however,
has just started manufacturing an aluminum casement window that closely resemble a steel
window. The finish would be black.
Mr. Martin said he has been promising the Brabands who live directly to the east a meeting
with the club’s Mechanical Engineer. He is expecting to meet with the engineer this
Approved 09/26/16
4
coming Wednesday to have a meeting onsite to discuss the roof top mechanical units and
their impact on the neighbors.
Ms. Rowell said they are proposing to display a 4 feet by 8 feet banner with a rendering of
the proposed club upon completion of the repairs. This will be installed on the construction
fencing. It will allow them to remove some of the other signs on the site. She said a
majority of the vegetation on the site, with the exception of the portion just south of the
building, had survived the fire so they won’t need to replace any landscaping. It will need
some fertilization and trimming but it’s in otherwise good shape.
Ms. Woleben-Meade said she had asked for a landscape plan at the previous meetings.
While most of the landscaping is salvageable it hasn’t been maintained. She is worried that
next year when the construction is complete that the landscaping will no longer be
salvageable. The weeds are really starting to take hold, the plants need to be pruned, and
fertilized. There needs to be a maintenance agreement to start taking care of the plants.
Ms. Rowell said they are planning to maintain the landscaping.
Ms. Woleben-Meade said there is still no landscaping along the alley. It is currently all
weeds.
Ms. Rowell said they have a problem because the area to provide landscaping on that part
of the building is very slim. They have tried to place mulch in the area to keep down the
weeds.
Ms. Woleben-Meade said it will be important for them to keep up on the maintenance
schedule if they are intending to keep the landscaping. The lawn however will need to be
replaced.
Mr. Sheridan said a maintenance schedule is a good idea, but if the existing landscaping
cannot be salvaged then it is expected the club will replace the landscaping.
Ms. Rowell said it would be replaced in-kind.
Mr. Sheridan said they aren’t showing any landscaping plans for the south side of the
building.
Ms. Rowell said they didn’t want to do a landscape plan if their long term goal is to install
a ramp.
Mr. Bradford said he’s not certain the commission can approve the proposal without the
handicapped ramp. His understanding of the Environmental Barriers Act is that any
building that is remodeled to a cost at least 25% of the value of the original structure that
accessible routes must be provided.
Mr. Phillips said he would not support an amendment to remove the ramp.
Approved 09/26/16
5
Ms. Rowell said they have successfully used temporary handicapped ramps when events
were held at the building.
Mr. Bradford said that was before the remodeling and repair work were proposed. The
building is no longer grandfathered and needs to be brought up to code.
Mr. Sheridan said he would not support an amendment that removes the ramp. He thought
the materials presented looked great.
Mr. Phillips asked how much longer they thought construction would take.
Mr. Martin said it would be into next year, but not longer than a year from now.
Mr. Phillips suggested if it was going to be more than six months, but less than one year for
them to complete the project to leave the ramp in the plans and then start fundraising in the
meantime.
Mr. Sheridan said they still need information on the roof top mechanical units. The screen
shown in the submittal looked great, but they still need information on the size of the units.
He also said there were decibel limitations. The measurements aren’t just at the ground,
but all the way up on the second floor. As much as they are proposing to use a quiet unit,
they may need to further reduce the decibels so as not to be a nuisance to their neighbors.
Mr. Sivertsen said on the front end they would review the specification sheets to help
determine if the unit would not exceed the decibel limit. Once installed they would then
verify it is below the decibel limit.
Mr. Elkins said he had previously suggested they may need to hire an acoustical consultant
to help them determine the anticipated decibels.
Ms. Woleben-Meade asked if the timbers and bluestone pavers are intended to be replaced.
Ms. Rowell said they would be replaced in-kind.
Mr. Sheridan asked about the egress door from the alley side. The photo shows an existing
fire escape. He wanted to know what they intended to do with that.
Mr. Martin said if it’s not needed for egress he would like to eliminate the escape.
Mr. Sheridan said if it is not needed to meet life safety code then he would be fine
eliminating the fire escape. They could also get rid of the light fixture over the door if it
were not a required means of egress.
Mr. Sheridan asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak.
Approved 09/26/16
6
Mr. Braband said most of the concerns he expressed in his letter sent to the Commission
had been addressed during the meeting. He was glad to hear they will be displaying a
rendering of the building. He hoped some of the other signs could be removed now that the
banner will be displayed. There are still some questions on the new roof top unit including
how the unit will be screened. He feels the Commission is working to make sure both the
noise and screening are addressed. He prefers the downlight as suggested during the
meeting. Lastly, he wanted clarification on the finish of the wall along the south end of the
east elevation. It is currently stucco, but in keeping with the rest of the building he felt it
should be stone.
Mr. Sheridan said if the stucco was existing then he thinks they would be allowed to keep it
stucco. However, he realized Mr. Braband looks directly at that wall out his front window.
The entire building is a nice stone, but unfortunately Mr. Braband has to look at the only
part of the building that isn’t stone. He understands the neighbor’s concern.
Mr. Martin said the foundation below the stucco is very narrow and would not be able to
support a stone wall. The foundation is brick and he doesn’t think it will support a
masonry wall.
Mr. Sheridan said he would challenge Mr. Martin to come up with a solution using the
stucco.
Mr. Martin said he could maybe do something with the control joints at the water table and
a window surround to help replicate what’s happening on other parts of the building.
Mr. Braband said something that breaks up the monotony of the building would help.
Mr. Bradford moved to grant an amendment to Case 2015-AR-45, 930 Greenleaf Avenue,
Women’s Club of Wilmette, for an Appearance Review Certificate based on the plans
submitted with the following clarifications: roof shingles will be GAF Timberline in
Charcoal; gutters and downspouts to be K Style oversized aluminum in color Wicker; the
south elevation approved conditioned upon the installation of the ADA ramp with a final
elevation along with a detailed rendering and a landscape plan for the south side; the roof
top unit screening will be North American Enclosure in louver style in color Crème, the
exact height to be determined once the RTU specification sheet is submitted along with the
decibel measurements at the property line; the exterior light fixtures will be resubmitted to
show downlights along the property line submitted along with a photometric point to point
plan; the exterior windows and doors will be Quaker Aluminum casement and French
doors in color black; the trash enclosure will be a AZEK material painted Wicker;
additional information required for the stucco detailing on the east elevation; that the
landscape plan submitted is approved with the condition that the landscaping be either
maintained or replaced in-kind; and that the second floor fire escape may be removed if
permitted by life safety code. The motion was seconded by Mr. Phillips. Voting yes:
Chairman Sheridan, and Commissioners Bradford, Collyer, Elkins, Miller, Phillips,
Woleben-Meade. Voting no: none. The motion carried.
Approved 09/26/16
7
2015-AR-20 135 Green Bay Road
IL Center for Digestive Health Appearance Review Certificate
Mr. Sivertsen called Case 2015-AR-20, 135 Green Bay Road, IL Center for Digestive
Health, requesting an Appearance Review Certificate to address conditions of previous
approval.
Mr. William Ng presented the remaining items that were conditions of the previous
approval including photometric plans, roof top screening and rear elevation detail.
Mr. Ng said the color of the roof top unit screen will match the paint color for the side of
the building which is a beige color. The front face brick is a darker brick. The rear wall of
the building facing the alley will be stucco and will be painted to match the face brick on
the façade.
Mr. Sheridan said since new downspouts are being proposed, he suggested the applicant
align the downspouts with the transition from brick to stucco. He wasn’t sure of the height
of the roof top units, but he thought the approval should specify the screen would match the
height of the mechanical roof top unit.
Mr. Phillips asked for the color of the proposed light fixture.
Mr. Ng said it would be black.
Ms. Woleben-Meade moved to approve Case 2016-AR-20, 135 Green Bay Road, IL Center
for Digestive Health, for an Appearance Review Certificate based off the plans as
submitted with the following adjustments: the light fixtures will be finished in black, the
louver screening must be the same height as the roof top units in khaki color, and the
elevation correction to elevation drawing #1. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bradford.
Voting yes: Chairman Sheridan, and Commissioners Bradford, Collyer, Elkins, Miller,
Phillips, Woleben-Meade. Voting no: none. The motion carried.
2016-AR-40 1162 Wilmette Avenue
Torino Ramen Appearance Review Certificate
Mr. Sivertsen called Case 2016-AR-40, 1162 Wilmette Avenue, Torino Ramen, for a
preliminary review of an Appearance Review Certificate request to install a new awning
and sign.
Mr. Sam Smith said they wanted to remove the traditional cloth awning and do something a
little bit different. They are proposing to remove approximately 10 feet of window and
replace it with an accordion style window similar to Nick’s Restaurant. The new windows
will be finished in a black frame. The existing window frames would then be painted black
to match. If they have enough in the budget they would like to replace all of the windows.
Approved 09/26/16
8
The awning would be a black wood frame with cedar slats in-between. Over the doorway a
similar frame would be installed, but in metal frame.
Ms. Florence Erie-Krueger said below the canopy they would hang banners, which in
Japan, act as like an open sign. They would be removed nightly.
Mr. Sheridan said he liked the design, but thought a rendering would help to better explain
the proposal, especially the louver design of the awning.
Ms. Erie-Krueger asked if an isometric drawing is what they are looking for.
Mr. Sheridan said even a single line drawing with a rendering over the top of it would help.
He would like to know more about the proposed lanterns.
Ms. Erie-Krueger said the lanterns would be like the banners. They will be removed when
they’re closed.
Mr. Elkins said having a complete package for the next meeting will help to expedite the
approval. He wanted to know what they were planning for signage.
Ms. Erie-Krueger said they plan on installing a sign on the C-channel, but it would not be
illuminated.
Mr. Sivertsen said alternatively, they would be allowed to do a projecting sign.
VI. PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no public comments.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
At 9:20 p.m., Mr. Bradford moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Elkins. Voting yes: Chairman Sheridan, and Commissioners Bradford, Collyer,
Elkins, Miller, Phillips, Woleben-Meade. Voting no: none. The motion carried.
Alerts Sign-up