Village of Arlington Heights Design Commission met June 9.
Here is the minutes provided by the commission:
Chair Fitzgerald called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Members Present: John Fitzgerald, Chair
Jonathan Kubow
Ted Eckhardt
Members Absent: Kirsten Kingsley
Scott Seyer
Also Present: Robert Flubacker, Robert Flubacker Architects for 406 N. Beverly Ln.
Chris Jenks, Jim Plat, Mike Sidor for Driven Car Wash
Steve Hautzinger, Staff Liaison
Chair Fitzgerald read the following statement as requested by the Village: I find that the public health concerns related to the coronavirus pandemic render in-person attendance at a regular meeting location not feasible.
REVIEW OF MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 26, 2020
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER ECKHARDT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KUBOW, TO APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 26, 2020. ALL WERE IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM 1. SINGLE-FAMILY ADDITION REVIEW
DC#20-036 – 406 N. Beverly Ln.
Robert Flubacker, representing Robert Flubacker Architects, was present on behalf of the project.
Mr. Hautzinger presented Staff comments. This is a proposal to add both first and second-floor additions to an existing 2- story home. This project does comply with all of the R-3 zoning requirements. The neighborhood context in this location is primarily single-story houses, with some split-level houses and a few two-story houses. The subject house has a unique “C”- shaped layout, and the rear portion has been previously expanded with a second-floor addition. The proposed new design will extend the front of the house forward approximately 5’-6” with a new second floor addition above. The new second floor addition has a low hipped roof, and the single-story roof line is being maintained, which both help the design to fit in with the adjacent single-story homes. However, the massing of the new second floor is somewhat busy with jogging walls and varying wall heights, as compared to the simpler surrounding context. The Design Commission should evaluate the scale and massing of the proposed design as it relates to the surrounding context.
Mr. Hautzinger also said that Staff received numerous letters of support from neighbors that were forwarded to the commissioners for review prior to tonight.
Mr. Flubacker had no comments at this time.
Chair Fitzgerald asked if there was any public comment on the project and there was no response from the public.
Commissioner Eckhardt appreciated Staff’s comments regarding the busyness of the design, but he saw it as unique detail and character that is characteristic of this architect. He liked the design being proposed, the ins and outs and things that have interest; he had no issues with that at all. He questioned how far the bracket at the front entrance extends out, and whether it is a single bracket or 2 brackets, and Mr. Flubacker replied that the front of the garage is at the setback line and the roof of the projection of the entry roof is 30-inches in front of the setback line. He added that updated drawings were submitted to show that the bracket was changed to a column, and now that he looks at it again, an attached column would most likely be added on the west side of the entry as well. Commissioner Eckhardt was in support of this change. He liked the design, the materials and the detailing, and he felt it was a successful project.
Commissioner Kubow agreed with Commissioner Eckhardt; he felt this was a vast improvement to the existing home and he did not find it to be busy at all; it is very interesting. He loved the material palette, the fenestration that is now being added, and the right side of the home with the cool windows. He asked for clarification about the brackets at the front entry because he did not follow all of Commissioner Eckhardt’s previous comments. Mr. Flubacker explained that the design was revised to eliminate the brackets at the front entry and add a column there instead; however, looking at it now, he felt that another column should be added on the corner of the garage as well. Commissioner Kubow felt that adding symmetry at the front door made perfect sense, and overall, he felt the design was fantastic.
Chair Fitzgerald liked the home a lot and agreed with the comments made by the other commissioners. He asked again if there was any public comments to be made and Mr. Hautzinger said there were none.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER ECKHARDT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KUBOW, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ADDITION TO THE EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 406 N. BEVERLY LANE. THIS RECOMMENDATION IS SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLANS RECEIVED ON 5/13/20, DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS, COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE FEDERAL, STATE, AND VILLAGE CODES, REGULATIONS, AND POLICIES, THE ISSUANCE OF ALL REQUIRED PERMITS, AND THE FOLLOWING:
1. THE PETITIONER HAS PROVIDED AN EXHIBIT THAT SHOWS A FREESTANDING ENTRY ROOF COLUMN INSTEAD OF THE BRACKET AND HE WILL BE ADDING AN ENGAGED COLUMN AT THE GARAGE CORNER, TO BE REVIEWED BY STAFF.
2. THIS REVIEW DEALS WITH ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED TO BE AN APPROVAL OF, OR TO HAVE ANY OTHER IMPACT ON, NOR REPRESENT ANY TACIT APPROVAL OR SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED LAND USE OR ANY OTHER ZONING AND/OR LAND USE ISSUES OR DECISIONS THAT STEM FROM ZONING, BUILDING, SIGNAGE OR ANY OTHER REVIEWS. IN ADDITION TO THE NORMAL TECHNICAL REVIEW, PERMIT DRAWINGS WILL BE REVIEWED FOR CONSISTENCY WITH THE DESIGN COMMISSION AND ANY OTHER COMMISSION OR BOARD APPROVAL CONDITIONS. IT IS THE PETITIONER’S RESPONSIBILTY TO INCORPORATE ALL REQUIREMENTS LISTED ON THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS INTO THE PERMIT DRAWINGS, AND TO ENSURE THAT BUILDING PERMIT PLANS AND SIGN PERMIT PLANS COMPLY WITH ALL ZONING CODE, BUILDING CODE AND SIGN CODE REQUIREMENTS.
KUBOW AYE; ECKHARDT, AYE; FITZGERALD, AYE. ALL WERE IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM 2. COMMERCIAL REVIEW DC#20-035 – Driven Car Wash – 2100 S. Arlington Heights Rd.
Chris Jenks, Jim Plat, and Mike Sidor were present on behalf of the project.
Mr. Hautzinger presented Staff comments. The petitioner is seeking approval of the architectural design for a façade renovation of an existing car wash facility that was originally approved and developed in 1969. The petitioner is currently proposing to update the property with a façade renovation, site improvements, and new signage. The façade renovation includes new metal siding panels over the existing brick walls, and a new “fin” tower element at the front of the building.
This project received a preliminary Design Commission review on March 10, 2020. Overall, the Design Commission was in favor of the proposed design. However, the following suggestions were offered for the petitioner’s consideration:
• A suggestion to increase the angle of the top of the wall on the front elevation.
• A recommendation to increase the thickness of the “fin” tower element
• Consider a different treatment for the tower siding for a contrast from the building walls.
• A suggestion to add something more to the north wall for added interest.
• Code compliant signage was recommended, although a fun signage design and accent lighting were encouraged.
In response to the Design Commission’s preliminary comments, the following changes have been made to the design:
• The angle of the top of the wall on the front elevation has not changed.
• The thickness of the tower “fin” has been slightly increased.
• The tower siding has not changed, but the overall color scheme has been revised with orange and dark blue color accents.
• An additional wall sign was initially proposed for the north wall, but per Staff’s recommendation, the sign was omitted. • All signage was redesigned and enhanced with the new “Driven” branding.
Overall, Staff feels the proposed design is very nicely done and will be a welcome improvement and update to the property. The new color scheme is vibrant and inviting. However, Staff feels that the orange color vacuum arms/hoses are too bold, being adjacent to the existing office building, and they should be revised to match the neutral gray color on the building.
With regards to signage, the petitioner is proposing to reface an existing ground sign facing Arlington Heights Road, and add three new wall signs to the building. Two wall signs are proposed on the front elevation, and a third wall sign is proposed on the rear wall. The signage is nicely designed and coordinates very well with the building design. However, per Chapter 30 sign code, only one wall sign is allowed per street frontage. The petitioner intends to pursue sign variations for the two additional wall signs, which will be reviewed in detail under a separate application.
The petitioner has indicated that all mechanical equipment will be located inside the building, which is ideal, and exterior screening is therefore not needed. A new trash dumpster enclosure is proposed at the rear of the site, which will be clad with metal panels to match the building.
Overall Staff recommends approval of the project, with the comment to revise the orange color vacuum arms/hoses to match the neutral gray color on the building.
Chris Jenks reinforced the comments made by Steve about the project, and said that as a local resident he is very excited for the opportunity to acquire both this business and the property. The biggest change since the preliminary review is the incorporation of the branding, which they have put a lot of time into and are incredibly excited about how it turned out. They have had many conversations with long-time residents who remember this site as the Colonial Car Wash, so their big focus is to create a brand that has more of a modern play on the retro car wash. They hope this will radiate from the signage, the emblem, the logo, and the color schemes being proposed. They feel these changes are a much needed improvement for the existing site. In response to the concerns about the Patriot Red color for the vacuums, Mr. Jenks said that a privacy fence will be added along the north property line, providing some element of protection to the property to the north. The Patriot Red color was intentional to add a lot of energy, vibrancy and make the property more welcoming, as well as add depth and dimension to the north wall of the building. Overall, they are very excited to hear feedback from the commissioners tonight.
Chair Fitzgerald asked if there was any public comment on the project, and there was no response from the audience.
Commissioner Kubow loved the original concept and color scheme that was presented at the preliminary review, and felt that the revisions presented tonight were fantastic. Although he really liked the previous blue color scheme, he acknowledged that color schemes are subjective and the new colors being proposed introduce a pop to the site that is needed along Arlington Heights Road, and will help draw customers into the site. He loved the signage being proposed and although he felt the Patriot Red color for the vacuums was fine, he preferred the dark blue color being used on the building be used for the vacuums instead. Overall, he felt this was a great project.
Commissioner Eckhardt said the transformation from the existing building to the current design is amazing and what the petitioner is doing for this building and the context of the other nearby buildings. He supported the changes that were made to the geometry of the building, the thicknesses and the height, and he supported the 3 wall signs being shown. He felt the ground sign on Arlington Heights Road would be helpful to first time visitors who might not know what the ‘D’ logo at the top of the front elevation stood for. Commissioner Eckhardt loved the orange color being proposed for the vacuums/hoses that adds a very nice contrast with the building. He felt the gray color would lack interest, and the orange vacuums will be a wayfinding element that look like art, and he completely supports it.
Chair Fitzgerald felt the architecture of the project was exceptional; he loved the shape, the design, and the colors; it is somewhat retro and modern at the same time. He was in support of the 2 signs on the front elevation that are exciting, and felt that the Patriot Red color on the vacuums is like a sculpture; it is exciting and interesting to look at. He liked that the vacuums are being highlighted with a bright color because a car wash should be a fun place to go; it fits well with the theme. He also liked that a fence was being added along the north elevation, and felt that it should be a requirement.
Commissioner Eckhardt asked if a color was selected for the fence and Mr. Jenks said not yet, although they are considering wood and masonry to keep it basic, along with landscaping for privacy. Commissioner Eckhardt said that the fence should not be a bold color, and he suggested grey. Mr. Hautzinger said that this project is assuming an existing zoning approval for the site and although it is not required to return to the Plan Commission, compliance with the previous zoning approvals are required. Some of the fencing on the site were requirements made at that time, so any comments from this commission regarding site design elements such as the fence would have to be put forth as a recommendation.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER KUBOW, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ECKHARDT, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN FOR THE DRIVEN CAR WASH LOCATED AT 2100 S. ARLINGTON HEIGHTS ROAD, AS PROPOSED. THIS RECOMMENDATION IS SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLANS RECEIVED 5/28/20, DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS, COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE FEDERAL, STATE, AND VILLAGE CODES, REGULATIONS, AND POLICIES, THE ISSUANCE OF ALL REQUIRED PERMITS, AND THE FOLLOWING:
1. DESIGN COMMISSION SUPPPORTS THE SIGNAGE AS SHOWN.
2. A RECOMMENDATION THAT A WOOD FENCE BE PROVIDED ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SITE, PER THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ORDINANCE FOR THE SITE.
3. THIS REVIEW DEALS WITH ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED TO BE AN APPROVAL OF, OR TO HAVE ANY OTHER IMPACT ON, NOR REPRESENT ANY TACIT APPROVAL OR SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED LAND USE OR ANY OTHER ZONING AND/OR LAND USE ISSUES OR DECISIONS THAT STEM FROM ZONING, BUILDING, SIGNAGE OR ANY OTHER REVIEWS. IN ADDITION TO THE NORMAL TECHNICAL REVIEW, PERMIT DRAWINGS WILL BE REVIEWED FOR CONSISTENCY WITH THE DESIGN COMMISSION AND ANY OTHER COMMISSION OR BOARD APPROVAL CONDITIONS. IT IS THE PETITIONER’S RESPONSIBILITY TO INCORPORATE ALL REQUIREMENTS LISTED ON THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS INTO THE PERMIT DRAWINGS, AND TO ENSURE THAT BUILDING PERMIT PLANS AND SIGN PERMIT PLANS COMPLY WITH ALL ZONING CODE, BUILDING CODE AND SIGN CODE REQUIREMENTS.
Commissioner Eckhardt asked that the motion be amended to include a recommendation that the fence be painted in grey tones to match the building.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER KUBOW, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ECKHARDT, TO AMEND THE MOTION AS FOLLOWS:
2. A RECOMMENDATION THAT A WOOD FENCE BE PROVIDED ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SITE, PER THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ORDINANCE FOR THE SITE, AND THAT THE FENCE BE CONSISTENT IN COLOR WITH THE MATERIAL PALETTE OF THE BUILDING, WITH GREY AS A SUGGESTION.
Chair Fitzgerald said that since the fence is going to be open to the adjacent building to the north, he preferred it to be a little more open and suggested natural cedar instead; he was unsure if grey would look good on the other side. This could be approved by Staff. Commissioner Kubow agreed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER KUBOW, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ECKHARDT, TO AMEND THE MOTION AS FOLLOWS:
2. A RECOMMENDATION THAT A WOOD FENCE BE PROVIDED ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SITE, PER THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ORDINANCE FOR THE SITE, AND THAT THE FENCE COLOR BE APPROVED BY STAFF.
KUBOW AYE; ECKHARDT, AYE; FITZGERALD, AYE. ALL WERE IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Hautzinger clarified to the petitioner that the Design Commission has expressed their support for the signage being shown tonight; however, a separate application and review is required for sign variations, with final approval by the Village Board. Mr. Jenks understood this.
ITEM 3. GENERAL MEETING
Commissioner Eckhardt did not want to skip the annual Alan Bombick design award due to the current situation of no public meetings being held due to the coronavirus. He encouraged Staff to continue with the selection process for the award recipients this year, and then take a wait and see approach as to when a public presentation of the award could be held. Commissioner Kubow and Chair Fitzgerald agreed. Mr. Hautzinger encouraged the commissioners to provide Staff with potential nominations.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER ECKHARDT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KUBOW, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:10 PM. ALL WERE IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED.
https://www.vah.com/your_government/agendas___minutes_
Alerts Sign-up